Agenda and Minutes 2008-10-15
City of Northampton
Community Preservation Committee
210 Main Street, City Hall
Northampton, MA 01060
Community Preservation Committee
Agenda
DATE: Wednesday, October 15, 2008
TIME: 6:00 PM (Meeting will conclude by 8:45 PM)
PLACE: City Council Chambers, 212 Main Street (BEHIND City Hall)
Contact:
Jack Hornor, Chair, Community Preservation Committee
Jack@JackHornor.com
Fran Volkmann, Vice Chair, Community Preservation Committee
Franv@comcast.net
Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner
byoung@northamptonma.gov
(413) 587-1263
Agenda
Public Comment period
?
Acceptance of 10/1 minutes
?
Chair's Report
?
Discussion of how to handle incomplete applications
?
Meeting with applicants
?
Continues discussion of CPA Plan revisions
??
Other Business
??
For additional information please refer to the Community Preservation Committee website:
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/
1
MINUTES
Community Preservation Committee
Date: Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Time: 6:00 pm
Place: 212 Main St., City Council Chambers
Members Present: Jack Hornor, George Kohout, Tom Parent, Fran Volkmann, Don Bianchi,
Mason Maronn, John Andrulis, Lilly Lombard, and Craig Della Penna
(6:30 pm)
Staff Present: Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner
John Frey, Community Preservation Planner
Jack Hornor opened the public meeting at 6:03pm.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
??
None
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
??
Jack Hornor presented the minutes of the October 1, 2008 meeting for approval.
??
Fran Volkmann clarified the consensus of the group regarding input from other boards in
the application process. The CPC will be neutral regarding the demand for board support.
Support is not necessary but would be helpful. Also, if the CPC decides input is needed
from a board it will pursue that input separately. Minutes will be changed to note this
consensus.
??
Upon motion by Mason Maronn, seconded by Tom Parent, all voted in favor of
approving the minutes (George Kohout and Lilly Lombard abstain).
3. CHAIR’S REPORT
CRAIG DELLA PENNA INVOLVEMENT IN RUGGLES PROJECT
??
Jack Hornor queried the CPC as to whether Craig Della Penna’s involvement as realtor
for the Ruggles project was a conflict of interest. MGL prohibits “direct and substantial
interest”. He stated it does not appear to meet that threshold in this case.
??
Bruce Young stated the appearance of conflict could be damaging to the CPC. He also
stated Craig Della Penna would need to contact the State Ethics Commission himself if
concerned.
??
Fran Volkmann stated the CPC must be very careful in situations such as these.
Perception is just as important as reality.
2
??
George Kohout stated it appears the consensus of the CPC is to recommend Craig Della
Penna remove himself. Also, he wondered whether it might be a conflict for Bruce
Young to participate in discussion of conservation applications as he staffs that
committee as well.
??
Don Bianchi stated Craig Della Penna might participate in discussion but abstain from
voting. The one application is not discrete, they all relate to each other for the round.
??
Jack Hornor stated he would recommend Craig Della Penna recuse himself from the
Ruggles discussion.
OTHER BUSINESS
??
Jack Hornor announced the CPC has received a confirmation email that the State match
of $588,231 (79%) is in process. Also, the State announced the matching level for next
year is projected to be approximately 35%.
??
Jack Hornor announced the meeting location would need to be changed for the meetings
of November 19, December 3, and December 17, 2008. The location is still to be
determined.
??
Jack Hornor announced the terms for John Andrulis and Craig Della Penna are set to
expire in 2009.
??
Jack Hornor announced the Community Preservation Coalition would like to publish an
article regarding our Preservation Guarantee policies.
??
Jack Hornor announced Peg Keller sent a letter to the CPC listing the priority projects for
the Northampton Historic Commission. The letter was forwarded to all CPC members.
??
Jack Hornor announced eligibility forms for the first funding round of 2009 would be due
on January 12, 2008.
??
Jack Hornor announced he attended the FCBA board meeting. The CPC request for a
preservation guarantee was well received. The FCBA now wants to see the actual
document and they will then vote on it.
VALLEY CDC MAPLES STREET SRO PROJECT
??
Jack Hornor announced Valley CDC has not received all its needed information to move
forward with its State One Stop grant application. At this point City Council will not vote
on the CPC grant until a new plan is in place. He queried the CPC as to whether it should
make a recommendation to the City Council on how to proceed.
??
Tom Parent stated this situation leaves a bad taste. It is not a good situation as now all
that grant money is gone for Round 3.
??
Lilly Lombard stated the CPC expedited the application for them to meet their deadline.
