Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-17-HC-minMEETING MINUTES August 17, 2022 Call to Order: A public hearing of the Historical Commission was held remotely through Zoom. The meeting convened at 7:00PM. Historical Commission Members in Attendance: Susan Bennett (arrived at 7:15 pm), Chair, Diane Pursley (Chair for this meeting), Marilyn Fenollosa, Katie Flynn, Wendall Kalsow, David Kelland and Robert Rotberg AGENDA ITEM #1 (7:06): Public hearing regarding the full building demolition at 29 Barberry Road APPLICANT (S) PRESENT: Michael Martinetti, Property Owner and Developer Joe Ciampa, Property Owner and Developer Mike McKay, Architect ABUTTER(S) PRESENT: Jamie Cats, 18 Barberry Road Joshua Apgar, 31 Barberry Road Bruce Embry, 11 Field Road DOCUMENT(S): Photos of existing house Structural Engineers Report SUMMARY: (Applicant Speech) Mr. Martinetti stated that the existing house has water damage and black mold and the exterior is surrounded by overgrown vegetation. He said that the proposed new house would be modern and keep with the existing neighborhood architectural style. He asked not to wait 12 months to demolish the dwelling because the house is dilapidated and no one will want to relocate it. Mr. McKay stated that the existing house has an odd floor plan, with low ceilings and a rotted staircase. HC COMMENTS: Ms. Pursley asked what the square footage of the proposed dwelling would be and how many bedrooms. Mr. McKay responded that he is not sure on the square footage but planning for 4 to 5 bedrooms. Mr. Rotberg asked when “29 Barberry Road LLC” purchased the property from Ms. Judith Jordan and Mr. Martinetti responded a few weeks ago. Ms. Fenollosa stated that she believes the applicant has met the burden of proof with the provided structural evidence and other materials and that the house may have lost its original integrity that would have landed it on the inventory in the first place. Ms. Flynn stated that she agrees with Ms. Fenollosa, and that she would prefer to have a better understanding of what the original house had been and what elements still remain. She wishes there was more documentation of the original home however appreciates the due diligence of the applicant to describe the existing condition of the home. Mr. Kelland commented that there is no on present in the audience that is pursuing restoration of the house. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. Jamie Cats, owner of 18 Barberry Road, stated that the existing house no longer resembles the house that is was, and is no longer similar to the current houses in the neighborhood. He added that the house does not add any value to the community in terms of exterior appearance and that the property is badly maintained. When asked if Mr. Cats could provide a description of the original house, he responded that all the houses in the neighborhood looked like small ranches with mildly pitched or flat roofs, but couldn’t recall the original design of 29 Barberry Road. Mr. Joshua Apgar, owner of 31 Barberry Road, stated that 29 Barberry Road is not in good shape, does not look like the other houses in the neighborhood, and is not easily visible from the street. Mr. Apgar added that he is glad Mr. Martinetti and Mr. Ciampa are developing the site and is looking forward to a more modern and attractive dwelling in the neighborhood. Mr. Bruce Embry, owner of 11 Field Road, stated that he has been an abutter to 29 Barberry Road for 15 years. He said that, with the exterior renovations that have been done to the house, the Commission is discussing a 1980’s house rather than the original 1960’s house and that it is no longer worth protecting. Mr. Embry is confident in Mr. Martinetti’s devotion of the character of the neighborhood and requests the Commission grant the application for demolition. MOTION: Moved by Mr. Kalsow to find that the house at 29 Barberry Road has lost its historical significance and to remove it from the inventory. Seconded by Mr. Kelland. VOTE: 7-0 in favor of the removal of 29 Barberry Road from the inventory due to loss of historical significance: Ms. Fenollosa, Mr. Kalsow, Mr. Rotberg, Ms. Flynn, Ms. Bennett, Mr. Kelland and Ms. Pursley. AGENDA ITEM #2 (8:01 PM) 69 Pleasant Street – Recommendation to Planning Board DOCUMENT(S): “Site Sensitive Developments – Protection of Historic Assets” Form B – Building; Locus: 69 Pleasant Street, Lexington, MA SUMMARY: Ms. Bennett stated that members of the Commission have been in discussion with Planning Board staff and Town Council about the range of options available, in cases where there is not an agreement, that they will recommend or accept a permanent preservation restriction approved by the Historical Commission. Ms. Bennett asked the Commission if they can request a “one size fits all” preservation restriction, and what are the options if the developer and/or board accepts or denies? Mr. Kalsow stated that he is a proponent of using the Massachusetts Historical Commission “MHC” template as an evaluation of historical significance and negotiations with the developer. Mr. Kalsow also said that the MHC template is straightforward and it acknowledges pragmatic changes that need to be made. Mr. Kalsow asked why Mr. Todd Cataldo, Developer of 69 Pleasant Street, was present at the meeting and stated that 69 Pleasant Street is a substantial project that wasn’t publicized and he would want the public informed before speaking with the developer. Three additional members of the Commission stated that they would prefer to have Mr. Cataldo’s comments in advance and not negotiate with a developer during a public meeting. Ms. Pursley asked if it is possible to negotiate with the MHC and Mr. Kalsow responded that the MHC’s flexibility comes in enforcement and interpretation of the restrictions, and that the MHC grant projects use a single form. Ms. Bennett said that Section 6.2 of the zoning bylaw does not apply to the Site Sensitive Development and that only Section 6.9 applies, but will confirm with Town Council. The Commission requests comments from Mr. Cataldo prior to the next meeting on August 30, 2022. Ms. Bennett left the meeting at 9:40 PM. AGENDA ITEM #3 Update on Hosmer House It was stated that the Historical Districts Commission has the governing authority over the Hosmer House relocation, and that when the relocation takes place, that is when Section 6.2 of the zoning bylaw will become applicable. A special meeting of the Historical Commission will be held on August 30, 2022 to discuss the relocation of the Hosmer House. AGENDA ITEM #4 (9:42PM) Ms. Pursley stated that she is handling the Annual Town Report and will have the HC section prepared and ready for vote at the upcoming September meeting. Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Kelland. Seconded by Mr. Kalsow. 6-0 favor to adjourn: Ms. Fenollosa, Mr. Kalsow, Mr. Rotberg, Ms. Flynn, Mr. Kelland and Ms. Pursley