[Denis MacDougall]: On July 16, 2022, Governor Baker signed into law an act relative to extending certain state of emergency accommodations, which, among other things, extends the expiration of the provisions pertaining to the open meeting law to March 31, 2023. Specifically, this extension allows public bodies to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of the public body physically present at a meeting location and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. The Act does not make any new changes to the Open Meeting Law other than extending the expiration date of the temporary provisions regarding remote meetings from July 15, 2022 to March 31, 2023.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Dennis. Okay, the Medford Historical Commission. Today is Monday, November 14. I'm going to start with our new business on our agenda tonight. We are going to start with 31 South Street, a determination of significance. Last month, there was an application received for partial demolition of the structure, and tonight will be determining significance. and I don't have my thing in front of me again. Ryan, do you have that just to give the definition of significance? If not, I can grab it real quick.
[Unidentified]: One second. Sorry.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sorry, this is my bad because my house is disheveled right now and my paperwork is not in front of me as it usually is.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, clarification chapter 48-77 under definitions, a significant building means any building or portion thereof, which is not within a local historic district subject to regulations under the provisions of MGLA 40C, but which has been listed or pending listing on the National Register or has been listed on the Massachusetts Register of Historic Places or three was built within 75 years or older and which is determined to be by the commission to be significant either because it is importantly associated with one or more historic persons or events or with the broad architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social history of the city or the commonwealth, or it is historically or architecturally important in terms of period style method of building construction or association with an important architect or builder either by itself or in the context of a group of buildings.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Ryan. Okay, so tonight we're going to determine significance for 31 South Street. Commissioners, a form B was sent around that everybody should have had a chance to read. And if somebody would like to make a motion one way or another for this one, we'll start with that, and then we can go around for discussion.
[Unidentified]: Madam Chair.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yes, Ryan, go ahead.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I make a motion to find 31 South Street historically significant.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, is there a second?
[Unidentified]: Second for the purpose of discussion.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Ed. Okay, Ryan, why don't you start us off since you made the motion?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Sure. South Street is a prominent way that developed beginning in the early 19th century. It started off as large house lots and then gradually fell into the predictable pattern of being owned by various shipbuilding workers and the yard owners. In this case, you've got both. You've got the yard owners down the far end where grandfather's house is. And on this end, you have some of the yard workers. And before the Mystic River was altered, there was actually a yard just behind this location, just beyond where the brick building is to the left of the subject structure. So it's importantly associated to me anyways, importantly associated with that development of Medford, kind of in the heyday of shipbuilding and the industry of wood building boats. And then it just falls into the later predictable patterns of being home to families in and around the Medford Square unit where one shipbuilding fell off. It just kind of became part of the commercial, you know, the larger commercial neighborhood that's on the other side of the river.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you so much. And yeah, and we know South Street has been the discussion of a potential, you know, discussion of potential historic district for a while now. So your synopsis does not surprise me. So thank you. Peter, I'm going to call on you next since you're next on my screen.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I agree with Ryan about the association with the shipbuilding industry. It seems like that it had that association and owned by folks who worked in that industry, which was a very significant thing for the historical development of Medford. I, on this one, I was a little bit confused on the inventory form because it, it didn't seem to have the box checked about recommended to be in a national register, but I guess it's an oversight because it is checked on the last page.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I think maybe it's just missed on the first page. Right.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So that, that threw me a little bit, but it's, I kind of thought so too. so that it could be a candidate for being in a historic register or at least a historic district due to its association with shipbuilding industry and the other properties of similar age along this street. So the house itself seems to kind of have lost some of its architectural character anyway. As I read the Form B, the rear addition, the porches had been filled in. Possibly the entrance on the front of the center of the front of the house had been shifted. They shifted the entrances to the two sides of the house. so that it could be converted into a duplex. So it seems to have lost a little bit of its integrity. There might be some stuff underneath there. So I'm a little bit on the fence about this one, but I'd like to hear what other folks have to say.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you. Ryan, just before I move on, do you think the box checking is an oversight from Claire? Can we get that fixed?
