[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, I'll call the meeting to order. It's 7.02 p.m. Just a brief statement pursuant to the acts of 2023, this meeting of the City of Medford Historical Commission will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so via Zoom using the link provided in our agenda, which is available on our website. No in-person attendance of the members of the public will be permitted, and public participation in any public hearing during this meeting shall be by remote means only. All right. So we have a relatively light agenda today. So we'll start off with 37 Locust Street, the determination of significance. So commissioners, I apologize for being late, but I did send out an MHC form B and the inventory form For 37 locus street puts the building circa 1940 so it is eligible for review, so we will be determining significance tonight for the public's information determination of significance is defined as either. being listed or subject to listing on the National Register of Historic Places, has been or is pending listing on the Massachusetts Register of Historic Places, or what is most common in Medford, was built within 75 years or older, and is determined by the commission to be significant because either 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. So commissioners, I will entertain a motion for this building to kickstart the discussion and we will go from there. I'll make a motion to find 37 locusts historically significant, with the caveat that I'm probably going to shoot it down.
[Unidentified]: Okay, thank you, Peter. And a second? I'll second. Okay, second. Okay, Peter, go ahead.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, having just read the form B, I actually visited the place, rode my bicycle over there. It's got a fairly typical history for industrial building in this area, but I definitely don't find the building to be very architecturally compelling. And although the history to me is interesting, I don't find it really rises to the level of significant for me.
[Unidentified]: So that's where I'm coming down on it. Okay. Thank you, Kit.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: I pretty much second everything that Peter just said, which is, I think it's an interesting and historical building, but I'm not sure it rises to the level of all that significant.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Jess?
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah, I think that the documentation in the Form B is really useful and seems pretty comprehensive there's not a whole lot that's happened with this building over the years it's been pretty much used as the same type of building and I agree with my colleagues here that it probably doesn't rise to the level of significance for preservation. There wasn't a recommendation to put it on the historic register so that's I would just agree with everyone so far, and I appreciate that we have the documented history that we do have through the Hornby. Doug?
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, there's not much here for me. I agree. Just looking at it, beyond the interesting story, I'm glad we have the documentation, obviously, because buildings like this generally don't get this level of detail. But yeah, there's nothing I see there that shouldn't make us think about saving this building in any way.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, just as a final point, I think I was most interested in the fact that it was the same descendancy of owners, but that doesn't mean it's any sort of significant building, but it is cool. The builder that did own this particular structure has its associations with a whole bunch of other buildings in Medford. So it's neat to see all that come to play and to see their kind of their home base, but you're right, it doesn't, for me, it doesn't even rise to the occasion. Okay, great. With that being said, we can move forward with a vote on that motion. So I will go around for a roll call vote. Just a reminder, Peter's motion was defined for significance with the caveat that he shoots it down. So a vote of yes would make it significant, a vote of no would mean that it was not significant. Okay, so I'll go around as I see you on my screen, Peter. No. And Kit? And Jess?
[Unidentified]: No.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And Doug? No. Okay, great. So 4-0-4. So the motion fails, so it is not significant. So we will make sure that we file the letter with the city's clerk's office and the applicant can go forward with their demolition. Okay, that concludes the information on 37 Locust Street. Next up is the application for 23 Winter Street. Peter was kind enough to send that out. If you guys have had a chance to review it, I will take a motion to accept that application for review.
[Unidentified]: I move to accept the application. Second. Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, well just can have it for a second. Okay, motion's been made and seconded. I'll go around and roll call as I see you. Peter?
[Unidentified]: Yes, to accept. Yep, Kit? Yes. Jess? Yes. And Doug? Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, great, 4-0 approved. We need an MHC Form B for this building. It'll be $500 for John Clemson to prepare that form.
[Jenny Graham]: I move to allocate $500 to order a Form B for, what was the property again? What winter street? 23 Winter Street. 23 Winter Street.
[Unidentified]: Yep, add a second. Second. Okay. Okay, motion debate the seconded going around the room Peter. Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And kit. Yes, Jess. Yes. And Doug.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Great. For zero approved. Okay, next up, 280 Mystic Avenue. There was an application that was sent to us by the city's planning department for a planned development district. I wondered if anybody wanted to take the lead on that. It's for the project at 280 Mystic Ave, but there's multiple parcels involved. I think I can send out all the information to whoever wants to take the lead on it. Comments are due by June 16th, so we would have to provide comments pretty quickly.
[SPEAKER_08]: Ryan, who's the owner or developer and who's the architect on that?
[Adam Hurtubise]: The owner is Combined Properties. And I don't see an architect, but I have to read through the application. Let me forward this email to... Is this different than the 40B thing when we visited? I think we visited that site once.
[Unidentified]: I'm not sure.
[Jenny Graham]: I remember housing Medford as a group visited that site.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't know if- Peter, something was proposed there years ago, but we thought the design was terrible. Right. It was like this courtyard, but it was like this canyon, had a zillion units.
[Doug Carr]: I think it looked like the board, you know, machine, the spaceship.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, it was. Hopefully this is not that. Yeah, hopefully. I mean, maybe it's something like that, but something better, hopefully.
