Revere Conservation Commission continues review of Revere High School stormwater and wetland impacts

The Revere City Conservation Commission on July 10 continued consideration of a notice of intent filed by the City of Revere for construction of a new Revere High School on the former Wonderland Greyhound Park site (DEP file 0610846).

The Commission heard a detailed presentation from Claire Hogeboom, a wetland scientist with LEC Environmental Consultants, and David Conway of Niche Engineering, who described grading, stormwater treatment trains and compensatory flood storage proposed across the site. The project team included Brian Dakin (owner’s project manager, Left Field), landscape architects Ty Johnson and Emmett Gregory, and Christy Lyons (Consigli, construction manager).

The project covers a large former racetrack parcel at VFW Parkway and North Shore Road. The proposal places a podium-style school building over at-grade parking, sets the first-floor elevation well above the current 100-year floodplain, and reconfigures the site to reduce impervious surface and add a network of stormwater controls. According to the team, the project would reduce impervious area on the site by about 6.5 acres and increase on-site stormwater storage by 5,116 cubic yards.

"For the record, Claire Hogeboom, wetland scientist with LEC Environmental Consultants representing the applicant, the city of Revere, for the Revere High School project notice of intent before the conservation commission," Hogeboom said at the start of the presentation, introducing the project team and the site context.

David Conway, the civil engineer presenting stormwater, said the design goal was to reduce impervious area and rely on a treatment-train approach to meet water-quality standards. "This will be one of the greenest schools we've done," Conway said. He described proposed water-quality units, vegetated swales and a mix of proprietary filter boxes and swales that the team says will achieve total suspended solids (TSS) removal rates in the range of roughly 87–90% depending on location and treatment train.

Key project elements presented to the commission:

- Building and site layout: a podium-style building with parking beneath, first-floor elevation at about Elevation 19 (sited above the 100-year floodplain), and two main site entrances at existing traffic signals on VFW Parkway and North Shore Road.

- Athletic and support facilities: two synthetic turf fields with subsurface drainage (field 1 to include geothermal wells beneath the turf), five tennis courts, and surface parking with roughly 69 EV charging-capable spaces overall (in lots and the garage).

- Stormwater and floodplain compliance: removal of roughly 6.5 acres of impervious surface; a multi-stage treatment train combining catch basins, filter boxes (Filterra-type units), water-quality swales and a compensatory storage area on the west side of the Eastern County Ditch. The applicant’s compensatory-storage analysis indicates a net increase of 5,116 cubic yards of on-site storage across the relevant elevation bins.

- Ecology and public access: a natural outdoor classroom with boardwalks and walking paths in the compensatory storage area, revegetation with native species and invasive-species removal in upland meadow areas; a pedestrian-only 15-foot crossing over the ditch to improve neighborhood access; and a proposed osprey nest as a wildlife enhancement.

Commission discussion and public comment focused on stormwater treatment details, maintenance and access for the Eastern County Ditch, whether portions of the ditch could be culverted or lined, ground conditions and geotechnical suitability, and whether a third-party peer review would be warranted. Commissioners and members of the public repeatedly asked for clearer, shorter documentation they could review before the next meeting; commissioners also emphasized the need for an accessible O&M (operation and maintenance) plan and limits on winter de-icers (the team said sodium chloride is precluded on the site).

Commissioner remarks captured the range of views. One commissioner who viewed the site and the materials said removing the existing concrete pavement will substantially improve infiltration and resiliency. Another commissioner urged a third-party peer review; others noted that MassDEP and other agencies had already reviewed the project in MEPA and agency comment letters and that an internal peer reviewer is already on the project team (Sanborn Head was named by the applicants as a peer reviewer working on 60% construction-review materials). The project team offered to post application materials on the Revere construction project website and to provide a condensed packet tailored to the commission’s questions.

Public comment included neighbors’ questions about vegetation and maintenance in the ditch corridor and a nearby resident’s concern about an active bird (identified as osprey) nesting in a light tower that is part of the demolition scope; the team said demolition of the tower will be delayed until the nest is vacant for the season and that a replacement nesting structure is included in the project plan.

Outcome and next steps

After discussion the commission agreed to continue the hearing to a later meeting to allow commissioners time to review condensed materials and any peer-review memos. The project team consented to a continuance and said it would supply the commission with a shorter summary of the stormwater and coastal/floodplain analyses, any peer-review reports in hand, and options for a site visit for more commissioners. Applicant representatives warned that continued delay past August could impact the construction schedule for the state-funded school and requested the commission’s guidance on what supplemental materials would be most useful.

The commission’s decision to continue was not a denial; it was a procedural postponement to allow members time for additional review with the stated goal of returning to the commission in August if feasible. The project remains under active review by MassDEP and other regulatory agencies.

Why it matters

The project reconfigures a large floodplain and wetland-influenced site for a major public facility that will serve grades 9–12 for the City of Revere. The commission’s review centers on whether the grading, compensatory storage and stormwater treatment proposed meet the Wetlands Protection Act and local performance standards while protecting the Eastern County Ditch and adjacent riverfront and floodplain resources.

The applicant-provided mitigation — reduced impervious cover, a compensatory storage design, vegetated swales and wetlands revegetation — is intended to reduce runoff and improve water-quality and flood resiliency on a site that has substantial existing pavement and degraded upland buffer areas.

Clarifying details noted in the hearing

- Reduction of impervious area: ~6.5 acres (applicant-provided figure). - Compensatory storage: proposed increase of 5,116 cubic yards distributed by elevation band to meet the 1:1 replacement requirement cited by the applicant. - Proposed on-site stormwater reuse: an 80,000‑gallon treated holding tank for courtyard irrigation and limited nonpotable uses. - EV charging: the team described roughly 69 EV charging-capable parking spaces across the site (garage and surface lots). - Project team and peer reviewers: LEC Environmental Consultants (wetland science), Niche Engineering (stormwater), Left Field (owner’s project manager), Consigli (construction manager); the applicant reported Sanborn Head under contract to do construction-phase peer review of stormwater/flood mitigation materials.

Speakers quoted or cited in this report were present in the meeting record and are listed in the article’s speaker roster. No regulatory determinations were finalized at this meeting; the commission continued the hearing to allow further review.

A site visit and supplemental packets were requested by commissioners; the applicant agreed to provide condensed regulatory compliance text, peer-review memos already completed, and to post the complete application to the project website (the applicant cited the project website r h s construction project dot com / revereconstruction.com).