Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutSelect Board -- 2020-12-08 Minutes I j a ' } O06O iWIS Town � ppOffice of Brewster Oce of• '"� 0 016* E�oegeA�F9 2198 Main Street Select Board �e '�N , 3 ,,, j Town Administrator �V a a = Brewster, MA 02631 = 1898 o `s _ = Phone : ( 508) 896-3701 " ' 'f ' Fax : ( 508) 896- 8089 , yt � �a NFO it 160 C i MINUTES OF THE SELECT BOARD EXECUTIVE SESSION MINUTES 4 DATE : December 8, 2020 I TIME : 9 : 00 AM I PLACE . Remote Teleconference ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE PARTICIPATING REMOTELY : Chair Chaffee, Selectperson deRuyter, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chatelain , Selectperson Bingham, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi , Assistant Town Administrators Susan Broderick and Donna Kalinick, Town Planner Ryan Bennett Call to Order Chair Chaffee called the meeting to order at 9 : 01 am, conducted a roll call vote of attendance , declared a quorum present, and read the meeting participation and recording statements . Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair No discussion . Next Meetings : December 15 , 21 & December 22 , 2020 Executive Session : To consider the purchase , exchange , lease or value of real property if the chair declares that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the public body . Chair Chaffee stated that the Board would be going into executive session to discuss strategy with respect to consider the purchase, exchange, taking, lease, or value of real property if such discussion may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the governmental body, and would not be returning to open session . Selectperson Chatelain moved that the Board go into executive session . Selectperson Bingham second . A roll call vote was taken . Selectperson deRuyter-yes, Selectperson Bingham -yes, Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Chatelain -yes, Chair Chaffee -yes . The Board vote was 5 -yes, 0- No . Every party present declared that no other person is present and /or able to hear the discussion at their remote location . Peter Lombardi reviewed the outline of the executive meeting and the documents provided in the packet . Ryan Bennett addressed the Board and reviewed the Route 6A parcel ; parcel is a little under 55 acres, with a mix of buildings and structures on the property . Ms . Bennett stated that any change of use will bring with it some lawfully protected pre- existing, non - conforming status to those structures and buildings, adding that BoS 12-08-20 www , brewster- ma . gov Page Iof10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c \\\\\0\\\kOWI I I I I IU11p#11//// Ew /"/i, Office of: IN\\�� 0� STF Town o Brewster � E.LormJegr .Q 'ii Select Board o � o 2198 Main Street e �N Town Administrator 4k rn = Brewster, MA 026314898 o � ` Phone : (508) 896-3701 Fax : ( 508) 896-8089 / CORPO 111!!1111 11111111\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\ this might be something that counsel would advise on . Ms . Bennett continued , that the parcel is located entirely in the Residential Medium ( RM ) Zoning district and about 1/3 of the property is in the Conservancy Soil district which prohibits new development, but again since there is development currently existing, there would be protected rights for expanding the way the zoning bylaw applies . Ms . Bennett mentioned the satellite portion of the parcel that abuts Route 6A is within the Historic District n, from approximately 500 feet of the center line of Route 6A into the property . Stating that through conversations with the Commission, the obvious threshold for Development of Regional Impact ( DRI ) review is greater than 30 acres; this threshold will trigger in either property if there is a land division . Ms . Bennett added that there are many other DRI thresholds; it has become clear with Commission staff that any private development or re - development will trigger Cape Cod Commission review, however there is some municipal exemption for land division where a portion of the property is being retained for open space or conservation purposes . Ms . Bennett continued that the District of Critical planning tool ( DCPC tool ) can apply to one parcel ; it does not have to be multiple parcels and imposes a temporary moratorium for permitting on the parcel but does not alter the ability for land acquisition or transaction to occur . Ms . Bennett stated that it is worth noting that the moratorium stops permitting while the Town can adopt regulations and adopt them as a zoning overlay to control the uses . Ms . Bennett then reviewed the table of potential uses chart in the packet provided , highlighted are some uses that seem more likely such as cluster, major and planned