[Jennifer Keenan]: Hello everybody. This is the Medford Historical Commission. Today is Monday, September 14th. It is 7.03 PM. I'm going to call the meeting to order. Peter, are you cool to take minutes?
[SPEAKER_10]: Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, we have a full agenda tonight, so we are going to get started right away. First up on the agenda, 15 Maple Park Avenue, the Hegner Center. We were supposed to have a preferably preserved hearing tonight. That has been tabled until our next meeting of October 5th, just because the petitioners did not get a yard sign up in time. So we are going to move that one to our next meeting, which will be October 5th. Moving right along, we have seven significance determinations tonight. So what I'd like to do before we get into those is just remind everybody what that means. So last month, we took applications for demolition review from these seven applicants. Some are total demolitions, some are partial demolitions. And so once we've accepted those applications tonight, we are going to determine significance on these properties and significance means that the property is either 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 that 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 a group of buildings. So tonight we're going to start our agenda with 67 Mystic Avenue. Ryan, do we want to do the. 3 together, I'll just do them individually.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, I do them individually and do them in order as they appear on.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah. Okay. So, 67 mystic Avenue, we have determined that it does not meet the age requirement. It's a post 1950 structure. So I think our job is to pass on review, even though we have accepted the demolition application. But we should probably take a motion for that. Would you agree, Ryan?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I'm going to motion to pass on review for failure to meet the age requirement.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you. Is there a second? 2nd, OK, thanks Luke. OK, I'm going to go around for a vote. A roll call as I see folks on my screen. 67 Mystic Ave as it pertains to determination of significance. We're going to pass on review. Ryan yes. Peter yes. Kit yes. Luke?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Sarah? Yes. But just to confirm, is this 67 through 71? Nope. It's just 67. OK. Thank you. Sorry. I'm looking at the drive, and it's listed somewhat together.
[Jennifer Keenan]: They're on the same parcel, but they are separate structures.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: OK.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sounds good. Then, yes. OK. And Doug? Doug, you might be frozen. Oh, there you are.
[Doug Carr]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK, thank you, Doug. OK, so that is 6-0. Can you hear me, Jen? I can. Thank you, Doug. Yes. So that's 6-0 pass on review for 67 Mystic Ave. Up next, we have 71 Mystic Ave. This is a determination of significance. If somebody would like to make a motion on this one motion to find for significance. Okay. Thank you. Ryan. Is there a 2nd.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I can 2nd.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Thank you. Peter. Ryan, why don't you jump off the discussion on this?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Sure. The last private residential-ish building along the streetscape, the entire streetscape, other than 41 Mystic, which was moved there, and the last one in this particular development, I think that's important. And in terms of the landscape, All three of these lots have an association with the Middlesex Canal. So I'm inclined, they are all technically listed as part of the National Register District, but they're not contributing buildings to that aspect. But I'm inclined to look closer at the potential demolition of this building and the site here. So I'm inclined to pause this project to review the demolition a little bit more closely on this building.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you so much. Peter, I'll jump over to you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't have too much to add. It is a pretty old house. And I think it probably deserves A pause, yeah.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you. Kit, anything to add?
[Kit Collins]: Just to say that I'm persuaded by Ryan's comment that it's the last house of its kind on this street. So I think it does deserve a second look to whether it's actually significant or not. Preferably preserved or not is another story.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you, Kit. Luke?
[SPEAKER_07]: Yeah, I agree with all three of you.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Okay, thank you. Sarah? I am open to discussion, for sure.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Doug, anything to add on this one?
[Doug Carr]: I guess I, I don't agree with the majority on this board. I don't, I just don't see it for this building. I don't think there's any chance it will be saved. And I just, when I looked at the building, I just didn't think it was, it was, it could or should be saved. And that's my opinion.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, just to echo off of that and play off of that comment. I am of the opinion that this building is likely to yield important information about building construction, but that does not mean that I believe that it necessarily should be saved either. I think it's more of a recording exercise at this point for this building.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, what kind of information would you hope to glean from this, just for everyone's understanding?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, I'm interested in learning a little bit more about what remains for the Middlesex Canal. Time and time again, up and down the corridor when they do archaeological investigations, they often find it buried. And I think it's reasonable to sort of, if we didn't pause this project and require review on the Existing building and look at the new building. We should also potentially ask for some archaeological monitoring similar to what we asked for at. Uh, walk link court when they do that new construction. And then the house itself, because of the last one, probably should just be recorded. We did not record any of the other 19th century buildings up and down the street, so I think that this one probably warrants just some capture.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Anything else, Doug?
[Doug Carr]: Well, Ryan, I obviously agree with you if there's some archaeological studies, but isn't that independent? I mean, couldn't that be part of the pre-construction condition of this project when it comes before the city board or some other that we could condition approval based on looking at the archaeology, looking at the scan, the type you've seen and I think encouraged in other places in the city?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I mean, I just, I'm open to ideas just for our purposes. Nothing's enforceable without the delay. So I look at it as a pause and then we release. I don't necessarily see that as being an impediment on their continuing on with their process. I also don't know if they, have to go before the CD board. This is a self-storage facility, which I believe they said was zoned for, so I don't know if they'll have to be before anybody else except for us, so. Okay, thank you.
