WILBER SCHOOL REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Approved Minutes—January 31, 2005
Attendance: David DePree (Acting Chairperson), Michael Baskin, Jim Glaser, David Gordon, Marilyn Kahn, Bob Levin, Marcia Liebman, Melissa Mills, Reese Schroeder
Guests: David Grasfield (Sharon Selectman), Bill Heitin (Sharon Selectman), Ben Puritz (Sharon Executive Secretary), Charles Aspinwall (15 Station St.), James F. Keating, Jr. (10 Chestnut St.), Jeanette Keating (10 Chestnut St.), Paul Vitali (8 Valley Rd.)
Meeting called to order at 7:40 p.m. by David DePree.
Minutes of January 17th approved unanimously. (January 24th meeting cancelled due to blizzard.)
Publicity
· First article published in the January 21st Sharon Advocate. Other papers did not publish item.
· Neighborhood letter sent Tuesday, January 25th. Marcia Liebman confirms receipt on Wednesday (and the neighbors in attendance tonight state they came because of the letter).
Selectmen
Questions were presented to the two attending Selectmen (third Selectman had attended previous meeting).
· Do we go forward with abatement?
· Uses—given that all uses have septic issues (also relates to town center septic issues), what are your thoughts on affordable housing, municipal use, and commercial/mixed use?
Bill Heitin’s comments
· Last week the town was awarded a $50,000 grant for a complete study for septic needs within the Town Square area. Includes all ground testing. Need to look at single site vs. multiple site septic system. Time frame: to start ASAP, but need to wait for ground thawing for some of the testing. Peter O’Cain is coordinating this grant.
· Use of Wilber property—suggests meeting with developers and potential landlords. Has heard suggestion for restaurant; recommends lower-price dining. In favor of carving out 5,000-10,000 sq.ft. for municipal use, but this part can be structured in phases, as there is concern about the effect on taxes, esp. in view of other town projects (Sharon Middle School, Sharon Community Center, Rattlesnake Hill) competing for tax money.
· Welcomes a land-lease idea; does not favor selling the property.
· Abatement—states we need to clarify our timing. If we are discussing a short-term project, the building is stable for now; for long-term project, maybe wise to consider abatement now.
David Grasfield’s comments
· The award for the septic study was to address the Town Square needs. While the Wilber School is not considered part of the Town Square, it is on the periphery and, therefore, is included in discussion of possible solutions to the Town Square problems.
· Use of site—suggests the committee make objective “best use” recommendations to the town. Balance what we want and what we can get. Feels we need more commercial development in town—is commercial development feasible here?
· Does not favor sale of the land.
· Abatement—decision needs to be brought to Capital Outlay Committee. Need to clearly state if there is anything that outweighs our doing the abatement or if we benefit to a greater degree if we do it ourselves.
Abatement
Michael Baskin
· Most optimistic time for a developer to begin work on building is 2½ years.
· Risk of increased expense by doing nothing
· Site is of more value without asbestos.
· All prior structural conditions reports have disclaimers due to the asbestos that needs to be removed to get behind the walls. No suggestion of imminent collapse.
· Discussing abatement of interior only (majority); some exterior hazardous waste around the windows will remain.
· We have no clearly defined numbers at this time as to costs. Has been in touch with STV, who will get back to Michael on abatement specifics.
David DePree—if we don’t abate, outside market will hit us for 1.25 to 1.5 times the actual cost. It is cheaper to do it ourselves.
Marilyn Kahn—clean building might be more attractive to developers.
Reese Schroeder—need to ask developers if they prefer we do it.
Bill Heitin—pointed out that Capital Outlay Committee should be advised on abatement plans. Although estimates are needed, ultimate responsibility for getting bids lies with the DPW, after the project is approved by Capital Outlay (and Town Meeting, if an increase in taxes is involved). Now is the time for presentation to Capital Outlay.
Ben Puritz and Bill Heitin agreed to work on costs and the Wilber Committee will test the market.
David DePree/Melissa Mills moved to “Recommend to Capital Outlay Committee to abate internal asbestos and other hazardous waste material from the Wilber building, subject to our shared findings”. Motion passed unanimously.
Bill Heitin, as member of Capital Outlay Committee, was asked to give the Committee a “heads up” and request that we may be asking for a $500,000-$750,000 warrant article concerning abatement.
Wilber Property Uses
David Grasfield expressed concerns for other expenses in town. This project is competing with other large projects, all with no idea of costs. Need to seek a great deal of public input.
Bill Heitin expressed concern that a municipal center will not be approved; it is an issue that “always goes to the bottom of the list”.
Michael Baskin recapped some of the ideas under consideration:
· Centralized septic treatment facility for town center
· Can reserve some portion of site for a free-standing library
· Green space can be used for a park
· Building use
o Housing
ü 40B
ü age restricted
ü rental apartments
o municipal
ü senior center—currently being considered to be part of restructured Community Center
ü library
ü town hall
o commercial
ü offices
ü retail
ü services
· Commerical probably does not provide interest to developers as residential
· Existing classrooms readily lend themselves to break up into apartments
· Challenging geometry of auditorium and gym may be difficult to subdivide into modest-sized residential units. Quick study suggests two units of 1,000-1,100 sq. ft. at each level
· Basement—tough and costly to develop—11,000 sq. ft. usable space—possible match to Town Hall program needs
· Upper floors likely to provide 28-32 residential units
Jim Keating—expressed an interested in seeing the building used for municipal purposes.
Ben Puritz—need to be sure to include impact on ground water levels when planning. Need economic studies for viable options and studies on water use and effluent for effect on neighborhood.
Reese Schroeder—need to look at impact of model on town in terms of vitality. Housing will bring people to town, but they will have to go elsewhere to spend money, which will not benefit the town.
Charlie Aspinwall—be sure the land can support the plans
· Retail concerns—traffic, noise, dirt
· Municipal space can be the heart of the community
· Pay attention to groundwater
Goal of Committee
· David Grasfield—wants three options for Town Meeting with recommendations as to why one was chosen. May have to wait until waste water/groundwater study completed before presenting options.
· Bill Heitin—would like Committee to make best decision and bring single recommendation to Town Meeting. Expects Committee to hold public forums to solicit sufficient feedback from all residents who care contribute.
· Marilyn Kahn—presentation of a couple of options might be a good idea, esp. if options include a smaller-impact project, which is more likely to pass at Town Meeting.
Next meeting: Monday, February 7th at 7:30 p.m. in downstairs meeting room of Sharon Public Library. Agenda:
· Continue to fine-tune options
· Discuss warrant strategies
Bob Levin/Michael Baskin moved to adjourn at 9:55 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Marcia C. Liebman