residential development, which all require special permit uses and Planning Board review . An educational use, non - profit recreational facility, or children ' s recreation camp are a by- right use in both parcels, Ms . Bennett stated that Sea Camps probably lobbied for this to apply to them . Adding that recreation facilities and services- private would be a special permit use . Ms . Bennett shared her screen to show the two overlay districts in addition to the Residential Medium zone that apply . Selectmen deRuyter asked if any portion of the bay property is subject to any DCPC and how is the DCPC established ? Ms . Bennett responded that the bay parcel is not currently under a DCPC overlay, which is not the case for the other parcel . Ms . Bennett added that to establish a DCPC, a vote by the Select Board to refer to the Cape Cod Commission , the designation of a DCPC over a certain parcel of land or a specific purpose . The DCPC for the Pleasant Bay Watershed was nominated and accepted by the Commission because the intention was to draft voting regulations that more closely and conservatively governed the water supply area . Ms . Bennett added that there does have to be a reason for nomination ; it can be for historic purpose, stating that the Board could flush this out more with the Commission if it was the direction the Board wanted to take . Adding that Open Space, Conversation, Historic Resource, etc . are all resource conservation protection areas under the Cape Cod Commission Act that would qualify an area for a DCPC nomination . Selectmen deRuyter commented that the concept of the Board proposing DCPC over the bay parcel is new to him in this process and it might be worth flushing out . Adding that Ms . Bennett makes a good point that despite the fact that a DCPC cannot hold a transaction up, it can inject a significant degree of uncertainty . Selectperson Chatelain referred to an email between Peter Lombardi and the Commission, asking if his interpretation is that although DRI would be trigged by a 40B, the regulatory oversight of the parcel would BoS 12-08 -20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 2 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c 4t 7 E '" Sr " Town of Brewster Office of: °OQ t,O�`EI.DER B9 Select Board 4q' �N 2198 Main Street Town Administrator ��; a = Brewster, MA 026314898 o Phone : (508) 896 -3701 Fax : ( 508) 896- 8089 i be greatly lessened, and if that is the case, would a 40B allow it to go around the DCPC . Ms . Bennett responded that a 40B is its own entity, the Commission does not play a mandatory regulatory role in the 40B, they act as a local land use board providing technical review and comment . A 40B would go through a local permitting process as a comprehensive permit entirely with the Zoning Board of Appeals, separate and apart from a DCPC approach . Peter Lombardi added that through conversations with the Commission , there is clearly a path to applying a DCPC to the Bay Parcel . Mr . Lombardi stated that we would have to be strategic about what our intended , or ideal outcome is for this parcel . Mr. Lombardi asked Ms . Bennett, if the Town were to impose a DCPC on either parcel , would a 40B supersede that or does the zoning moratorium stand up against a 406 ? In response Ms . Bennett stated that she was not sure of the answer and requested time to review . Mr . Lombardi then asked , regarding the conservancy soils overlay, would this give rights to maintain or expand uses ? Ms . Bennett answered that it would apply to the structures rather than the use, so any structure that exists can be expanded , altered , or changed through a special permit process . Mr . Lombardi asked if the structures could be knocked down and start new, or if it would have to be within the footprint of the existing structure . Ms . Bennett responded that this would have to be reviewed with Victor Staley in the Building Department for the answer . Selectperson Chatelain commented that in respect to conservancy soils, is it almost always or very often waived ? Ms . Bennett stated that the ZBA in consideration of relief for development within conservancy soils, looks at soil shape and topography as a hardship to grant relief and very often , historically, has considered conservancy soils as a topography that justifies hardship and will grant the variance for the relief needed to develop . Ms . Bennett added that this is a matter of practice over time and does beg the question whether the conservancy soils is an effective overlay in some respects . Confirming that it is not a waiver, but a finding that the soils represent a hardship within a variance criterion and the ZBA typically grants the variance . Selectperson Chatelain stated that this constitutes