Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-04-08-CPC-min Community Preservation Committee Public Hearing Thursday, April 8, 2010 Cary Hall 7:00 pm Present: Betsey Weiss, Chair; Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice Chair; Joel Adler, Norman Cohen, Jeanne Krieger, Wendy Manz, Leo McSweeney, Nathalie Rice, Admin. Asst.; Sandy Shaw and Dick Wolk. Also in attendance were Carl Valente, Town Manager; Peter Kelley, Selectman; David Kanter and Shirley Stolz of the Capital Expenditures Committee, Alan Levine, Chair, and John Bartenstein of the Appropriations Committee, Karen Mullins, Director of Community Development, and Todd Cataldo, owner and representative for the Cotton Farm property. The meeting was called to order at 7:07 pm. There were approximately 15-20 other residents and interested board members in attendance. The purpose of the Public Hearing was to receive comments on the proposed purchase with CPA funds of the Cataldo property (Cotton Farm) located at 121 Marrett Road. 1.Purchase of the Cataldo Property (Cotton Farm) Mr. Peter Kelley of the Board of Selectmen opened the discussion, detailing the elements of the purchase. These were; the purchase of 4.2 acres (9 lots) for $4.0 million dollars, the restriction of approximately 2.9 acres of frontage on Marrett Road (included in 4.2 acres), and a restriction on the number of houses that can be built on the back land remaining in Cataldo ownership to 4 lots. Part of the negotiated deal also includes a gift of 14.5 acres of land on Hartwell Avenue, which is primarily wet, but which abuts existing conservation parcels such as the Goodwin piece. The first question for Mr. Kelley regarded the gift of a $200,000 Trust Fund for conservation purposes. Mr. Kelley explained that the gift which the Cataldos had suggested for land management purposes, did not pass Town Counsel review and was therefore no longer part of the negotiations. (CPA funds cannot be used for land management or maintenance purposes.) There was a great deal of interest in the appraisals for the property, and Mr. Kelley explained that there had been two appraisals, one conducted at the request of the Selectmen’s Office, and a subsequent one requested by the CPC. The appraisals had come in at $4.4 and 3.7 million respectively, though the CPC appraisal had not been received in full. Mr. Kanter questioned whether the 1 Selectmen or CPC could proceed with their respective votes with only a three- page summary for the second appraisal. He also questioned whether the CPC would have their required 14-day review period for review, a policy they had adopted after the Busa acquisition. There were further questions about whether the CPC could pay more than the appraised price for the property, to which Mr. Kelley responded that Town Counsel had reviewed this issue, felt that both appraisals should be scrutinized, but that as long as the appraisals were conducted with acceptable standards, either one would stand. Mr. Hornig, speaking as a resident, not as a Planning Board member, questioned the prudence of accepting a purchase price in the $4 million dollar range. He cited two properties at 341 Marrett Road and 52 Lowell Street which were purchased in 2008 and 2009 and had reasonable lot values. One he noted had sold for $520,000/acre. With this in mind, he questioned the wisdom of buying the Cataldo land at approximately $952,000/acre. Mr. Hornig further questioned the “left lot” value of the land, stating that he felt Mr. Cataldo’s remaining lots would be enhanced by the surrounding conservation land, and thereby increase in value. He asked if this had been taken into account in establishing the value of the 4.2 acres under negotiation. There were supporters of the purchase, including Mr. Gerry Paul, an abutter. He stated that he agreed there might be some “sticker shock” to the purchase price, but that in the future, as with many land purchases, the Town would look back and feel they got a bargain. He said he felt Town Meeting should ultimately decide. Mr. Bartenstein returned to the issue of the appraisals, and asked Mr. Kelley to describe and explain the various appraisals which had been completed on the Cataldo property over the past several years. Mr. Kelley reviewed a number of the past appraisals, but explained that they were not a comparison of apples to apples, since many of the past appraisals included different land configurations than in the present two appraisals. Mr. Urich stressed the need for the second appraisal to be made available to Town Boards and TMM members as soon as possible. Residents in support of the acquisition included Mr. David Kaufman, who spoke of the wildlife value of the parcel, and Mr. David Williams, who noted the contiguous nature of the parcel, its value to school children, and the aesthetic value it had to passersby. Ms. Ann Cubic noted that the land was one of the older parcels in Town with an agricultural history and that it also had value as a connecting swath of open space. There were questions about the roadway on the property which will be used by the Cataldo family until the family further develops the existing home (or removes it) or develops the back lots. Mr. Kanter asked if the agreement with the Cataldos gave the Conservation Commission the right to install a parkinglot while 2 the driveway was still in Cataldo us. Mr. Kelley responded that this was part of the agreement. There had been confusion about the possible uses for the Cataldo land, and Mr. Bartenstein asked for some clarification on this point. Mr. Kelley explained that initially the Cataldo’s had wanted the land to be designated for only conservation purposes, but that there was now no restriction on the land. There were continuing questions about the appraisals, and particularly about the discrepancy in the values, some $700,000. Mr. Charley Wyman, who has been associated with the negotiations, and who works in the field of land preservation, responded to this question. He stated that it is not uncommon for appraisals to come in at different values, and cited a land purchase on Cape Cod with the very same appraisers, where the values came in exactly the opposite – our low appraiser was higher, and our higher appraiser gave the lowest value. In response to a question from hearing participants, Mr. Kelley explained that the purchase could be paid for with cash and bonding, or by fully bonding. He said if the purchase were bonded, however, it would not be as an aggressive bonding schedule as with the purchase of the Busa property. There being no further questions or discussion, the hearing was closed at 8:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Nathalie Rice Administrative Assistant Community Preservation Community 3