Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-03-10 Historical Commission Minutes Town of ReadingTOW(' D a , Meeting Minutes REAr, jrje,, MA 2021 APR 15 PM 2:� Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Historical Commission Date: 2021-03-10 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Location: Address: Session: Purpose: General Business Version: Final Attendees: Members - Present: Virginia Adams, Associate (VA) Jonathan Barnes, Member (JEB) Samantha Couture, Chair (SC) Pino D'Orazio, Member (PD) Amelia Devin Freedman, Secretary (ADF) Sharlene Reynolds Santo, Treasurer (SRS) Members - Not Present: N/A Others Present: Carlo Bacci (CB) Erin Calvo-Bacci (ECB) Andrew DiMichele Laura DiMichele Joe Marceau (JM) Julie Mercier Donna Silver Linda Smith (LS) Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amelia Devin Freedman Topics of Discussion: Julie Mercier helped PD establish himself as the host of the meeting and then she left. SC called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PD described the rules for the Zoom meeting. He also advised attendees that RCN was recording the meeting, which might be live streamed on television or on youTube. Sawtelle House, 320 Haverhill Street: LS described the planned replacement door and the new screen door. She said that the new mahogany door would have six panels, like the existing door, and that the contractor would reinstall the existing hardware on it. ADF asked if the contractor would also replace the existing sidelights. LS said no; the contractor had already repaired them. VA said that she was unsure of the age of the existing door, but she recommended LS store it for future owners of the house instead of discarding it. Motion: To approve the design plans submitted to the RHC by the Sawtelle Nouse team per the applicable Preservation Restriction Agreement, to replace the rage 1 1 existing front door, to reinstall the original hardware, and to install a screen door as shown in their emails on March 1 and 8, 2021. JEB motion, SC second; vote 5-0-0. Demolition Delay Review: CB and ECB attended the meeting to ask about the Commission's current review of the bylaw. SC said the Commission is examining how Reading's demolition delay bylaw compares to that in other towns. ADF said that preliminary research indicates the following: most towns in the Commonwealth have demolition delays; most of delays are longer than Reading's, which currently Is 6 months; and that Mass Historical recommends that a demolition delay be twelve months. As a result of these initial findings, the Commission is considering bringing the bylaw to Town Meeting to ask for an extension of the demolition delay. CB asked why the RHC is examining this issue now. SC said that six of the last seven buildings that came before the Commission requesting a demolition permit were demolished, and that the Commission finds this rate of loss worrisome. ECB asked what actions the RHC was willing to take to save historic structures, aside from imposing an extended demolition delay. Specifically, she asked if the RHC would be willing to raise funds for renovations, and/or to make owners aware of outside grant programs. VA said that the RHC is willing to make owners aware of such funding sources. CB asked about the RHC's record in saving historic structures in Town from demolition. VA pointed to the lengthy and ultimately successful efforts to save the houses at 409 Grove Street and 420 Franklin Street. CB asked if the Commission has added any additional houses to the Inventory recently. SC said that the Commission is planning to hold public hearings on adding three new houses to the Inventory. She added that that the owners of two of these houses came to the Commission and asked for their houses to be added. CB said that he was concerned about any possible extended demolition delay period infringing on owners' property rights, which he called"sacrosanct." SC said that the Commission is aware that extending the demolition delay period will not save every historic house, and that the RHC must also employ other preservation strategies; an extension of time, however, could provide a more reasonable opportunity for the RHC and homeowner to entertain acceptable alternatives to full demolition. CB reiterated that he wants to be"fair" to homeowners. SC said the Commission is conscious of that concern. JEB said that he had heard from Andy Friedmann, the owner of 27 Hillcrest, who asked that the Commission put off the April hearing about adding his house to the Inventory. VA asked if the Commission should reschedule all three public hearings for May. SRS, SC, and JEB said yes. JEB reviewed the steps that are necessary for the RHC to take prior to the hearings and the timing of those steps. He said he will transmit to SC copies of the required letters he drafted previously for these hearings, so she can revise the letters as necessary in time for the May hearings. 94 Salem Street: JM, the architect, and AD, the owner, appeared to explain the circumstances which led them to demolish two chimneys without notifying the RHC in advance. The building permit for the work currently In progress on this historic property did not include demolishing these chimneys. During the renovation, the team had discovered that chimneys had deteriorated so much that they had become unsafe, so they demolished them; he said that the brick was of poor quality. The team is in the process of rebuilding the chimneys, the Flues, and the fireplaces so that they are all functional. JM said that they have hired a historical mason to rebuild the chimney topper, which will have 2 courses of corbelling and no bell top and, thus, be more historically accurate. VA asked the name of the mason. She wanted to know if the team had hired Richard Iron, who Page 1 2 has an excellent reputation. JM said they had been unable to book Mr. Irons but had hired someone who had worked with him in the past. In reference to the chimney topper, VA remarked that it is not always necessary to return a house to its original state when renovating. The Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for historical renovation note that changes in historic homes that are in place for a long time take on a historical weight of their own. Nonetheless, VA agreed with JM that the planned, less ornate chimney