[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, I'm gonna call the meeting to order at 7.02, meeting of the Medford Historical Commission. Just begin with our statement from the governor's office. Pursuant to the acts of 2022, this meeting of the City of Medford Historical Commission will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via Zoom. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted and public participation in any hearing during this meeting shall be by remote means only. All right, commissioners, we have a pretty light agenda. We have some applications to take, a determination of significance, site plan review, and then just some old business. So I'm gonna begin with 31 South Street. I uploaded the information provided by the applicants. So I need a motion to approve the application and accept it for review whenever you have a chance.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: move to accept the application as a matter of form.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, roll call vote. I'll go around as I see you on my screen. Peter? Yes. Ed? Aye. Kit? Yes. Doug? Yes. Great. Approved 4-0. So we will have that for next month. An MHC Form B does exist for the building, so I will send it around later this evening and get it up on the website so folks can read it and participate at the next meeting. Next up on the agenda is 180 Lincoln Road. We received a demolition application for that property. It's in the MHC Google Drive. So again, we need a motion to approve that application.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: move to accept the application as to form okay in a second i'll second okay thank you kit uh going around the room peter yes and ed
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. And Doug. Yes. Okay, approved for zero. MHC form B does not exist for this building. So we need to allocate $500 from our normal budget to have john Clemson do an MHC form B. I'll make a move to expend $500 to create a form B for 180 Lincoln Road. Great. And a second. Second. Yay. And we'll call Peter.
[Unidentified]: Yes, Ed.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes. Okay. Yes. And Doug? Yes. Okay, great. Approved four to zero. All right, next up on the agenda is 8 Hamlin Avenue. We have a determination of significance. For those of you who are following along at home, we have uploaded the MHC inventory form on our website. So if you go to the website medfordhistoricalcommission.org and go to our news section, the latest meeting materials are right at the top. You can download the inventory form that the commissioners are reviewing tonight. So the demolition process is a two-part process. The first step is to determine whether or not the building is significant. And per the bylaw, what that means is any building that's listed or pending listing on the National Register of Historic Places, pending or is listed on the State Register of Historic Places, or was built within 75 years or older and is determined to be significant by the commission because it is either importantly associated with one or more historic persons or events or with the broad architectural, cultural, economic, or social history of the city or 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. Just as a reminder, with any application that we receive, we do not determine or take into consideration the condition of the building from a structural standpoint or a livability standpoint. That is the jurisdiction of the building inspector and only he can override the demo delay for that purpose. So tonight we're basically looking at the history of the building prepared in the form and architecture and determining whether or not that's significant to the city of Medford. So commissioners, I will open it up to initial motions and then we can have a discussion and then we will go from there with any action.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: A point of information, I saw the MHC was done about three years ago.
[Adam Hurtubise]: 48 Hamlin. Yes. No, 8 Hamlin was done. Maybe it was a correction of, maybe it's a correction of numbers, but 8 Hamlin was done between last month and this month. The area was surveyed more than three years ago. So perhaps there was a stray form that they were going to do and just forgot to date it presently, because it definitely wasn't finished until this last week. Okay. Yeah.
[Unidentified]: Any further questions?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Otherwise, I'll take a motion.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: To move the process, I will move it. It will be found significant without any assurances to how long I'm actually gonna come out.
[Unidentified]: Okay. And a second? I'll second.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And do you wanna start or do you want me to bypass and go to?
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: I would be happy if Peter started. Okay, go ahead Peter.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So this one, I felt that it was historically significant by the mere fact that the owner's name is on the street that the house is on. That's important for the history of Medford. He owned the property and everything, and then he was important in the neighborhood. Beyond that, I didn't find the historical narrative particularly compelling. I also don't find the architecture particularly compelling. I think it's a fairly common building type and a lot of the historical detail has been lost. Not sure for me that this one, rises to the level of historically significant though I'd like to hear from the other commissioners to see if they have any insights that I don't know about.
