2005-06-07
CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Economic and Community Development Council
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: June 7, 2005
LOCATION: Third Floor, Conference Room A
MEMBERS PRESENT: Neil Douglas, Pat Grimes, Carla Cox, Don Stacey
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joyce McMahon, Larry Smith, Jason Silva, ex-officio
Bill O’Hare, Conservation Commission representative
(vacant)
OTHERS PRESENT: Mayor Bill Scanlon, ex-officio members City Planner
Tina Cassidy, Engineering Director Frank Killilea
RECORDER: Tina Cassidy
The meeting opens at 7:00 p.m. and the committee welcomes the Mayor, who was invited to
talk to the committee about economic development related issues in Beverly.
Scanlon thanks the members for inviting him. He notes that there are many pressures on
the City’s operating budget from year to year, and new growth in tax revenue is the primary
solution to those pressures. Some types of residential development help in this regard, but
the business side of new growth is the most promising. Beverly’s youth population is
declining and is reflected in decreasing school enrollments in recent years that are projected
to continue into the future. This may, ironically, relieve the school funding situation in the
longer term. The City is also experiencing a moderate rate of apartment-to-condominium
conversion and a trend toward smaller family sizes.
Scanlon states that one of the major challenges facing the City is finding good, appropriate
new tax growth to fund City initiatives and increasing operational costs. This year, the City
used some of its free cash to develop the budget for fiscal year 2006, but there are definite
ways to replenish that fund, and during the upcoming year it will be restored to at least the
level of last year.
Douglas asks if the Mayor has prioritized pending projects. Scanlon responds that the
Brimbal Avenue overpass is the number one priority. Transportation Secretary Grabauskas
recently announced that the State has set aside $870,000 in funding for the next phase of
design for the project. Douglas adds that the Brimbal Avenue project may also result in new
utilities and improved access to the Dunham Road area, potentially facilitating
redevelopment of existing businesses along that road. Scanlon states that his second priority
is the redevelopment of the Brimbal Avenue property now owned by the Archdiocese of
Boston, and the third is the development of parcels near the airport.
Douglas asks how the former Vitale site at the corner of Cabot Street and Henderson Road
will be used once it is capped. Scanlon answers that the site will be developed into active
recreation playing fields, including restroom facilities, a gravel parking lot, and possibly lights
for the fields.
Cox asks how the ECDC can help advance these projects, perhaps by performing various
analyses, or hosting public information meetings. Scanlon says that understanding the
limitations Proposition 2 ½ places on the City and explaining those limitations wherever
Economic and Community Development Council meeting minutes Page 1 of 4
June 7, 2005 meeting
possible is one answer. Others include the fact that revenue from the State has been
declining over time and will probably continue to do so, and that the remaining industrial
and commercial land in the City must be used judiciously to maximize new tax revenue.
Cassidy states that in the past the ECDC has done analyses of future development capacities
for properties along Dunham Road. It has also reviewed tax increment financing
applications (TIFs) and provided recommendations to the Mayor. Scanlon states there have
been 6 TIFs granted by the City Council in the past, most of which have been nominal and
accompanied by corporate decisions to designate the new Beverly facility as their respective
worldwide headquarters. He adds that the City should encourage the creation of jobs that
have “staying power”, and would expect the ECDC to continue to review new TIFs as they
may be submitted in the future.
Grimes suggests that there are a lot of people in the community who do not understand the
details and mechanics of TIFs, and suggests the City needs to do a better job of explaining
those details. Likewise, the benefits accruing to the City from granting a particular TIF need
to be explained better. Cassidy agrees.
Douglas states that the committee must advocate for basic economic and community
development objectives. Those might include education/research/communication,
brochures, information on available land for development and community demographics,
facilitating grants and loans to encourage economic and community development, and
planning. These objectives would also need to be prioritized.
Stacey asks about the area between the two downtown commercial streets (Rantoul and
Cabot) and how it is zoned. Scanlon states that the area’s zoning is predominantly
residential, and Cassidy adds that the City doesn’t envision changing that to something else
in the future. The area serves as a built-in market for the businesses on those streets.
Cox suggests that the area between Park and River Streets should be a focus of the
committee. Douglas suggests that this area provides an inventory of affordable industrial
land not available elsewhere in the City, and perhaps the region. There are a number of
incubator-type businesses in that area. Cox says that at a minimum the area needs to be
better managed and needs significant physical improvements. She asks if this is an
appropriate subject and area for the ECDC to consider, and Scanlon agrees that it would be.
