WOOLWICH
Members of the building committee continue their work with an architect in order to devise plans for an expansion of the municipal building.
The selectboard Monday night approved up to $8,000 for new design plans, and is working with architect David Matero.
In May, residents rejected spending as much as $1.3 million for the project, but space and privacy issues persist, town officials say.
Town officials are hoping for an L-shaped addition, including a basement, on the end of the building away from U.S. Route 1. Voters could reconsider the office expansion at annual town meeting next May.
The selectboard will conduct public hearings and make surveys available once Matero completes his sketches.
Dana Lindsey, building committee chairman, told the board the committee has given Matero three options, using the original plan as a base.
Once Matero sketches the options, Lindsey said the committee wants to do a community survey. The public could choose from those options, and the one with the most votes would likely be the option brought to town meeting.
David King, selectboard chairman, said he thinks it is best that the town center kept in one location.
The town plans to have voting at the school this year and town meeting there next spring, King said, but it would be nice to have decent office space for the town staff and a selectman’s meeting room to use.
King and Bill Longley, a building committee member, indicated they felt the town meeting vote supported moving forward with the plans and bringing something back for them to vote on at the next town meeting.
In another matter Monday night, Bruce Engert, the codeenforcement officer, said he has taken pictures of the waterfront and boat launch areas up to George Wright Road for the purpose of completing a permit application for removing vegetation and improving the swimming area.
The “tier one” application would involve about a quarter of an acre of a wetland, Engert said.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less