1.17.2023 Community Preservation Committee

uh welcome to the uh Florida Community preservation committee meeting out at uh the hearing room in one government center for River match the meeting is accessible virtually through Comcast cable TV 18 uh the following website Fall River uh government television Facebook live stream um it's Tuesday January 17 2023 six o'clock uh pursuant to the open meeting laws any person may make an audio or video

recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or Transmissions are being made whether perceived or unperceived by those present and aren't deemed acknowledged and permissible uh we'll start off with roll call we'll start with our Zoom members Caroline here is Oliver Kristen Cantera Oliveira attending remotely by Zoom

Richie Calderon president I think the various present and we're missing uh members from housing and uh planning and we also have tonight with us uh Alex from uh frgtv and we have Sandy Dennis from Administrative Assistant for CPC um uh any system input tonight yeah okay uh can I have a motion for approval of minutes from October 17 2022. I'll make a motion to accept the minutes from October 17 2022. I'll

second it broke off vote we'll start with Caroline yes it's all over yes yes Alexander Silva yes yes Richie Calderon yes yes okay uh next on the agenda uh agenda is uh I've been recently appointed to uh the steering committee on the state level there's eight members from the state that uh are nominated to uh do a three-year term and I want to thank my committee because the results of our hard work and what we

do here helped me get on the committee so uh we all are congratulated on that uh and uh the South Coast can always use somebody else up there uh helping to get things down this way so uh I'm looking forward to that that's a three-year term so uh thank everybody for helping me get there so what are some of the uh Dukes uh the duties uh we're actually having a

an online uh class on what our Duties are most of it is uh uh helping out with new uh cities and towns getting uh CPA um we're working on legislation with uh funding and all that stuff that's one of our things with the state reps so uh I'm looking forward to it you know yeah I think um you know that's great that the city of Fall River has a voice yeah you

know at the state level and you know definitely represents the work that's being done here in the city so congratulations John thank you thank you I know with uh senator roderick's being on board and uh being our local state senator he's a big CPA opponent so uh yeah yeah uh but you know this I hope this carries on uh Al Lima's Legacy uh because he was the one that fought for CPA in the city

and I hope to continue if I can as best as he died so uh it was definitely a Pioneer in the uh that end uh congratulations thanks so moving on the next one is uh Maple Park uh light project uh requesting uh additional funding Nancy would you like to come up and just

um think it is um we uh have been working on the Maplewood Park lighting projects introduce yourself yep my name is Nancy Smith I am the director of parks we have recently gone out we had to go out actually a couple of times for the um bid to replace the ball field lighting at Maplewood Park the first time the bids came in very much over the 4.99 that we have been granted by the community preservation

so we had to go out for a rebid I have provided um information to the committee which indicates all of the invoicing and it's pretty transparent I think of what we have and the shortfall that we have so we did on the second bid eliminate some items or at least change some items in the materials and we also decided that it would be cheaper probably for us to purchase the lights directly from a co-op this way

whoever was bidding wouldn't have to bond for that extra 300 000 dollars that the lights were 294 440 I believe um so we need at least um according to the information that I've provided approximately fifty three thousand dollars of additional funding to um award the actual construction of the project unfortunately this was something that we estimated prior to the covid situation and with the lead times

and with cost increases um we got fairly close but I think we did fall victim to some of that so um if the committee is able to we would like to request that additional funding there are two items in this contract that we would not know if we were going to incur that cost and I've also included an email between myself and the architect regarding if there's additional ledge

that needs to be disposed of and if the um existing service conduit can ends up not being able to be used so he suggested a 20 contingency on the actual construction um amount contract which is that 218 590.

um that's above and beyond I mean right now we definitely need the 53 to even move forward with this project 162 we'll have to get in the ledge well we did do some boring uh borings and we did test for ledge but sometimes when you have to go down a little bit further you hit some ledge and and then maybe it's a possibility so it's not a guarantee um and neither is that uh replacement of

the the existing service conduit but I don't want to have to come back before you again to ask for additional funding so I just don't know what type of funding the committee does have available to them but at minimum we do need the 53 000 to award the contract for that work to even begin to move forward to see if this is even a situ a situation that we even need to

deal with we may not have to cross that bridge but it's kind of good to have a little bit of a a buffer so that we don't have to come back again but that's up to the committee but definitely to award this contract and move it forward we need a minimum of 53 000. so okay so I have a couple questions well I'm sorry yeah so um so in the email that that was

that was provided and thank you by the way um to me it doesn't really Define what the scope of work was changing this is kind of very vague so the scope of Works change change but it still came in over fifty two thousand dollars well what happened is for the total project if you look we had to if you look at the breakdown we were awarded the 499 to 14. correct we did not

anticipate that the 9800 of the geotechnical services the borings so that was something that we had to um kind of absorb so let me and I'm sorry I'm just gonna ask questions as you go along so with the Geotech so the architect didn't know that they needed those Services when they so when they put these the scope will work no and in the second in the second um that was something that was suggested

