First, the benefits to the municipality were immense. The project utilized 20 acres of downtown, waterfront, former industrial land that posed numerous high level risks to the community and transformed that land into a state-of-the-art middle school campus providing a vastly improved educational environment to the City for generations of students to come.

John Chambers Please provide a brief overview of the project.
The Woonsocket Middle School Campus redevelopment project was a remarkable brownfield redevelopment project for four primary reasons.

• Long-term Municipal Benefits: First, the benefits to the municipality were immense. The project utilized 20 acres of downtown, waterfront, former industrial land that posed numerous high level risks to the community and transformed that land into a state-of-the-art middle school campus providing a vastly improved educational environment to the City for generations of students to come. The land was highly contaminated with multiple hazardous contaminants spread over large areas which had posed substantial human health and ecological risks for decades. In addition, the blighted and abandoned nature of the property created a haven for unauthorized access by trespassers and vagrants, resulting in multiple enormous fires which damaged both the on-site buildings and adjacent neighborhoods. In short, this site which posed significant threats to the surrounding community in terms of health risks, property damage risks, and blight to the heart of downtown was transformed into one of the finest, safest, and most aesthetically attractive public school campuses in New England.
• Adverse Regulatory and Environmental Justice Precedents: Second, the regulatory climate in which the school was permitted was extremely adverse for this type of redevelopment. The school is located in an Environmental Justice area and serves a primarily Environmental Justice (e.g low income and minority) population. As a result of a previous school project (the Springfield School) built on brownfield property in Providence, Rhode Island, the state brownfield regulatory agency, the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) had been sued by a citizens group and as a result of that suit was required to implement more robust public outreach and school siting policies which were anticipated but not in effect at the outset of the Woonsocket project. The result of this court action was that all decisions from RIDEM required buy-in at the highest levels and the regulators were extremely conservative in their decision making and approach. This problem was exacerbated on the Woonsocket project because in order to obtain $57.5 million of the $78 million required for the project, permitting with RIDEM needed to be done expediently. The $57.5 million was contingent upon school occupancy by no later than January, 2010, a roughly 2-year window to complete the entire project. This combination of a highly contaminated property raising concerns in the neighborhood and recognition that substantive public feedback and response was necessary, coupled with the reservations of the regulators and the urgency necessary to meet the public funding requirements posed an immense challenge to the City and project team.
• High Levels of Contamination: The site had multiple large expanses of free-phase petroleum contamination, a large chlorinated solvent release source area, a large chlorinated solvent plume migrating off-property to the abutting Blackstone River, generally contaminated urban fill across the entire 20-acre site, and multiple historic buildings containing hazardous materials in various states of disrepair and fire damage. Due to the planned use of the site as a school, the City committed to full cleanup of all of these issues and redevelopment in an extremely short 2 year time frame, in order to have a fully remediated site prior to school occupancy. This commitment was paramount in addressing the Environmental Justice, school siting, and regulatory agency confidence issues expediently but was challenging to the limited budget and timing constraints inherent in the project.
• Tremendous Funding Gap: Early in the planning stage, the estimated budget required to fund the school was determined to be short by roughly $8 million, even if the stringent January, 2010 occupancy date that triggered $57.5 million in state funding was met. The primary means to close that gap was application for additional grants after the project was initiated, which were not guaranteed. The collaborative support of the three Rhode Island Brownfield funding programs (e.g. from RIDEM, RI Economic Development Corporation, and USEPA) became integral to reducing this gap by $1.7 million prior to completion of the project.

