2016-05-09-CEC-STM2-STM4-rpt (supplement)

Browse Search

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT TO STMs 2016-2&-4 • Relocation of Central Office. This would require more limited renovation/remediation and would free up old Harrington, allowing greater flexibility for use of the Harrington campus. • Swing Space for Renovation/Expansion of School or Municipal Facilities. (Capital costs are not cited as they range significantly depending on what specific use is made of the space.) • Senior/Affordable Housing Even with substantial wetlands, Pelham contains enough space to accommodate up to 35 small, clustered, senior/affordable apartments, which would likely create less traffic and disruption than school uses. The Town has very few locations which would allow enough units, as this does, to qualify for State- and Federal-financing options, and few opportunities to make substantial progress in maintaining its affordable-housing inventory at 10% of existing housing—as calculated by the State—that provides the Town protections from Chapter 40B development that can avoid many zoning restrictions. Proximate location to Town Center and the LexCC. Partial preservation of the existing building might allow shared use of the gym and food-service areas. Would require significant investment by the Town and an increase in operational efforts. Conclusions Purchase at this time preserves the opportunity to further evaluate the property and see which of the options (or others which may not be listed above)best suit the property and the Town's needs. The Town has considered a variety of other locations throughout the multi-year master-planning process (e.g., Laconia Street, Worthen Road—across from Lexington High School, Harrington Campus). These have been examined for a variety of school uses. While it is possible as yet unknown properties might become available in the future, Pelham is not likely to remain available. (See the Appropriation Committee's report to this STM 2016-2, released May 6, 2016, for additional information on this Article in its analysis and recommendation to Approve(7-1).) Further exploration needs to be done regarding the feasibility of any of these, as well as of possible conservation land swaps to extend this parcel. The ability to do that work thoughtfully and thoroughly warrants action now to purchase the property; however, that must not diminish the importance of pursuing due diligence for both the property and the building prior to purchase. While it is not this Committee's, or Town Meetings' preference to purchase first and "fit" to program later, the central location of this property, the myriad needs we face and the ability, if necessary, to sell off the property if it does not adequately fit a need within our plan,justify pursuing its acquisition at this time. Minority Position With asbestos and lead paint identified throughout the building, as well as PCB contamination in classroom areas, the opponent to this article is concerned that 1) property purchase will expose the Town to great risk/financial liability without costly remediation; and 2) remediation costs could be considerably higher than the estimates provided at $1 to $2 million. The opponent's larger concerns are: 1) lack of transparency and information made available to Town Meeting on this acquisition (recently released reports on contamination in the building were performed in September); 2) The taxpayer impact of this additional capital expense, considering a capital plan which already includes items such as: the new Hastings School; a new LHS heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system (estimated at $13 million);Police and Fire Stations; etc. 3