Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-02-HC-min Lexington Historical Commission Meeting Minutes March 02, 2023 Meeting Conducted by Remote Participation Commissioners Present: Susan Bennett, Chair, Diane Pursley, Wendall Kalsow, Marilyn Fenollosa, David Kelland. Commissioner Absent: Associate Commissioners Present: Robert Rotberg. Associate Commissioner Absent: Town Counsel: Mina S. Makarious Staff Present: Siqing Pan, Department Assistant nd Chair Susan Bennett called the March 2 Historic Commission meeting to order at 4:01 pm. AGENDA ITEM: Hosmer House-enforcement of Special Permit Conditions and Demolition Delay Bylaw APPLICANT (S) PRESENT: Rosalina Carroll, Owner Robert McGinty, Contractor ABUTTER(S) PRESENT: DOCUMENT(S): SUMMARY: Rosalina Carroll and Robert McGinty, owner and contractor, explained the proposed relocation and renovation work of Hosmer House at 790 Waltham Street. The Commission reviewed whether the relocation of the Hosmer House has been complying with the Request for Proposal and Preservation Restriction that was part of the RFP, and with the Special Permit conditions issued by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Makarious, Town Counsel, stated that the Special Permit specifically states the historic elements of the building, such as the clapboards, siding, windows and trims will be retained. He stated the under this Special Permit, the Historical Commission does not have authority on its own to issue a stop work order and financial penalties. He recommended that the Historical Commission request that the Building Commissioner issue a stop work order and impose fines if it is appropriate under the zoning bylaw. HC COMMENTS: Ms. Bennett stated that under the Special Permit approved by the Town and the accompanying Preservation Restriction, it was clear that the historic fabric of the Hosmer House was to be preserved in the relocation. Now the first floor, roof, windows, clapboards, and trim were removed, and only door remains. The second floor apparently has been demolished. 1 / 3 Mr. Kalsow stated the Hosmer House was carefully restored and renovated in 2011. Mr. Kalsow and Ms. Bennett emphasized that no permission was given to alter its appearance. Ms. Fenollosa inquired if the Demolition Delay Bylaw be set aside by a special permit. Mr. Makarious stated the application of the demolition delay bylaw in this case is ambiguous, because of the relocation of the house to a new address. Mr. Kalsow suggested and Ms. Bennett agreed to recommend the issuance of a stop work order, to allow time to assess the violations of the Special Permit conditions and the Preservation Restriction. Ms. Pursley inquired what is left of the Hosmer House. She stated it looks like the house is completely rebuilt. Ms. Carroll replied that the first floor is still intact. Mr. Kalsow clarified only the structure of first floor was there, and exterior historic fabric was all gone. Mr. Kelland, Mr. Kalsow, and Ms. Bennett all stated the building was renovated and restored with a well- qualified historical architectural firm in 2011 for preservation and rehabilitation of historical structure, so there is substantial information on the condition of the building at that time. The historic materials of that building may not be the elements of 1840s, but they are the exact replicas of 1840s elements that were put on under the supervision of qualified experts. Mr. Kelland also stated given this information, taking the historic materials off was in violation of the principle of the restoration of the house. The fabric of the house should have been retained. Mr. Rotberg asked to clarify the use of the word “retain” and pointed out that the movers and builders, seemed to have interpreted in ways that are clear violations of what was intended. He also inquired what are real remedies at this point. Mr. Makarious stated the Preservation Restriction must be in place before any certificate of occupancy issues, and the historic elements of the building should be restored. Mr. Kalsow recommended that the applicants should come back to the Commission to demonstrate how they propose to replicate the lost historic fabric of the building as it existed prior to the move. Ms. Bennett stated her understanding is if the Building Commissioner declines to take action on the Historical Commission recommendation, the Commission can appeal to the ZBA. Mr. Makarious replied that is correct. She also stated her opinion that the demolition delay bylaw should apply as there was substantial demolition of the building after it was moved to the Waltham Street site. Public Comments: No public comments MOTION I: Mr. Rotberg made a motion that the Historical Commission urges the Building commissioner to issue a stop work order for the property until such a time as the applicant returns to the Historical Commission with a plan for restoration of the project in accordance with the Special Permit and Historic Preservation Restriction and that the Building Commissioner and Town staff consider other enforcement remedies including but not limited to penalties under the zoning bylaw. Mr. Kalsow seconded. Roll Call Vote: 2 / 3 Ms. Pursley – Yes, Ms. Fenollosa – Yes, Mr. Kalsow – Yes, Mr. Kelland – Yes, Mr. Rotberg – Yes, Ms. Bennett – Yes. Motion carried 6 to 0. MOTION II: Mr. Kelland made a motion that the Historical Commission wishes to explore with Town Counsel the enforcement of failure of compliance with the Town’s demolition delay bylaw. Mr. Kalsow seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ms. Fenollosa – Yes, Mr. Kalsow – Yes, Mr. Kelland – Yes, Mr. Rotberg – Yes, Ms. Pursley – Yes, Ms. Bennett – Yes. Motion carried 6 to 0. AGENDA ITEM: Adjourn Ms. Bennett made a motion to adjourn at 5:00pm. Ms. Fenollosa seconded. Motion carried. All in favor. 3 / 3