We now need to re-look at their application in context of other applications. We should
re-vote later. Valley CDC does not need to start over, but we must re-vote.
??
George Kohout suggested the CPC bundle it with the rest of Round 3. He stated there
would be bad publicity regarding this project. Not going to help us.
3
??
Don Bianchi agreed with Lily Lombard. We should reconsider with round 3, however it
is not fair to infer bad faith on the applicant’s part. They needed to move forward with
some assumptions. Good for them to not go forward now, they acted responsibly.
??
Jack Hornor summarized the two subjects now before the CPC, 1.) how to deal with this
application and 2.) how to communicate this with city council.
??
George Kohout questioned what would be the revised application.
??
Jack Hornor stated this is the heart of the question. It is not different from one point of
view, from other point of view budget will be different.
??
Bruce Young stated the other point is that they won’t make this year’s deadline.
??
Tom Parent stated the CPC must be more careful, make them have everything in place.
??
Bruce Young stated the current recommendation to City Council out of CPC hands.
However CPC could make a statement to City Council in order to guide their actions.
??
Fran Volkmann stated Valley CDC was trying hard to meet deadline to get the project
moving. They can’t make it now and they are disappointed. They were not clear about
what they could do by right, enhanced SROs or not. The project would require same
amount of money from us no matter what style they choose.
??
Don Bianchi suggests not getting into discussion of whether project changed. Let’s
narrowly ask the council to table the proposal for now. We will discuss further later.
??
George Kohout countered the timing has changed. It puts a different spin on that piece of
money.
??
Tom Parent stated Valley CDC announced the February funding round would likely be
cancelled.
??
Don Bianchi clarified it would merely be delayed to later springtime.
??
Lilly Lombard questioned whether the CPC is at liberty to judge the application in Round
3 or is money fully committed.
??
Jack Hornor stated asking council to table does not preclude the CPC from debating later.
??
Fran Volkmann stated tabled motions in City Council are automatically eliminated at end
of year.
??
Don Bianchi suggested the CPC request City Council table and not take further action
until we weigh in.
??
George Kohout proposed the City Council withdraw it and the CPC put it back in the
Round 3 bundle.
??
Lilly Lombard made a motion to request City Council withdraw the motion.
??
Don Bianchi requested Lilly Lombard to add term “without prejudice”.
??
Fran Volkmann requested Lilly Lombard use term “early decision”.
??
Lilly Lombard added both terms to the motion.
??
Mason Maronn seconded the motion.
??
George Kohout stated the term early decision clouds issue for council.
??
Jack Hornor stated the City Council knows the difference.
??
All in favor voted in favor of the motion.
CRAIG DELLA PENNA INVOLVEMENT IN RUGGLES PROJECT - CONTINUED
??
Craig Della Penna arrived at 6:30 pm and discussion continued.
??
Jack Hornor stated to Craig Della Penna that the CPC thinks you should recuse yourself
from the Ruggles Project discussions.
4
??
Craig Della Penna questioned whether that means to leave or not.
??
George Kohout stated sitting in the audience is acceptable practice.
??
Mason Maronn disagreed and stated he left the room in a similar instance.
??
Jack Hornor stated the two things the law talks about are “direct and substantial” benefit.
However, the CPC thinks perception is important too.
??
Craig Della Penna stated any person on any city board is in conflict then.
??
Jack Hornor stated it is the realtor connection, not the Historic Commission connection.
No one is accusing you of wrongdoing, but there is the appearance of conflict.
??
Craig Della Penna stated he I would leave during discussion.
??
Don Bianchi stated the member could choose what to do. Observing is not a problem.
??
Bruce Young countered that during training the State said to leave the room.
??
Fran Volkmann encouraged Craig Della Penna to be ok with this situation. She stated it is
not about you. I have been there as well.
4. DISCUSSION OF HOW TO HANDLE INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS
??
Jack Hornor tabled discussion to a future meeting.
5. MEETING WITH APPLICANTS
DAR
??
Jack Hornor welcomed members of the DAR to discuss their grant application.
??
Karen Tatro introduced the application. Full details can be found here…
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/2008_First_Round_CPA_Ap
plication_Packets/.
??
Don Bianchi questioned what kind of preservation guarantee would be appropriate.
??
Karen Tatro responded that she too wanted to know what that entails. DAR is only asking
for $2700 and the DAR is on the historic register already.
??
Don Bianchi stated he is comfortable not pressing for a guarantee.
??
Fran Volkmann stated this is a great plan to add windows on the interior without hurting
the historic look.
