2002-01-10
CITY OF BEVERLY
Public Meeting Minutes
BOARD: Master Plan Steering Committee
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: January 10, 2002
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:Virginia McGlynn, John Murray, Wendy Pearl, Donald
Preston, Larry Ralph, Maureen Troubetaris, Joanne Avallon,
Scott Houseman, George Simon, Wendy Frontiero, Linda
Goodenough, John Thomson, John Young
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Dinkin, William Delaney, Bruce Oveson, William
Rodenbaugh
ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director Debra Hurlburt, Ken Buckland of The
Cecil Group
RECORDER: Karen Bradley
Welcome
Buckland calls the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Buckland informs the committee that Bill
Cummings of Cummings Properties will be making a presentation at a Society of Marketing
Professional Seminar on January 16, 2002. He states that he will email the details to any
interested members.
Approval of minutes: November 8, 2002 meeting
Avallon asks what approach will be taken to incorporate the municipal airport into the
Transportation and Infrastructure section of the plan. Buckland states that is a summary of the
municipal airport in the Findings section of the Master Plan. Buckland suggests approving the
meeting minutes and discussing the municipal airport in more depth during the master plan
discussion section of the meeting.
Troubetaris:
motion to approve the meeting minutes dated November 8, 2001, seconded by
Thomson. All members in favor. Motion carries.
Discussion: draft final master plan document
Buckland states two things that should be accomplished this evening are to finalize the draft
master plan document and to discuss the public presentation.
Buckland states that two emails have been received with suggested changes. He states that after
reviewing Frontiero’s suggestions, he discovered the need for an Executive Summary. He
displays a board that he has created for that purpose.
Houseman asks how many committee members have submitted comments thus far. Buckland
states four. Houseman states that he is currently in the process of reviewing the entire report and
states that he will have comments to submit when he completes his review of the plan.
Master Plan Steering Committee minutes
January 10, 2002 meeting
Page 2
Buckland suggests organizing a drafting subcommittee and reviewing the executive summary
that he has drafted in order to avoid continuous revisions.
A discussion takes place as to whether or not to postpone the public presentation. Buckland
states that committee must decide if the draft should be available to the public prior to the public
presentation. He states that the purpose of the public presentation is to communicate what has
been done and what the master plan is all about.
Ralph is of the opinion that the executive summary is imperative to review and finalize since is
summarizes all points of the master plan. He states that this is a good way to get the information
out to the public.
Thomson states that the purpose of the public presentation is to find out if there are any major
things that the public thinks are missing from the master plan. He states that there should be a
two-step process, one session to get the information out to the public, and another session to
confirm the information.
Houseman states that there should be a targeted distribution list of public hearing attendees that
the executive summary could be mailed to prior to the public presentation.
A detailed discussion takes place on the various avenues to be taken to communicate the
executive summary prior to the public presentation. Some of those discussed are copies left at
several public locations, the Internet, the newspapers, and displays in windows of local
businesses.
Troubetaris states that it would be beneficial to invite all City Boards to get their respective
input.
Goodenough states that the Chamber of Commerce and some of the private sectors should also
be invited to attend the public presentation.
Buckland states that the likely approach based on discussion this far should be:
·
Process invitations to City Boards, etc. based on discussion and send out mailings to prior
attendees of public hearings;
·
Getting the executive summary on the website as well as out to the public at various
locations to review prior to the public presentation;
·
Conduct the public presentation;
·
Give the public some time to review the information and come back with comments.
Buckland next presents a detailed review of the Executive Summary and asks committee
members if this approach makes sense.
Master Plan Steering Committee minutes
January 10, 2002 meeting
Page 3
Pearl states that the map should contain more detailed information. Buckland states that when
using that approach the summary becomes too busy. Buckland passes out another version of the
executive summary that does not include the map as another approach to take.
A discussion takes place on some of the different information that could be included on the map
and which approach is more appealing. Goodenough states that emphasis on the gateways into
Beverly is very important.
A summary of the proposed timetable:
·
Tentative date for the public presentation - either March 5 or 7, 2002.
·
Comments regarding the executive summary e-mailed to Hurlburt - February 1, 2002.
·
Deadline to receive comments from the public – March 21, 2002.
