MOTION by Mr. Leavitt, SECOND, by Mr. Trafton and UNANIMOUSLY VOTED to accept the agenda as submitted.

Ms. Butler for the Scituate Housing Authority

Ms. Butler gave the members a brief update, stating that the engineering company surveyed the property on the Driftway and wanted to help the Housing Authority develop a plan for rental housing. This was not expected, as all along the Housing Authority had planned to build homeownership houses. The original deed says that the property is for rental units only. She showed the member two different proposed layouts. Ms. Butler said the Housing Authority was looking into was to look into money for a 689 development, which is DMR or an 811 development for handicapped, physically disabled people. Mr. Bulman agreed that there is a demand out there for both types of developments. Right now the plan is for three units, housing 8 people, with the possibility three 1 or two bedroom houses. With the 811 plan there is a Capital Grant you can apply for, that if you build and guarantee the property will keep within the guidelines of the program for 40 years you don’t have to pay it back. Ms. Butler reiterated that the Housing Authority is looking into what’s available and what they can do. The only thing they know for sure right now is that there will be 24 rental units.

Mr. Bulman asked for clarification of just what the requested funds would be used for, to do more design. He felt there was no need to do further design until it was determined what the available source of funding are.

Mr. Scott asked if the money appropriated last year for the Housing Need Assessment had been spent and Ms. Butler explained that the RFP was put out and they have received three replies.

Ms. Ivas asked if Scituate residents would have preference, and Ms. Butler answered that she believed because it would involve HUD funds Scituate residents would not receive preference.

Mr. Bulman wanted to know if there was any of the $18,000 left that they did this piece with and Ms. Butler felt there was a balance of approximately $4700 left. Mr. Bulman thought that those funds could be used to pursue grant applications. Ms. Butler questions if that is possible because she thought those funds were limited to only the soil work. Mr. Bulman said he would check into the article but he believes the article was for a broader range of expenditures.

Mr. Leavitt asked if there had been meetings with the neighbors and was told not at this point for this proposal. There had been a neighborhood meeting concerning the walkway and at that point their concern was for a buffer. Without question that concern can be accommodated with the current plans. Mr. Leavitt said that in his opinion the “rental” will be more alarming than “ownership” to the neighbors and even though this site has been designated for some sort of community housing for many years he feels it is imperative to do everything you can to passify the neighbors.

Mr. Limbacher asked how long it takes to know if you will receive the 689 or 811 grants. Ms. Butler wasn’t sure about the 689 but felt the 811 doesn’t take that long, the awards are made in September. She wasn’t sure however that they would be able to get the application in on time.

Mr. McKain reminded everyone about the Stockbridge Road affordable housing article that was voted down at Town Meeting a few years ago and echoed Mr. Leavitt’s thoughts that it is very important to get the neighbors support for the project.

Mr. Bulman then asked if the land was already owned by the Housing Authority if the project had to in fact go before Town Meeting. His thought was that if the Housing Authority did the project in conjunction with the Affordable Housing Trust with property already owned for the purpose of community housing they wouldn’t need Town Meeting approval.

Mr. Leavitt and Mr. Bulman engaged in a discussion involving this question. Ms. Butler said at this point she would prefer to go before Town Meeting and Mr. Bulman reminded the Members that this was one of the reasons the Affordable Housing Trust was created, to have them oversee the creation of housing, and not always wait for a Town Meeting vote.

Application postponed

Janet Cornacchio for SAA

Ms. Cornacchio introduced the other members with her and passed out form proving the SAA non-profit status. She read a history of the Ellis House and gave an overview of what the SAA hoped to accomplish. Ms. Corannchio stated that the project meets the goals of the CPA because the house is a historically note worthy building and deemed worthy of both State and National Historic Registration. She was informed by Mr. Smith, of the Scituate Historical Commission, that he had begun the process for State Registration but until the National Registration has been received the State Registration will not apply. Part of the revised budget includes the $5,000 necessary to go forward with the National Registration Nomination. In Ms. Cornacchio’s opinion the project also qualifies as a CPA project because it optimizes the use and enjoyment of Town resources. In its current condition the Ellis House is not ADA accessible. Ms. Cornacchio informed the Members of a grant that went around from Lieutenant Gov. Murray last week. The SAA filed for this grant, requesting $200,000 for grading of the road, installing lighting and a new septic system.