[SPEAKER_00]: They will, because if it's over 10,000 square feet, it automatically includes a CD board filing, which this would. And it also, I believe, my understanding, it also has to go before the zoning board as well, which it would sort of do the zoning board beforehand, because I believe there might be some dimensional things that they need. They're still sort of working over now. So I haven't actually gotten any filing yet, but if it's over 10,000, which I know it is with all the lots together, then that would trigger a site plan review, which would be a CD board hearing.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, so we can make sure that if we discuss some of these things that we pass along as part of the filings for all of these buildings, that we pass along those to the respective boards so that they can potentially make it a condition that they monitor for archaeology on the NR site.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, commissioners, any other comments on this before we vote?
[Doug Carr]: Okay, can you remind people what we're voting for?
[Jennifer Keenan]: This is for 71 Mystic Avenue. We have a motion on the table to find for significance that has been seconded. I will go around for a roll call vote. This is only for 71 Mystic. Ryan? Yes. Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit? Yes. Luke? Yes. Sarah? Yes. And Doug?
[Unidentified]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK. OK, so the motion passes 5 to 1. OK. OK, moving right along to 73 Mystic Avenue. This one also does not meet the age requirement. So if somebody would like to make a motion on that one, for passing on review.
[Kit Collins]: I move to pass on review.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Kit. Seconding. Thank you, Sarah. Okay, so there's a motion on the table for 73 Mystic Avenue to pass on review that has been seconded. Ryan.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Heater.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Luke.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sarah. Yes. And Doug.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. That one passes 6-0. And finally, for 81 Mystic Avenue, this one also does not meet the age criteria. So I will take a motion on this one to pass on review as well.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Motion to pass on review.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Ryan. Is there a second?
[Kit Collins]: I'll second.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Kit. OK, a motion on the table for 81 Mystic Ave to pass on review due to the age requirement. Ryan?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit? Yes. Luke? Yes. Sarah? Yes. And Doug? Yes. OK, that one passes 6-0. Okay, so for the owners of all four of these parcels, next month we will have a preferably preserved hearing only for 71 Mystic Avenue. And we will email you the requirements to set up for that meeting. Moving right along to 78, oh, I'm sorry, sir, did you have a question?
[Doug Carr]: No, we just said thank you, that was all.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you so much. Okay, moving right along to 78 Circuit Road. Commissioners, there is a form B in your email, and I will take a motion on this one when someone is ready.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'll motion for significance.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Thank you, Ryan. Is there a second?
[Unidentified]: Yeah, I'll second.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you, Luke. Okay, Ryan, I'll start the conversation with you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Sure, just two simple things that stuck out for me. One is that it's been owned by the same family for the entirety of its ownership and life, which I think was fantastic. And the second is that it has association with the development for George McCormick. For those who don't know, George McCormick's global philosophy was, if you're on this earth, own a piece of it. And he marketed extensively to specifically middle-working class individuals to try to make land ownership affordable. And this is one of many developments that he did in Medford. He's probably the most prolific land developer, but often not builder. There's often builders that come in after him. That's it for me.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Thank you so much. Luke, anything to add since you seconded the motion?
[SPEAKER_07]: I won't waste everyone's time with my words. Just reading through the narrative, I back up what Brian says.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Thank you. Peter, I'll come to you next.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I mean, I defer to Ryan on this one and his knowledge base, but I don't know. For me personally, it seemed like a small house, maybe not that special, that maybe the land could be better used for more housing. So I'm not sure how I'm going to vote on this one.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK, I'll come to Kit next. I'll put you on the hot seat, Kit.
[Kit Collins]: I actually don't think this is significant. I hear Ryan's comments about having been owned by the same family and McCormick's philosophy of, if you're on this earth, own a piece of it. That doesn't mean you have to own this house. And I just, I don't see anything about it that is architecturally significant enough outside of, and I think it says in the form B, outside of it becoming a, as part of a district that it would qualify. And it just sort of seems to me like, why would we impede the development of this?
[Jennifer Keenan]: It's funny you say that, because when I was reading the form, I kind of thought the same thing, that at first glance, I'm like, oh, no. And then when I saw the note about the historic district, I was like, hmm. To me, that was an interesting kind of note that the consultant made when writing this up.
[Kit Collins]: But would it ever be, I mean, it's hard for me to imagine that Circuit Road is going to become a historic district.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I don't think it would be necessarily Circuit Road. They would pull the entire forest park development there that is listed in the form. That's what they would generally recommend beyond just the streetscape. I know that they, Claire probably just looked at the I don't know. I didn't walk around that particular neighborhood. I mean, I know the homes are. I didn't want to overstate what the house is or isn't because I tend to leave talking points open, but I mean, most of the houses in this neighborhood. There's a smattering of various degrees of preservation Some have vinyl siding some don't but this one doesn't this one also has its original wood windows. It looks like Looks like it actually has wood shutters as its original front door. So there is a degree of Preservation here that you don't normally see on in this part of Medford like outside of you know sometimes Fulton Heights these houses survive with their original materials because they just they're either on small lots and you can't upgrade but this is a This is a house that had a potential to either go up or make changes and they didn't so I'm sort of interested in you know seeing what the interior looks like, because I bet it's probably also somewhat preserved. Again, preserved does not necessarily mean stop development. It just means, you know, I look at it from a potential mitigation standpoint. Hey, Doug, is there any relationship to you in this, the car house? Definitely not. Different car. Different car.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Doug, did you have any comments on this one? I'll come to you next since we're talking.
