Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-12-08-CPC-min 1 Minutes for the Community Preservation Committee 12/8/2022 Remote Zoom Meeting Meeting Id: 959 3574 6115 Committee Members Present: Marilyn Fenollosa (Chair), Jeanne Krieger (Vice Chair), Kevin Beuttell, Bob Creech, David Horton, Lisa O’Brien, Bob Pressman, Mark Sandeen, Melinda Walker Other Attendees: Jim Malloy (Town Manager), Mike Cronin (Director of Public Facilities), Mark Manasas (Former Member Stone Building Committee), Jeff Howry (former chair of the Stone Building Feasibility/Reuse Committee), Cristina Burwell (Executive Director, Munroe Center for the Arts (MCA)), Steve Poltorzycki (MCA Board Member), Brian Healey (MCA Architect), Sandhya Beebee (Capital Expenditures Committee Liaison), Melissa Battite (Director, Lexington Recreation Department), Peter Coleman (Assistant Director, Lexington Recreation Department), Christian Boutwell (Recreation Committee), Todd Rhodes (Sustainable Lexington Committee), Maggie Peard (Sustainability & Resilience Officer), Carol Rose (Consultant), Dave Pinsonneault (Director of Public Works), Carolyn Kosnoff (Assistant Town Manager-Finance), Jay Peters (Haley & Aldrich), Rick DeAngelis (Chair, Recreation Committee), Rick Reibstein (Sustainable Lexington Committee), Meg Buczynski (Activitas), Elaine Ashton, Sabine Clark, Tom Shiple. Administrative Assistant: Christopher Tierney Ms. Fenollosa called the meeting to order at 4:01 Stone Building: Jim Malloy and Mike Cronin returned to answer any remaining questions the Committee may have had. Mr. Malloy stated that the Town was now proposing to phase the project over multiple years in order to reduce the overall costs per year. Mr. Horton asked about a potential disconnect between the Town and the Lexington Lyceum advocates over the vision of the building (especially with regard to a future operator) and the condition of the structure. Mr. Cronin commented about the phasing in relation to escalating costs by explaining his process for putting out bids: subcontractors are not given a blanket contract and phasing requires new bids each year (or phase). Mr. Cronin also explained how the Department of Public Facilities has floor plans completed but these are not equivalent to full designs, which do not exist for this project yet. Mr. Cronin also stated that the building still needs considerable work, both cosmetic and structural, and that the upgrades to the building (last made in 2009) fall far short of the needs of the building. Mr. Cronin stated that the cost for the rehabilitation of an historic structure like the Stone Building is substantially greater than the construction cost of new structures. Mr. Pressman identified the amount of CPA funds committed to date to be $35,000,000 plus for historic preservation and $12,000,000 for community housing. Mr. Pressman identified the total costs for the Stone Building and M unroe Center projects to be $20,000,000. Mr. Pressman stated that he is uncomfortable with this amount of money and that it would “decimate the other buckets.” Mr. Pressman stated that the allocation of funds 2 should not favor historical preservation projects to this extent in the future. He mentioned the approval of the Affordable Housing Trust and the initiative to revamp LexHAB with regard to future community housing requests. Ms. Walker asked Mr. Malloy about whether the Committee was voting to finance the entire project or just the first phase, and asked if there could be greater clarification in the future. Mr. Malloy stated that the Committee is being asked to vote on the first phase only, and that the new associated design costs for this first phase have reduced the FY24 request from $1,000,000 to $400,000. Mr. Horton asked Mr. Malloy to comment on the content of the letter from Mr. Howry’s group. Mr. Malloy responded that the letter had reached his office on this day and that he had not had the opportunity to review it. Mr. Howry, former chair of the Stone Building Feasibility/Reuse Committee, commented that he believed there was a disconnect between the plans presented to the CPC and the former committee to investigate uses for the Stone Building. He offered to meet with Mr. Cronin and Mr. Malloy to create a better understanding on details that may have caused confusion. After a motion was duly made and seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote in a straw poll (6-1-2) to support the project. Munroe Center for the Arts: Cristina Burwell, the Executive Director for the Munroe Center for the Arts, returned to answer the Committee’s questions and presented revised costs after the “sticker shock” from last week’s meeting. Brian Healey, the MCA’s architect for the project, commented that the plans for Munroe Park in the rear of the building was not included on this current set of plans, with the new focus being placed on accessibility. This change, coupled with other reductions, reduced the total project cost from $8.4 million to $5.7 million, representing a considerable potential savings. Mr. Beuttell stated that he supported the architectural changes but was concerned that the park would be disturbed with no site budget to repair the park for public use. Mr. Healey then clarified that the site design would be modified to avoid any park disturbance. Mr. Creech stated that he supports the architectural changes but was concerned about the costs of site work. Mr. Creech asked about the renovation of the bathrooms at the site. He added that he came to the meeting prepared to support costs for the addition, bathroom renovations and the HVAC replacement. Mr. Healey stated that the bathroom renovations would continue. Mr. Healey restated responses made in writing to written questions about the proposed new structure. Mr. Pressman asked if the proposed new structure, outside of the footprint of the existing building, would include any elements replacing elements within the existing structure. Mr. Healey cited bathrooms and explained that the space freed up would provide access to the new structure. Ms. Walker commented about writing a grant letter to the Massachusetts Cultural Council and whether some of the costs like HVAC can be covered by writing for grants from outside organizations. Ms. Walker said that in 2021 she had been in contact with Ms. Burwell about