Special Board of Aldermen Public Hearing — 12/16/2019 Page 9
Of concern at the Committee level and was addressed appropriately, | have not seen the final report, but
Wayne Husband, our Senior Traffic Engineer for the City along with Hoyle Tanner, they did conduct a traffic
study for that area of the City. At the time we met, they did not have that final report in-hand, but they did have
enough data to confirm that a consolidated facility at the landfill would not have a significant impact on traffic in
the West Hollis Street corridor.
Our subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend to the next level, to move forward, to build a new facility
at the $9.9 million dollar level. Of course, we are using funds that we anticipate receiving from the sale of
Burke Street as you heard Director Cummings say earlier of $3.9 million, resulting in a $6 million dollar need.
The Board of Public Works met two weeks ago | believe, I’m not sure of the exact date, had a very robust
conversation. We voted 4 to 1 to move forward and recommend. We also held an informational night at the
landfill for neighbors and residents to come in. We answered all the questions that were asked that night. In
conclusion, the subcommittee unanimously and the Board of Public Works in a vote of 4 to 1, recommend
moving forward to build a building at the landfill. Thank you.
Ms. Fauteux
That concludes our presentation, thank you.
Chairman Dowd
Is there anyone from the Board of Aldermen that has an clarifying questions for the presenting people?
Alderman Jette
For clarification purposes | would like you to make it clear that the problems that we have with our current
buildings include facilities that would not be included in this new building. For example, the Street Department,
the inadequate conditions there for the bulk of the workers there, the drivers and stuff, they are not going to be
moving to this new building. So their locker room, their lunch room, as inadequate as it is, is going to remain
such. Also although the garage at the Street Department is not part of this project, it is going to stay there, but
eventually, | mean this is, if money was no object, | think ideally you’d want to move all of your facilities to this
new site including the garage. But because of the cost and the City just can’t afford to that right now but the
long-range plan would include moving the garage to the landfill site. So | just don’t want anyone to think that
that is not part of the long-range plan. Am | correct in saying that?
Commissioner Teas
I’m still Frank Teas, Commissioner of the Board of Public Works. | think that everything that Alderman Jette
said was true. | think it’s important to note that with respect to the renovations that were being proposed in the
Harvey presentation earlier, it did not taking into account making any improvements to the actual mechanical
area improvement, so yes, those folks would stay in place. Long-term? Sure we would like to move that
garage. We are going to mindful of where the building goes to ensure that we could put the garage there in the
future. We are not making that recommendation tonight because we are being fiscally responsible with our
money and over time perhaps we will be able to do it. Thank you.
Alderman Caron
So Alderman you asked the question | was going to ask. So that means Park Rec staff, other than the
administration is going to stay in that 1902 building?
Ms. Fauteux
No | don't believe so.
