[Adam Hurtubise]: Hello everybody, this is the Medford Historical Commission meeting, August 14 2023. It started in just a second, just take a second to get yourself settled. Are you ready to take minutes. Okay, great. All right, I'll just have to read the governor's statement here on March 29 2023 governor Healy signed into law a supplemental budget bill which among other things extends the temporary provisions pertaining to the open meeting law to March 31 2025. Specifically, this further extension allows public bodies to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of public body physically present at a meeting location and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. Language does not make any substance change to the open meeting laws other than extending the expiration date of the temporary provisions regarding this remote meetings to March 31st, 2023 to March 31st, 2025. Okay, first up on the agenda for new business 421 High Street. I believe I sent around this to some folks. We have a site plan review for comments. Was there any comments from the board? Peter, do you happen to have the drawings that we can show to Kit, Jess? I believe so. This was a project that we reviewed for demolition delay. Way back nearly a decade ago, there was a project in the back at 423 High Street that was demolished. And then the building in the front, 421, has since been demolished. It went through demolition review. It got mitigation. And we reviewed the proposed design. This is basically what we came up with. There's been some changes since. So basically that's the frontage. It sort of fits in with the commercial development. I think one of the last pages shows this in the adjacent building, yeah. So they've kind of kept the front at street level, three stories and stepped it back a little bit up the top with terraces. any questions, comments, concerns, things we want to comment on. If not, we can tell them we have no further comments, but just wanted to make sure that that's okay.
[Doug Carr]: Are there two different sets of plans we're seeing here?
[Unidentified]: No, this is all one.
[Adam Hurtubise]: These are the side views, I believe, the rear view. Although you can kind of see it in context with adjacent buildings.
[Doug Carr]: Peter, this design just doesn't remind me of what we had before. I know they said there were changes. What were the changes?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think the entry used to be in the corner. And then this corner tower, if you will, was a little bit more defined as an element. But I feel like I can't remember if there was this arcade. I know there was pilasters.
[Doug Carr]: I don't think there was an arcade at the ground floor. I think this is more different than we think, but is this, this came out of the community development board design review, I presume.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. Okay. Um, I might have the old set if you want me to look for it.
[Doug Carr]: I suspect we're not going to be able to go to undo anything here. It is essentially the same scale.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't know that it was, it was the previous one. I guess they did sort of have an arcade partially, but it was, you know, this corner tower or bay was more pronounced. So, but I think it's kind of the same mass. It's just, this was more based on the tower at the corner and the other one's more of a kind of a symmetrical centralized facade. You know what I mean?
[Doug Carr]: But I think we should probably, I would recommend we probably pass on this in terms of making changes, because it is just a more detailed articulation of what we've already seen.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. I don't think it's that much different. Yeah. Okay.
[Unidentified]: I can let them know that we'll pass if all the commissioners agree on that course. All right. Hearing no opposition, we'll go in that direction. Oh, there's a 3D view. Yeah. Yeah, I think it'll be a nice building for that neighborhood. Hopefully it will spur the developers next door to improve their building.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. Thank you, Peter.
[Unidentified]: Yep.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Next up is Wackling Court, the review of the MHC Form A. I sent this around to the commissioners a little bit earlier today for review. Basically, we just need to, the consultant has asked us just to review and make sure nothing seems out of the ordinary there for details. I reviewed it, didn't seem that was the case. And then what will happen is, We should just summarize our comments or whether or not we agree or disagree with the findings and then forward those on to the applicants, and then they can include that with the. with the project notification and environmental forms. And then basically MHC is going to ask us if they find that there's impacts to historic resources, they're going to ask us what we want. So I would just like to go on the record and say that based on the consultant review of the property, they're recommended that we ask for documentation as part of this process. And that's it, I think, and maybe some archaeological review during excavation to make sure that if there are subsurface elements of the canal remaining that they're at least documented. So I'm curious, Ryan, does this It's not 75 years old correct. It's more like it's 60 years. Yeah so in terms of the National Register the National Register is going to consider any building. At 50 years old or older is not going to be reviewable under the demolition delay. But what this is reviewable under is the section one of 6 review an environmental process because they're receiving state and federal monies. It's they're going to have to file a project notification and environmental form. So that's going to be where we're get our review so we're just being proactive here and taking part of the process earlier than then waiting for the PNF to be submitted.
