Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-01-06 Historical Commission Minutesorq ow , Town of Reading `U Meeting Minutes Cl- E R K JJ9.p 4 l.I YS. _ L (r Board -Committee -Commission -Council: Reading Historical Commission Date: 2022-01-06 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Location: Remote Meeting - Zoom Address: Session: Executive Session Purpose: Joint Meeting with HDC Version: Final F Attendees: RHC Members: Samantha Couture (Chair); Virginia Adams (also on HDC); Jonathan Barnes; Pino D'Orazio, (also on HDC); Amelia Devin -Freedman (also on HDC); Sharlene Reynolds Santo; Christine Keller; Dan Moresco HDC Members: Everett Blodgett; Carl Mittnight; Ilene Bornstein Members - Not Present: RHC: n/a HDC: Greg Maganzini; Priscilla Poehler Others Present: Julie Mercier, Community Development Director; Ivria Fried of Miyares & Harrington (Town Counsel) Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Julie Mercier Topics of Discussion: MEETING HELD REMOTELY VIA ZOOM 186 Summer Avenue (Criterion property) Executive Session Mr. D'Orazio made the following motion for the HDC: Move, to enter executive session under purpose 3 to discuss demonstrably likely litigation relative to obtaining access to 186-190 Summer Avenue, where discussion in an open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the litigating positions of the RHC and HDC, as declared by their respective chairs; to invite Town Counsel Ivria Fried, Julie Mercier, Community Development Director, and Associate Members of both Commissions, to attend the executive session; and to return to open session for further discussion or adjournment of the meeting. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0-0 by roll call vote. Ms. Couture made the same motion for the RHC. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0-0 by roll call vote. Ms. Mercier put the public attendees into a Waiting Room. All members stated the following: "no one can overhear me." 6�, (Irq� I ° Town of Reading �a .`e Meeting Minutes a :. Ms. Fried explained that Criterion has a new attorney, Attorney Petrini, who she has worked with on prior legal matters. She summarized his analysis that the Commissions do not have the ability to access the premises. She stated that she does not believe his analysis is accurate and that the Commissions have the ability to enter the premises - interior and exterior. She spoke with Attorney Petrini on the phone, and they discussed whether a middle ground could be reached. She opined that if the matter went to court, the Town could potentially be successful, though there is no downside to accepting a meeting with Criterion and their attorney. She noted that the issue may come down to finances and how much the property owner is willing to spend. She noted that they may be trying to sell the property and may not put a lot of money into work required to comply with the PRA. She advised that the Commissions schedule a meeting with the Criterion team. Mr. Barnes agreed with Ms. Fried and suggested the meeting take place as soon as possible. He remembered a prior discussion regarding whether the meeting should include the structural engineering consultant, who is not aware of the current situation. He noted that the fee agreed to with the structural engineer does not include any additional meetings, so it would come at a cost. Ms. Fried made two points: (1) that she told Attorney Petrini that the Commissions were upset with how slowly things were moving and that a meeting would need to take place within the month of January, which Criterion seems committed to, and (2) she envisions the meeting being between Criterion, the Attorney, Town Counsel, and would not include the structural engineer. At this meeting, the parties would come to some agreement about how to proceed, and if they agree to allow the structural engineer into the property then such a meeting could be arranged. Ms. Adams chimed in that Criterion has lost more money by hiring a new attorney, who simply reiterated how Historic District jurisdiction works. Ms. Fried noted that the discussion is about an agreement (the PRA) that the property owner willingly entered. She noted that litigation takes time and money and does not always result in something positive for the Town. She said if they are willing to compromise, that could be a better path forward. She asked if the Commissions would authorize her to reach out and set up a meeting on their behalf, rather than creating a subcommittee by including individuals of the Commissions. Mr. Barnes opined that Attorney Petrini did not make a good case in his letter, and that certain aspects of his argument were completely Incorrect. He said that the HDC clearly has authority outside of the statute and the town bylaw. He noted that the references to the case law were well off the mark. He opined that Attorney Petrini conflated the issues but does not have much of an argument. Mr. Barnes noted that he is very interested in participating in the meeting if he is authorized to. Ms. Adams encouraged it because of Mr. Barnes' historical and legal background. She also suggested Mr. D'Orazio would be a good participant because of his legal background. Ms. Couture asked if one person from each Commission would be sufficient for the meeting. Ms. Adams offered that the Chairs could go as well. Mr. Barnes agreed. Ms. Couture noted that Mr. Barnes has better availability and longer-term knowledge of the history with this property. She suggested that Mr. Barnes