Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-15 Community Preservation Committee Minutes Community Preservation Committee Minutes of February 15, 2023 Present: Chairman Brian Roache, Ron Rudis, John Mabon, Terrance Holland, William Callahan, Rick Green Tim Tschirhart, John Simons. Absent: Tracy Watson Immediately prior to calling the meeting to order at 7:00 PM, Brian Roache read aloud a statement regarding the conduct of virtual meetings and public access Call to Order 7:02 FY Year 24 Applications 17 application before CPC this year. Affordable Housing Trust Application Christopher Jee is the Chairman of the Affordable Housing Trust, will speak on this application. This is the the full allocation of affordable housing. This is done in several towns in Massachusetts. B. Roache explained that the Affordable Housing Trust (AHT) is requesting the 10% of the available CPC funds required by law for affordable housing. J. Simon questioned what would happen if another project for affordable housing comes in? L. Burslaff believes that 27 other towns allocate the funds in this way. L. Burzlaff will supply the list of communities to the CPC. J. Simons asked for clarification about the governance of the AHT. Seven members appointed by the Select Board for 6 years, controlled by Statute and the recorded trust. They can not disperse any money unless they get the approval of the Select Board and under certain circumstances, they also need to get approval of the Finance Committee. T. Tschirhart asked the amount of money available. B. Roache will get that number, but may not know it much before town meeting. L. Burzlaff suggested possibly using the amount given in previous years. R. Green would like to see the list of other communities that receive the 10%. T. Holland liked the AHT requesting funds for a specific project as it has in the past. Asking for 10% with no idea or control over how it is spent is a change in how it is done. J. Mabon asked why they are asking for the change in funding. L. Burzlaff reminded that in 2017, the originally started with this process. In following years, the committee preferred not to go that route, so the AHT adjusted their plan. L. Burzlaff pointed out the AHT have fund, but the AHT can, so there may be missed opportunities throughout the year. CPC can only allocate funds once a year, whereas the AHT can allocate funds all year long. She gave the example of Bread & Roses coming in front of the AHT next week to talk about 5 units they are looking to renovate and build and make affordable housing. J. Simons asked how much money is currently in the fund. Approximately $800,000. They have earmarked about $500,000 for Fountain Drive, $100,000 for the down payment assistance program, as well as approximately $50,000 for the rental assistance program. There is approximately $300,000 not yet earmarked. The AHT helps fund projects like Bread & Roses, but we down payment assistance program works. L. Burzlaff explained the process. There are no other funding sources to AHT other than CPC. Properties bought are deed restricted to be affordable units in perpetuity. Historic Preservation Application submitted by Laurie Burzlaff for $50,000 for the Neil Painting. It is a valuable painting that is owned by the Town so it is in our best interest to make sure that we preserve it properly. The funds are to get the painting restored. J. Simons asked how we know restore it? L. Burzlaff is not sure. B. Roache asked if it has been deemed a historic significant artifact by the Town Historic Commission? L. Burzlaff is not sure. Application submitted by Laurie Burzlaff for the Carriage House. The building is actually referred to as The Stables, they have the support of the Historical Commission. There is a grant through State for up to $100,000, but probably would receive only $50,000. To apply for this grant, the Town would need to spend $20,000 to have an architect do part of the application as a requirement for Mass Historical. The matching funding is also a requirement. If this application is approved, we would like to use $20,000 to pay for the architect, then apply next March, that way we would already have the matching funds. To date, there has been about $380,000 that the Town has spent this year at Stevens Estate for the renovation of the gate house. T. Holland asked what the plans are for the building. Fireside will manage the building, but the Town works closely with them. Once the building is stabilized we can come up with a plan for the building. R. Green asked if we know the magnitude of repairs that are needed to stabilize the building. The architects have not done their job yet, but the maintenance study that was done came out to $196,000 to stabilize the structure, nothing more. J. Simons asked what CPC funds have been spent on this recently? L. Burzlaff said roof repairs have been done. Master Plan Application for $30,500 submitted by Andrew Shapiro, Assistant Town Manager and Community & Economic Development Division. This request represents a grant match we are applying for. They are also applying to Mass Historic Commission, but for separate grant specific to planning and survey. The project would be an Historic Preservation Master Plan to preserve everything we do in terms of historic preservation. The system of governance, the Historic Commission itself, two historic district commissions as well as our historic assets and what we do procedurally. It is identified in the 2018 grant. This request represents more than the 50% because the MHC tends to provide less funding. They are accounting for $15,000 from MHC and this would fund the balance. J. Simons asked for an example of what would be a result of this project. One strategy could be that this plan would point to other funding sources for historic building renovations, like the Carriage House. It would look at how the various historic commissions in town are run and make suggestions for improvements. Provide support to the Historic Commission when applying for grants. T. Tschirhart how does this coordinate with the North Andover Historical Society and their application. The Historical Society and stakeholders will be part of the Master Planning process. T. Holland asked that once this is done, the town would get an idea of the priority of what would be needed on both sides. Yes, we would receive a list