[Adam Hurtubise]: It's not going to be fixed, but I do think it is an oversight, given that they give you a whole statement at the very end. I would like to make a note that, you know, I haven't been inside this building, so I don't know, but looking at the demolition plans and the layout of the structure, it looks to me as if it were built as a duplex, which in the 1850s, that would not be surprising given the need to house the number of workers necessary to build the boats here by hand. John and Claire mentioned that it's a single family, or may have had single family ownership. But I think that's just because all they're going off of is the deeds and the census, where the floor plan seems to suggest, especially because there's entrances on both sides now, and that it's divided clearly down the middle on all floors, that perhaps it did originally have a duplex. Basically, they put up one side of the house for the owner and the other side is a rental for maybe a family member or close associate at work.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you for that. Doug, anything to add here?
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I wonder if I could get a little bit of clarity. The last page does say potential historic district, you know, something that, but are you saying that there's a, which box are we saying we don't think is checked that should be?
[Jennifer Keenan]: Oh, it's just on page two at the top where it says recommended for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. So usually the usually the consultant checks that box and then does the last page, but the that box is unchecked. on page two.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I see it now, but I guess which I think is a oversight. Yeah, I guess I read it as they didn't think it was, but they thought it would be part of a district is they didn't say contributing, but I guess I we should clarify that because I think that's an important thing because I don't see a really strong case being made here. You know, because a lot of fabric has been lost. It's surprising because most of the houses like that we see like this are I assume this is this is a this is a partial or renovation, right? Where most of the house is being kept. Is there a huge addition for this house? I can't remember the details about this one.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I think so. I don't remember. I looked at it briefly, but it's a, the roof is coming off. It's a completely like a flat roof and I think a big addition in the back.
[Doug Carr]: Got it. Okay. Yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think it was a pretty, I don't want to say drastic, but yeah, it was pretty pervasive. Right now. Yeah, yeah. Okay.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I guess, you know, to me it's, it's more about the context in the neighborhood than it is about this individual property is the way I, I look at it, because that that house that you know the houses. got some integrity, but it's really, over the years, it's just been, you know, generation after generation has kind of peeled away, pieces of it made changes, does not, it would be tough to actually bring this house back if somebody was going to do it. And obviously the intent of this developer slash owner is not to do that, is to go the other direction, is to continue the evolution of this house going forward is what I see, which I, You know, if it was a really big architectural gem, I would be a little bit more hesitant, you know, but to me, the only reason to put this on as significant is to impact design review more than anything else, try to get it to be a version of this design that we like versus, you know, I don't feel like we're in a position to halt this. This doesn't rise to that level for me personally. I'm leaning against it unless people think that there's a design review issue they want to influence, which is a different thing altogether, which we can't get into anyway at this meeting. It's a secondary, third step down the road.
[Unidentified]: So that's where I stand right now.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thanks, Doug. Ed, anything to add?
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Again, I think, except in the context of the district, And particularly given the immediate environs of the house, I don't know whether there's a lot left to save. I think the context of that particular block or that particular side of the block is pretty much a lost cause. I mean, it's now between two multi-unit buildings, which are certainly much more modern looking. I think the other side of South Street has still got some integrity. I don't think even for the purpose of saving the district is much there. I could be persuaded otherwise, but that's my impression as somebody who walks by it all the time. I can see the frame is old, but I can't see much else.
[Unidentified]: Okay, thank you. Kit?
[Kit Collins]: Yeah, I have to say I agree with Duggan and Ed. I think the historical context is important and really interesting. It just feels like there's been so much lost already. There's not much context, at least on that side of the street, to save.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I'm not ignoring you, I'm just looking at on Google Maps myself since it's been a while since I have driven down here. Yes. Thank you, that, yeah, I'm just looking at, I would encourage everybody to look at Google Maps if you haven't already, just if you're looking for some context on these comments.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, Street View particularly.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yes, thank you, that's what I meant.
[Unidentified]: Okay, thank you, Kit.