by the lighting company so that contractors wouldn't be able to come back and say okay did you do boring tests because now we have to dig and and then be able to put in a change order that was to have kind of avoid a change order um no I unders I understand the scope of work that changed um in the second advertising of the job was we eliminated spare conduits that

we're gonna we were going to put in spare conduits to expand the the lighting system if we needed to and the aluminum feeders instead of copper because originally the speck had called for Papa so we changed that and then the other thing that we took out of the bid was the um separate purchasing of the lighting so that the the particular vendor wouldn't have to bond or tie up that kind of money

and we did it through like a co-op which was kind of like a state that is list so this was on a state contract with the vendor just the lighting just the lighting yes just the lighting yes so for me again I just this is a little it just doesn't make any sense I mean I would I would definitely like to see you know before approval um just get a copy of

what the bid tabulation was for the for the bid for the re-bid um just just to compare pricing and I would like to see like the scope of work for the bid and the rebid just to take a look and see okay what was actually removed because um when so when you when you take out the scope of the work the the purpose of doing that when you go out to Beta so

you can bring the cost down to try to get it under budget or at least that budget you know but instead it's appears to me that and I get it I get covered and I get inflation but still even though you remove that work it's still coming in over 52 000 and you know I will say that the architecture to know about these services so normally The Architects should be working with these organizations

um you know and kind of trying to put the specifications together because that's that you know that's their duty to do that that's why we hire professionals to to uh to put the scope of work together so that way surprises like this doesn't happen um so I like to make a motion if if we can again get a copy of the bid tabulation sheet for them I have a bit

tabulation with me I mean I can and the a copy of the bid and the rebid to try to figure out to compare work and see well the original I have here that the total bids the original bits when we advertise one bid came in at 687 a second bid came in at 820 and a third bid came in at 983 just to round it off that was the first set of bids okay

um the second time we put it out for bid um they came in at 557 595 585 6 29 and 7 37 and after we did those deducts it brought it down and I can I can provide you with this paper right here if you want to just look at it thank you is this I mean for those obviously for the whole entire Community not just for myself too no but it gives

you a quick just a quick with the deducts of the lighting being purchased the first time it was just outrageous there was no way we were going to be able to go with 8 000 I mean 800 000 and 900 000 bids yeah so what happens is with these contractors it's public work and what they do is they throw this bogus number and hope it sticks exactly I know the game yeah and that's why we

took the lighting portion out of it because we knew that we could get that lighting through that Co-op so now it was just a matter of it came in at 2 18. for the actual construction to be done okay um there were really no big surprises um other than the fact that um we didn't anticipate people to bid the way they did and so now when we took it down to down

a notch we will say this this was applied for I would say 2020 and then this is now 2023 costs right so I mean it's probably like a 10 percent increase from the 4.99 if you if you do you know 499 10 would be 49 000 and it's basically 52. so it's like a 10 increase based on pricing that we thought we were going to see in 2020 or 2019 based on the actual 2022-23

right I mean I I we I anticipated most projects were going to come back for 10 15 more because costs went up I mean inflation's up to 8.5 so the cost of the bids they did back in 20 are obviously going to be higher now so I I understand that but you know a lot of these contracts are sue the other second part to us that they're busy and

this is why bids like that come in so so the goal is for for municipalities for cities and towns what they do is they remove scope of the work to try to come in at budget or if it comes in a little over that's fine but not it's still coming over for what was that so I know it's you know times are a little you know with inflation and stuff but

well I I would ask that if the if the if the committee does not want to include what additional questionable funding may be included like down the road but the other the original 53 000 that we're asking for so that we're able to award this because we're not going to be able to go out for bid again to be honest with you I think this contract for this work this CPC is due by

finished by June so we've gone out a couple of times I think this is as low as we're going to get it to be perfectly honest with you I would ask if the committee can at least try to award the 53 000 so we can move forward even if they don't award the contingency of if there is ledge or if we can't use the conduit boxes those are things that we

wouldn't have been able to anticipate I have a couple other questions too and if you don't know the answer that's fine yeah um where was this advertised where the bits yeah oh it goes with the central register it goes everywhere A lot of these companies were from our um out of town I didn't bring the actual bids um but I do have the um so was it was it also advertising comb eyes

you've got me that's that's the architect's job that's actually the city's job and the purchases the Department's job yeah I I don't I'm not sure I know that there are certain um right so so organizations where they I know Central register that type of thing where they had to advertise um but I'm not sure statutory so so I and again and that's okay if you don't have the answer I don't know and I know

that's true the purchasing department responsibility yeah um but I'm curious uh you know also see a copy of the advertisements and where they were advertised to because as an example when you advertise and comb eyes you can select the type the type of contractors you want to bid on a certain project so this is where you can see where you can get these numbers from um so and again and I know you you know