of prioritized strategies, how long it would take to execute the strategy, the cost, and who the responsible parties for carrying out the strategies. This would help prioritize future CPC projects. J. Mabon questioned having public input on the final plan. Public input and input from all stakeholders would be sought. B. Roache inquired on other communities that have done similar process using CPC funds. Andrew Shapiro does not know, but can get that information. Trustees of Reservation application for refurbishment of the mural at the Stevens Coolidge Property. Christy Jackson, Director of Collections and Senior Curator for the Trustees of Reservations and Bob Murray, Project Director for Structures and Landscape for the Trustees of Reservations. Christy gave an overview of the Stevens Coolidge Estate and explained that this application is for the conservation of a very large 20 panel mural in the ballroom. It was painted in 1918 by Joseph Ramirez and is now in need of repair. The total cost of repairs would be approximately $80,000. $20,000 will be paid for by the Trustees, and the remaining $60,000 would be CPC funds. Past building renovations were discussed. Ms. Jackson explained the process of the mural restoration. R. Rudis asked how the value of the mural is established. As curator, Ms. Jackson believes from an historical standpoint it is priceless. It is an important historical artifact to preserve. J. Mabon asked if they have requested support from the Historic Commission or Historic Society? Not for this project. If they could get a letter of support from the Historic Commission it may be helpful. T. Holland asked if this would be the first time coming to the CPC for funding? Yes. T. Holland asked how the Town would benefit from this project. They would like to have future programming in this space. the Trustees in the past. Internal improvement are different in that the Trustees usually fund the internal projects, not the municipalities. Overall, CPC members would like to encourage public access and programming for town residents. B. Roache asked members if we should be giving the Trustees more direction or we want to wait to hear what they have to say. T. Holland suggested having the Trustees provide information regarding terms of access and what they are willing to do. Perhaps talk to the schools and youth center to see what they would like to use the property for. He would like to provide more access for the children to the beautiful property. Mr. Murray will provide information on better access for residents. B. Roache will connect with the Trustees before the next meeting and discuss how best to submit the overall application. Five application from Ridgewood Cemetery Association Jim Lafond of 329 Osgood Street and Joseph Pelich of 1915 Great Pond Road, member of Trustees of Ridgewood Cemetery. 1 -Second Burial Ground Failed Headstone Footings Mr. Pelich gave overview at the last meeting. Mr. Lafond compared the Second Burial Ground (SBG) property to the Ridgewood Cemetery. When Ridgewood inherited the SBG, they found many maintenance/overgrown issues and very old headstones that are buried under overgrowth. Much work that needed to be done. Right now the are looking at found more work than anticipated that needs to be done to the cemetery. The SBG also has a lack of funding as compared to Ridgewood which has an operating revenue from grave lot sales and endowments. T. Holland asked about future work matching what is there now. The current superintendent has a business where he does restoration and raises stones, and the contractor that does excavation has dome so much at Ridgewood that they work as a team and would be done by our own manpower for much lesser cost. 2 - Ridgewood Cemetery Boundary Wall, Easement & Property Line Restoration Mr. Pelich gave overview at the last meeting. B. Roache asked about the precise location of the wall on the property. It is Roache asked how much of this is new boundary wall versus existing? Most of it is restoration of existing. B. Roach is requesting more detail on the restoration, a new wall cannot be funded. Pictures would be very helpful. 3 -419 Johnson Street - Mr. Pelich gave overview at the la be a future burial area, what are the plans on it for the use now? Mr. Pelich feels personally that it would be great for soccer fields for the community or other community use. House could be used by their superintendent. T. Holland would like to know more about public access, we should have a better plan to present to town meeting. W. Callahan reviewed the difference between requesting funds for Open Space vs. Historic preservation. Mr. Pelich stated that they see the barn as an historic structure but would be happy to refine their request to remove items for planning for future fields, survey, cleaning the edges, re-establishing the fencing and withdraw that portion of the request if the board would consider the specific line items for that historic structure. They would be happy to reduce the application and the scope of the request. W. Callahan suggested a letter from the local historical commission regarding the historical significance of the barn would be helpful. We would need the designation from the Historic Commission for it to be eligible. J. Simons asked about the short-term and long-term use for the barn? The barn would be used short-term for equipment storage and other things for the cemetery, mid-term use would be incorporated into the field use and the general public. J. Simons feels $400,000 is a lot for preserving a barn for storage. What would the cost to make soccer fields here? Would be best to break the barn out from the rest of the property. Joe Pelich discussed the cemetery finances, endowment and the anticipated maintenance costs of the future. 4 -Ridgewood Cemetery Preservation of Historic Documents Mr. Pelich gave overview at the last meeting and there are no further questions. 