Washington Planning Board
Washington Planning Board
Working Meeting Minutes - DRAFT
October 25, 2016
0.0 Assembly: 2:00PM
0.1 Members present: Crandall, Kluk, Schwartz, Dulac and Williams
0.2 Members and Alternates Absent: Hatch, Terani and Russell
0.3 Visitors: None
1.0 Minutes:
October 10th working meeting: Terani sent a few comments to Schwartz, which she had already fixed in the minutes. Crandall commented that he would like to see any motion made in the meeting in bold or italic type to set it out in the body of the copy. Schwartz agreed to do that from now on. Crandall pointed out a double negative statement that Schwartz will correct. There was also a “he” that should be “she”. There were a few comments that needed attribution and context, Schwartz will correct these. Williams wanted to lose his comment that $100K goes away if some site work isn’t done, Schwartz will check her notes to see if he said that and correct if he didn’t. Schwartz said she would make the changes and send them out to the members and we can approve at our monthly meeting on November 1st.
2.0 Crandall said he would like us to reaffirm our vote from the last working meeting after comments made at the F/R meeting on Wednesday night. He feels they (F/R) deserve an answer from us after their letter and presentation of ideas. Crandall said he observed that statement made - that the BoS and PB stand by a garage only as a long-term solution isn’t true. He doesn’t feel that way; he sees it as a big step forward and part of a long-term solution. He doesn’t want to close the door. Williams asked what we are doing; crafting a response or what, he doesn’t want to rebut what they wrote. Kluk asked what we feel about what we heard and what we are putting forward. Has anything changed? After conversations she thinks we should revote to make sure that is what we want to do. Crandall doesn’t know if the minutes will reflect what was said. Williams said the meeting was an official PB meeting so we should get the minutes from Bob Hofstetter; we might want to make some changes to the minutes. He thinks a quorum of the board showed up so it was a PB meeting. Schwartz disagreed, it was a Fire/Rescue meeting, called by them that we were invited to and the minutes are theirs. Schwartz noticed it as a working meeting of F/R and PB but it was not our meeting. Dulac wanted to respond; he said he has great empathy for the F/R people, he is sympathetic but he thinks there hasn’t been much movement; cost and an empty station are the big issues for him. Following the meeting he talked to people; if we use the existing station for a few years, it doesn’t resolve the issue of the empty station; we need to clarify what we want to do. He wants clarity for where we stand relative to the F/R station and the other two buildings (TH and SH). We need to make clear where we are to both the BoS and F/R. Do they want to come talk to us again? Williams said that we are saying our position is clear; we support the TH but not the shell with the barn for F/R. Kluk said they invited us to continue the conversation. Dulac doesn’t want to cut them off. Crandall said we owe them a response. Kluk said there were statements made by PB members that might make them think otherwise.
Kluk wants to reaffirm both motions and wanted to start with the TH. She read the motion as passed at the last meeting. “Meeting House -We recommend a Warrant Article for the option developed with Dave Drasba (Architect) as presented at our October 4th meeting for a scaled back Meeting House with access to the second floor to be paid by donations, grants, or volunteer labor. We are committed to working with the selectmen to present this plan as a warrant article at Town Meeting”. Crandall made a motion to reaffirm the motion passed at the October 10th meeting, Kluk seconded the motion and Dulac wanted to comment. He said his understanding was that the MH committee participants were, in general, in favor of the new plan and accept it as presented. Crandall called for the vote, 4 in favor with Williams abstaining.
Kluk said she had a copy of the motion on the F/R station, she was proposing a new motion to add to that – “The Planning Board understands and agrees that there are building needs for Fire and Rescue, but does not support Plan B (Fire/Rescue Barn with partially finished annex, $1,590,000) because it results in the current fire station being empty/underutilized and insufficient cost savings. The Board has proposed several conceptual options to Fire/Rescue for their consideration and will continue to welcome ideas from F/R and the public on alternatives to meet F/R needs until a mutually agreeable solution can be found.” Crandall seconded the motion. Dulac said that this says we do not support Plan B but we are open to discussing a mutually agreeable solution. He is concerned that the last 5 words may not happen. Williams said we should lose those words. Crandall suggested an amendment to that effect, Dulac seconded adding that we hope for a mutually agreeable solution but he didn’t think it should be in the motion. The motion now reads: “The Planning Board understands and agrees that there are building needs for Fire and Rescue, but does not support Plan B (Fire/Rescue Barn with partially finished annex, $1,590,000) because it results in the current fire station being empty/underutilized and insufficient cost savings. The Board has proposed several conceptual options to Fire/Rescue for their consideration and will continue to welcome ideas from F/R and the public on alternatives to meet F/R needs. All voted in favor as amended.