just so they can be involved in the discussion because I think I want

you're doing a great job though I'm like all right I'm looking for his um so let's see so there were bidders from Norfolk Mass Providence Marshfield North Reading and Wilmington so those were the five right those are the ones that submitted a bit yes but that's great but I'm looking towards the actual advertising copy of the advertisements yeah and I know you don't have that no I know that oh I trust me I know that

you guys back yeah it was you that disappeared Carolina Caroline and I were here you guys are like Houdini did you have any more questions no that was it um I'll just wait until we make an origin do you guys have any questions did you hear what was going on do you have any comments on the Maplewood Park uh Caroline anything nope was Oliver no I mean given the given um how

everything has increased over the past a few years anyway to me I I think that a 10 increase doesn't seem that outrageous um so I don't really have any questions right now okay can I can I respond to that so you're absolutely right but when you remove scope of the work you know it should reduce it so but that's awesome it did significantly reduce what we had from the original bids because like I said

they were from 687 to 983 the first time yeah and when we reduced the scope of work it came in from 557 to 737 so it did significantly reduce it by like over two hundred thousand dollars in some cases

answering questions also do we again a new player on the Block here so I don't want to be overstepping my bounds or being a cloud but can we or do we get the actual bidding document when we have something that's In Contention as it is here tonight is there do we have the ability to get the actual bidding document the review we normally get that at the beginning of the project so we you would have gotten

all the bids last but we voted on this project but they just went out to rebid though estimate when we when we submit the project we give you yesterday when when it was bid out in I believe October and then again in December right so what uh Mr messini's saying is those are probably a documents right what he's asking for is the actual bids that came in for these numbers not the estimates

so correct little bidding doctor correct we could take a look at that what the architect provides me with what I just um read to you which is a page where he submits the five um firms that have submitted and their bids yeah so that's the bid type of relationship right he submits the bid tabulation and and purchasing has copies of each individual's bid on file we also get a copy of that

as well I mean we could provide that to you but that would be great um that I I mean I think at this point that might be something that we want to or the CPC wants to put in everyone's project to say before you award the bid we'd like to see the bids as well in case there's any questions but when when we first see this these bids and we're going along we award to the architect

and we want we're we're running like a you know a running tally and then we come in at 2 18 instead of one 92 or whatever or one 72 for what we think and that's how we know we're over until then we wouldn't know we were over as far as what we were granted as far as our funding because we're anticipating we're going to stay Within you know within the budget you're

absolutely right that's one of the things that I was going to bring up for for new business as far as the committee you know having the ability to to approve any CPC bids that come in that we're supposed to that where we know ahead of time so we're better prepared so in a case like today as an example you know all the questions that are being asked you know everyone's better prepared

um and the Committees just kind of has all the information in front of them and the decision can be made tonight versus like hey we due to times constraints of trying to get this project completed um by by a certain completion date to your point so Alex I have a couple questions sure um the first is I noticed in the kind of breakdown that you provided thank you um there was the two advertisements I

don't think that is covered under CPA funds so I don't think we can approve those two I think it comes out to a thousand one hundred twenty six dollars a 92 cents okay um additionally I'm not actually sure and I'd ask the committee's uh opinion on this if we can fund changes increases in scope uh from the original Grant award without taking a whole other vote on it because I mean the geotechnical services

probably should have been included in the original uh application and that's a whole new addition to the scope correct well I listed it separately but it's actually charged To Us by the architect I'll be honest with you but I listed it separately because it was charged to a different firm not paid so so it's not going to be so I wanted you to know that that particular fee but the architect

was the one who came to us and said we were the the lighting company recommends the musco lighting company recommends that you have this I think that was something that came to him as an after kind of thought as well but being recommended by the lighting company so I said I think it would be in our best interest to avoid any kind of change orders because I was looking to try to not

have to come and have any more additional money hoping to live within my means but that didn't work out but no right so this was a recommendation after the fact so too Mr uh Mr Sylvia's point it's just this is this change the scope away and I didn't mean to take care it was only for the approved uh scope of services and as far as I know we can't uh just change

the scope right now in a additional funding vote um but maybe we can I don't know if we have any clarification on that I don't think I've seen it in any votes that the committee's taking at least not since I've been on the committee um let's kind of go up to our discretion on changes as a local CPC so it's how we would vote on it and how much has the parks

department or the city put into this project so far we have not put into the project so far and is that not an option on the table for additional scope of services well I was considering the additional that was the contingency to be that way that I I kind of considered the Dr and I could be mistaken but the drillings and the borings kind of part of the construction to should have been part of the original

right but actually that's construction you know the construction documents which were put together by the by the architecture so I kind of considered that I didn't consider that to be something separate I considered it to be this is something that has to be part of construction construction documents construction Administration all the bidding that that's all included in the in what my understanding is that the CPC

covers so I did not look at that 98 000 at 9 800 as a separate cost I looked at that as part of our construction costs because I looked at as a pay me now or pay me later but it's something that you really need to know so that it's not a surprise when they change order I figured it was something we knew up front and we were better off to know it

up front whether we were going to incur additional costs and from what they've discovered supposedly no but it's not out of the question my my main concern is to get this project up and running and as I said the 10 I didn't think was out you know out of range of what we anticipated and perhaps we should have anticipated more of a contingency fee when we requested the money um

that was another one of my questions so the original usually we recommend a 10 contingency so you've already eaten up that 10 and this is an additional 10 I'm not sure that the league put in that um because the league was the one that submitted the application we just backed their application um like so this is 20 over the original estimates not 10.