[Unidentified]: So, questions, comments?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Did folks read the form and have thoughts on it? I thought it was pretty interesting. Yeah, it was interesting. I had one question, I guess, about the form. Because there is a page in there that says National Register of Historic Places Criteria Statement Form. Nothing is circled or checked off although. Claire says something about. I think they're likely to be. Well clean court housing product likely to be eligible as national register district. Under criteria and see at the local level. Yeah be eligible under criteria D so I was just confused because is that there is not in her, in their opinion, you know, possibly eligible, I guess. Yeah, it's just missing that. It seems like it's missing the checkpoint, the checkbox. I'll ask her to clarify whether she thinks it's individually eligible or eligible in a historic district. It's probably both because it's a it's a district, basically. So But I'll ask her to clarify that and what this is going to. So what she's saying is she feels that it is and are eligible. And what this is going to do is the moment they submit the PNF and we provide this with the comments, it's going to trigger an eligibility review. by the state, and if it is and are eligible, it's the same weight as if it were listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and then the state will review on whether or not the demolition is detrimental. They might say yes, it is a newer resource, but I think Claire makes a compelling case that because it's a major part of Medford's housing history, that they're probably going to say yes, and then they're just going to come back to us and say, what do you want? At which point, we're going to provide them with the answer. already right off the bat. which is documentation more yeah, yeah, yeah, our goal is not I think in my opinion, my heart. Our goal is not to stop this project but rather just to document the building as an existing resource in the landscape and then you know let it move forward and that's basically part of the section 106 process, there's no it's not like a demo delay where it's not to stop a project, it's only a a brief pause to make sure that they mitigate the damages to historic resources.
[Doug Carr]: So Ryan, I agree with your assessment. I think most people understand that Medford desperately needs affordable housing. And this project, the one that's gonna supersede this one is more units, more modern units. These buildings, obviously, one way of looking at them is well-preserved. Another way of looking at them is that they're frozen in time and they're functionally obsolete, which the housing authority has told us this for decades, that that's the case. accessibility and otherwise. So, I mean, I think we're, I think it's pretty clear the direction we're going. The question is, do we want to get ahead of this? Do we want to make an assessment, ask for documentation now? Who would that be asking?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So, there's a process. So if the state says no, I wouldn't want to get too far ahead because the state's going to be under the gun. They have a 30-day deadline to respond. So it's going to move pretty quickly once they submit. And if they do determine that it is NR eligible and it is detrimental, there's a whole process that involves the signing of a memorandum of understanding with that. So that's out of our hands and we really can't override that. have the owners start pulling some consultants for what it would cost for documentation efforts and what that would involve. You know, PAL is, we've worked with PAL before, they're one that would do it. You know, Epsilon, I believe, is the environmental planning group. I think they have done things in the past. There are other groups that do this type of work, so. we can certainly give them three or four names and they can go poll. We just have to make sure we give them a scope of work of what we're looking for. And we can come up with that pretty quickly. Plus, as Claire says in her form, the building department has a lot of great resources to dig into, and not every question could be answered. You wouldn't normally get every question answered, but she knows that there's other stuff there that would answer some questions, like, for example, the Housing Authority's decision to move forward with the creation of Walkwing Court. They didn't dive into any of the original Housing Authority meeting minutes, but they were all there. And those are the type of things that documentation would dive into and would try to get those questions. Plus, there's photographs during construction. You saw just a small sampling of them on the form. Those type of things go into documentation records, and then they would go in and kind of take sample photographs of a few of the empty units that are best representative of it, you know, the whole complex.
[Unidentified]: So that's basically the whole process there. Okay, other thoughts, questions on the form?
[Adam Hurtubise]: we have a direction because the can the proponents sent over a letter and they were asking for us to support it but I I was not willing to sign it because we hadn't had the form to review it and it was it's summary contradicts what the form says so I'd like to recreate a new letter that kind of supports both their project but also supports the findings of the consultant as well. documentation, I mean you're well yeah yeah basically that says that we're that we believe that the building is historic as stated in the MHC form a and that we're interested in seeing the building documented as part of the process.
