2013-12-12CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC HEARING MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE:
LOCATION:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
RECORDER:
Community Preservation Committee
December 12, 2013
City Hall, Third Floor Council Chambers
Wendy Pearl, Marilyn McCrory, Henry
McDonough, Lincoln Williams, Heather
Buchsbaum and Darien Crimmin
John Thomson
Environmental Planner- Amy Maxner
Amy Maxner
Pizzo, Leland
Richter, Robert
Pearl calls the public hearing to order at 7:00 p.m. and welcomes attendees to the Beverly
Community Preservation Committee's (CPC) inaugural public hearing to introduce the draft
CPA project evaluation criteria and hear from the public on ideas relative to Beverly's
community needs in open space, historic preservation, community housing and recreation.
Members of the CPC introduce themselves noting their representations to the Committee. Pearl
asks how attendees heard about the hearing, noting that the informational mailing arrived later
than expected.
Pearl turns to a power point presentation and explains the main agenda items and meeting
format. She encourages attendees to follow along with the presentation on the handouts
provided for their reference. She hands the presentation over to McCrory for a brief explanation
of CPA.
McCrory provides an overview of the CPA and its adoption by Beverly voters in the November
2012 election at a 1% surcharge on local real estate taxes. She explains that the CPA allows
communities to establish a dedicated fund that can only be spent on open space protection,
historic preservation, community housing and recreation. This local fund is supplemented by an
annual disbursement by the State Community Preservation Fund. She explains the process of
adopting the local Ordinance that established the CPC, which is comprised of nine Beverly
citizens — 3 at -large seats appointed by the City Council and 6 seats from various boards and
commissions throughout the City.
Pearl notes the requirement of setting aside or spending at least 10% of the funds on each of the
three main categories, up to 5% on administrative costs and the remaining funds banked into a
general reserve account that can be spent on any of the three categories as well as outdoor
recreation.
Pearl moves on to explaining the functions and duties of the Community Preservation Committee
as required by the State Statute and the local Ordinance. She notes the CPC is charged with
establishing guidelines for evaluating project proposals to ensure that the projects are compliant
with the CPA and meet the local criteria that have been drafted. She explains that the CPC
makes recommendations to the City Council as to which projects to fund and at what level,
noting that the City Council's actions on the CPC's recommendations are limited to: approving
the recommendation, approving a project at a lower funding amount or rejecting the
recommendation. She provides an overview of the CPC's FY 2014 budget that has been
approved by the Council.
Pearl turns attention to the Allowable Uses Chart that details what CPA funds can be spent on.
She explains that the chart lists specific definitions: acquire, create, preserve, support,
rehabilitate and restore as they relate to open space, historic resources, recreational land and
community housing. She emphasizes the important utility of this chart, noting that a project
needs to fit into one of the "Yes" boxes in order to qualify for CPA funding and that a project
could possibly fit into more than one box.
Pearl turns the presentation to the draft Project Evaluation Criteria explaining that along with
over - arching General Criteria, each CPA interest has its own set of category specific criteria.
She now turns the presentation over to Heather Richter to introduce the General Criteria.
Richter provides an overview of the 10 General Criteria which address projects on a broader
level to ensure that the project is compliant with applicable laws, is consistent with the various
existing City plans, serves a clear public benefit and leverages additional funding sources. She
notes that projects addressing multiple criteria will be given preference.
Pearl turns to Robert Buchsbaum to present the Open Space Criteria. Buchsbaum notes that the
existing Open Space & Recreation Plan is a good starting point on how open space projects are
evaluated as this Plan contains the City's priorities relative to open space protection. He notes
that criteria l.a. gears toward methods of protection and l.b. gears towards what should be
protected. He gives a brief overview of the 10 criteria, noting some of the priorities involving
preserving or expanding waterfront and public access thereto.
Pearl explains that the CPC researched other CPA communities to get a sense of how others are
evaluating projects and notes that Gloucester, Peabody and Newburyport were great resources to
use as a starting point.
Pearl turns to the Historic Preservation Criteria and explains that she is the designee from the
Beverly Historic District Commission (BHDC), which for the purposes of the CPA acts as the
Historical Commission. She notes that the Historic Preservation Category is a bit different than
the rest of the categories because historic resources must be designated as historically significant
by either their listing on the State Register of Historic Places or determined so by the BHDC.
She explains that the BHDC is in the midst of developing a process and application materials by
which CPA applicants can obtain a determination by the local Commission. She provides an
overview of the 7 criteria. She notes the concluding paragraph under this category that sets forth
the statute's requirement that all historic preservation projects must be carried out in accordance
with the US Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. She
explains that historic projects can be very complex and often require oversight by qualified
professionals with expertise in proper methods for authentic restoration of historic resources.
Community Preservation Committee
12 -12 -13 Public Hearing Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 6
CPA funds can provide money to cover the cost of hiring such an expert to oversee a project to
ensure that it is being carried out in compliance with the Secretary's Standards.
