Loading...
CPC meeting minutes 5-19-2022-FINAL BEVERLY COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE (CPC) DRAFT MEETING MINUTES Date of Meeting: May 19, 2022 Location of meeting: Beverly City Hall, City Council Chamber, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA CPC Members Present: Derek Beckwith; Robert Buchsbaum;Thomas Bussone; Nancy Marino; Marilyn McCrory; Heather Richter; Danielle Spang. Members absent: Christy Edwards Others Present: Denise Deschamps, CPC Committee staff person, Economic Development Planner, Beverly Planning and Development Dept.; Victoria Healey,Associate Planner, Beverly Planning and Development Department Heather Richter called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. and provides a welcome. Richter acknowledges that long time CPC member and founding member of the CPC,Wendy Pearl, has resigned from the CPC. Richter celebrates Pearl's contribution to the CPC over her years of service including her knowledge of the CPA and wise counsel. Richter also acknowledges that CPC staff person, Denise Deschamps, has resigned from her position and thanks her for her service. Richter then asks the Planning and Development Department's new Associate Planner,Victoria Healey,to introduce herself. REVIEW OF MEETING MINUTES FROM APRIL 21, 2022 Richter asks if members have had the opportunity to review the minutes and if they have any edits. Richter notes she has a minor typographical error to note which she will bring to Deschamps's attention after the meeting. Hearing no further comments or edits Marilyn McCrory makes a motion to accept the minutes, as edited. Thomas Bussone seconds the motion. All vote in favor of accepting the minutes. REVIEW OF THREE PROJECTS WITH MOU'S ABOUT TO EXPIRE • Upgrade of Cabot House HVAC as was proposed by Historic Beverly-Susan Goganian, Executive Director of Historic Beverly submitted a letter to the CPC requesting an MOU extension, expiring on June 30, 2023. Goganian also sent a subsequent email providing further detail regarding their financial need related to this project and plans for fundraising. Nancy Marino asks for confirmation regarding the amount of funds awarded to Historic Beverly for this project. Richter confirms the amount awarded was$175,000.00 (one hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars). After review of the letter and email submitted by Goganian, Bussone makes a motion to extend the expiration date of the MOU to June 30, 2023. Marino seconds the motion. All vote in favor of granting the extension. • Restoration of the Stairs Connecting Gillis Park to Pleasant View Beach-Marino met with the Beverly Parks and Recreation Director, Bruce Doig. They felt confident that the work could commence in June, 2022. Members of the CPC also review the email sent to the CPC from Suzie La Mont, member of the Beverly Historic Districts Commission (HDC). Ms. LaMont want to bring attention to the fact that before any work commences the Parks and Recreation Department (BEVREC) needs to bring their plan for the project to the HDC for their approval since the project was funded,with CPC funds, as a historic preservation project. Several members of the CPC were under the impression that discussion between the Parks and Recreation Dept. and the HDC re the project, including scope and materials, had taken place when BEVREC pursued a Determination of Historic Significance from the CPC. Danielle Spang notes that the HDC does need to sign off on the plans for the project before work commences. Marilyn McCrory states that the extension should give BEVREC and the HDC adequate time to meet. McCrory make a motion to approve to extend the expiration date of the MOU to September 30, 2022. Marino seconds the motion. All vote in favor of extending the MOU to the date requested. • COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Housing Assistance Program-CPC member Derek Beckwith will be speaking to this topic later in the meeting as his arrival was delayed by a work commitment. STATUS OF COMMUNITY PRESERVATION PLAN UPDATE Richter begins by stating that the section related to the Open Space and Recreation Plan is missing. McCrory asks Victoria Healey if she is aware of the status of the Open Space and Recreation Commission Plan update. Healey states that she is working with the Open Space and Recreation Committee (OSRC). The OSRC will finalize the goals in its plan at their next meeting. McCrory will then update the Community Preservation Plan as needed. McCrory asks Deschamps to send her the word version of the latest draft of the CPC Plan and she will update once the information becomes available. Richter would like several hard copies of the Plan printed once it is complete. McCrory notes that the quote in the introduction to the CPC Plan Update needs to be corrected. McCrory asks if it is the intent of the CPC to update the Plan annually or every 3-5 years, noting that the public comments from the annual public hearing need to be incorporated annually. Richter responds that annual updates would include the update of basic information such as projects funded, notes from annual meeting, list of members, etc. while a more robust update would take place every 3-5 years. McCrory requests that photos included in the Plan not specifically related to projects funded with CPA funding be removed. McCrory also asks that those projects that were funded but did not advance be removed from the map. On the topic of engaging a consultant, in the future, to assist with a Plan update Richter noted that she initially thought it would be helpful to engage a consultant to assist with community outreach, however, after doing some research on community outreach and what it might entail she felt that the CPC is doing everything possible in this regard, although they could do a better job of interacting with the City Council. McCrory notes that the Councilors do engage with the CPC when they want to. Richter believes it is important that a CPC member present information to the City Council as opposed to a consultant. Bussone concurs that