Each of these issues was addressed through an extremely collaborative and transparent approach from the project team, the regulators, City officials, the public, and the tremendous assistance of the multiple Rhode Island Brownfield Programs. These issues are discussed in more detail in the following sections of this application. Project Background Prior to January 2010, the City of Woonsocket (population of approx. 45,000) operated a single middle school for the education of all of the middle school-aged children in the City. The former middle school building, which was constructed in 1915, was recognized as the largest middle school in New England with a population of approximately 1,600 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students. The existing school facility was woefully inadequate, as it was overcrowded, obsolete in layout and infrastructure, and lacked many of the features the City and the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) deemed necessary for a suitable current educational environment. Replacement of the middle school facility was identified as a top priority by the City, however economic constraints and lack of available buildable sites in the densely urbanized municipality stalled the much needed improvement project for decades. Starting in 2006, the City leadership took the initiative and embarked on a renewed effort to replace the deteriorating and antiquated facility. A group of project stakeholders was assembled, and project feasibility and site selection was extensively studied. As part of a combined effort by the project stakeholders and aided by initial Community-Wide Brownfield Assessment Grants and Targeted Brownfield Assessment Grant Funding provided by USEPA and RIDEM, a preferred site was identified. The identified site provided numerous positive aspects including size (approximately 20 acres), central location within the City, location adjacent to a well developed mixed use urban neighborhood, centralized bus route access, site availability, and access to amenities including recreation facilities, a bike path, and the Blackstone River which abuts the site. However, the identified property was significantly contaminated due to an over 100-year history of textile, printing, and metal working industrial operations in seven large-scale, multi-story mill structures throughout the entire 20-acre site. Additionally, the site was blighted and underutilized as the existing mill buildings were mostly vacant. The site had had been the scene of two significant mill fires in 2003 and 2006 that destroyed three very large mill structures and further degraded the environmental quality of the site, the neighborhood, and the surrounding natural resources. Due to the blighted and underutilized nature of the site, and the ongoing public safety and fire hazards, the City was eager to resolve the dire need for a new middle school campus while also taking control of and redeveloping the site for productive use. After almost two years of intensive evaluation, negotiation, and acquisition of legislative approvals, the site, located at the intersections of Hamlet Avenue and Florence Drive, was confirmed as the selected site for a new middle school campus to consist of two independent and free standing 880-pupil middle schools and a large athletic field complex situated along the Blackstone River in downtown Woonsocket. Upon legislative and municipal approval, full scale site design and environmental site investigation and remediation planning commenced in the Fall of 2007. Site development and environmental remediation began in the spring of 2008, and the facility was completed, developed, and built out by October 2009. In November, 2009 the City held an open house to show off the new school and the line of interested citizens ran out along the building and into the adjacent athletic fields for several hours. The citizens of Woonsocket, through a collaborative public outreach project, strongly supported the transformation of this severely blighted and contaminated urban property into the largest middle school campus in New England. On January 4, 2010, the City proudly opened the doors to the two beautiful and state-of-the-art middle school buildings for the commencement of classes following the school department's winter break and the school will continue to provide a better educational environment to generations of future Woonsocket students.

What makes this project unique? How does it stand out among other successful brownfield redevelopment projects?
As presented previously, the combination of high profile Environmental Justice and public outreach requirements, the negative regulatory and public climate set by the previous problems with siting schools on brownfield sites in Rhode Island, the high levels of contamination present and the associated complexity of remediation, the finality of the project deadline necessary to secure the bulk of the project financing, and the numerous overlapping regulatory issues all of which required expedited resolution to meet the project deadlines, all created a "perfect storm" of overlapping and substantive brownfield redevelopment impediments. Any one of these issues alone could have resulted in project failure, but the combination of these issues and the resonant affects of these issues occurring simultaneously created an extremely challenging redevelopment environment. The creative and collaborative resolution of these challenges is really the essence of the success story at the Woonsocket Middle School campus project. The integrated, transparent, and collaborative approach utilized was the only reasonable way to manage all of the issues successfully. Some of these issues are detailed further below. Sensitive Re-Use: The project consisted of the transformation of highly contaminated former industrial land into the largest middle school campus in New England. USEPA has recognized the many challenges of siting schools on contaminated sites and regulators across the country are currently supporting USEPA in the development of school siting guidelines. Rhode Island regulators are at the forefront of these efforts as a result of the Springfield School legal case in Providence during which RIDEM was successfully sued on improper approaches to permitting a school on a brownfield site in an Environmental Justice community. The Woonsocket project was the first large school project to require RIDEM brownfield permitting since the Springfield School case and as a result, all the previous issues of siting schools on contaminated property were at the forefront of all regulatory consideration and decisions. Environmental Justice and Public Involvement Concerns: The Woonsocket Middle School campus was located in an Environmental Justice area and was intended to serve a predominantly lower income and minority population. The Civil Rights laws of the 1960s required that issues of Environmental Justice be considered in all regulatory decisions on these types of projects and as a result of the recent Springfield School case in Providence, all the regulatory agencies and state government were aware that Environmental Justice must be addressed in a meaningful manner. What this approach required was multiple substantive public outreach efforts and forthright dissemination of all environmental information in multiple public meetings and other outreach efforts. Effectively, the project team was required to be very forthright with the public and parents of potential students that the proposed school was to be located on highly contaminated property which if not effectively remediated, could pose substantial risks to students. This type of public outreach and direct public confrontation of Environmental Justice issues, which turned out to be very effective at addressing Environmental Justice and public concerns with siting the school on a brownfield, had not been utilized effectively in Rhode Island or other areas of the country prior to this project. Timeframe and Financial Constraints: The Woonsocket project had some extremely stringent timeline and financial constraints that could not be exceeded for any reason. On a high profile brownfield redevelopment project, during which encountering unforeseen issues is a virtual certainty, these constraints posed a daunting challenge. First, in order for the City to receive $57.5 million in state education funding, the project needed to be complete and the schools occupied by January, 2010, roughly two years after the project was authorized. Previous school projects sited on brownfield property in Rhode Island had produced an environment in which regulators had to be very careful in providing approvals, public outreach had to be robust and public issues addressed, and full cleanup of substantial contamination issues prior to school occupancy was a commitment of the City to the public. These three aspects of the public and regulatory environments made the expedited objective of the project more challenging. Complexity of Environmental and Regulatory Issues: The site was utilized by multiple industrial operations over the previous century and the legacy left by these interests was that the 20-acres were a complex mix of contamination owned by multiple responsible parties in varying stages of regulatory compliance, including two owners who were in clear violation of Rhode Island environmental law. Upon initiation of the project, the properties were documented or alleged to be contaminated or with large areas of multiple petroleum products, metals, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, and anthrax. Response actions to address groundwater, soil, sediment, surface water, and vapor impacts were all required to fully assess and remediate the site prior to completion and occupancy the schools in January, 2010. Multiple regulatory approvals were necessary to address these issues. Environmental aspects of the site were regulated by FEMA, USEPA, Army Corps of Engineers, RIDEM (including the UST section, remediation section, underground injection section, water quality, solid waste, and compliance and enforcement section), and Historic Preservation. Federal and state permitting was required from all of these regulatory agencies and individual sections. The project team was required to develop a comprehensive permitting approach that would acquire expedited and coordinated approval from every regulatory agency and section with enough time to construct and occupy the school campus by January, 2010, which was successfully accomplished.

