Loading...
2005-02-16 CITY OF BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS Public Meeting Minutes Board: Historic District Commission Meeting Date: February 16, 2005 Members Present: William Finch, James Younger, Matthew Lewis John Condon, John Frates Members Absent: None Others Present: Leah Zambernardi Recorder: Diane Presutti Mr. Finch calls the meeting of the Historic District Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. 1. Discussion of Future Litigation regarding 61-63 Front Street/Papagelis Mr. Munroe states that because there is no current litigation, there is no need to recess for an executive session. Ms. Zambernardi states that she had asked Mr. Munroe, Asst. City Solicitor, to address the Board regarding the Appeals Court case the city has won against the Papagelis family at 61- 63 Front Street. Mr. Munroe states that to insure compliance of the Certificate of Appropriateness, the city has different options. The first would be to record a certificate stating there is a violation with the Registry of Deeds, similar to the procedure the City of Salem has in place. This would provide information to any new potential buyer that the property is not in compliance. This will most likely force the sellers to remedy the violation because a bank is not likely to give a mortgage to a property with violations. He continues to state that they can also acquire a citation book from the City Clerk’s office and write a citation for each day this violation is not in compliance. The Board can establish a daily fine of $25 according to the City Ordinances. Another option is to go to Superior Court for an injunction. Mr. Munroe continues to explain the restrictions and penalties the court can impose. He also states that this family has been in non-compliance for more than two years and they have lost numerous appeals and this procedure would not be difficult for his office to pursue. He states that the Papagelis family will attempt to be removed from the Historic District. This process is governed by M.G.L. Chapter 40C and will take time. He states that the City should act as soon as possible on these outstanding violations now that the courts have ruled in the City's favor. He then recommends that the HDC take action by filing for an injunction. Mr. Finch states that the Papagelis’ has until March 11 to send notice of their intent to come into compliance with their COA and asks the Board for any other questions or a motion. Mr. Younger motions to refer this matter to the City Solicitor’s office if the Papagelis family does not express their intention to come into compliance by March 11, Design Review Board Meeting Minutes February 16, 2005 Page 2 of 3 2005, and that the Solicitor’s office should take action as they see fit, seconded by Mr. Condon. Motion carries 5-0. Mr. Finch suggests to the Board that they review the City of Salem’s policy for recording certificates of violation with the Registry distributed to them by Ms. Zambernardi for the next meeting. 2. Demolition – Kavanaugh/12 Parkview Avenue Mr. Finch states for the record that Francis and Cathleen Kavanaugh and Mr. Daryl Aldrich are present. He reviews the Board’s procedure regarding how they determine if the building is Historically Significant and/or if it is Preferrably Preserved. He then asks them to present their case. Mr. Aldrich, the architect for the Kavanaugh family, approaches the Board giving a brief history of the dwelling. He begins by stating that it has been their summer residence for over 50 years and they now wish to transform it into a full time residence. He states that the existing house has structural issues. The foundation has been examined by marine engineers and has been deemed structurally unsound. The dwelling’s present elevation is not high enough above high water mark. They also determined that they do not have a location for the house to be moved to while a new piling system is erected. He states that parts of the house are leaning and sagging and some of the house cannot be used because of this problem. Also, the open porch railings and guard rails are not to code. Their only alternative is to rebuild the structure. Mr. Aldrich states that he found no part of the house to be Historically Significant. Ms. Zambernardi states that the MHC area form for the Salters Point area references Aunt Betty’s Cove area as potentially contributing to a larger noncontiguous historic district which also would include Salter’s Point and Fosters Point. She states there is not an individual form for this property. Mr. Finch asks for comments from the public. There being none, he closes the public hearing and opens discussion up for the Board members. Mr. Finch states that this is a prototypical summer cottage. He states it retains some of its integrity. He notes that many of these house types are gradually eroding away. He states there should be an attempt to retain those properties that still have some integrity. He states that the exterior, not the interior is of concern. Mr. Younger states he wishes the residents could be here to give their thoughts on how they want the neighborhood to be. He states this house is an unknown jewel and that it is a significant architectural example, few of which still remain. Mr. Finch states his feeling that people haven’t attended because they all want to be able to change their houses too. He speculates there isn’t a concern for retaining these houses in that neighborhood. Mr. Younger states that he thinks it is important for this group to recognize this house and the other remaining houses that are similar and have significance to the City. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes February 16, 2005 Page 3 of 3 Mr. Finch agrees and states that it is as good a representation of its type as we’ll find. He states most of these houses have been through changes and he thinks this house deserves recognition because it retains integrity. He notes this is not a monument or landmark but an anonymous vernacular building. It is a good example of its type. If there was a greater degree of change to the building it would be another story. He notes that there has been so much change to the neighborhood that he doesn’t think there is a district there. Mr. Younger motions that the dwelling be deemed Historically Significant as a vernacular summer cottage in Aunt Betty’s Cove, seconded by Mr. Finch. Motion carries 5-0. Mr. Finch asks for comments on Preferrably Preserving the dwelling. Mr. Lewis does agree with Mr. Younger but states that the building stands alone and he does not believe that the dwelling should be preferably preserved. Mr. Condon states it would take too much money to preserve the house. Mr. Younger states he would be more concerned about the house if there was some outcry from the public that these types of houses are important. He doesn’t see any outcry. He thinks it would be a difficult building to preserve. He doesn’t see that imposing a delay would have any effect on whether the house is preserved. Mr. Younger motions not to deem the dwelling at 12 Park View Avenue Preferably Preserved, seconded by Mr. Lewis. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Other Business Mr. Finch states he referred to Ms. Zambernardi the owner of a South Street home who came to him regarding a satellite dish. Ms. Zambernardi also states she received a request for a COA for 20 Front Street for windows. The Board agrees to set a meeting for March 16, 2005. 4. Minutes of September 1, 2004 Mr. Condon motions to accept the minutes of September 1, 2004, seconded by Mr. Younger. Motion carries 5-0. Mr. Condon motions to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Finch. Motion carries 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 pm.