[Doug Carr]: Since we're talking about my surname. I'm with Kit on this. I think it's a lovely little house. I just don't think this rises to significance. It's a solid vernacular, simple building of its time. and documenting it, which I think we could have done. I don't see this happening.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I also missed the association with Dutch Car. Dutch Car is who Carr Park is named after.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: I was going to ask, yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Very important boxer.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: So this Car family is the same Car family, not Doug Car family?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Not Doug Car family, yeah. Okay.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, John, I was looking up on the side and it's, oh goodness, I lost it. John C. Carr, Mayor and City Manager of Medford. I just don't know if that's the same, to go back to the application.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So it's Carr Park, not Doug's family. Different cars.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I never knew there were so many cars in Medford. I know, right?
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, commissioners, any other conversations, comments, anything about this particular property before we vote on significance? Okay, for 78 Circuit Road, we have a motion on the table to find for significance that has been seconded. I will go around for a roll call vote. Ryan?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit? No. Luke?
[SPEAKER_07]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sarah? No. And Doug?
[Doug Carr]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, so the motion fails. Two to four. Two to four. Thank you. I couldn't do that math quick enough. Two to four. Okay. So if the owners of 78 Circuit Road are here, we will get you your release letter and you'll be on the way with your project. And good luck with your project. Okay. Moving right along. 146 Spring Street. commissioners, I will take a motion one way or another on this one when somebody is ready. 146 Spring Street. I'll take a motion. I can't make the motion. Somebody's got to make it.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Make the motion to fight for significance to kickstart the discussion.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you, Ryan. Okay, thank you, Sarah. Okay, Ryan, I'm going to come to you since you made the motion.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Well, it's a building. It's a a backtrack a little bit so uh... this section of east medford develops order sequentially starting from medford square working its way out really accelerates after the bankruptcy of dougley calls tea company uh... they were developing properties for rentals uh... then they get forced by their creditors to sell all the land uh... so as you go street by street in the neighborhood uh... ending with the spring street you get like sort of a marching progression of Victorian-era development, ending with these what I would call sort of mid-level residential housing. There is larger buildings, and it's a little bit unusual because normally you put the larger buildings on the main streets like Spring Street, but in this case some of the other development sort of overshadows these buildings so that they scale back a little bit. But what's interesting to me is that this is a group that clearly was all built by the same builder and that they all have the same form, have some variants, some have porches, some have bays. But by and large, you can see the same basic massing. And I think the consultants capture sort of the development history, some of the potential builders associated with the project. I think that's sort of interesting. Gibson is, you know, the halls, and when they sell their land, they don't actually develop any of it. They sell it to other small-time developers, and that's all documented here in this form. Gibson's a big one. Gibson Street is named after him and his development. He does live just off of this location. And that's sort of an interesting thing that I often point out to people, like, unlike the developers of today that live sometimes outside of the community, most of the developers that are building in this neighborhood actually end up living in the neighborhood or already lived in the neighborhood and stayed for some time. So that's my view of this building. It sort of captures all that history. I know it's going to be renovated, but I do think it should get, you know, reviewed.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, Ryan, thank you so much. Sarah, I'm going to come to you next since you seconded the motion.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, I think we're at the discussion for sure. Okay, thank you.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Peter, anything to add?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, I mean, I think there was a set of proposed drawings, wasn't there?
[Jennifer Keenan]: I'm actually not sure what came in with the application.
[SPEAKER_07]: It was mainly focused on demoing windows and doors. I don't think there were any changes to the massing.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I might be thinking of a different one, but I thought I saw one that had... Yeah, no, it's in here. It doesn't have a second floor addition in the rear? Maybe I'm thinking of a different one.
[SPEAKER_07]: You know, it looks like they're demoing the shed roof off the rear, but I don't see a... I feel like I saw that somewhere.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Anyway. Yeah, I don't see them adding on top. It might have been on the Google Drive or something, but I thought it seemed like what they were... I mean, if I have the right project... We have a lot tonight, so... Yeah, then I think... It was a pretty respectful addition. Didn't seem to do much to the front, although they're going to replace windows and stuff. And I think there's a bay window on the side of it. They were extending that up. Anyway, so I thought it was pretty good renovation. So, I wasn't in the mood to stop. I guess that's where I'm coming down on it.
[Kit Collins]: It also doesn't look like there is their original windows. That are, you know, it doesn't.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I think I might be thinking of a different project, but I don't think you are.
[Kit Collins]: There are renderings here.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, in the, in the drive at all the way at the bottom of the, it's called progress.
[Doug Carr]: Would it be worth putting 1 on screen just so we can take a quick peek? Yeah.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I mean, you know, we can just let the motion fail in terms of significance if we're good with what they're doing. If that's the route people want to go.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, maybe we get through everyone 1st and then circle back and see where we are.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Yeah. Doug, do you have any comments?