[Doug Carr]: It's, it's significant but not perfectly preserved.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, it would be know what you would say you would. So their MHC is kind of basically do like a one and done and they would probably say it's both preferably preserved and significant. Because again, Claire says that in her thing, in her form, she basically says because of the lack of updates and maintenance, it is preferably preserved for that reason because it maintains a lot of integrity. But Doug, I think what Ryan was also saying, it doesn't really fall under our purview because it's not our particular board purview because it's not old enough. Right. Slightly different. It's a different process. We're doing this at the the state level. So we wouldn't vote on whether it was. Significant or preserve because it's really all right.
[Doug Carr]: I guess that's what we want to do.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Correct yeah, I guess we will have to provide comments we could either I don't want to wait until the PNF is submitted. I want to submit our comments with their project notification form.
[Unidentified]: So, okay. Sorry, I'm just sending it. I can't, I'm just sending you the form now just so you can take a look at it. Jess, anything else from you?
[Jenny Graham]: I don't think so. I agree with Claire's assessment and your, you know, your interpretation and next steps. So, thanks.
[Unidentified]: Questions, comments from Jeff or Natalie?
[8msxsKW1z_4_SPEAKER_26]: If I could jump in, this is Margaret Donnelly-Moran. I'm the deputy executive director of the Cambridge Housing Authority, and I'm joined with Jeff Driscoll and Gabe Ciccarelli from Medford. So as you know, we're serving as the development consultant. And I guess the one concern I had, and maybe it's because of the purview of Miss Dempsey is, you know, I'm wanting to hear you say that the project has has been kind of sustained as it was built in the 1960s because the housing authorities had very little money to renovate the The building so it's actually preserved, but the current condition of the building is in very poor condition and you know the the first page of the report referenced it as good condition. And it really doesn't represent the kind of the infrastructure issues that the housing authority has been experiencing in the. The age of the property in terms of the pipes failing and the heating system failing and the other building components failing. And then I think you guys already addressed the fact that they're obsolete for the intended use because half of the units are On the second floor and folks are not able to age in place and and and it's not suitable for the population that was intended to to preserve to serve and all of that seems to be missing, you know, one, you know, the language on on condition.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm going to offer a point of clarification. Yeah. So there's two different, two different things that being talked about. I think all the things that you're talking about are life cycle features that are from an architectural perspective that I 100% agree that the buildings would you know, are aging, but in terms of perspective from the consultants, they're looking at it from what's there for historic fabric. And they're looking at how much of the originality of the building and how much of it has changed over time. And it seems like not a lot. And, you know, so, but... And that's where it gets its good rating. Yeah and I think that they're both they're both going to come together because none of us none of us are trying to stop the project we're just making sure that this building just gets its due. So I think everybody's moving in the right the same the right in the same direction. Ultimately you you will get your new project we just want to make sure that that you know we perceive this as a you know a good representation of Medford's first attempt into elderly housing development and it will be replaced with something that will be representative of the Medford of today.
[Doug Carr]: Right I I actually echo is Margaret said I when I saw good condition. I actually did a double take because I'm like, I know those buildings are not in good condition. And these photos are beautiful, but they make it look like it's in pristine form. And it's a disaster if you get close to it or inside of it. It's falling apart. I mean, obviously I was preaching to the choir for the people on the screen.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, and I feel that those are certainly, that's the difference between preservation analysis and historic fabric versus the life cycle analysis. It is preserved, but it's also at the end of its usable life. So in this, and there are two slightly different things, but they're both gonna work together to get the documentation here and then be done with this project. So we hear you. I hear that sentiment. Again, I'm not trying to stop the project at all.
