Loading...
2012.11.26 Northampton Historical Commission Meeting Notice DATE: Monday, November 26, 2012 TIME: 5:30 PM PLACE: City Hall Hearing Room, 210 Main Street, Room 18 For questions contact: Sarah LaValley, staff: slavalley@northamptonma.gov, or David Drake, Chairman: davidd321@yahoo.com Agenda 1.Public Comments 2.Approval of Minutes a.November 5, 2012 3.Public Hearing: to determine whether 87 Bridge Street, map ID 32A-185, should be determined "Preferably Preserved" pursuant to the Northampton Demolition Ordinance, Chapter 161 of the General Code. 4.State Hospital Artifacts a.Vote on Items Considered to-date b.Discuss auction c.Approve Use of Sale Proceeds for Hospital Memorial 5.Continue discussion of Addition of Partial Demolitions to Demolition Ordinance 6.Discuss Proposed Zoning Amendments 7.Review of Mail 8.Other business not foreseen when agenda was prepared Adjourn 9. Northampton Historical Commission Minutes DATE: Monday, November 26, 2012 TIME: 5:30 PM PLACE: City Hall, 210 Main Street, Room 10 Members Present: David Drake, Barbara Blumenthal, Bruce Kriviskey, Craig Della Penna, Dylan Gaffney Staff Present: Sarah LaValley Chairman Drake called the meeting to Order at 5:30 PM. Public Comments None Approval of Minutes a.November 5, 2012. Ms. Blumenthal moved to approve the minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kriviskey, and carried unanimously. Public Hearing: to determine whether 87 Bridge Street, map ID 32A-185, should be determined "Preferably Preserved" pursuant to the Northampton Demolition Ordinance, Chapter 161 of the General Code. The Commission considered a report regarding the age of the structure from Aaron Helfand, Sanborn maps from 1856 and 1860, and an abstract of ‘John Wright Account Books.’ These are filed with the permit materials. Mr. Gaffney stated that he looked at available maps, which showed a structure back to at least 1856. The location was just outside the palisades in Northampton’s early days. The lot was shown as belonging to the Wright family, all descendants of Samuel Wright, one of Northampton’s first settlers. However, no evidence was found to indicate that the Wright’s built the present structure. Louis Hasbrouck, Northampton Building Commissioner, informed the Commission that while he did not complete a full building survey he inspected the structure and determined it unsafe to occupy. An addition has been added to the rear of the building, and the chimney on the western side of the building is much older than the other chimney. The building has been divided and additions placed in such a way that many of the original features are gone. Creation of motel rooms has removed the colonial central hall, and fireplaces have also been removed. The motel-related work appears to have been done in the 1930s or 1940s. Mr. Kriviskey asked whether the building retains any structural integrity. Mr. Hasbrouck replied that the interior structure has been severely altered, and that work was not done with the history of the building in mind. The first floor and basement are in very poor condition. The interior structure, rather than being covered, may have been removed. Mr. Kriviskey read some of the evidence for Preferably Preserved as listed in the Ordinance, noting that it is no longer intact, and the condition is poor, and while the age is unknown, it could be a very old structure. Ms. Blumenthal noted that as late as the 1860’s, earlier construction techniques for homebuilding were used, so the presence of Colonial construction elements may not indicate year of construction. Chairman Drake noted that Northampton has very few Colonial structure, and if it is Colonial, that carries an additional responsibility for protection. Mr. Gaffney asked about the outcome of the Ward 3 meeting regarding the building. Peg Keller replied that several different ideas were discussed; there were several ideas including rehabilitation discussed, but condition of the building was not really a factor in those ideas. Mr. Kriviskey continued discussion of Preferably Preserved evidence, noting that some exemplary construction elements remain, and it is not known whether it yields important information to history. The site plays a very important role in the streetscape as a gateway to downtown. Mr. Gaffney asked why a site visit was not possible. Mr. Hasbrouck stated that the building has been abandoned since 1999, and much of the first floor is not adequately supported. While the building is not yet in danger of collapsing, it poses a possible hazard to those inside. Mr. Della Penna pointed out that the building has also had a long history of use as a motel, which should also be considered in the Commission’s decision. The Commission discussed the zoning permit application (ZPA) that triggered the review process, rather than a full building permit application. Mr. Hasbrouck stated that a building permit application would not be able to be filed until all abatement has been completed, which can be a significant expense. Ms. LaValley noted that the ZPA has been consistently used for all demolition reviews, including some that were filed for 2 real estate listings or by non-owners. Mr. Kriviskey noted that this instance is unique as neither the owner nor the applicant is present to speak to the application. Mr. Kriviskey moved to determine the structure Preferably Preserved pursuant to the Demolition Ordinance, with a delay of up to one yar, seconded by Mr. Della Penna. The Commission discussed demolition delay options. Ms. LaValley suggested that if the structure is found Preferably Preserved, specific conditions could be added to allow demolition to take place within the year time period. These potentially could be satisfied with additional historical documentation, or evidence that the condition of the structure will not allow for alternatives to demolition. Ms. Blumenthal added that a delay not-to-exceed 12 months seems appropriate, with a reduction for additional evidence provided, if approved by the Commission. Mr. Kriviskey suggested that a requirement for a structural analysis could be added. Mr. Della Penna asked whether the application covers additional buildings under common ownership. Ms. LaValley clarified that the application is only for the motel and outbuilding on the same parcel. Chairman Drake stated that a delay for a year without action would not be helpful, and the Commission will need to work to move research forward. The motion carried, 4-1, without specific conditions. Mr. Kriviskey requested that staff investigate the possibility of a site visit. Discuss Proposed Zoning Amendments Chairman Drake state that the Planning Board is considering zoning changes to allow additional increases in density within urban residential districts. Many historic structures are located within these districts, so the Commission to seek to ensure that density works in conjunction with historic preservation. Ms. LaValley stated that the Ordinance will not be referred to the Historical Commission, but the Commission could provide input. Mr. Kriviskey suggested that the Historical Commission advocate for additional historic districts, and also request an opportunity for additional input if an inventoried property is affected. Mr. Della Penna noted that inventory forms are an important base for creating new districts, and asked if a master database is available. Ms. LaValley stated that tying the recently completed forms to an online map is in process, but cautioned that the inventory was not comprehensive, so lack of a Form B does not necessarily indicate that a property is not historic. She will add the forms to the Planning Department’s online database. The Commission will review the changes and continue discussion at the next meeting. 3 State Hospital Artifacts The Commission looked at photos of artifacts in City Hall, and will take action on final recommendations when additional artifacts at DPW and the state hospital are inventoried. The Commission discussed possibilities for sale of the items that the Commission will not retain. Continue discussion of Addition of Partial Demolitions to Demolition Ordinance No discussion. Review of Mail The Commission received an historic postcard from the Bernardston Historical Commission, staff will send a thank you letter, and the postcard will be placed into the Forbes collection. Copy of MassHistoric correspondence to applicant regarding the CT River Greenway project not impacting any historic resources. Copy of MassHistoric correspondence to Army Corps of Engineers, regarding Norwottuck Rail Trail bridge work not impacting the historic resource. Other business not foreseen when agenda was prepared The Commission reviewed and approved a City Council order to allow the sale of the State Hospital artifacts, with a request that the Commission retain any funds, for use in an appropriate memorial. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 7:58 PM. The Commission agreed the next meeting will be December 17. 4