??
George Kohout stated the CPC usually asks for multiple bids, but this is a specialty job.
Sole bid is appropriate in his opinion.
??
Lilly Lombard stated this is a very low price for the job. She is comfortable with the
single bid. She apologized for the CPC’s inability to help fund DAR’s paint job, her
mistake. Perhaps add to plan that no CPC money can be used to re-imbursed work
already completed. ***
RUGGLES CENTER
??
Jack Hornor welcomed members of the Ruggles Center to discuss their grant application.
??
Steve Strimer introduced the application. Full details can be found here…
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/2008_First_Round_CPA_Ap
plication_Packets/.
5
??
Don Bianchi stated he has a few impression, 1.) value has been demonstrated, 2.) from
real estate transaction point-of-view the project doesn’t seem far along, and 3.) this is two
different projects, acquisition and renovation including three artists studios. Need to
focus on museum only.
??
Don Bianchi questioned what is process for development if condominium addition were
to fall through.
??
Steve Strimer stated the condominiums are a separate project and clients usually own
unit. Condominium documents need to be finished.
??
Don Bianchi questioned if the CPC supports the project how can we be assured this will
move forward if condominiums fall through. To assess as stand alone project need to
know value as is without condominiums. He would like to find out more about
development and construction costs. Also, what happens if money is not raised? He still
wants a pre-development budget. How much needs to be spent to get at point of
understanding full project? One option for us is to support pre-development costs then
have applicant come back for more as the project progresses.
??
Fran Volkmann questioned if the purchase price is $180,000.
??
Steve Strimer stated that is the cost for the building as part of four-unit condo. He is not
sure of cost if condominiums do not work out. He requests your decision include
possibility of conditional funding, not moved next round.
??
Fran Volkmann questioned the possibility of an historic preservation guarantee.
??
Steve Strimer stated they welcome that. It would be a resource to Northampton for
education, a research institute. They welcome that responsibility.
??
Jack Hornor stated he does not understand why condominiums are part of application.
??
Steve Strimer stated it is not part of application, but is part of the overall project.
??
Jack Hornor asked if condominiums must be done for success.
??
Steve Strimer stated they do not necessarily need be included. He added that in the offer
to purchase the owner has been very generous. This is the best possible outcome for the
demolition delay order, a groundbreaking example. He emphasized they are a non-profit
organization trying to make this happen.
??
Bruce Young stated the applicant must think creatively regarding the preservation
guarantee. He stated the Historic Commission would likely question adding
condominiums though they do appreciate the historic significance of the museum.
??
Steve Strimer emphasized the condominiums are not to be attached.
??
Bruce Young stated this is about a historic property. There are other options, perhaps
regarding historic collection.
??
Don Bianchi requested the applicant provide more information showing the project could
be successful as a stand-alone project. Another option is to let CPC help you with
deposit, due diligence, appraisals, etc. He wants the project to succeed regardless of
condominium standing.
??
Steve Strimer questioned if it is ok to discuss directly with Don Bianchi.
??
Bruce Young stated that is acceptable, but also email him with updates in order to
maintain the file.
??
Jim Harrity, who is the current owner, stated he is one of the biggest proponents of the
project. This was not always the case, but he bought in. The Ruggles organization have
motivated and educated me. This fits into model where we use development tools for the
6
common wealth. This scenario C fits the model though scenarios A or B would be more
profitable. The Ruggles Center is separate from the condominiums and meets zoning
criteria. It less intrusive than the original plan. The building itself is sound.
??
Fran Volkmann stated the CPC is empowered to support afford housing also. Is there any
chance of doing affordable housing as well?
??
Jim Harrity stated the only way is if more subsidy were involved. Any profit is going
back into the Ruggles Center. $135,000 is sale price of affordable housing. We can put
together idea of live/work space.
??
Don Bianchi questioned how he arrived at the $180,000 value.
??
Jim Harrity stated he backed into that price. He stated he is currently into it for more than
that. This is a collaborative project with back and forth. More units could have brought
the figure down more. A broker’s opinion is possible instead of appraisal in order to save
on costs.
??
George Kohout stated it is a wise idea to help with pre-development costs. He suggested
the CPC commit to some but wait for buy/sell agreement.
VALLEY CDC – FORECLOSURE PREVENTION
??
Jack Hornor welcomed members of Valley CDC to discuss their grant application.
??
Michele Morris introduced the application. Full details can be found here…
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/2008_First_Round_CPA_Ap
plication_Packets/.
??
Tom Parent questioned if anything at the federal level is changing regarding this support.
??