[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Ryan, I'm certainly in touch. Jeffrey Driscoll here. I'm sorry. I'm the director of the Housing Authority, and I'm certainly encouraged to hear the point of view. Anything that would create a roadblock for us may jeopardize our funding down the line. And the Housing Authority itself at this point has incurred quite a cost just to get to where we are now. And we've had the support of both the state, significant support from the state with this and from the city. But I'm pleased to hear that you recognize that it is, at least in our opinion, functionally obsolete. And so that not only are the as Margaret indicated and Margaret touch base on a number of issues that I agree with. But not only is it difficult for us to maintain those buildings, it being functionally obsolete is that we actually have difficulty housing people at that development because there's nine buildings of two stories without any type of lift to get people to the second story. And we're talking about elderly and disabled folks. So we're looking to try to address that along with trying to improve the number of affordable units in the City of Medford. So I appreciate the approach you're taking, but I encourage you to continue working with us and we will be a very good study of what it is that we all can move forward on in the City of Medford.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, and I I I definitely want to frame our letter as a support letter so that you guys can include it with the project notification form and at the state level will see the comments right away that we have basically it will be you know, here's the form that they will make their decision off of and the moment that you guys submitted if you're not familiar with the process they have 30 days to respond. Once they do they'll either say it is or isn't and are eligible. and there is or isn't detrimental impacts. If there is, then it will just still come back to us and say, what do you want out of it? We're going to tell them in our letter that we just want to see mitigation in the sense that we want the buildings documented. So we want them photographed to record the condition that they are in for posterity, maybe a little bit more historic research on the background and changes over time. And then once MHC and the commissioner satisfied that's been done. Usually that's a month or 2 in total depending on the consultant then we submit that I think the state gets a copy and that you guys will be free to move forward however you So choose so and I think all of this is working in tandem with your timeline to start for like a springtime demolition, if I recall correctly, so we still have plenty of time for these processes to take place over the over the winter.
[Jeffrey Driscoll]: The one thing that that I get concerned with, though, is because of the requirements that we have in so far as not only design, but more importantly, bid will be bidding this more than likely before that springtime deadline.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, and that we don't want you to stop bidding and all that. We understand having done our own projects that it's complicated and it can be problematic sometimes. So you guys can just keep moving forward with those processes while this one happens concurrently.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And we, you know, we want to get this right because I'm sure we'll be doing it again and again, right? Because I'm sure that something's planned in the future for like LaPraze Village and the other developments at some point, so.
[Jeffrey Driscoll]: You're exactly correct on that.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: Ryan, quick question, which is, I mean, if what we're after is documentation, what precludes us from going ahead with that right now ahead of the letter? And I mean, what's the process by which You know, we can we can do our process. The housing authority can do theirs and we can move this along as quickly as possible for everybody.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, so we can we can provide the names of consultants that do this type of work if you guys haven't ever had somebody do documentation for it. And we'll come up with just a very quick like half paragraph summary of the type of things that we're looking for we can give you an example of what's been done before. And then you guys can investigate a couple of consultants because if the state does mandate that as part of their process they're going to put that on the House authority to move forward with as the proponent for demolition.
[Unidentified]: So nothing's precluding they can get started with that right away.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So I will work on that tomorrow morning and get you those names.
[Doug Carr]: Thank you. Do you think you could, uh, you could execute that, um, documentation that Ryan's requesting with the direction we give you quickly?
[Jeffrey Driscoll]: I'm going to defer to Margaret on that.
[Doug Carr]: Okay.
[8msxsKW1z_4_SPEAKER_26]: Yeah, no, I think, you know, if you give us a few names and we've worked with Epsilon on some other projects, So they're from that we're well experienced with but we'll have to go out and solicit proposals from from the firms as public agency. So getting a head start and that would be really helpful.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Margaret can you mainly your last name for the record.
[8msxsKW1z_4_SPEAKER_26]: Sure it's not it's Donald and I tried to put it on but I couldn't figure out how to change my name so my apology said it didn't have my name. So it's Donnelly Moran double last name.
[Unidentified]: And I'm deputy executive director for Cambridge Housing Authority for the development department. Any other questions?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think we're all set here so I think what we're going to do next is all tweak the letter that was sent out originally to us to focus it more on the findings of the MHC form and to be supported, you know, take that information that that the consultants were looking for and continue to be supportive, send it around to the commissioners and we'll get it out to you guys maybe by the end of the week. So then you guys can submit the PNF
[8msxsKW1z_4_SPEAKER_26]: I think that would be fantastic and thank you so much. You're welcome guys. Thank you.