the CPC is doing the right thing. He continues,the CPC should not think that a decline in the number of applications received is indicative of a problem. A high volume of applications does not necessarily mean that they would be eligible for funding. Bussone also notes the multi- board/commission meeting called by Mayor Cahill last year. Bussone thought that it was a great opportunity to get the word out about the work of the CPC. He agrees with Richter that a consultant isn't necessary. Robert Buchsbaum asks if a consultant would be necessary to assist with a major update of the Plan. Bussone suggests that members of the Planning Dept. may be able to assist in the future. Bussone believes that the CPC's Plan is as good as, if not better than, the Plans produced by other communities. Spang notes that Beverly's'ten-year anniversary of adopting the CPA is this year. There are a lot of people that don't know the CPC exists or the types of projects that may receive funding or that community members can propose a project. She asks if the CPC can do things to generate more community support. Bussone responds that the meeting the Mayor organized is the best you can do to bring attention to the availability of CPA funds. Marino notes that, in the past,the CPC has reached out to local civic associations, PTO's, other groups. She thought that it was very effective and important outreach as not everyone is aware of the CPC. Richter agrees stating that many people are not engaged with local government and may not have the time or interest in doing so. Bussone suggests that the CPC request that the Salem News write an article about the projects that have been funded, encouraging people to apply. Marino agrees. Bussone notes that often newspaper articles mentioning projects that received CPA funding don't always acknowledge this source of funding. McCrory also suggested grassroots outreach such as attending events like Harbor Fest as Richter and Deschamps did last summer. Bussone notes that the more applications they receive the increased likelihood that a number of applications will not meet eligibility requirements. It is also possible that the CPC and the City will have to identify priorities or award funding less than the amount requested. He also reminds the CPC that despite the fewer number of applications received most of the funding available has been awarded. Richter mentions that the community is well represented on the CPC with three at-large representatives and six members representing other municipal boards and commissions. Buchsbaum asks if BEVCAM would be useful is getting the word out. Spang will ask BEVCAM how many people livestream their programs. Richter mentions that a consultant may be able to help with social media. Spang suggests that the CPC invite Rani Jacobson to a CPC meeting. Jacobson is the Mayor's Director of Constituent Services and Special Projects. Richter asks who administers Beverly Trails because it is very well done. Bussone motioned to table the discussion of hiring a consultant. Marino seconded. All were in favor. Review of CPA Project Master List- McCrory asks that the round in which the project was funded be added to the list. She also suggests that it would be helpful to have an excel version of the table. Deschamps agreed to make those changes. Marino and Bussone acknowledge the impressive list of projects that have received CPA funding. Marino notes that the general public doesn't know about the diversity of projects that can be funded. Bussone agrees, continuing that they don't know how this funding directly affects them, such as the improved condition of the parks. Richter suggests a press release after every round once the City Council approves the projects recommended for funding. Richter also mentions the need for both temporary and permanent signage on the site of projects. It provides an important visual cue. It is noted that temporary signage is available to lend to funding recipients. Deschamps confirms that the temporary signage is displayed on many sites, but not all. She asks Bussone if it would be possible to have a temporary sign on display at the entrance to Garden City Towers. Bussone encourages Deschamps to reach out to the Beverly Housing Authority to request it. McCrory notes that there is a role for enforcement here as this is required by the MOU. Bussone suggests requiring the applicant to supply a photo of the signage in place. Richter suggests that the topic of signage be added to a future agenda for further discussion. SMALL PRESERVATION PROJECT PROGRAM GUIDELINES Richter notes that after reading the draft program outline and the information provided by Spang she would like to see five steps delineated that are user-friendly for the applicant. Richter doesn't see how the amount of award can be capped. Each project must be taken on a case-by-case basis. The scope of each project may vary greatly. McCrory mentions that the HDC also needs to be on board with regards to each specific project. Marino believes that the application process must follow the CPC's existing process for in cycle and out of cycle applications. Spang mentions that Cambridge has income guidelines. Bussone is concerned about getting many applications from homeowners. He asks if it would be possible to bundle applications. Marino notes that income guidelines require applicants to submit income statements. She doesn't feel like the CPC should be in the business of reviewing income statements. Perhaps the HDC should manage it or another organization. McCrory states that she does see value in such a program although there could not be any guarantees that a particular applicant would receive funding. Spang mentioned that both the Cambridge and Somerville programs augmented funding with CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) monies. She also noted that the City of Malden is considering such a program. Bussone and Spang both mentioned the public benefit associated with these projects and Spang mentioned that if the work can be seen from the street there is public benefit. Bussone