[Doug Carr]: I didn't look at the new design, but I think this consistent with, I guess, everything I said tonight, it seems like I'm not finding anything significant tonight. I don't think I'd find this one either. It's a nice building. When I first saw this, I thought it would be torn down because these type of scale buildings don't tend to get renovated. If it's being saved and it's reasonable, I would not stand in front of it. I want to keep moving.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, I think the lot is really too small to do anything, like any drastic changes here. I know myself personally, I mean, obviously I'm not voting, but the only thing that jumped out to me on this one was the age. So I think we're just, you know, obviously cognizant of pre-1900 structures.
[Kit Collins]: But it's also not a full demolition. I mean, it looks like it's more of a, it's a, it's an addition on the back. The roof line is seen, I think.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Replacing the two previous additions, it looks like. And then windows and I can't tell if the deck is to be rebuilt or if that's to be removed.
[SPEAKER_07]: Yeah, it's just lopped off. Looks like, yeah, the rhythm, the rhythm of the roof lines and everything and proportions being of those, the houses staying in line with the houses down the street. So that doesn't bother me.
[Doug Carr]: Jen, would you vote if there was a time?
[Jennifer Keenan]: I would vote if there was a tie.
[Kit Collins]: Does anybody have that's why I have my notes or do you want to do you want us to pull them up?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Peter? I don't know. I can't find them. So, okay, let's see here.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Luke has them.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. Oh, well, yeah, I have these, but I thought there was something that shows the proposed, huh? Okay. I must be thinking.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Not that I saw. The second to last page on that one, Luke, you can see the difference. Yeah, so there with the black outline in the back, it says very small call of proposed addition.
[SPEAKER_07]: Oh, okay, so it's not design. It's just they're literally just demo drones.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, they, they submitted as part of the original permit proposed plan to dormer out the roof and to do a different style addition on this property, which is part of why it triggered review and it was being called a guide so that we review. free gaps, but they have changed it. Because they're not really changing the roof line, I just think that's a better style project. If they're just proposing to build on the back there and leave the roof line, I would be inclined to switch to Uh, pass on review based on the set of plans with the addition in the rear, because if we vote down significance that we can't review it, but if they come back and say, oh, we want to do the dormer now, that's a different project that can come back and trigger review again.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Well, again, like it's either significant or it's not, right? That's the question we're answering right now. So I think regardless of what they're doing, you know, we're right now the motion is for significance.
[Unidentified]: So I think we should press.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Hold on, I'm just muting Doug. You know, we should vote on the motion at hand.
[Doug Carr]: Correct.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay.
[Doug Carr]: All right.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Commissioners, does anybody else have anything to talk about this one? Okay. Luke, can you bring down the screen share? Yes. Thank you. Okay. So for 146 Spring Street, a motion on the table to find for significance that has been seconded. Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sarah? Luke?
[Kit Collins]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And Doug, I had to mute you. So unmute yourself to vote.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. So the motion fails.
[Adam Hurtubise]: One to five.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: She stands alone.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, okay, so for 146 Spring Street, not significant. We will get your release letter and you'll be on your way with your project. And good luck with your project. Okay, finally, for significance, 73 Surry Street.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Motion for significance.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thank you, Ryan.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, shoot, this is a long one. I was looking at the wrong set of plans. I apologize. It's okay.
[Jennifer Keenan]: We looked at the right ones because Luke put them on the screen.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Are you making a motion, a second motion on this one, Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'll make a second. Yes. Okay. To kick it off.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Okay, Ryan, I'm coming back to you since you made the motion.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, no problem. There'll be nothing left of this building based on the demolition plan. I mean, there'll be a loose framework of what was this building, but this building is gonna be extensively remodeled beyond what it currently is recognized as, which is a modest residential building, typical of the early 20th century. John Walker and his brother Frank are on similar scale to George McCormick and the Halls, still doing large-scale developments. What I find cool is that this entire development is defined by those neat little half-round arches on the front porch. All of the buildings in this neighborhood that have original porches have that detail, so I thought that was kind of neat. It's more than just the one that John provides an inventory form for. They're literally up and down the street on the singles, on the two families, and they built this sort of neighborhood. It has a variety of architectural styles, so it's kind of cool that this one survives as a single when so many of the others in the 20th century were built as duplexes. So that's my view on significance.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, I think that's an interesting, I mean, I saw the picture that John put in the form with the curved porches, which is quite beautiful. And, you know, and again, that was kind of my question, is this one of two? Or if it's the whole street, does that change in the sense of like, well, it doesn't matter because there's many examples of this, or it does matter more because of the grouping that exists of them? So I would be curious to hear folks' thoughts on that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that if the interior has not yet been gutted, that it's based on the real estate photos from the last sale, that it's completely intact on the inside.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sarah, Luke, any thoughts? I'm going to jump to you guys first.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: I am trying to glean from the demo application, what's being proposed. And it seems like a very thoughtful renovation. I mean, it seems like they're keeping the porch details of the arch. They're adding a gable detail up at the top, extending that bay sort of half turret to the main roof line. I think it's quite nice. compared to just vinyl and kind of hidden details that might be there now. In terms of significance, I think the porch definitely is significant of its neighbors, but that is remaining. So that's really nice to see.