[Jeffrey Driscoll]: Thank you all so much. Appreciate it. You're welcome. Good evening. Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Thank you everybody. Have a nice evening. You too. All right. For CLG annual report, I got noticed that
[Adam Hurtubise]: The state. Let us know that for the last 29 years apparently Chris Bader has been the CLG coordinator contact for the state and no report has been filed for Medford for the last 12 years so we are in debt jeopardy of losing that status so I am working with him on not only preparing the CLG report for this year but the CLG for the previous 2 years to bring that for back into compliance. This will be going to the mayor once it's This year's is done because she should be aware that he's been getting these in and not acting upon them. And I think this is something that maybe the commission should be the regular contact because we seem to be far more active, even if it requires their assistance and requires their input I think we should continue to be the CLG. coordinator in this case. For those of you who don't know, CLG communities are ones that have historic districts and local historical commissions. They have some sort of local ordinance and they go through a certification process with the federal government. It puts us in a smaller pool of money. 10% of federal funds have to be passed along to CLG communities, so that's why we're guaranteed to get money every year. from the Massachusetts State Historical Commission through the CLG, through the Survey and Planning Program. And in this particular year, we actually got even more money because they had CLG funding that they had to spend, and they asked us if we wanted to spend it, and we said, sure, free money is good money. So it's very important that we don't lose this status. So I am going to work with the HTC to kind of bring them back into compliance with public meeting laws and all that good stuff. So if I need help, I will let you know. Chris Bader is currently working on some things.
[Doug Carr]: So hopefully, you know, let's, let's get it here. We obviously have enough capacity to organize them.
[Unidentified]: Okay. Any other new business?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, going back to old business. Properties under demo delay. I signed off on 31 South Street, so that's all set. There is a permit incoming for 65 Park Street, I believe. It's the total demolition of a one and a half story or 65 Court Street, rather. One and a half story pre 1855 house. I'd like to get a jump on the MHC form be, if possible. Yeah 6769 Court Street is the actual address. It's a one and a half story building with a bunch of additions in the back and the permit just simply says total demolition of existing House so I'm assuming the whole thing's coming down. So I'd like to get a jump on the form be before they submit paperwork. Somebody wants to make a motion to appropriate $500 for 4 people have talked.
[Unidentified]: I make a motion to us.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Expend $500 for form B for 67 through 69 Court Street.
[Unidentified]: And a second. Second. He'll go around the room as I see people. Kit? Yes. Doug? Yes. Peter? Yes. Jess? Yes. All right, motion passes 4-0, approved.
[Doug Carr]: Right, he said 69 court Street right, I'm looking at a Google Street view looks like.
[Adam Hurtubise]: yeah 6769 it's a one and a half story. Like gable and house okay. Judging by the granite foundation it's going to be pre 1855 looks like it's had a handful of additions in the in its day just as total demolition so. I'm going to assume that the whole building's coming down, and they'll put something new here. Or maybe they're going to build a giant addition. I don't know. But so far, all I can work off of is it just says total demolition.
[Doug Carr]: It still looks like a three-story house to me on the Google Street View for both buildings.
[Unidentified]: Like in the back? It's blue. It's blue? Oh, Court Street? It's 67 Court Street. Okay. I'd like to say Park Street originally, but it's 67 Court Street. Okay. Well, we'll send the form to us. Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Other than that, I don't, I didn't see any movement on 33 Third Street, which was the last one and nothing on 91 Winchester. Although I did send an email saying that CPC preliminary. Eligibility forms are due if she wants to apply for any CLG funding. CPA funding rather. It looks like from the list that this is a month that 33 3rd Street is up. Do we have to do anything for them. We don't have to do anything we don't have to write any letters. Nope don't follow up. Sam it's the applicants responsibility to follow up and move their project forward.
[Unidentified]: Any other questions on property under demo delay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I have nothing to report on permits at this point. I do have some cpa project updates have at the mayor's office right now two projects that are awaiting her approval one is for the small grant from the cpa committee that the commission authorized a match for the design of a monument at Thomas Brooks Park that will cap the archaeological resource and protect it from any sort of disruptions in the future. Peter Hedlund gave me a cost of $9,800 to do total design of that monument and some of the content within and paths and grading and all that good stuff. So that's that is at the mayor's office. And we're looking to get basically a 50-50 match where half of it's coming from the commission budget. And we're looking to see if we can get the other half from CPA. I have been talking with Freedom's Way National Historic Area. They are also interested in contributing funding to this project. So even if CPC doesn't, I know CPC is gonna be tight this year. So if CPC doesn't have the full funding for it, then we can ask Freedom's Way to also expend some money into it and try to get that. So that's the small one. And then I have a much larger eligibility form going in for Thomas Brooks Park phase two, which is inclusive of the completion of archaeological excavations at the Thomas Brooks House site, deadwood removal, signage for the park, crosswalk and curb cut improvements, And with a 15% contingency on all of that, it's a $290,000 project in total. And again, with the CPC being limited in terms of its funding because of the amount of projects that are gonna come to it this year, I tried to hit multiple departments, both historic preservation, open space and recreation. And I'm already talking with community development about other grants that we can apply for just in case funding falls short. There's also multiple components so we can also phase it out into further phases of work if need be. So I have like a plan A, B, and C for this project. So something will go forward contingent on some funding coming our way.
