Loading...
2007-07-30 CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Historic District Commission, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: LOCATION: July 30, 2007 City Council Chambers, Beverly City Hall, 3rd Floor Chairperson Willo Chairperson J Matthew L John Frates Kate Newhall, Associat Andrea Bray MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Chairperson William Finch calls the meeting to order. 1. Public Hearim!:: Demolition ofilitructure at 62-64 Water Street. David Carnevale - Determinations as to wh cture is historically significant and if preferably preserved and 2. Certificate of A ro riateness: existing brick and block structure two issues and then recuses himself, turning the Chair over to the r. issues can be considered in unison. vale plans to demolish the building at the site. Younger asks for c Robert Nelson of 12 Davis Street states that he likes old buildings but he is an old yankee who believes that the City would be better served to see a plaque on the property which explains the historic significance of the site. He speaks in favor of demolition. August Meyer of 57 Front Street speaks in opposition of the demolition, stating that the historic building that is on that site should include the present building. Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes July 30, 2007 Page 2 of 5 Chris Wizwold who works at 52 Water Street states that the proposed design looked architecturally appropriate but the costs were prohibitive so they couldn't work with the building. He adds that the owners put tenants in the building which are not good tenants. He speaks in favor of demolition. Dale LaJoie of 57 Front Street agrees about the tenants, but states that the structure is worth saving. Aurelia Nelson of 12 Davis Street states that it is more dangerous to keep that building as it is than to take it down and build something nice. She claims that she has restored buildings in the past and in this case it doesn't make sense to work with that old building. She adds that it is in the best interest of the neighborhood to put up a nice plaque and build a new building. Justin Sullivan of 43 Front Street agrees with N Nathan Zoll of 4 Orchard Street recognizes the fa "~ against demolition stating that this building is one of the few things that significance to Beverly's traditional colonial past. He states that he does not live e neighborhood but frequently uses Water Street. He agrees that the building' 0 0 n is questionable and maybe unsafe but maintains that it is possible to restore it to ver productivity level it structurally was several years ago. He says that he does no elieve another condo on Water Street should be b 0 the expense of removing one of Beverly's historic sites. He suggests the devel 0 te with the Commission to sell the property for preservation, usin Preservation Act, to fund this project through additional taxes. Carol Rose of 50 Front Str a emolition stating that the Hugh Hill Warehouse is a rare structure. ds that the original plan to develop the warehouse had too many units for the size 0 ilding and would have caused a loss of parking on Front Street. Rose states that. Glovsky worked with the neighborhood residents to form a compromise which would have 3 residential units at the warehouse. She adds that the new plans called for the removal of the ugly cement block building addition, and restoration of the original structure including the part destroyed in the 1938 hurricane. She urges the Commission to vote against demolition and she urges the City to work with the developer to allow him to carry out the compromise plan. Gail Davis, trustee of the building at 22 Front Street, speaks against the demolition stating that her father purchased her house to prevent it from being demolished. She urges the Commission to maintain this historic part of Beverly. Rosemary Maglio of30 Pleasant Street speaks against the demolition. She sites the example of 56 Front Street which was restored and is now a nice building. She states that the applicants must prove that this is not a historically significant building in order to Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes July 30, 2007 Page 3 of 5 attain a demolition certificate. She suggests a demolition delay of 12 months for some alternative plans to be made. Dorothy Hayes speaks against the demolition stating that the building is one of the richest, most valuable properties that we have. She adds that the developer seemed to have a solution to restore the building. She recommends looking to Salem to see how they have preserved their buildings. Joe Sweeney of 57 Front Street presents copies of two letters for the demolition. on. He claims that e bought his rtant to keep s one Robert Neiley of26 Front Street speaks in opposition of the street didn't even have side walks and was in ruins at e time property there. He adds that it since has been restored. He says it is this building as part of Beverly's heritage and identity, and once it is go forever and it cannot be replaced. Paul Adam of 52 Front Street speaks in opposition to the demolition because the applicant didn't even show up to sha is plans with the public. Richard Davis of32 Preston Place spea previous plans looked very good. Speak! be a turning of ones back. He adds that if like to see the City do it and make it a perm Otion of the demolition stating that the er he states that there seems to lllg to be torn down he would Betsy Bundy of 51 Front Street speaks in oppo warehouse is one of the only ones in existence of the project stating that this wand it can be a lovely place. of two units at 41 Front Street, expresses frustration in having ars. He states that he is generally a preservationist at heart veral years for something to be done with this property. etters from the public into the record: 1. Date July 28, 2 m Jason Sevinor of 49 Front 2. Date July 27, 200 , from against the demolition against the demolition Dwayne Anderson states that there is someone currently living in the property. Turcott: Motion to close the public hearing. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes July 30, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Younger closes the public hearing and opens the regular meeting. He states that the previously approved plans for the building are not to be considered tonight. He says that the building is as historically significant today as it was then. Lewis agrees with Younger that this is still significant. Condon states that it is still historically significant. Turcotte states that the place is a dump but it is worth saving. Commission can do is delay the demolition for one year. He impossible to find a mason who is willing to work on that b ds that all the s at it is virtually Lewis: Motion to deem the building as historicall gnifi Condon. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4- . Lewis: Motion to deem that the building should be preferably pres seconded by Condon. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. Condon states that it appears that the Olding is currently being taken down. He asks what should be done about this. The members discuss the demolition delay. of the Building Department. Younger states that this should be broug Turcotte requests they only delay for 9 months. can get federal grants to fix that building up. pose a one-year demolition delay on 62-64 Front Street, mbers vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. Condon: All members vo the Certificate of Appropriateness, seconded by Turcotte. he motion passes 4-0. April 12. 2007 Meetin2 Turcotte: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Younger. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. New/Other Business 4. Determination of Need for Public Hearin2/Certificate of Appropriateness: 2 South Street. Krstanovic - Replace front door Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes July 30, 2007 Page 5 of 5 Younger states that the Krstanovics have been before the Commission once before for other requests. He states that William Finch met with the applicants and convinced them to change the door design from having the Palladian window to having two small square windows, and therefore there is no need to have them come before the Commission about this revised design of the door. He adds that the door should be wood, not fiberglass. Condon: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Turcotte. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. The meeting is adjourned at 8:20 p.m.