Crandall said he had a motion for the Schoolhouse, which he read to the board: “As respects to the Old Schoolhouse, we recommend the hiring of a structural engineer and Architect to develop plans to preserve and restore the building for office occupancy.” Schwartz seconded. Schwartz asked for discussion and wanted to know if we are asking for money to do this? Crandall said the BoS is asking for a conceptual plan. Williams said there is no money to release. Schwartz said that there is money in the Town Buildings fund that can be used for this purpose. Dulac said that this is the same language we asked the BoS to consider months ago; we want a foundation under the building. Dulac thinks they (BoS) want that to move forward. Crandall said it was left out in order to not get into an argument about the use of the building. Williams said the BoS want a plan in order to do anything. Schwartz said we did a report on the condition of the building months ago. Williams said it was never given to the BoS so it needs to be given to them with a request. He thinks we are premature in making this motion; we need to give the BoS a plan. Schwartz said that at our meeting Marshall said that we need to make a formal request. Kluk said that she struggles with not nailing down what is being done with the SH, maybe this is premature. Schwartz said that looking at the building structurally isn’t premature, it is responsible. Kluk suggested that if we move forward in looking at it structurally then we could recommend a specific use for the building.
Dulac thinks the PB needs a focus; we are making suggestions for the buildings – this is what we want to do, a scaled back MH, use the existing F/R with a barn, with further discussion on the F/R. In a macro sense this is what we want. Schwartz said that we want to look at the SH structurally and it doesn’t matter who will sit in there eventually. Williams said we don’t have a macro position for all three buildings. Schwartz asked that if the F/R members were ready to work on another solution will the BoS let us use some of the money to work with the architect to find a real solution? Williams said he couldn’t speak for the BoS. Dulac said we are open to discussion. Crandall said we need a position on the SH along with our other positions. Kluk said we need to clarify our position in a positive way. Crandall wants a vote on the motion; there were 2 for, Williams voted no and Dulac abstained, then Kluk voted no and Dulac changed his vote to no, making it 2 yes and 3 no, the motion didn’t pass. Dulac made a new motion – “As respects to the Old Schoolhouse, we recommend the hiring of a structural engineer and Architect to develop plans to preserve and restore the building for office occupancy. We will provide the BoS with a conceptual plan that supports the funding of this recommendation.” Crandall seconded the motion. Williams wanted to know if the conceptual plan would include suggestions for the usage. Dulac wants to know if it is for office occupancy, if so it is a red flag to him and others. Crandall wants to just get started on the Schoolhouse. Williams said you were talking Macro, office occupancy is not macro, would it sit empty? It needs a stated use; we have a responsibility to answer the question. Crandall said he had more wording in his motion before but it was suggested by Marshall that he takes it out. Kluk suggested we say it should be structurally sound for its current use. Crandall asked if we want to amend the motion again. Kluk read the motion again, 4 voted in favor with Williams voting no, motion passed. Kluk said that now the onus is on the PB to come up with a plan. Kluk suggested she and Dulac work with Bill Cole’s report, our report on the SH and she can use Cole’s drawings to come up with something for the BoS.
Schwartz said that Jed and Shawn have indicated that they are willing to work with the Architect to explore using the existing station as an alternate option. She asked if we get confirmation from the F/R committee would the BoS come up with some money? Kluk said get confirmation, then we can work with them on the programming and Costello on the siting then we can work with Kyle Barker (Architect). Williams said we need to do the work we can do and then talk to the BoS. Dulac said come up with a small group to come up with a schematic to propose to the BoS to fund. Williams said we, as a board need to get something from the F/R before we take that position. Crandall said this is good news. Williams said this needs to happen fast. Schwartz said there is time to get things done, she will speak with F/R.
3.0 Meeting date for next Planning Board meeting, November 1, 2016, at 6:30PM
4.0 Adjournment: Time: 3:20 pm
Motioned by Kluk, seconded by Dulac, all voted in favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
Nan Schwartz