[Doug Carr]: So if I could just chime into that. Ryan, the deadline is this Friday, I believe. Have you gotten it in already, or is it going later?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, it's sitting at the mayor's office, and then as soon as she signs off on it, all I got to do is copy and paste all this stuff into the smart sheets.
[Doug Carr]: The smaller project, is that an off cycle? Or are you trying to put that on this cycle?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Now it's well, I mean, we could put it on this off cycle, on this cycle, but I'm trying to do it as an off cycle grant, small grant under $10,000, under $5,000. And I'm proposing that because it's, well, I'm trying, there's a limited number of those projects that can happen and they're outside of, I understand they're outside of normal CPC round funding. So I'm just trying to grab them.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I think that's actually a good idea to try to get in there because the process of, you know, getting the full cycle, you know, as long as you know, several rounds, there's meetings, there's votes, there's city council. you know if you get that one under the radar and I would I would definitely recommend that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah and I'm also happy to to say that if the project moves fund forward you know when we you can report this right to CPC are happy to come tell them you know we have the match in our budget already so we can just move forward with the project and because it's a $9800 proposal. I don't have to go to bed I can just move forward with Peter and it will go forward right into the design process. So it's a if they award the funding then we can just move forward accordingly.
[Unidentified]: The grid.
[Doug Carr]: This is never last year was the first year where they had to make choices of the CPC they couldn't find everything they wanted to. This year the state revenues are down a little bit we're not sure if they're going to try to a supplemental funding in September. Uh, to try to boost that back up, but I think it will be highly competitive. There are some big ones. There's affordable housing coming in that we just saw previously. Um, and this, you know, the, the usual cast of characters, uh, coming, um, back, you know, most years. So it's, it's going to be competitive, but bringing it into phasing allow them slightly reduced funding, uh, is a good plan, uh, for sure. So I think you're on the right track and all that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I don't want to say, I don't want to say that, you know, there, I can phase it. I think the most important thing that needs to be done next is there is the sidewalk crosswalk and curb cut improvements for ADA accessibility and to there have been several neighbor. I want to call them complaints. They're not complaints. They're neighbor feedbacks, looking to make sure that the access from the south of the end of the park, which was closed off in preparation of putting in a sidewalk and concentrating people to a new crosswalk, actually happens rather than let it sit more than a year. cost is much less than the biggest cost which is the actual deadwood and tree removal work, which is nearly $160,000 to manicure all of the trees and remove all of the deadwood, but that is also a very critical component because currently If you just look up the park is actually quite unsafe it's got tons and tons of deadwood it just sitting there and any good storm. Even just sitting there any good wind would take it down, so we want to make sure that they know the park is safe and to encourage new growth and some of those older trees so.
[Unidentified]: So so you know, again for some hard priorities, but we can do it so. Any other questions.
[Adam Hurtubise]: are hearing on a move forward to the brickyards so this was one of the projects that we got an extension on we got more funding I think we got another 10 grand to do another series of inventory forms in a corner of the neighborhood that was bypassed on the first round of work so the consultants are. basically taking care of that because it needs to be spent by September, which is just around the corner. And we have until December to get the whole project wrapped up. So we're a little bit under the gun, but we can do it. State came to us. They believe in us. And I am confident that I can get it done. So that will be one project on its way. The consultants are working on Fulton Heights as well, but that's going to take a bit of a backseat while they do this temp work, but they did say they're focused on areas of development that are representative of the larger Fulton Heights neighborhood. They're particularly interested in some sections that were built by, the houses were built by the owners in the sense that they were literally framed by the owners. There's a small collection of buildings that kind of were highlighted by the Boston Globe in 1920 that talk about this little village of self-created houses and it represented like what Fulton Heights wanted to become and so that's all going to come out as part of this whole process and project and The consultants are excited because this type of development doesn't normally occur very close to Boston. And if it does, it's often eradicated by later, larger development. So this is a great opportunity to learn something new about the landscape that, and hopefully it will, you know, by understanding it, it will be preserved rather than simply demolished in the future.