[Unidentified]: Yeah, I'm just sending it out right now. All right, I sent it out.
[Adam Hurtubise]: What we can do is we can circle back to that because we have something else on the table. Folks can review that information. But then we'll, we'll circle back at that a little bit after the next information. All right, next up on new business. It's not on the agenda, but we received an email from the City of Medford's Housing Authority in regards to Walkland Court. Walkland Court is slated for demolition in the future, and they have to provide the state with a project notification form to initiate review for the Massachusetts Historical Commission under the Section 106 review process. So they are coming to us tonight to discuss that process and its progress and to get a little bit of information. And then at the end of that, we need to authorize because there's not any sort of inventory form, an MHC area form for that development so that we have some documentation as to its history. So if the folks who are here for that project tonight could just introduce themselves, whoever wants to take the lead, I'm happy to initiate and let you guys speak.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Thank you very much. My name is Lee Morissette. I'm a principal architect at Dietzen Company Architects out of Springfield in Cambridge. I'm here with Danny Garber-Leticia, project manager on this project, and also two representatives of the owner from CHA, Maura Berry-Garland, and from the Medford Housing Authority, Gabe Ciccarello. If it would be okay, we have a short presentation we'd like to make to you about our findings on the site, and we have a few questions. Is that acceptable for us to share our screen?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Sure, let me just see if I can.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: It will be Danny will be driving in case you're curious.
[Unidentified]: Let me see. I think I can Danny see if you can share your screen and if you can't then I'll make it co host.
[Garbo-Leticia]: No, it says host has disabled participant.
[Unidentified]: Let's try this and I'll try to make you co host. There you go. Yeah, see if you can do that now. Yeah.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Thank you very much. I just I'm going to turn it over to Danny to make the presentation.
[Garbo-Leticia]: Sweet. Great. So first off, I just want to say thank you very much for entertaining this discussion with us, especially in particular, knowing that your typical deadline for new business and review is typically a week before the meeting. So just wanted to say thank you very much. We're really excited that we can start our conversations with you. So the presentation isn't long. I'll try to keep it brief. I'll just give you a little bit of a purview. You may have heard about this project already, but for those who haven't, right, we're working with the Medford Housing Authority on their Walkling Court property, the redevelopment of it. And so just as a reminder, this site is located in back of essentially where the U-Haul facility is, and Puff's space, as well as the Whole Foods and other commercial spaces, abutting between that and this neighborhood here along the Alewife Parkway and the Mystic River. So there's currently nine two-story masonry buildings from the mid-60s, 1965. And so there's currently 144 residents. And through the request of the Housing Authority, they would like to add units. And so this is our current proposed design. We would move the seniors into this And then we would have a series of one family housing apartment building and then 3 family housing townhouses. We recently discovered that this site is on the MACRS list, the inventory, like so many sites and properties are. And so in this search, this is an exact clip from the website. Our property is here in this area. And you can see that MDF.474 is for Wakling Court. Medford Housing Authority's property is between one and 20 Walklane Court, and I believe it's four to six Walklane Court constitute as the inventory. Not quite sure why. It's not all of it, but it's part of it. So this, what it seems to be causing, or the purpose, or the reason for it being on the inventory is this canal that goes under the site. which I'm sure you must be aware of. It is quite a canal extending even out of Medford into many other municipalities up north.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, there's two lines there because there's two separate inventories. The red one is the one I believe that's the formal national register nomination that's based on a actual, the original surveys and they mapped it out based on the original, so it's much more accurate in terms of its positioning and accuracy. But the whole canal prism from Charlestown to Lowell is listed on the National Register as a, I believe it's also listed as a National Engineering Landmark. So the resources in the canal prism specifically were I would say surveyed, but there's no data on them. But what's actually triggering the it is in the inventory, but what's actually triggering your project notification review is the fact that the city's housing authority receives federal funding. Any project that receives state or federal funding or requires state or federal permitting or environmental permitting requires a project notification form. So that is what, that is what's triggering that PNF. And then these are the, what they'll do is they'll look at the resources that are in that particular area and make a determination on whether or not there are adverse effects to historic resources. Of course, Wakling Court, the actual development itself hasn't been inventoried, but we want to at least have that inventory created so that when you guys submit your information, MHC can make an appropriate determination based on real information, you know,
[Garbo-Leticia]: Wonderful, okay that brings definitely a little bit more clarity. I'm going to continue through, I assumed you were familiar with this. So this excerpt is directly from the National Registry within this area and so this Again, the shape here is our exact boundaries for the property of the site. And through here, right, there is this segment, segment 80 of the canal. And if we zoom in, right, we can see segment 80, and that it has been built over this segment of the canal. And that's exactly what it's cutting, part of it is cutting through our property. So you've already described I know email was sent over today with that request for. the, I forget the exact terminology, but basically a documentation of the site.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Any sort of information that you guys have will help our consultants. And then, you know, we're going to also research the housing authorities records and the law department's records, because those were fruitful for the other development that we researched. So, but anything that they have already given you, I'm sure with new construction, you may have looked at the existing condition. floor plans and elevations and site plans and all that good stuff. Having that information, even digitally, would be a huge, huge step forward.