local control, in the event of a 40B, they would be able to circumvent the regulations Ms . Bennett agreed . Selectperson deRuyter provided information of a situation he is aware of in the Town of Dennis on the bay side were a developer purchased 6 cottages, knocked them down and built 6 " McMansions" , and condo' d them off with no subdivision , is this a scenario that could play out in this case ? Ms . Bennett replied she believe it could , zoning doesn't regulate form of ownership, this condominium approach is a way developers have been able to circumvent subdividing when there isn' t sufficient land area to meet the minimum area requirements of the zoning for buildable lots . Adding that given the scale of this parcel , the amount of likely square footage that could be re- developed would trigger the other DRI thresholds, anything that adds 10, 000sq of area or 40, 000sq commercial would trigger DRI review . Peter Lombardi added that starting on page 10 of the packet are DRI regulations, there are 14 different thresholds; it is important to note that the Town has the ability to discretionally refer a project to the Cape Cod Commission, if they weren' t somehow to trigger other statutory requirements . Selectperson deRuyter commented that through these conversations with respect to zoning around this parcel , seems we all treat DRI as some sort of backstop, but we all recognize that it is not . Continuing though it might trigger DRI review, doesn ' t mean it couldn' t be seen through to completion . Mr . deRuyter added that despite the fact BoS 12 -08-20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 3 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c \\\\\\Q\\\\\\0111 IIIII U(lrprrr�� �4E '" STF�%�i Town of Brewster Office of: "'T""' Select Board oX r���oEk sy*o .Q % 2198 Main Street = Q �� Town Administrator 9A y = Brewster, MA 02631= 1898 Phone : ( 508) 896- 3701 Fax : ( 508) 896-8089 ///����9jrrrirriir i ni n i l n u\�\\\`\°�\\\\\\\\\• the hurdles would be high , we need to proceed with the understanding it is conceivable . Chair Chaffee added that Mr. deRuyter has summarized the discussion on the use of DRI correctly, Ms . Bennett agreed it is a deterrent given the cost to mitigate the impacts of the project, but not a barrier . Selectperson Chatelain commented that as he understands it DCPC would be the opportunity for the municipality to put the brakes on development and reassess zoning at the lot . He immediately worries about acquisition of spot zoning, asking Ms . Bennett to speak to this situation . Ms . Bennett answered that as long as there is legitime reasons for the purpose of the nomination then you can get around the spot zoning argument . The end game has to be clearly identified for the DCPC tool to work, as it will play a degree of certainty about where the land use regulations/zoning is going to take . Adding that spot zoning is not a concern even though it is one parcel . Mr . Lombardi reviewed the nomination process, the Select Board has the ability to nominate an area for DCPC including a single parcel , then the Cape Cod Commission votes on it who recommend to the assembly of delegates and the County Commissioner . Mr . Lombardi asked at which point does the moratorium go into effect? Ms . Bennett responded that she was not sure and would take to the Commission for an answer . Donna Kalinick asked if the property was to remain a non - profit camp and the preexisting use kicks in are they required to do anything in terms of accessibility for the buildings and when would that have to be addressed or in some cases can it remain as is ? Ms . Bennett responded that because it is a by- right use, only if ownership changes, review by any local land use boards, as building permits are pulled , may trigger certain code compliance requirements to come up to ADA compliance . Ms . Kalinick asked for clarification , between non - profit or private group ? Ms . Bennett responded that Recreational facility use - private would be some sort of private membership- based organization and would trigger special permit review . Mr. deRuyter added that he agrees with Ms . Kalinick' s assessment; the man leading the non- profit effort currently has a daughter that has cerebral palsy that uses a powered wheelchair and has attended the camp for many years . Chair Chaffee asked Ms . Bennett to provide more information on by right uses . Ms . Bennett offered that by- right uses is considered allowed under zoning and only land use review standards that apply under zoning bylaw are the site plan review . A Planning Board would conduct a site plan review which is non- discretionary and not a process that can be denied by the Board and would simply have to find that the site plan has meet