5-Ridgewood Cemetery Restoration of M37 Howitzer Motor Carriage Mr. Pelich gave overview at the last meeting. They have since reached out to find a way to restore it for less money. They may have other available funding and would be able to withdraw the request, but not sure yet. R. Green questioned the appropriateness of displaying a military tank in a peaceful cemetery. Jim Lafond said they are sensitive to this and still discussing the issue. Pedestrian Rail Trail / Sutton Pond Riverfront Restoration Project Black Swan Realty Trust. Sasha Weinreich of 21 Sawyer Road is the Trustee for Black Swan Realty Trust distributed revised documents as there was a part of the scope that was missed in the initial packets. Ms. Weinreich gave an overview of the application and the revisions from last week. This is a stand-alone project from the rail trail. In the packet, there is more information about the Sutton Pond dam. Removing the dam is the most efficient and cost effective way to deal with a dam that is not in good condition, however they would prefer not to remove it as this would result in the upstream area of Sutton Pond becoming more of a smaller brook. She reviewed the grant application request breakdown. This general scope helps them decide what to do on the parcel in regards to waterfront restoration, pocket parks, access to the pond, potential to build the pedestrian bridge and pave the existing Sutton Pond dam. Part of this funding request is the contingency that we would only ask for an advance with the approval and determination by the Community and Economic Development Division. J. Simons struggles with the application. As owner of the property, would you suf property to the Town? Joe Pelich stated that from a valuation standpoint, they still own the building which is part of the land. J. Simons pointed out the Black Swan is the applicant and the beneficiary. J. Simons is not sure if technically they are allowed to apply for funding where you are the beneficiary of it. This project would not change the value of the property. This project began because they received notice of the dam safety. An assessment was done in 2019 stating certain things needed to be done. Mr. Pelich met with the Department of dam safety who explained how it all worked. It was then explained that the goal was to dismantle dams in the Commonwealth. Made no sense to Mr. Pelich. It was an unusual request. J. Simons asked that if this goes forward, would someone need to replace the dam? No. From a private standpoint, we have two choices; we can breach the dam which is a process but inexpensive. The second avenue is to develop the property for the community. J. Simons is not clear on the total overall cost, or how this would benefit the town. Ms. Weinreich suggested a site visit to walk the area and get a better understanding of the proposed project and areas of opportunity. T. Tschirhart likes how funding for the engineering would benefit the town? Paying for the engineering and not knowing that anything is going to come to fruition i the dam and you go in another direction. Joe Pelich has discussed this extensively with their engineer GZA. They got the scope for this application from the Town engineer. His understanding is that if the community is involved and makes the application, there is a tremendous amount of funding at the state level to pay for the dam restoration. Much of the application of the vision was der hired engineer. J. Mabon reviewed the fact the property owner would benefit from this project, but ultimately, Plan. good idea for this committee to become more familiar with the area and this is the path that needs to be followed to make it happen and preserve the pond. Must be presented clearly at town meeting. R. Green asked that if the rail trail happens in the future and it goes over the dam, who then becomes responsible for maintaining the dam? It would be based on how much of the rights get transferred to the town. B. Roache asked about the initial application identified 11 dams and culverts, have there been any discussions with other property owners. Only one is on this parcel, one is currently in front of the Conservation Commission and the rest are under roadways. Andrew Shapiro appreciates the partnership that Sasha and Joe have exhibited to work with the Town conceptually on the multi-use path that would connect Main Street and loop around to High Street as envisioned in Master Plan. In order to make something like this happen, we need the public/private partnership on several ken with many abutters and still want to engage in public feedback. Mr. Shapiro spoke about making this eligible for part of the Mass DOT TIP (Transportation Improvement Program) we could receive additional funding. Certain requirements would need to be met, including that we could not engage in right-of-way acquisition discussions. The State would want to have oversight over that process. It would be premature for us to do anything in the way of right-of-way acquisition negation or processes if we wanted to eligible for TIP. This is yet to be determined. As far as the scope the applicant has put , to communicate how we would utilize that funding. We are still figuring out the next steps. In regards to whether the Town could visualize or envision the property to be useful for the uses intended in the application, we do. We participated in the site walk with the applicant and our engineers. The Town feels very excited about the project and encouraged, but we have a long runway ahead of ourselves. We appreciate the urgency that the applicant has in regard to the dam and what is being communicated to them from the State. T. Tschirhart asked if the $150,000 would cover the cost for a wetlands study? The Town has not gotten that far in the process with our engineer to understand whether that is necessary or not. Joe Pelich reviewed the process and stated that the environmental assessment would be done first. J. Mabon confirmed that this is the correct way to do it. The scope of work was provided to the applicant from the Town Engineer. Discussion took place regarding Clean Harbors and Sutton Pond property as part of the final trail. Andrew Shapiro explained that the struggle for him is how to utilize the study done well as the Town. MOTION made by to move into Executive Session pursuant to Mass Generals Chapter 30A section 21A6 to consider value to possible purchase of zero Bradford Road for public discussion of which may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the town. Motion made by R. Green, seconded by W. Callahan. Role call vote taken. J. Simons-yes, T. Tschirhart-yes, R. Green-yes, W. Callahan-yes, T. Holland-yes, J. Mabon-yes, R. Rudis-yes, B. Roache-yes. Motion passes unanimously. Members moved into executive session.