[Jenny Graham]: Jess? The other commissioners comments have been really helpful to fill in some more information. In addition to what was in the form be, I feel like, yeah, there were some appealing things in the form be about it being part of the initial development of the neighborhood and that there were, you know, even though there were several alterations, there were several other comments that it was maybe worth preserving. But I think I'm going to take a look at the Google Maps street view real quick, because I was also on the fence. It wasn't super convincing, I didn't think, because they definitely said that it had been altered a lot. So I thank the other commissioners on their assessments that have helped me understand a little bit more about this.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So I want to bring it back to Ryan, because I don't know if there was ever did Ryan was there ever a list made of the houses on South Street that I think like, I don't know in terms of order of importance or anything like that and I guess, you know, looking at street view, personally like diagonally across the street is, you know, the, the large house on wall, I think it's one walnut, which certainly. You know, it's pretty stately and kind of fits in with the streetscape here. We know there's a larger development happening further up South Street. I'm just kind of, I just wanted to bring it back to, you know, Ryan made the motion for significance. We just wanted to bring it back to you, Ryan.
[Unidentified]: One second, I'm just quickly cruising through the,
[Jennifer Keenan]: Obviously we had, I think it was 75, if I remember correctly, was under delay for a while. There have been lots of changes on the street in the most recent years. And are we at a crossroads where this street is going to continue to evolve?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I'd like to speak to that. We have the kind of modern apartment building next door, and then the modern renovation next door on the other side. I feel like if this one becomes a modern renovation, where the kind of original fabric of the house is lost, It does sort of tip the scale. I mean, if you go further towards Main Street, there's a couple, the next house up, it still has, looks like it has some architectural character left to it.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Do you remember, Peter, there was a time at one point where we had a couple gentlemen here that, where I think we're going to take those last two parcels and build a building there.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So the last two parcels towards Maine?
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yes. If I remember correctly.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan and Doug might remember this. And we had talked to them about, you know, like what that would do to the end of the street. And so it almost makes sense now because if, you know, if someone's eyeing those two parcels, and then, you know, we have modern, modern, modern, and then does South Street and does this particular house end up being the one in between all the newer ones? Yeah, look at it from a reverse perspective right through.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, just reviewing some of these forms in the area because a lot of this project was done in two phases. They did a huge number of residential buildings and then they did a more focused area. And I was just looking at one of the other ones on South street. And it seems like they prioritize those buildings that face North. So that's the opposite side of the street. Basically all of the well-preserved buildings, one of which we know based on site plan review is slated to be renovated. George Goodwin house, it's right across the street, the yellow one on the kind of on the diagonal, and they seem to end at the house of William Bradbury, which is one Walnut Street, which is on the corner. So they seem to prioritize the larger buildings on larger lots and not. go down as far as this other building. Although they were also constrained. With any survey and planning project, it's constrained by budget. You can only do so many examples and they try to choose the best examples of architecture that represent Medford. Obviously, this is not a prime example, but it is a part of the greater group of context of buildings. As I've mentioned before too, Neil Larson in the survey plan mentions, just to put it in context of how many of these buildings are around. Any building built before 1875 is really important. There's 3,000 pre-1900 buildings. Of that, half of them are probably before 1855. And then there's only a handful of 18th century and 17th century buildings in Medford 12. or 14, I think, of that grouping. So, you know, it's in that range, but, you know, that does not mean that, you know, we've chosen to not include every building as being historically significant. So, but I did want to put it in context that they are, we are losing them.
[Unidentified]: So.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you. I think that was really helpful. And I think knowing about the more Northern end of the street is also helpful. you know, to those that are voting might give some, you know, kind of weight to leaning one way or the other.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. Folks want to go on the macros database. You can see just how many buildings have been inventoried and, you know, what the different states are based on that. And of course you can use a street view, but most of the buildings on South street have been inventoried at this point.
[Doug Carr]: So Ryan, what are the prospects for the historic district? We hear about historic districts all the time, but nothing ever really happens to most of them.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So I think there was interest from some of the homeowners to preserve some of their own properties but I, and I see that may be gaining traction because it has homeowner support. But I understand that there was some pushback about doing single houses so there. I have not been in touch with the HTC but I think that they may be moving forward with a larger district. I don't personally, I don't think that I don't think it stands a chance of passing I think it faces homeowner opposition I think it faces. Problems with city council. And, you know, I think that it also faces integrity issues with the buildings changing. They're basically coming in after the changes and that's not what you want. You want to kind of stabilize an area before it encounters major change.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So when you said they're looking at a district, you mean over here on near South, like either on South street or the adjacent streets.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. That's what I've heard.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So they have, they, are they not moving forward with four street and moving over to this one?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Uh, I don't, I don't know. I don't know what the deal is with forestry. I heard that they wanted to reduce down the number of properties there, but also they, uh, They didn't have the homeowner support to do that. So it didn't even make sense to keep trying.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. I mean, I won't, I mean, obviously we're talking about 31 South right now, so that's a, I'll, I'll send Chris an email and ask him for an update, but I'm just kind of coming back here to 31 South. Do, does anybody else have a question, a comment, anything that they'd like to say before we go for a vote?
