Loading...
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