What were the primary funding sources (i.e. private or public) for the project and what were the total redevelopment costs?
Identification and acquisition of funding sources sufficient to facilitate initiation and completion of the project was extremely challenging, given the financial state of the City and the overall economic climate. The City of Woonsocket is a diverse community with a high level of low-income residents (greater than 19.4% of the population living below the poverty level). As such a significant effort was undertaken to identify, compile, and leverage available private, municipal, state, and federal funding sources to make the project possible. The overall development cost of the project was $78 million. The State of RI General Assembly approved a funding platform which provided state funding through the RI Department of Education for 82% of eligible program costs. However, the legislature limited the total amount of the project that could be funded through the sale of municipal bonds and therefore eligible for the 82% State contribution to $70 million. As the City was not authorized to sell bonds to fund the entire project, a significant funding short fall of approximately $8 million was realized. Through the diligent efforts of the project stakeholders alternative funding sources were identified to leverage the primary state funding source to finance the remediation and redevelopment of the site into the middle school campus. A summary of the primary funding sources are detailed below:

• Municipal - bonds: $12.5 million
• Municipal - other: $3.3 million
• State - Department of Education: $57.5 million
• Federal - brownfield grants: $1.7 million
• Federal - E-Rate reimbursement: $1 million
• Private - prior property owner contribution: $2 million

Of particular note, the project stakeholders were successful in the identification and acquisition of 14 individual brownfield grant opportunities, totaling $1.7 million, to help defray the cost of the environmental investigation and remediation of the site. These grants included assessment and clean up grants for both hazardous materials and petroleum products from multiple brownfields programs. These programs included direct assessment and cleanup grants from the USEPA Brownfield Program, assessment and cleanup grants through the RI Department of Environmental Management's Brownfield Program, and petroleum assessment and cleanup grants from the RI Economic Development Corporation Brownfield Program.