[Kit Collins]: I was interested in the fact that it was one of the first buildings that was actually built on this street. And one of the questions I wanted to ask the other commissioners who are architects is about, you know, obviously the Dutch colonial architecture is pretty common in this area, but with the entrance on the end, I wondered, I just wanted to ask those of you who are in the business, sort of your sense of how common that is.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think it depends on lot placement. I find that they're not as common as the center entrance buildings of the teens and 20s, but they do happen, especially on the narrow lots on this side of Medford. It sets them apart as infill development. You can almost immediately tell that it was on a lot, that it's basically a 19th century lot that didn't get built out and then they plug it in.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, could I ask a question about the date of the house? There's a wide range given there in two different periods as well. Is there any additional thoughts on that? Because it makes a huge difference if it's a 20th versus a 19th century building.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I suspect because of its present appearance, it's probably, you know, there may be 19th century bones, but if it's recovered from a major fire, chances are it's probably been completely rebuilt from the foundation up.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, that was a big concern of mine. To echo what Peter said, I actually don't see a lot here. It doesn't have a lot of integrity. So much has been changed and altered. This original building is almost impossible to see, and I have no illusions that it would be ever put back to what it was. I'm not even sure if it's possible to know what it was back to what it was. My instincts are, even though it may be a very old house, I just don't see it. I want to plant my flag on that house to save it personally.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: I would join the consensus. Again, to me, this look like whatever is up this house on the exteriors between 1930 and 1980. There is much as I think We do have to think about the preservation of what were the streetcar neighborhoods which were built now anytime before the 40s. This is simply not a, wouldn't be a contributor. Preservation of this house would not be a contributor to such a project, even from a social history point of view. So on my own motion, I'm a dissenter.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I didn't find anything particularly compelling about this building. The early buildings that are built in the timeframe that this first house was built in are infinitely more interesting than this particular building is. Because it doesn't have any integrity, we have to only look at what's there now, and that building is a common building in Medford, so not really one that I'm much interested in saving. Let's put it that way. Any further comments from the commissioners? Otherwise, I'll move forward with a roll call vote from the motion. Just to clarify, the motion was made to find the building significant by Ed West with Peter Miller seconding. So a vote no would find the building not significant and a vote yes would find the building significant. Does that all make sense? Roll call vote. Ed? No. Kit? know. And Doug. No. And Peter? No. Okay, motion fails 4 to 0. So 8 Hamlin Place is not significant. So we will go ahead and get their get their their letter out. I do see that there's a hand raised from Charles Kellman. Charles, you want to have anything to add?
[SPEAKER_02]: I'm sorry I arrived a little bit late and I just I was here to see if the 31 South Street have been discussed yet I see it first on the agenda but I think I missed it. Okay, perfect. Thank you so much. Sorry to interrupt the flow of things. Appreciate it. Charles, do you live at the address? No, no, I don't. I work for the law firm that's for Foster Walker and DeMarco. I was just here to see if it was accepted. So you're with Foster? Foster Walker, DeMarco. Sorry.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, that's okay.
[SPEAKER_02]: We just have to write down who spoke. Understood. Yeah, I should have made that clear from the outset. No problem.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Great. So we will see you back here next month.
[SPEAKER_02]: All right. Thank you. Either me or Attorney DeMarco. Thank you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you. Okay, I'm 121 Riverside Avenue the site plan review. We received a letter stating that the housing authority is going to be renovating the salt install building. They're basically adding units. It's quick and simple. I didn't know if the commission had any comments on this particular project, but of course, we're always invited to provide comments. I sent around the information. Did the commission have any comments or is there anything additional that we want to say or do we just want to say no comment at this time?
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Well, I found it interesting that they were talking about, it seemed to me there was gonna be a change in the facade going beyond mere repointing the brickwork. And it's way after our authority, our nominal authority anyway, in terms of when it was built. But again, it was sort of curious that they were looking to make some change of the look of the tower.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I did look at the plans and it looks like they are going to re-skin the building. I do have the drawing here if anybody wants it. I could share for anyone.
[Doug Carr]: Peter, why don't you share it? I think it's actually a pretty major change. Yeah, it's quite a major change. It's not a minor renovation, it's practically a redo.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, just to let people know that the Saltonstall building is actually Medford's first skyscraper. So it's actually pretty, pretty important. So if we didn't want to consider having an MHC inventory form done to it and maybe considering. What year was it built? 70s. 70s maybe I can check with what does the paperwork say?
[Kit Collins]: I think it was the late 60s. It was like 67, 68. Yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Can you guys see my screen?
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. So I'll zoom in a little bit, but you know, it has a brick facade, I think like a concrete frame with brick facade. So it looks like they're putting, um, fiber cement panels basically over the whole thing. And I don't know if they're taking the old skin off. That wasn't clear to me, or if this is just going on top or what the issues are with the current skin that makes them want to do this. But it is quite a different look.