[Unidentified]: Okay. Any other questions? Peter, your meeting minutes are up next. Okay. Peter sent around meeting minutes. Any questions, comments, concerns, edits, changes? Hearing none, I'll take a motion to approve.
[Jenny Graham]: I move to approve the July meeting minutes, July 2023.
[Unidentified]: Second. I can't make a motion because I'm chair Peter can't make a motion because he made it done that leaves you again.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: And I need to recuse myself because I wasn't there for a job.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay.
[Unidentified]: Yes, you're.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, it's not sorry not just yes and Ryan says yes approved for 0. Any other old business. I missed.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, I thought we determined some time ago that people could vote on minutes, even if they weren't around. I heard that maybe it was another meeting I was in the city. Did you hear something different?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, I think they can. I think this people sometimes recuse themselves because they weren't there at that meeting. So they just don't want, don't feel the need to vote, which is fine. Yeah.
[Doug Carr]: Okay. Uh, the only other question I had, uh, Ryan was the, uh, I had circulated a letter, a draft letter to the, the, uh, Mystic Ave, Harvard Ave, lab building proposal that was about a month, I think it was the last time, and we didn't act on it. I don't know if it's too late or if we want to still put that in for the record or what do you think?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I mean, I can see if I can follow up with Dennis to see where that project lies. There's no reason why we can't just submit those comments. I think it's important to note, I think our general consensus was yes to development there, current proposal too big, not feasible, but we encourage them to do something that's a little bit more feasible. Was that the general consensus?
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, it was. And there was also some things that were functionally unworkable on the ground floor, regardless of parking, loading, and a whole bunch of things. It just, like, it was not a viable plan. And it's a giant building on essentially a single family lot, size-wise in Medford. So I think that had some real challenges. You know, the other buildings we saw on Mystic Avenue were much bigger, but they were on much bigger sites too. They had, you know, drop-off areas and surface parking and setbacks and landscaping, this had none of that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, and I was, just as an aside, I was driving by the development that all went in along The commuter rail line in Cambridge and some of those buildings seem to be what you talked about about lab space with the 2 and 3 story. Cooling towers and HVAC equipment up at the very top so I can see very quickly where like Boston have other buildings are feasible without that so.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I think this one actually had a reasonable panels, but it's just a lot of market is just not viable right now what happens. Okay. Let me know if we want to wrap it up. We can circulate that later this week. Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Um has there been any movement on the Fellsway project? I know you're accused yourself on that one. Um but I'm just curious if you knew anything about where that stood. That's the development on Myrtle Street corner of Fellsway. The corrugated box company. That's I think they're going to tear down half of it. Put up new development and some townhouses
[Doug Carr]: It was that was that the Mill Creek building was in the creek.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't know if it's Mill Creek. It's I don't know what they called it.
[Doug Carr]: That is you know what he's talking about.
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, no, it's, it's the other one Mill Creek was the one on Valley Park way that just finished. This one was another developer. I can't remember the developer name to be honest with you but it's that one is one of the ones that got appealed and it's tied up in the housing courts, and we're just waiting. to see if that'll get settled at some point. We're not really sure. I know like they were all all all the projects were in that court and then Mill Creek negotiated with the city to just come back before us and I think they've been trying to do that with this project but I'm not involved in those discussions so I know there's been at least talks of trying to move this one forward at least but it's as of right now it's just sitting in the courts at HUD, their courts there, just waiting.
[Adam Hurtubise]: What's the Fellsway, a 40B, probably? Yeah. That's the one we went and looked at like a couple years ago? Yeah. All the bricks struck?
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, it would have been.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah that one's that one's been sitting a while I was just curious as to what's going on any. So any movement on the conversion of that rail line into a rail trail.
[Denis MacDougall]: There's been a way back when there's just doing it is just a matter of the ownership of that is Unusual?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, it's CSX. It's different. They're difficult. Well, it's also MBTA.
[Denis MacDougall]: When you go past, the line would be going over commuter rail lines, which apparently the T doesn't really like paths going over lines.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah well I also I also heard that the commuter rail abandoned the tunnel that they were once under so it kind of made it problematic that they're now surface running at that cross.
[Doug Carr]: So there's some community path.
[Denis MacDougall]: But it's going over I don't. There's been a lot and they've been trying to work on it and it's.
[Unidentified]: You cut out Dennis.
