Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-03-22-CPC-min Minutes of the Community Preservation Committee March 22, 2010 2:00 pm Room 207 Town Offices Present: Betsey Weiss, Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice Chair; Joel Adler, Norman Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Wendy Manz, Nathalie Rice, Admin. Asst; Sandy Shaw and Dick Wolk. Absent: Leo McSweeney Also in attendance were Mr. David Kanter, Ms. Shirley Stolz and Mr. Ted Edson of the Capital Expenditures Committee; Ms. Deb Mauger and Mr. Peter Kelley of the Board of Selectmen; Mr. Mark Barrett, project manager for the Facilities Department, Ms. Karen Simmons, Director of the Recreation Department, and Mr. Joe Pato of the Appropriations Committee. Ms. Weiss called the meeting to order at 2:05 pm. The purpose of the meeting was to meet with a representative from the Disabilities Commission regarding the ADA upgrades to the Town Office Building, to discuss certain policy decisions, and to receive updates on various projects. 1.Town Office Building Project, Commission on Disabilities – Ms. Victoria Buckley, Chair of the Commission on Disabilities, had asked to meet with the CPC regarding the Town Office Building (TOB) Project. Ms. Buckley read a prepared statement, in which she referenced reports from 1990 and 1992 that explained the need for improvements that would bring the TOB into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In referencing the 1992 report, she highlighted the lack of access to the building, inadequate bathrooms and poor access to services. She stated that the building failed to address the needs of the elderly, the disabled and those with strollers. She noted that the building did not have adequate facilities for individuals interviewing for jobs who might be disabled, or for those simply paying tax bills. Ms. Buckley then highlighted the list of ADA upgrades suggested in the architect’s design report and spoke briefly to each. She added that the TOB project fit the scope of the objectives for CPA funding since the TOB was a historic and significant building in Lexington. In looking at the project as a whole, Ms. Buckley said it was the opinion of the Commission that all the ADA upgrades should be done, and that the project should not be / piecemealed. She addressed the 65%35% split that had been discussed at a previous CPC meeting, and stressed that the project should not be split. She 1 said the need for the project “would not disappear”, that the Town Office Building should be welcoming to residents and visitors, and urged the CPC to fund it in its entirety. Ms. Buckley then answered a number of questions from CPC members. These included the need for handicapped access at the lower westerly entrance, the height of light switches and the need for their replacement, lighting issues, and bathrooms on the lower level. Ms. Weiss asked if the TOB was considered a top priority by the Commission to which Ms. Buckley said that it was. Mr. Kanter asked to see a list of the priorities for municipal buildings, and Ms. Buckley said she would provide it. There was general agreement among CPC members regarding the need for the project, but there were questions about the appropriateness of completing the project with CPA funds. Ms. Fenollosa noted that project might not receive support on the floor of Town Meeting. There were disparate views on the CPC regarding the funding of the project, with Ms. Krieger noting that it was her belief that CPA funds were very appropriate for the purpose of ADA upgrades and for the project as a whole. Mr. Adler noted that there were residents who felt that funding the TOB with CPA funds would be a “dramatic mistake”. He said he felt the Fire Station renovation represented a higher priority. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the different philosophies represented by different members of the CPC. Mr. Adler went on to say that he had done a breakout of the costs he felt were unnecessary, which included among many items, a Clerk of the Works and ADA upgrades to the westerly lower entrance. With these costs taken out, he proposed that $1,031,923 was a more fitting funding level for consideration. Mr. Kanter stressed the importance of not “backing in” to the dollar amount and stated his opinion that the project should be evaluated in its entirety. There were questions about specific parts of the project, however, which Mr. Barrett addressed. He explained that the cost of the handicapped bathrooms had been factored into the estimate for the project, and that the unused $49,000 from the FY09 Town Office Building ADA Bathroom and Signage project would be turned back to the CPA fund. He also explained that a Clerk of the Works was necessary for the project, and that an existing Town employee could not fill the position. He stressed that supervising contractors, dealing with parking and egress and access issues, etc. was a full time job and was too time-consuming for existing staff. Ms. Krieger moved that the CPC allocate $1,825,821 for the project, the entire amount requested by the applicant, with the understanding that the $49,000 from the FY09 ADA Bathroom renovation project be returned to the CPA 2 fund. The motion was seconded and a vote was taken. The vote was (4-5), four in favor and five against; the motion did not pass. Mr. Adler then suggested his figure of $1,032,000, which would not include “soft costs” he had previously mentioned. There was no motion following his suggestion, however. Ms. Manz made a subsequent motion that the CPC recommend for appropriation that portion of the project that represented the ADA and code work, some 65% for a total of $1,185,523. The motion was seconded and a vote taken. The vote was (3-5), three in favor and five against; the motion did not pass. Mr. Wolk then offered a compromise to this position, and made a motion to recommend $1,500,000 in funding for the project. A vote was taken on this amount, and the CPC voted (6-3), six in favor and three against. The motion was passed and the CPC agreed to recommend for funding $1.5 million of the $1.825 million dollar project. 2.Prioritizing Projects – Ms. Weiss opened the discussion about prioritizing projects. Ms. Krieger stated her opinion that it was very difficult to prioritize projects and felt they needed to be evaluated individually. This led to a discussion of bonding as an avenue to giving the CPC more flexibility in project selection. Ms. Weiss said she was opposed to bonding, citing the Busa bond, which had created a large debt service for the next two years. 3.Cotton Farm Acquisition – The Committee discussed the Cotton Farm acquisition, and Ms. Shaw expressed her dismay that the appraisal had not yet been made public. Mr. Cohen explained that Ms. Mullins and the Board of Selectmen had commissioned the appraisal. Committee members expressed serious reservations about the acquisition cost associated with the appraisal, which was approximately one million dollars per acre. Members discussed the Lexington Gardens property which had been on the market for $3.4 million for 11 acres. Mr. Adler felt that such a high cost for Cotton Farm would set a dangerous precedent for the CPC. Ms. Stoltz of the Capital Expenditures Committee questioned whether the Town needed to own the land or could just purchase an easement across the property. 4.Town Meeting Schedule – The Committee noted that there would be an indefinite postponement of Article 10, the purchase of land off Farm Road (the Goldinger parcel). The Committee noted that the Public Hearing for the th Cotton Farm property would most likely be scheduled for April 8at 7:00 pm. The meeting was adjourned at 4:02 pm. Respectfully submitted, Nathalie Rice Administrative Assistant Community Preservation Committee 3