[Garbo-Leticia]: Great. And we can definitely work on that. Absolutely. So the real question we come to you, just to solidify it clearly, is based on, well, what I'm hearing really is that it's on MACRIS because of the owners receiving federal funding. and as well as it is.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, it's on MACRIS because the specific properties are listed on the Middlesex Canal District. Any property that was in the canal prism was included in that survey just so that there's a landmark associated with the canal prism itself. What's triggering, separate from that, even if it wasn't listed on MACRIS, the fact that you guys are moving forward with the demolition of a resource, and receiving federal funding would require you to file the project notification form. What they'll do is they'll look at MACRIS and see what's in there for resources in the immediate vicinity, such as, you know, not only the canal prism, but anything that's within an immediate vicinity like the Mystic Valley Parkway is also a listed resource. The Mystic River is a listed resource. So all of those will come into play. in terms of review, but they may not impact that in terms of the actual review process. There's no review for us for demolition, but we will get a say through the project notification form process so you'll submit that to mass historical and you'll see see us and mass historical will solicit us for information will provide feedback and then they'll ultimately make a determination of whether or not there's adverse impacts to historic resources. And that could be anything that could be the canal prism, that could be the actual buildings that exist now in walkway court, because in terms of their process, they review buildings that and consider buildings, whether or not they're eligible for the National Register, and that includes buildings that are 50 years or older, generally so it's a much less time, much more recent timeline. And if they felt that the buildings were even of greater importance to Medford, they might even look at even newer buildings. So they will, they have kind of a review process that's separate. We're involved with that. And we're certainly helpful, trying to be helpful in terms of guiding you guys when you submit that information. So and one of the very first things that we're going to do is have an inventory form created for the building I don't, it would be good to know what your timeline is because it's going to take us a little while to have that form created, but then once you, you know, once we have that, that will be. You know that will be useful to to at least you guys to know to have what's there and then show, you know, at least it will go into the data backers database, and we can show the change. I don't, I don't, any of us are opposed to the new housing authorities plan for what's going to go there. I think it's a great design and. We're certainly looking forward to seeing it happen. Our goal is to make sure that historic resources get reviewed and get their due. And if, for example, Mass Historical says there's adverse effects to historic resources, for example, because the whole site is being demolished, the general process is to document the site a little bit more extensively than we would in the area form. there may be some archaeological work with the canal prism if they decide that that's important, but in no way shape or form does the section 106 process stop a project at all. It's moving, it's just there may be a pause for consideration.
[Unidentified]: Does that make sense?
[Garbo-Leticia]: That does make sense that great.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: I just, I can speak a little bit to the schedule to answer 1 of your questions from a little while ago. The current schedule is to have the, the design completed and the documents ready. for the end of this calendar year, and that construction should start before June of next year. And construction in this case would involve site work, a substantial amount of site work, because it's a redevelopment of the site, so it would be demolition of a selection of the buildings, most likely the ones next to the railroad tracks to the southwest, and the initial site work associated with utilities, and then the actual construction of phase one, which is the senior building only.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, so if I said realistically that it would take a month or a month and a half for to have the area form a really substantial and concrete and well thought out, well researched area form that would not derail your timeline at all because we have until the end of the year certainly. So you've reached out to us early in the process, which we really appreciate.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Yeah, absolutely. Our deadline is the beginning of November, and we want to make sure that we don't miss anything to cause any trouble.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. do you look like you want to make a comment?
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I just got a question. Mr. Morris said I serve on the CPC, the Community Preservation Commission committee, and from this board. And I know there's strong support in the city across many departments for the housing project. And I'm certainly one of them. But I was understanding that the financing was still not 100% locked down. I'm impressed to see that you're gonna construction schedule that is aggressive and hopefully realistic. Has the money been secured?
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Well, it's definitely a better question for Gabe Ciccarello, and he can speak more specifically to it. The schedule that we have for design in the beginning of construction is dependent on that financing falling into place as a result of documents being prepared for the beginning of November, so that financing can happen and closing can happen in time for construction to begin. And Gabe, I'm not sure if you want to add anything to that.
[Unidentified]: Hey, good evening, everyone.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, Gabe, you're cutting out a little bit.
[Unidentified]: Oh, it's really bad. Turn off the video. We might be able to hear you. Dave, I tried to stop your video just to see if that would help.
[Doug Carr]: It's okay. I think I have enough of an answer. We don't need any more. If it's in the works, I'm okay with it. Let's proceed.
[Garbo-Leticia]: It's in the works, and this is pretty standard, right? They're not going to get the money without the design. Yep.
[Doug Carr]: Makes sense. Thank you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Do you guys have a, just so we, I would like to put this presentation just this brief summary up on our website just to the blog, but it would be also great. I'm sure you guys have exterior renderings and all that good stuff too as well to go along with this.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: That's a really good question and we have some exterior renderings. They're not completely vetted at this time because we're going through some pretty aggressive cost estimating and reconciliation right now. And we can put a little blur on it so that you can't tell quite what it is. But in the interest of honesty, perhaps in a couple of weeks, maybe after July 4th, we might have a more realistic rendering. Just because right now we're looking at either six or five stories for portions of the buildings and I wouldn't want to mislead anyone.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, that's perfectly fine. I'm content with the floor plan. I think that's most of us can visualize what the building's going to look like.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Absolutely. We will definitely share this for you as soon as they're ready. Sweet.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Do you have a total project cost, Mr. Morrissette?
