HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-14 Permanent Building Committee MinutesOFq
Town of Reading
r' Meeting Minutes RECEIVED
TOWN CLERK
READING. MASS.
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Permanent Building Committee 1016 MAR 29 P ; 241
Date: 2016 -03 -14 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Conference Room
Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Open Session
Purpose: General Business Version:
Attendees: Members - Present:
Chair Greg Stepler, Nancy Twomey, Brad Congdon, John Coote, Patrick
Thompkins; Associate members Michael Bean and David Traniello; Cemetery
Trustees Chair Janet Baronian and Secretary Bill Brown.
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Town Manager Bob LeLacheur, Facilities Director Joe Huggins, Conservation
Administrator Chuck Tirone, FINCOM member Paula Perry
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By:
Topics of Discussion:
Conservation Administrator Chuck Tirone reviewed the setbacks. Within 100 feet of
wetlands is under Conservation Commission jurisdiction. The absolute closest we could build
a building is 35 feet, while 50 feet is the optimal range.
At 50 feet a Notice of Intent would need to be filed with CONSCOM and a wetlands scientist
might be needed. Both Wood End and Charles Lawn cemeteries are likely to involve
CONSCOM. They are unlikely to require a full survey, but may want to Flag the wetlands. He
thought that CONSCOM would prefer Wood End over Charles Lawn, and noted that a storm
water plan would also be needed.
In 1990 CONSCOM and the Cemetery Trustees went to Town Meeting and did a land swap
at Wood End according to Mr. Brown.
At Charles Lawn there may be sewer Issues with the change in grade.
The team agreed that Charles Lawn and Wood End are possibilities.
Brad Congdon noted utilities are available on Parson's Lane. A significant elevation exists at
Wood End in the rear area which may require a pump station.
Natural gas is still a question in the Charles Lawn location.
Mr. Tirone noted septic would require a notice of Intent to the Conservation Commission.
80 -90 feet away the commission would be okay. Wood End makes more sense due to
proximity to the wetlands.
Page I 1
Permanent Building Committee Minutes - March 14. 2016 - pace 2
If another site such as Charles Lawn makes more sense due to utilities, a write up should be
done stating the challenges and cost benefits.
John Coote asked what our next steps are.
Laurel Hill and Forest Glen are not impacted by Conservation.
Patrick Thompkins noted Charles Lawn appears to make the most sense at this point.
The rankings were reviewed on the projector and the team discussed how each faired.
Mr. Thompkins said Laurel Hill's cost will be higher due to relocation costs.
Mr. Stepler noted laurel Hill presents demo costs and possibly relocation costs.
Mr. Tirone said if we can justify having a building at the 35 foot mark, the Conservation
Commission will consider It. His advice is to bring in one site and bring it in for review.
Whatever we choose, a limit of work/activity needs to be well thought out.
Mr. Tirone left at 7:42 PM.
Mr. Stepler is talking about narrowing down the field of choices for next steps. He suggested
that we give an engineering firm only those cemeteries that are best suited by priority
ranking. From the work done by members of the committee it appeared that Forest Glen
could be removed from consideration immediately. At Laurel Hill there is not much space, at
Wood End the cost of utilities might be high.
Mr. Coote suggested putting 2 sites forward and not paying them to choose from the four
and do a lot of work the team has already done.
Mr. Thompkins suggested moving forward with Wood End and Charles lawn as the two sites
for the study.
Mr. Brown made a motion to move forward for Wood End as first choice and
Charles Lawn as a second choice, seconded by Mr. Congdon and approved
unanimously 5 -0.
Mr. Stepler suggested the engineering firm verify the findings. The RFP process was also
discussed. The language would be married Into our boiler plate done by Town Counsel.
Mr. LeLacheur mentioned the process of developing the RFP. He also mentioned the
possibility If the project doesn't go to build on a totally new site.
The team looked . at a schedule and agreed that qualifications should be reviewed first then
pricing is evaluated second.
Mr. Stepler noted the target is to have the RFP start in June by the first week. This will
enable us to carry over the money.
Mr. LeLacheur will contact legal counsel on getting the boiler plate together.
Mr. Stepler suggested that Michael modify the schedule to meet the June 1" timeline.
Mr. Congdon reviewed the Weston + Sampson RFP as a possible template.
This will be used as a basis for all documents.
Page 1 2
Permanent Building Committee Minutes - March 14 2016 - pace 3
The next task is to modify the document and tailor it to the project.
Mr. Stepler spoke about the process involved from conceptual to schematic decision for the
project.
The next meetings will be March 281h, April 111h, May 2nd and May 16th.
On a motion by Mr. Brown seconded by Ms. Twomey, the committee adiourned at
9:08om by a vote of 5 -0.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
Page 1 3