Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 4/17/2023
SOUTHAMPTON — During a Select Board meeting on April 11, members of the Senior Center Feasibility Committee presented the final plan recommendation of the feasibility study regarding a new senior center.
Background
For the last several months, the town has been working on identifying several properties for a new senior center and public safety complex.
The two projects follow different timelines, but some of the steps have overlapped. The senior center project will need to see quicker progress due to funding requirements. A former resident, David Parsons, passed away last year and bequeathed $2.5 million to the town for the new center. The project design must be completed by May 17, 2023, within two years of Parsons’ death. The Council on Aging was notified in July 2021 about this money.
Southampton eventually hired Abacus Design and Build, a consulting firm out of Boston, who identified several possible sites for both buildings. Specific floor plans were created for possible senior center locations.
Reminder Publishing reported in mid-February that three or four properties are most suitable for both the public safety complex and the senior center: 210 College Hwy., 0 College Hwy., 79 Clark St. and 89 Clark St.
The town also acquired further input from residents through a survey to gauge the public’s interest in developing a new senior center. Abacus and the ad hoc committee used the March 1 meeting to advance their preparations for their May 17 deadline.
March 1 and April 11 meetings
The Select Board meeting on April 11 comes a little over a month after Abacus and the ad hoc committee hosted a public forum at the William E. Norris School to go over the progress that was made with the senior center feasibility study.
David Eisen, principal at Abacus, told the public during the meeting that the current senior center has myriad problems.
Specifically, the current facility is undersized, cannot accommodate multiple activities, houses an inadequate septic system that prevents them from serving meals and offices do not allow for privacy during consultation.
The current center also lacks parking, spaces for outdoor activities and sufficient storage for medical and other equipment.
“The bathrooms don’t even begin meet to contemporary needs and aren’t compliant with building codes,” Eisen added.
According to results from an online survey that was conducted for the public recently, 255 people out of the 296 who answered claimed that the current senior center is not sufficient enough.
After taking peoples’ suggestions about what they would like to see in the interior, the committee gathered the evidence and determined which room will hold what and what the projected square footage would be for each. Possible programs in the new center include a game room, multiple offices, an arts and crafts room, an exercise room, a commercial kitchen, a medical equipment storage room and much more.
“We came to the conclusion that 12,000 square feet is what you need to accommodate the needs today and into the foreseeable future,” said Eisen. “This balance is big enough for the future while not having excessive costs.”
Since then, the committee has finished the feasibility study-which was presented during the April 11 meeting in front of the Select Board.
Throughout the process, the committee determined there were eight possible sights for the new center, all in a 2-mile radius of each other. According to Eisen, three locations were eliminated as possibilities early on, including 16 East St., 8 East St., and 17 College Hwy.
The committee felt that the 16 East St. location would have cost a lot due to its presence of wetlands, while the 8 East St. location presented size problems that would not accommodate parking or other senior center uses. The 17 College Hwy. location, meanwhile, was too far from the center of town.
Locations were therefore narrowed down to 79 Clark St., 89 Clark St., 0 College Hwy. and 210 College Hwy., before the committee ultimately decided on choosing 89 Clark St. as the recommended location for a total cost of $10.3 million between new construction, site work and other project costs. 79 Clark St. was a close second, but the proportions were not as “fortuitous,” according to Eisen.
According to the study, the 89 Clark St. location featured the most advantages and least disadvantages when it came to what Acabus and the committee were looking for. The current owner of the property has also expressed a willingness to sell.
“On the wider of the two Clark Street sites, across from Conant Park, a new building can engage the street and connect interior activities to the surrounding landscape,” read the study.
The next steps of this process will include utilizing the remaining bequest from the Parsons estate to advance the project and pursue 89 Clark St. as the main option. After that, the committee will negotiate with the owner a price to purchase the property that will then have to be approved by the Select Board and at Town Meeting.
The committee will now submit the final study to the town attorney for approval.