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: That's an excellent question that's actually working on right now. The total project cost is somewhere around $100 million.
[Adam Hurtubise]: 100 million and how many additional units will be created additional units.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: So that's a 190 you say. There will be an additional 54 units total between the 2 phase or.
[Garbo-Leticia]: Phase 1 is going from 144 to 198, so that's 54 units. And then we're adding 40 units of family housing. So in total, yes, we're adding 98 units to the site.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So $100 million for 98 units? Additional. Additional units, yes. Additional units. So what's the cost? I'm sorry Peter, I was just going to say everybody saw Gabe's comment that they received $50 million from THCD and tax credit allocations for 2020. $100 million for 98 additional units?
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Excuse me, Peter, let me clarify. It's a complete replacement of the existing site and a complete redevelopment of the site. So it's 238 new units in five new buildings. Right, but
[Adam Hurtubise]: 98 new units in terms of the count.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Yes, yes. But the problem with the current units is they're antiquated and beyond their useful life. So they're due for a massive upgrade, which isn't feasible, which is why we're going with replacement.
[Doug Carr]: Peter, that would be about $420,000 a unit, roughly.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Is that for total units or? Total units divided by additional units. No, total.
[Doug Carr]: I'm treating this as if nothing exists on the site, because that's the reality of it. It's a complete start over.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm just curious. So if you look at it in terms of additional units, what's the number cost per unit? So 98 units at $100 million, that's about a million dollars a unit, right?
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: But I'm sorry I don't understand how this is relevant to the story is curious.
[Adam Hurtubise]: You're you're counting only the additional units but you're the cost is for all units so I don't think that's a proper way to evaluate it I agree it isn't but it's something to think about in terms of value to the city. Anyway.
[Unidentified]: Any other questions for the representatives?
[Garbo-Leticia]: I do have one question. I know it's perhaps general and not specific to our site, but seeing that this canal goes through Medford, just making sure that Is this going to be, is this going to adversely affect the project or it's really just formality based on the historic nature of the canal and the documentation of it?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Can that be said even right now? So what I could imagine, there are two very important considerations here. What I could imagine is that mass historical, let's just say worst case scenario, they say there's an adverse effect because the canal runs through it and there may be archaeological resources what they would do is they would recommend that you hire an on call archaeologist who would monitor excavation, and if you hit anything. they might, you know, stop the project to record what's there and for a few hours and then move forward. There are, because you're near the river, it's always a consideration that you may hit native sites and there are native sites that are not documented in MACRS, so that is just something that I'll throw out there. And the proximity of the river You know, having done projects near the river, the river kind of tends to slope off very steeply and have a steep embankment in terms of its occupation. Most people were far back. Like, for example, there is a native site near you on Rock Hill. It's just down the street. If you were to drive past your site on Route 16 heading towards I-93, it's about a half mile away on the left-hand side. So there are native sites in the immediate vicinity. So it's quite possible MHC will take that into consideration as well. Again, not going to stop the project, but it's going to certainly get consideration as part of that. And it may just extend out your, I would say maybe your demolition period.
[Unidentified]: Just one quick comment.
[Doug Carr]: I live on Boston Ave about a thousand feet from this site. That was the Middlesex Canal before my house was built, maybe 80 plus years. I don't think there's any physical archaeological remnants of the canal in the city of Medford that I am aware of. I know that it exists in Woburn and other places further north, but I've never heard of any place in Medford that has actually got archaeological remains of the canal. And I'd be shocked if that was the case here, given the development and right through the middle of this, that they would have uncovered that in the 60s when they built it, I imagine. So I just don't anticipate that happening. Anything's possible, as Ryan said.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So I'm just going to bring this up because we just finished working with PAL. PAL had to do archaeological testing in Foss Park over on the Fells Way where the canal ran through, and the canal is Currently, it's there. It's under about 15 feet of fill, but it's very much there. But it's not anything that they needed to worry about in terms of their surface. Again, and I'm not worried about it. It's not about preservation. It may be more about what they filled the canal in with, how that impacts your site, et cetera. And again, it's in no way, shape, kind of stop the project.
[Doug Carr]: That's documentation really.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, it's all documentation at this point. Okay. Yeah. As I mentioned, the more thing that I'd be concerned about is the proximity to the river and the native resources in the immediate vicinity.
[Unidentified]: That's, yeah. Right. Yeah. Lee raised her hand. Yeah, Lee, anything?
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Yeah, thank you. It's funny you should mention the 15 feet of fill, because that's about what we've encountered in preliminary borings and testings on the site, is there's between 10 and 16 feet of urban fill and reuse on the site. And the reason that we're coming to you now, and we didn't get an earlier jump on it, is because the earlier Sanborn fire insurance maps and other kinds of historical research that were done on the site during its feasibility stage, A couple of years ago, didn't reveal evidence of that canal. So it looks like it was redeveloped a very long time ago. So, it's interesting to hear that we might still be able to find something. So we really appreciate your recommendations. So, thank you.
