Community Preservation Committee

Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes *DRAFT* PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES CITY OF BEVERLY BOARD OR COMMISSION: Community Preservation Committee SUBCOMMITTEE: N/A DATE: October 06, 2022 LOCATION: Barnet Gallery, Beverly Library, 32 Essex Street, Beverly, MA MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Heather Richter, Vice Chair Derek Beckwith, Thomas Bussone, Christy Edwards, Nancy Marino, Marilyn McCrory, Suzanne LaMont, Danielle Spang MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Buchsbaum OTHERS PRESENT: Victoria Healey (City of Beverly Planning Department), Mary McCaffery (representing Beverly Farms Improvement Society), Alison Dudley (representing OSRC), Kevin McCarthy (representing YMCA of the North Shore), David Goodwin (representing YMCA of the North Shore), BevCam, Evan Stentiford, Brendan Sweeney (At-Large City Councillor), Dan Richards, Marybeth MacBride, RECORDER: Brandon Kubik, Laurie Sullivan 1. Call to Order Chairperson Richter calls the meeting to order at 7:02pm and welcomes all committee members and attendees to the meeting. A roll call for the committee members was done. Members Beckwith, Bussone, Edwards, Marino, McCrory, LaMont, and Spang were present. Chairperson Richter then introduced the 10th Annual CPA Funding round to all public and invited attendees, adding that the current plan can be found online at the CPC webpage. Chairperson Richter also states that the meeting will be recorded on BevCam, and will be partially transmitted live with remaining elements to be presented on the city’s municipal access station at a later date. Bussone made a motion to recess the current CPC meeting in favor of opening the public hearing and committee presentation. Vice Chair Beckwith seconds the motion, The committee votes 8-0 in favor to approve. 2. Welcome and History of Community Preservation Act Chairperson Richter calls the public meeting to order, and asks for a roll call of attendees from invited and public guests in attendance. Proceeding the roll call, Healey reads the public hearing notice to all attendees. Chairperson Richter then introduced the CPC prepared presentation and McCrory to provide insight into the history of the CPA within the city of Beverly. McCrory discussed various aspects of the CPA through Massachusetts general law and within the city through its local ordinance, and continued on to explain that the CPC is responsible for 1 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes taking those guidelines and establishing criteria with the four criteria categories of the CPA, including Historic Resources Preservation, Community Housing, Recreation, and Open Space, reviewing applications and ultimately making recommendations for CPA funded projects. She then went on to state that to date 70 projects have been funded within the city with a total of $8.5 Million in CPA funds. McCrory then introduced Vice Chair Beckwith to discuss the 2023 Fiscal Year Budget of the CPA funding. Vice Chair Beckwith presented the preliminarily approved budget, with a total of $1,287,376 being available, and stated that the final steps of review and approval were currently being reviewed by the city council. Vice Chair Beckwith inquired with the attendees if there were any questions concerning the budget, to which there were none. 3. Public Hearing to Discuss Needs, Possibilities and Resources in Beverly Vice Chair Beckwith continued the meeting by introducing the public to the next topic of discussion, the public hearing to discuss needs, possibilities and resources within the city that could benefit from CPA funding. At this time the live stream portion of the BevCam presentation was halted. Vice Chair Beckwith opened the meeting to public discussion and lead the conversation by discussing the Open Space category. Chairperson Richter stated that a focus on pocket parks would not only be beneficial for the public, but would be relatively inexpensive to fund. LaMont stated that green spaces proportionate to the growing apartment population should be monitored as to balance green spaces for the use of the population increase. Certain members of the public also agreed to this, and stated that they would like to see open spaces being designated within areas of the city where building and development are occurring at an accelerated pace. Bussone inquired that if the areas discussed didn’t have land available currently, could a portion of the area to be developed be earmarked for open and green spaces. Vice Chair Beckwith stated that moving forward, the CPC is looking to have discussions with the city and is hopefull to establish some zoning ordinances that would do just that. Chairperson Richter stated that she would like to see continued protection of waterfront areas and a larger public accessibility to them. Vice Chair Beckwith inquired with the public if there were any other points, and with none being presented moved onto the next category, Community Housing. He stated that while community housing as related to its typical sense was approved through CPA funds in the past, more out of the box actions, such as providing housing assistance funds during the pandemic, was executed recently and could also be considered for options moving forward. LaMont inquired if CPA funds could be designated for programs that provide assistance to parties transitioning to or acquiring community housing. Vice Chair Beckwith reviewed the CPA charter conditions for the matter and stated while not outright for or against, funding could potentially be utilized for this matter but further review would need to occur. Chairperson Richter stated that other communities have utilized CPA funding for items like this in the past, but required an outside organization to champion the effort and apply for the funding. Spang stated that she would like to see funding utilized to assist elderly community members, either through transitioning to community housing or aging in place at an existing location, and that the city senior center could be a resource to help review this matter. 