Loading...
2014-05-29CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION: Community Preservation Committee SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: May 29, 2014 LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, Third Floor Conference Room B MEMBERS PRESENT: Darien Crimmin — Vice Chair, Heather Richter, Marilyn McCrory, Leland McDonough, Lincoln Williams, John Thomson Henry Pizzo, Wendy Pearl — Chairperson (arrives 7:40p.m.) and Robert Buchsbaum (arrives 8:13 p.m.) MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Amy Maxner - Environmental Planner; Aaron Clausen — Planning Director; Mayor Cahill, Bryant Ayles — City Finance Director; Bruce Doig — Parks & Recreation Director; Maureen Driscoll — resident of Ocean Street RECORDER: Amy Maxner Crimmin calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Administrative Updates from Staff Crimmin asks if Maxner has any administrative updates. Maxner provides an overview of the amendments to the Community Preservation Committee Ordinance explaining the rationale for the changes. She notes that the final passage of these changes will happen at the June 2nd City Council meeting. Maxner notes that Crimmin's, McCrory's and Thomson's terms on the CPC are expiring on July 31, 2014 and offers to help coordinate with respective appointment authorities to renew their terms. Maxner notes that she was not able to prepare any draft minutes for approval this evening. Pearl arrives. Crimmin turns attention to review of the applications under the Recreation Category. Camp Paradise, Acquisition of 12 Acres — City of Beverly Crimmin suggests beginning with the Camp Paradise acquisition. He notes that this project seems to be a very high priority for the Mayor. McCrory notes that notwithstanding the Mayor's stance on any particular project, she notes that the project aligns with many of the CPC's Project Evaluation Criteria and is an immediately imminent opportunity that is fleeting. Discussion ensues as to the State grant funds that are being sought and how the CPA funding can be made contingent upon the State grant being awarded. Pearl notes that this particular application was weak with regard to its focus on the building, which is not fundable under CPA. Discussion ensues as to how separate appraisals for the land and building and the fact that State grant can go toward the purchase of the building. McCrory explains the Open Space & Recreation Committee's (OSRC) stance that this project is primarily a Recreation project and not a strong Open Space project. Further, she explains that the OSRC believes that the 10% set aside for Open Space should not be used for this project. Extensive discussion ensues as to the CPA statute's definition of recreational land and how the CPC should reconcile the OSRC's position relative to this project. McCrory notes that the CPC can expect a comment letter from the OSRC shortly. Crimmin asks if there is any more discussion on this for the moment. Aaron Clausen explains that the Mayor and Finance Director Bryant Ayles will be in shortly to discuss this and other City projects, but mainly from a bonding perspective. Members agree that the project is worthy. Lynch Park, Bathroom Renovations — City of Beverly Crimmin notes there is a healthy leveraging of funds, with $50,000 of CPA funding requested for this project. Pearl notes that she was not pleased with the proposed building design as this is a significant historic landscape and the proposed design does not align with the nature of the landscape. Discussion ensues as to the ability of the CPC to place contingencies on funding requiring Historic District Commission input on the design to achieve a more aesthetically pleasing building. Discussion with Mayor Cahill The Mayor and Bryant Ayles arrive. Thomson moves to suspend this discussion to give the Mayor the floor. Seconded by Williams. The motion carries 7 -0. Mayor Cahill thanks the members for its time and service on this Committee and for those of the members who were instrumental in getting the CPA passed in Beverly. He explains that the main reason for his presentation this evening is to provide a framework for bonding several projects submitted by the City and Parks & Recreation Department. He briefly notes the potential uses and opportunities that Camp Paradise will afford the City. He goes on to explain the other City projects: the Lynch Park and Dane Street bathrooms, the proposed spray pad, and Ellis Square, how outside funding sources are being leveraged for these endeavors. The Mayor provides 10, 15 and 20 year pro -forma bonding tables for the five projects and discusses CPA funding bonding and other funds leveraged throughout the State. Discussion ensues as to options for bonding terms. Discussion ensues as to the confidence level of receiving the PARC grant, with Doig noting that the grant agency representative showing enthusiasm for the project. The Mayor notes that if the PARC grant does not get awarded, then the project cannot go forward, noting that the maximum funding available from PARC is $400,000, so there is a gap that the City would need to bridge. Discussion ensues as to options for bonding some projects, and funding others outright in future application rounds. Discussion ensues as to the City's projections for funding projects that should normally be part of the City's operating budget and keeping the CPA fund nimble enough to respond to projects such as Camp Paradise or other significant open space acquisitions. Community Preservation Committee 05 -29 -14 