agrees that the existing application process does not need to be changed. Spang states that the HDC could run the program. McCrory not comfortable with another group managing the CPC's program. Marino notes that there may be pushback from the public as taxpayer money is being used to improve privately owned homes-even if there is a clawback clause. Richter notes that there is nothing that currently prevents private individuals from applying. She is not sure a special program is necessary and not a program that receives its own funding. Bussone notes that there are other communities that receive more CPA funding than Beverly so they have greater flexibility in setting aside funds for specific programs. McCrory notes she does not want a specific amount of funding allocated to the program. Spang asks if a set of guidelines could be adopted as the CPC's own internal guidelines for evaluating small projects. Bussone noted the value of flexibility given the different types of projects that may be proposed. Marino notes that private homeowners may apply now,they are just not aware that the opportunity exists. Spang notes that with this type of program clawbacks would likely be a regular feature of the agreement(MOU). Buchsbaum provides a reminder that proposed projects would need to be shared with the HDC for a Determination of Historical Significance and their thoughts on the appropriateness of what is planned. McCrory thinks the guidelines are helpful but that a distinct program is not necessary. Richter likes the way the guidelines are being developed but she does not believe a separate program is necessary. She has questions about potential clawback features. Spang notes that the clawback provision does not need to be filed with the MA Registry of Deeds. Bussone believes that filing the clawback with the MA Registry of Deeds is necessary, as was required of The Cabot. A list of projects with clawback provisions would need to be maintained and compliance tracked. Marino agrees that articulating guidelines may be helpful but that separate program isn't necessary. Bussone suggests that once an application is reviewed the CPC may ask the applicant to meet certain criteria before the CPC votes. Buchsbaum makes a motion to table the discussion on this topic. Bussone seconds the motion. All are in favor. Healey asks if the CPC has provided funding for design only projects. Richter states that the CPC has recommended funding for a number of projects that propose design only. McCrory asks that the decisions that need to be made on the draft program guidelines be identified. Spang responds that decisions would need to made around the clawback provision(s), limits on the amount of an award. Spang suggests that it might be best to wait on decisions until the new representative of the HDC is assigned to the CPC. The CPC agrees to add this topic to the agenda for the June 2022 meeting. COVID-19 TEMPORARY EMERGENCY HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Derek Beckwith joins the meeting at 8:30 PM and is asked by Richter to address the expiring MOU for the COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Housing Assistance Program. Beckwith states that he spoke with Laura Meisenhelter, Executive Director or of NSCAP,the agency administering the program for the CPC/City. Meisenhelter stated that they have assisted two additional families and will be submitting invoices to the City in the near future. Meisenhelter will have a further conversation with staff but understands the CPC needs to determine whether to extend the existing MOU and she understands if the CPC decides not to extend the existing MOU. Meisenhelter will also submit a final report to the CPC. Beckwith notes that the when the CPC was originally discussing the possibility of creating a program, during the first year of the pandemic, it wasn't clear how much in state and federal funding would be made available to assist with housing in response to the impact the pandemic was having on the job market. However,funding for RAFT and other housing assistance programs turned out to be very robust so demand for the program initiated by the CPC was much less than anticipated. Beckwith went on to note that the program was publicized by the City and organizations serving those is need to the extent possible. Bussone noted that the CPC/City program was successful in providing a safety net. Beckwith agreed and added that the program was created to address a historically rare set of circumstances, but it is a model from which the CPC can learn. The CPC agreed, as a body,that it is acceptable to allow the MOU to expire on the date identified in the existing MOU. CPC MEMBERS WITH TERMS EXPIRING IN 2022 Deschamps notes that the terms of two members will expire in July of 2022, Heather Richter and Nancy Marino. Both Marino and Richter expressed interest in maintaining their membership on the CPC. Marino will contact the Beverly Parks and Recreation Commission and Bruce Doig,the Director of the Parks and Recreation Dept. to express her continued interest. Richter is an at-large CPC member and as such will need to express her intentions to the City Council via the City Clerk's office. Richter reminded the CPC that election of officers will take place at the next CPC meeting. She encouraged all members to consider whether they would be interested in either position. Richter asked Deschamps to send an email to Committee members with an additional reminder that election of officers will take place at next months CPC meeting and ask them to consider pursuing. Richter asked Healey is she would check in with the HDC regarding their selection of a representative to the CPC as the CPC would like to see that vacancy filled in the near future. CPC SUMMER SCHEDULE The CPC decided to take a brief summer hiatus, not meeting in the month of July. The CPC's regular schedule will resume in August 2022. Deschamps will revise the posted schedule accordingly. ADJOURN Bussone moved to adjourn the meeting. Marino seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM.