Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-02-03 Historic District Commission Minutesx� rxcyr. Town of Reading Meeting Minutes P� INIOPP Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Historic District Commission Date: 2022-02-03 Building: Address: Purpose: Joint Meeting with RHC Time: 7:00 PM Location: Remote Meeting - Zoom Session: Executive Session Version: Final IK L&i, . 14 Attendees: HDC Members: Virginia Adams (also on HDC); Everett Blodgett; Ilene Bornstein; Pino D'Orazio, Chair (also on RHC); Amelia Devin -Freedman, Vice Chair (also Secretary of RHC) RHC Members: Samantha Couture (Chair); Jonathan Barnes; Sharlene Reynolds Santo; Christine Keller Members - Not Present: RHC: Dan Moresco HDC: Carl Mittnight; Priscilla Poehler Others Present: Julie Mercier, Community Development Director; Ivria Fried of Miyares & Harrington (Town Counsel); Chris Haley (Select Board Liaison) 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; and under purpose 7 to review executive session minutes; and 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. Ms. Devin Freedman 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. There were no public attendees. IsrR Town of Reading �� Meeting Minutes All members stated the following: "no one can overhear me." Ms. Fried gave both Commissions an overview of where things stand, noting that a site visit was conducted in October, but that the meeting was terminated by Criterion and the Commissions were not permitted to bring their structural engineer into certain parts (attic, basement, and barn) of the property. Ms. Fried believes that it is the right of the Commissions to have a structural engineer visit the site and enter the buildings. She reminded the Commissions of the letters that were sent between Town Counsel and Criterion's counsel, the latest of which reneged on a prior agreement to a meeting with the Commissions in January. She noted that the most recent letter said that Criterion would not be available until mid-March because they are currently evaluating whether and how they should use the parcel. Ms. Fried noted her disappointment with this response, as the Preservation Restriction Agreement (PRA) is effective regardless of how the property is used. Ms. Fried said she sees no issue in the Commissions agreeing to take the meeting in March, and then reevaluate where things stand in April. She noted that this approach is extremely frustrating and that she echoes their concerns for how long this is taking. Ms. Bornstein asked whether the timetable within the PRA was extended due to covid and whether it is still valid. Ms. Fried clarified that the PRA does not have a timetable, but that the Certificates of Appropriateness were extended to September 2022. Ms. Fried noted that if the Town were able to get a court order, Criterion may not have the funds to comply with it. She noted that she has not been authorized nor have funds been committed to commence litigation yet. She clarified that the PRA and its overall intent to protect the facade will run with the land. Mr. Blodgett asked if there are other things that should be checked, such as insurance. Ms. Fried stated that one option is to send a letter strongly stating the commissions' dissatisfaction and certain things that are in violation of the PRA such as the shingles falling off and the porch. She said they can threaten a court order without committing to anything further at this point. She noted that if Criterion does not want to do anything, they won't do anything. Ms. Fried said she has not seen paperwork on insurance for the property, but that it may be required in the PRA, and they can ask for it. Mr. Barnes suggested that his initial opinion is that we should authorize Town Counsel to commence litigation, because he is extremely unhappy with the course of events and with their recent determination that they cannot meet until March. He opined that there is no legitimate reason to wait until March, especially since it was their suggestion to meet in January. He opined that Criterion does not want an inspection with a structural engineer, particularly if Criterion is hoping to sell the property. He said he has no reason to expect they will ever agree to an inspection. He noted that this issue has been ongoing since 2014 when the prior owner expressed an interest in selling the property. Criterion has owned the property since at least November 2016. He commented that the condition of the building is deteriorating. He added that the Commissions have been pursuing working with them since January 2019, and the number of times they have denied access or refused to cooperate, provide information, respond, etc. indicates that the record is replete with examples of them pushing things off. Mr. Barnes suggested a middle ground could be a letter from Town Counsel indicating that the Commissions are more than unhappy with their refusal to meet and that they reject this idea and are willing and prepared to meet in February. � rR Town of Reading Meeting Minutes 9`IIY<OP Mr. Barnes also asked about Attorney Petrini's letter from December 2021, which indicates a willingness to meet to discuss structural concerns raised by the Commissions, which is not complete since the Commissions have not been able to have a structural engineer in parts of the building. He noted that the letter mentions discussing proposed changes to the interior of the building, which is completely unacceptable