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4 Pearl suggests that the Committee move on to discussing the applications. Members thanks the Mayor and Ayles for coming in. Lynch Park Bathrooms — Continued Discussion Discussion ensues as to the merits of the project, it urgency and members' overall impression of the application. Brief discussion ensues as to the CPC's leverage for conditioning better design as part of funding award. Camp Paradise Acquisition — City of Beverly Extensive discussion ensues as to the merits of the application, the likelihood of PARC grant funding and whether the CPC should vote to approve this project and fund it, and whether to write a support letter to the PARC grant agency. Maxner asks if the categories from which this project is being funded needs to be clarified. McCrory explains that the Open Space & Recreation Committee does not see this as an open space project but primarily as a recreation project. Discussion ensues as to whether it is the applicant or CPC's burden to decide which category a project qualifies under, with members agreeing the CPC should make that determination based on the merits of the applications. Considering there is time to submit a support letter to PARC, members agree to table this discussion to the June 19 meeting. Dane Street Beach Bathrooms — City of Beverly The budget is reviewed, and discussion ensues as to the design concerns on this visible public space. Crimmin expresses his concern as to the longevity of the project considering storm surge and sea level rise and the building's resiliency. Ms. Driscoll notes her concern about flooding in that area, and does not think it is in the best location. Members agree that eco- sensitive design (i.e. water -wise fixtures etc...). Discussion ensues as to the City's Master Plan and whether hazard mitigation is part of that document. Members agree it best to invite applicants in for Q & A should that deemed necessary. Obear Park Pavilion — Ryal Side Civic Association Members note that the application checked off both open space & recreation, but agree that this is not an open space project since the property was not acquired with CPA funds. Pearl questions as to whether there is clear City support for this project, or whether it is committed to doing the work. Buchsbaum thinks that this is a great project but not urgent and perhaps it could be funded next year. Williams notes that this is an opportunity to fund a private entity. Pearl likes it geographic location in the City but wonders if it is an accessible structure per ADA requirements. McCrory wonders if there are back up on estimated costs and which phases of the project will be performed by who and timelines for permitting (i.e. Conservation Commission) and actual Community Preservation Committee 05 -29 -14 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4 construction. The budget is reviewed with members noting that the $8,000 in labor from the City is slated to be covered by the CPA and Pearl wonders that was meant to be a match. Considering the later hour, members agree to table this discussion and move on. Ellis Square — City of Beverly Discussion ensues with Aaron Clausen regarding the need to secure this space as a City -owned parcel in perpetuity (i.e. City Council vote to discontinue the section of r -o -w and place a permanent recreation restriction) since it is currently part of the right of way now, which may incur additional costs. Thomson asks why the street is not narrowed even more to make the Square larger. Clausen explains parking issues in that regard and that the project has a traffic calming element at the intersection of Cabot, noting that there is increase in space within the Square. Buchsbaum notes his reservations that this is not a recreation project, but merely a gathering place. Discussion ensues as to the merits of the project as a recreation project, with Pearl and Richter agreeing it is an urban park. Members agree to move on. Lynch Park Spray Park & Play Structure — City of Beverly The budget is reviewed. Thomson notes, that despite the robust funding leverage, he does not believe this is an urgent need. Williams expresses his concern on the maintenance issues long term. It is clarified that the grant requires a match by the City, and if CPA funds are not awarded the City would find it elsewhere. Pearl does not believe that the planning, location or design of this project was thought out very well. She also notes that landscape should be considered (i.e. planting trees, restore lawn etc...). The need for permitting is discussed. Members agree to table the rest of the applications. Other Business, Next Meeting Agenda Items Pearl notes the next CPC meeting is scheduled for June 19 and the Committee members need to start formulating their rankings of each application for discussion. Methods for ranking is discussed. Members agree to rank each application based on the Project Evaluation Criteria and score each project on a scale of 5 being the highest and 0 the lowest. Maxner will collect everyone's scores and place on a master spreadsheet in time for the next meeting. Pearl suggests that perhaps at the next meeting the Committee could decide which applicants should be asked in for Q & A. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, Williams moves to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Pizzo. The motion carries 8 -0. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M. Community Preservation Committee 05 -29 -14 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4