Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
<br />Minutes of the Community Preservation Committee <br />Monday, November 7, 2011 <br />3:00 pm <br />Ellen Stone Room <br />Cary Memorial Building <br /> <br /> <br />Present: <br />Board Members: <br />Wendy Manz,Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice-Chair; Joel Adler, <br /> <br />Norman Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Sandy Shaw, Betsey Weiss, Dick Wolk. <br />Administrative Assistant <br />: Nathalie Rice <br /> <br />Also in attendance were Shirley Stolz, member of the Capital Expenditures Committee <br />(CEC), and Glenn Parker, Chair of the Appropriation Committee (AC). <br /> <br />The meeting was called to order at 3:04 pm. by Ms. Manz. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1.Minutes – <br />Approval of the minutes of 10/24 was postponed until the next <br />meeting. <br /> <br /> <br />2.Visitor Center Redesign and Expansion – <br /> Dawn McKenna, Chair of the <br />Tourism Committee, presented this project application for $225,000. In her <br />presentation, she referred to a draft of a “Visitor Center Report” which she <br />said she would later submit to the CPC. Ms. McKenna itemized the reasons <br />for the need for renovations to the Visitor Center. She said the building is <br />somewhat out of date, cannot accommodate busloads of visitors, does not <br />have adequate restroom facilities and is not welcoming from the Minuteman <br />Bikeway side of the building. She said the project would involve both a <br />renovation and expansion of the building. <br /> <br />Ms. Fenollosa raised the question whether the CPC could approve funds for <br />the design of the new portion of the Visitor Center, when it could not approve <br />funds for its construction. (The Statute allows CPA funds to be used for <br />renovation/rehabilitation of historic resources, not new construction.) Ms. <br />McKenna was asked to break out the square footage of the proposed addition <br />and its associated costs, and submit these to the CPC. There was also a <br />discussion of whether the Visitor Center, constructed in the 1960s, qualified <br />for funding under the Historic Preservation category. Ms. Fenollosa stated her <br />opinion that it did qualify for funding, due to its inclusion in the Historic <br />District and its listing on the State and local Registers of Historic Places. <br /> <br />Mr. Wolk noted that the projected FY 14 costs for this project were <br />substantial – some $1,403,500 - and suggested that an alternatives analysis be <br />conducted. <br /> 1 <br /> <br />