Loading...
HDC Minutes 8-27-20 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE/COMMISSION Historic District Commission DATE: August 27, 2020 LOCATION: Google Meet MEMBERS PRESENT: William Finch, Chair; Suzanne LaMont, Vice Chair; Caroline Mason, Wendy Pearl MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Emily Hutchings (Planning Department, City of Beverly) RECORDER: Jodi Byrne Call to Order Chair William Finch calls the August 27, 2020 meeting of the HDC to order at 7:00 pm. Vice Chair Suzie LaMont reads the following script: Before beginning the meeting, I would like to announce that this meeting is being recorded by the City of Beverly. I am confirming that all members and persons anticipated on the agenda are present and can hear me. Members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Suzie LaMont William Finch Caroline Mason Wendy Pearl Staff, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Emily Hutchings Anticipated speakers on the agenda, please respond in the affirmative. Peter Benton Introduction to Remote Meeting: Chair Finch introduced the meeting and reviewed the Public Meeting Ground Rules: This Open Meeting of the Historic District Commission is being conducted remotely, , 2020, due to the current State of Emergency in the Commonwealth due to the outbreak of COVID-19. This meeting is being recorded and by participating you are giving your consent. You may turn off your video if you are participating via computer. Mute microphones or phones. Mute yourself by clicking the microphone icon at the bottom of the screen, pressing the mute button on your telephone, or by pressing *6 on your telephone keypad. The host may mute you. Use Chat only for technical difficulties and to ind Chat). Do not use the Chat for public comment. State your name and address or affiliation before speaking. Speak clearly, loudly, and in a way that helps generate accurate minutes. discretion unless required by law (such as a public hearing).  1.Historic Preservation Plan: Review draft recommendations Chair Finch reports that this Historic Preservation Plan draft was prepared by Peter Benton. Benton states that the format of the draft was mandated by Massachusetts Historical Commission guidelines based upon their grant. He provides a recap of the Steering Cmeeting (which was immediately prior to the HDC meeting), and reports the following draft recommendations as the major points of discussion: 1.Beverly to become a certified local government. 2.The HDC to have access to professional consultants when needed. 3.Historic properties to be inventoried as a category. Property Surveys 1.The HDC will continue to inventory properties on a case by case basis, with each year looking at priorities of funding and inventory work. This is to encourage a regular rhythm of inventory work that may be prioritized. 2.The HDC will inventory downtown neighborhoods with a priority on the area between Rantoul Street and Cabot Street, from the waterfront to Elliott Street. It is noted that there is no real record of what is there except for Broadway. The plan is to encourage inventorying entire neighborhoods working on the most vulnerable as a priority. This plan may help to target a social justice initiative in housing plans. Proposed Local Historic Districts 1.Expanded Fish Flake Hill District, to match the existing National Register district. 2.Beverly Center Business District Local Historic District, based on the existing National Register district and the proposed expansion. 3.Beverly Farms Village as a local historic district if there is neighborhood momentum. 4.Local historic landmarks to include single property districts and a local landmark program. This initiative is proposed to address future concerns of care and upkeep in buildings such as the library and City Hall. With a Local Historic Landmark, most public buildings would be covered when administration or other changes occur. This initiative also enables property owners to have their property listed as historical enabling them to take a preservation step under a local historic district. It is reported that Wellesley uses this model. 5.Conservation Districts it is recommended that the Cabot/Rantoul neighborhood become a conservation district so that it would be under the HDC. This could expedite HDC reviews with the purpose of preventing worst case scenarios. This plan could allow the HDC to provide guidelines for the treatment of new neighborhoods and would deny demolition of historic structures. Chair Finch states that in local historic districts, a certificate of appropriateness (COA) must be acquired to demolish a building. Benton says that this is currently the only mechanism to say no to demolition of a historic structure, rather than simply placing a temporary delay on the demolition permit. Chair Finch reports that in 2014, at 62 Water Street, there was an application for demolition, and a delay was placed on the demolition. Chair Finch says that the COA was denied, so no demolition permit could be issued.  Other significant recommendations included: 1.Public Awareness a city interpretive plan/presentation to raise people's awareness of buildings on Cabot Street. This would be tied to Essex Heritage and Historic Beverly. 