[Unidentified]: Yeah. Great anything else I'm going to.
[Adam Hurtubise]: If you want to stop sharing the. Absolutely. I don't have anything else on that just so we can all see each other. I don't expect anything interesting there. From what you're telling me with the borings, that sounds completely right. When we did our project at Medford Square, it drops off from five feet below to clay to when you get close to the river, something like 30 or 40 feet down to blue clay.
[Unidentified]: Wow, wow.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, it's a pretty steep drop off there.
[TnJNLyjh-qU_SPEAKER_12]: Excellent, so I would just kick it back to Dani. Did you get your questions answered as far as next steps?
[Garbo-Leticia]: 100%, which has been extremely informative. We are glad that we could come to you now, try and get a jump on this now, get what is needed, and move forward together.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, so a question about your PNF. Are you going to do it yourselves? Are you going to sub it out? I'm just curious. Some people sub it out to consultants. There's a number of consultants that do that sort of work. So I'm just curious. And then if you want us to review it beforehand. So MHC, when you submit it has usually 30 days to answer it. But if the clock starts ticking every time they send a letter back. So if they find anything is faulted with it, they'll send a letter back and then it starts the clock all over again. So if you want us to give it a once over and if you want us to look at it ahead of them, we're happy to review it and then submit a letter. You know, we can submit our comments with your report.
[Unidentified]: So.
[Garbo-Leticia]: Yes, I'm not quite sure yet if we will be hiring our consultant, but that will talk internally. That's one piece, but the other piece, yes, we would definitely like for you to review it, you being the experts and seeing these go through and knowing the little points just to make sure that we are staying on track as best we can so that hopefully that clock doesn't have to restart or restart frequently. Great. All right, we're happy to help wherever we can. Well, Ryan, thank you so much and thank you to the rest of the board here. This has been really helpful.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Great. Thank you all. All right, we as a commission need to appropriate some money for an inventory form. So I talked with Claire Dempsey, who just did the inventory form for what, for the Willis Ave Housing Authority. So she's quite familiar with the housing authorities records right now. So, um, We need, we came up with a budget of a max of $2,000 to inventory the whole parcel. And that can probably be done in about two months, all told give research dependent, but as long as they, the Housing Authority gives us access to their records, we shouldn't have a problem there.
[Unidentified]: So I would need a message from the commissioners.
[Doug Carr]: A motion to spend up to $2,000 to create a form A for the walk-in court site.
[Unidentified]: And a second? I'll second.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, sorry. Nope, just got it. Sorry. Okay, going around the room. My screen has changed, so Kit?
[Unidentified]: Yes. And Peter? Peter, you're muted. Okay, yep, yes, from Peter. Jess? Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And Doug? Yes. Okay, great. So we'll work on that MHC inventory form, and as soon as we have it, we'll give you guys a copy of it, and then you guys will have that for your records. Ryan, was it up to $2,000? Was that the commitment? Yeah, it's a budget up to $2,000.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, is there any chance they can improve the two-month? It seems like it's a, I know it's a big site, there's a lot of buildings, but that's a long time too.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I just, I say two months, but it's probably got to be a month dependent. It really depends on what the records are and who has them and where. So like the law department took 30 days to get us everything, but if they open their doors and allow us to come in and access them so that the researcher knows exactly what they want, what they're looking for. So they are perfectly content to come in and do some research. So what I'll do is I'll reach out to our previous contact again and see if we can set that up.
[Unidentified]: So good. Thank you. Yeah. All right. Thanks. You're all set. Okay. Thank you. Have a good evening, everyone. YouTube. All right, that's it for new business. Is there any other new business that I haven't heard yet?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, hearing none, we'll just move forward right along with I don't think we have any information on properties under demo delay. We did get our We did get our letter back from KP Law in terms of the enforceability of our bylaw and it is 100% enforceable by the building inspector. He is well within his rights to stop a project if it goes off of the plans that were submitted to our board. So he has his answer and he is content and he is perfectly happy to go back to enforcing our demo delays.