Pearl turns the presentation over to Lincoln Williams to introduce the Community Housing
Criteria. Williams states that the Community Housing category is perhaps the most flexible
category and CPA funds can be spent on all of the actions that can be taken under the verb
definitions in the Allowable Uses Chart. He notes that the thrust of the category is to encourage
development, redevelopment and improvement of the low and moderate income housing stock in
Beverly. He explains the 8 criteria, noting that the qualifying income for affordable housing is
less than 100% of the median household income, which is about $55,000. He notes that an
important component of these criteria is to ensure long -term affordability of a property or unit
and avoid "expiring use" scenarios. He notes that housing project examples are available on the
Community Preservation Coalition's website and there are a lot of very creative approaches
taken by CPA communities relative to community housing. He encourages everyone to visit the
Coalition's website as it is a great resource to draw from.
Pearl turns the discussion over to Henry Pizzo to introduce the Recreation Criteria. Pizzo
provides an overview of the 7 Recreation Criteria, noting that providing recreational
opportunities to as wide a group of users as possible and including universal access was a
priority for the CPC.
Pearl thanks members for their presentations and turns attention to the open forum and Q &A
session, noting that this is the CPC's chance to hear from attendees relative to the Criteria first
and then about over all possibilities for Beverly and project ideas.
Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, thanks the CPC for all its hard work and inquires as to timing of
fund collection and when funds can be spent, noting that he understands that funds will be
collected during the January and May tax bill cycles. Pearl notes that the funds will be available
in the fall of 2014 and the CPC anticipates announcing approved projects in early November
2014 at which point funds would be ready for disbursement. She goes on to explain that the
CPC anticipates developing a process for expedited review for projects that arise and have
immediate funding need due to threat of sale or some other pressing reason. Johnson asks if
there is a requirement that all of the funds be spent each year, or is there a possibility to bank
funds for future projects. The CPC confirms that banking for future projects or larger project
budgets can be done.
McCrory introduces the Application Flowchart that was part of the handouts. She explains the
timeline that the CPC anticipates for receiving applications and performing its due diligence in
reviewing the proposals.
Rosemary Maglio, resident of Pleasant Street, asks if it is possible to extend the public hearing,
as people didn't get the mailing until today. Pearl notes that the mailing was significantly
delayed as it was supposed to arrive in mailboxes before Thanksgiving. She states that the CPC
will consider this if extending the hearing is warranted. McCrory explains that the CPC had
published press releases, legal notifications, website posting and email communications in
publicizing this hearing.
Community Preservation Committee
12 -12 -13 Public Hearing Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 6
Bruce Doig, Director of Parks & Recreation, thanks the CPC for all its efforts in administering
the CPA and believes that CPA is a great opportunity for Beverly to enhance the quality of life in
Beverly and he looks forward to the developing possible projects in recreation and particularly
the Lynch Park Carriage House in the future.
Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, asks if the BHDC making historic significance determinations is
a new function of the Commission. Pearl states that it is a new function noting that the
assessment will be based on the National Register Criteria, which are tried and tested standards.
She explains that it is possible for locally significant resources be listed on the National Register,
so the BHDC will adopt those Register standards as it moves forward. Johnson notes he was
very glad to see the allowance to adaptively re -use historic properties as opposed to freezing
their use in time.
Pearl notes that she neglected to recognize elected officials in attendance and introduces Ward 4
Councilor Scott Houseman and Ward 2 Councilor -Elect Estelle Rand.
Rand thanks the CPC for all its hard work and inquires as to whether departments of the City can
apply for funds. Pearl affirms this.
Houseman asks if the CPC is aware of the status of the Cabot Cinema. Pearl notes the Cabot
Cinema has never been inventoried as an historic property but is the same era, style and builder
of the Sommerville Theater. Therefore the BHDC would have to make a determination as to its
significance. Houseman asks if there is a process to get this building inventoried and if so, he
imagines that process would be time consuming and expensive. Pearl encourages everyone to
attend the next BHDC (date to be determined) at which an application process will be discussed.
She envisions that the local determination process would not be too arduous for most applicants
and there would not be a need to hire experts in that phase as long as sufficient documentation
can be provided to the BHDC to make an informed decision.
Ann Nichols, resident of Common Lane, asks if, relative to the Open Space & Recreation Plan,
this Committee's role will be initiating open space projects under CPA. She also asks if CPA
money can be used to clear title of owner unknown land. McCrory explains that the CPC has
had extensive discussion as to whether it would be initiating and overseeing projects and it was
decided that was not the CPC's role, rather it would be the body that reviews and recommends
projects that are brought forward by other entities such as the Trustees of Reservations, the Open
Space & Recreation Committee etc. Buchsbaum responds to the second part of the question
noting that title searches are a possible eligible expenditure. Discussion ensues as to the process
for title search process as it relates to tax title properties.
