Loading...
2001-05-10 CITY OF BEVERLY Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Master Plan Steering Committee May 10, 2001 Wendy Frontiero, Wendy Pearl, Larry Ralph, William Rodenbaugh, Maureen Troubetaris, John Murray, John Thomson, Wendy Pearl, George Simon, Linda Goodenough, Bruce Oveson, Don Preston, Virginia McGlynn Richard Dinkin, Joanne Avallon, Scott Houseman, John Young Tina Cassidy, Planning Director, Ken Buckland and Alex Delaney, The Cecil Group Jeannine Dion Cassidy calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Approval of Meeting Minutes Thomson moves to approve the meeting minutes dated February 8, 2001 regular meeting, February 15, 2001 workshop, March 8, 2001 workshop, March 15, 2001 workshop and April 19, 2001 workshop, seconded by Rodenbaugh. All members in favor. Motion carries. Discussion on results of public workshops Troubetaris states the meetings were very well planned out. The group of people attending the meeting was diversified with common ideas. McGlynn states she was pleased with the participants' enthusiasm. Murray states it seemed that the same people attended all of the workshops and he hoped to see a more diverse showing of people at diligent workshops. Goodenough states when the topic of the downtown area (waterfront) was discussed, she was struck by how pro-development virtually every group was. The concept of reuse and redevelopment was very interesting. Master Plan Steering Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2001 Page 2 Ralph states he was disappointed that more people didn't come for the Residential and Open Space workshop. Preston states quality of life, open space, neighborhood preservation, historic qualities, limited commercial development, conservation subdivision design and a need to coordinate things in the city were important topics discussed. He recommends an "overview board" in the City. Cassidy states there is a Site Plan Review Ordinance on the books now, but the way it is crafted is not by a Special Permit. The City's Site Plan is more a review than it is a "yes" or "no." There is also a Design Review Board, which negotiates on facades, signs, etc. but there is not a lot of teeth to the ordinance and they are not given the power that they need to be stronger and set more rigid and strict guidelines. They do a great job with the tools they have but there are some things that can be improved upon in the community to achieve some of the topics discussed at the workshop. Bnckland provides the top five ideas for each of the workshops. Transportation and Infrastructure 1. Develop an inventory of surplus buildings and plan to renovate and reuse those buildings in a manner that preserves their historic appearance. 2. Create bike paths and make roads more pedestrian friendly to encourage alternative forms of transportation. 3. Create more offsite parking in downtown, including depot garage. 4. Engineer community development of the "working" section of the city's waterfront that maximizes the economic potential of the parcels and creates a magnet for tourism and community activity. 5. Protect the drinking water supply. Diversity in Housine 1. Design and reuse old commercial and industrial properties for housing. 2. Build partnerships with funding agencies. 3. Rezone for mixed-use development accessory units (multi-family units) in selected areas throughout the City. 4. Encourage owner occupancy for low and fixed income residents. 5. Maintain the New England character, while promoting new housing opportunities. Economic Development 1. Use waterfront as a way to generate activities and tax revenue. 2. Develop tourism as a new opportunity using the city's historical aspects and waterfront as destinations. 3. Reuse the older indu~irlal and commercial areas before designating new areas. Master Plan Steering Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2001 Page 3 4. New development must come under will defined design guidelines to preserve character and protect adjacent residential neighborhoods. 5. Maintain the New England like quality of the City. Residential Development and Open Space 1. Adopt conservation development regulations along with other zoning regulations to preserve open space. 2. Protect the water supply and expand wetland resource protection. 3. Preserve and enhance the historic and natural character of the City. 4. Create partnerships with non-profit and for-profits to expand open space and recreational use 5. Bolster the regulatory process with staff and coordination. Bucklund states the next step is to develop an implementation plan that follows through with the concepts discussed. There is discussion regarding the coordination of City boards. Cassidy states the Conservation Commission has a state law that they must administer, which is spelled out clearly. The Planning Board is charged with having a set of Subdivision Regulations and they look at the Zoning Ordinance. Part of the solution is not just coordination. There is a lot of sharing of information that you would not see on the public level. Everything that goes to the Planning Board is reviewed by at least the Conservation Administrator and can go to the Conservation Commission if she feels it is appropriate. Thomson disagrees that coordination is the issue. The boards are doing what their charters pet f, it them to do. Coordination needs to be in the form ora Master PLan that provides the tools to the bodies so that what they do differently, can work toward the same ends. The Master Plan must provide the incemives and change the zoning districts. If we want to spur deveiopment in a certain area, we have to put in the zoning tools and the Subdivision Control tools that will allow that to happen and through that process, things will get coordinated. The notion of having every board talking to each other or some master coordinating board is not going to work. Goodenough states a lot of existing landowners of waterfront property did not attend the workshops. She suggests talking with some of the landowners and businesses to form "partnerships." Simon states if land is rezoned, it would create interest. He suggests providing alternative areas for Mass Electric and Boston Gas to relocate to in the City, to encourage them to vacate the lots they now occupy along the Bass River. Murray states that providing incentives is very important and should be considered. Pearl suggests there is a way to create a commercial / industrial historic district that might preserve Master Plan Steering Committee Meeting Minutes May 10, 2001 Page 4 the integrity and character of what is there and then any property owner who sells, the new owner would still be bound by their district regulations for anything they build or do on their land. There might be a way to control the character but not the actual use. Frontiero states it is important to talk about the implementation plan and the Master Plan should identify responsibility and set priorities. Discussion on next steps in the master plan process Cassidy states there was some discussion about having a 5th workshop. Part of that meeting would be a wrap-up to explain to people what the top 5 issues were for each topic. Buckland offers to prepare an outline of the implementation plan for the next meeting. The committee could then review it and make some decisions. He states it is important not to look like the committee has gone to far down the road with implementation without having some real public input. Thomson recommends informing the public of the findings of the workshops. Cassidy responds that she could mail a summary to the attendees of the workshops. Oveson recommends putting the ideas in the newspaper several weeks before the next meeting. It might pique people's interest. The more people you get, the broader the consensus base is. Pearl recommends a Vision Statement for the City of Beverly. Buckland offers to draft a Vision Statement for discussion at the next meeting. Cassidy states next Master Plan Steering Committee will be June 14, 2001. The members will review the implementation tools and Vision Statement prepared by the Cecil Group. Rodenbaugh: motion to adjourn, seconded by Oveson. All members in favor. Motion carries. The meeting is adjourned at 8:45 p.m.