[Unidentified]: that took care of that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: You know, 33 3rd Street is up coming up in August, so I have heard nothing from them. You know they've done nothing so and that's I think 31 South Street is also under a delay to 624 and then yeah 31 South. You know I sent what I was hoping was a final round of comments. In late May. And Nelson wrote back. We'll do, you know, thanks for the quick comments or whatever, but I haven't heard anything since, which is kind of weird. I haven't heard anything since May 21. I know. Yeah. I, maybe we should follow up, but I don't think he's very motivated to make changes to his project. So, I mean, he's been making changes left and right though. He's done everything we asked basically. So yeah, I guess maybe this one was the bridge too far, but yeah. I don't know. We can bring it back to the board. But you know, I think, you know, he did he did make improvements. Let's put it that way. So yeah, maybe, maybe it's time to do it. Maybe it's time to get them to come back to the board and just bring them here and just move forward with it. Yeah, I mean, the only question was the windows on the on the South Street facade, right? And I just asked them to do a drawing that shows why they couldn't do the eight windows or whatever. And just to put notes on there and say, well, this is why we can't do it, but. Right. I mean, even faking the windows out so that they look like they're infilled would balance the facade quite a bit, you know. I put that in there. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you know, that's a historic feature that normally people do. If you see like old Italian houses where like they have a window on the second floor, but to balance it out, they put a fake one on the first floor where there's clearly a stair or something. So, but yeah. Great. I wonder if I should write him and say, Yeah, let's send them an email. Let's just say the commission was asking so that we can get this off of our plate. Okay. 91 Winchester, we are working on, I've connected the owner with the builder who is experienced. Their framing crew said that the building is really delicate, but it is savable with the money, with some money that she wants to put into it for alternatives. So as I sent out the design to some of you guys, She is interested in doing some work and if she does work on that building, it's going to be to make sure that it lasts for the rest of forever. So we're talking about actually restoring the roof line and adding a dormer so that she can ultimately convert that building over into a housing unit. The reason why we're doing that is because it came out that the plan to actually save the concrete block garage would also require significant amounts of work. You know, there's a twist in the wall and it's obviously leaning back and it's been a problem for some time. So she just, you know, we've changed up our game plan a little bit here to at least put some investigation into what the actual real costs are, because all she had was just the cost of demo and she really wasn't interested in demolishing it. She just got talked into it by her developers, by the person who is interested in doing the demolition work. Once those costs come back, she'll make a determination on whether or not it's feasible for her to save the building. She told me several times and I think she's very sincere that she really does want to save the barn and see it reused in some way. She was talking, Right now, she just wants to be able to put her stuff back in the building. But long term, it is literally 150 to 200 steps away from the adjacent T stop. So, you know, it could be a little studio apartment. You know, there's plenty of off street parking is parking there for four cars. So with plenty of space, so, you know, if you even need a car, so. So we're investigating that to find out what the real costs are to see if we can move forward with that.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: This feels like a win.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm hoping it's a win. I mean, we talked about, you know, the building, the builder basically told her, you know, to fix the roof, it's going to be around $20,000. And that includes a new roof, but she wanted to add a dormer so she can get a roof deck on top of the concrete block garage. And it's virtually the same price. So if she's going to pay $15,000 to demo it, she can put a little bit more money into it to actually fix it and get the building that she wants. You know, I, cause you know, if she demoed it, she's not going to replace it with anything. So that's where that stands. I'm hoping it turns into a win. If not, we've at least investigated real numbers to see if it actually works, but I think it will be pretty close to working. All right, so that's it for that. Permit subcommittee and process, I think I covered that with the building inspector. Did I send you guys or did Jen send you guys the letter from KP Law?
[Doug Carr]: I got a copy, but I don't think everyone did. I would add one thing, Ryan. In addition to that narrow issue, there was a lot of discussion in previous meetings about streamlining our process. I still think all that is still valid, and even the approvals we did tonight for accepting, we talked about that being done by staff, right? Potentially trying to make that a faster process.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, as I said, I think I responded to maybe the subcommittee, but I told the commission, or I'll tell you guys now, I am willing to support a automatic significance determination for any building built before 1900. We could be more concrete with that, but in Medford, there's less than 3,000 documented pre-1900 buildings out of a city of 18 to 20,000 housing units that are currently eligible for maybe demo delay and that includes stuff that's like up until what 19. 45, 47, somewhere in that department. So, you know, really the pre-1900 buildings should just be, you know, could sail right into, you know, automatic significance, go right into the public hearing, save yourself 30 days. We would still need that 30 days if we didn't have an MHC Form B for them, but, you know, that would give people time, you know, we'd have to make sure that it gets out there so that people have information to make a, public comments during the public hearing.
[Doug Carr]: I think those are both excellent ideas. I would add that if we had somebody who could make at a staff level an assessment of the submitted drawings, if they're compliant, if it's just a rubber stamp, in order that form B, which is what we always do anyway, that could save another 30 days. I'm just trying to think those are We're often attacked because not for our actions, but for the speed. You know, the people think the process is too complicated, too long, even though we've been doing it for a long time. It's like it's clearly there's a way at the front end at the back to try to shave off weeks at a time if we can.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I guess what I could do. I don't know, you know, John is probably still going to take 30 days to prepare the form. But I mean, if we got applications, I mean, what we could do in terms of the budget is you could authorize, the board could authorize Jen and I to make a determination on whether or not we're going to need a form B and just order it automatically, authorizing basically a blanket $500 for each form B and $1,000 for an area form. or as is seen reasonable, like for a walkway court, it's a little bit bigger, so we might need a little bit more budget.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, that sounds great. I mean, we've never not voted unanimously on a form B ever. Right. It is a rubber stamp because it's why would you not want the information? That's what we thrive on. But if they get a submission to the city, Somebody at the city can say that that looks complete. That's an automatic Form B. The budget is there. I mean, there's a whole meeting not even needed right there. You know, that seems like that would be a win for everyone, because it just makes our process faster.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, we do need to just be cautious and then I'll get to justice and because she's raised. We do need to be cautious as the only reason why we are waiting and having people submit stuff is because that's the official day that it starts the clock. Technically for review that's why we have them come to the meeting and submit the application. you're, you know, I don't have to wait for Form B to be created for that. And certainly if people are comfortable, you could have that and then go right into the public hearing or the determination of significance if we're comfortable with that and have that information ahead of time. So, okay, Jessica.