[Unidentified]: It says the building was built between 1966 and 1968.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I actually think that we probably should have a look into, and actually I'm going to go check and see right now if an inventory form was done, because it may have actually been done given its importance. So while you guys keep debating this, I'm going to keep looking up information.
[Kit Collins]: I'm sorry. Oh, thank you. So I was just going to say that the sort of photo version of the renderings in the site plan review makes it look white. I mean, honestly, I looked at it and I thought it looked like a hospital.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. I don't know. I might. I think maybe we maybe should comment on this. I don't know what you think. Anybody else thinks, but.
[Unidentified]: I mean, it's not a bad design.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I could see room for improvement though, but I don't know what you guys think.
[Kit Collins]: I totally agree. I think it's a pretty major departure from what's there now.
[Doug Carr]: I agree, and I think we should comment on this. I actually used to work for this company 17 years ago, Barbara Hendry, so I would probably recuse myself, but I think the comments we would make would be more clarification because the colors here are quite strong in this rendering. It's a Revit model just shown in 3D form, but the actual rendering, I think it doesn't seem to match this.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. And I think we want clarity on that. If I can find the that's on the front page kit. This one made me Yeah, there it is.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, it's well, I guess on the right side of the shadow, you see it a little bit better. The colors.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah.
[Doug Carr]: But it's, I mean, look, it's a big change. It is, but I must, you know, get to applaud the people doing this. This is an investment in public housing. You know, it's trying to reinvent a building after, you know, 60 plus years. I think it's It's a good project. Fundamentally, we just want to make sure that everything is accounted for, you know, and we've always commented on most major projects. This is a major project. This is highly visible right on the edge of Medford Square here. It's just something we should have some comments on and try to see if there's any room to tweak it a little bit.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Just let folks know, too, we should also make a point to them that if the project is receiving federal funding, which I am almost guaranteed to be receiving federal funding, they're going to have to file for the Section 106 review with the State Historical Commission anyways. So we'll get a second pass at this as well.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: The other question, which is way past our end, but just a point of curiosity, When I read the description, they said they were going to be doing renovations to the off to the M.H.A. office areas, which makes sense. It wasn't clear to me whether the senior center, you know, which is used for social services purposes to use a very bad way of putting it. Is part of this project or not, because I know it's at the site, but I couldn't figure out from the wet from the renderings whether that was part of it.
[Unidentified]: Yeah, I wasn't sure about that either.
[Doug Carr]: It seemed like it was just this building, but... Yeah, I don't think the senior center is part of the scope of work from the letters that I read. Yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: It looked like there was some office or there was some tweaking going on in the inside to the office area for sure.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, that's where I saw them. That's where I was trying to figure out what the line was. Right. Because it's always looked to me as part of the same structure. It was not really, yeah.
[Doug Carr]: They talked about an option if the funds are available to actually expand, I think the footprint of the office space and the ground level. beyond the current footprint, but within the site by, I think it was 1,500 square feet or something, not too big, but I don't think that's not there. I think that's their add alternate, if you will. They're going to price this out. If they can afford it, they will, but they're not committing to it until they understand the price. Got it.
[Kit Collins]: They're also adding 22 units.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: From what it looked like, they either were going to take some otherwise not currently used space or reconfiguring some stuff. That's what it looked like. That's the only reason why it was in site plan review, because at that point, by increasing the number of units, it became subject to site plan review. But this is a public agency, so they had their priorities.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, I'm hearing that we have a fair number of comments. So does somebody want to volunteer to put together a letter and we can get that out? The comments are due in early November, I believe.
[Unidentified]: Yeah, I can. I can head up the letter.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I mean... And then I'll start something and send it around. Doug, I'd like to hear your comments, even if you're recused or whatever, but you usually have great comments about stuff like this.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: I'll take one. Yeah, I mean, my concern is that it sort of stay, you know, pressure in a DS, but sort of try to stay consistent to period, you know, stay consistent to period. I'm not asking for more brutalism, but...
[Doug Carr]: Would you define that building as brutalism?
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: I'm not sure I'd go that far. No. I was throwing a period word out which doesn't apply. In this century, modern doesn't work either.
