2022-12-08-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 HVAC costs. When asked about other funding sources on smaller projects, Mr. Poltorzycki stated that for now, those costs would be paid out by the Munroe Center. He also stated that the Center would be applying for additional grants but that the Massachusetts Cultural Council grants for capital improvements are only issued every other year , and that the next window to apply for these types of grants would be in January of 2024. Mr. Sandeen commented that he was at this point uncommitted but wanted to have some of the figures validated, a sentiment echoed by several other members of the Committee. He also noted that this Center has a dedicated user and there is a need to become fully ADA complaint. After a motion was made and duly seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote in a straw poll (2-0-7) to wait before they can support the project. Lincoln Field Upgrades: Melissa Battite returned to answer remaining questions about the project at the Lincoln Fields. Prior to the meeting, the Committee had been given written answers to many of its questions as well as a more thorough breakdown of the project’s costs. Ms. Fenollosa asked if the lighting project was dependent on whether or not synthetic or natural turf was used. Ms. Battite commented that if the decision were made to use natural turf, then the request for lights would be removed. Mr. Creech asked if natural turf were installed, how much less the fields could be used. Ms. Battite stated that the natural fields would be used less overall and also used less every day, mostly as a result of difficult field conditions (waterlogged etc.). Mr. Pressman asked about the lifespan of the fields and whether it is appropriate to replace these fields before the ten-year warranty expires. Ms. Battite stated that while the Town purchases ten years of warranty coverage (eight years with the purchase of the turf and a second purchase of two additional years), the lifespan of the fields is somewhat variable depending on usage. Ms. Battite stated that Lexington was able to get 12 years’ usage out of the turf at Lincoln Field 1. She also noted, however, that Lincoln Field 1 had failed its most recent inspection. Ms. Battite also stated that there is a nine-month window between the approval and installation of the new turf. Ms. Battite added that there is a need to efficiently stagger the replacement of the fields in concert with the potential new High School site and Center Recreation site replacement projects. In response to the Committee’s many questions regarding PFAS in synthetic turf fields, Jay Peters, a risk management consultant at Hadley & Aldrich , commented that PFAS testing is extensive, and in his experience PFAS is usually present as a “background condition.” Mr. Peters also stated that any turf fields that do contain PFAS chemicals fall well within the acceptable safety limits. Ms. Krieger asked if there was an option to select a synthetic field without any PFAS. Ms. Buczynski mentioned that manufacturers can be asked to certify that no PFAS has been used during the manufacturing of the turf. Mr. Creech commented that he feels that both the Proponent and Town Staff think that synthetic turf i s the best approach and, if so, then that is what he thinks that we should do assuming the no PFAS guarantee. Mr. Sandeen asked about several line items on the application , as well as whether the North Andover case [Silverio et al. v. Town of North Andover, which held that the expenses of site preparation for synthetic turf were not eligible for CPA funding] was applicable to this project. Ms. Battite responded that Town Counsel had opined that the Recreation Department’s application was eligible and that the Department had separated all synthetic turf costs to be paid out of cash