to him. Ms. Fried said she made it clear to Attorney Petrini that the situation is unacceptable and that the Town is very frustrated. She spoke to him at length about how the Town is not interested in fixing bannisters or other things that are interior and not related to the structural integrity of the building. Ms. Fried clarified that authorization for litigation lies with the Town Manager and the Select Board, not with the Commissions. She offered that litigation can be threatened before it is authorized. Mr. Barnes said that if the Commissions would prefer to put off litigation until at least March, that he would like to proceed with whatever is needed to proceed with the authorization for litigation. That way it can be initiated right away if needed. Ms. Adams noted that she has had experience with insurance on vacant properties and that it is quite difficult to have Insurance on unoccupied properties, so the property may not be insured. She said she is in favor of waiting for Criterion one more time, now that they have indicated they might sell the property. She said it could help the Commissions if the property were on the market, and another two months is not a big deal to her. Mr. Haley said he echoes everything that Mr. Barnes said, and that he believes they are playing games. He suggested that the Commissions agree to a March lu meeting with Criterion. He asked what the end goal is if Criterion is forced to fix the building but doesn't have the money to do it. He asked if the Town could take the property and opined that it doesn't seem like the issue will ever be resolved. Ms. Fried said there would be a court order and if Criterion doesn't comply then they would be held in contempt of court. If they try to sell the property, then they have court orders hanging over it. Ms. Fried said it is likely they would have to file a bankruptcy proceeding. She noted that litigation can force people to come to the table and work out a settlement deal. She agreed this will likely go on for a long time, costing both Criterion and the Town a significant amount of money. Ms. Fried noted that PRA Section 22 requires insurance, and that a copy should be provided to both Commissions within 10 days of request. Mr. Haley mentioned that the neighborhood will be stuck looking at the fence for a decade, which to him is the big issue with this property. He said other things can be fixed, but the fence will remain an eyesore. Mr. Blodgett suggested that the Criterion owner may be a snowbird who is not back in the area until later In March. He suggested that the Commissions get the ball rolling with the new Town Manager regarding litigation. He said that the neighbors may get together and put up a group lawsuit against the property, but that is not certain. Ms. Couture agreed to a meeting on March 1't, proceeding with a list of things that need to be fixed, and asking for a ropy of the insurance. She opined that peeling paint Is a big sign that the house is not being maintained and commented that the best thing would be for the property to be sold. She agreed with trying to get litigation authorized. 3 � OFq Town of Reading Meeting Minutes ROA Mr. Barnes asked Ms. Fried to comment on his concern regarding the sentence in their letter about interior fixes that they have proposed, which would mean a meeting would be a complete waste of time. Ms. Fried said she doesn't know if the letter is sloppily worded or if they mean that they are only willing to allow changes as outlined in that sentence. She suggested they have that conversation in March and see what they say. Ms. Fried agreed with the sentiment that the meeting will not be successful but that they should agree to it and see where it goes. Mr. D'Orazio asked about the site inspection and structural engineer, which if things are found, would need to be disclosed when they try to sell the building. He said he agrees with turning as many screws as possible, but that from Criterion's perspective, the Commission's structural engineer could be at the benefit of everyone, because the Commissions are paying for it. He said the structural engineer may clarify that things happening in the basement are not the worst-case scenario people are anticipating and could result in findings that are not so bad. If they are trying to sell the property, they may need to pay for a structural engineering inspection on their own. He asked if Ms. Fried could craft something using that line of reasoning. Ms. Fried clarified that the structural engineering report would be considered a public record, unless it could be protected as part of litigation. Mr. Barnes referred to a conversation he had with the structural engineer, Matthew Bronski, and noted that a bill was received for a 1/1 day of work. Mr. Bronski asked if there is anything he can do to assist the Commissions with the process. Ms. Devin Freedman opined that the structural engineer should be able to draw some preliminary conclusions and asked if they could get him on the record regarding his concerns. Mr. Barnes agreed that the structural engineer should be able to provide initial findings, and that he would ask him for an interim report. Mr. Blodgett noted that maintenance is a funny thing, and that certain disrepair can generally be attributed to more than one thing. He said the building has not been maintained and the peeling paint will enable the siding, timbers, etc. to get wet, rust, etc. and then the building