[Kit Collins]: but it's just a question, which is just sort of in terms of the architecture of the time. I mean, how common was the Italianate style? And in terms of Medford's inventory of historic houses, how well represented is it as a style?
[Unidentified]: So I think that there,
[Adam Hurtubise]: Their numbers are up there with the Greek revivals. So Medford, just to backtrack on architecture. So a lot of the early 19th century houses are Greek revivals of various forms. And then starting around like 1850, you get what they call like the romantic styles. That's the Italianate, the villas, basically the nice low sloping roofs. And then if you look on the street just to the left of this South Street court or whatever it is, you have the other style that was extremely popular, which is the Gothic Revival. There are far more Italian houses than Gothic Revivals, but both of them are are far and few between. They stick out like a sore thumb because usually most neighborhoods have 20th century infill. Those are like the tens of thousands of two families and duplexes that all went up or the colonial revivals that all just basically eat up all the land after the post-war, you know, leading up to and then after the post-war years. So, I mean, it's not uncommon, but it's, It's not, it's not, you know, it's not like there's a million of them either. And it's, it's this one's a small example. I know it's kind of hemmed in on a corner lot and You know, dictated by its lot size, but normally when you build an Italian house, you have a much, you usually put it on a much larger lot, like what you would see just down the street on South street with say the yellow one or the purple one on the left-hand side. So it's not a, it wasn't chosen for initial survey just because of the, you know, it doesn't, it's not a high style. Hey, I just looked up the agenda for last Thursday's historic district commission meeting and it's it's set on their next on their agenda next steps for South Street LHD.
[Unidentified]: So, I guess they must be talking about it. Okay.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Does anybody else have anything to comment on with regards to 31 South before I call for a vote? No, okay. Okay, so we have a motion on the table to find 31 South Street significant that has been seconded. I will go around for a roll call vote as I see people on my screen. Please unmute yourselves and be ready to vote. Peter.
[Unidentified]: I would vote yes for significant. Ryan. Yes. Doug. No. Ed. No, not significant. Kit. I find this one difficult, but I say yes. Jess. No.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, Madam Chair, you get to cast your vote.
[Doug Carr]: Wow, she's an actual hung jury. We don't get many of these.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Whoa, I was not prepared for this. No pressure. I'm gonna vote yes, so that we can get any public comments at a preferably preferred hearing next month. So the motion will pass four to three for significance. So next month we will hold a preferably preserved hearing to determine whether or not an 18 month demo delay will be placed on this property. We have to get a legal notice in the paper. Petitioner needs to drop a check at city hall to pay for that legal notice. We will send you the language for the legal notice as well as the yard sign that has to be placed at the property for at least two weeks prior to next month's meeting, which will be on December 12th. Um, okay. Moving on to one 80 Lincoln road. Uh, again, commissioners here, you have a form B for, uh, to discuss significance for this property.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I make a motion to find one 80 Lincoln road significant with the caveat. I'm going to shoot it down.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. I'll second. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, okay. Ryan, go ahead.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Uh, 180 Lincoln road is, uh, might be perceived as significant in the group context of a group of buildings, similar to South street because of its association with the Lawrence estate development. But I find that it's not a really good example of the type of development that went on in the neighborhood. So I'm not finding for significance.
[Unidentified]: Okay. Thank you, Ryan. Peter. I think this is a pretty common example of a Cape style house. It doesn't seem to be too much unique about it. Certainly not in great shape.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I thought I thought it was interesting that the you know that they did, I was surprised that they did check this one unambiguously check this one to be recommended for listening in the national register of historic places so. You have to take that into consideration. When a clarification. Yes. made, it's made note that it's eligible only in a historic district. So it's, it's really a contextual building, um, as opposed to being individually eligible or more contributing. Okay. Um, so I think it's such a common, I don't think there will be a huge loss to the community about this one. That's such a common house form.