[Doug Carr]: The new community path in Somerville goes over commuter lines and every line imaginable. You know, the one that goes from Dallas-Davis Square now to Lechmere. You know, it can't be done. It takes effort, obviously, and willpower, but that's a great opportunity, as you're alluding to that, Brian.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, it would cut my commute down from one hour walking distance to nearly 15 minutes. It's like got a win-win for that entire neighborhood. So I just would really like to see something there and I might have to become the push that makes it happen. But for now, my attention is turned on making sure that I deliver on the promise of Thomas Brooks Park and making sure that the neighbors, that we take care of the neighbors there. Okay. Hey, Doug, you know, one other thing I remembered from previous meetings, I don't think ever, anything's ever happened with the, uh, the marquee thing at the old theater.
[Doug Carr]: You know, I, I, I was thinking that the other day, cause I would drove by just to check out. I'll, I'll send them another email because he promised that. I don't know if it was within a year or six months, but either way, it's been longer than both.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, well, and now we have a letter from KP law that it says that it's reasonable to have the building inspector restrict or delay or withhold the permit on a project if they don't deliver on plans that were before us. So if those plans, I know where we engaged in the community development office with that process, but they too have the right to withhold their approvals on that project and to not release the certificate of occupancies if he doesn't deliver on that canopy.
[Doug Carr]: But Ryan, hasn't that already been done for the housing portion?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't, I don't know. He's currently building something. So what happens if he doesn't get his commercial permit, you know? So I would try to play it before he completes that project in its totality. Cause once it, once he completes it and walks away, nobody's going to do it. So Peter, you were saying. Oh, no, I was going to make a bad joke about which would happen first, the marquee or the opening of the tequila bar. It looks finished, but I don't know what's going on with that either. Latest rumor is that they've been trying to hire staff. Yeah, I've heard that's difficult in this day and age.
[Unidentified]: Yeah. Yeah. OK, any any other business that we miss? Hearing none, we can we can dissolve the meeting. Folks are ready. So moved. And a second? Second. I'll go around the room. Kit? Yes. And Doug? Yes. And Peter? Yes. And Jess? Yes. OK, great. 4-0 approved. Under an hour meeting.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So that was perfect.
[Doug Carr]: Let's set this as the new bar, Brian.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And no, other than Court Street coming in and perhaps maybe one other small project, nothing for next month. So maybe we should plan on working on, you know, reviewing CPC stuff and where we go from here.
[Doug Carr]: One quick comment on CPC. They're trying to do a five-year retrospective and they want to highlight all of the projects, obviously. So I think there'll be the new coordinator, Teresa DuPont, there will be reaching out to anyone who did a project basically over the last five years. So if there's some fine images or something that we need to share for anything we've done, Ryan surveys, Thomas Brooks park, other things, you know, we should just get the ball rolling and just send them.
[Adam Hurtubise]: It is just Thomas Brooks park. That is my one and only CPC project. There's been other things, but nothing that's materialized. So that's the, that's the one and only one and only.
[Doug Carr]: Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So, but that is the shining star. So, by the way, the consultant, Mason has, and I will find the archival ways to archivally store them. As part of the restoration of Pomp's Wall, he saved four bricks that have the finger marks in them. So we felt that those were worthy enough that they shouldn't go back in the wall and that they should be, should have some sort of plaque put on them as to where their origins are. And then they'd be permanently stored with the archeological artifacts. And I, I agree. I think that's something that's so moving and touching that it shows quite literally that they are handmade. So those will be coming to us in the next few weeks.
[Doug Carr]: Brian, does the phase two include a new plaque? Because there's a process to rename both the wall and potentially the park as well, right?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So I think, yeah, I think as part of the memorial design, one of the things that we want to do is kind of highlight all the history that's there. So I don't know if so much the wall needs its own plaque as much as it needs both identification and to direct people to the memorial that's there as well. So we can discuss that with the Historical Society. I would like to put up a sign that talks about the park maybe on either end and at Palm's Wall maybe have a freestanding sign that says Palm's Wall at Thomas Brooks Park so people know it's there. and can see it from the street rather than just simply driving by but that and that's all in that sign budget is part of the larger app but we can certainly discuss that as those move forward.
[Unidentified]: Anything else. I thank you all thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Thanks everybody good night.
|
total time: 0.21 minutes total words: 23 |
|||