well I I I'm not 100 sure I don't want to say yes or no because I'm not sure what the league did put in for it might have been a five I thought it was a five percent but I'm not sure and do you might not know this off hand do you know how much you saved from Co-op lighting partly from the co-op lighting purchase um yes well it all depends some some bid

is put in I know that the co-op lighting purchase for us was 294 440 294 440.

some bidders were bidding in their contract 317 309 so by us doing that we already did take down some of this cost yeah um because many of them were including like a 10 increase yes because they were going to have to sit on that fee until the construction started so they were going to have to put out that money to purchase the lighting until they actually could start the construction so

we figured okay let's try to that was one of the things we did to try to bring the lighting the construction costs down and figuring they wouldn't have to bond for as much because if you're bonding for seven hundred thousand or six hundred thousand compared to two hundred thousand you're going to bond you know the bid bond that they have to provide for the city would be less correct so we would kind of

trying to save everything that we could right and it's true so like in the Clover World on the flip side before that used to be the case but now um when when you hire a contractor they tend to order things fail you know as soon as they get the approval because the delayed times right exactly on equipment so that this and that was there for a contractor to say hey we

don't want to sit on this it's like maybe before covert yes but now no they didn't say that there are concerned the lead times are horrendous yes and that was another concern of ours so we wanted to take the lighting into our hands so that we could order that and the lighting has been purchased from the co-op already because we wanted to make sure we had the lead time so by the time we awarded

the second part of this contract which was the construction it had already it's already been a couple of weeks that we've had those those lights in in the auto system so we're doing our best to move it all along unfortunately like I said we did come up a little bit short um I'm hoping that we can settle something at least at 53 000 tonight if not the if not the other I

know we're going to be probably meeting again in two weeks so that would still be enough time for you to um I listen where I'm at the mercy of this committee at this point what is it that the committee would like to see from the Smith well I mean he died I'd like to see if we can get that bring up the 10 percent just get the project going all right that's

possible what would you like to see in paperwork yeah so I mean uh so I and I mean so just I mean Abdul I understand covet and pricing and scope of work it just you know kind of the way you know I think the ball got dropped with with the Architects they they definitely didn't do their due diligence um you know making sure that that everything was explored and what was

needed this is the reason why you hire professionals um to to provide you the scope of work will provide the city the scope will work and the drawings so that way you know they they once they do that they're able to provide a provide the city with an estimate to say more or less what this should come in obviously of course with with inflation it's it's very difficult to to try to hit a

certain number because everything is just increasing every day um but as far as like the scope of the work and what was changed I mean I would definitely like to to see for myself I mean I'm not sure if my other colleagues would like to or not but I would like to see the actual scope of work I would actually like to see a copy of the bid

and a rebid they can email it to me okay and I would love to take a look and I will also like to take a look at the advertisements um and they were where they were advertised when speaking about the rebid you you want to see the actual bidding document correct exactly I concur with that thank you um I was just trying to do the math really quickly uh yeah I also agree I

don't want to hold up this project I understand costs and increases with uh covet I do think that those estimates are a little concerning how different they were from initially uh from the initially requested amount I would say from the park department and us as a community we pay a closer put a closer eye on geotechnical services for similar projects like this and maybe even consider a warning to all

applicants to maybe up it to a 20 contingency for future projects I would like to see the bid documents and the changes of scope before we approve the amount um just like a little bit bigger of a breakdown with this and how the contingency factors into these numbers but I I don't think we can include the the ad the two advertisement costs at 11 026.92 I don't think because it's 500 and 500 so it's

probably 11. it's listed here 580 80 and 546.92 yeah so 1000 we have paid that in the past though yeah I don't know how you would advertisement good job every time the city goes out forbid it's advertised we paid for it so we can make that the next time around but okay I don't think it should be included but we can if we confer the sake of moving it along I mean I would think

that maybe the park Department could pick up the advertisement costs but I'm not familiar with the Department's budget I don't have an advertising budget but um

so let me ask you a question um so any City division that goes out the bid um the purchasing Department's the one that puts out the initial bid correct the initial bid yes goes out for both both bids go out for the the architect submits the bidding documents and the to purchasing purchasing then does the advertisement advertising and then all bids come back to the purchasing agent correct right so my question is

does shouldn't purchasing people they don't pay for the advertisement it still comes out of the respective departments yes individual Department interesting okay thank you any other questions do you want to make a motion sure I'd like to make a motion to get a copy of the bid and a copy of the rebid along with the um the advertisements uh whether if it was any any state advertisement a local advertisement that