What contaminants were present on the site? Please discuss what remediation technologies were used and what the total remediation costs were.
Due to the wide range of industrial activities at the mill complex that formerly occupied the site, a broad range of contaminants and impacted environmental media were identified at the site. Hazardous Building Materials: Numerous multi-story mill structures were present at the site upon initiation of redevelopment activities. These structures contained a significant amount of hazardous materials including asbestos, ash, PCBs, mercury, lead paint, storage tanks and containers full of liquid wastes, and other hazardous materials. Prior to demolition all hazardous materials were removed form the buildings. The structures were then razed by mechanical methods and the building materials were salvaged and recycled wherever possible. Underground Storage Tanks: Nine USTs were closed at the site as part of the redevelopment program. These USTs included: one 650-gallon gasoline UST, one 7,800-gallon No. 6 oil UST two 10,000-gallon No. 6 oil USTs, one 20,000 gallon No. 6 oil UST, and four 25,000-gallon No. 6 oil UST. Most of these USTs leaked leaving large areas of separate phase petroleum in the ground. Petroleum Impacted Soil Remediation: Historical leakage from the fuel oil USTs detailed above resulted in a large quantity of soil containing petroleum that required management. Additionally, a portion of the site was historically used as a metal part manufacturing and wire drawing facility. This facility was destroyed by a major mill fire in 2003. As a result of the metal production operations and the fire, soil within a large portion of the site was contaminated by a release of cutting/lubrication oil. A total of 38,000 tons of soil containing fuel oil and cutting oil were excavated from the subsurface for remediation. Remediation of this soil was conducted utilizing an innovative and low impact recycling approach consisting of on-site solidification and stabilization with asphalt emulsions and Portland cement. Upon completion of the solidification/stabilization process, the resulting material was recycled and sustainably utilized for beneficial uses on-site including excavation backfill, structural grading, and asphalt pavement sub base. Urban Fill Contamination: Because the site had been utilized for more than 100 years as an industrial mill complex, urban fill and contaminated surficial soils were present. This fill and native soil throughout the 20-acre site was confirmed to contain metals and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons at concentrations exceeding cleanup standards. Remediation of this fill and soil consisted of the construction of an engineered cap across the entire 20-acre site. The cap consisted of a minimum of two-feet of clean fill imported from off-site or one foot of clean fill overlying a geotextile fabric. Throughout most of the site, the imported clean fill cap was significantly thicker than the minimum required in order to raise the grade and avoid potential flooding issues from the nearby Blackstone River. In total, 128,500 tons of clean loam, sand, and gravel fill were tested and imported to the site for cap construction. Tetrachloroethene (PCE) in Soil: A large portion of the site was found to contain the solvent PCE in soil at concentrations exceeding the residential cleanup criteria. The horizontal and vertical extent of this soil was carefully delineated, and the soil was excavated and disposed of off-site. A total of 6,800 tons of soil containing PCE was transported offsite for landfill disposal so as to remove the source of an associate dissolved phase plume described in the next section. Tetrachloroethene (PCE) in Groundwater: In addition to the PCE source area in soil discussed above, groundwater at the site was also confirmed to contain PCE as well as other chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOC). A chlorinated solvent plume in groundwater was documented to be emanating from the source area, and migrating across the site to the adjacent Blackstone River. The aerial extent of the groundwater exceeding cleanup standards was approximately 90,000 square feet and groundwater was impacted to depths of 70 feet below grade. To remediate groundwater at the site, an Enhanced Reductive Dechlorination program was implemented. This "Green Remediation" program consisted of the injection of a mixture of food grade dextrose and brewers yeast into the subsurface through a series of 54 injection nodes. A total of 53,000 pounds of dextrose and yeast were injected into the subsurface throughout the entire saturated overburden between 10 and 70 feet below grade. Groundwater monitoring following the completion of remedial injections indicated that all groundwater cleanup criteria were met and maintained within six months. Most importantly, this cleanup of groundwater was successful prior to school occupancy in January, 2010. Vapor Intrusion Mitigation: Though not considered a separate contaminant release, subsurface soil vapors sampled from several locations at the site contained concentrations of VOC, including PCE, which exceeded laboratory detection limits. The concentrations of VOC in soil vapors varied across the site, however, the highest concentrations were observed in samples collected at locations in the vicinity of soil and groundwater that contained the higher concentrations of PCE measured in soil and groundwater at the site. While the two new school buildings were not constructed above areas where the highest concentrations of VOC in soil vapor were detected (i.e. the area above the soil and groundwater containing PCE), the redevelopment plan included the pre-emptive construction of a sub slab ventilation and vapor barrier system beneath the two new school buildings as a conservative and redundant safeguard to mitigate the potential for migration of soil vapors containing VOC to indoor air. This system consisted of a Liquid Boot spray-applied membrane and a network of 10-inch diameter sub slab piping and ventilation fans designed to maintain negative sub slab pressure throughout the entire footprint of each of the two new 65,000 square foot school buildings. The remedial activities discussed above were implemented prior to and concurrently with site redevelopment. Prior to occupancy of the new school campus in January 2010, all final regulatory approvals, including the final Letter of Compliance from RIDEM, was issued. The costs associated with remediation activities are summarized below:

• Environmental investigation: $800,000
• Remedial design and management: $630,000
• Building abatement and demolition: $2,690,000
• UST and soil removal: $410,000
• Soil stabilization: $1,480,000
• Soil capping: $1,670,000
• Soil excavation and disposal: $580,000
• Groundwater remediation: $330,000
• Vapor intrusion mitigation: $860,000
• Total Remediation Cost: ­­­­­$9,450,000

Before:

After:

Did the project increase job opportunities in the community, or communities, surrounding the site?
The project has created substantial opportunities in the community. The site property was located in the heavily urbanized downtown district of Woonsocket on prime riverfront real estate. Due to the relatively large size (20 urban acres) and underutilized layout of former mill buildings, the site had become a haven for trespassers and vagrants and had fallen into disrepair. Fires were frequently set in the old mill buildings, including two of the largest fires in the region which leveled mill buildings in 2003 and again in 2006. These fires damaged the surrounding residences and the blight of the site was detrimental to economic development in the down town area. The redevelopment of this site eliminated the primary blight related to underutilized property in this downtown area and replaced it with a beautiful riverfront school campus. The blight, fire danger, and environmental damage caused by the site were all remedied by the school and while the school has only been open for a few months, businesses and jobs are anticipated to follow the 1,600 students and associated school personnel drawn to the site. In addition, the school environment for the students and families of Woonsocket was tremendously improved by the new campus. The former Woonsocket Middle School building was 85 years old and not well suited for modern education. The layout was cumbersome with many hidden and poorly accessed areas and teaching areas adapted retroactively to support current education practices. Virtually no parking and no green space was present at the former school which was completely surrounded by a dense residential neighborhood. The school had a well documented history of frequent student violence and fighting that the poor layout of the school exacerbated. The new school is designed to have much better connectivity and open spaces without hidden areas. There is extensive green space, athletic fields, and a riverside bike path area that connects to a second large municipal recreation area just a few hundred feet away. In short, the new school campus provides an immeasurably improved and safer educational campus for the students of Woonsocket. As Woonsocket has one of the highest Environmental Justice populations in Rhode Island, providing that population with one of the finest public school campuses in the state should provide a substantially better educational experience to Woonsocket students.

Did the project help to decrease local crime rates or to improve human health and safety?
The site posed substantial public health risks to the surrounding community prior to redevelopment. Substantial contamination was present on the surface grounds of the site, in the deteriorating abandoned buildings, and in the abutting riverfront public property. The property was situated in a dense urban mixed use area and as such, was not effectively separated from the neighborhood. Trespassers used the site liberally and were frequently exposed to the site contaminants. Furthermore, the site posed substantial physical hazards. The buildings were in disrepair but were often accessed by trespassers. Multiple fires, several large enough to damage off-property residential structures abutting the site, occurred and the city was challenged in providing adequate security to prevent fires and trespassing. Due to the large mill buildings and security challenges, and the fact the site was a large blighted property in the midst of a developed mixed use neighborhood, the site also posed a haven for street crime. By virtue of transforming the site into a clean, bright, and utilized school campus with clear view sheds through the open space, the potential for crime both on the site and in the surrounding developed area is greatly diminished. The environmental remedies also mitigated the contamination and physical risks.

What was most challenging about your project?
The magnitude of the transformation of highly contaminated industrial property into a superior school campus can not be overstated. The City had tremendous vision to see the immense impact that transforming the dominant urban blight property in their downtown area into an educational asset for generations to come would provide to the community. The project also took immense courage from the leaders of the City to propose putting a school serving a large and sensitive Environmental Justice population on such a highly contaminated property, particularly in light of the prior failures of the previous school projects in Rhode Island on brownfield properties. In that light, the greatest challenge was to believe that this school project could be successfully completed despite the aforementioned slew of impediments including:

• That the property had to be fully assessed, permitted, remediated, and the school fully built and occupied in less than two years.
• That the primary funding source, $57.5 million in state funds would not be available unless the occupation deadline of January, 2010 was met
• That the previous school projects on brownfield sites in Rhode Island had resulted in a successful suit against RIDEM which created strong reservations in the regulators regarding the school running contrary to the goal of expedited permitting
• That the multiple types and large magnitude of contamination posed obvious impediments to the expedited assessment, remediation, and permitting strategy
• That the school's location in an Environmental Justice area coupled with the sensitive re-use scenario required substantial public outreach and involvement and that unforeseen delays from this public process could not be accommodated in the schedule.