[Adam Hurtubise]: It is classified by Claire and John as a modernist building, partly because it's got an exposed exoskeletal system that the bricks do not make up the whole facade, but it's also the structural system on the outside that's visible. It is a modern, I won't say that this design is more appealing than what's there now, but I think we should at least comment on it then. Great. Okay, good. That's it for new business at this point. So Peter will have that up and we'll have that letter circulate and then folks can add their comments to it and we'll go from there. We'll send it in. I do want to let commissioners know that there may be a project coming up for Michael Cohen, but the subcommittee needs to review it first. It's a project in my neck of the woods, but I suspect that it probably will just need to go to subcommittee and it will be good. He did submit paperwork, but I don't feel it's without an architectural plan showing what the scope of demolition is. I don't feel it's necessary to accept that application yet, given that the next meeting is only three weeks away anyways. Did anybody else have any new business to bring up before we move on? I did want to mention, we've been talking about it for a while, I sent out the comprehensive plan. We had been asked to take on certain aspects of that document, and I don't know if folks had had a chance to review it. If they had, I wondered if you guys could provide feedback on whether or not you think we should take Take on what we're being asked to take on that were only a few things that we were mentioned in some things that I don't necessarily agree the commission should take on, but maybe a liaison for the city and I know it needs to just be broad but. There are, commission has a set duty and set parameters in our bylaw. So, and plus we're taking on CPC stuff. So I don't know if we should be broadening that with the limited support that we have.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, what did you, I read the plan and provided my own comments, but I didn't focus them on historic commission comments per se. What additional scope are they asking the commission to do?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, I think they were asking they were they were lumping us in with other organizations like the Historical Society and Brooks Estate and Royal House Association about taking on celebrating our history and maybe encouraging economic tourism or historical tourism and little things like that. And although I agree that maybe us as individuals would want to take some of that stuff on, I don't necessarily think the commission should be chairing that. That's really an economic development committee it would be the historical society the commission's job is really to a administer the demo delay but also b to identify properties of historic value we're doing that and then c i think the third most important thing that we're doing is the CPC administration both encouraging projects and working to administer our own projects. So I think we should probably stick to our guns there and keep a pretty narrow focus. Well, you know, I do think the one thing that they did mention was they keep saying staff support for the city of Medford, which is a yes and a no. It is a yes, we do need it. I really appreciate Dennis, but we also need a full-time designated preservation planner here in the city of Medford to administer the historical commission, the historic district commission to do some of these things that they're saying the commission should be doing, but it's not the commission, it's a preservation planner that should be taking some of those things on.
[Doug Carr]: Well, Brian, you're absolutely right. One of my comments overall on the plan is that it looked like it was the full-time job of at least three people to execute it, people who are not presently employed by the city of Medford, because I know Dennis and all the staff in the building do not have any excess capacity to be kind. They're stretched thin. They have been for years. And so I think we should respond. I think we need to respond in a way that is tactful, obviously, about encouraging the goals. This is an investment. This is going to have to pay for people to support. We can move things along, but this master plan, this comprehensive plan needs people whose job it is to execute it. It's not going to be done with the volunteers or existing staff. That's been pretty clear.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I agree. We did send in, that was one of Jen and I's comments, that the terminology needs to not be staff necessarily, but also a department head or a director or a preservation planner, as I said, and that was completely bypassed. Obviously, they're not necessarily, they must have received a lot of comments, but that is an important one, I think, that needs to be clarified. Because to say staff just simply means hiring, hiring a lowball, this is a person whose full-time responsibility is to do it and to head up a whole section, you know, and to do multiple jobs, so.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: The one thing which struck me was a discussion which I think makes a lot of sense that, you know, attention to be paid to gateway zones. And my, you know, again, my concern was probably a one line comment is that particularly what's left of the old Medford Square, maybe West Medford Square, we not get a situation where we throw the baby out of the bath water and make them gateway areas to the city. And they should be, you know, thing, you know, we should celebrate what's there now, not just try to, you know, repeat, repeat, repeat the Route 93 and Riverside Mall fiascos.