would be great including the Scopes and services right yeah they'll provide all that yeah I'll second that okay and this won't interfere two weeks waiting I'm hoping not okay all righty can we do a roll call Caroline yeah it's all there yes Richard Mancini yes Alexander Silva yes yes Richard Calderon yes yes and perhaps the next time I come back I'll ask the architect to come back

because I feel like I threw him under the bus but I with the 9800 but it was something that came to me after the fact so I don't know when it came to him so maybe you can speak for himself if he's interested in attending then he should who was the architecture I'm surprised they're not here well I I we really didn't um ask them to come because we probably would have been good

so we feed if it wasn't something that they needed to do we would come here and um present ourselves so the next meeting is uh we're probably gonna go outside yeah but it's going to be within the next two weeks so okay we're not gonna I think I have the next item anyway so okay the next one is the North Park here I'm here uh we approved this project back in 2018 for 45 000.

for a study upgrade in North Park which we have a study that's fairly new that we paid for that is available to the parks department and I think if you want to take it out from here um so so this particular item I believe the North End neighborhood association put into this um through Mr Gallagher who at the time was the director of facilities maintenance and the way the POC Department found out

that this was even applied for was the because the group came before the park board and said how come we're not moving on this particular study and the Blackboard had no idea that the study existed and I believe that's what even prompted this committee asking for letters from the Departments saying that we approve particular projects going before the CPA so with that being said I have a letter here

that's dated March 13 2019 and it's from Mr Souza who was the chairman of the CDC prior to Mr Grant and it said at a meeting dated October 22nd 2019 it was voted that the preservation committee that before the historical committee commission be in charge of the North Park existing conditions report once the report is complete for a historical commission will share the report with the pox and Recreation Department

so we have not had anything at all never touched this particular study that I guess the committee awarded in 2017.

it went from facilities to the historical commission and I don't think that anyone has done anything with it and it's my understanding that there may be something about taking it off the table that would be I've talked with uh this Toronto city planner and uh and then even yourself that I think going back to the old plan always shows us what we need to do in North Park I mean I don't

think we need to spend 45 000 on another plan a show when I'd rather put the 45 towards the project my project yeah so maybe we should have done this in reverse hello so I have this study it was done in 2000 and uh I believe six and it was through a historic lands it wasn't something I believe that CPC paid for it was a city um study and it was exclusively for North

Park and it did lay out what they thought should be done it would she is a historic landscape architect um I believe also as I said to Mr Grant I believe the open space plan that's city-wide incorporates pox in it as well so I'm not sure what this particular um study was going to do or why the group came forward to request it but I I don't have any control over it

um and I have it okay Miss elevator so my understanding um because I mean this got put on the historical Commission but we we hadn't really gone forward with it because we had never gotten to meet with um the facilities maintenance at the time who was supposed to put it out for bid but so my understanding was that Martha Lions had done the original study I guess in 2006 and for some reason north

um the North End neighborhood association was not happy with that I don't know if it was because they felt that it wasn't um close enough to the original Olmstead design or for but for whatever reason they wanted an existing condition study done again um and that's that's where that whole thing came from I'm not I'm not really sure I don't even think that Northern neighborhood association right now is

um working I don't I don't know that they're meeting because I know at least during covert they were not and I'm not sure if they 've met at all so um that that was my understanding they didn't like the original plan that was done and they didn't they didn't want to use Martha lions um term for the new study but I I don't know that they really have a set because you have the actual plans that

are done to even tell you it tells you when they play with certain plants and flowers around them right and I think that because they felt that it wasn't it didn't go back to the original original historic design and that was an issue um so I don't know all right I mean I may be reaching out to the North End neighborhood association might be a good idea or someone from there to see

what I mean John you were on you were on the committee back then when they presented so do you remember I I remember but I mean reaching out I mean it's been since 2018 they should have reached out right I mean we award the project we don't I mean that's when our job ends right so I I just I do not like studies that sit on the Shelf we have a study done and we

kind of know what North Park means I'd rather put it into right if I may I think the committee has since put um stipulations of two years that's where we are with this Maplewood project of once we award you the money you have two years to complete whatever you're going to do with this money if not then you have to come back before this committee and if this has been since 2017 and I

have a letter saying 2019 it went to the historic commission so we're now at 2023 that contract probably didn't have that clause in it because I know as we've changed things as we have gone along and learned yeah from these obstacles that we have um but um as far as that goes I have no no say in what that you know what the committee decides to do with that particular okay so um just a couple questions

um so a visibility study was done for North Park I'm just I got the information today so I don't don't have too much information on it so there was a feasibility study that was done in 2017 you know they do they use I think it was awarded I don't think it was ever done I think is that no because CPC didn't come in existence until uh 2013 was our first

