EASTHAMPTON — At its May 6 meeting, the Easthampton City Council voted to declare the Town Lodging property at 75 Oliver St. surplus property and finalized a request for proposals for potential buyers.
After continuing the public hearing on the item from its April 22 meeting, the council voted unanimously to move along with the process of finding a suitable buyer for the property.
This has proven to be a challenge because the property has three deed restrictions on it: historical preservation, affordable housing,and agricultural.
During the public comment portion of the hearing, many residents came forward to express their frustration with the current state of the property, particularly the actual lodge, which has fallen into significant disrepair over the last several years.
“The city did not maintain its responsibility to that house,” said Cathy Wauczinski, an Easthampton resident.
Michael Owens, the city’s procurement officer, laid out how much money the city has invested in the property over the years, including a new roof 30 years ago, an archaeological dig to see what was on the land and other minor projects. Most of those funds came from grants or Community Preservation Act funds.
Councilor Thomas Peake noted that it’s “valid for people to be frustrated over the condition. Most of us probably are frustrated by that.”
Several councilors noted that the city doesn’t have the funds to take care of the property the way it needs to be cared for. Previous studies have noted that the property would need nearly $1.5 million in renovations to bring it up to code and functional again.
Peake explained that it’s a really complicated situation because the renovations would be expensive due to the historical preservation restrictions, but he said the city would also need to make it affordable to future residents because of the affordable housing restriction.
Council President Koni Denham remembered when the property was a palace of refuge for people. She expressed a desire “to do right by that place,” while also saying that the city doesn’t have that capacity.
The approved request for proposal would require information about the plans for the property, staying consistent with the deed restrictions, as well as looking at the method of financing and timing for any projects. The City Council will have the ability to accept or reject any proposals. Although several residents said that they were hearing there were proposals already, Denham reiterated that the city has not even put out that request yet.