the standards of the bylaw which include, parking, landscaping, lighting, buffers, storm water management, etc . Ms . Bennett added, if a special permit use, site plan review is required , in addition the discretionary special permit criteria that allow the Board to approve or deny the use is in play . Discretionary criteria are not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood , those types of criteria allow the Board some discretion . Ms . Bennett reviewed the Pond Parcel , a 70- acre lot that is located both in Residential Rural ( RM ) and the Residential Medium ( RM ) districts, noting that when a parcel is in both districts typically the more conservative district applies to the whole parcel . She added that there is a provision in the bylaw that allows the extension of one allowed set of uses to another district by special permit, but at the base level the RM BoS 12-08-20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 4 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c i Town of Brewster Office of. rF '' Select Board 0� 16 E�oeq gjo9 2198 Main Street '�aa 2� % Town Administrator °�P 9 Brewster, MA 026314898 OF _ Phone : ( 508) 896 =3701 Fax : ( 508) 896= 8089 conpon 04?8 ig ISO l l I 1111111 district applies . Ms . Bennett continued that the property is partially covered by Zone 2, which aligns with the DCPC zoning overlay and the Water Quality Protection Regulations that were written to support the DCPC . The Natural Resources Protection is a bylaw adopted in 2009 to control the design of residential subdivision , but maximum resource protection , the result is a cluster type development where the resources that exist on the parcel are enhanced and protected as part of the division process . Ms . Bennett stated that the same base DRI trigger applies as the parcel is greater than 30 acres; any land division would require their mandatory DRI review, and the same municipal exemption for a land division with conservation or open space, or water protection purposes would apply . Adding that there are 3 privately owned parcels nearby that may or may not derive their sole access across the parcel , something we would need to investigate for access easements . Noting that one of the property owners is Dr . Eten . Ms . Bennett went through the 2 - zoning district allowed uses and highlighted the most likely uses, which are very similar to the Bayside parcel - cluster, major and planned residential developments, educational use, non - profit recreational facility, children' s recreation camp and recreation facilities and services- private . Ms . Bennett mentioned that provided in the packet are supporting material for the Robinson land acquisitions there was a very long land grant application that included an assessment of the property, a likely development scenario which included a 241ot cluster subdivision . Noting this helps support the Open Space community request for the land grant in order to acquire the land . Ms . Bennett commented that this gives a sense of what the value may be under a similar subdivision configuration for this parcel . Adding that she spoke to the Commission for extending the option for DCPC, this could happen through a Town meeting vote, noting it doesn ' t require full steps to DCPC nomination , just acknowledging through the Commission that the regulations in place would extend to the entire parcel if that was the direction the Town wanted to take . Selectperson Chatelain requested clarification between the State Zone 2 regulatory obligations for a developer, the Towns DCPC regulations, and the DRPD regulations . Ms . Bennett provided the State' s Zone 2 regulations, she believes, at its most base level is 1 bedroom per 10, 000 sq ft of land area , that is enforced through the Board of Health septic regulations . The DCPC was nominated for more enhanced water resource protection in the area and the Water Quality Protection District regulations were adopted to support the nomination , which looks at nitrogen loading for commercial and residential development, storm water management runoff and imposes regulatory standards and thresholds that are tighter than the states thresholds . Continuing, that the DRPD is a separate zoning overlay, but applies for a land division, the two - zoning work interchangeable if you were to go through a land division process; DRPD would apply and then each of the subsequent lots would have to meet water quality protection district standards, this is layers of regulatory review at the local level . Selectperson Chatelain asked which one of these would be circumvented under a 40B application . Ms . Bennett responded all of them, except the Zone 2 . Selectperson Chatelain stated that at a maximum under any circumstance, we