[Unidentified]: A lot of the trim work's been removed, some remains, but it has been altered quite a bit. Those are my observations.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Peter. Doug?
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I kind of agree with Ryan. I grew up in the Lawrence Estates, about three blocks from here, and it was The development does have a lot of continuity, a lot of consistency, even though there's multiple styles. But this house is just, you know, not one of the more shining examples of it. I think there are, you know, I doubt the district, I mean, the district will always have houses that will kind of, there's been some teardowns there, some unfortunate teardowns, and that's obviously something that should be addressed as part of a larger zoning. assessment of the city, but yeah, I just don't think this is worth playing the flag on for this one. It's kind of a small little house. We've seen some great bungalows, some great small houses. We're not against small houses being, you know, reimagined or added on to, but it's just, it's not a lot here. So I'm definitely on the noose side.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thanks, Doug.
[Adam Hurtubise]: If I'm not mistaken, this is a teardown, right?
[Jennifer Keenan]: This is a full teardown, yes. Ed, anything to add?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Again, it's just, I'm not going to argue with the neighbor, so I'll just leave it at that.
[Kit Collins]: It seems like a kind of run-of-the-mill cape to me. I guess my only question would be sort of how well-preserved is the rest of Lawrence's estate? I mean, it seems to me that the only significance that this house has is within the larger context. And if this isn't a particularly good example, it just sort of seems to me, I mean, I'm familiar with that area of Lawrence Estates, and it seems like a pretty well preserved area, both in terms of the newer houses that have been built and the older ones that are sprinkled in. I mean, it just seems like a pretty consistent context.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, I would say, I mean, just looking again at street view and looking at what's around it, I think there are much better examples of a Cape, a 1930s Cape there versus this one. And, you know, I think with also with this one being at the end of the cul-de-sac, at the top of the hill, you know, it's like, unless you're driving there, you're not driving by it. So in terms of, you know, the view coming up and down the street, It's a little hidden up there in the back, so I would tend to agree with you on that. Jess, anything to add?
[Jenny Graham]: No, I agree with everyone else. I don't want to take up any more time, but yeah, thanks everyone.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, all right, well, unless there are no other comments on this one, we have a motion on the table to find for significance at 180 Lincoln Road that has been seconded. I will go around for a roll call vote. Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan? No. Doug?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ed? No. Kit? No. And Jessica?
[Unidentified]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, so the motion fails. Zero to six. Yep. So for the owner of 180 Lincoln, hi, we'll get your letter off to you by the end of the week. So you'll and we'll release the hold on your permit. So you'll be good to go. Welcome. Happy Thanksgiving. Um, Okay, moving on our last item of new business tonight. Ryan wanted to thank you. You're welcome. You're welcome. Good luck with your projects.
[Unidentified]: Thanks.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, Ryan, you wanted to talk about expenditure discussion, a form B for Marion Street and some new maps.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. The consultant is working in the brickyards and it has come to their attention that as part of the last project, they missed the church that's on Marion Street in South Medford. It's the Assembly of God Church on 15 Marion Street. It's a really well preserved building, has a really active looking congregation so they wanted to ask us if we could appropriate $500 to document it as part of this project. And they'll include it with their next batch of survey work. And it was missed because it really is tucked away on a side street. But it does relate to the district that they are currently surveying, the commercial district along Main Street. So I'm hoping to allocate $500 for that out of our budget. We seem to, well, we're There's a number of issues with our budget, but I am told just to proceed as normal. So without bringing any of those up and having to worry you guys, I just would recommend that we spend $500 and get the form done.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Are you making an official motion?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't know. Yeah, sure. I'll make a motion and then we can discuss it if need be.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, so motion to spend $500 for a form B for what number Marion Street?
[Adam Hurtubise]: 15 Marion. Yep, one five.
[Unidentified]: Second.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Ed. Okay, motion on the table that's been seconded to spend $500 for a form B for 15 Marion Street. I'll take a roll call vote unless anybody feels they need to discuss. Okay, Peter.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan. Yes. Doug.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ed.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit. Yes. And Jessica. Yes. Okay. All set, Ryan.
