HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-12-21-CPC-min
Minutes of the Community Preservation Committee
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
10:30 am
Legion Room
Cary Memorial Building
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 of the Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC).
The meeting was called to order at 10:30 am by Ms. Manz.
The purpose of the Meeting was to discuss and take votes upon the ten projects before the
CPC for review.
th
1.Minutes –
The minutes from the meeting of December 6 and the minutes
th
from the Public Hearing held on December 7 were approved as amended.
2.Review of Projects –
The CPC discussed and voted on each of the ten
projects before the Committee for review. Critical discussion and votes on the
projects are as follows:
a.)Archives and Records Management –
The CPC discussed this project
(and all projects) in light of notification that a Lexington citizen will be
submitting a citizen’s petition to reduce the CPA surcharge from 3% to
1%. Members agreed that a reduction to 1% would have a severe impact
to on-going projects such as the Archives Conservation project. Members
agreed to support this project, (9-0).
b.)Planning Funds for the development of Affordable Housing on the
Leary Property
– Members had a lengthy discussion of this project. Ms.
Weiss noted that the Leary Land Task Force had recommended to the
Board of Selectmen that CPA funding be sought for stabilization of the
Leary farm house and for design funds for housing on the land. She
expressed her objection to the Selectmen’s vote to seek only planning
funds and to exclude stabilization funds from the request. She stated that
she would be voting against this project on the basis of her displeasure
with this process. Ms. Fenollosa commented that she too was opposed to
the Selectmen’s vote, and objected to the project request for $30,000,
since it would allow the demolition of the Leary House. She noted that
1
the Historical Commission had not endorsed the project and referenced
their letter to the CPC, dated December 17, 2010. Ms. Manz reminded the
Committee that the only issue before the CPC was the approval or
disapproval of the $30,000 in planning funds, and that the matter of the
Selectmen’s vote on the use of the Leary house was outside the focus of
the CPC discussion. After considerable discussion, the CPC voted (6-2-1)
to approve the project.
c.)East Lexington Fire Doors - Replacement
– Ms. Manz voiced her
objection to this project, noting that despite the East Lexington Fire
House being in a Historic District, the building itself did not have historic
significance in her opinion. The CPC voted (8-1) to approve this project.
d.)LexHAB Request for Set-aside Funds
– The CPC discussion of this
project questioned whether the full amount of $450,000 was an
appropriate level of funding. The Committee noted that LexHAB had
sufficient funds to be able to complete acquisitions should the CPC vote a
lower amount of support for this project. Ms. Fenollosa expressed her
opinion that LexHAB should “have an equity stake” in the purchase of
affordable units.
The Committee agreed that a set of guidelines for CPA funding would be
necessary for the CPC to vote affirmatively on the project. Members noted
the receipt of a submittal from LexHAB, which contained a set of
preliminary guidelines prepared by co-Chair Bill Kennedy. The CPC
voted (8-1) to approve this project, with the provision that it remain
pending subject to final agreement on acquisition guidelines with a
provision that the CPC review all LexHAB acquisitions. This project will
be brought back to the CPC for a vote of confirmation.
e.)Muzzey Condominium Unit Owners’ Replacement of Windows
-
Discussion focused on the poor state of the Muzzey Building, the
economic status of its residents, and specific terms of the appropriation
should the CPC approve the project. Members were in agreement that if
the CPC appropriated the $253,915 for the project, they would consider
the appropriation to be an interest free loan. Loans would be granted to
individual unit owners with the stipulation that the loan be repaid upon
sale of the unit. The amounts of the monies returned would not include
any depreciation on the windows, but would be the entire amount of the
loan. Members agreed that the inclusion of this provision would be the
only way the proposal would be likely to be approved at Town Meeting.