Michele Morris stated FHA refinancing is not happening yet.
??
Don Bianchi stated the CPC is charged with helping low income. What is change of
helping even lower, perhaps 6 of 10 at 80% or less of AMI?
??
Michele Morris stated that should be fine.
??
Lilly Lombard questioned if the remainder would be up to 100% AMI only.
??
Michele Morris stated yes, by CPA law that is the limit.
??
George Kohout questioned if Valley CDC reviews income levels later on.
??
Don Bianchi stated no, income picture is snapshot in time.
??
George Kohout stated this does not add to affordability housing stock.
??
Bruce Young confirmed this maintains housing, but does not change number of
affordability housing units.
??
Michele Morris stated however that keeping houses in better repair and maintaining tax
income helps affordable housing in the long run.
VALLEY CDC – KING STREET SRO
??
Jack Hornor welcomed members of Valley CDC to discuss their grant application.
??
Pat McCarthy introduced the application. Full details can be found here…
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/2008_First_Round_CPA_Ap
plication_Packets/.
??
Carl Williams, a former resident of 60 North Maple SROs, stated he left because of lack
of enhanced units. He was very grateful but important for enhanced SPOs. It is
depressing in current set-up.
7
??
Don Petigny-Perry, SRO coordinator, stated this project would be very important in this
community. One size does not fit all. Enhanced SROs are needed. The population served
is very diverse. Often SRO housing is permanent for many people. We have lost many
units lately. The units serve low income, aging, and those with mental health or substance
abuse problems. Many have made great contributions in their past lives. There are many
resources for families, but this is a lost population including many veterans.
??
Jack Hornor questioned whether Valley CDC is likely to get both Maple St and King St
funded in the next round by the State.
??
Pat McCarthy stated there is a good chance to get both. There is a state initiative to fund
SROs. We do very thorough applications and have gotten multiple before in one round.
??
Lilly Lombard stated she read about the concern City Councilor Murphy stated regarding
his opinion these projects are too expensive per unit.
??
Pat McCarthy stated it is a great deal of taxpayer money and the expense is an assurance
of well done work. Using an architect is important. A qualified attorney is very
important. Environmental work will be done correctly. Due diligence will be reflected in
soft costs. It protects taxpayer dollars. Affordable housing is an oxymoron. It is not
cheap. He invites anyone to visit the School Street site to confirm.
??
Jack Hornor stated Councilor Murphy’s statements took him by surprise. He has
discussed with many parties and gotten assurances these costs are within range.
??
Pat McCarthy stated the old system was to get verbal ok from CDBG, then work through
due diligence. The CPC requires cart before the horse. CPC is valuable resource but
much more difficult to maneuver. However, this is much more open process.
??
Tom Parent asked if the lot is zoned for business.
??
Pat McCarthy stated it is and no special permit would be needed. Commercial is needed
on first floor however.
??
Tom Parent questioned the viability of receiving $325,000 from Smith College.
??
Pat McCarthy stated they have only had verbal support at this point from Smith College.
??
Joanne Campbell stated they did get $220,000 from Smith for School St.
??
Don Bianchi questioned in addition to $25,000 for development costs, what is minimum
we could give to help for acquisition, but put off rest for construction.
??
Joanne Campbell stated dollars could come on either end, but it includes costs/risks on
either end.
??
Don Bianchi requested Valley CDC please work up an estimated plan for the CPC.
VALLEY CDC – PRE-DEVELOPMENT LOANS
??
Jack Hornor welcomed members of Valley CDC to discuss their grant application.
??
Pat McCarthy introduced the application. Full details can be found here…
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/2008_First_Round_CPA_Ap
plication_Packets/.
??
Jack Hornor questioned if Valley CDC is applying to Amherst and Easthampton for this
idea.
??
Joanne Campbell stated neither town has good system for CPC applications. They have
started discussions however.
??
Jack Hornor stated perhaps others could contribute to create a pool of funds.
??
Jack Hornor stated there is a philosophical issue for CPC giving funds without a stated
8
purpose.
??
Joanne Campbell stated this would be a restricted fund. CPC could hold money.
??
George Kohout asked if Housing Partnership is supporting this application.
??
Pat McCarthy stated yes, they are. They should have sent a letter of support.
6. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF CPA PLAN REVISIONS
??
Jack Hornor tabled discussion to a future meeting.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
??
None.
Upon motion by George Kohout, seconded by Tom Parent, all agreed to adjourn meeting at 8:38
pm.
Respectfully submitted on October 28, 2008,
John Frey, Community Preservation Planner
9