Loading...
2015-05-20Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Board: Historic District Commission Date: May 20, 2015 Location: Beverly City Hall, City Council Chambers, 191 Cabot Street Beverly, MA. Members Present William Finch, Chair, and Wendy Pearl, Martin Lian, Suzanne LaMont Members Absent: James Younger Others Present: Allison Crosbie, Staff Planner Recorder: Eileen Sacco Finch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing — Request for Demolition of Buildings Located at 20 Washington Street - Beverly Masonic Temple Finch explains the process for this evening and notes that the matter before the Commission is the request to demolish a building located at 20 Washington Street. He explains that the task of the Commission this evening is to determine if the property is historically significant and if so to determine if it should be preferably preserved. He further explains that if the property is not found to be historically significant, that essentially ends the process and the applicant is free to proceed and get a permit from the Building Inspector. He explains that if the Commission finds the property to be historically significant, the Commission would then determine if it finds that it should be preferably preserved and if so, a demolition delay would be imposed for a period of one year, during which the applicant would be free to work with the Commission on other designs etc. or to present additional evidence to them to prove that all options have been considered other than demolition. Finch states that it is not the role of the Historic Commission to make judgements on what is proposed to be developed on the site and asks that those who wish to speak this evening comment only on historic significance of the buildings. LaMont moves to recess for public hearings at this time. Pearl seconds the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). Page 1 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 Finch explained that the main portion of the building was built as a church and became a Masonic Temple in 1953 at which time the interior of the church was gutted to make way for the Masonic auditorium. The applicant, Steve Archer, and his wife Kathy were present at the meeting. Mr. Archer explained that they are proposing to renovate the main building and construct four condominium units, and demolish the rear portion of the building in order to construct a parking garage for the units on the site. He noted that they intend to move into one of the units themselves. Mr. Archer explained that the rear portion of the building is a former chapel, constructed in 1891 by Walter Kilham, a Beverly -born architect. He explained that they intend to restore the rest of the building and bring back the windows that have been covered over, noting the siting of the building and the view from Washington Street. Mr. Archer explained that the building sits on a little over 17,000 s.f of land. He stated that they are proposing to take the chapel down to construct a parking garage. He explained the existing site limitations for parking, and stated that they want to keep as much green space as possible. He also noted that they wish to create high -end units and further noted that they intend to restore the original columns on the building that have been encased since 1953. Mr. Archer stated that the Brown Street side measures 12 feet 1 inches, and that is the only parking. Zoning requires 18 feet width for access for cars. Mr. Archer stated that he understands that there is some historic significance to this building and he hoped that the Commission would see fit to allow for their proposed changes to the site. Lian noted that zoning in that district allows for 2 condos. Mr. Archer explains that the R6 zone allows for up to 2 units, however there is enough land and square footage to divide it into 2 duplex lots. He stated that they will be filing for a modification of an existing special permit to allow 4 units on this site. He asked for the support of HDC on that matter as well, explaining that he does not want to take the church down to build the units. Finch asked if there are any questions from those present this evening. Archer explained the existing condition of the site and reviewed what he is proposing to tear down for the benefit of some citizens who arrived at the meeting at this time. He explained that they are proposing 4 units inside the church and restore the windows and other historical features of the building. Archer stated that they will be constructing garages at the back of the building and increasing the size of the existing driveway to meet the current regulations of an 18 -foot width for the driveway. He explained that in the 1930s there was 25 feet of driveway and at some point the lot line was changed and a piece of the adjacent property was taken. He explained the location on the site. Page 2 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 Kathy Archer stated that the important thing for them is how beautiful the building is and they want to restore some of it. She noted the green space and how little green space there is downtown, and explained that they want to preserve that as much as possible. A resident in the audience asked if the garages will have flat roofs. Mr. Archer states that he thinks that they will but they have not designed them at this point. Finch noted that the design of what they are going to do is not before the HDC this evening and explained the process of a demolition request. Archer stated that the area is not a historic area. Finch agreed and noted that there are various designations of what are historic properties. He noted that there is an inventory of historic properties. Crosbie reported that the property is listed in the Beverly Center Historic District on the National Register and is also listed on the Massachusetts Inventory of Historical and Archeological Assets of the Commonwealth. Finch noted that this property has been inventoried. He also explained that the National Historic Registry is a higher level of designation but it does not preclude a property owner from doing what they want on their property. Finch explained the differences in the historic designations that are given to properties and areas and notes that there is a National Register Historic District and Chapter C under State Legislation that gives local jurisdiction on the protection of the building for the public enjoyment. Finch explained that the job of the Commission is to determine if the property is historically significant and if so, should it be preferably preserved. He noted that the charge is to look at the building itself and its attributes and determine if it is significant and should it be preserved for the benefit of the public. Finch opened the hearing up for Public Comment at this time. Nicholas (audio was noisy) of 9 Brown Street stated that he is a mason and they asked him to do a compilation on the building. He questioned what happened to the steeple from the church. Finch states that he does not know and asks if the there is any information in the inventory. Nicholas explained what he knows of this history of the changes to the building and the changes that the masons made to the building. He stated that if anyone wants to make the building attractive they should be listened to. He noted that the chapel was built by a local Beverly architect and was not an original portion of the building. He stated the history of the site is vague and questions what would constitute historic value. He urged the members to support the applicant in his request. Devon Grant of 22 Washington Street believed that the demolition of that portion of the building would be a benefit to the neighborhood. The building as it is now does not do justice to what the building underneath could be. He stated that we are looking at keeping a building that was Page 3 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 commissioned by the church to Walter Kilham who was 22 at the time and later became a notable architect. He stated that the demolition of the building would improve the neighborhood. There being no further questions of comments Finch closed the public hearing. Finch explained that the historic significance applies to the overall site and not just the piece that is proposed