[Doug Carr]: Sarah, can you put that drawing on screen quickly if you have access to it? Sure. Nice to see that.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I mean, it looks like from this drawing, though, that it says that taking the vinyl off the front is not in scope. There's some removal because they're coming forward. There's a whole... Yeah, but on the porch itself, it says not in scope. So I guess seeing that, it makes me want to kind of pause this a little bit and Although I agree with Sarah, it's a, it's a pretty sensitive addition and everything. I think there could be, it might, I think we could exert some leverage on this in terms of getting them to kind of restore the front porch a little bit, et cetera. So I think this one might be, in my opinion, might be worth taking a pause on at least for now.
[SPEAKER_07]: I can see that I'm looking at the proposed West elevation, right? And the extension of the turret they're putting on, they're kind of like, and maybe it's not fully thought through, but it looks like the lower part of that turret and the siding is considered not in scope. So it's like, where are they drawing the line between mixing new siding and old siding? And I'd agree, the drawings are very thoughtful, but maybe just kind of requesting a bit more detail. I mean, the transitions between new and old are handled.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Yeah, and I would say at the very least, confirming whether what is in scope, I think, is important because I'm looking, you know, you can see here, here's the turret extension up to the roof line, you know, this new exterior wall finished to be coordinated with owner, but it says, yeah, like you're saying, not in scope. So why is it included?
[Adam Hurtubise]: And maybe they're just gonna put new vinyl on the new parts and leave the old vinyl. So, I mean, that might be okay, but I think it's just, I think this one might be worth a little bit closer look at. That's why I'm coming down. Others may disagree.
[Jennifer Keenan]: This is a dumb question. Is the house white right now? Like, how? They'd have to re-side the whole thing to make it match, even to be consistent.
[ir8Km2ErkFk_SPEAKER_19]: Yeah.
[Doug Carr]: I noticed that, just looking at these drawings, that both of the curves on the porch, on the front and the side, are not actually matching the geometry of the photos. They're more subtle than that. These drawings are actually not accurate. And that's the character-defining feature, per Ryan's comment of the building. I'm with, I'm with Peter on this one. I think a pause here just to get, just to tighten things up a little bit on the design and the documentation would be, would be worthwhile.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, because I don't see, even if we put a delay on it, I couldn't see our delay lasting more than a couple of weeks just to fine tune it a little bit. Anyway. Agreed.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, does anybody else have any comments on this one before we go around for a vote? Okay, so we have a motion on the table for 73 Surrey Street to find for significance that has been seconded. Peter?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Ryan?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit? Yes. Sarah? Yes. Luke?
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And Doug?
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, so that one passes 6-0. Okay, great. So we will have three preferably preserved hearings next month. One for 15 Maple Park Avenue, one for 71 Mystic Avenue, and one for 73 Surry Street. Pack your coolers. And our next meeting, just to be clear, will be on October 5th, because the second Monday of the month is Indigenous Peoples Day. So we are going to have our meeting on the 5th, and then we will have another meeting on the 19th, just because of the funkiness of the 30 days and all of that. Although we might not have any, if we don't have any business for the 19th, we might be able to table that, but we'll have to wait to see what happens for the 5th. If we have new things, we might have to hear them because then the November meeting is also later than it would be, I think, because of Veterans Day. So it's always a funky, it's always a funky eight weeks between October and November. Okay, moving on to our last bit of new business. 321 Winthrop Street, discussion of the American Legion building. So there's a potential future project here. Ryan, do you want to fill everybody in on that?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I think there is a potential future projects to renovate the building that involves the demolition of the existing residence there. And I think that we should probably do have John and Claire do an MHC inventory form that looks more extensively into that building and whether what exists on the inside and the outside. Possibly for the benefit of the Community Preservation Commission too as well if they want to open it up to CPC funding. They're looking at developing the parcel into veterans housing. I don't know if that's feasible that is, but they're talking about tearing the building down and building a new because it didn't seem feasible to save the existing. I want to try to steer them away from that direction because, you know, I, I suspect that the size of the building will allow them to renovate just some important things like access and elevator in the building is probably what's driving up some of the costs. So they were talking about saving the hall, but also just not. Keeping it but renovating it into like offices and new program space. So I'd like to at least start with an MHC form B. There's an old one from the 70s that was done with some updated information, but we can we should probably do a real real updated one this time.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Do we need a motion for that?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No, I don't think so. Unless anybody objects to it, we can just we have a standing motion to do forms as needed so.
[Jennifer Keenan]: No, it's good to get an updated one.
[Kit Collins]: Go ahead, they did it to the outside of Davis square. They redeveloped it and put a housing upstairs. Seems like a similar project.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I'm not sure they were talking a certain number of units, but they, they, they didn't have construction numbers yet. They had loose plans, but I just, I find it weird because that building is so large that I find it. difficult to believe that they wouldn't be able to develop it with some creative additions perhaps to make it, you know, functional for their needs without having to go through the very difficult process of demolition. I mean, demolition alone for that building is probably, you know, you know, in the, I don't know, $12,000 to $15,000 range easily. I don't know, guys, you tell me for construction numbers these days, they're pretty high, so.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And what year was that structure built?
[Adam Hurtubise]: It's in the 1880s. Really? Well, the hall is much later than that. The hall was like the 50s, 40s, 50s, somewhere, possibly 60s. But the house itself is old.