Buckland states that typically the Planning Board will adopt the Master Plan upon its
completion. Troubetaris states that there should a comment at the end of the plan that suggests
forming a follow-up committee once the process is complete. Buckland agrees that this is a good
idea.
Buckland states that the April meeting could be reserved to receive final report from Buckland
that will include a summary of the public comments and make final decisions of where the plan
will go from there.
Next, Buckland hands out the e-mails that have been received to this point and asks the
committee to review (see attached).
A detailed discussion takes place on Avallon’s comments:
·
Comment #2 - Buckland states that there is a minimum space requirement that is
mandated by the State, and this meets that requirement.
·
Comment #3 – Charlie Raymond of the Harbor Management Authority is present. He
states that the Public Access Plan for the inner harbor should be incorporated into the
Master Plan.
Goodenough states that this is a specific recommendation for the Bass River, but not for
the rest of the harborfront. She states that the entire harborfront plan should include a
consistent building design all the way around the waterfront. A discussion takes place
that this should be put into place prior to any zoning changes.
Buckland states that there should be a formal recommendation made by the Harbor
Management Authority.
Master Plan Steering Committee minutes
January 10, 2002 meeting
Page 4
Houseman asks if incorporating the Harbor Management Plan, the Open Space Plan and the
Airport Plan into the Master Plan endorses them. Buckland states yes.
Preston provides and overview of the Airport Plan explaining that most of which is out of the
control of the city since it is FAA ruled. He explains that there are three parcels being released
by the FAA and states that that Master Plan should take an active party in what happens to those
parcels. He is of the opinion that the city should step in and have a vision of what should happen
with the land around the airport. Buckland states that the Master Plan should suggest the best
use of the land in accordance with the rules of the plan.
A detailed discussion takes place on the goals for housing. Buckland states that he will revisit
this section based on the discussion.
Preston suggests revising the implementation schedule. Buckland states that this is an aggressive
plan and states that that no one should expect things to happen within the first year.
Buckland states that Thomson’s format comments will be incorporated into the plan.
A detailed discussion takes place on Pearl’s comments:
·
Historic and scenic road designation – Pearl suggests creating a city ordinance to ensure
the protection of these roads. A discussion takes place regarding the MassHwy road
designation process.
Buckland suggests reconsideration of MassHwy standards.
Ralph states that he is finalizing his list of comments and will submit them to Buckland upon
completion. He provides an overview of his comments, most of which are grammatical.
Ralph suggests that another term should be used where CPA is mentioned. It is suggested a
Preservation Trust Fund could be established.
Ralph suggests that on page 48, Reclamation for Building Disposition – the term to be used
should be “should be avoided and only considered as a last resort after all other public reuse
options have been considered”. The committee is in agreement.
Ralph states that the Wetland Protection Ordinance has been adopted and changes should be
made in accordance to that ordinance.
A discussion takes place on adopting a signage ordinance that will provide greater restriction on
signage use.
Master Plan Steering Committee minutes
January 10, 2002 meeting
Page 5
Houseman asks if the concept of gateways has been defined. Buckland states that the term has
different meanings in different places. It is decided that a standard should be defined and put
into place.
Buckland states that Frontiero has submitted an extensive list of comments that he will review.
Pearl states that she is in favor of the use of the executive summary, however she is of the
opinion that no strong description exists of what makes Beverly special.
Buckland asks for final comments from the committee.
Goodenough states that the concept of a maintenance plan of the schools should designed and
incorporated into the Infrastructure Section.
Troubetaris states that the Fire and Police Station plan is not concrete and subject to change. She
states that this section should be reviewed.
Young states that non-structural flood management techniques could be included as a way to
open up wetland areas.
Murray states that high school and secondary school improvements should be noted as next
major project.
A detailed discussion takes place regarding maintenance programs of the schools. Buckland
suggests a school building master plan and a school vision master plan. The committee is in
agreement and states that both should be referenced in the master plan.
The committee is in agreement that both education excellence and school maintenance should be
referenced on the 10-Point list on the executive summary.
Schedule public meeting on draft master plan
The next meeting is scheduled for February 7, 2002. Buckland states that planning for the public
presentation should be finalized at this meeting. He also states that the public relations actions
for the public presentation should be decided at this meeting.
The public presentation is tentatively scheduled for either March 5, 2002 or March 7, 2002
depending on the availability of the Senior Center.
The meeting is adjourned at 9:00 p.m.