Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 12/5/2018
WILBRAHAM – In early November the Wilbraham Senior Center Feasibility Building Committee met to discuss three potential sites for a new senior center. On Nov. 28 the Committee reconvened and revealed the site that they endorse: Springfield Street behind the Wilbraham Town Hall.
At the Nov. 1 meeting the Committee discussed the renovation of Memorial Elementary School, a new building at Springfield Street, and a new rental property at 60 Post Office Park. Ultimately, renovations at Memorial School proved to be too costly, as it would be roughly $14 million to $15 million with the removal of asbestos, addition of heating and cooling systems, sprinkler systems and new roofs.
Leading up to the Nov. 28 meeting, the question the Committee was left with was whether building a new structure or renting a new structure would prove to be a more beneficial option for the town.
Since the Nov. 1 meeting, Director of Elder Affairs and Wilbraham Senior Center Feasibility Building Committee member Paula Dubord explained that they’ve learned new information and looked into both the Springfield Street and the Post Office Park locations further.
Springfield Street
Committee member and Building Inspector Lance Trevallion had walked the property behind the Town Hall with an environmental engineer. Dubord stated that they “got the thumbs up” and that there was enough space for the building and the driveway. The next step, should the committee choose to move forward with the Springfield Street property, would be to hire an environmental official to do an official report. There is approximately 2 1/3 acres behind the Town Hall for this use.
60 Post Office Park
In regard to 60 Post Office Park, earlier that day the Committee received information from property owner and developer Glen Garvey with proposed lease information. The building would be 16,000 square feet and the lease would be for a 10–year term. For years one through three, the space would cost $18 per square foot, for years four through six, the rental would cost $19 per square foot, and for years seven through 10 the lease would cost $20 per square foot. This means that years one through three the town would pay $288,000 each year, $304,000 for years four through six annually, and $320,000 for years seven through ten yearly.
“What a bargain,” a resident in attendance at the Nov. 28 meeting remarked.
After the ten years were up, the lease would then be renegotiated.
Financing
Assistant Town Administrator for Budget and Finance, Treasurer/Collector Thomas Sullivan was in attendance at the meeting and shared information that he prepared on how to finance the building with the “least impact to taxpayers.”
Sullivan prepared a budget for a $6,500,000 building. He noted that this building could be paid for within that budget without a proposition 2.5 override.
“Now we don’t have an architect who has given us any estimates or cost estimates, this is just a number that I put in that we could do within the 2.5 limit,” he said. “I also put in an interest rate of 4.5 percent which obviously is a conservative number, which would probably go down somewhat, but I figured this is the maximum that it would be.”
He continued, noting that they have free cash available from 2018, money in the capital project stabilization fund, and also funds put in the budget that was used to pay down the town’s debt.
“What occurs in the past when we would pay down debt, that money would come off of debt and go back into the operating budget and be spent by the operating budget. Now when debt rolls off, it’s reserved for use for capital expenses and it becomes part of our free cash number,” Sullivan said. “What we’ve been doing, which we did at Town Meeting, is the projects that were going toward our capital expense we are using our free cash so they don’t hit our bonding so we have more money available to do this.”
He reaffirmed that if the building costs $6,500,000 or less, there would be no need for a debt exclusion.
Moving forward in the committee’s discussion, they discussed the cost of the new Police Station, which was approximately $6,500,000 including their equipment and the cost of the land, which was $375,000. The Committee reminded those in attendance that the Town already owns the Springfield Street property. Toward the end of the meeting, Sullivan stated that he believes the senior center would cost less than the Police Station did, but they won’t know until the architect makes preliminary renderings.
Resident Comments
A resident asked Sullivan what his opinion was on which building is the best property for the town. Sullivan stated that he believes the town is better off owning their own building, however the decision is ultimately up to the residents of Wilbraham when this is up for a vote at Town Meeting.
In regard to the two locations and traffic, a resident questioned the Post Office Park location as it is off of Boston Road, an already busy street.
“We did not want to be on Boston Road unless we were at a light,” Dubord stated. “In my opinion, it is [Springfield Street] a great location. Centrally located in town, town-owned property.”
A committee member added that they’ve looked at properties all over Wilbraham, “It’s not an inexpensive proposition to lease property.”
Resident Bob Page questioned talk that occurred at the previous Nov. 1 meeting regarding the potential for the Springfield Street location’s access to water and sewer. Sullivan responded, stating he had asked the Department of Public Works (DPW) earlier in the day about this, and the DPW told him they would have to run a line from Stirling Drive.
“It would be something similar to the Main Street sewer project. Basically, the residents on Stony Hill could hook up and the line would run to Springfield Street and then you would hook up the Senior Center and the Town Hall. It’s a much more involved project,” Sullivan said. “We would have to take into account whether septic or sewer; Town Hall is on septic. That is a possibility if we did the same thing on Main Street where those residents and the town would each have their own betterment and pay for it.”
A Decision Made
Coming back to the Committee, they reaffirmed that their job is to review all of the potential sites and that their intent is to move this forward. The group stated that this is a recommendation, not a decision. Continuing, Dubord explained that they’re in the middle of a feasibility study. She stated there are seven parts of a feasibility study, three of which have been completed. The next four parts of the study can only be completed when a site has been chosen.
“In my opinion, I would say that we should move forward. I think most of us on this committee think we have found a good site to move forward on to have our architect come back in,” she said. “At this point, he would come in, look at the land, tell us what we need to do, which we know is an environmental study; a couple thousand dollars for that.”
Following that study, the architect would do a preliminary design for the potential site, give a total project cost estimate, implementation plan and final part of the architect’s role is a presentation at Town Meeting.
At the close of the meeting, the Committee voted to recommend the Springfield Street location to the Board of Selectmen contingent on a proper site assessment, referencing the completion of the feasibility study. This decision was unanimously in favor by the Committee.
Moving forward, the Committee will contact John Catlin of Catlin and Petrovick Architects to walk through the site and complete the rest of the study.
Dubord shared that following the completion of the feasibility study with Catlin, they would then put out a request for proposal (RFP), the submissions would then be vetted for the actual building. Once the feasibility study is completed, the Feasibility Committee’s job is done and this moves on to a Building Committee. Ultimately, the decision whether or not to build a new senior center will be taken to Town Meeting for residents to decide. Dubord added that the environmental study on the ground cannot be done once the ground is frozen, so they may be looking at spring for a timeline.