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Right there are appropriate places for things like transit oriented design and places to increase along major transportation corridors that have access to say buses and, you know, the train itself but, you know, then there's areas that we want to maintain to have a certain look and feel. And, you know, I think the city's trying to do some of these things like, you know, They were trying to out roll facade improvement program where the city would put funds forth to make signage improvements provided that they were consistent with the neighborhood. And I, I think that's a good idea but that also should have a preservation component where they work to kind of preserve some of these, these low one and two story buildings but encourage additional development on top of of them. So you still get the same look and feel of the neighborhood, but also encourage additional development in places where it always should have happened. So and I, you know, I wouldn't just stop at at Medford Square and West Medford Square, I would go to Haines Square, which has a lot of potential and South Medford, where at the corner of Harvard, there's tons of stuff there. And eventually there will be new squares, right? So there will be the interchange between Harvard and Mystic Ave, that whole area is going to become a new development. So We want to make sure that we encourage some sort of either ultra-modern design that sets it apart or something that consistently brings the whole Mystic Ave streetscape together. Some of that's historical commission, other parts is just part of the site plan review, etc. A lot of it's zoning. Cities come a long way, but we still got to keep going. Okay, any other comments on the comprehensive plan? Otherwise, I'll review these and when Jen gets back, we can review them and send them off to the consultant. Okay, hearing none, going back to old business then. Properties under demo delay, we actually only have one right now, and that is 33 3rd Street, of which we have heard nothing for at this point. I think it was pretty clear that the owner just walked away from the table at that point, so she is just waiting her time. I have not heard that project making its way through any additional planning processes. I don't even know if they need anything, but At this point, I haven't heard anything. As you know from last meeting, Otis went out the door and 130 Boston Ave is under construction. I did receive an email today in the email box from 130 Boston Ave noting there were some concerns over the construction. So I'm going to make a point to put the architectural plans that we voted on up on the website. Based on the photos, it didn't look that radically different. There are you know, some very minor changes to adjust for roofline, probably for head heights inside the buildings, but it's nothing major from what we last discussed. So I'll make sure that those go up on the website just so people can review them. And I'll answer that email. But other than that, I haven't heard anything from anybody else. And we have basically cleared the table at this point. On permit and processes, Jen and I were working to try to find out who the new building commissioner is going to be. We don't have any outstanding issues, but we just want to stay on top of that just so we have open communication for when he does come, he or she comes on board. I'm not sure where they are in the hiring process, but it would be good to keep that. We're just going to try to keep in touch with the mayor's chief of staff to keep that open line of communication between us and the city going forward. All right, down to CPA projects. I have a couple of updates. They're delayed. Having difficulty finding appropriate brick and... Yeah. Hold on one second. That's weird, I can't mute Dennis, so sorry about that. Circling back to CPA. The masons having a hard time finding sandstone and appropriate brick for the wall. So we've delayed until the springtime so that he has accurate, accurate time to source that material. There's, it's going to be difficult because the quarries that. produce the traditional sandstone in upper state New York are no longer really active. So it's a salvage situation and then they have to cut it to find it. And we don't want to take anything less than perfection. And obviously what had been put on the wall previously was like a poor choice substitute that sort of looks like sandstone but has more hefty grit. So we're really trying to make sure that what goes on there will will look and feel like it originally did. Finance department still hasn't moved on the CPA paper at all, because they are probably overwhelmed. So I have yet to been able to award the project for the stonewall, stonewall, The stone wall project. So that's still in works. I do have the financial department, supposedly working on some things with. with the survey and planning grant. So I'm hopeful that once they get done with that, as an immediate and pressing item, that I can then turn their attention to some of these other very minor things and get them out the door. Because I'm assuming that their bid is still good, but they have been waiting for over, what, four months now to act on this paper so that I can award the project. And that I think is a little unacceptable, so.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, do you have any issues with the brick match or the mortar type for the wall itself for POMS foam?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So far, the consultant did go down and pick out the mortar and he said he would have mortar samples for us to approve once he finds a suitable brick, but we haven't found a brick to compare yet. A lot of the brick that's there is salvageable and savable, but we just want to make sure that we have backup in case of when they ultimately pull it out to make sure that it doesn't disintegrate. Because what you can see from the outside doesn't necessarily mean that the whole brick is still good.
