Community Housing Council
Judge Welsh Hearing Room
Members Present: A.J. Alon, Elaine Anderson, Catherine Reno
Brouillet,
Joe Carleo, William Dougal, and Molly Perdue.
Members absent: none
Staff: Maxine Notaro
Others: David Krohn and Sharon
Lynn, Town Manager
The meeting was called to
order at
Meeting Agenda
Update on
A.J. Alon would like to know
the sq ft cost per building. Bill Dougal
said that there would be some benefit to having some kind of proforma for the
project since there are too many assumptions here and we do need to be more
definite. We do need a base line. As we go forward as a Council - we need this
information. Molly Perdue said the sq ft
building costs can’t remain confidential even when we’re talking about private
development. Bill D. said that under the
current zoning bylaws, we are entitled to that information.
David Krohn said that he is
ready to produce the financials for the Council. He has a letter from the builder about the sq
ft cost and he detailed his concerns:
1. the purchase price per sq ft
2. the building costs (again
mentioning the high-end aspect of the project)
3. the interest cost (as in what
is the cost of the money?) and that becomes a
huge variable.
Bill D. asked – based on all
the information given, “Then why are you doing this?”
David K. replied that his
business partner, Jim, asked much the same question. Then David launched into his “we’re new
developers and we’re inexperienced” scenario and that they wanted to do
something that was wonderful.......................... etc.
Bill Dougal then asked if the
tennis revenue were included in the financials.
Ans: - No.
Then Bill D. asked if there
were any contingencies in the budget, i.e., a law suit, builder quitting,
interest rates going up, etc.? David
said that engineering fees, architectural fees, legal fees, septic
installation, landscaping, and all are reflected in his presentation except the
$1.75M land cost. Molly Perdue asked if
the tennis courts were to become common units?
The tennis courts will be owned
by David Krohn and not the condo development.
Molly P. then thought that in the original cost of the property - shouldn’t
the value of the courts be extracted if the proposed value of the entire
property is 1.75 million?
Molly P. repeated, “Shouldn’t
the tennis courts be subtracted from the value of the land?” (The reply was that the wetlands comprise
almost 3 acres?)
Bill asked David, “What is
your break-even point?” David K. said
that he didn’t do it that way.
A.J. said that you’re talking
about revitalizing the tennis courts and asked, “Is that included in the building
costs?” Molly P. asked, “What is the cost of redoing
the tennis club?” It is comprised of
approximately 900 sq ft and would be
very costly.
The prices the Council was
given assume net to the seller. Joe Carleo
said to David K., “You’ve presented a lot of stuff to us and as a Council - moving
forward – maximizing the number of bedrooms available - the one bedroom is your
break even point - so, as a Council…..
we’re going to be looking at ways to maximize the affordable accommodations.
Motion: Accept the three
1-bedroom units as part of phase 1.
Motion: Molly Perdue Seconded:
A. L. Alon
A very long discussion
followed this motion. Before it was
voted on David K. wanted more discussion.
A.J. Alon said at the last
Local Housing Partnership (LHP) meetings – there was never any discussion about
phases – this phase idea is something new.
Molly P. joined in and said that it’s not fair for us to look at this as
2 projects. You have to have the affordable
housing component in this – so you’re caught in this issue. This is truly one project and that is how she
views it. You couldn’t get an occupancy
permit until the affordable housing units are completed and occupied.
Joe C. said that we’re looking
at it and you’re developing many units – 17 in all. Maxine
Notaro understands how David’s thinking – however - he went to Zoning as a
whole project – not phased – so the project has to be revisited by all the
Boards who initially approved it when it was a single project with 17 units.
Molly P. said (repeating what
David K. had stated) that you’re not even certain that the rest of the project
will ever be done. Profitability of the
project relates to the development of the market units.
Catherine Reno Brouillet said
that this shouldn’t be before us right now.
Molly P. said that’s exactly why she made the motion. C. Reno Brouillet said that when it originally
came before us it was one project. We
can’t approve it now that it’s been changed.
Bill D. talked about the possibility
of a loan from the Community Preservation Committee (CPC). Elaine Anderson’s suggestion was that we wait
until you present the “phases” to the other boards, i.e., Planning, ZBA, BoH,
and ConCom.
A.J. questioned that – in the
past - we had asked them to move the affordables and when we asked for them to
be moved around, you refused – but now that you want to break down the project
into two phases - you can move them?
Bill Dougal presented a
hypothetical question, “If the CPC were to loan you $363K, what would be your objection to building the 3
affordable at this time?”
The cyclical discussion
continued in this vein until Molly Perdue – who had to leave – withdrew her original motion – about one page ago. She left around
Joe Carleo said that he would
like the three affordable units built first but he, too, had to leave and
passed the baton to A.J. Alon. David
K., once again, said that this wasn’t fair!
This happened around
Elaine Anderson said – to
David K. - in conclusion, you have to decide whether this is one project – or two. If this is two projects – I’m not ready to
take a position.
Bill D. said, “What we need to
hear from you is – if you can’t do it – why?”
David K. said, “We have to
make some fast decisions.” He promised that he would come before the
group – once again – on September 10th at their next meeting.
Adjournment happened at 9:45
a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Approved by
_____________________________ on ____________, 2007.
Joe Carleo, Chair