Selectboard Discusses
Town Garage Plan
By Cornelia Cesari

It was a full house at the March 18 Chelsea Selectboard meeting, as about a dozen citizens came to voice concerns and ask questions about the town garage plan which will be coming up for a bond vote this spring.

The preliminary plans were displayed at Town Meeting, and the preliminary budget estimate has come in at $597,000 plus sitework, approximately the figure the facilities committee expected. This figure is reduced by about 30% from last year’s estimate. The town has about $150,000 saved in an account for the project.

Concerns raised began with Morton, the design-build firm the committee hired. Bruce Hook said he had never heard of the firm, and he thought the town could build it more cheaply using local contractors.

Alan Ackerman of the facilities committee explained that Morton would be acting as general manager, saving the town from hiring a Clerk of the Works. This company heads up municipal projects all the time, so it brings an expertise about special requirements; for example, the plans are licensed architect’s drawings as required.

"Engineering services up front and project management during construction seemed worth paying for," said Ackerman.

However, he explained, their estimate is a maximum figure, based on national contractor costs. Morton would erect a pre-fab structure, but then many components of the project would go out to local bid, such as concrete, electrical, plumbing, roofing and siding. That would likely lower the final cost and also provide an opportunity to include local contractors and materials.

Another concern expressed was the site’s proximity to the recreation fields. Issues raised were safety, space, aesthetics and floodplain.

In response to safety and space, the committee pointed out that the plan provides more parking spaces than are currently available, and that they are better defined and therefore safer. There would also be clearly marked walkways. Room for future expansion is certainly not guaranteed, however.

The aesthetics of the space have been taken into account; the design has a barn-like appearance, with natural wood (possibly local) siding, a clapboarded office addition, and a standing seam roof. Landscaping would enhance the look of the entire area.

Floodplain issues are controversial. The committee is working with the Agency of Natural Resources to engineer a plan for relocating the sandpile, raising and capping off an area to place it.

Kevin Marshia of the facilities committee reported feeling very confident that the plan would be approved. Robert Brown wasn’t convinced. "Your lawyers and engineers will tell you you can do it, but it’s not the right thing to do," he said. He likened the move to putting a "brick in a bathtub," in that he felt that it would cause problems elsewhere.

Finally, there was extensive discussion about an alternate location. Citizens wanted to understand why a site on the East Randolph Road was not being investigated. Andy Pomerantz, selectboard chair, explained the facilities committee process: "The facilities committee was born of a town-wide process [the community conversation], the volunteers who were willing to come forward and approach the process from a position of neutrality."

Marshia recalled, "Our first meeting was over three years ago in the existing town garage. We made a list of about 20 possible properties. We made phone calls, contacted people, did site visits. We started out being very objective. We whittled it down to the creamery property and Heath Field."

The East Randolph Road property in question was ruled out after being evaluated by consultants who reported back to the selectboard with cost and accessibility issues. The committee members explained that while they had hopes of offering two alternatives to voters, the creamery property fell through only recently.

After three years of work on this project, the committee felt that, rather than delaying another year to research another site, they wanted to bring a proposal to completion to offer up to the voters.

"If this plan is defeated," questioned Caleb Rick, "what will the selectboard do next?"

"First we will get a sense as to whether it’s defeated because people don’t think we need a town garage," suggested Pomerantz. "Or is it the site, or the design, or the price? Then I guess we’ll be back to the drawing board and look for sites."

A multi-optioned bond vote is not a possibility, only a "yes" or "no." The selectboard will collect opinions through a survey or exit poll of some kind.

Ackerman shared, "Originally I voted against this plan [for the site, four years ago]. I thought it wasn’t well-presented; I didn’t think it was well-planned."

Ackerman volunteered to work on the committee, and after many hours of research and consulting, he has come to support the Heath Field location.

Pomerantz agreed that this current plan is much more complete than when the site was previously proposed. "I am satisfied with the safety, space, and aesthetics of the latest plan."