03-17-16 CPC MinutesCITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION: Community Preservation Committee
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: March 17, 2016
LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, Third Floor Conference Room B
MEMBERS PRESENT: Wendy Pearl — Chairperson, Marilyn McCrory — Vice
Chair, Heather Richter, Christy Edwards, Robert
Buchsbaum, Thomas Bussone, James Matz
MEMBERS ABSENT: Henry Pizzo, Jon Paddol
OTHERS PRESENT: Environmental Planner Amy Maxner, YMCA Senior
Director of Healthy Living Janice Naimy, Edenic
Development Company: Wendy Murray, Ben Zoba,
Jonathon Zoba
RECORDER: Aileen O'Rourke
Pearl calls the meeting to order at 7:03pm.
Administrative Business
Maxner reports the 2nd Round grant agreements and MOD's are out and are either fully executed
or signatures pending. For the Greens Hill project, the Planning Department will be the
managing entity.
Consultation and Q& A with CPC (7:00 p.m. -7:15 p.m.)
Pre - applications review
Camp Mitchman Garden School
Jon and Ben Zoba and their mother Wendy Murray explain that they have an agreement to buy
the property with Joe Boccia and provide an overview for the concept of the Garden School.
Ben Zoba notes that it will be modeled as a `gap year' program geared to kids who are out of
high school but may not be ready for college or to commit to a trade. The garden school will give
students an opportunity to develop practical skills including woodshop, garage, and farming
skills combined with an intellectual environment like reading and writing to help them form their
future plans or prepare for college. The curriculum will be horticultural, agricultural and some
trades based. They will network with local farms and provide internships and eventually they
envision it to be a boarding school. The first year they hope to enroll 7 students with the max of
14.
Edwards asked about plans for public access. Zoba notes they plan to convert the tennis courts
into a garden and use it for smaller scale programming such as: garden workshops, a
demonstration garden, and provide hands -on techniques to the public. Parking spots will be built
for the public to access the garden. The property is 8 acres. They plan to add some level of
security when it becomes a boarding school. The lodge will be made available for events such as
wedding receptions. The back of the property is adjacent to Camp Paradise and they will explore
developing a connecting trail to that property.
James Matz arrives.
Murray explains a big portion of the property is wooded and being able to connect with nature is
key to their vision as is conserving the wooded areas. Where there are already buildings, they
would consider renovating those and keeping the building footprint to a minimum. McCrory
states that CPA funds would require some level of conservation restriction, Maxner clarifies CR's
can be site specific; and carve out areas that are more suitable for development. If the property is
acquired as open space, it would need to be protected in perpetuity as open space with a CR.
Pearl advises the applicants to be aware of the requirements of the law if it is acquired then the
public interest has to be protected in perpetuity.
Pearl asks if the $450,000 is the full acquisition cost. Murray notes it is not. Pearl advises the
applicants to think of the long term site development plan. McCrory asks who will be the
owners of the property, not the City like Camp Paradise. Edenic Developers would be the
owners which is a private, non - profit. McCrory asks about the historic resources, just the
building or the whole camp? Pearl notes the application sent to HDC focused on the lodge with
the architectural McLaughlin design that is the centerpiece, it is a historic building but the
designers created the whole property. She thinks there is a design landscape for the front of the
property and perhaps restoration of that landscape could get CPA funding.
Pearl asks what the intent of the architectural survey is for $ l OK. The applicants respond it is to
figure out what the renovations would look like within the historic parameters. They don't know
what they can do and what needs to be done. Pearl advises the applicants to be sure they work
with an architect who understands historic requirements and the code requirements. Camp
Paradise was owned by the City and CPC bonded for it that was allowable because the property
was city- owned, members are not sure if that would be the case here, will need to check with the
City Solicitor.
Determination of Eligibility Matrix under Acquisition of land: Edwards believes that some
portion of the property would fit with a conservation restriction as long as the public has access,
especially with some connection to Camp Paradise. Edwards moves that a portion of the
property is eligible under Open Space acquisition as a portion of the land or as a bundle of rights.
Buchsbaum seconds. McCrory adds the acquisition of a portion of the property including an
interest or fee simple is eligible. Bussone seconds the amendment. All in favor, Buchsbaum
opposes, thinks it's unnecessary to say, only opposing the amendment. Motion carries (6 -1 -0).
McCrory believes the City will need an appraisal to determine the value, Mayor and City
Council will need to sign on with the appraisal if the City would be getting an easement. Pearl
advises the applicants to attend the Conservation Commission or the Open Space Committee to
let them know of their plans.