2.Creation of a Preservation Advocate Agency there is a model of this used in Cape Cod. 3.Working with ordinances: a.Cultural Heritage Ordinance b.Historic and Scenic Road Corridors 4.Municipal Policy a.Preservation Act, to establish the priority of preserving historic resources b.Recommendation on the Arts cultural landscape reports would benefit future staff c.Grants to work on cemetery stones Hutchings refers to page 33 of the draft recommendations. She asks about the encroachment of property maintenance codes and how they coordinate with housing policies in relation to social inequity. Benton answers that the main objective is to incorporate these residential principles into districts, as a way of preventing demolition by neglect. He says that this is an intervention through a systematic approach of set provisions within the demolition ordinance. Such provisions include: 1.Incorporating the Secretary of Interior's Standards into Building Department reviews and other community improvement strategies. Benton notes that strengthening historic properties strengthens economics. This initiative will provide property maintenance through enforcement staff who are aware of the historic character of neighborhoods, requiring training and programs to meet consistent goals to strengthen neighborhood character. 2.Landlord Policy landlords must register so that when there is an issue with a rental properties, the City knows how to reach landlords. 3.Archives the need for funding and best practices. Mason says that she is interested in the idea of the HDC working more actively with other aspects of the City government, as she does not think that currently they are as integral as they could be. Benton recommends a strong policy statement from the City that historic buildings should be preserved and incorporated into new developments. He suggests that the HDC should actively evaluate projects that are undergoing review, even if HDC review is not required. Chair issue, Benton suggests the following: 1.The Planning Department should provide the HDC with a spreadsheet of development projects that are in process. 2.Members of the HDC should attend meetings of the Planning Board to be kept aware of all projects.  Emily Hutchings reports that the Planning Department keeps an email list to send the agendas from the Planning Board and the Conservation Committee, and the HDC could request to be placed on the email list. Pearl says that while they should further discuss the power that the HDC can have in this, it is important to note that part of the draft talks about the coordination with other commissions. Pearl suggests that the plan should mention a crossover, such as a recommendation of an annual review that includes something like a PowerPoint of all buildings that were either demolished or saved, and what grants were secured. She says that the purpose of such a review would be to show the public the number of buildings that have been lost versus protected. Hutchings says the city does provide a yearly report of each Board and Commission, and that this is something that they could easily carry over into a more individualized report. It is suggested that a report could be prepared for the City Council. LaMont says this is also a substantial way to show how funds were allocated. Pearl asks if the HDC can operate fundraisers, and Benton says they should be able to accept grants and donations. Chair Finch asks if a notification process could occur for the HDC to be made aware of buildings over 50 years-old that are being considered for demolition. Benton suggests that the HDC request documents for all Planning Board projects so that they could write letters, not just wait for a time to speak at meetings. He says that the HDC should be notified whenever a new subdivision or land development is planned. Sue Goganian, a member from the public speaks. She says that she is grateful for all that the HDC does to preserve public buildings and historic landmarks. She also says that she feels local landmarking and conservation districts offer the best protection for historic sites. She says that demolition by neglect happens for two reasons: a homeowner cannot afford to fix his property or a homeowner chooses a deliberate degradation. Because of this, Goganian stresses the need for advocacy, prevention, and enforcement. She says that the city needs to be held to these standards. Goganian also states that she supports the CPC funding of document archiving. In reference to previous applications for CPA funds for document archiving, Pearl says that Historic Beverly serves as an archive, hosting important city documents. She states that the City Clerk has been trying to get these documents scanned in order to preserve them as they are stored in horrible conditions. Benton says that the HDC could recommend that the documents be moved to a better storage area, and Finch requests information on any type of index for existing documents. Benton suggests that the HDC review the Historic Preservation Plan with the intention of meeting again for more discussion. He says that Hutchings is working to schedule a public forum with the date to be confirmed within the next week. Benton states he will be developing a PowerPoint presentation to share the big picture of the overall plan. Discussion: Considerations for Small Preservation Projects Grant Program via CPC Wendy Pearl says that the purpose of this discussion is to construct a plan to address private homes that wish to apply for CPC grants, ensuring a way or the CPC to fund smaller grants but recapture funds if the property is sold or the publicly funded preserved features are altered. She says that the purpose of a recapture clause rather than requiring a preservation restriction is to make the process less onerous for the applicant and the City.  