topper is more in keeping with the house's Federal style. JEB asked about the state of the interior brickwork. JM said there is brick damage from the roof down to the fireplaces. SRS asked if the new fireplaces would be the same size as the originals. JM said that they will be slightly larger to accommodate the new, single flue. JEB said he thought the Commission needed to communicate its decision with the Building Inspector in a formal manner. Motion: When the applicants have submitted to the Building Inspector the revised plans showing the restored chimneys, as presented during this meeting, the RHC will communicate its approval of these plans to the Building Inspector in writing. JEB motion, SRS second, vote 5-0-0. VA said that she had been"devastated"to see the chimneys removed. JM apologized for demolishing them without contacting the Commission; he characterized It as an "on-the-fly" decision. SC thanked the team for coming to speak to the Commission about the incident and their new plans. SC reiterated she would send a letter to the Building Inspector indicating the Commission's approval of the new plans. 1 General Way: As a part of its Section 106 review, the Trileaf Corporation has notified the RHC of a proposed addition of a communications antenna to the existing smokestack at 1 General Way. JEB explained that a Section 106 review is a federal requirement in a project of this nature, and that the RHC should consider whether (1) the project will be visible from any historical structure, and (2) it will negatively affect any historical structure. VA suggested the RHC look at an area of 200 feet around the smokestack. JEB noted that there are already numerous antennas mounted to the smokestack. SC said that, since there were already antennas in place, an additional antenna probably would not make much of a difference. VA suggested sending a letter to Trileaf to that effect. JEB asked if the RHC could put off responding to Trileaf until April. SC said no, because they asked for an initial response by the end of this week, with a detailed response due in 30 days. JEB said he was unhappy that Trileaf gave the Commission so little time to respond. He suggested that processes such as this should include a more public component, such as at a SB meeting, to allow for input from affected residents. SC will Investigate whether Trileaf informed any other Town entities. VA will drive the discussed radius, and she will generate a list of the historic structures that lie within it. Once she receives the list, SC will draft the letter to Trileaf. 24 Gould Street: SC reported that she sent the Commission's recommendations about the text of the planned historical marker to Dave Traggorth, the developer. Mr. Taggorth said that his team would rework the text. Utility Box Vinyl Wrap Artwork Project: SC reported that Andrew MacNichol's"Outside the Box" program will be moving forward this spring after all. Mr. MacNichol, Staff Planner, told SC he will be determining which boxes he wants to use soon. SC suggested that she tell him that the Commission wants to use the box at Memorial Park, and either the box at the Depot or the one at Woburn Street and Summer Avenue. JEB and PD both said they preferred the latter. Page 1 3 SC asked if the RHC has pictures suitable for use on the box at Woburn and Summer. VA said there is a picture of the Prospect Street School in the Archives. JEB suggested the Commission also consider using a picture of a property in the Summer Avenue historic district, such as 186 Summer. SC said she would notify Mr. MacNichol that the RHC would prefer the box at Woburn Street and Summer Avenue, and that she would report back to the RHC after she receives a response. Finances: SRS filed her request for reimbursement. Membership: SC emalled the Select Board, to thank them for appointing PD as a full member and to ask them to fill the two open associate positions. She also reported that Ms. Beatrice has updated the RHC's webpage on the Town site to reflect the current members and their positions, as well as the open positions. Town Archive: SC sent a reformatted copy of the Town Archive Policy to the Town Clerk per her request. Ms. Beatrice sent SC an email regarding archive access, since Town Hall is now open by appointment. Specifically, she said SC should suggest a schedule for regular access to the Archives. JEB said he thought there would be some COVID prevention procedures for RHC members to follow when entering Town Hall. VA wrote a policy about physical maintenance of the Archives which she would like to see posted there. SC said she would like to ask some of her former professors at Simmons for a student intern who can help with Archive maintenance and Inventory. SC reported she asked Ms. Beatrice to check the Archives for water leaks, and she reported there are currently none. New Business: VA recommended a recent Reading Post article, "John Brooks - Reading Town Doctor, Revolutionary War Hero, Governor of the Commonwealth." VA spoke to Everett Blodgett, who received a request for two copies of"Reading's Colonial Rooftrees." She said she does not remember how many copies the Commission has in the Archives, or how much the Commission used to charge for them. JEB suggested that it would be acceptable to sell two if there are twelve or more copies. SC suggested charging $25 each. SC will go to the Archives to determine how many copies there are. VA said SC should look for them in the file cabinet immediately to the right of the door. VA drove by 32 Prescott Street, whose owner emailed the Commission about demolishing her garage. She recommended telling the owner that the RHC has no objection, since the structure is in poor condition and is not on the Inventory. SC will follow up. SC heard from Rick Nazarro, who said that the seller of 46 Woburn Street has decided to keep the pictures and doctor's bag he previously offered to donate to the RHC. He will, however, make copies of the pictures for the RHC's records. Review Minutes: Motion: To accept the minutes from February 24, 2021 as emended. Motion SC, SRS second; vote 5-0-0. Page 14 Next Meeting Dates: Wednesday, April 14, 2021 at 7 PM; Wednesday, May 12, 2021 at 7 PM. Adjournment: Motion: To adjourn. Motion SRS, JEB second; vote: 5-0-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:14 PM. Page 1 5