Nancy Clark, Colon Street, asks for a clarification on what an historic inventory is. Pearl
describes the process of an inventory, noting that a town reconnaissance survey is carried out and
Beverly's was completed in the early 80's. She notes that at that time, due to the 50 -year rule,
properties or structures from the 1930's era did not make it into the survey. She states that
perhaps a new survey could be funded through CPA, which could result in extending local
historic districts, nominating new properties etc.
Community Preservation Committee
12 -12 -13 Public Hearing Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 6
David Gardner, Open Space & Recreation Committee (OSRC) and Lynch Park Carriage House
Advisory Committee, notes that the OSRC does have an inventory of all the tax title and owner
unknown lands and has a priority list for certain parcel acquisition. He asks for clarification as to
whether a CPC member would be vocal advocate for a project that fell within that person's
particular area of expertise or representation. Discussion ensues. McDonough notes that in his
research of other CPA towns, it has become clear to him that input from the public is of the
utmost importance and that avoiding conflicts of interest is always required. Williams explains
that as part of the Ordinance process, which he took part, that group was very cognizant of
keeping the membership on the CPC as broad and open to the residents as possible. He thinks
that it is important to keep in mind that this is the first time with this process and there is a
learning curve that will inform the process later. The CPC affirms the importance to ensure that
no CPC member has a direct conflict of interest or holds a personal gain in the advancement of a
project, but that it would be expected that all members actively provide their input and lend their
expertise to the evaluation process.
David Gardner asks if there is any application forms available. Pearl notes that there will be a
two -phase application process with an eligibility form to start the process to make sure that a
project qualifies for funding by using the Allowable Uses Chart. She explains the CPC will be
finalizing the forms at its next meeting on January 9, 2014.
David Gardner asks if historic projects absolutely must follow the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and would hate to see the restoration of the Lynch Park Carriage House that is on
going and planned for the future not be eligible for CPA funding. Pearl notes that following
these Standards is a requirement of the Act and notes that the BHDC has sent a letter to the
Lynch Park Advisory Committee and the Parks & Recreation Commission asking for better
collaboration on this project to make sure the Carriage House is restored appropriately. She
emphasizes that adaptive reuse is perfectly allowable so there is room for allowing that building
to have an active life.
Houseman asks if a project can address more than one of the criteria in the Allowable Uses Chart
would it get preference for funding. Buchsbaum explains that while addressing multiple criteria
is attractive, the CPC will carefully consider all projects on their own merits and will not
necessarily rule out projects that address only one criterion as it might b.
Molly Benson, 191 Brimbal Avenue, asks if any portion of the Water Street area where the
proposed Black Cow is slated is historically preserved or designated. Pearl explains that the only
historic district in Beverly is the Fish Flake Hill area, which is where all of the captains lived.
Wes Ward, Trustees of Reservations, congratulates the City for adopting the CPA, as
participation by cities in the program will help sustain it. He notes that under Open Space
Criteria, preserving wildlife habitat can be achieved by removing invasive species that is
threatening the habitat and asks for clarification as to whether invasive specie removal is an
eligible project. Buchsbaum responds that this activity could come under "restoration" as long
as the property was acquired or protected with CPA funds. Pearl notes that I. a. 4 th bullet adopts
Community Preservation Committee
12 -12 -13 Public Hearing Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 6
the language under rehabilitation and restoration, which speaks to making the asset functional for
its intended use.
Estelle Rand suggests that CPC send out request for proposals and encouraging organizations to
partner as well as sending out invitations to the various organizations and departments. Dave
Gardner dove tails this comment by suggesting the CPC list resources and potential
organizations and entities that applicants can partner with.
Peter Johnson notes that other grant agencies like to see Beverly has an invested interest in
projects and has funds of its own to place on the table. Discussion ensues as to the process for
bonding projects.
Rick Marciano, Mckay Street, explains an existing right of way from Lynch Park to Rice's
Beach, which is now blocked in the middle by a property owner and asks if this is an issue that
the CPC can address. Pearl explains that if a specific proposal for funding related to this can be
assembled that meets the criteria can be considered for funding. McCrory clarifies that this
sounds like an encroachment issue that should be addressed perhaps through the OSRC.
Peter Johnson explains a recent conversation he had with the former City Clerk that had a small
annual budget to protect and preserve vital City records but it is unclear if there are any
appropriations made to continue this effort, but can be funded by CPA.
Pearl notes that there aren't any further comments she turns to reviewing the application flow
chart explaining the tentative deadlines for submission and expected timeline for
recommendations to be made to the City Council for funding projects. She reminds everyone of
the ability to submit written comments to the CPC through December 20, 2013 at noon.
There being no further comments or questions, Pearl concludes the meeting and thanks everyone
for attending this evening. She reminds everyone of the next CPC meeting on January 9, 2014 at
encourages them to continue to be part of the process and visit the CPC's website for upcoming
meetings and events. The meeting is adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Community Preservation Committee
12 -12 -13 Public Hearing Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 6