Ms. Fenollosa noted the Historical Commission’s recommendation for
approval of the project. Ms. Manz commented that repurposing historic
buildings as affordable housing could leave residents subject to
unaffordable requirements for maintenance and restoration as has
happened at Muzzey. She stated that she was not inclined to approve this
2
kind of reuse in the future. The CPC voted (8-1) to approve the
appropriation of $253,915 for this project, contingent upon it being
structured as a loan. Ms. Rice will contact Ginger McGuire of the
Muzzey Condominium Association to inform her of the CPC vote and
ask that she obtain agreement from the condominium owners.
f.)Battle Green Monument Restoration –
Ms. Manz noted Town
Manager, Carl Valente’s directive to keep this project separate from the
Battle Green Master Plan project. Mr. Kanter of the CEC noted that his
committee would be willing to entertain a joint proposal for $100,000 if
the Battle Green Master Plan project becomes sufficiently detailed. Ms.
Fenollosa noted that the Historical Commission recommended approval
of the project. The CPC voted (9-0) to approve this project.
g.)Battle Green Master Plan Implementation –
The Committee noted that
this project remained poorly defined to date, despite the receipt of the
Draft Master Plan document. Members agreed that restoration of the
walkways by the various monuments should not be done in an “ad hoc”
manner. Mr. Wolk voiced his objection to the project, which he felt was
“not well thought out”. Ms. Weiss suggested keeping the application
before the CPC as a placeholder, pending submittal of further details on
the sidewalk restorations. The CPC voted (8-1) to keep the project
application in as a placeholder, pending more definitive information. This
vote included a provision that the $50,000 appropriation could only be
used for the restoration of walkways surrounding the monuments restored
in the Battle Green Restoration project.
h.)Center Playfields Drainage
– Phase II - The Committee discussed the
increase in the amount requested for this phase of the project after further
testing had revealed additional drainage requirements. Members had
questioned the applicants as to whether they could expect further
increases in the third phase of the project, expected to come to the CPC
next year, but had been assured that testing had been completed and that
no further increases were anticipated. The Committee voted (9-0) to
approve this project.
i.)Housing Partnership Down Payment Assistance Program
– There
Committee noted that this project, while assisting individual home
buyers, does not add a single additional unit of affordable housing to the
Town. It was also noted that while some eligible applicants for
affordable housing might be barred from proceeding without this
additional assistance, there were other applicants who did not need the
additional assistance, so that there were eligible applicants for all
available units. The Committee also noted the advice of Town Counsel,
Kevin Batt, who suggested that the project was not eligible for CPA
funding because of a lack of public benefit. Mr. Adler also questioned
3
this project in the context of a warrant article calling for the reduction of
the 3% surcharge. Members voted (2-7) not to support this project.
j.)Vynebrooke Village Drainage Work
– The Committee noted that
capital expenditures on the drainage systems at Vynebrook were
necessary for it to continue to be used for affordable housing. It voted (9-
0) to approve this project.
3.Needs Assessment Report
– Having reviewed the Needs Assessment, as
amended, since the last meeting, the Committee voted (9-0) to approve it.
4.Town Report
– Ms. Manz brought up the finalization of the Town Report,
but some members had not received it. The Report will be distributed and
members will make their comments to Ms. Rice.
5.Discussion of the Busa Farm Property
– Ms. Weiss brought two Boston
Globe articles for the CPC to review regarding Busa Farm and the progress of
the planning committee. Ms. Weiss and Ms. Shaw had planned to speak to
this agenda item. The Committee ran short on time, however, and this item
will be discussed at the next meeting.
6.Next Meeting
– The next meeting of the CPC will be on Thursday, December
th
30 at 3:00 pm in the Legion Room.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:40 pm.
Four documents were presented at the CPC meeting:
A document from LexHAB regarding their project, entitled, “LexHAB, Guidelines
for Acquisition of Housing”. The document is undated, and is on file in the CPC
office.
Two Boston Globe newspaper articles relative to the Busa Farm planning process,
(1) “Lexington committee gives community farm proposal thumbs”, dated December
17, 2010, and (2) “Changes at Land’s Sake”, dated January 31, 2010. Both
documents are on file in the CPC office.
And a spreadsheet entitled “Notes for Meeting of December 21, 2010” prepared by
Ms. Rice for the discussion and vote on projects. This document is on file in the CPC
office.
Respectfully submitted,
Nathalie Rice
Administrative Assistant
Community Preservation Committee
4