This unique combination of challenges, each of which had the potential to exacerbate other issues, was the greatest challenge on this project. The vision and courage of the City in seeing that the risks posed by these impediments, the collaboration and competence of the project team and regulators in solving these challenges, and the open mindedness and engagement of the public to understand the long term benefits of the vision and eventually support the vision were all keys to overcoming these challenges. This project was one of those rare cases in which despite a daunting array of challenges, the numerous stakeholders in the project through collaboration, competence, and foresight were able to meet every challenge and transform a blighted City problem into an educational asset for generations.

Did the project receive any loans, grants or financial assistance from any public or private organizations?
This project was conducted in the 2008 to 2010 recessionary time period by one of the poorest per capita Cities in Rhode Island. Acquiring the necessary funding to complete the project was an immense challenge to the City in this environment and the City was extremely creative in identifying and acquiring funding for the project. To obtain most of the sources of funding took courage and vision from City leaders in the fiscal environment of that time. A summary of the primary funding sources are detailed below:

• The City generated $12.5 million in municipal bonds which took a public referendum to attain. The public demonstrated courage and vision to vote for this added debt during such a financially strapped time.
• The City obtained $57.5 million in state education fund reimbursement, contingent upon the project being completed and the school occupied by January, 2010. With the numerous challenges facing the project at the outset, proceeding with the project knowing that very difficult deadline had to be met took tremendous vision and courage from the City.
• The City negotiated $2 million from previous industrial owners at the site to take over their contaminated properties. Taking over the substantial environmental liabilities of these properties was alone a risky but necessary undertaking for the project and acquiring additional funding for the project was an added benefit to close the funding gap.
• The City obtained $1.7 million in USEPA funded brownfield grants. While necessary to complete the project, many of these grants were not obtained until the project was well underway. The collaboration and support of the state and federal regulators was key in acquisition of these necessary funds.
• The City was extremely diligent in pursuing as many additional available grants and funding solutions as possible to close the funding gap. The City garnered $1 million in an E-rate reimbursement to help fund technology infrastructure, and also identified other municipal funds, including CDBG funding and other programs to fill the remaining funding gap.

This kind of large public project, conducted by a cash strapped municipality during a recession, could only happen with strong leadership from the City creatively seeking and leveraging any available funding source they could identify.

Could you describe the collaboration that occurred among multiple parties to enable the project?
Collaboration was one of the primary keys to success on this project. As mentioned previously, several stakeholders in the project had legitimate reasons to lengthen the permitting process in a manner that would have precluded the primary funding of $57.5 million from the state. The state regulators had reservations about siting a school on this site both for the high level of contamination present and their previous negative experience at the Springfield School site in Providence. The Woonsocket citizens who would be sending their children to a school built on a contaminated site also had reservations that might have delayed the project. In both of these cases, forthright collaboration was the solution that prevailed. The project team implemented a strategy of being extremely transparent with all environmental information from the very beginning of the project. All environmental information was presented to the public and the regulators as soon as possible so that any conflicts or issues could be resolved quickly and not result in overall delays to the project. For public outreach, the project team actually sought out the opinions of the public and attempted to increase public participation as much as possible. Information was sent out via mail, electronically, via repositories and public meetings. Information was disseminated in multiple languages to increase potential public involvement. The outreach strategy was one of aggressive and honest outreach. When the regulators or public brought up an issue, that issue was addressed, typically in very conservative fashion as the City was committed to not only providing a safe school but also a school that parents felt confident sending their kids to. The end result of this collaboration is that the eventual remedial solutions presented to both the public and the regulators instilled confidence and approvals were obtained quickly as necessary. There was also substantial collaboration amongst the project team. As with most large brownfield redevelopment sites, there were many overlapping technical issues that had to be addressed during remediation and the construction of the schools. The project team was made up of a wide range of construction specialists, architects, environmental professionals, site design engineers, traffic engineers, school committee members, City Planning and Engineering officials, school personnel, and others. Often, solutions to problems had to balance many conflicting interests and the best solutions came from collaboration. A typical example of a multidisciplinary solution was the capping of the site. The City wanted the school building raised higher than typic