">FINAL Minutes, January 8, 2007, Community Preservation Committee Meeting
Present: Community Preservation Committee members: Bob Wilber (Chairman), Dave Walrath (Vice-Chairman), Kathy Sferra,
Laura Spear, Corinne Green, Karen Gray.
Associate Members: Margie Lynch Administrative Assistant: Deb Seith
Also Present: Eric Bachtell (RFS), several members from Recreation for Stow (RFS), and Bill Seymour, Gale Associates.
The meeting began with quorum at 7:37pm.
BILLS & MINUTES
le="text-indent:-18px;padding-left:48px;text-align:left;">EPORT
" style="text-indent:-18px;padding-left:48px;text-align:left;">color:#000000;">
A This will not be known until more study is done.
Q. Karen asked if anyone had contacted the Massachusetts Society for Historical Archeology and suggested that money would need to be budgeted for historical investigations.
A. No one has looked into this matter yet.
Q. Karen said that she supports the need for recreational space but asked if all the fields had to be in one place.
A. This is the best parcel of Town owned land that RFS could identify (using Town owned land is a way to keep the cost of the project down, and RFS is only considering using Town owned land at this time.)
Q. Margie asked if the RFS felt that they had adequate data from residents regarding what they want (paved walking path, covered pavilion, etc).
A. Surveys can be very timely and expensive.
Comment: The CPC suggested holding a Public Meeting.
Q. Margie asked if they could do a phasing plan and if they had done a priority of needs.
A. A priority of needs has not been done. Phasing is possible.
Q. Margie asked if they had considered on-going maintenance costs, police patrols, etc.
A. All these types of costs will be included in the final analysis. It was also mentioned that while synthetic fields have larger upfront costs, they can be played on much more with minimal maintenance costs. Natural turf fields cost less money to build but have higher maintenance costs and less available play time.
Q. Laura asked if they had considered zoning issues, especially in regard to the entrance(s) and exit(s).
A. These issues will be addressed in the final report. Bill (Gale Assoc.) did mention that there would be one entrance and one exit. They also said they would keep the entrance/exit close to the current one and keep the parking up front.
Q. Bob asked if there was a timeline for the Feasibility Study because the CPC will need some time to review the report and discuss the project. Bob also asked that RFS fill out the CPC’s application form.
A. The feasibility study will take 60 days to complete. The Town warrant closes on March 16th Town Meeting is in May RFS may need a special Town Meeting in the Fall to keep on track.
Q. Chris Way asked if RFS would look at ways to improve existing fields.
A. No, this proposal is just for the new complex.
Comment: Kathy asked that in order consider a funding request RFS provide cost information for permitting, design, and construction. She also asked for information about other funding sources.
Q. Corinne asked if $10,000 would be enough to do a feasibility study that would be comprehensive enough to go to Town Meeting with.
A. Bill (Gale Assoc.) indicated this would be possible because the proposed parcel seems to be ideal for the project, with few constraints.
Comment: Dave suggested adding one slide to the presentation that describes Stow’s existing fields.
Comment: Bob asked that RFS send their completed application and package to Deb (CPC Admin) 3 days before the next meeting on January 22, 2007.
At this point most members of RFS and Bill Seymour left the meeting. Eric Bachtell remained.
CPC members discussed the fact that many groups are seeking Community Preservation funds, and it is important to set expectations of how much money is available. The Committee discussed bonding as a means to finance some projects. The Committee also discussed holding a public meeting to determine what the residents would want to see happen with the different projects.
The Committee discussed some of the questions proposed during the Q&A period (concerns regarding traffic, archeology, existing fields, other land, etc.)
The Committee and Eric discussed the need to go through the RFP process. Margie asked if RFS had considered funding the feasibility study in order to avoid the RFP process. Eric said the general feeling from RFS is if the CPC agrees to help fund the feasibility study, it will show a willingness to support the project (and the project needs CPC funds in order to happen)
DEED RESTRICTION PROJECT
Margie mentioned that the Housing Partnership will meet on Tuesday, January 9 and discuss the Deed Restriction Program.
To date we have only received one letter of support from another Community. Deb will continue to follow-up on these.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00pm.
Upcoming Meeting
January 8, 2007 7:30pm
Respectfully submitted,
Deb Seith
CPC Administrative Assistant
| 
