Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-12-07-CPC-min Minutes of the Community Preservation Committee Public Hearing Tuesday, December 7, 2010 6:30 pm Cary Hall Present: Board Members: Wendy Manz,Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice-Chair; Joel Adler, Norman Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Leo McSweeney, Sandy Shaw, Betsey Weiss and Dick Wolk. Administrative Assistant : Nathalie Rice Also in attendance was David Kanter and Shirley Stolz of the Capital Expenditures Committee, and Arthur Katz of the Lexington Minuteman. The Public Hearing was called to order at 6:30 pm by Ms. Manz. The CPC had previously heard presentations on all ten projects. 1.Archives and Records Management and Conservation – Ms. Donna Hooper, Town Clerk, and Archivist, Ms. Nasrin Rohani presented a request for the fourth of a five year undertaking to preserve important Town records and documents. Ms. Hooper explained that in Year 4, Town Reports from the late 1800’s will be conserved, in addition to the records kept in the Assessor’s vault. The Assessor’s records will be given first priority in FY12, since the vault will be remodeled for office space. Ms. Hooper explained that HDC records have recently qualified for preservation and will be part of the FY12 project. She also noted that the schools have put in a capital request for a significant expansion of their laser fiche system, which if approved, would necessitate their records being stored with the Town’s. There were no questions on this project. 2.East Lexington Fire Equipment Door Replacement - Mark Barrett, Project Manager for the Facilities Department, Pat Goddard, Director of the Facilities Department and Bill Middlemiss, Fire Chief were present for the presentation. Mr. Barrett explained the project, a $60,000 request to widen the Fire Station doors at the East Lexington Fire Station. He explained that there is presently 6” of clearance and that the fire engines have to fold in their mirrors when backing into the building. He showed photographs of the engines in place, which highlighted how little room is available. He said that since the building 1 is in a historic district, efforts will be taken to replace the bull-nose brick on the sides of the doorway, and to recreate the lintel at the top. There were no questions on the project. 3.Leary Planning Funds – Lester Savage, member of the Ad Hoc Leary Property Community Housing Task Force presented this project request for $30,000 in planning funds to design and formalize a community housing proposal for the Leary property. He said the funds would be used for architects’ fees, lawyers’ fees, a wetlands analysis, and any other environmental assessment. He said he anticipated that the Committee would be returning to the CPC in the future for funding for the development of community housing. There were no questions regarding this proposal. 4.LexHAB Set Aside Funding for Acquisition of Affordable Housing – Co- Chair Bill Kennedy presented this application for $450,000 in set-aside funds for the purchase of affordable housing units. Mr. Kennedy explained that the request for “up front” CPA funds would allow LexHAB to save considerable money in legal fees, interest payments and lost rental income. He said that the present arrangement, which frees CPA funds at the beginning of the fiscal year necessitates two closings, and considerable lost time and resources. Ms. Fenollosa asked Mr. Kennedy if any of the CPA funds would be used for previously-owned buildings to which Mr. Kennedy replied in the negative, stating that such costs would be taken out of LexHAB’s operating budget. Ms. Manz noted that if the CPC votes to forward this request on to Town Meeting for approval, it would be essential to define a set of conditions for the appropriation. This might include the process by which LexHAB would attain CPC and Board of Selectmen approval once a unit is identified for purchase. Ms. McKenna spoke in support of this project, stating that as a Town Meeting member, she had had problems approving CPA funds for LexHAB units that had already been purchased. She said she very much supported setting aside the funds for future acquisition of affordable units. 5. Battle Green Monument Restoration - Mr. Pinsonneault, Superintendant of Public Grounds described his request for $50,000 for the restoration of the historic monuments around the Battle Green, specifically the Minuteman Statue, the Obelisk, the Minuteman Monument, the Flagpole and the Half Shell. Mr. Pinsonneault described the various restorations that were needed to 2 each of the monuments, and said that the repairs were intended for completion by the three hundredth anniversary of the Town in 2013. There were no questions regarding this project. 6. Battle Green Master PlanImplementation – Ms. Dawn McKenna, Chair of the Tourism Committee, Mr. Dave Pinsonneault, and consultant, Ms. Cindy Brockway were in attendance to present this proposal for $50,000 in CPA funding. Ms. McKenna commenced the presentation with a brief overview of the timing of the Battle Green Master Plan, stating that the Committee was th planning to hold a Public Hearing on December 9, and would meet with the th Board of Selectmen on January 10. She suggested that this project may be combined with the previous project, the restoration of Battle Green Monuments. Ms. Brockway described the Master Plan Implementation project in more detail, stating that the project would involve improvements to the walkways around the base of each of the monuments. She said this would be done with a combination of granite stones and stone dust, and was not “maintenance”. She said the cost estimates for this work was $48,000 with a $2,000 contingency. There were no questions regarding this proposal. 7.Center Playfields Drainage Work, Phase II - Dave Pinsonneault, Superintendant of Public Grounds, presented this proposal for drainage work at the Center Playfields. He explained that the cost of the project would be $911,862 for work under Field 2, (a baseball and football field). He explained that the work had originally been estimated at approximately $575,000, but that the drainage pipes under the field had recently been found to be blocked or broken – a discovery made while examining the drainage system by camera. This new finding necessitates replacement of all the piping under Field 4, resulting in the significant increase in the cost of the project. Mr. Wolk questioned Mr. Pinsonnneault about Town Counsel’s recent comments regarding the specifics of his project. (Mr. Batt wanted to make certain that all portions of the drainage project were CPA eligible, particularly resodding.) Mr. Pinsonneault responded that he had discussed the matter with Mr. Batt’s, and that all the costs in his request did conform to the CPA statute. Housing Partnership Down Payment and Closing Cost Assistance 