have a 1 bedroom per 10, 000 sq ft on this parcel . Ms . Bennett responded that she believes that to be the case . Mr . Lombardi added that only half the parcel , the eastern portion closest to 137 . BoS 12-08-20 www , brewster-ma . gov Page 5 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c b\�WW11(111/////// Ew , Office of: �A . STF Town of Brewster o� Q rA'E�oeR6'da q Select Board o , o� 2198 Main Street Town Administrator Brewster, MA 02631 = 1898 O ' _ in Phone : (508) 896-3701 LL Fax : ( 508) 896-8089 INCORPOVt ii/f t�19, ni�i Selectperson deRuyter asked when the DCPC was established and did the borders precisely match the existing Zone 2 borders ? Also, how can Town Meeting arbitrarily extend that ? Mr . Lombardi responded that his understanding is that they are not exactly the same, a portion of the DCPC extends outside of the Zone 2 . In which Ms . Bennett agreed , adding that the Pleasant Bay Watershed is outside of the Zone 2, but a portion of the DCPC . Mr. Lombardi noted that at the end of the DCPC process when talking about the Bay Parcel , Town meeting ultimately would have to support whatever zoning regulations that process recommended . Adding, that in this case we jump right to the end of the process, DCPC in place, potential extension of existing regulations to the full parcel , and Town meeting would have to act . Ms . Bennett pointed out that DCPC follows parcel boundaries and Zone 2 follows water shed boundaries, any surveyor will tell you that there is a huge margin of error when looking at water shed as regulatory boundaries . Chair Chaffee summarized the following : the DRI process, the DCPC, and the Natural Resource Protection policy would serve to slow the development process, if either parcel was purchased with the intent to subdivide into a cluster or other type of development . Ms . Bennett added that it would also give the Town a voice in the Commission' s regulatory process . Mr . Lombardi stated that there could be prohibited uses that would restrict certain development on either parcel , DRI would disincentivize, but the DCPC could ultimately prohibit certain uses . Ms . Bennett added that if you went through the DCPC process and wanted to prohibit hotel/ motel use on the property you could do that . Selectperson deRuyter asked if it is achieved by an overlay district that is applied to the DCPC? Ms . Bennett confirmed his question . Mr . Lombardi commented that our first impression is that a DCPC on the single parcel feels like an odd match , but ultimately looking at the footprint of an area of 50- 70acres, DCPC is appropriate . Ms . Bennett clarified that a motel/hotel is not something currently allowed , but a recreational facility and services- private, a membership organization could be prohibited . Selectperson Chatelain stated that at the conclusion of the DCPC process and starting to enforce new zoning, a 40B developer would be able to circumvent all of them in exchange for 25 % affordable units, is still correct . Ms . Bennett stated that 40B is always going to be on the table . Selectperson Chatelain declared that he feels we have reinforced what he suspected earlier that the Long Pond Parcel is a greater challenge for a private developer because of State regulations that can' t be circumvented and has private property concerns with access that needs to be protected . Whereas as the Bay Parcel is not subject to as much local control, has more prime real estate . Noting that even in the event of DRI or a DCPC designation , an aggressive developer could achieve their goals . He advocates a stance from the Board that focuses energy on the Bay Parcel , he doesn ' t think they have a good negative approach . Continuing that to the extent that we expanded energies on a DCPC, it is still a lengthy process that requires Town Meeting approval . Zoning is extremely controversial under the best circumstance, and he is leery of the process . Selectperson Chatelain stated that in the event it is passed through our worst- case scenario of a large -scale development going in has not been prevented anyhow . He would advocate for a positive posture, a good conversation about what we want, not what we BoS 12-08-20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 6 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c i i I I Town of Brewster Office of: Q yq� �1,DER Bq9 Select Board 2198 Main Street �rSQ FAN' Town Administrator Brewster, MA 026314898 o 's. Phone: ( 508) 896-3701 Fax : ( 508) 896 - 8089 'N00RPOR Pt�o . \\\\\\ don' t want, deciding what the best outcome ( highest and best use ) is for the community, for the parcel and bring the parties to the table that can help effect that in the most efficient way . Chair Chaffee inquired with Mr. Lombardi and