Hutchings shares the most recent iteration of draft recommendations for the program, last reviewed included in the draft, and describes and clarifies the comments for the HDC. Pearl notes The Cabot Lobby project and its implementation of a step down recapture clause. She says that the City Solicitor seemed to see this as a sufficient way to protect the investment. Pearl says that in order for one to apply for such a grant it would already have to be listed on the National Register or determined eligible. She suggests that they further develop and compose a recommendation for the program to submit to the CPC after their new grant cycle set for early October. Benton asks if they could put some type of recapture in the recommendation plan for both commercial and residential. Hutchings adds that the funding of small grants for preservation was a priority in the public survey (described in chapter 3 of the draft Historic Preservation Plan), and that a recapture plan could help to facilitate historic preservation. Pearl says that the CPC already funds projects on private property that have a clear public purpose, and suggests they fully develop the criteria of what can be funded with more guidance to better protect buildings and to facilitate projects that meet a higher standard than what would normally be done by the homeowner. Chair Finch adds that the condition of a higher standard and public purpose is essential. Hutchings says that she will discuss these items with CPC staff member Denise Deschamps. Pearl suggests adding a second bullet on the report that indicates the necessary criteria for each project with examples provided. Hutchings agrees to return to the HDC with revised project requirements and review criteria, for further discussion and review at later meetings. Section 106 Review: New England Power Company d/b/a National Grid N192 Cabot Relocation/Beverly Regional Transmission Reliability Project, Salem and Beverly, MA. MHC #RC.65410 Hutchings reviews the underground transmission project that will run through portions of Salem and Beverly. She says that the HDC has been notified due to Section 106 review requirements, and has noted sensitive archeological sites that may be impacted by the project, including at Monument Square and the Beverly E Substation. The Public Archaeology Laboratory has completed a report and recommendations for the treatment of historic sites, with recommendations for sites in Beverly to be monitored, but not treated in any other way. Mason recommends further monitoring and reviewing of more highly sensitive Beverly sites based on the potential impact to sensitive areas. Chair Finch asks if the HDC has any reason to be stricter than what the Massachusetts Historical Commission has already determined, which has not asked for any additional protection of sites in Beverly. Pearl says that the report states that the Beverly sites are only being monitored and asks why Monument Square is listed as high sensitivity and yet is only requiring the action of monitoring. Pearl asks Hutchings if they could write a letter to the Massachusetts Historical Commission and to the applicant with recommendations and additional questions as noted in a standard Section 106 review. The Commission discusses the effectiveness of test pits, and the reports of unmarked graves in the area of Monument Square. Mason says that on page 79 of the report it lists the use of both hand and machine digging, and LaMont notes that this is only designated for one Salem site. Mason says that she feels they should be more sensitive in their approach to the area of Monument Square. Hutchings says that the HDC will need to vote to write a letter to the Massachusetts Historical Commission, which she can compose and submit for HDC review. Chair Finch says that the same standard of work that is being designated for Salem should be used in Beverly. Pearl: Motions that the HDC draft a letter to the Massachusetts Historical Commission, requesting that the same level of research and protection planned for the Salem site be used at the Beverly site, and that National Grid modify the scope of work to further address the highly sensitive area of Monument Square/Ancient Burying Ground with concern to unmarked burials in that area. LaMont seconds the motion. There is a formal roll call vote of the HDC with each member voting yes:William Finch, Chair; Suzanne LaMont, Vice Chair; Caroline Mason, and Wendy Pearl. The motion passes (4-0). Approval of minutes a.July 23, 2020 Mason motions to approve the minutes from July 23, 2020. Lamont seconds. There is a formal roll call vote of the HDC with each member voting yes:William Finch, Chair; Suzanne LaMont, Vice Chair; Caroline Mason, and Wendy Pearl. The motion passes (4-0). There is a discussion of the requirements for the members of the HDC. Chair Finch requests that the requirements be removed and recommends a plan for five HDC members with three alternates. Alternates would only come in when needed and would only vote when needed, although they may sit in on meetings at any time. Chair Finch says that they are in the process of scheduling a meeting with the mayor for a fifth member. New/Other Business /Other discussion or action items related to Commission business, if any Hutchings reports that the Powder House restoration is complete, and the grant report will be submitted to Denise Deschamps on behalf of the CPC. She says that the Powder House had its first visitors this past week. Hutchings also reports that the Hale House preservation restriction was reviewed and will be sent to the Massachusetts Historical Commission for final signatures, after which it will be submitted to the Registry of Deeds. Adjournment LaMont motions to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 pm. Pearl seconds the motion. There is a formal roll call vote of the HDC with all members voting yes:William Finch, Chair; Suzanne LaMont, Vice Chair; Caroline Mason, and Wendy Pearl. The motion passes (4-0).