[Adam Hurtubise]: The other issue is that the consultants are asking us if we would be interested in hiring a cartographer to put together some geo-reference maps in regards to the development of the Royal Estate. So they are working in an area basically defined as east of Main Street, south of Hancock Street, and along Mystic Gap for their survey project. And all of that is former royal estate holdings, and they spent some time unraveling the complicated deed history that took place after the royal family abandoned the estate at the end of the 18th century. then continued through the 19th century and then ended with the resulting development that is 20th century here. As part of that, there were two major surveys that were done in the 18th century that are pretty close to, they're pretty accurate given their time period of creation, and they can be geo-referenced. Basically, the cartographers will scale the maps to fit on the current map plane so that we'll have accurate dimensions that will then explain how a lot of the development took place. It will require some sort of allocation to make that happen, so they suggested that maybe we set a budget for it. and then see how much work they can do for that budget. They didn't give us any sort of fee yet. So it's entirely up to us. I wonder, I would think that a less than a thousand dollar budget would be able to take care of this, but I defer to the commission to ask questions to see if this is a good idea or not.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Again, just so I do the map in my head because I'm close enough, you were saying south, east of Maine, and south of Hancock? Correct.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, that little triangle there, that's basically all of the combination uh mystic trotting park and combination former combination park uh land so all those streets that are named after horses it's like golden ave and all of those those are all the horses and track owners um so that that's the general area and we'll get you know we'll get more out of it because there's also um you know the royal holdings also include the land on the western side of main street all the way over to somerville up until when it butts up against uh tough university, basically. My neighborhood, I'm not gonna, I'd be happy to vote for the grant.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, I think if we maybe do up to a thousand dollars, and then if it hits that, fine, but anything more than that, we need to reassess. That would be my suggestion.
[Jenny Graham]: Go ahead, Jess. So what would this data be, like, used for?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So they're going to put the map transposed on both the modern map and then once it's geo-referenced there, all of the other maps, say the 1875, the 1889, The 1898 maps all of those are currently through other softwares geo reference so you can literally show layer by layer all of the development that occurs in that neighborhood over over very specific time, and that will help with. first planning at a planning level, basically from a top down, you can see all the houses and individually pinpoint them very quickly. And then once that happens, basically the it will explain all of the write up that they're planning to do. So it's basically giving them a graphic to go along with their extensive write ups.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think it always helps to have graphics, but I sometimes on these Form Bs, just reading the information, like the architectural information, I almost can't make sense of it without having the photograph there. So I think it would be really worthwhile or the, you know, community person who wants to learn about the history to have a map like that, you know, to kind of tie all this together.
[Doug Carr]: I agree, Peter. I wonder, is the Royal House aware this is underway? Because this is the kind of graphic they'd want to have in their, in the slave quarters, you know, three feet wide to have people understand the context of what the original holdings were versus the neighborhood that's there now, it would tell their story better too. I wonder if they, I mean, they don't have a lot of money, so I'm not sure, or I would wanna ask them, but it feels like we should at least talk to them about this and see what their interest is. We should still put, I would still put forward a thousand dollar max to see what we get out of it, but it feels like it could be something that could have a use beyond just us.
[Adam Hurtubise]: at some point, presumably Royal House or others could put in some grant, could massage the grant money.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, perhaps they can take it and transfer it to be on their website. I mean, I think all the more reason if multiple entities in town can use it, then it makes sense to spend the money for it.
[Doug Carr]: What was deliverable again, Ryan? I heard, I didn't write it down or anything like that. at the end of the day, they're making a map that's a digital graphic that tries to explain the whole, the context of the Royal House of State versus present day Medford, is that correct?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I mean, yeah, yeah. And it's, it's going to be geo referenced. So it will literally be scaled in and laid over a modern map of Medford. So hold on, I'm going to share my screen just very quickly.
[Unidentified]: If it will let me, may not.