[Doug Carr]: Do you have drawings of what they're proposing or something sketches?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Not yet. I believe that the veterans department is working with Suffolk construction and that's who the BFW is working for. But and they had like. Ideas and conceptual, but they were talking about I saw some loose plans, but they weren't ready to give them to us yet So I can ask to see if we can't look at what they're proposing to see how we can better fit that program into the into the building. I mean, you know, there's The site is huge. So there's A lot of opportunity there, you know, and I mentioned this last month, but, you know, 1 of the things that the historical commission could advocate for is to push. Or, you know, selling the building to somebody that would actually renovate the building. And I think that, you know, perhaps there may be a better opportunity there to develop that site into. residential with potentially saving that existing building and getting an even larger residential project out of it than perhaps the veterans housing. Not that veterans housing isn't good, but I do think that there's a potential better use there if the veterans organization can't come up with the funding to do it themselves. That I think is gonna be the key factor here.
[Doug Carr]: If if we're not satisfied with the design options that they're pursuing, we should make our own. I think I don't we've done that in the past successfully. Yeah, I agree.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I agree. And I think, you know, I, I don't think originally they were looking at. Oh, we can, you know, we could, I don't think that we're originally looking at, oh, we could acquire CPC funding for this if we incorporate a historic preservation program as part of it. And it's veterans housing, which in my mind is an affordable housing component. I mean, they're specifically geared towards veterans, but there must be they must be smaller units. I mean, they were talking basically bedroom, renting bedrooms with a communal spaces, communal kitchen and dining room and shared living quarters, I guess, amongst others and that sort of thing. So I don't, I don't really know. I need to learn more about that portion of it and how it works. But I feel like all of that will fit into the existing program that's there on those buildings. So So, yes, we should ask for plans and then see how we can't guide them through to, you know, because I want to guide them to funding, especially if that means, you know, if they can save money by not demolishing the building and reusing it, then so be it. That just gives them more money for their project.
[Doug Carr]: Ryan, are you, are you thinking how much you think CPC would be? I mean, I can tell you right now that they would do a lot of money for planning, but there's no way they're going to fund like, $600,000 for essentially 1 unit, which is what we, what's kind of going great for construction with the, with, with affordable units that we've seen over the last 5 years on the CPC.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, no, I agree. I think some of it may be that they need planning funding to incorporate the historic preservation component and the affordable housing component of it. Because right now, based on my conversations with veterans, they are just looking at demolition. So I'd like to maybe see if we can steer them in because According to veterans, there's money out there to develop projects. So I just don't know if that also includes the renovation component or if they won't fund buildings that are renovated. But I find that hard to believe that because there's so many good buildings out there that you could fit this. The goal is to just if the goal is just to incorporate new veterans housing, it would be foolish to demand every building be new. So let's learn more about it. Let's see if we can't work together. This is a good opportunity. And Veterans has an association with the VFW, but it's really the VFW that's driving this project. So it's their facility, their private nonprofit organization. So the city just has a role in it and helping.
[Doug Carr]: Is there a sense of urgency here?
[Adam Hurtubise]: They're going to keep marching forward. I mean, if they already have, they were having the discussion of coming to us originally this month for demolition approval, but I don't, I think when I started asking questions that sort of walked them back into, we're not there yet, we don't have enough information yet. So I think we should do the inventory form and then approach them with, this is the building. You know, and our view on it and then walk through the building and see the interior and see what sort of, uh, and hear them out as to what their project is that they're proposing. And then go from there and see how we can help. Because I, I just don't want to be, I don't want us to be blindsided by a project.
[Doug Carr]: That's why I want to get ahead of it. If we can, I'd rather, you know, if they're unwilling to design, I would look at designs to keep the building and remove the building because I think they're both worth studying, but they have to. You know, if they're if all they see is demo, you know, then we're not going to get much out of them. I don't want to wait for that. I'd rather. have alternative designs when they come before us, if we thought about it, we have 4 architects on this board, we can whip up designs in about a week. Right. And if they're.
[Adam Hurtubise]: If they're not planning on saving the hall, for example, and just planning on renovating that space into other space, I would actually advocate keeping the house and demoing the block building so that they get a nicer addition onto that facility rather than what's there. But you're right, I do agree that both need to be studied to basically show that they've looked at all angles.
[Doug Carr]: If you get your hands on a site plan and some existing condition drawings, we could just go to town on this subcommittee.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. The other thing is too, if they're not willing to, I don't know how bad it would be, but if they're not willing to compromise and they're only thinking of demo, it could be put in a historic district if we push the district commission. But let's start with having a collaborative discussion.
[Jennifer Keenan]: All right, well, let's get the form ordered and then we can go from there. Okay, thanks, Ryan. Does anybody else have any new business for tonight?
[Doug Carr]: Do we expect to see those guys next month or not from the VFW, the Post 45 building?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm going to ask that they come and provide us a little bit of information. I would love to, and maybe I'll ask them to come to the other, the second October meeting rather than the hearing meeting, because usually we just do hearings and then we'll switch to normal business. So maybe the normal business on the third. 3rd week of October, just so that we can give them a complete, you know, basically open open meeting.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, okay. Okay, Doug, any zoning updates you want to fill us in on.
