Agenda and Minutes 2009-02-04
City of Northampton
Community Preservation Committee
210 Main Street, City Hall
Northampton, MA 01060
Community Preservation Committee
Agenda
DATE: Wednesday, February 4, 2009
TIME: 7:00 PM
PLACE: City Council Chambers, 212 Main Street (BEHIND City Hall)
Contact:
Fran Volkmann, Chair, Community Preservation Committee
Franv@comcast.net
Tom Parent, Vice Chair, Community Preservation Committee
ParentBridge@hotmail.com
Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner
byoung@northamptonma.gov
(413) 587-1263
Agenda
Public Comment
?
Acceptance of 1/7 minutes
?
Round 1 2009 Applicant Q&A Session
?
Chair's Report
?
?
Items for Discussion
-Signage Options
-Budget Update
-Project Status Updates
-Policies & Procedures for Allocating Funds to Applicants
-Community Preservation Plan Revisions
-Other
?
Other Business
For additional information please refer to the Community Preservation Committee website:
http://www.northamptonma.gov/gsuniverse/httpRoot/comm/
1
MINUTES
Community Preservation Committee
Date: Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Time: 7:00 pm
Place: City Council Chambers, 212 Main St.
Members Present: Tom Parent, Jack Hornor, George Kohout, Don Bianchi, Lilly Lombard
and Downey Meyer.
Staff Present: Bruce Young, Community Preservation Planner
John Frey, Community Preservation Planner
Tom Parent opened the public meeting at 7:05pm.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
??
None.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
??
Tom Parent presented the minutes of January 7, 2009 meeting for discussion.
??
Upon motion of Jack Hornor, seconded by Lilly Lombard, all voted in favor of approving
the minutes.
3. ROUND 1, 2009 APPLICANT Q&A SESSION
??
Andrew Crystal and Tom Douglas, representing the Academy of Music, announced their
application this round will include more graphics and color renderings that were
submitted to Mass Historic for their approval. They queried the CPC what additional
items they would like to see this time.
??
Tom Parent requested they include the comments of Mass Historic.
??
Bruce Young stated the building already has a Preservation Restriction with Mass
Historic. He assumes this would suffice for the CPC.
??
Tom Douglas confirmed the PR is attached to the deed and Andrew Crystal stated the PR
is the strongest form of guarantee possible.
??
Lilly Lombard asked if any of the renovations would be to the interior.
??
Andrew Crystal stated interior renovations would be minimal.
??
Jack Hornor reminded the applicant that the process is not quick. He encourages them
understand the timeline include CPC post-approval (Council votes, grant agreement,
contract and check processing delays).
2
??
Lilly Lombard also reminded the applicant no work could begin until the contract is fully
approved.
??
Andrew Crystal stated it would be important to the Academy to know the exact date they
could start to incur costs. Also, a drawdown schedule would be a good funding plan for
them.
4. CHAIR’S REPORT
FEBRUARY 18, 2009 MEETING
??
Tom Parent proposed a very short meeting, perhaps just 20-30 minutes.
??
Bruce Young stated there would be contracts to signs and applicant packets to distribute.
??
Jack Hornor stated it appears the CPC might not have a quorum planning to attend.
??
Tom Parent proposed canceling the February 18 meeting. Instead, Bruce Young would
email CPC members as to when they could pick up applicant packets and sign contracts
at the Office of Planning and Development. The next meeting would be March 4, 2009.
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COALITION DUES
??
Tom Parent announced Coalition fees are due. The annual fee is $2500.
??
Upon motion by Jack Hornor, seconded by Lilly Lombard, all voted in favor to renewal
the membership in the Coalition.
5. DISCUSSION ITEMS
SIGNAGE OPTIONS
??
John Frey presented eight different font options for the signage.
??
Lilly Lombard and Jack Hornor stated they were the only members interested in the
design issues. They collectively agreed to use the Tahoma font, in bold, not all caps.
??
Jack Hornor proposed the CPC change the language of the signs to individual each with
the title of the project. Upon motion by Jack Hornor, seconded by George Kohout, all
voted in favor of this change.
??
Jack Hornor proposed to approve staff and a CPC designee to work with applicants on a
case-by-case basis to determine appropriate signage requirements. Upon motion by Jack
Hornor, seconded by Downey Meyer, all voted in favor of the proposal.
??
It was agreed Lilly Lombard would be the CPC designee for signage needs.
BUDGET UPDATE
??
