2011-05-19Beverly Historic Commission
Draft Minutes — May 19, 2011
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Board: Historic District Commission
Date: May 19, 2011
Location: City Council Chambers, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA.
Members Present William Finch, Chair, James Younger Vice Chair, John Condon,
Ralph Turcotte, Matt Lewis
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Kate Newhall, Associate Planner
Recorder: Eileen Sacco
Finch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m
Demolition of a Portion of the Structure at 48 Dodge Street/ Westward Apple Orchards, LP
Attorney Thomas Alexander and David O'Sullivan are present at the meeting. Also present is
property owner, Jeff Rhuda
Finch asks the owner or his representative to present their case.
Atty. Alexander addressed the Commission and stated that some of the commissioners visited the
site earlier in the evening to gain some familiarity with the property. He explained that Johnny
Appleseed's had vacated the property and Coldwell Banker is not going to renew their lease. Atty.
Alexander described the property as a mish mash of functional and unusable space. He introduced
David O'Sullivan to explain the proposal.
O'Sullivan addresses the Commission and states that the property is a maze of rooms, noting that an
addition was added in the 1960s. He stated that the layout is inefficient and a challenge. He noted
that the corner of the building has been altered over the years, replacement windows have been
installed and the basement presents structural challenges; they recommend that it be torn down and
that the entire building be re- built.
Atty. Alexander states that his clients feel that the property has lost its historic significance and
requests that the Commission find that the site is not historically significant.
Finch opens the public hearing at this time.
Finch notes that the Commission has two tasks this evening: (1) to determine if the site is
historically significant and if it is, (2) should it be preferably preserved thereby imposing up to a 12-
month delay of demolition period. He also noted that the owner can proceed as he sees fit if the
Commission determines that the property is not historically significant, in which case no
determination would be made as to whether the property should be preferably preserved.
Finch addresses the applicant and states that the Appleseed's portion of the building is circa 1960's
and typically the anything over 50 years old is considered historic, but the Commission is not
concerned with this portion of the building. They are concerned, however, with the structure on the
corner, which was built circa 1715.
Page 1 of 3
Beverly Historic Commission
Draft Minutes — May 19, 2011
Finch opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
Cheryl Oliphant of 2 Chipman Road addresses the Commission and stated that the first she heard of
this was when she received the notice of this meeting. She stated that she is concerned about her
property value. She recalled earlier agreements regarding the use of the site with Appleseed's when
the property owners pledged to keep a grassy buffer between the rear of the building and her
property line. She stated that she did not think that the demolition of the building would be in her
best interest. She stated that the current property owners may not keep that grassy buffer as they
redevelop the site.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Finch declared the pubic
hearing closed.
Younger stated that the first issue for the Commission to decide is whether the building has historic
significance. He stated that historic significance of the site and of this particular house is
documented with information to support that the house was built in 1715 and that the general
configuration of the house, which retains some of the original beams and skeletal structure are an
important part of Beverly's early history.
Finch stated that he agrees and noted that the first owner of the home was an original signer of the
covenant to establish the congregational church located around the corner on Conant Street. He
also noted that it is a visually prominent location and defines the corner of the intersection.
Turcotte stated that the history of the home goes back to the earliest settlers of Beverly.
Finch asks if the Commissioners have anything else they wish to state. There being no further
questions or comments regarding this matter he will entertain a motion:
Younger: moves that the Commission find that the building is historically significant for the
reasons discussed. Turcotte seconds the motion. The motion carries (5 -0).
Finch states that the next matter before the Commission regarding this property is the question of
whether the property should be preferably preserved.
Younger stated that the same architect, who was able to preserve the home across Conant Street,
was brought in to examine this home. The Commission encouraged the applicant to find a way to
incorporate the home into future development plans much like the neighboring property owner.
Younger stated that there is a significant amount of that building that could come down but that the
original home, the corner section, is historically significant and is an important part of the
streetscape. He stated that he sees an opportunity here to preserve a part of the City's history.
Finch agrees, noting that the streetscape, that the position of the house defines a key intersection in
the North Beverly neighborhood. He stated that the loss of the building at the corner would
present some design issues in the future redevelopment of the site.
Finch describes the property and notes that the least important portions are furthest from the corner
and encompass the 1960s addition. He noted that he sees a positive community benefit with
Page 2 of 3
Beverly Historic Commission
Draft Minutes — May 19, 2011
keeping the original home and renovating it so that it will work with the applicant's plans for future
redevelopment.
Atty. Alexander requested that the Commission attach a copy of the site plan to the decision that
indicates what portions of the building the Commission deems to be preferably preserved. Finch
agrees to that request.
Finch asks if the Commissioners have anything else they wish to state. There being no further
questions or comments regarding this matter he will entertain a motion:
Younger: moved that the building defined in Exhibit A on the site plan of land for 48 Dodge
Street, be preferably preserved due to the comments made by the Commission. Turcotte seconded
the motion. The motion carried (5 -0).
Atty. Alexander addresses the Commission and explained that the ordinance provides for the 12-
month period of stay on the proposed demolition, and that the applicant should make every effort
possible to find someone to rehabilitate the property.
Jeff Rhuda, property owner, addresses the Commission and stated that he would like to move the
building to a different site, but his business decisions are made and the building, where it currently
stands does not factor into them. Younger stated that the building is valued because of its sighting
and moving it is not a viable solution. Rhuda agreed stating that he is only before the Commission
here to get the 12 -month clock started so that he may demolish the structure.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the Historic Commission held on January 20, 2011 were presented for approval.
Younger moved to approve the minutes of the meeting as presented. Turcotte seconded the motion.
The motion carried.
Other Business
Kate Newhall addressed the Commission and stated that there was an application filed today for the
demolition of a house on Foster's Point. She noted that a lot of the original homes in this area have
been demolished and replaced with larger ones. Younger agrees stating that he is inclined to think
that this does not need a hearing but he would like to visit the site to be sure. Newhall asks the
members to visit the home over the weekend and call or email her with their thoughts on the
proposed demolition.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Beverly Historic Commission this evening,
Lewis moved to adjourn the meeting. Turcotte seconds the motion. The motion carries (5 -0).
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Page 3 of 3