at some point becomes unrecoverable. He said maintenance is a big deal. Mr. Barnes said that if the Commission comes up with a list of things to repair, Criterion will respond that the list will do nothing to maintain structural integrity of the building. Ms. Fried said that things need to be fixed for structural reasons and cosmetic reasons, as required by the PRA. She added that the meeting in January was not supposed to be a big lift for them, they just needed to show up and have a conversation. Yet they still would not cooperate with the Town at that basic level. She said writing it all out in one letter would be beneficial to future litigation. Mr. Haley offered to try and get this topic on a Select Board March meeting agenda and noted that he fully supports any litigation related to this. Ms. Fried noted that the Vacant Properties Bylaw could be explored as well, if there is a concern regarding health, safety, and welfare. She noted that that bylaw is related to Building Code violations. Mr. Barnes noted that the Building Commissioner was present at the site visit but that he didn't opine on whether there were Building Code violations. � rR Town of Reading aMeeting Minutes Ms. Adams asked if it is too early to talk about proposed uses for the property if it goes up for sale. Mr. Barnes said that the Town could conceivably raise funds to purchase it. Mr. D'Orazio commented that he's not sure anyone would make money on the property unless they could convert it to 2 or 3 condo units. Mr. Blodgett noted that care should be taken to avoid the property being condemned and therefore bulldoze -able. Ms. Fried noted that any litigation taken will make it harder for the property to transfer to a new willing buyer, which is not a reason not to proceed but a thought to consider. Ms. Couture noted that it is a double-edged sword, but that pressure from the Town may make them more likely to sell the property. Ms. Bornstein opined that the pretense they are using to develop the property has been taken too far, and that they didn't deserve to get approved for the proposed use in the first place. She commented that their refusal all these years to cooperate indicates there is no good will on their end. She asked if this can be factored Into any litigation. Ms. Devin Freedman suggested that they talk about what Ms. Fried should do in the short term. She noted the things Ms. Fried has suggested and agreed that they should try to get approval to initiate litigation. She reminded the Commissions of a meeting with some members, Ms. Mercier, and Ms. Delios, during which it was indicated that the Town Manager is supportive of litigation for this property. She asked if the current Town Manager could go on record saying that before he leaves. Mr. Maganzini asked if there were a mortgage on the property, which would mean there has to be insurance. Ms. Fried agreed but said the PRA might require a higher level of insurance. Mr. Maganzini asked about property taxes, and Mr. Barnes clarified that they have been paying property taxes and are all caught up on them as of his conversation with the Assessor's Office today. Ms. Fried explained how the Dover Amendment fits into this. Mr. Barnes agreed with Ms. Devin Freedman's suggested approach. Mr. Barnes made a motion for the RHC to get authorization from the Town Manager and Select Board to initiate litigation against Criterion pursuant to the PRA. Mr. D'Orazio seconded the motion. RHC voted 5-0-0 in favor via roll call. Mr. D'Orazio made the same motion for the HDC. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion and the HDC voted 5-0-0 in favor via roll call. Mr. Barnes noted that Attorney Petrini requested records from the Town regarding inspection reports and site visits to the property. He said he anticipates that a formal request for this information will be coming soon. Ms. Fried said she spoke with Attorney Petrini about this and told him he needs to ask for the documents formally if he wants them. Ms. Devin Freedman asked who will put together the list of needed repairs, noting that only some people remember what the building looked like back in 2016. Mr. Barnes offered to come up with a list and share it with Ms. Fried. Ms. Fried noted that staff have a baseline document file. She suggested that each member email her directly by next Monday or Tuesday so she can get a letter out by next Wednesday. Mr. D'Orazio asked if the structural engineer has a preliminary report he can share. Mr. Barnes said he may not have generated one yet because he was hoping to be able to go back. Mr. Barnes offered to reach out to the structural engineer to get an initial list. Town of Reading = Meeting Minutes o�'IMCOP��y Executive Session Minutes of 11/22/21 Ms. Reynolds Santo made a motion to approve minutes as amended. Mr. Barnes seconded for RHC and the RHC voted 5-0-0 in favor via roll call. HDC voted 4-0-0 in favor via roll call Executive Session Minutes of 1/6/22 Ms. Reynolds Santo made a motion to approve minutes as amended. Mr. Barnes seconded for RHC and the RHC voted 5-0-0 in favor via roll call. HDC voted 4-0-0 in favor via roll call Mr. D'Orazio made a motion to return to Open Session. Ms. Couture seconded the motion. The RHC voted 5-0-0 by roll call. HDC voted 4-0-0 by roll call. Documents Used at the Meeting: Letter from Christopher Petrini to Ivria Fried, dated Dec. 17, 2021. Email from Attorney Petrini to Ivria Fried, dated Jan. 19, 2022, 5:05PM.