Ms . Kalinick to see if there is any other information from their meeting with the Cape Cod Commission that the Board needs to be aware of and requested that Mr . Lombardi speak regarding Mark Robinson' s role . Chair Chaffee stated that she agrees with Selectperson Chatelain that the Pond Parcel is going to be trickier for a developer to want to act on . Ms . Kalinick mentioned that the Commission said that since we are in the LCP process, that using the process to gather information on what the Board and residents might want for the parcels is an opportunity for us . Adding that the LCP process could in some ways shape what the future of these parcels are to some degree . She continued that we are in a certain space because of the LCP, once adopted it gives the Town more authority to enter into agreements with developers, that we don' t have right now . Mr . Lombardi added that the challenge is that we are just starting out with the LCP process and will take a while to get there . To get an LCP approved to allow us to further leverage the Commission' s technical support or enter into development agreement . Mr . Lombardi acknowledged that we know there is a lot of community interest and support in the parcels, we need to be strategic on how we engage the vision planning committee in the public discussions ; this is a complex and sensitive dynamic right now, and we need to keep the Town ' s overall best interest in mind . Mr . Lombardi recapped his discussion with Mark Robinson , specifically the appraisal for the Robinson parcel, the full document is in the packet, this ultimately supports a $ 1 . 9M valuation that the Town used to secure land grant funding and the basis as negotiating with the Robinsons . Mr . Lombardi added that also included is a document that is an analysis of how the NRPD applied considerations to the Robinson Parcel , this is the work that John O' Reilly did in coordination with the appraiser, trying to identity what the work product would be if we were to take the time to specially look at the Long Pond parcel . Mr . Lombardi stated that Mark' s recommendation is to have John O' Reilly do the same work for the Long Pond Paracel , similarly Linda Coneen had gone through the appraisal and analysis looking at different development scenarios for the Robinson property. He continued that it is fair to say, based on conversations with Phoenix Management, after the request for tours of the sites, the Robinson property again received a strong response back that the acquisition costs for the property shouldn ' t be used as a proxy for this Long Pond parcel , which is what you would expect . Mr. Lombardi added that this further supported the inclination that there is no clear path forward where the Town doesn' t engage an appraiser to bring to the table as our starting position for acquisition . Mr . Lombardi noted that both parties are interested and available; Mark Robinson who does some work with Ocean Edge, has heard second hand about their interest in the Bay Parcel and thought John O' Reilly may be engaged by them to do some work there . Urging that if we do want to get John O' Reilly onboard, it has to be soon . Also included is a copy of Mark Robinson ' s existing contract which is a retainer of $ 5, 000 funded through the CPA to look broadly for land acquisitions, we do have an appropriation in place to get Mark going for now, adding that he doesn' t believe we have gone through much or any of the existing BoS 12 -08-20 www , brewster- ma . gov Page 7 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c \\\\\\WIMIIII111/1 !!r// RSwsjt 1 � Town of Brewster Office of: Q4 ,�DElieg4. //�i� 2198 Main Street Select Board =�e F�N' � Town Administrator � $� �Q a v = Brewster, MA 026314898 o = Phone: (508) 896=3701 Fax : (508) 896=8089 unirininiun\�"a`\\\\\\\\\\\ retainer for this fiscal year. Mr . Lombardi added that he spoke to legal about the title research , approximate cost is $ 5- 7, 000 which can be paid through the legal budget and believes we also can pay for the appraisal work through legal . Continuing that we don' t have a dollar figure yet for appraisal work, John O' Reilly wanted the Board to have a copy of the scope of work that Mark developed following up on what the team had done the last time through this is on pages 71 and 72 of the packet . Mr . Lombardi stated that both have been notified that the Town is interested in potentially engaging their services on the appraisal . Mr . Lombardi also reached out to counsel , depending on what path forward , wanting to make sure that our appraisals can be fully supported and stand up over time to scrutiny, so he received recommendations from KP Law on appraisers they have used for similar, complex real estate transactions . Chair Chaffee clarified that we would need to retain both Mark Robinson and John O' Reilly as soon as possible . Mr . Lombardi responded that his recommendation would be to retain John O' Reilly for potential work on both sites . Reminding the Board that the information was second or third hand on Ocean Edge, he has spent the past several weeks meeting with various interested parties and at this point it would be appropriate to reach out Ocean Edge directly to gage their level of interest . Mr . Lombardi stated that it is our understanding they may be forth coming or not, but there is a long-standing relationship with that organization . Chair Chaffee directed her question to the Board if they would like Peter to retain their services ? Selectperson deRuyter wanted to clarify specially for what purposes would we retain John O' Reilly . Mr . Lombardi replied that John would be responsible for primarily drawing up an affirmative plan , working with the appraiser, noting the challenging part is that the scope of work is really going to be blended between multiple parties . When reviewing the items that are within the scope of work that Mark Robinson put together recognizing that John O' Reilly isn ' t going to solely own any item . Selectperson deRuyter responded that he recognizes that there are unknowns , the important question is whether it is worth locking up both John O' Reilly and Mark Robinson at this point when we haven ' t identified what our goals are yet . Selectperson deRuyter recognized that Mr . O' Reilly has done remarkable work for the Town and if we think it is worth it right now taking this step, he is fully supportive . Selectperson Chatelain is in agreement with Selectperson deRuyter, with respect to the next step, he stated that he does feel that we are inching up to having something appropriate in hand , this output is an appraisal . He added that bringing someone with a more off cape focus, commercially minded appraiser, who does large, complicated lots and with a history of this kind of work is a good idea . Selectperson Chatelain commented that if we presented the scope of work that was clear about the engineering of what we wanted out of it, a good company will meet the need and John O' Reilly would be the likely choice or someone else who has the reputation that he does . Mr . Lombardi agreed it would be premature to bring anyone under contract, the intent of the scope of work is to solicit some response on both qualifications and price to have the discussions to what extent we would want to engage the individuals on the work . Chair Chaffee stated that it seems going forward that Mark Robinson is going to be an essential partner on both and the same with John O' Reilly, asking do we at this point want to retain Mark Robinson for future efforts related to this project and at least have a conversation with John O' Reilly? Noting to both that in the BoS 12-08-20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 8 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c i . °\ tEWIsT"'° Town of Brewster Office of: �4oEp'e9�Fq Select Board 2198 Main Street Ztate �Na � Town Administrator aha Brewster, MA 026314898 c ` Phone : (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896- 8089 4184 m I los llllllllllll1111\\\0 very near future we are going to have a better sense of what exactly what we need of them but asking that they please don ' t accept a contract with a potential competitor to the Town . Selectperson Chatelain, doesn ' t want to put John O' Reilly in that position , stating we either hire him or we don' t . He added that putting out an RFP or scope of work to ask for private responses is perfectably reasonable . Selectperson deRutyer agrees, we need to recognize that we could decide that the highest and best use from the municipality perspective on say the Long Pond Parcel , is to build 200 rental apartments, in which case would be directly competing with Mark Robinson ' s interest within his organization . He added that he worries that in some respects we are putting the cart before the horse . Mr . Lombardi commented that whomever we ultimately engage is supporting our efforts, we need to definitely have them under contract with the Town as opposed to another party paying for their services . He reminded that we don' t' need to do anything with Mark Robinson as we have an existing contract for $ 5 , 000 which buys us some time as we work through our overall strategy and direction on both parcels . Mr . Lombardi stated that Brewster Conservation Trust ( BCT) and to a certain extent Mark Robinson in his role is primarily focused on the Long Pond Parcel at this stage, recognizing that the Bay Parcel is more complex and will involve multiple partners, but