Anecdotally, he informs the committee that the City had told the State it would be willing to
purchase the former State DPW yard on Park Street if it were valued around $250,000. The
property actually sold for $670,000.
Douglas states that one of the questions to answer is how to facilitate more investment in
the downtown, and he sees a shortage/lack of parking as a major hurdle to that. He suggests
that a planning/parking study of Cabot and Rantoul Streets may be needed. Killilea briefs
the committee on the future plan to reconstruct Rantoul Street, which will completely redo
the road, sidewalks, and utilities along and in that road. Scanlon adds that the project will
include improvements to water services, and Killilea notes that the City of Salem has a 125
year old pipe running down Rantoul Street. Douglas notes his thought that with more
parking and residences along Rantoul Street, that area could be a possible boon to the City.
Stacey states that he expects to see a downturn in housing prices and perhaps distress sales
in the future. He expresses concern with “interest only” loans and the increasing use of this
Economic and Community Development Council meeting minutes Page 2 of 4
June 7, 2005 meeting
type of mortgage. Cox says she typically sees loans requiring 20% down, and has not seen
any “interest only” loans in her work.
Speaking generally, Scanlon states that there are real opportunities to improve and help the
City by facilitating economic development and suggesting and implementing economic
development initiatives on the City’s behalf. The City will be making a significant
investment in its high and middle schools in the near and long term, and while financially
things may not be robust, they are better than they were.
Douglas asks Cassidy about the status of the former Ventron site. Cassidy recaps the
neighborhood meeting held last year, and the stated desire of the property owners to
develop the site for office use. She suggests that residential uses may be more in keeping
with the neighborhood, and speculates if the developers might be interested in that useas
well. Members ask Cassidy to invite the property owner to the next committee meeting to
discuss their plans for the property.
Members briefly discuss the proposed rezoning of the Archdiocese property on Brimbal
Avenue, the City-owned parcels near the airport, and Beverly Hospital’s on-going $60
million renovation project. Douglas states that the hospital adds about 5,000 cars a day to
the residential neighborhoods around it, and access to that facility is an issue that should be
addressed. The hospital is a very important employer in the City, and a major player in the
local economy.
Scanlon thanks the members for inviting him to the meeting.
Next, the committee discusses development of a mission statement and reviews a draft Cox
prepared. Douglas, Stacey, Grimes, and Killilea state their general support for Cox’s
suggested mission statement.
The committee then discusses possible goals and objectives and reviews a draft prepared by
Cassidy that updated some of the previous goals and objectives developed in the mid 1990’s.
Douglas suggests that some of them could be tightened up and a new section called “specific
priorities” added. The goals and objectives from the master plan could be incorporated by
reference. Douglas agrees to redraft the goals and objectives and it will be emailed to
members for review. Members will email any suggestions/revisions and Cassidy will revise
the document as needed before the next meeting.
Cox states that with respect to the Rantoul Street project, it would be helpful to have “post
construction” drawings available to explain the project to the business community and gain
their support for it. Cassidy explains that it will be a very difficult and complicated project to
undertake. In the early planning stages, the City had thought about conducting the work in
phases (e.g. doing all work in one section of road, and then moving on to subsequent
sections). Killilea states that this approach would not work in practice, given a number of
realities about roadway construction and construction timelines for various elements of the
project. He suggests that the project will need a business/community liaison when it moves
forward. Douglas notes that providing parking as part of the project would make it more
attractive to the business community and would increase support for the project.
Next, members decide to postpone the election of a chairman and vice-chairman until the
next meeting when all members are present.
Economic and Community Development Council meeting minutes Page 3 of 4
June 7, 2005 meeting
Cassidy asks if members have reviewed the draft minutes of the May meeting, and whether
there are any changes that should be made.
Cox: motion to accept the minutes of the committee’s May 2005 meeting as drafted,
seconded by Grimes. All members in favor, motion carries.
Members confer and decide to schedule the next committee meeting for Tuesday, July 26,
2005 at 7:00 p.m.
Douglas: motion to adjourn, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor, motion carries.
The meeting is adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Economic and Community Development Council meeting minutes Page 4 of 4
June 7, 2005 meeting