Board of Trustees Keeps Open Mind On St. Paul's
The Public Information Committee of the Garden City Board of Trustees is reminding residents that the trustees have made no decision to accept the AvalonBay proposal as it appears in the Mayor's Committee Report, or with the enhancements offered by AvalonBay at the November 6 Board of Trustees meeting. Contrary to some of the information circulating, it will not do so until the trustees can take into consideration the results of the public opinion poll, which is open to all residents, and is to be conducted as a public service on December 2 by the Eastern and Estates Property Owners' Associations at the St. Paul's Field House.
Because a decision on the St. Paul's Main Building has been an open-ended matter for 15 years, many residents, both long-time and new, have requested a review of the history and issues surrounding the problem, as well as the remaining options that are now on the table, to help them make an informed choice on December 2.
In 1993, the entire 48-acre St. Paul's campus, which includes the playing fields, the Field House, Cluett Hall, the Main School Building, Ellis Hall and the cottages, was purchased by the Village by means of an $8,500,000 20-year bond issue to cover the $7,300,000 purchase price plus the $1,200,000 needed for the closing costs and basic capital repairs to the Main Building, which was then unoccupied, and has remained so.
The stated goal of the purchase was the acquisition of the much-needed playing fields. Although it was hoped that the main building could be converted for public use, in 1993 there was no plan in place, and consequently, no estimated cost to the taxpayers for any such project.
The Village has since used the Field House and Cluett Hall for public activities, improved the playing fields and constructed a new playground, comfort station and parking lot. All of these facilities will remain in place for continued Village use, regardless of the disposition of the Main Building.
Throughout the past 15 years, a number of studies were commissioned by Garden City mayors and Village boards. Professional architects, engineers, financial and real estate experts were retained to explore the feasibility of converting the Main Building for public use. Concomitantly, committees made up of residents, who are also professionals in these fields, were appointed to review the report of each consultant and make recommendations to the Village boards.
Proposals to convert the main building for use as Village Hall, the Police and Fire Departments, the Recreation Department, a senior center, a youth center, a public high school and a public library have all been carefully scrutinized. Mayors and Boards of Trustees, the Board of Education, the Property Owners' Associations and many residents have given serious consideration to every consultant's findings and every committee report on each proposal for public use.
In the end, vested with the fiscal responsibility of maintaining the entire Village infrastructure, including aging water mains, 75 miles of Village-owned roadways, acres of municipal parking lots, green space and parks, while providing municipal services Garden City residents expect such as police, fire, recreation programs for all age groups, rear yard garbage pick-ups, and leaf collection, no Village Board has been willing to justify the projected high costs to convert even part of the Main Building for any proposed public use.
However, in recognition of the many residents who strongly wish to save the building, and in consideration of all taxpayers who would bear the cost for years to come, and fully cognizant of every rejected proposal for public use, in 2005, in a final effort to bring the problem to conclusion, the Board of Trustees retained Karen Backus Associates as consultants and the current Mayor's Committee was appointed. It was commissioned to explore the feasibility of returning the building to productive use, restoring its historic exterior and other distinguished features to the extent possible, and providing for its long-term maintenance at little or no cost to the taxpayers by means of private redevelopment.
In response to the stringent requirements set forth in the Request for Proposals formulated by the consultants, reviewed by the Mayor's Committee and issued by the Village, several entities, including an independent citizens group, The Committee to Save St. Paul's, submitted proposals for the restoration of the building that included apartments.
For a variety of reasons, all applicants were eliminated with the exception of the Albanese Corporation (which thereafter withdrew), AvalonBay and The Committee to Save St. Paul's. In 2007, after in-depth analysis of the experience in large-scale restoration projects and the financial resources of both AvalonBay and The Committee to Save St. Paul's developer, the Mayor's Committee recommended that no further consideration be given to the proposal of The Committee to Save St. Paul's, and that further exploration of AvalonBay's proposal be made on a conditional basis, if the building is to be saved without undue burden to the taxpayers.
In July, 2008, the current Mayor's Committee, chaired by Trustee Thomas Lamberti, and committee members Trustee Gerard Lundquist, along with residents James Carney, Robert T. Davis, and Cosmo Veneziale, who are professionals in the fields of construction, real estate finance, and architecture, presented their report to the full Board of Trustees.
In light of the 15-year history of the unsuccessful search for a feasible and affordable public use, the Committee concluded that the only remaining options for St. Paul's are (1) to privatize the restoration of the building by AvalonBay, while keeping control of the underlying land, or (2) demolish the building at an estimated cost of nearly $6,000,000. They also stated that, in their opinion, "spending $13,900,000 and paying at least $200,000 a year to maintain an uninhabitable building with no planned future use is a waste of time and money."
Notwithstanding the committee's rejection of "mothballing," the Board of Trustees is determined to also obtain public input on this third alternative before making a final decision. For that reason, all three alternatives will be on the Dec. 2 poll.