to be demolished. He explained that the decision about the chapel and whether it is historically significant. Lian stated that the building has a totally different look to it now than what it once was, and the only historic significance is perhaps its age and maybe the architect that worked on the design. He stated that he does think it may be historic, but he does not feel that it should be preferably preserved. He stated that if this design goes forward it will help the appearance of the building and the neighborhood. Pearl stated that this is a clear example of why the ordinance has two pieces to determine if the building is historically significant and if so, should it be preferably preserved and she feels it was a smart decision. She stated that she feels that the building is historically significant just by the fact that it is on the National Historic Registry District. She stated that she feels that the Commission should look at it as historically significant noting the architect. Pearl clarified the timeline noting that the inventory was done in 1979 and noted that the siding on the portico was done in the 1970s. LaMont stated that she feels that the building is historically significant in ugly gift wrap right now, but she feels that what is on the inside is very interesting. She stated that she feels that it is historically significant for where it is, what it is, and who was involved in its design. Finch stated that he feels that despite some loss in integrity through renovations over the years he feels that the whole site is historic to the city and he thinks that the chapel is part of the history of the building, and has some significance and maintains integrity that is pretty reversible. He notes that it is typical of a church of that period and he thinks that there is value to it in the context. Pearl: Motion that the Commission find that the building located at 20 Washington Street is historically significant. LaMont seconds the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). Finch asked the Commission for comments as to the question of if the property should preferably preserved. Pearl stated that she agrees that the changes that have happened over time have changed the building, and the plans submitted are amazing for restoring the bigger temple and states that she does not feel it should be preferably preserved. Page 4 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 LaMont stated that she is not sure. She stated that she would love to see it used. She stated she understands what the applicant is trying to do, but she has reservations about this. Lian stated that he feels that it should not be preferably preserved. He noted that the plans presented are great and he feels that it will be good for the neighborhood. Mrs. Archer explains what they considered in looking at the challenges of the site. Mr. Archer explained that there was a lack of consistency in the layout of the units that they envision and he wants to be proud of the site. He noted that they have been working on this for over a year and it was hard to make the decision to get rid of this part of the building but it is the only way that the project will work on this site. Mrs. Archer stated that she wants to keep as much green space as they can. Finch stated that while he thinks that the space in the chapel is quite nice and has more integrity, the importance of giving back the original facade to the community overrides the issue of the chapel. He stated that he thinks there is a much better public benefit to allowing it to be demolished. Lian: Motion that the Commission find that the building proposed to be demolished at 20 Washington Street should not be preferably preserved. Pearl seconded the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). Pearl: Motion that the Commission write a letter of support for this project so that all other requested permits for the project can be obtained. Lian seconds the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). Mr. Archer thanked the Board and stated that he realizes that this was not an easy decision. Pearl stated that their presentation clearly stated that they have thought this project through very well. Elections of Officers Finch suggested that the Commission table the matter of the Election of Officers this evening as Mr. Younger is absent. Discussion of Mass Historical Commission Planning Survey Grant Crosbie reported that she is attending a meeting on May 27, 2015 at the MHC in Boston to review the provisions and the requirements of the grant project, including contracting with the MHC, consultant procurement procedures, project schedule and reporting requirements as well as the responsibilities of the local project coordinator. Pearl requested that the Planning Department issue a press release to announce the grant. Lian agreed and noted that he feels that the public likes to hear what is going on and it would help the public to better understand what the Commission does. Page 5 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 Discussion on Documenting Properties Under Demolition Delay LaMont explained that she is concerned about documenting historic properties that are scheduled for demolition and suggests that photographs be required so that they can be archived to preserve the history of the building. The Commission held a discussion regarding possible ways to do this. Finch stated that he feels that it is appropriate for the city to give copies of photos to the historic society for archiving. Finch stated that we could require a condition that the applicant supply high quality photographic recording of the property but noted that it is an expensive item to put on the applicants. He stated that he has done documentation for towns that allow demolition that wanted documentation. LaMont stated that if the HDC has a hearing there is some value to the buildings. She also noted that she is concerned that as properties are demolished there will be no record of what it once was. Pearl asked if the Commission can require without an ordinance change noting that when they talked about signage for the building it was noted that it would have to be required by ordinance. Finch stated that he would be concerned about the quality of the photos you would get and noted that he has done this for other communities and it is not cheap. Finch explained that there are a couple of ways this could be done and noted that the applicants submit photos for submission with the application and the other is recording a building that is to be demolished and having a requirement for high quality recording that would be a fairly expensive requirement to put the applicant to. Pearl suggested that the Commission could specify the requirements for the photos be submitted with the application and get the context of the site, noting views of elevations and views from every public way. She stated that if it is a requirement the Commission could use them for the decision and pass them on to archive. Crosbie stated that the ordinance does have requirements for photos. Pearl stated that if we decide to make this a requirement the Commission needs to have a discussion regarding when it is triggered. She suggested that it could be for properties listed on the registries. Finch stated that the Commission needs to determine levels and should be decided on a case by case basis. Old/New Business Page 6 of 7 Beverly Historic District Commission Minutes — May 20, 2015 Pearl reviewed the status of CPA projects filed last year that require review by the Historic Commission and notes that they should be coming to the Commission soon. Finch reported that the there is an effort by the North Bennett Street students for the salvaging of artifacts of the Loring House for the Peabody Essex Museum and the Museum of Fine Arts. He will keep the Commission informed. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Beverly Historic Commission meeting held on March 25, 2015 were presented for approval. Pearl moved approval of the minutes as amended. LaMont seconds the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Beverly Historic Commission this evening, Pearl moved to adjourn the meeting. LaMont seconds the motion. The motion carries (4 -0). The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Page 7 of 7