ultimately what BCT' s preferred outcome is the more traditional approach in partnering with the Town on the Long Pond Parcel which really where most of the focus is at this point, Mark Robinson ' s role with BCT and the Bay parcel is to be determined at this point . Chair Chaffee recaps that we do not make any commitments or decisions today on appraisal, title research , John O' Reilly and anything else, that we pause these discussions and convene next week for more discussion on what we think the Town' s role on both parcels should be . Selectperson Bingham commented that Mr. Lombardi seemed to be pushing to put John O' Reilly under contract . Mr . Lombardi responded that he needed to point out that John O' Reilly flagged that he worked for Ocean Edge before and if they did have interest in the Bay Parcel in particular; the Town would be in a tough spot that we would not be able to engage Mr . O' Reilly in either or both parcels . Mr . Lombardi offered that he is meeting that afternoon with Jim Faye and the leadership of the Brewster Flats Foundation ( group of alumni and directors looking to form a non - profit to support same use of the Camp ) , he will be able to report back on that conversation next week . Mr. Lombardi asked for the Boards input, if they would like him to reach out to Ocean Edge this week or not ? The Board gave Mr. Lombardi the thumbs up . Selectperson Chatelain, asked if it is possible to get quotes on an appraisal on both lots this week, so that next week if we decide to go in that direction, we would be able to vote to allocate funds . Mr . Lombardi said we can certainly try, though it is a pretty quick turnaround . He requested that he would like to talk with Ms . Kalinick and follow up with Mark Robinson in regard to the scope of work that needs refinement so that responsibility is clear if we have one or more entities involved . Selectperson Chatelain stated it is excellent idea to reach out to Ocean Edge since we have a relationship with them . Ryan Bennett added that she has routine conversations with Tom Devane, the Site Development coordinator at Ocean Edge and previously had been talking with them about the Nickerson House, however since the Sea BoS 12 -08-20 www , brewster-ma . gov Page 9 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c \\\\\\\111111 I I I I11111q// °0�E.wsr Town of Brewster Office of: FS \� Select Board 0 °Q eF��y 2198 Main Street Town Administrator 9 y = Brewster, MA 026314898 o = Phone : ( 508) 896-3701 Fax : ( 508) 896-8089 Camps information has come out, she has not heard anything from them on that application moving forward . Ms . Bennett is happy to work with Mr . Lombardi and loop Tom in for a conversation . Selectperson Whitney asked if the completion of title research would help inform the Board on possible uses especially the Bay Parcel and if this could come out of the legal budget or is it something we could move forward with sooner rather than later? Mr. Lombardi responded that it would take time, probably & 8 weeks to complete both parcels, at this point it makes sense to wait until the Board has the broader policy discussion, as we don ' t want to engage in work and spend dollars that might not make sense if the Town isn ' t going to be actively involved in both parcels . Adding that both are ready to go on their end and legal has already reached out to them to let them know we may want them to do the work . Chair Chaffee noted three items that Ms . Bennett would follow up on and get back to the Board . Recapping that Mr . Lombardi will have a conversation with Ocean Edge, potentially including Ms . Bennett and we will hold off on title research, also that Mr . Lombardi will have another conversation with Brewster Conservation Trust and has the meeting this afternoon with the non - profit group . Adiournment Selectperson Whitney moved to adjourn at 10 : 44am, Selectperson Chatelain second . A roll call vote was taken . Selectperson Whitney-yes, Selectperson Bingham -yes, Selectperson deRuyter-yes, Selectperson Chatelain -yes, Chair Chaffee-yes . The Board vote was 5-yes, 0- No . Respectfully submitted , Erika Mawn Executive Assistant 09 / 07 / 2021 BUG Approved : Signed : Date Selectperson Bingham, Clerk of the Board of Selectman Accompanying Documents in Packet : Agenda, Town Planner memorandum, Cape Cod Commission emails, DRI document, Filing for Project Review, Barnstable County Ordinance 20-07, DCPC document, Cape Cod Commission Ordinance 90-15, Natural Resources Protection Design Worksheet, Real Estate Appraisal, Town of Brewster Agreement, The Compact of Cape Cod Conservation Trusts, Inc. letter. Release Date : 2 .27 .23 BoS 12-08-20 www . brewster-ma . gov Page 10 of 10 Doc ID : b5184a25d137166fcac10d725c988bd50aeaaa0c