The most significant agenda item concerned the Town Hall’s facade renovation and preservation. Russ Anderson, the facilities manager, and Nicole Parker presented the application seeking funds for this critical project. Anderson elaborated on the findings from prior examinations of the Town Hall’s roof and HVAC systems, which uncovered unexpected moisture issues. Built in 1928, the Town Hall’s design contrasts starkly with contemporary buildings, particularly in water drainage management. Anderson pointed out the deterioration of the building’s brick facade, limestone, and mortar joints, predominantly due to inadequate water shedding. This degradation threatens the structural integrity of the historical building, which is a central hub for town governance.

To address these issues, the application proposed hiring a restoration architect specializing in historical structures. The restoration would involve several components beyond the facade, such as repointing the brick and resolving water issues near the clerk’s office. This would require excavation and barrier installation to prevent basement water infiltration. Anderson also noted the need to carefully balance historical preservation standards with ADA compliance, especially regarding the front ramp.

The committee engaged in a thorough discussion, questioning whether the architectural report would include plans and specifications for the entire renovation. Anderson assured that comprehensive plans would be developed for bidding purposes, clarifying the project scope. The conversation also highlighted the importance of input from the Conservation Commission and the historical commission, as their support and insights would be crucial before making recommendations at the town meeting. The committee agreed on the importance of these consultations, with the town meeting set for May, allowing time for necessary discussions and approvals. They planned to reconvene on December 18th to further discuss and review any additional applications.

The second major topic involved a land conservation project, which had previously received the select board’s approval. A land appraisal revealed the property’s industrial restricted zoning value at $185,000, with a conservation value of $60,000. The project funding was debated, with sufficient money available in the open space fund. However, a suggestion to use the unreserved general fund, with its substantial balance, instead of depleting the open space fund was considered.

The Historical Society intended to purchase the property, while the town would acquire the conservation restriction. The funding shortfall required the Historical Society to contribute $50,000. The committee expressed concern about long-term maintenance costs, proposing a comprehensive management plan to ensure the land’s preservation and benefit to the community.

Financial logistics were a focus, as the committee discussed a motion to propose $125,000 from the CPC unreserved funds, covering various associated costs. A revised motion suggested increasing the total to $175,000. Consensus emphasized the importance of not underfunding the project, with unspent funds being returnable.

The meeting also touched on the timeline and implications of the land purchase agreement. Concerns arose over the potential expiration of the purchase and sale agreement, with verbal assurances from the landowner to wait until May for the town meeting. The possibility of a special town meeting if the landowner changed the property’s zoning to residential was discussed, heightening the urgency of the situation.

The committee approved sending the article to the select board for further review, acknowledging the efforts put into its preparation. An upcoming grant agreement for a different property was noted as a future discussion item, contingent on the warrant article’s passage. The committee also reviewed and approved a new online application process for community preservation projects, expressing satisfaction with its functionality.