[Jenny Graham]: Sometimes we do find, rarely, but sometimes we do find the application not in So I guess my question is just, if the city were to accidentally approve an application that we might not have approved if it had come before us, would that cause a lot of issues down the line? I mean, what kind of issues, I guess, could that cause down the line when it gets to the point of us reviewing it?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So Ed's not here, but I think if I channel my inner Ed, I would say 30 days is 30 days and that's all we have. So we have a deadline to meet. So we could not, we either have to say it's significant or not significant and move forward with the public hearing. And we would not be able to stop that clock. What we could do is we could say, we don't have enough information so we can determine it's significant based on this and you know, this and say, get it at the next one and give it seriously consideration when we have the full information during the public hearing. So I guess the onus is off, you know, but if if generally we have that checklist of all that stuff that's there and, you know, we should tell people, you know, not to do what some of them have been doing, which is piecemeal information or send a million emails, all one email, all one package, you know, one PDF or multiple PDFs that are clearly labeled as to what they are. You know, and I know not everybody has that skill level and, you know, some people do their best, but also, you know, like if Dennis or Teresa were to be managing those applications down the road and taking them for us, you know, they would automatically kick them back if they didn't have all the information.
[Doug Carr]: Or they would ask you, right? I mean, they would ask Jen or you or somebody, you know, what do you think of this? Just, there's no harm in that, right? Right, right.
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah, I guess I was just thinking if it would be if it's if it's a burden on city staff to take that on or something like that is there a possibility that we can approve things over email or like I don't know with open meeting law and everything if that's if there's any possibility of doing anything over email between.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So that's why we have the subcommittees, so we can subcommittee it out, review it, but there's a fine line to walk in terms of making determinations. So that's why we have city staff because that does not get around, but it's a function of city government that's still open and transparent, that it leaves the board to make that determination in the open light. So I would say that, you know, If we had Dennis taking applications, he would have us look at it and say, you know, Jed or Ryan, is this complete? And we would say either yes or no. And what do we need that we, you know, what do we need?
[Unidentified]: Sounds good to me. All right.
[Adam Hurtubise]: So why don't we come up with a list of Why don't I come up with a list for next month of a defined motion for the pre-1900 buildings, and I'm going to come up with reasons, a couple of reasons why that would be made as a blanket statement for any pre-1900 building. I want to give it a little bit more definition than we did for the carriage houses, and I will I will make a few blanket statements and then go from there. And I will also come up with, as part of that, the blanket statement authorizing Jen and I to spend a certain dollar amount for MHC inventory forms.
[Unidentified]: And that should speed things up a little bit.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, CPA projects. I have a couple of updates. PAL finished their archaeological report, so the only thing left to do with that is the public presentation in the fall. They submitted their final invoice, so they will be done as soon as they're paid. The fieldstone wall has been entirely restored up and down Grove Street. That project is done. And there's Palm's wall, which is 95% complete. There's some very minor stonework. Mason was confident that by next weekend, he would have work entirely completed. So the repairs to the wall, if you happen to be going by, the fieldstone wall is excellently built. It's extra thick, so it shouldn't crumble or shouldn't fall apart. And then the brick masonry wall is repaired in such a way that it has a copper flashing pan under the stones that entirely protects the coursing below it. And then the capstones are sealed with lead, lead flashing for it in between each joint. So it's, It's entirely sealed. It should be a repair that lasts at least 100 years, if not longer. It's done completely in kind to what was originally there. And the entire wall is uprighted now. It's completely straight at the upper end where it was going to topple over. So the wall has been completely restored from top to bottom. It shouldn't have to do it. So I just want to say thank you for Doug and CPC for supporting those projects because it was a As I will say, it was a monster of a project to get underway, but once it got underway, the contractors really did a good job and it is all wrapping up and it should be entirely wrapped up by the end of this month.
[Doug Carr]: And Ryan, first of all, you guys, you and Jenny did a great job managing it. Between that and the Brooks Estate wall, Grove Street has really seen an incredible facelift over the last couple of years. What is phase two again? How far in the future is that?
[Adam Hurtubise]: So Kit and I and Jen are working on a like a phase like 2a and so that's we're looking to have Peter Hedlund do a design for a memorial, a future memorial at that park that will cap the archaeological site and protect it and then engage people with the you know the former occupants, the enslaved people persons the Native Americans the Brooks family, and of course the city of Medford's ownership of that park phase to be which will be the bigger CPC project that will be based on. that design like determining the impacts will be larger archaeological dig to answer any of the questions to finish that up. Remove all the deadwood in the tree because in actuality, if you walk through the park, there's a lot of deadwood that makes that park very unsafe. So there'll be a huge amount of tree trimming, not tree clearing, just tree trimming. You may do some selective tree planting to replace some of the trees early with actual native species that are there that have died, that are completely dead. Signage, crosswalks, and maybe marking out the handicapped spots across on some of the side streets. And that's, that's to give the park now a public appearance as, as an actual park. There are a few areas that we need to tidy up, like there needs to be a sidewalk extension down to the entrance opposite Jackson Road. Because we closed off the entrance that people were using next to private, they were walking on private property to get to it. But I could imagine it's another project of similar size that'll be another $200,000 or $300,000 request easily.