Mr. Bulman questioned Ms. Cornacchio on the point of use and enjoyment of Town resource. He wanted further explanation of how the general public would be able to use the Ellis House. Ms. Cornacchio’s responded that anyone could attend classes there, you don’t have to be a member of the SAA and if a studio became available anyone could run their studio up there. In the SAA plan, one of later phases includes putting in a kitchen space so when the building isn’t being used for association events the building would be available for rent. She further explained that the only reason it hasn’t been available in part is because the condition of the building.

Mr. Scott asked how many members were in the SAA. According to Ms. Cornacchio her data base has approximately 1,000 names with approximately 300 of them being members. She informed the Committee that at any given time there are five to six hundred people receiving mailings from the SAA, they come from as far away as Quincy, so the SAA is really South Shore based. In response to Mr. Scott’s question, of the 300 members approximately 150 are from Scituate.

Mr. Scott also questioned the historic nature of the building and Ms. Cornacchio referenced an E-Mail letter from Doug Smith of the Historical Commission which sites a letter from PAL stating the house has historic significance. Discussion continued surrounding the PAL survey, the house’s historical value, and the projects ranking in term of the Historical Commissions list of priorities.

Mr. Detwiler, an 18th century home specialist, spoke of the extreme uniqueness of the property, sighting that there are not a lot of 18th century homes of this nature and are publicly owned. In his opinion it is nice for towns to own properties from different periods because the properties represent what the country stood for at that time, so he requested that the Committee Members take that into consideration as well.

There was discussion on what kind of additions and/or repairs had been done to the property over the years and how those may impact the historic nature of the house.

Ms. Ivas asked if the SAA had applied for any grants and Ms. Cornacchio answered that they were working on one to pay for the furnace they had to replace but until the Ellis House receives National Registration there isn’t much they would be eligible for.

Mr. McKain echoed the concern of the members that the Ellis House be available for use to the general public. He asked about the Selectmen’s support for the project. Ms. Cornachhio reported that Mr. Murray was in favor, Mr. Harris abstained because his company had installed the new heating system, Mr. Vengani had no knowledge of the property so without knowledge of it he didn’t want to comment, Mr. Norton and Mr. Danehey were supportive.

Mr. Wood asked if it would be worthwhile to restructure the proposal, so that the request for CPC funding would be for the first two phases only, which would reduce the funding to $350,000 in the interest of protecting the building from further deterioration. Mr. Bulman said that was something the Committee could do in their vote.

Mr. Danehey

Mr. Danehey reported that the Affordable Housing Trust has been finalized and the only thing holding up the institution of the Trust is that they need three more members. He anticipates that the Trust will be up and running within a month. Mr. Danehey told the committee that the Scituate Housing plan has been passed by both the Board of Selectmen and the Planning Board and will be going to the State for approval. However the issues before the Town concerning affordable housing are daunting. He acknowledged that although $700,000 is a substantial amount of money when you are looking at purchasing properties and prices $700,000 will provide for a good start but if the Trust was funded at 1.4 million it will allow for a really good start. He was not suggesting that the Trust would spend all of that money in one year, this amount of money is something that will be held by the Trustees to do due diligence with, to try and get as many affordable homes as possible.

Mr. Bulman reminded the Committee that we are required to spend (assuming the funding is where it is estimated to be) almost $241,450 that has to be spent for affordable housing. So the $700,000 would be supplemented by another $450,000 beyond the required 10%. He also reminded the Committee that the CPC has never exceeded the 10% in the area of affordable housing where we have in every other area.

Discussion continued between the Members and Mr. Danehey on how the Affordable Housing Trust would work, who would be on the Housing Trust Committee, did it have to adhere to CPC regulations etc.

