2006-11-08
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION:
Economic and Community Development Council
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE:
November 8, 2006
LOCATION:
Beverly Public Library
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Tina Cassidy, Carla Cox, Frank Killilea, Pat
Grimes, Don Stacey, Neil Douglas, Bill O’Hare,
Don Fournier
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
RECORDER:
Eileen Sacco
Cox calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the ECDC meeting held on October 11, 2006 are presented for approval.
Cox asks if anyone has any changes to be made to the draft. There are none.
Douglas
: motion to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Stacey. All members
in favor, motion carries.
Discussion on Waterfront Rezoning Initiatives
Cox notes that the City will be hiring a consultant for the rezoning of the waterfront and
she would like the ECDC to have input into the scope of work. Cox states that there are
important issues that should be included in the scope of work that are essential to
implementation of future redevelopment initiatives. She suggests that ECDC
recommendations as well as those of other Boards and Commissions be included in the
early stages of the process.
Douglas states that he is not necessarily advocating for maximum density uses and notes
that there should be design flexibility and variations of building heights to achieve the
waterfront redevelopment goals.
Cox notes that the result of a consultant’s work is based largely on the scope of work
he/she is assigned. She suggests that the consultant talk with the ECDC, Zoning Board of
Appeals and other city boards and commissions. She notes that the buildings on the
waterfront will define the City for years and should vary in height and appearance.
Cassidy mentions the earlier build out analysis conducted by Vine Associates. Stacey
asks Cassidy to define “floor area ratio”. Cassidy explains that it is the ratio of the gross
square footage of the building to the size of the lot.
ECDC Minutes 11-08-06 ECDC Meeting
Page 1 of 4
Killilea agrees with Douglas’ comment and notes that creativity in site development is
important.
Douglas suggests that the development of a proposed zoning alternative that entails
variable height requirements/limits would be useful and helpful. He also notes that the
consultant has to be familiar with the city’s master plan and the proposal should promote
development and redevelopment of this district, leading to the establishment of the water
front community.
Cox notes that the ECDC would like to see economic and commercial development that
would be revenue generating for the city. She states that she would like to achieve
something that would be a positive landmark for the city of Beverly.
Cassidy reminds members that the Bass River area will also be included in the scope of
the consultant’s work, along with the inner harbor. She notes that an overlay approach as
suggested by Douglas at the previous meeting is an intriguing one. It would allow an
owner to avoid the negatives inherent with a simple rezoning while allowing and
encouraging preferred, alternative land uses.
Douglas suggests that there be no prescribed setback requirements, that height and bulk
area and density be regulated, and there should be ascending floor area ratios. He also
suggests that the ECDC should be supportive of progressive incentives to develop public
land.
A discussion was held on the review process outlined in Douglas’ notes. Douglas says
that the qualifications of the architect as well as the engineering and construction
management teams should be considered during a project’s review by the Planning Board
or other city agencies, and that development proposals should be sensitive to the resulting
neighborhood impact. He states that he feels that this would set the tone for economic
development and a creative product that will contribute to the city.
Cassidy asks for guidance on how the ECDC feels.
Cox summarizes that the ECDC is an advocate for development proposals that contribute
to the economic development of the city. She asks if the committee wants to suggest that
it wants the new zoning to allow the scale and types of development that the property
owners have said they’re interested in building. Douglas states that he could embrace
that.
Killilea says it is best to follow specific rules and regulations regarding new construction.
Douglas states that achieving the City’s goals will require it to think “outside of the box”.
He also notes that he objects to restrictive setbacks that can’t be flexed to accommodate
the unique needs of each development/lot. Cox agrees and notes that a “one size fits all”
approach does not work.
ECDC Minutes 11-08-06 ECDC Meeting
Page 2 of 4
Grimes notes that she missed a few of the presentations made to the ECDC on the
waterfront development plans of the owners, but notes that she read the meeting minutes
and newspaper accounts and noted that the Kinzie’s redevelopment plan for their site
seems to conform to the City’s master plan.
O’Hare notes that we have to think about what uses we want and don’t want on the
waterfront as well as height restrictions in some areas, noting that is important because of
the history and scale of some of the neighborhoods.
Douglas also notes that parking requirements need to be looked at.
Cox notes that we have some definitive guidance that can be given and suggests that
people make suggestions as to what they would like to see in the scope of work.
Cassidy explains the hiring process for the consultant and states that she expects to have a
committee of five people work with her to select the consultant and then to act as a
steering committee during the process of developing the new zoning districts. She
expects the selected consultant to review all relevant existing documents and then meet
with city boards and commissions to discuss their interests and issues, as well as to meet
with waterfront property owners to understand their future development plans.
Cox has a reservation about directing the consultant to the mission statement of the
ECDC without elaboration and explanation from the committee itself. She suggests that
the committee might send a letter to the Mayor with recommendations on the scope of
work and recommends that members email their suggestions to Cassidy prior to the next
meeting. Douglas notes that it is a good idea but cautioned that the consultant’s work is
also going to include the development of design guidelines for both the inner harbor and
the Bass River areas. He asks how and where the line will be drawn between the two.
He notes that Main Streets has been looking at the issue of the waterfront too.
Stacey leaves the meeting at this time.
Discussion on Beverly Harbor Navigation Study
Cox asks Cassidy to provide an update.
Cassidy summarizes the study and notes that it basically concludes that the limits of the
Federal Channel can be reduced without detriment to the City. She notes that Vine
Associates did the study and they specialize in this type of marine study. She offered to
get their qualifications if the members wish.
Cox notes that straightening the existing channel would benefit boat traffic. She also
suggests that the City will need to coordinate with the City of Salem on moving the
Federal Channel, since it could impact mooring space on the Salem side of the harbor.
ECDC Minutes 11-08-06 ECDC Meeting
Page 3 of 4
Cox suggests that the ECDC propose to the Mayor that City of Salem counterparts be
included in the discussion on the relocation of the federal channel.
Updates from City Planner
a. 128 Overpass Project
Cassidy updates the ECDC on the 128 overpass project and explains that there are six or
so alternative designs being investigated currently as an Environmental Impact Report is
being prepared. She notes the project would encourage economic development, improve
safety on and near Route 128 as well as improve the quality of life for the residents in the
Dunham Road area. She reviews three of the conceptual designs with the members. She
notes that the Environmental Impact Review is expected to be completed by the end of
next spring.
b. Ice Rink RFP
Cassidy explains the location of the proposed ice rink and notes that the property would
be leased to a rink operator. In addition to tax and lease revenue, the City expects to
receive reduced-rate ice times for Beverly organizations and the public as a result of the
Request for Proposals process. The RFP will be issued early this winter.
c. Development of Parcels near Beverly Airport
Cassidy notes the locations of the parcels that were included in the City’s Request for
Proposals and summarizes the responses for members in terms of proposed uses and
proposed building sizes. The City is negotiating lease terms with the proposed
developers, who are all expected to begin their respective permitting processes as soon as
possible.
Next Meeting
The next meeting of the ECDC will be held on Wednesday, December 6, 2006.
Douglas
: motion to adjourn, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor, motion
carries.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
ECDC Minutes 11-08-06 ECDC Meeting
Page 4 of 4