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 217
Members discuss the definition of Recreation in the Act, which mentions creating community
gardens, Edwards expresses she is not sure if CPA funds could be used for private land, if it is
not a true community garden. The applicants clarifies the garden would be for the public to
enjoy and also learn about gardening, but it is not a traditional community garden where anyone
can apply for a plot to garden and there would be a fee to attend the workshops. Pearl suggests
including in the acquisition piece providing public access. Pearl is not sure if this would fall
under recreational use if it is just a stand -alone garden, but if there was a master plan with trails
for the public to use connecting to the garden, maybe recreation could apply. McCrory is not
sure the act requires public access only a public benefit which can be interpreted as protecting
this land for active /passive uses.
McCrory makes a motion the project is eligible under Recreation for the acquisition of land as
active /passive recreation use. Edwards seconds. All in favor, motion carries unanimously 7 -0.
Bussone asks how they will determine if it will be for recreational use. Pearl states they will
discuss in the full application stage and will also ask the Coalition for the definition of
community gardens as recreational use. The applicant adds they plan to use the main open
grassy area for recreation.
Buchsbaum makes a motion that the architectural study of the lodge is eligible under the historic
preservation category. Bussone seconds. All in favor, motion carries unanimously 7 -0.
YMCA Fitness Trail
Janice Naimy representing the YMCA's proposal for a fitness trail is present. Edwards asks
about the public access right of way. Maxner states she believes the City owns the right of way,
which is access to the old landfill. The trail will pass through 2 parcels. Edwards would like to
see the language of the easement for the right of way. Pearl states the applicant is rehabbing the
land for recreational use but she is unsure if creation would apply. Bussone will read Newton
case where creation is defined for CPA terms. Naimy states anyone can use the trail they do not
need to be a member of the Y and it will be ADA compliant. They are also adding fitness
equipment along the trail. Edwards doesn't think it qualifies in the open space category.
McCrory makes a motion that the YMCA application is eligible under Recreation as
rehab /restore and /or possibly creation but is not eligible under the Open Space category. Richter
seconds. All in favor, motion passes unanimously 7 -0. Pearl reminds the applicant they will need
to demonstrate site control for the full application, which is a stipulation for all applicants.
Girdler House
Maxner notes that this application came in after the deadline, but Pearl had asked that it be
considered by the Committee. Pearl notes this is conversion of full bathrooms to half baths
would be rehab /restore but only eligible if acquired with CPA funds. Edwards makes a motion
the project, notwithstanding the late application submission, is not neligible as a rehab /restore
because the property was not acquired with CPA funds. Bussone seconds. All approved motion
passes 7 -0.
City Clerk Municipal Document Preservation
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 317
Pearl notes this is a continuation of work already funded in previous rounds. She notes the HDC
made a determination that all records over 100 years old are historically significant. Total
project budget is $50,000 and members discuss the scope and budget which need to be specific
for this round. McCrory makes a motion that this project is eligible. Edwards seconds. All
approved, motion carries 7 -0. Members agree that the following stipulation be required for full
application: The project budget (both CPA and outside matching funds) must correlate directly
with the specific suite of documents that will be restored under this 3 d Round CPA funding
request.
Beverly Historic Resource Study
Pearl explains that the applicant received a grant from the Mass Historic Commission with CPA
funding the local match though an Out -of -Cycle application process. She reports the City has not
had any survey work since the early 90's. She believes this is a small amount of money and it
will go to the project already underway. She also explains that if they were to do this study on its
own separate from the current survey work, it would likely cost more. Bussone moves that this
project is eligible. McCrory seconds. All in favor, motions passes 7 -0.
Vittori Park - Replace Play Structure
Maxner notes this was voted as eligible last year. Bussone makes a motion that this project is
eligible for funding. Buschbaum seconds. All in favor, motion passes 7 -0.
Cahill Park — Replace Tennis Court
Pearl notes that this was one of the two tennis court projects that came in last year, and CPC
funded the Cove project but not this one. Bussone makes a motion this project is eligible for
funding. McCrory seconds. All in favor, motion passes 7 -0. Matz clarifies that this does not
mean it will be funded, members agree, with McCrory noting that funding is dependent on
available funds and priorities.
Cooney Field Lights & Stands
Bussone and Edwards express their concern that this may not be eligible. Pearl notes the
applicant is citing accessibility and code compliance. Code compliance is an allowable use under
Recreation for rehab. Matz states the stands need to be demolished as they are unsafe.
Pearl asks if stands and lights make the property useable for recreational use. McCrory is not
sure the stands are eligible although it mentions ADA. Matz notes that the stands are integral to
the park, but he is not sure about the lights. Buchsbaum states the lights allow people to recreate
longer. Richter believes other communities funded lights and stands.
Edwards notes that under recreational land it does not include funding for a stadium. Pearl
thinks a stadium or gymnasium implies an indoor function. Members grapple with the definition
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 417
of stadium. Maxner will get clarification from the City Solicitor. Bussone states that the
applicant should separate lights from the stands into separate applications.
Bussone moves to table the Cooney Field application until the CPC gets an opinion from City
Solicitor as to the definition of "stadium" as it relates to this facility. McCrory seconds. All in
favor, motion passes unanimously 7 -0.