2 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes Vice Chair Beckwith inquired with the public if there were any other points, and with none being presented moved onto the next category, Historical Resources. A member of the public inquired if the committee was aware if any action had been taken regarding the Gillis Park, and several of its built features. He also inquired if CPA funding could be designated to preserve “memories and stories” and not just physical elements. McCrory stated that while it was an interesting idea, the law states that funding is really only available for acquisition, preservation, rehabilitation and support of historically significant entities or locations, so it may be out of the realm of CPA funding. LaMont also stated that CPA funds could not be utilized for informational signage. The member of the public also inquired if funding could be allocated to interviews or documentation of personal records. Vice Chair Beckwith stated that it may be a little too “out of the box”, but the committee had funded studies in the past which may be relevant to the topic. Chairperson Richter stated that the local ordinance makes a distinction between artifacts versus history, and information itself may not be covered as opposed to physical items, which the committee had dealt with in the past with preserving local historical reference materials within city hall. Vice Chair Beckwith inquired with the public if there were any other points, and with none being presented moved onto the next category, Recreational Uses, and started the conversation discussing the carriage house at Lynch Park. Marino stated that she several of the CPA funded projects from past rounds were initiated into review by the community, and not at the direction of the city recreation department, and would like to continue to see efforts like this moving forward, she also openly thanked all the community members who had done this in the past. Chairperson Richter stated that members of the city council are looking to investigate community garden projects in several neighborhoods, and that they would not only be a resource to help the community, but more than likely could be assisted with CPA funding to make the goal a reality. A member of the public brought back up Gillis Park, and how several aspects of it could benefit from being refurbished or upgraded. LaMont stated that it would be nice to have a more centrally located dog park facility within the city, with the current one being located out of the general range of the majority of the people within the city downtown area. Vice Chair Beckwith inquired with the public if there were any other points, and with none being presented he thanked the public attendees for their input, and finished this portion of the committee’s presentation. 4. How to Apply for CPA Funds Vice Chair Beckwith handed the presentation over to Marino who then introduced the next segment, Examples of Successful Applications. Marino introduced Mary McCaffery of the Beverly Farms Improvement Society to discuss the Beverly Farms Cemetery fence renovation project. McCaffery started her presentation stating that the Beverly Farms Improvement Society was established in the 1950’s with the goal of the beatification of Beverly Farms. She stated that a majority of the projects that they had implemented had been planting and beautifications, but they were looking to do a larger project. The repair and rehabilitation of the fence around the cemetery, and the review of the project with both the city and partners like Cassidy Brother’s Forge was undergone. Once the full scope of the project was determined, the decision to establish 3 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes phases for the work was made, and phase one was funded through fundraising efforts and donations. McCaffery stated that during the review of the scope for phase two, the application to the CPA to gain funding to do the work was submitted as well as an application for historic significance in order to designate the cemetery and its elements with landmark status, and the project scope moved forward. McCaffery then stated that she was thankful for the assistance of the CPC and its help in preparing the required documentation and ultimately providing the approval to fund the project, and that she is looking forward to working with the CPC again in the future to continue the refurbishment efforts on the remain phases of the project. Marino thanked McCaffery for her presentation and insight, and then introduced Alison Dudley to discuss her role in the Simon Street Pocket Park project. Dudley stated that the Simon Street parcels were two run-down lots in the Gloucester Crossing neighborhood that were located between several residential lots, and while not maintained were used as a form of open space by the community on an unofficial basis. During the pandemic, the lots were eyed as potential open spaces that could be established as a formal park to not only provide an exterior space to go to during the time of lockdown, but as a much-needed open space in an area of high density. In conjunction with the Beverly Housing Authority and the City of Beverly, the lots were purchased and established as a site of future green space. At this time, Dudley worked to get other community members on board to support the project, and while slow at first it gained traction as it moved along through the various review and approval processes. Ultimately, with the help of the CPC, the Mayor, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and the CPA funds, the site was reworked to include both an active playground portion as well as a green open space that could be utilized by the community. Dudley stated that now the park is being viewed as a positive improvement to the neighborhood, with community members signing up to assist with various activities to keep the park beautiful and operational. Marino thanked Dudley for her presentation, and offered a special thanks to the Housing Authority for helping to secure the land for recreational needs. Marino then introduced Kevin McCarthy of the YMCA of the North Shore to discuss the recently completed housing project at the Cabot Street location. McCarthy stated that the Beverly YMCA had been a component for affordable housing since 1901, with a revitalization in the effort locally in the mid 1990’s. He then went on to discuss that the pre-renovation capacity for the facility was 45 residents with selective shared amenities. In 2018, in partnership with Harborlight Community Partners and several other components, the YMCA set out to expand upon their existing facility, and provide more amenities and housing opportunities. After a review for historic preservation, and application to the CPA to gain funding, and obtaining state and federal funding and grants, the project kicked off in 2019 to upgrade the facility to house 67 residents and provide various amenities for them, and was ultimately completed in 2020. McCarthy then invited David Goodwin, of the North Shore YMCA, to provide additional insight into the project. Goodwin stated that the renovated housing facilities and new addition space at the upper floors of the building is a great asset not only to the