Susan Hennessey, Connie Hennessey, MaryAnn Bailey, Chirs Hennessey, Cynde Robbins and Wayne Robbins

Mr. Limbacher excused himself because he is a member of the Planning Board. Mr. Hennessey gave a brief history of the property and told the Committee that the Hennessey Family filed an open space housing plan which has been approved the Planning Board. The property once developed will be called The Glenn and accessed off of Summer Street. Their hope is that what is called the uplands, which is approximately 24 acres, would be purchased by the Town with CPC funds, with the conservation restriction to be held by Maxwell Trust. Mr. Hennessey went on to say during the process of going before the planning board, the idea came up that the Hennessey Family could convey to the Town a little less than an acre of land, which is in the corner of the land to be developed and abuts Bates Lane, for a water tower or stand pipe. In exchange the Town would be willing to waive the hook-up fees of $3500 per unit for ten units. Also requested by the planning board is that there would be trails through the property with access from the development to the conservation land, and there would be an easement to the water tower.

Mr. Bulman asked if there was going to be a deeded easement for people to get from the subdivision to the back of the property. Mr. Hennessey answered yes. Mr. Bulman also confirmed with Ms. Robbins that Maxwell Trust would hold the CR at no additional cost to the Town.

Mr. Scott spoke of the Committees request to Mr. Jeff Rosen of the Water Resources Committee to establish priorities for the purpose of purchasing open space for the protection of water supplies. Mr. Bulman stated the Water Resource Committee was meeting on the 15th of the month and the CPC will receive their report after that date. Mr. Bulman answered Mr. Scott’s other question that Cohasset has declined to participate in the purchase of this land.

There was discussion between Mr. Scott and Mr. Hennessey about where the wetlands were located on the property. According to Mr. Hennessey most of the wetlands are in the area of The Glenn, the more desirable area to build would have been the uplands but the issue is access.

Ms. Ivas asked if there would be parking for the public to access this property and Mr. Hennessey said there would be parking on Summer Street and Ms. Robbins said that the property would also be accessible from two other points, one at Mt. Hope and one at Bates Lane.

Mr. Bulman spoke of the original application that listed a price of $515,000, which was based on acreage of 30 plus acres. He said that the CPC has typically paid far less per acre. He also stated that the CPC would have to get an independent appraisal of the property and the CPC would be obligated to pay the lesser price per acre.

Mr. Leavitt asked what would happen if the CPC voted not to purchase the property and Mr. Hennessey said that he would have to revisit the issue of a 40B development, maybe he could find a buyer to purchase the whole property. He said the property has more value now because it has been engineered. Ms. Robbins said she would hope that wouldn’t happen because the Selectmen want to be able to put the stand pipe up there.

The issue of which town’s water supply is fed from this property was discussed and Mr. McKain feels that the water issue is common to both towns and important to protect it no matter which town it supplies, additionally the fact that this property is contiguous to other open space in important. Mr. Bulman echoed Mr. McKain’s feelings regarding the water supply, reminding everyone that it is important to all towns. Right now the Town of Scituate buys water from Marshfield and someday we may have to buy water from Cohasset.

Mr. Bulman suggested the Committee send a letter of thanks to Claire McDonough and asked about the idea of getting her a gift card and how much would be appropriate. $250.00 was decided. St. Mary’s never informed the Committee of any needs they have so Mr. Bulman will send of letter of thanks and ask Ms. Lonborg to call with any requests they may have.

Ms. Phippen contacted Mr. Bulman to schedule a visit to the WPA building. It was scheduled for 2:00 p.m. on January 26, 2009.

Ms. Fenton asked to schedule the Advisory Board presentation. It was scheduled for January 29th and anything not finished could be heard on the February 12th.

The public meeting was rescheduled for March, sighting not enough time to get information to the Mariner between the vote on January 26th and a public meeting on February 9th.

At the next meeting Mr. Bulman wants to review old items that are still open. There was discussion between the members on how this would happen, if a vote was needed at Town Meeting, how much money was outstanding etc.

MOTION by Mr. McKain, SECOND by Mr. Scott, UNANIMOUSLY VOTED to adjourn the meeting.