vote so that was done by the city so if we okay that was 2006. oh 2006. oh okay which is I mean you look at it I mean that's a long time ago plan so I mean it's lays out I mean yeah I mean so this was done in 20 2006. we've taken down buildings yeah no that's why that's gonna bring up I'm like so I so I so there's a two

parts to it so I I agree with Mr chair that well I'll rephrase that I I understand the visibility study and and I also understand that we should have a time constraint on it because um you know for this case being that it's 2006. for me uh I I think another one should be done because there's a lot of variables that that you got to take into consider consideration like you know is the

surrounding area still the same what has changed there has there been anything added or taken away from from from you know from this park so I'm not sure how to know the answers but this is a real whole reason why I can understand why the chair doesn't like visibility studies because it's almost like you do a visibility study and you put it on a shelf in a library and don't pick it up

so you know this time around so we you know the taxpayers just wasted all this money this was something to sit on the Shelf that's just that doesn't work right now you know we haven't done anything with it yet so technically it's just basically in the 2006 is going to tell you that the uh Granite stairways need replaced the ball field needs replaced the uh stadium seating which we did CPC funded to take

down right and just make a grass area now right because it you know so and I was trying to remove the chest also too there's also variable it's like okay has any um any uh any ordinances or or any um codes have been changed let's just say like hey you can I'll just say like in construction and you know electrician they have certain codes that they need to make sure that they follow I'm sure

it's the same case in public works so between that long time frame has anything changed that my you know the Integrity of this visibility study might cause an issue so I'm just throwing stuff out there that possibilities too is that the council is asking that we do an open space um assessment of all pox as far as improvements and oh okay and that kind of thing so and that's something there's a meeting

upstairs that I'm probably going to from here um to discuss that so depending on if that's something that we do we don't want to repeat right you know kind of repeat ourselves by doing a study here and then another study through the CPC I would think that the pox would be included it may not get as specific to North Park as a forty five thousand dollar study would be singular singularly but I think it's

going to give us the information that we need but that's entirely up to this committee I'd rather let the city going do the plan and see how that looks and then I'm wondering I mean we can vote to put an extension on the 45 um so was the applicant uh Kristen has another question too Kristen so I think the difference between what the city wants to do the plan that the city wants

to do in studying open space and something like this is the historic um the historic value of it because the city really isn't going to be focusing on the fact that it's an Olmsted Park and the way that it was designed and the way that it should be going forward the city's just looking at open space whereas this plan was actually supposed to take into account the the original intent of the park the way that it

looked the way that it looks now it's in existing conditions report it's not a feasibility study it was in existing conditions report and then going forward of like having a plan going forward about what can be done to I guess bring it back to that um that look of of what it originally was whereas a city plan is is definitely not going to do that they're just looking at what you've got you know and and what

you can do but I think and being on the historical commission I know when I was on it I know it was always an issue with the Olmsted Parks were never taken into consideration that they were Olmstead parks and they were treated just like all the other parts and they're not so I think that the North End Neighborhood was trying to keep that in mind when they were doing this study

um so was the applicant notified about tonight they probably should have been just for uh their consideration but uh Miss Smith you are right there there was actually a year term limit for this project if it wasn't extended in December 31st 2018 as far as I'm concerned this is already a moot point it shouldn't it shouldn't have been it shouldn't be renewed in 2023 when it was in 2018 supposed to be

completed and we haven't gotten the yearly extension since then so I'm I'm for uh I'd make a motion to withdraw the grant amount second motion a second roll call vote Caroline yeah that's all there no right right yes Alex yes withdrawal yes yes withdrawal yes and I mean we can always bring this back up if it doesn't work we can reapply and do something else I mean they can always apply again yep I have a

question right but I take the fact that you never that that they were never given the the notification that hey this is going to be ending and you need to come back and you need to reapply you need to do something with this I think that that's not being taken into consideration here yeah but when they were awarded it back in 2018 they had to turn to use it and they haven't been in

before well was it on there or was that something that we decided out we've had that on there for a while bullet number two of the 2017. all right letter that we got it's just right there and if they haven't reached out yeah there's no communication limits or to get reimbursements I mean yourself the group might not even be meeting so I don't think that I don't think they are but I mean I it would it

would have been nice to find out what their intention was but it would have been nice to get it done in 2018 where does the original opposal that was developed back in 2006 where was that now uh I would think that the CPC has yeah I got a copy of it so yeah I would be interested in looking at that copy and getting a better feel for a lot of the work might be completed if

I remember correctly when this goes back a few years when this was a was an issue that this study was very reputable study for authenticizing the conditions of the original Park so it might be the Martha lion study yes study so it'd be really nice to just take a look I have a copy of the Martha lion study but what to 45 000 that you're referring to would have been in an application and I think the

application was very brief it was like a yeah I got two paragraphs synopsis of what they wanted to do but I I can provide you with a copy of I'd have to have it made in Government Center but not the Lions plan but I guess from what Kristen is saying they didn't want to follow that plan but what what you're saying is you'd like to look at that plan to see if

there was even a need for additional studies let's see okay all right I can get you a copy of that as you can even uh if you go to the uh City Hall of fifth floor and ask for I think I got it free they will print out uh the original uh blueprints of the North Park and it's kind of unique because it will list when they planted flowers at certain places what flowers

went in in certain areas and where trees and what you know so the original is right there so I think that's good enough for me so the study is done you just have to keep up with what's on that plan right I mean you can spend 45 000 but we have the original the scones different too the part is different as it is still the original from back then I mean