[Doug Carr]: Is there some brick in the back that they might reuse to the front to try to keep all the front elevation? I know that there's a lot going on with the way the whole park's being reconsidered, but there's a lot of judgment calls there once they get into the project about what to put where.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I think the intent is to keep the same brick sizes and locations. Basically, what you see here is what's going to be rebuilt, with the exception being that they are going to try to straighten up the rear end of the wall which is, you know, out of plum by nearly a quarter of an inch, if not more so. I think that's a good idea. I don't see why that wouldn't be a problem. But they're also working against matching machine-made bricks from some of the later stuff against handmade bricks. And there are still companies that do handmade bricks of sorts. They're in screens and things like that. But it's just a matter of finding ones that will be able to provide a close match to what's there. Um, so that's it for that I'm just, you know, I'm again just waiting and we do have some work for the archaeological stuff. We do have to pare down the number of artifacts that's on my list but it's been difficult with finding a time to go back down to Rhode Island so if somebody wants to volunteer to come down and help sort artifacts, we just have to. I use the term loosely it's a disposal it's not so much a physical disposal it's weeding out duplicate items so that they don't so that the consultant that's pal doesn't have to catalog all of them, they only have their budget about 1500 artifact. about 500 artifacts to catalog, and we have currently around 1,500 or so. So it's mainly going down and just choice picking out shards of redware that don't tell us anything, bits of glass that don't tell us anything, sardine cans, 20th century stuff. I tried to work with them to say, but they weren't comfortable just doing it without our person being there with them. So I think it's doable. It's just a matter of spending a little bit of time down at PAL. So if anybody wants to take a trip, I'm happy to drive and carpool, but I do need a partner because I just don't want to be doing it just by myself.
[Doug Carr]: Is it got to be during the week?
[Adam Hurtubise]: They may work on the weekends. I would prefer it to be during the week, but we could ask because I suspect that they probably have certain cases. I can ask because I suspect they have cases where they may be available on weekends.
[Doug Carr]: I couldn't do it during the week. It's a possibility on a Saturday or Sunday if it was possible, but I could not do it during the week.
[Kit Collins]: I may be able to go on a Friday if that was a possibility.
[Unidentified]: It's a possibility, okay, or Friday.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, that's certainly a possibility. I will warn people, traffic going down is virtually non-existent, but traffic going back, especially on a Friday, I don't mind doing it as long as we're out of there probably by two, because all the people coming back from or going north to New Hampshire all go that way. So I don't suspect it would take us more than four hours if we went down there at like nine, we'd be done by noon, one o'clock. But something to think about. But thank you for volunteering. Well, I'll let you know. And Doug, I'll let you know, too, if they do weekends. Okay, great. Then for survey projects, Jess is away this week, but just to let people know, there's multiple COGs working. I got an email from MHC noting that we have to close out the Winter Hill project. financial department hasn't been moving on any of our requests for nearly four months. So again, I sent it to them and copied the mayor and the mayor said that she would push the new financial team that's there into working on it. Hopefully by the end of the week is what I'm hoping to, because all I have to do is get some financial stuff straightened out. And once it's straightened out, then John can be paid the final outstanding payment that he's owed. And then once we have that, then I can close out the project. Brickyards, which is the project that follows that is in process. There is some paperwork that needs to be adjusted. Apparently, a grant account was never set up, and they tied the whole thing to our budget. So again, more straightening out of paperwork, and then we're awaiting. We did award the project to Claire Dempsey with John Clemson as a And then the other day, I had to further compound things, I received the application for next year's survey and planning grant so we need to pick a neighborhood, or we need to come together pretty quickly to decide where we're going next because Fulton Heights was the last neighborhood that we needed to do. There has been coverage in a neighborhood known as the Brooks Estates, which is the 20th century subdivision to the west of Grove Street. That's all of the 20th century houses that were built after the Brooks family sold off their farms in that location. But it's not been produced into any sort of MHC inventory forms. So that's a possibility. We could also redo neighborhoods sub-neighborhoods in Medford Square. For example, the Lawrence Estates, which is fairly uniform, might be a good example of a large single development. Or we may find that there's a whole another section of Fulton Heights that we have to do. But unfortunately, we haven't even gotten off the ground there, so I won't be able to tell that until we dig our heels in a little bit more.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, can I ask a question? You mentioned earlier that we've taken, tell me if this is accurate, a first pass at every part of the city now. So are we talking about going deeper? I used to say the product we started with years ago is not up to what we're doing now.