[Jennifer Keenan]: You should be able to.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So this is the survey that's in question, one of two. There's also one done by John Winthrop in like the 1660s, 1680s. It's a little bit older than this one, but this is a plan that was in the Registry of Deeds that shows the balance of the royal estate when they acquired it in 1732-ish. And then there's one done just after the American Revolution when the a state is being broken up. And so this map will be transposed on a modern map. And when that happens, then you can go back and lay it over, say, this map, which is the walling map of 1855. And you will be able to clearly see the bounds that start to impact Medford. For example, this is a boundary right here. that defines the royal estate. This is another one. This is another one. So when you have that data, you can clearly see what the extent is. And then that will allow all of that will give you a good graphic that then goes along with all of the extensive text that they talk about, because there's all sorts of breakup that happens here. For example, there's the development that occurred in Winter Hill. That's one break up there's another one that one of the tenant farmers has some land it's another and then this whole area basically is given given to commercial development in the early 1800s. So all of that is great data that explains all of that history on that side of the river. And I don't know if you guys know, but the only reason why we have that side of the river is because Royal wanted to be a part of the Medford community. So he actually set his entire farm off from Somerville. So.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: We told people in Somerville, man.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: I'll try to take it back.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So I'll try to do that. Joe Joe, you might joke and say summer will sticking it to us up at the top here where all the development and Broadway is going they give us they give us the parking lots.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, is there going to be a map that they overlay that's more recent than 165 years ago?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, yeah. No, it's going to be overlaid first on the modern map, the present day. And then from there, like 1855 and 1875 and 1889, all those maps have already been geo-referenced by other parties, so they can just import them.
[Unidentified]: Okay, thank you.
[Kit Collins]: It doesn't seem like there's any downside to this except for the cost. It has more applications than first meets the eye.
[Adam Hurtubise]: If it's successful here, you can look at the other maps and we can use that same process elsewhere, just continue to overlay.
[Kit Collins]: I think it would be hugely helpful in terms of helping educate people about the sort of overall history of Medford, because it's so hard to visualize driving the streets now.
[Doug Carr]: And to be honest, Brian, there's, there's actually a similar exercise that could be done for the Brooks estate because that's something that we constantly trying to explain to people. And unless you have a dozen maps, and I've only seen a couple and they were hand drawn by by people who took the time to try to figure it out, there's actually no one place where it's clear. the historical moments of the Brooks Estate, which has grown and contracted 10 times since Medford was founded. The Brooks Estate was founded in Medford in 1660. So I think this is a good test, but I think I agree with Kit. There are actually several other estates where this logic could be applied that would help tell the story of Medford better.
[Unidentified]: Great.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Um, does someone want to make a motion?
[Unidentified]: So moved.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Ed. Is there a second? Okay. Thanks Doug. Okay. So motion to spend up to $1,000 for an overlay map of Royals landholdings, something to that effect that has been seconded. I'll go around for a roll call vote. Jessica.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes, but can we also make sure that we contact the folks at the Royal House and make sure that any of their needs get included in that, in the project?
[Unidentified]: Yes, thank you.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Peter?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan? Yes. Doug?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ed?
[Unidentified]: Yep.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And Kit? Yes. Okay, motion passes the six zero. And with the caveat that we reach out to the royal house.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Um, that's all I have for new business. Does anybody else have anything that we need to talk about before we move on to old business? Okay, moving on properties under demo delay. All we have is 33 Third Street, which has been radio silence. So, um, I don't have any updates there. Um, we do have a new building Commissioner. I have not met. Yes, I. His name is escaping me.
[Unidentified]: His name is Bill 14.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you. And I only knew that because I tuned into I think it was zoning at the end of last month for a few minutes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And how do you spell that last name?
[Jennifer Keenan]: I think it's f o r t e. Is that correct?
[Unidentified]: Like musically?
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So yes, otherwise, permitting has been going smoothly. I do intend to send Commissioner Forte an email just as an introduction and, you know, want to obviously establish a good working relationship with him like we had with Paul. So if anybody happens to speak to him before I do, please let him know we are grateful that he's here and we look forward to working with him. Thomas Brooks Park, in terms of moving on to CPA projects, we are working through some budget mix-ups, I guess we'll say. And so we've been trying to get the contracts awarded and some money paid. But I think at this point with the time of year, none of the work is gonna be until the spring. Is that correct, Ryan?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay.
[Unidentified]: And do we need to finish out The dig?