I think the ball field was added that wasn't a long long time ago because the ball field was originally a uh a stadium stadium for horse uh yeah so but yeah there's a lot of things that are different so there's no Pond anymore and you know there's and I know they're they're going to be doing other things there there's plans for the park um I don't know how close the plans are

to what the original was that was there but well they have done some work on the waiting Pond a little bit of the resurface of the waiting Pond and that was done through the city um the problem with that Park is there's some serious drainage issues because of the runoff um yeah that comes down that hill and sometimes that's something where where you think you got it under control but it just

like when you get weather like we've you know had yeah two weeks ago with the rain it's just about it yeah all set gentlemen and we will see you again thank you so much Miss Smith for coming thank you uh Nexus review funding hearing process with a review of projects looks like we have 11 projects we do have a Bettencourt is it joining us Bentley from uh housing and then Rick

Mancini is new to the board uh just to give you an overview of how like the committee votes but not necessarily how you vote or any of us vote but uh 64 of our projects have been to the city projects 38 has been to the parks 28 has been to non-profits and only less than 10 percent has been deprived housing now when you look at housing we do have projects that people don't think

of housing like Dr fiskels Madison project they each all have housing components to them Durfee Tech so out of 11 projects when we start going through and we'll have plenty of time to go through everything you can go on site whichever you want to do you will vote on those one two and three and the lowest point gets the highest when we come to uh talking about grant money

so uh that's what we'll be looking at as we get into the funding round Alex did you want to add anything to that that they should be besides the normal application when coming comes in uh we look for three bibs we look for letters of support uh sometimes on the six side we're not going to get three estimates just because it's a different bidding process um if they have permission

we have some projects out there that we don't know if they have permission to be there or to get the money from either state or Citywide so we look at that stuff um but Alex should have anything it's pretty much it it's just when inviting the applicants in uh asking them any questions that you have and then we have the review around when we talk about and the letter of support is mandatory if it's a preservation

property from the historic commission um it's on our checklist uh could you add to that about what anything like a checklist uh he was saying the uh store commission is that required I know it's on our checklist I don't know if it's required yeah anything any project that's any project that that is under consideration for um historic uh under the historic the historic category has to go and get a

letter of support from the historic Commission alrighty uh so if anything else we'll move on to uh funding hearing dates uh normally this is a time we haven't had too many meetings but uh it's always good to uh meet in these things like kind of every two weeks that way you keep everything in your mind and you see one project the next week you're seeing them all and then you can kind of go

through your head and if you got to get back out to look at something uh you retain it kind of a little better so we've always kind of had meetings like twice a month uh during this time um especially uh so we have 11 so we can Marathon it one day or split it up into two I'd say do two what do you think I mean why we got two new members and uh you know

Richard's just last year so I mean uh why why Russia I mean two weeks is breaking it up um how does like uh February 2nd or first sound everybody I have a pockboard meeting on which day on the first of all okay do we want to push it off to the February 7th and then we come back to the 14th or 21st it doesn't matter to me if it's back to back weeks not before

it's very fortunate is Valentine's Day you're not going to get one like Valentine's Day is the 14th so I don't know if you want to ah we bring our misses to the CPC meeting bingo seven is fine okay do you want to change to Thursdays in the 9th and the 16th I can't do Thursdays yeah I can't do it Tuesdays or Thursdays okay how about Wednesdays and we oh no you can't about

the eighth and the 22nd any second for everybody yeah I'll be fine 20 seconds okay okay sorry yeah want an alternate date so uh how about uh 15th and uh March 1st yeah as the two alternates well let's see we're going to meet and then we're going to vote uh do we want to get through the hearing and then uh decide when we want to hold the voting round honestly okay we booked March first two

and then we'll go from there okay so the February 8th the February 22nd March 15th that's March 1st I'm sorry why is that March versus POG boy oh we meet everywhere first oh okay uh um if we can't do the eighth and the 22nd how about if we do the eighth and the 15th one week after in February February he said he has a meeting the 15th right yeah oh

how about like a big dates on Mondays it seems like days during the week yeah like we can do except the first Monday of every month so after that I'm free so do we want to try Mondays the 6th 13th and 20th sixth I have a conservation so 13th 20th and 27th we can do that yeah oh yeah President's Day yeah no I can't actually I'll be done okay so let's

maybe stick with Tuesdays the 7th the 21st and the 28th so I'm gonna yeah two Tuesdays don't work with me are we on Tuesday right now yeah Tuesdays yeah okay how about we do Mondays the uh 13th so 27th and the May uh March 13th so repeat that one more time

okay yeah yeah and then look and then what was the dates again March 6th and 13.

