My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/14/2019 AFFORDABLE HOUSING Minutes
>
05/14/2019 AFFORDABLE HOUSING Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2019 5:01:00 PM
Creation date
7/23/2019 1:43:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/14/2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
be for low/extremely low income, which was less attractive than CCD, who scored slightly <br /> higher in this category. <br /> Regarding Wastewater Systems, worth 15 points, the Chair emphasized the need Capewide to <br /> minimize or eliminate nitrogen waste impacts to the groundwater. Points were awarded based on <br /> projects delivering a wastewater system that would keep nitrogen waste below 20 mg/Liter, with <br /> points increasing with lower amounts of nitrogen waste. Both proposals offered different <br /> approaches to addressing wastewater, requiring a request for supplementary information. <br /> POAH/HAC proposed to meet the advantageous threshold of 19 mg/L or better, but they did not <br /> propose a specific amount of reduction in nitrogen waste below 19 mg/L. POAH/HAC indicated <br /> that they would work with the Town to reduce the number, but would need financial assistance <br /> from the Town to achieve a better result. CCD committed to treating 5 mg/L or better but <br /> provided no detail as to how they would do so. Both developers provided the supplemental <br /> information requested, but CCD provided information indicating that, financially, they would be <br /> able to meet only 19 mg/L so both proposals were ranked advantageous. Selectman O'Hara <br /> inquired whether de-nitrification systems were proposed and the Chair responded that they <br /> proposed a modular system that would improve over time, but would require more monitoring <br /> and cost. Selectman O'Hara suggested the possibility of offering cost savings to systems that <br /> continued to improve and were maintained to function at a higher level. Selectman Sherman <br /> noted that one of the proposers was seeking double the cost of the system. Mr. Lehrer stated that <br /> the RFP Working Group could only review the information submitted by the deadline for scoring <br /> purposes. The Chair stated that POAH/HAC requested a total of$300,000 from the Town while <br /> CCD would be seeking $360,000. With the supplementary information regarding wastewater <br /> and in order to meet the 5 mg/L level, an additional amount of$110,0004150,000 would be <br /> needed by POAH/HAC and $500,000 by CCD. CCD would also need an additional $60,000 in <br /> the operating budget. <br /> Regarding Site and Infrastructure Design, both proposals fell short of expectations to achieve a <br /> landscape and site plan that would be equivalent to a LEED or Enterprise Green Community <br /> standard. Neither proposal committed to becoming certified under either standard. However, the <br /> proposers indicated that they would pursue the standards, but did not wish to become certified, <br /> and would achieve part score such as in abutter buffering, low impact design, low impact <br /> vegetation and green infrastructure using natural processes such as rain water use on site. There <br /> were no significant differences between the two for the criteria. Mr. Lehrer confirmed there was <br /> no fundamental difference in the scoring but the POAH/HAC proposal planned to contain <br /> development to one parcel whereas CCD proposed to utilize two of the parcels. <br /> For Building Design, it was hoped that the projects would reflect the local standard while <br /> accommodating the needs of the household in terms of unit size, layout, healthy environment and <br /> meeting the needs of disabilities. The CCD design proposal was more appealing and reflected a <br /> local design standard and was more creative with respect to the contours on site, allowing access <br /> to units on both floors. All of the units were visitable without the use of an elevator. The <br /> POAH/HAC design reflected a Cape like design, but was not reflective of the surrounding area. <br /> Three buildings were referred to as barn style, with a silo to house the elevator. Both designs <br /> offered good buffering with abutting South Cape Resort, although CCD provided a slightly better <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.