[Doug Carr]: Sure, the Boston Ave zoning that we had drafted in late June has been finalized and submitted to the City Council. I think they're viewing it tomorrow night. It's pretty much intact from what we had from June. There's been some clerical and text edits, but we were We were pleased, not with the process, but the product at the end. I think it came out pretty good. I'm already hearing about development opportunities, north and south of Tufts that potentially could be coming later this year. So, that is in process. It should pass the City Council, I believe, tomorrow night, in which case we're also That's the end, I believe, of the current consultant's contract, and we're going to put an RFP out soon that will look at basically the next two and a half years for a consultant, and it might not be the same. It's going to be an open process.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Great. That's exciting. Ryan, anything on the high school?
[Adam Hurtubise]: They did photography, I believe, today. We're poking along and looking for additional sources for information, but they're moving forward slowly.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Did you say they did photography? Is that what you said? Yeah, they did exterior photography today.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Are they making a form, right, or no?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, they're going to do a big area form, I believe. I mean, it's effectively like several individual buildings. They're all built at the same time, but they're several individual buildings. Not that there is there any phase of construction. It's just it's easier to sort of break it down building by building.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK. I'm not aware of any updates under properties under demo delay, Ryan, are you?
[Unidentified]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Nothing from the other Mystic AF people?
[Adam Hurtubise]: No.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Anything on Cross Street?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I was there today. They're doing work on, the main consultant doing the 85 stone restorations is about three quarters of the way through their project. In the duration of the time that they sped up and did a whole bunch of stones in the middle, when they dug up the stones that had sort of been squashed by a large leader that came down about 10 years ago, They actually discovered 10 new headstones that had been buried in the ground. So because of that, we had a change order that I just put in for today for some additional restoration work. But it's nice to see, when I went through and did this project initially, I documented all of the stones. I have the record from the 30s and the 60s and the most recent. And I'm like, oh, there's stones missing between the move. And it's nice to see that some of those have come back, that they didn't just walk off. So I have that. And then we're using the rest of the funding to do Using the rest of the funding to do a small restoration, a recreation of one of the veteran stones that was missing. So that's the last of the, we did 15 test stones originally last time, and that's the one that was missing. So we just want to have the data list do a reconstructed stone. for that. He's almost done with the gate. That will look fantastic. He's just gonna put it together. So basically they gotta weld it, and then paint it, and then they'll come put it back together. The wall was almost done. There's some very minor things on the boulders that need to be put back, but other than that, he's good to go. So, and we have a consultant for GPR, so over the next few weeks, you'll see GPR both there and in Medford Square. The biggest thing is that the consultant graciously said, oh, if you're just doing the testing at the relocated site, in addition to the grassy area in the front to know whether everybody's buried there, they said, we'll just do it, we'll just do the entire cemetery so we'll know who's buried where. So that's fantastic. So we'll get a sense of who actually is interned at the cemetery. The hope is that they actually interred people at the cemetery, but they also warned us that it's entirely possible that they were very selective in their removals and we may find that they only removed the headstones. So that would be scary. So we will see. The fact that we found a burial An intact coffin stain six inches under the historic ground level at cross street in the original Trench that we dug the test trench wasn't was not a good sign So this is at the downtown site. Yeah Yeah at City Hall. Yeah that that tells me that they did not even disturb if they're not disturbing that, then there's chances are if they're at surface level, there's people stacked there. And that's why I think it's important to GPR that site. Normally you wouldn't ground penetrating radar site, but there was such a discrepancy that we need that information. So you'll be able to tell if there's coffins or whatever beneath the renovated stones. Yeah, there should be. I know that some people were removed to that site because they talk about them being buried in pinewood boxes about the size of a shoebox, maybe a little bit bigger. And so it should be pretty clear and consistent if there are burials there. It should appear over and over again as the same basic And because of that, you know, if they testing in the areas where there's known burials when they get to the areas with the unknown burials, it should be pretty clear whether there's a disturbance or not. The other side is a little bit more difficult because it really depends on how deep the site is. Some sections of the site are 6 and 6 feet deep. Other parts are nearing surface level just below the surface level. So you know it really. You know, it should show us boundaries. There should be stone wall on all sides. And there should be a receiving tomb somewhere in there. But then, you know, the rest of it is a complete crapshoot on what it shows. Could be sand, could be nothing, could be everything. So, I'll be very interested to see it.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, that sounds interesting.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah.
[Jennifer Keenan]: When is that work happening?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Within the next two weeks.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay. Getting close to Halloween.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah.
[Doug Carr]: How fitting.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Right?
[Doug Carr]: I've seen that movie. It doesn't matter.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Maybe that's why they chose to put a parking garage there instead of residential housing. It'll be poltergeist otherwise. Right.
[Jennifer Keenan]: highway. Anything on the survey project?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, I'm trying to get Mass Historical to provide some information and oversight on the Brooks Estate Project neighborhood project, but I haven't been able to get anything. The procurement's ready to bid it, so I just want to, maybe I should try to follow up again and see if I can't get an answer out of them because they've just been so bogged down, delayed. Okay.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Speaking of the Brooks Estate, the M-Belt annual meeting is Thursday night. It's at the West Medford Community Center. If anyone would like to come, you're more than welcome. It's an open meeting. We're going to have snacks and a slideshow and come learn all about the great things the M-Belt has been doing the past year and our goals for next year. That is my plug for that.