the possibility of writing a letter in support of the Munroe Center to the Massachusetts Cultural Council (she did not ultimately write such a letter.) She then asked about the possibility of the Munroe Center applying to the MCC for grants to supplement funding from the Town. Mr. Poltorzycki explained how the MCC reviews and rewards grants. Mr. Poltorzycki commented that the Center had received a grant but it was limited in scope to design work only and would not cover 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 4 capital and not CPC funding. Mr. Sandeen then asked about an increase in the lighting cost. Ms. Battite said that the change was made to allow for the lighting of both Lincoln Field 1 and 3. Ms. Walker asked if this would change the overall funding request, and Ms. Battite said that it would not. Mr. Pressman asked if infill for turf would continue to consist of a sand and rubber material. Ms. Buczynski stated that sand and rubber is what was carried in the five-year capital budgets -- however, this could be changed with further discussion. Mr. Pressman then asked about the extent of recreation land to be affected by lay down areas for the High School construction project and the impact of that project on the use of the turf soccer fields, including at the Lincoln Street site. Ms. Battite responded, mentioning discussion of potential lay down areas. She stated that baseball and softball fields, the football field and practice field and the Little League field would all be taken up by the new High School project and that the Lincoln Fields would absorb the use even though they were at the end of their lifespans. After a motion was duly made and seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote in a straw poll (8-0-1) to support the project. Turning Trees into Art: Carol Rose returned to answer specific questions regarding the maintenance and upkeep of the sculptures, and stated that one of the artists suggested that a natural log oil be applied to preserve the sculptures and that this maintenance would cost approximately $320 per year. David Pinsonneault, Director of Public Works, commented that the cost and staff time to conduct this maintenance was so small that the Department of Public Works could absorb these costs. Mr. Beuttell asked about the path between the sculptures ; Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the path would be made of crushed stone and part of the Across Lexington initiative. He also noted that the project would not conflict with the tennis court renovation project. Ms. Walker commented that she believes that the Committee may be stretching the definitions of Recreation and Open Space and she does not believe that this is an appropriate use of CPC funds. Ms. Fenollosa asked about potential damage to the sculptures from snow plows and other snow removal equipment. Mr. Pinsonneault stated that the sculptures would be safe as they are not in an area where snow removal takes place. After a motion was duly made and seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote in a straw poll (7-2-0) to support the project. Committee Finance: Carolyn Kosnoff, the Assistant Town Manager for Finance, joined the Committee to discuss its finances. Ms. Kosnoff stated that the estimated 38% state match was not going to happen, with the first funding round coming in at 30.3%, and that when combined with second and third round funding, Lexington would be receiving a total match of 31.45%. Ms. Kosnoff made it clear that financing all of the proposed projects with cash was not possible and that some degree of debt financing would be necessary. Ms. Kosnoff then outlined several scenarios with different bonding options and how that debt would affect the future finances of the Committee, especially regarding the Stone Building and the Munroe Center for the Arts. Mr. Horton asked about the length of a potential bond; Ms. Kosnoff stated that bonds are usually issued for five or ten years, depending on the cost of the project. Munroe would be an example of a project that could be funded with a five-year bond while the Stone Building would be better suited for a ten-year bond. 5 Ms. Beebee, the Capital Expenditure’s Committee’s liaison to the CPC, stated that the CEC is aware of the “two big ticket items” and that those project sponsors will be meeting directly with the Capital Expenditure’s Committee. Mr. Creech left the meeting at 6:46. Minutes: After a motion was made and duly seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote (8-0-0) to approve the minutes from the meeting dated 12/1/2022. LexHAB Pre funding: Ms. Fenollosa advised that she had received a new request from LexHAB regarding property acquisitions. Sarah Morrison, LexHAB’s Executive Director, recently had informed her that the Select Board had awarded LexHAB $400,000 in ARPA funds to acquire a property that was previously planned to be funded by CPC. Ms. Morrison is now asking if the Committee would be willing to substitute the originally-recommended $400,000 acquisition funding for prefunding of another future property acquisition, similar to the Affordable Housing Trust prefunding project. Members were asked if they were willing to consider the request, and they indicated informally that they would. Mr. Horton asked whether Town Counsel should review the changed request. Ms. Fenollosa expressed the view that this was probably not necessary since the CPC had recommended similar projects to Town Meeting in 2011 and 2012, but said that she would ask for his opinion on the matter. Committee Business: The next meeting will take place on December 15th at 4:00, directly before the Public Hearing to receive comments on the Needs Assessment Report at 5:00. Following the Public Hearing, the Committee will vote to approve the Needs Assessment Report and then take final votes on the FY24 projects. Both meetings will take place over Zoom. After a motion was duly made and seconded the Committee conducted a roll call vote (8-0-0) to adjourn the meeting at 7:04. Respectfully submitted, Christopher Tierney Administrative Assistant Meeting Materials: MCA Cost analysis Lincoln Field Project Memorandum Community Preservation Fund Balances Community Preservation Committee Projected Revenue and Debt Service Minutes dated 12/1/2022 APPROVED 12/15/2022