[Adam Hurtubise]: The PAL graciously donated some of their own funding towards our project to finish cataloging the entire collection without needing to pare it down. And as a result, they will be done with that work probably January, February. Then they're doing their final report, which will take a little bit longer. So I thought maybe a good time to do the public presentation would be May of 2023, which is Preservation Month in Massachusetts.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Great, and I think that probably will, if not, have already started with the Palms Wall restoration. That might be good timing to be able to present the dig findings and then say that the work is there starting as well. So that sounds like a good plan. Okay. Survey projects, any update on that Ryan or Jess.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. Big update, big update, big update for the commission concerns budget. So because we have a new budget director, the directive is, is that folks should know use it or lose it in terms of budget. Because the funding from the city side dries up. Basically at the end of the year, so that's that's directive number one so I am glad to see that we're allocating funds all over the place here on that on that mentality. So, folks should know I've been trying to close out winter hill for the last six months, it's finally coming to a resolution I believe after an extensive meeting with the mayor's chief of staff, the budget director and. Alicia hunt and Teresa who works with us at planning and community development. So, a couple of things came out of that because we have to pay john Clemson some money that wasn't paid originally. That is partially coming out of this year's budget. And that means we're going to have less budget. because of errors that had taken place back in fiscal year 21. We're also working on fixing some things for the Brickyards project, which is ongoing. So that will also further impact our budget this year. But basically, we were told that if we run out of budget before the fiscal year, that the city is aware of the potential shortfall and that they will help us. make everything whole. My hope is that after correcting all of these issues that at the end of the this fiscal year, all of those problems will reset and that will have a completely clean slate and that all the problems that we had will go away. Um but just know that it took six months for that to happen. That is unacceptable but we are moving forward.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Is this year just so I can understand the fiscal year. This is you're talking the June 30 July 1 year not the calendar year, or am I right?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Correct. Yep. And, and there were a number of problems back in fiscal 21 that will impact this year because we're paying out some of those things that either didn't get paid because of issues or but they're now getting paid this year. So there, that impacts this year's fiscal budget, there was no rolling of it forward.
[Unidentified]: So
[Jennifer Keenan]: We're just going to keep moving forward and do our work. And if it comes, we have a budget issue, we'll deal with it when that happens. So OK, well, thank you for that update. And I think it'll be good to get caught up on everything. So it's all good.
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah, I mean I am kind of nervous that the budget slowdowns are going to impact our ability to get good consultants to do work because it's so there's a yeah on that point.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I have, you know, I reached out to to get the information for the. uh thomas brooks park wall uh the fieldstone wall and those consultants have been sitting there waiting after making their bid for six months you know and and uh you know obviously we let them know that we were going to contract with them and then we had to just get the money and then we worked hard to get the money and then it took this long to get the account that it was supposed to be set up. So, you know, it wouldn't surprise me if they say, you know, they're well within their rights to back out of that bid because, you know, it's been six months. So.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah. Or we get less wall done for the same budget.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, I mean, their bid is their bid. So, and it is an all-inclusive price. So.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Well, we'll just have to see what happens moving forward. Right. Thank you for all your hard work on that. I know it's been a beast.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No problem.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Does anybody have anything else for tonight? We have meeting minutes, but Doug, did you have something?
[Doug Carr]: I'm amazed we can get, we've had many meetings go well north of two hours to get this done in an hour. I'm thrilled at the end of the year.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I know it's a little, it's a little bit nice. I'm not going to lie. Um, okay. Uh, so Peter circulated the meeting minutes from last month, so I'll take a motion when someone's ready to approve or make any edits to those.
[Unidentified]: Move to approve the minutes as submitted. Thank you, Ed. I don't have any comments since I wasn't at the meeting. Thank you, Jess.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, motion to approve the meeting minutes from October that has been seconded. Jessica? Yes. Peter?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan? Yes. Doug?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ed?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, if no one has anything else, motion to adjourn. 7.58 p.m.
[Unidentified]: So I'm gonna say it.
[Jennifer Keenan]: All right, we'll call that a first and a second. Jess. Yes. Peter. Peter, are you voting to adjourn?
[Unidentified]: I said yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Oh, sorry, I didn't hear you. Ryan. Yes. Doug.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, please.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ed.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Yes, the dinner bell is rung.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And Kit.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you all. We will see you on December 12th. Happy Thanksgiving, everybody.
[Unidentified]: Adios. Thank you.
|
total time: 1.88 minutes total words: 142 |
total time: 1.43 minutes total words: 139 |
||