[Doug Carr]: But an even bigger plug is the 26th of this month is the pop-up event at the Brooks Estate where we're going to have beer and a food truck, which we did in August. We're doing it again because we had 200 people came out.
[Jennifer Keenan]: We did. It was an awesome day. Yeah. So brews, bites, and beats at the Medford Brooks Estate on Saturday the 26th from 12-5. It was a great day in August and we're looking forward to, and I think it's the last event of that series where we're gonna be the grand finale, I guess. So come on up, it'll be a great day at the Manor. And I'm sure Doug will be doing tours.
[Doug Carr]: I don't know, I'm a pilot now.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Right, yes. So if anyone would like to see the inside of the Manor, that's your opportunity to see it. Okay, does anybody have anything else before we approve our meeting minutes and wrap it up?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Just for the sake of our membership here, but also maybe we can discuss this. We're a member of Historic New England. We have passes so that we can go visit any of their buildings. So if anybody's so inclined and want to go, I have the passes there. But also, if we wanted to, we could make those passes open to the general public as well. Just just a thought, but I figured I would mention it to the commissioners in case you want to go to some of the great buildings that historic New England has.
[Jennifer Keenan]: So that sounds like it might be a great perk for M belt members.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Possibly, yep, it could be a good field trip for historical society. If we warn them that we're coming to, they might be willing to give us some additional insight into the preservation things that they do like they. Restored the. that new building, that new old building that they got down in Milton. There's a huge estate there. It's beautiful. They went through and like restored all the wall art and wallpaper and things like that. So might be a fun field trip.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I love it. Excellent. Let's definitely talk about maybe offering those passes out to MBEL members. That might be a nice perk.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, do you guys do like raffles? We can. We could do a raffle basket or something like that.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I mean, I think it could just be something where it's like a benefit to them, where it's like, put it in, and if they're available, you can have them. And if there's a wait list, then, you know, for the day that you want, you can be on backup or whatever.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I will also mention too that we're institutional members of NEMA. NEMA, North American Museum Association, NARMA, its larger associate, because we're institutional members, we get into a good number of national museums for free. So if you want, I can send you the list around. Some really good ones. All the all the big hitters, Museum of Old York, Strawberry Bank, Old Sturbridge Village, Mystic Connecticut, those sort of places, plus a whole bunch of individual ones. I believe we also get into the gardener, but the gardener is difficult because you have to make reservations.
[Doug Carr]: Yeah, I've seen that. It's too much of a pain in the butt.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah. I believe the Gibson House Museum is on there in Back Bay. If you haven't been to the Gibson, that's a good one. It's one of the few completely preserved brownstones in Back Bay. It hasn't been chopped up into tiny apartments. I believe it's been preserved since 1930 or 1940. The, um, the most the coolest thing is that it has, like, a iridescent wallpaper, right? When you walk in the front lobby, um, it's something that you would think it would be straight out of the 60s, but it's actually straight out of the 1880s. It's cool.
[Jennifer Keenan]: I love it. Yeah. Okay, we sent around the meeting minutes if somebody would like to make a motion to approve.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Don't move.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you, Doug.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'll second, because I wrote them.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK, thanks, Ryan. OK, motion to approve the meeting minutes from August, whatever that date was, August 5th, 2026. Ryan. Yes. Kit.
[Kit Collins]: I'll abstain, because I wasn't here.
[Jennifer Keenan]: OK, Sarah.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Doug.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And Peter.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I wasn't here either, so.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, so that's one, two, three, four, no, four, yeah. Yeah, four yeses, no. Four yeses, two abstentions. Yep.
[Adam Hurtubise]: And one dog.
[Jennifer Keenan]: And one dog. He says yes.
[Doug Carr]: And that was August 10th?
[Jennifer Keenan]: August 5th.
[Doug Carr]: August 5th.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Is that right?
[Doug Carr]: It's not Monday, is it?
[Jennifer Keenan]: Oh no, our meeting was August 10th. Oh yeah, the date is wrong. We just approved minutes that the date's wrong.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I will change that and I have it up on my screen right now. Also, I should probably put that Kit and I were not here. Oh, did I not put it in there? No, you did not.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Yeah, no. And the date's wrong, so it's fine. It's all good.
[Adam Hurtubise]: OK. I'll blame Doug. He was the one that said it. Hey, I took notes off your agenda. OK. I probably used it, you know, whatever the previous month is. So that's my fault. Getting ugly.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, I think we're all set. It is 8.11 PM for the minutes. Is there a motion to adjourn?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Motion to dissolve.
[Doug Carr]: Thank you, Ryan. I'm going to adjourn, not dissolve, but I'll second that.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Okay, thanks, Doug. Okay, motion to adjourn, 8.11 PM. Peter? Yes. Ryan.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Kit.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Sarah. Yes. Luke.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Doug.
[Kit Collins]: Yes.
[Jennifer Keenan]: Thank you all. Have a lovely evening.
[SPEAKER_07]: Thanks everyone.
[Jennifer Keenan]: See you October 5th.
|
total time: 2.03 minutes total words: 289 |
|||