ask the structural engineer if they would even be willing to attend a future meeting with Criterion. She noted that without the initial letter from the structural engineer, she is not sure what would even be agreed to at the meeting. Town of Reading >ra t Meeting Minutes 9: LKOPP � n Ms. Fried said the purpose of the meeting would be to determine whether the structural engineer would be allowed on the property and to establish some general things on the property that should be addressed. Ms. Couture noted that the letter from Criterion included a lot about the HDC, and not so much about the RHC. She said she would like to keep them focused on what is needed on the property. Mr. Blodgett stated his feeling that they are avoiding the PRA on purpose because there are issues In it that need to be resolved. He noted that the comments about the staircase were intended to distract. He opined that Mr. Barnes and Ms. Devin Freedman would be great at the meeting. He would like both the legal and the structural to be represented at the meeting. Ms. Fried said the goal of the meeting is to avoid litigation and to get them to allow the structural engineer on the property. If they are unwilling to allow it, then the Commissions can consider litigation. Mr. Barnes said he has every intention to maintain an open mind and conciliatory attitude in attending the meeting but that he will be clear there is absolutely no way under any circumstances that they could agree to not allow a structural engineer on the property. He said that to him it is an absolute deal -breaker and there is no other fathomable concession that could obviate it. Ms. Couture stated that most Commission members would agree with that sentiment. She noted that there is no reason everyone needs to show up an masse, including employees, as was done in October. She opined that Criterion should keep the door locked. Mr. Blodgett asked about logistics of having the structural engineer join one of the Commissions. Mr. D'Orazio said they don't live in Reading. Ms. Fried said she would rather not concede that the Commissions cannot bring a representative on-site. Ms. Couture asked when the Certificates expire. Ms. Devin Freedman said they expire in September 2022, because it was extended due to Covid. Mr. Barnes noted that the extension cuts both ways because the Certificate gives the Commission authority over the property. He added that with respect to the consultant, both the MGL authorizing the RHC and MGL authorizing the HDC, as well as the Reading General Bylaw and HDC Regulations all provide for both Commissions to employ clerical, technical and consultant assistance, and further provides that they can administer deed restrictions and other interest in real property. He stated that they both have full power to employ consultants to exercise their duties under State and Town laws. Ms. Adams noted one other topic is how to address the Dover Amendment, which was included specifically in Attorney Petrini's letter. Ms. Fried said it is a misplaced argument, because it is about zoning, and allows a structure to be used for a particular use without having to comply with zoning. She said now the PRA governs the property. Ms. Reynolds Santo commented that Mr. Blodgett might be a V person to join the meeting because he is incredibly knowledgeable about the property. She commented that the building needs to be structurally sound for a new person to use it. Mr. Barnes noted that the owner has interest in selling the property and wondered out loud whether the Town has any funds to consider acquiring the property if the opportunity would ew orntgo Town of Reading "c Meeting Minutes make itself available. He asked if anyone has had any conversations with their Select Board liaison, Carlo Bacci, to see if this is an option that could be entertained. Ms. Couture noted that she will ask about it. Mr. Barnes stated that it is a pressing issue of utmost importance to the Town, and it has been going on for 7 years. He said the circumstances and facts may align in a way that can resolve the ongoing problem of lack of maintenance. Mr. Blodgett chimed in that Mr. Barnes might be right. He noted that he is not familiar with the law and may not be the best person to attend the meeting. Ms. Adams noted that Mr. Blodgett has knowledge about the property and about architecture. Mr. Barnes asked about conflicts with members serving on both Commissions and how best to communicate going forward. Ms. Fried said she can communicate what happens with the whole group and then set up another joint meeting to make a final decision on how to proceed. Ms. Couture made a motion to authorize Town Counsel to reach out to Criterion and Attorney Petrini to set up a meeting. Mr. Barnes added that the motion should include that the meeting does not concede any of their positions or rights regarding the entire matter. Mr. Barnes then seconded the motion. Mr. D'Orazio made the same motion for HDC. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion. The HDC voted 5-0-0 by roll call. The RHC voted 5-0-0 by roll call. Ms. Fried noted that Executive Session minutes must be reviewed and voted in an Executive Session, and that it wasn't noted correctly on the agendas so it cannot be done this time. Ms. Couture made a motion to return to Open Session. Ms. Reynolds Santo seconded the motion. The RHC voted 5-0-0 by roll call. HDC voted 5-0-0 by roll call. Documents Used at the Meeting: Letter from Christopher Petrim to Ivria Fried, dated Dec. 17, 2021.