[Adam Hurtubise]: We did we meaning the consultants did a project with their students at the time, or Brooks estate, they didn't actually do a survey and planning grant. So the no inventory forms were ever produced but what they did produce is a database of. just general building information they have data on the buildings what they look like you know what their architectural features are in hopes that we might go back there at some point and and we look at that neighborhood. It was a 20th century neighborhood. At the time it wasn't covered under demo delay so it wasn't really a high priority. It's still, I don't know if it still is and I say that because what we should do is we should look at all the recommendations for all the survey and planning projects because they were able to do a fair number of inventory forms, but they were always areas that they weren't able to complete. So there are recommendations that basically will form the next survey plan for the next, I don't know, five years or so, you know, because we're never going to be able to do it all, but we are going to be able to chip away at huge neighborhoods and learn more. Like there's nothing known about the Lawrence estates. We know a little bit about the development, some of the houses, but, you know, by and large, it's mostly remained the same. Like you'll notice that there's not a lot of demolitions that take place there. So that might be a good one that's pretty uniform, pretty well preserved to learn a lot about.
[Doug Carr]: Except tonight, right? I mean, wasn't Lincoln Road? That's tonight.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, Lincoln Road. Lincoln Road is kind of on the cusp, the back side of Lincoln Road is really the Lawrence had his farmhouse up there and it didn't really develop. Those were the showpiece houses and what could we do to this neighborhood if we were going to do it? Then they waited until after the whole neighborhood developed on the backside and then they tore down all the houses on the Medford side. So they left those actually for last, which is unusual. I don't need an answer now, just to let folks know to not put you on the spot. I don't need an answer now, but we should have an answer by next meeting.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, that's what I was exactly going to say, is that we should think about it, because there's economic pressures in certain areas like Hillside, Greenline, even West Medford, and Medford Square. If the comprehensive plan goes forward, there should be some rather significant changes, and we've been talking about you know, historic district. So there's certainly areas of the city that are seeing pressure and future pressure which should be coming. So we should come to the next meeting with some thoughts about where to put our priorities, I think.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Right, I keep harping on this, but maybe, you know, and maybe I'll really do it this time. It would be nice, I'll take the housing production plan and show where they wanna increase density and see if there's areas, you know, if any of that's in East Medford. I mean, we have good coverage here, but there's always other areas that we can be doing. Great. And then the last thing that I have an old business unless I missed anything is the approval of the meeting minutes. Either that you, I didn't see I read some meeting minutes I didn't see anything.
[Unidentified]: Did anybody else have any questions comments. If not, I'll take a motion to approve. I know Ed has stepped away.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Quorum's four, though, just so you know.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, I was not present at the last meeting. No, I was present at the last one, but the one before in early September, I think. Yeah. Yeah, so I won't be voting on that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. All right, so let's take them out of order, then, because I'll wait for Ed to return. the meeting minutes for October 3rd meeting? Yes.
[Unidentified]: I need a motion to approve. I move to approve. Second. Okay, roll call vote. Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Unidentified]: And kit.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes. And Doug. Yes. And, and we have a motion on the table. Yes. 10 three meeting minutes. Yes. Okay, so approve five to zero. And then last month's meeting minutes that is September 12.
[Unidentified]: I need a motion to approve.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I did a motion to approve not by Peter because Peter wrote them and I can't I can't.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: So that's it. I I will move move noting my absence of the meeting.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I was also asked and so that's why that's why we couldn't that's why we couldn't he wasn't voting on these ones. But can't you're going to second I'll second okay. It goes okay motion to approve Peter.
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And Ed?
[SPEAKER_02]: Aye.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And Kit? Yes. And Doug, you're recusing yourself from the vote? Yes. Okay, so four to zero to one, approved. Great. Well, actually it's three to zero, right? Three to zero, one, two, three, three to zero, sorry, right, three to zero, I do not vote.
[MCM00001222_SPEAKER_04]: Majority of those present voting qualified, yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yep, yep, I suppose I could vote if I needed to, but I don't. One recusal. Okay, that's it for whole business unless anybody else has anything.
[Unidentified]: Move to adjourn.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, hearing none. Ed West motion adjourned. And undebatable seconded by? Second. Okay, Peter. Okay, going around the room, Peter.
[Unidentified]: Yes. Going home, yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes. Doug. Yes, I'm so pleased it's not been a two hour meeting like so many of them have had. Yes. So 4-2-0. Great. All set. Thank you, everybody. So we will see you back here. Three weeks. Three weeks. November 14th? Yeah.
[Unidentified]: Yeah, 14th.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yep. So we'll see you then. I'll get the MHC.
[Unidentified]: Adios.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thanks, everyone.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
|
total time: 0.86 minutes total words: 96 |
|||