8. Program, $30,000 - Ms. Karen Sunnarborg, consultant to the Housing Partnership, presented this proposal to the CPC, explaining the history of the 3 need for housing assistance in Lexington. Sh e said that due to a disparity between requirements for HUD (Federal Housing and Urban Development) and the DHCD (State Department of Housing and Community Development), homeowners seeking to purchase affordable units could not currently receive federal assistance of this kind. This had left potential homeowners, some of which were Lexington residents without assistance, and therefore unable to purchase affordable units. She explained that the problem involved the different types of deed riders required by the two agencies and DHCD’s insistence that their deed rider be used if the units were to qualify as affordable. She said that the Housing Partnership had raised $10,000 in private funds to help families, but stated that further assistance was needed to provide for families and individuals in FY12. In order to meet the needs of these groups, the Housing Partnership requested $30,000 in CPA funding. Ms. Weiss asked if there were other towns considering similar CPA funding proposals, to which she responded that Carver, Leverett and North Hampton had requests before their respective CPCs. Mr. Cohen asked Ms. Sunnarborg how many units in Lexington Place and Jefferson Union might qualify for such assistance, but Ms. Sunnarborg was uncertain of this number. Ms. Fenollosa brought up the issue of Town Counsel’s review of this project, in which he noted that “there is no obvious increase in affordable housing stock promoted by the down payment assistance program”. Ms. Sunnarborg said she had read his opinion, and was somewhat surprised, since several communities such as Chatham have subsidy programs. (In Chatham’s case it is a subsidy program for accessory apartment conversion.) Ms. Fenollosa was also concerned with Mr. Batt’s opinion on the issue of public benefit. Ms. Sunnarborg responded that the issue is one committing to reducing the affordability gap. Ms. Fenollosa asked if the focus of the homeowner assistance is not one of expanding the stock of affordable housing, but of increasing the pool of eligible people. Ms. Sunnarborg concurred with this interpretation. 9.Muzzey High Condominium Association Window Replacement – Since the Public Hearing had proceeded more quickly than anticipated, the applicant was not yet present and Ms. Manz briefly described this project. Ginger McGuire, Hans Maas and Sally Springer of the Muzzey High Condominium Association joined the Hearing, however, and made a second and thorough presentation. Ms. McGuire supplied attendees with a handout, which explained that the Association was seeking $253,915 in CPA funding to replace 132 windows in 44 units at the Muzzey High School building over a period of 5 years. Ms. McGuire explained that the project was being proposed under both the historic and affordable housing components of the Community Preservation Act, and that it further conformed to the goals set forth in the (2002) Comprehensive Plan for the Town. Ms. McGuire explained that the present windows are 100 years old, in poor repair, and have interior storm windows which are difficult to manage. She said the Condominium Association had met with the Historic Districts Commission and that the two groups had reviewed the options for 4 replacement of the windows in a style that would conform to HDC standards. The HDC-preferred window by Andersen was priced at more than three times the cost of a vinyl alternative ($2,855 versus $931) and Ms. McGuire explained that the Association was seeking funding from the CPC to bridge this difference. She added that the Senior Center and LexHAB will be contracting the replacement of windows on their own. She said the window work would be undertaken over a 5 year period from 2011 with approximately 25 windows being replaced each year. She had looked into bridge loans so that the work could be “bundled”, but the Condominium was ineligible for such a loan. She did hope however to consolidate the replacement work, so that the job could be finished before 2016. After Ms. Manz’s initial presentation, Mr. Kanter of the Capital Expenditures Committee noted his concerns with the project; that he felt; (1) the primary benefit of the project was to the owners of the units, (2) there remained a question of how much “cost” could be attributed to the HDC request since it was primarily beneficial to the owners, (3) the cost breakdown seemed insufficient, and (4) that not every part of the building would be addressed in the replacement project. Mr. Adler noted that he had been involved with the conversion of the Muzzey High School to condominiums and stated that at that time it was apparent that the windows were going to be problematical. He said he believed it was appropriate for the Town to step in and use CPA funds for the window restoration. He said it was also unfortunate that those who may have moved in to the condominiums did not know of the future expense of the window replacements. 10.Vynebrooke Village Drainage Work – Since the Hearing had proceeded quickly, Steve Keane was not yet present for the VynebrookeVillage presentation. In his absence, Leo McSweeney, Chair of the Housing Authority (and CPC member) described the project and the request for $364,800 in CPA funds. He noted that the project was a follow-up to design work approved in FY1 by the CPC. He said Mr. Keane had been working with an engineer and with Karen Mullins of the Conservation Commission. He said the drainage work would alleviate flooding in the basements of the units. Mr. Kanter expressed his opinion that it would be critical to have an opinion from the Conservation Commission prior to the project going to Town Meeting. Mr. Adler also pointed out that the CPC would appreciate a letter from Mr. Keane stating that there were no other available funds for this work. 5 After the presentations of the projects, Ms. Manz explained that there were four additional administrative items that would appear on the warrant. These were; (1) $150,000 in Administrative expenses, (2) a $125,000 shortfall in the FY11 budget, (3) $974,600 for the Busa Farm debt service, and (4) a $1,300,000 first-year debt service payment for the Cotton Farm acquisition. Ms. Manz said the CPC would review the projects at its next meeting st scheduled for December 21 and begin the process of voting on whether to forward the projects to Town Meeting. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:45 pm. One document was presented at the Public Hearing: (1) An explanation of the Muzzey High Condominium Project presented by Ginger McGuire, entitled, “Muzzey Window Replacement Project”. The document was undated, and is on file in the CPC office. Respectfully submitted, Nathalie Rice Administrative Assistant Community Preservation Committee 6