John Frey presented the latest CPC budget report. He stated the CPC would have
~$454,000 available in May for Round 1 projects. However, he reminded the CPC the
next Forbes Library payment of $250,000 would be due on July 1, 2009. Given the time
delay in funding new projects it should not be a problem to the CPC cash flow if the full
$454,000 is committed in May. To protect the CPC they might choose to condition any
Round 1 awards with a stipulation that funding would not be available until August or
September 2009.
3
??
Jack Hornor followed up on an early question regarding committing additional funds
beyond the minimum to set reserve accounts. He stated the Coalition recommends against
doing that in order to leave the CPC in a more flexible position.
??
Jack Hornor requested staff present more detail regarding administrative costs.
PROJECT STATUS UPDATES
??
Tom Parent stated he has reviewed the funding process protocol and determined much of
it is a long, drawn out process out of CPC control.
??
George Kohout stated it is a duplicative process designed to protect taxpayer money. He
stated the CPC would need to accept it. It is best for the CPC to be pro-active and warn
applicants as to the long nature of the process.
??
Don Bianchi stated the CPC should weigh in on the process. He believes this protocol is
unacceptable.
??
Bruce Young stated much of the Round 1, 2008 delays were due to staff creating an
unacceptable contract. After much delay it was determined the CPC must use the official
city contract form and process. Now that staff is up-to-speed delays should be predictable
and limited.
??
Don Bianchi stated as long as the protocol is known it should be possible to shoot for a
30-45 day process.
??
Bruce Young felt 60 days is more realistic. Any sooner would be a bonus.
??
Jack Hornor stated we all bear some of the responsibility. We can’t fight the system. We
instead need to let the applicant know the exact process and its many steps.
POLICIES & PROCEDURES FOR ALLOCATING FUNDS TO APPLICANTS
??
Bruce Young stated the CPC would need to determine a policy regarding funding
schedules for long-term projects such as restorations. It would obviously vary by project
but a general policy should be adopted.
??
Tom Parent suggested conditioning the funding terms individually in each contract going
forward.
??
Jack Hornor suggested for past projects giving the funds in thirds. One third each at the
start, middle, and end of the project.
??
Bruce Young stated the pros and cons basically boil down to the time needed for micro
managing versus the risk of losing money.
??
Downey Meyer stated more disbursements could actually create both more work and
more chance of mistakes.
??
George Kohout stated Tom Parent’s suggestion of conditioning each contract individually
is a good solution.
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION PLAN REVISIONS
??
Jack Hornor stated he edited the plan and produced a two-page memo of suggestions. The
CPC would need to decide what to do with it now. Most of the CPC members have
suggested a sub-committee should produce a final version then bring it to the full CPC to
discuss and approve.
??
Tom Parent agreed that plan made sense.
??
George Kohout also agreed. He asked when the revised plan would be completed.
4
??
Tom Parent stated the CPC was originally aiming for April for completion.
??
Jack Hornor stated so long as it is completed before the next round begins in August that
would suffice. No major hurry.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
CPC MEDIA COVERAGE
??
Bruce Young stated the CPC is lacking in good press. Signage is important but so are
press releases. He has crafted a standard press release for applicants to use after receiving
awards. This would be handy for applicants to help spread news of their CPC funded
projects. This is especially important with a possible future CPA renewal vote.
??
Jack Hornor commented he is hoping the CPC members and staff would have more time
moving forward to publicize the CPA and the many projects already approved. More
work needs to be done with the website. He requested further discussion concerning the
website at the March 4, 2009 meeting. Also, he is disappointed with the small number of
applications received this funding round. The CPC may need to solicit more small group
interest.
VCDC FORECLOSURE UPDATE
??
Don Bianchi stated the VCDC Foreclosure report is pending from the city solicitor. If it
comes back with a negative opinion then the issue is moot, but if the opinion is positive
then VCDC and the CPC have more work to do to bring it forward.
??
Bruce Young stated he has received preliminary word from the solicitor that her opinion
is negative. She would be sending the report soon.
??
Don Bianchi stated it is not acceptable for her to simply re-date her original opinion.
Instead, she needs to respond directly to the new questions he posed.
??
Bruce Young stated her legal opinion is based just on the facts and her opinion remains
the same after reviewing Don Bianchi’s new information.
??
Don Bianchi requested this issue be placed on the March 4, 2009 meeting agenda.
AGENDA PRIORITY LIST
??
Lilly Lombard requested the CPC discuss the priority list results at the next meeting.
Upon motion by George Kohout, seconded by Lilly Lombard, all vote in favor of adjourning the
public meeting at 8:44 pm.
Respectfully submitted on February 11, 2009,
John Frey, Community Preservation Planner
5