because you're going to have two funding hearings then are you going to have deliberation and scoring voting the same night yeah that would be the 13th okay what are they say the sixth I have an observation oh so not booked to the sixth then

okay I'd rather hold a book than on the book see who's here you know okay because I've done that before where I just canceled but I took them all for us yeah I think it's easier to overbook and then cancel than when you're trying to book wanted to try this one night and the Publix a separate night uh um maybe half and half and half so the public officials can be at the beginning

and they can or or the private whoever time sensitive wise okay whatever that works that's fine yeah can we can we do the public first um only reason being probably because of time constraints and stuff maybe right but what I'm saying is so out of the two buckets can we do the public first oh the first day yeah correct yes just because of time because yeah yeah that works yeah yes thank you

tomorrow we'll check for the room the rooms are okay I'll send the lettuce to all the applicants so they'll know yeah both Bay systems all right sounds are good uh um could we just repeat those dates one more time I'm sorry February 13th 27th March 13th and 20th okay thank you March 20th so that's what we said right okay yeah well I had a six thank you six is the department board yeah yeah sorry

February 13th and 27th March 13th and March 20th okay march to March 3rd third email can you email all us these dates so we can all be I look at dates all day so I'm already lost everything

um and I'll work with the I have a copy of the plan too um Recreation plan is on our page I believe on our web okay so we want to look at the open space thank you

funding agreement if you guys sent me a copy are you sure

yeah if you have the copies yeah exactly what this committee voted to pay for yeah that would be great thank you Miss Dennis wow this soul is very helpful I'm gonna put your two in your piles okay and then I'll drop them off to the Carolina pick up yours let's throw the packets today

attendance before me I do know in one of the projects for uh academica I'm going to have that looked at by Mike Dion since it's a housing project so he can kind of guide us and if the project will meet his fulfillment since we're obviously not in that field I think it's nice to have a second opinion coming in so are you playing that for the deliberations meeting or I'm going to give that to him

probably uh Jenny do we have an extra copy of uh okay let me know they'll drop it off for Mike Dion to look at to advise us on it uh is he a contractor he's a CDA uh he's in charge of CDA for uh foreign

maybe some funding of partial funding from well I just want to make sure that he he gave us all the paperwork now we look at the pro Bonos and all this when it goes into building construction of uh a new housing project I'm I'm not I know a little but I'm not an expert so where he would know that uh what the rates are everything how the project shapes out and will advise us you know

on what he thinks and then we'll take his opinion as a group and go from there okay just to add in real quick um it's just a conversation and just for the committee to Donna Road I'm not sure if there's um when we do projects like that because again I'm although I've been here a little bit but this is actually like my full year when it comes to the

housing um is when we sign a contract to to provide the funding is there any language on that contract that says they are locked in to give let's say if they have four affordable housing units they did and and also do they provide you know you know a copy of okay you know these are these are the units you know give us some kind of updates because they can agree and then afterwards when

a cat's away the mice will play we do put that into our agreement but like this project if we were to say we okayed it uh when it comes somebody to uh tracking it yeah we would we would have that CDA wreck would track that yeah and make sure they're meeting all of affordable housing okay and all that okay perfect we don't do that it's similar to the historic the historic projects the preservation deed

restrictions is Affordable having housing deed restrictions oh that's perfect too oh cool so and it's only a if I two of these humans that are going to be affordable housing how do they proposed 11. yeah so yeah because we have to check that with Mike also to see how much that I I don't know what the percentage is but uh going one in the past um or two percentage usually yeah building I think was what

two hours before my time I can't say that two or four you remember it's I mean generally yes it's more than you would expect yet I mean that's why we're gonna have him look at it and I mean as a board we might say we want to see three you know that's where I'm thinking three or four you know so I mean we can come to our own conclusions but that

might change how the perspective of the pro bono works too on funding the project so uh as soon as he we get it we'll turn it out and we'll hear back from him and uh just to make us look as a group as a whole because I mean I don't know the developer that's doing it but you always hear like the old boy Network and this is clearing us from

we're running up and up we want to make sure and if it's a housing project it's good we'll we'll fund it you know but it's got to be good absolutely yes I agree yeah I agree good any any other business new business I got a list yes you're not smiling no more do we need that on the agenda to talk about it Sandy yeah okay okay save that for next next week all

right I'll do it if you want oh I will okay yeah add that permanently now at the end of the meeting honestly I I think it should be on yeah it should be I think it came off when we did the interviews and it might have dropped off all right we'll put that on now so otherwise we'll have a complaint uh tomorrow so uh so could I have a motion to adjourn

I'll make a motion to adjourn second Rocco vote Caroline yeah Miss elevator yes Rick and Sandy yes Alexander Silva yes yes Richard Calderon yes uh Victor Parish yes uh meeting is adjourned thank you folks thank you thank you good night everyone