Loading...
Smith Charities' responses to CPC questions.pdf1 October 17, 2022 Ms. Sarah LaValley Community Preservation Committee Northampton, MA Dear Ms. LaValley and Community Preservation Committee, Thank you for your questions about the Smith Charities CPA proposal for Phase 2 of Emergency Restoration work for Smith Charities historic building. Below please find replies to your questions about our proposal. Can you verify the project timeline with beginning and ending dates. The proposal reads that the beginning date is February 1, 2023. Is that correct? I contacted Jones Whitsett Architects to seek their input on your building-related questions. Jones Whitsett is the firm that completed the CPA funded Smith Charities Historic Building Conditions Assessment & Treatment Plan Final Report (April 13, 2018). Jones Whitsett Architects would also be completing the specifications for the proposed project and working with the stone masons to complete the project. Jones Whitsett indicated that the schedule of the project could start as early as February 2023 or it could start later in the year if funding were not available until later in the year. They indicated that they were laying out a schedule that aimed to complete the work in good weather that summer. The only matching funds proposed are a potential state grant. Have Smith Charities investigated options for allocating some of its own funding toward critical building repairs? The cost of the historic restoration work described in the Jones Whitsett Assessment and Treatment Plan far exceeds Smith Charities very modest annual budget. Smith Charities has already paid for some urgent repairs such as replacing a boiler that was a significant expense. Smith Charities did not seek CPA funding for the boiler and, likewise, would not seek CPA funding for other urgent internal repairs, but it is partly because of the need for such repairs that Smith Charities is relying on CPA and Mass Historic (MPPF) funds for this restoration project. You state that you are applying for a $50,000 grant frp, the Mass Historic this spring. If only partial funding for the high priority items was granted by the CPC and lower priority items delayed, could a third MPPF application be made? Based on the MPPR website, there is only one round of applications annually for the MPPF grants (in 2022, applications were due in March with award notifications in June). Judging from MPPF grants offered in prior years (see link here: 2 https://www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc/mhcmppf/mppf-recipients.htm) $50,000 seems to be one of the highest grants given to any organization. If your question is asking if a third MPPF application could be made in a subsequent year, I do not see anything on the MPPF website that would prohibit a third application. However, we would probably need to do a third application in general (even if CPC fully funds our current proposal) because Jones Whitsett Architects has indicated that even if the CPC fully funds our current proposal, there would still need to be one final round of restoration work to complete the exterior stonework. The current proposal prioritized the most urgent work for right now, but the final phase would not be until next year. One concern about having this project not be fully funded this year is that it could mean that a fourth phase would ultimately be needed. With each passing year, the cost of restoration work goes up and some of the costs aren’t easily separated out. Jones Whitsett Architects noted: Each elevation requires setting up a scaffolding system to complete the work safely. We would want to do all of an elevation's work in one phase rather than part in order to use the scaffolding efficiently and not have to pay to bring it back. Your proposal is for funding $349,218 which is the low estimate. Given the volatility of construction costs, is this amount realistic? Jones Whitsett Architects responded to this question as follows: “Regarding costs, these are recently reviewed costs and reflect changes in masonry work since the last phase of renovation was completed. At a rate of inflation of 7.5% the estimate would not be accurate a year from now. We always include [sic] deduct alternates in the bid documents to remove scope as necessary to be sure the project can proceed on budget.” Why do you need this building to operate out of? Has Smith Charities considered sale of the building and moving operations to another location? The Smith Charities building, built in 1865, is historic not only because of its unique architecture, but also because it has continued to function for the same purpose for which it was originally built for more than 150 years. The current Smith Charities Trustees and Electors meet in the same meeting room that has been used for 150 years. The mortgages that Smith Charities holds based on the framework that was established by benefactor Oliver Smith’s 1845 Will are still stored in the vault behind the teller desk that looks like that found in Harry Potter’s Gringotts Bank. This is to say that part of the historic value of the Smith Charities building to the City of Northampton is based on the fact that the building, built in accordance with Oliver Smith Will, is still continuing the charitable work required by the Oliver Smith Will. This idea was commented on by Historic Northampton on their website which notes in relevant part: The monumental aspect of the Smith Charities building harmonizes with its purpose. Oliver Smith of Hatfield died in 1845 leaving a remarkable will, whereby indigent children and women were to receive financial assistance. Rufus Choate contested the will for Smith's unhappy relatives, but he was no match for Daniel Webster who successfully defended the will. Countless residents of Northampton have benefited from Smith's generosity. 