community, but the residents that are living there. He 4 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes stated that as a direct result of the project, they were able to assist several residents transition from homelessness to housed, and provide a community services program for the residents which also employs several full time staffers to aid in the various programs and processes. Marino thanked both McCarthy and Goodwin for their presentation. She then went on to state to the public that if they had a project in mind, or if they would like to have a project and need help determining its eligibility, to please reach out to the CPC, and that they are here to help in any way that they can. At this time Marino introduced LaMont to review the locations of previous CPA funded projects within the city. LaMont brought up a map with various designations of the locations and types of projects that had been done within the city in the past, and showed how they are present throughout the city. She also welcomed the public in attendance to review the areas of the map that were currently not represented with projects, and posed the question for them to think of anything within these areas that may represent a potential future project, and to think about what could be done there. Chairperson Richter thanked both Marino and LaMont, as well as the presenters, for their portions of the proceedings, and then introduced Bussone to discuss CPA Eligibility Requirements for projects. Bussone started off by reintroducing the four categories, and how the CPA section of the local ordinance provided specific annotations and requirements for each that needed to be met in order for a potential project to have the ability to be considered for CPA funding capacities. After going over a chart developed by the state Department of Revenue, Bussone ultimately stated that if a project does not fall within or under the parameters of the presented guidelines, its capability for CPA assistance is not truly viable, but the CPC is here to help potential applicants review these conditions and present their projects in ways which may make them eligible for assistance. Bussone then read through a series of important dates and deadlines for the upcoming funding round, with the most important being October 20th for determinations of Historic Significance from the Historic Preservation Committee, October 27th for the submissions of Pre-Applications, and January 10th 2023 as the date of full Application deadline. Bussone then introduces Edwards to discuss Application Forms and Instructive and Informational Materials. Edwards starts her portion of the presentation by stating that like Marino had stated applicants should not feel intimated by the applications, and that the CPC is there to assist them throughout the process. She then proceeds to review the Pre-Application and the requirements that are needed for eligibility including project description, general budget and historic significance determinations if required, and states that this portion of the application is due by noon on October 27th . Lamont generally states to the public that the historic designation is a separate application that needed to be filed with Historic Commission, and that would need to be done by October 20th in order to include it within the CPA pre-application paperwork. Edwards then went on to discuss the full application, and stated that if applicants were determined as eligible to apply they would be invited to do so on December 2nd, with a meeting scheduled to assist in the process on December 15th. She then stated that the two most important parts of full 5 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes application consisted of the Project Budget and Project Schedule, and then went on to describe the nuances of both of these sections. Ultimately, she stated that the final applications would be due by noon on January 10th, 2023, and that all informational materials and resources for the various applications would be available online at the City of Beverly’s website under the CPC page. 5. Questions and Answers Chairperson Richter thanked all members of the committee and the invited guest presenters for their participation this evening, and opened up a questions and answers session with the public attendees. McCaffery had inquired if Historic Significance designation presented for projects had a timeline, or if they were indefinite. LaMont stated that usually the designation applies as long as the site is maintained as per its designation, and that any projects that would occur within its boundaries would need to undergo review for specific requirements. Chairperson Richter inquired if there were any other questions, and with none being presented thanked the public for their attendance. Vice Chair Beckwith made a motion to adjourn the public portion of the meeting and move back to regular committee business, to which Bussone seconds the motion. The committee votes 8-0 in favor to approve. 6. Regular Committee Business Chairperson Richter stated that since the CPA Budget for the 2023 Fiscal year had already been reviewed by and approved by the committee, further discussion did not need to occur at this time. She then asked the representative from BevCam when it would be expected that the meeting would be televised, to which he stated that editing would start the following day and that the airing would occur within the next two weeks and that notification would be provided to the committee when a more hard set date could be established. Edwards inquired that if the upcoming November meeting would be dedicated to reviewing the pre-application submissions only, or if there would be other regularly scheduled business to attend to. She expressed that if there were a large submission base that there may not be enough time to do it all in one meeting. Chairperson Richter stated that if needed a special meeting could be called in order to make sure all matters are attended to, and that if specific items could be reviewed in the upcoming October meeting it should open up the forthcoming meetings for timing. In an effort to efficiently end the meeting on time, the group discussed the outstanding agenda items that would be moved forward to the next full group meeting, which consisted of the review and approval of outstanding meeting minutes and all other outstanding points from previous meetings 7. Adjournment Marino moves to adjourn at 8:48 p.m. Seconded by Spang. The motion carries 8-0. The next regular meeting of the Community Preservation Committee will be held on Thursday 6 Community Preservation Committee October 06, 2022 Meeting Minutes October 20th, 2022, at City Hall. 7