Pete's Park
McCrory notes the application describes the basketball and tennis courts falling apart, the play
structure is unusable, pretty much a re -build and the whole park will be made ADA compliant.
Bussone moves the renovation of the park is eligible for CPA funding under Recreation.
Buchsbaum seconds. All in favor, motion passes unanimously 7 -0.
Oaks Heights
Matz reports there is an erosion problem at this site, and the applicant's plan is to level the park
to make it safe. Edwards moves that this project is eligible under Recreation. McCrory seconds.
All in favor 7 -0.
End Congress Street
Pearl reviews the project to perform beach and waterfront access. McCrory notes the land was
not acquired by CPA funds, so it cannot come in under the open space category, and believes that
historic or educational signage is not eligible. Members agree that the only category this project
can fit into is Recreation. Maxner states the applicant may need Conservation Commission,
Army Corp and DEP permits, and so she suspects the application will likely need more funding
and time to obtain the necessary permits. The budget likely does not reflect the cost of
permitting.
Buchsbaum makes a motion the project is eligible under Recreation. Edwards seconds. All in
favor, motion passes 7 -0. Members agree to assign the following stipulations for full
application:
o The CPC determined that the project is not eligible under the Open Space category because
the property was not acquired with CPA funds.
o It appears that the project will require permitting by the Conservation Commission, and
perhaps other state /federal agencies. Therefore, the CPC strongly recommends that the
permitting costs be factored into the final budget when submitted with the full CPA
application.
o Interpretive or information signage is not eligible under CPA therefore your budget
should clearly distinguish what elements of the project will be funded by CPA and what
will be funded by other sources.
o The City of Beverly must sign off on the full CPA application.
Open Space Parcel - Lot 4 Map 21 End Folger Ave
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 517
Maxner explains that Aaron Clausen previously advised the applicant that the City is not
interested in purchasing this unbuildable property. McCrory notes the application is lacking in
identifying a buyer, and wonders if it is it possible the applicant would gift this land. Maxner
notes this is owned by a trust, and it does not seem that all parties are in agreement about what to
do with the property. Maxner notes the Building Inspector has determined that it is not a
buildable parcel. Maxner points out that the City owns 18 and 19.
McCrory makes a motion to table the application pending clarification of ownership. Pearl states
that Ms. Madore and a trust are the owners, and that this is for the sale of open space, not the
acquisition, and Ms. Madore is not the buyer. Matz makes a motion that the purchase of property
as open space is eligible. Ricther seconds. All in favor the motion carries 7 -0. McCrory thinks
the project is eligible but the way the application is structured, they cannot award CPA funding
due to an unidentified buyer as the applicant, members agree and note that should be a caveat for
full application.
Powder House
Pearl states this is one of the last 8 sided powder houses in existence. McCrory asks if the City is
able to manage this project, while Windover can do the work she would like to see oversight
from a historic standard perspective. The building could be lost if nothing done. McCrory makes
a motion this project is eligible under Historic Preservation category for rehab /restoration.
Edwards seconds. All in favor, motion passes 7 -0. Members agree to assign the following
stipulations for full application:
o The evaluation/analysis of restoration/rehabilitation needs must be compliant with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation;
o The City of Beverly must sign off on the CPA funding application;
o Interpretive or historical informational signage is not eligible under CPA, therefore the
project budget should clearly distinguish what elements of the project will be funded by
CPA and what will be funded by other sources.
First Parish Church
Maxner explains that the project is to fund installation of an elevator and front entrance ADA
improvements. The building was ruled as historically significant, will fall under the Secretary of
Interior standards for Historic preservation rehab /restore. Members review the language of the
application and some members are not clear as to whether the project elements, as described, are
specific enough to address ADA code requirements. Members agree to invite the applicants to
come in to clarify project purpose before ruling on this project.
Hale House Landscape Restoration
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 617
Pearl notes the application is to create period- appropriate landscape and create a path. Maxner
notes the applicant has applied under open space and recreation categories. Pearl notes the
applicant should have gone to the HDC for historic landscaping determination, if the property is
already on the State Registry of Historic Places, it's a matter of just HDC verification in writing.
Members discuss the Historic, Recreation and Open Space categories and activities within each.
Members are unclear as to which category most appropriately applies to the project. Members
agree to table this discussion and ask the applicant to come in to clarify what category they are
applying for. Pearl notes they will need a HDC determination for historic landscape and suggests
they apply for such at the next HDC meeting.
Pearl notes that the CPC will continue its review of the pre - applications at its March 24, 2016
meeting.
The April CPC meeting is scheduled for April 28, 2016.
Adjournment
Bussone moves to adjourn the CPC meeting. Edwards seconds. Motion carries unanimously 7-
0. The March 17, 2016 CPC meeting is adjourned at 9:23pm.
Community Preservation Committee
March 17, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Page 717