[SPEAKER_02]: Ryan, I took a stab at the proposal and it's in the Google Doc.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yep. Yep. So in terms of that, that for we're going to try to apply for a CPC small grant and the city, we will be asking CPC for $5,000 funding for the design of the memorial with a $4,500 match from the coming from the commission.
[Unidentified]: So it's basically a we're proposing a 5050 match for that work.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Tell me again what the memorial is for the memorial is to do two things, it's to cap the archaeological resource to protect it from any sort of salvagers and there has been, I'll just say it in an open public meeting, there has been somebody in the park several times with a metal detector floating along. Site is an archaeologically protected site is listed with the Massachusetts Historical Commission for caught in their metal detecting, you're going to be subject to trespass and fines. So we're trying very hard to protect that site so we figured. on top of the site that has kind of always been thrown out there in various ideas will help protect the biggest site, which is the house site. And the idea is to engage people visiting the site by talking about the enslaved African-Americans that were there, the native population, the Brooks family's involvement with West Medford and the city of Medford's ownership, because the next year will be a hundred years of city of Medford ownership of that site. gifted to us in 1924, so. Okay, so those are the main ones, enslaved Native American and Brooks family.
[Unidentified]: Yep. Thank you. Yep. Any other questions on CPC stuff?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I hear now we'll just move forward to brickyards. So brickyards is done, I have the final survey product it went to the library. I will upload it to the Google Drive. Another successful survey and planning project done. There's a lot of good information about the various housing there lots of 20th century resources, just goes to show, there's tons of you guys will definitely have to look at it because there's tons of little treasures that are well preserved or lots of good history kind of scattered in that area of South Medford between Winter Hill and. uh medford square south which basically is the former racetracks and former brickyards that were at the foot of tufts so um that's done we're just waiting for john to be paid and as soon as john is paid i get copies of the checks and we can close out that grant entirely and that just leaves the survey for fulton heights to be completed and fulton heights is underway. The contractors are going to get started walking the neighborhood. I warned them that they may get lost because Fulton Heights has a wonderful maze of streets, but it also has a whole bunch of awesome, cool resources up there. So, you know, maybe it will be a good thing that they get have to wander around for a while.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: I think you mean rabbit warren.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I mean, you can walk down, you can walk down a street and then hit a 20 foot cliff and go, oh, look, the streets up there now, you know, or, you know, what I like about Fulton Heights is how houses are kind of organic. They start off as these little cottages. And in fact, some of the neighborhood was originally called Tar Paper Village because it wasn't actually covered in anything more than just tar paper. They really were shanties. And then they when they needed a room, they would add a room. and add a room and add a room and add a room. So you get these really vernacular buildings that are just kind of different from everywhere else in Medford. So that when the survey comes out of there, I think it'll be good. We talked about maybe needing to do two layers of survey there because of how dense it is, but we'll cross that bridge when we get there.
[Unidentified]: Any questions? Okay, with no questions, meeting minutes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Peter sent out meeting minutes for both the regular MHC meeting on the 8th and the special meeting.
[Unidentified]: We'll start with the meetings on the 8th. Any questions, comments, concerns? Hearing none, I'll take a motion to approve. Peter can't make the motion because he wrote the minutes, so. I have to approve the minutes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, Doug motioned. Got a second? I'm in there, I'll second. Yeah, Kit Nichols second. Okay, motion to approve, Maiden seconded. Start with Kit. Kit?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Peter?
[Jenny Graham]: I was absent, abstain or present?
[Unidentified]: Yep, present.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And Doug?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, three zero, three zero one. So Peter, three zero one.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And then the special meeting minutes, any questions, comments, concerns?
[Unidentified]: Hearing none, motion to approve. I'll move to approve the special meeting minutes. Got a second? Second. Second, okay. Motion's been made and seconded. We'll start with Kit. Yes. And Peter? Yes. And Jess? Yes. Yes, great was there any other old business. Hearing none I'll take a motion to dissolve the meeting. So moved. Second.
[Doug Carr]: What happened to the lady who was just on for the last 10 minutes?
[Adam Hurtubise]: She just came in. That was Gina. Gina's the owner of 23 Winter Street. I'm sure I'll see an email from her asking what happened, but we'll just tell her that her application was approved.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And I'm sure she'll be at the next meeting. She's normally there. Okay, motion has been made and seconded to dissolve the meeting. Start with Kit.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Peter.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Jess.
[Unidentified]: Yes. And Doug. Yes, dissolved.
[Doug Carr]: Perfect, exactly an hour. I like, Jess, I like the glow around, you look like an angel with that. You know, Saint Jess from Medford.
[MCM00001614_SPEAKER_01]: Did the commissioners get halos, is that how this works?
[Doug Carr]: Only if you vote right, Miss Kit. Good night, everyone. Thank you all.
[Unidentified]: Good night. Bye.
|
total time: 1.71 minutes total words: 166 |
|||