Historic District Commission
Minutes
Land Use Meeting Room
March 17, 2009
Members present: Chair Ken Fowler, KF; Kate McNulty-Vaughan, KM-V; Elaine Steinert, ES; Jason Berger, JB; and Jim Harwood, JH
Staff present: Peggy Ammendola, Land Use Clerk, PA; Mary Albertson, Town Planner, MA;
Bill Thornton, Building Inspector was also present.
JH and KF recused themselves.
There were five residents in attendance. Also Jim Harwood set as an audience member.
Merritt 2004 LP, Demolition at 100 Church Street, Map 43 Parcel 86. Continued from Feb. 3, 2009 and March 3, 2009. Sitting for this application were Acting Chair Jason Berger, JB; Kate McNulty-Vaughan, KM-V; and Elaine Steinert, ES.
Present were Matt Merritt who represents Merritt 2004 LP and Architect Robert Harrison.
JB opened the continued meeting and asked for public comment.
Speaking in opposition to the demolition were Andrea Winter, Daniel Mintz, Suzanne Pelton (representing the Lenox Historical Commission), Jim Biancolo, and Bob Munch. No one spoke in favor.
Submitted to the Commission were:
1. A memorandum from Andrea Winter that she read aloud
2. A letter from Daniel Mintz
3. Petition of opposition dated March 17, 2009, two of the same, signed by a total of eleven citizens
The four following letters were read into the record:
1. Letter of March 2, 2009 from Frank Macioge, Architect
2. Letter of March 5, 2009 from Robert Harrison, Architect (This letter was in response to the request of the HDC to provide a plan, a timetable for demolition and the proposed reuse of the property.)
3. Letter of March 13, 2009 from Attorney Kenneth Margolin
4. Letter of March 17, 2009 from Town Counsel Jeremia Pollard
Mr. Harrison commented that work done to preserve this building would merely be “re-building”, not rehabilitation, as it is no longer salvageable. Further, he said, the building has no architectural value or historic importance and the Historical Commission, in surveying the property for inclusion in the Historic District, was unsure of the building’s eligibility. (Mr. Harrison was referring to the Form B submitted to Massachusetts Historical Commission in 1987.) Ms. Pelton disputed this by saying that it was not determined by the Lenox Historical Commission that the building was not eligible, but that more research needed to be done.
Jim Harwood asked Mr. Thornton if the Building Code required that an owner maintain a property. Mr. Thornton responded that there is and that he had written a letter to Mr. Merritt to either make the building safe or to tear it down. Mr. Merritt asked Mr. Thornton for a permit to demolish the building, and Mr. Thornton told Mr. Merritt to seek permission from the Historic District Commission. Mr. Merritt submitted his application to the HDC thus this meeting.
Mr. Harrison informed all that the only forcible action the state can take against a building owner is to make the structure safe from entry, and ultimately forcing demolition. The state has no power to force renovation.
JB referred to Mr. Margolin’s letter which said his client was looking for a Certificate of Hardship. He pointed out that the notice to abutters was stating Mr. Merritt was asking for a Certificate of Appropriateness and asked Mr. Merritt which certificate he was seeking. Mr. Merritt responded that the building cannot be saved and he is asking for whatever certificate it took to grant permission to demolish the building.
The public hearing was closed to further comment. KM-V made a motion to issue a Certificate of Hardship and or a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the building at 100 Church St., Map 43 Parcel 86, owner of record, Merritt 2004 LP. JB seconded the motion.
KM-V proposed to the Commissioners to allow the motion fail. She said that the application was incomplete as the applicant did not check off which certificate he desired. She feels the applicant has other options other than demolition and she believes that there has been some level of neglect since Merritt LP acquired the property. Additionally she feels that standard for financial hardship has not been met and that rehabilitation is conceivable.
ES said that she would like to continue the hearing to get other professional opinions. JB feels that the information provided is sufficient to decide whether or not demolition is appropriate. If the Commission determines that the demolition is not appropriate, then the Commission look into determining whether there is a hardship. He suggests the motion be withdrawn and two separate motions be made. Discussion ensued regarding whether there should be one certificate or two. References were made to the Guidelines, Procedures of Administration Appendix C, Section A1; the Lenox Historic District Bylaw; and MGL 40 C Section 10 Paragraph C.
Recess of ten minutes was called.
The meeting was called back to order at 7:05 pm.
JB informed all that the application received was for a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish a structure. Mr. Merritt’s attorney feels Mr. Merritt is entitled to a Certificate of Hardship. Both need to be dealt with separately.
KM-V referred to the letter from Town Counsel and feels the notification objective has been met. She agreed to initiating two motions if so desired.
JB feels that Certificate of Appropriateness should be dealt with at this time. Hardship, if necessary, can then be done. KM-V amended her motion KM-V made a motion to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the building at 100 Church St., Map 43 Parcel 86, owner of record, Merritt 2004 LP. ES seconded the motion. The motion failed by a 0-3 vote.
KM-V made a motion to issue a Certificate of Hardship for demolition. JB seconded the motion.
In their discussion, KM-V stated that she does not feel the standard of financial hardship has been met and the condition of the building is not great. JB said that he feels that there is a substantial derogation of the purpose and intent of the bylaw. The motion failed by a 0-3 vote.
Both KF and JH returned to the meeting at this point. KF resumed the position of Chair.
Historic Plaques: Suzanne Pelton of the Historic Commission provided a sample of the historic plaques which are proposed for historic buildings in Lenox. The information on the sign is authenticated by two sources before it is put in place. The Historic Commission wishes to have signs in five locations which would indicate the boundaries of the Historic District. The Commission stated they felt that the sign meets the criteria, but that when the time comes, the Historic Commission is to submit an application which states all of the parameters. They also suggest that there may be a zoning issue with regard to the number of signs.
Eric George Haythorne, 9 Cliffwood Street:
Kristine Sprague submitted plans for a garage that is proposed at this location. The plans show that the garage, setback at 172 feet, is located beyond the 150 feet of jurisdiction of the HDC.
JB made a motion to issue a Certificate of Non-Applicability for the construction of a garage at property located at 9 Cliffwood, Map 43 Parcel 63, owned by Eric Haythorne, as submitted by Kristine Sprague. JB seconded the motion and the Commission agreed 5-0.
JH made a motion to adjourn the meeting and KM-V seconded the motion. The Commission voted to adjourn 5-0.
Minutes of March 3, 2009: Minutes were tabled until the next meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
