Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Project Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners press staff after Alley Street removed from CSO design; ask for policy on substantial design changes
Summary
A commissioner said Alley Street was in earlier 60% CSO drawings but later omitted; staff said cost and constructability drove the change. Commissioners requested clearer notice of substantial design changes and directed staff to draft a policy or memo explaining thresholds for returning change orders to the commission.
A commissioner raised a concern that Alley Street — shown in earlier 60% separation drawings — was removed from the final design without notification to the commission, hampering expectations for storm‑resilient redevelopment in that neighborhood.
The chair and engineering staff said that the change reflected cost and constructability tradeoffs and that the alternative north‑of‑the‑tracks approach was chosen to meet consent‑order goals for less expenditure. Commissioners pressed for a clearer oversight path: at what point does a substantial design change trigger a return to the commission for approval rather than an engineering‑level change order? Counsel Sam and staff discussed options, including sharing 60%/90% submittals with the commission and drafting a one‑page policy outlining thresholds (dollar amounts or scope) for when items should come back for formal review.
Staff agreed to draft a memo that captures the discussion and possible funding thresholds for future meetings so commissioners can weigh whether Alley Street or similar omissions should be revisited as a separate capital item or policy action.