3 This building is unique in Northampton as being one of the only (or perhaps the only) historic building that continues to house the same entity for which it was originally built more than a century and a half ago. It also would seem contrary to the intent of the Oliver Smith Will to sell the Smith Charities building that the Will caused to be built so long as the mission of Smith Charities is still being fulfilled while remaining in this building. Lastly, as is discussed in detail in the attached letter from Smith Charities President, David Murphy, the resale value of the Smith Charities building would be fairly low, in part because of the historic preservation restriction on the property and because of structural issues both in terms of the architecture (e.g., the main floor is dominated by a huge bank vault in the center of the space) and because of antiquated systems. Ironically, the uniqueness of the building to its intended purpose makes it uniquely ill-suited to other purposes. Finally, we hope that the fact that the Smith Charities building is one of the landmark buildings in Northampton’s Historic Downtown District is evidence of the value of the building and the importance of the building’s uninterrupted historical purpose. We think continuing the Smith Charities mission in the Smith Charities original building benefits both Smith Charities and the community as a whole. Some of the requested project funds seem to be geared more toward maintenance rather than historic preservation. Is there a way to further refine the budget and detail what are the most critical of the preservation activities? Jones Whitsett Architect’s budget (attached) indicates which items are higher or lower priority. Jones Whitsett provided this additional explanation of some of the work needed: Regarding interior work --- the structural framing work in the attic is addressing a critical force issue. The downward force of the roof has been essentially pushing the exterior walls outward. The work involves installation of collar ties to and strengthening of key structural members and attic walls that have been separating from the floor. This work totals about $85K. I would honestly not call it repair because this is a critical structural modification to arrest action that is deteriorating the building and may be part of the cause of the chimney failure. The attic work is relatively cheap compared to the rest of the more complicated masonry work off of staging, but not less important. Regarding the issue of whether the work proposed is maintenance versus historic preservation, Jones Whitsett Architects provided this response: The proposed work addresses fundamental structural concerns in a building that was built in 1865 and has withstood significant aging and weathering that has deteriorated masonry features that allow the building to remain intact. These are not deferred maintenance issues. The work will preserve the exterior masonry on the south elevation and re-tie the roof framing to the exterior wall. Once complete, significant masonry restoration to the roof and facade should not be needed for several decades. 4 How does Smith Charities plan to appropriately maintain the building now and into the future? Please see reply above. Based on the final report by Jones Whitsett Architects and Jones Whitsett’s reply to the above question clarifying that all the proposed work is considered historic restoration, we do not think that the deterioration of the stone façade and chimney is the result of poor care or deferred maintenance. To the contrary, it would seem the stone façade has held up quite well for the past 150+ years. But when stone restoration is needed, it is, unfortunately, costly. In terms of a plan, Smith Charities is relying on the report prepared by Jones Whitsett Architects as its building plan. This report prioritizes restoration work which it deems to be emergency work. We are using that plan as our guide to try to complete emergency restoration work in multiple phases as recommended by Jones Whitsett Architects. This architectural firm, and the stone masons they would be working with, have the expertise in historical preservation, design, and restoration to ensure adherence to the requirements of the Historic Preservation Restriction that is in place for this historic structure. We hope these responses have answered your questions. Please let us know if you would like any additional clarification. We thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carol Gray Carol Gray Smith Charities Trustee September 15, 2022 Smith Charities Phase 2 Cost Estimate SCOPE OF WORK LOW ESTIMATE MEDIAN ESTIMATE HIGH ESTIMATE Chimney Restoration and Partial Rebuild*** $101,250 $112,500 $123,750 Cornice Restoration***$10,800 $12,000 $13,200 Limited Roof and Flashing Repair*** $24,300 $27,000 $29,700 Attic Wall Repair**$55,350 $61,500 $67,650 Attic Collar Ties**$6,750 $7,500 $8,250 Attic Purlin Sister**$2,250 $2,500 $2,750 Attic Rafter Sister**$3,375 $3,750 $4,125 SUBTOTAL $204,075 $226,750 $249,425 Design and Engineering Fee $20,408 $22,675 $24,943 TOTAL $224,483 $249,425 $274,368 Quoin Replacement*$75,600 $84,000 $92,400 Ashlar Patching and Unit Replacement* $67,500 $75,000 $82,500 Ashlar Edge Spall Repair*$15,750 $17,500 $19,250 SUBTOTAL $362,925 $403,250 $443,575 Design and Engineering Fee $36,293 $40,325 $44,358 TOTAL $399,218 $443,575 $487,933 *** Extremely high priority items that could be accomplished with one set of scaffolding / mobilization ** High Priority * Slightly lower priority