Vote to establish the Benjamin Lynde House Local Historic District

Transcript (~20 min @ 5:48:45)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 5:48:44 Speaker 10: Chair Vanderberg? No.

▶ 5:48:50 Speaker 10: Two, four, six, eight yays, three nos. Okay.

▶ 5:48:56 Kimberly Vandiver: So that will go back to the full council with a recommendation to deny this request for free cash. That concludes- No? ... this section of the agenda- Okay ... appropriations. We have one more topic, however. We move on to orders. We're on ID number 2026-1291, vote to establish the Benjamin Lynde House Local Historic District.

▶ 5:49:23 Speaker 10: Okay. Here we go.

▶ 5:49:25 Speaker 14: Thank you. So the 244 Main Street has the Benjamin Lynde House on it. It was put on the market for sale, and this caused the community and the Historic District Commission to try to take action to save the house on this lot. So, the historical significance of the house, it's one of only the remaining few homesteads of the Lynde family, who were the first settlers of Melrose. It was built originally in 1693, and it burned... I'm sorry. So it was built in 1693. Benjamin Lynde, who lived there, left that house to go fight in the Battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775. The house burned in 1819, and it was rebuilt in the Federal style house, which exhibits many of the hallmarks of that style, which continue to be present today. The Historic District Commission studied the site and wrote a preliminary study report, in order to pursue designating this property as a single building local historic district. Right now, we have the downtown local historic district, and this would be our second district. It's not that unusual to have single building districts in municipalities. And then went through all of the steps involved to designating this site. The local historic district is a really strong way of protecting a property in its current state. Part of that process is sending the preliminary study report to the Mass Historical Commission and to the planning board, which they did, and received favorable recommendations for moving forward with this process from those two entities. The commission held a public hearing, and we received a handful of comments in favor of designating this property as a local historic district. There was also a comment about acknowledging that the Lynde family held slaves, and recognizing the role of enslaved people in the historical context of the setting, which the commission updated the report to include. There was no record of slaves being owned by Benjamin Lynde or in constructing of the house, but an acknowledgment of the family connection with slaves. And, so this final step is for bringing this to the council, who has the authority to vote to des-... designate this property as a local historic district, and then if approved, we would go through the recording of the district.

▶ 5:52:39 Ryan Williams: Okay. Thank you. I have Councilors Williams, Obremski, and Finocchiaro, starting with Councilor Williams. Thank you. This has been an interesting case that we went through with the last council, and I wanted to lift up Councilor Finocchiaro role in leading this effort. You mentioned the historic commission and the community really rose up, but it was the council that actually put together the first demo delay ordinance that sort of led to the conversation around the potential for what else could happen, and I think that sort of lit a fire under people. I'm a supporter of housing, and so I want to make sure that we're balancing these things carefully. I think in this case, this is an okay approach for us to take. I wouldn't recommend having them pop up all over the city, which I think some people would be in favor of. But I think certainly this is a house that always catches my eye whenever I go by there, so it's good to see it being preserved.

▶ 5:53:39 Speaker 10: Okay, next I have Councilor Obremski. I just wanted to thank you for noting the section about slavery, because I did get an email from a constituent asking me to raise this publicly while we deliberate this issue. I'm happy that the Historic District Commission did in fact put it in their final report. And along with this, the constituent asks that we advocate for signage regarding the Lynde's family history to slavery. That's pretty much it. Thank you.

▶ 5:54:21 Kimberly Vandiver: Thank you. Next, I have Councilor Finocchiaro.

▶ 5:54:25 Cal Finocchiaro: Thank you. It's actually through the chair I want to make a comment on that. So did you say that they did, or I thought it was found that they did not have?

▶ 5:54:32 Speaker 14: The family owned slaves. The family had several properties in Melrose- Mm-hmm ... so the District Commission didn't find a connection with this particular property- Okay ... and slaves, but acknowledged that the family did own slaves.

▶ 5:54:50 Cal Finocchiaro: Okay, because I know the Lynde family was a large family in Melrose, and they lived at several properties. I just want to make sure. And then my question to you is, I am in favor of this, but I know I feel like you're knowledgeable in this, and I just wanted to see what the planning department and you personally think about something like this.

▶ 5:55:09 Speaker 14: Yeah. So the Demolition Review Ordinance, which the council passed, is a mechanism to-- Typically, what results of that is either it gives time to go through this process to designate the property as a local historic district, or documentation, or trying to work through if the building can be saved or purchased by somebody else. But it doesn't result in saving a structure necessarily. So, this is the way you do that. So it is the right tool for this property.

▶ 5:55:52 Cal Finocchiaro: Okay, and I agree. I don't know if it was you that said it, but we're not looking to designate every older home historical district. Right? We're going to save this for homes like this. But I appreciate your feedback.

▶ 5:56:13 Speaker 12: With that, I'd make a motion to recommend.

▶ 5:56:17 Kimberly Vandiver: Second. Okay, I see I have a motion to recommend from Councilor Finocchiaro, second Councilor Jamaleddine. Next in queue, I have Councilor Kowal.

▶ 5:56:28 Elizabeth Kowal: So I want to thank you for bringing this forward also. I think a lot of us have been either directly or tangentially involved with sort of some of the heartache that's gone around this house- ... and there's been a lot of passion around this, and I'm glad that it's sort of forced this issue to sort of come forward. I think it's important, particularly in a historical town like Melrose. And I think my only question is sort of, I think we should get ahead of some of this stuff instead of-- and again, this one, the timing of it was. So sort of is there a plan? And maybe it's not you, this may be more geared towards the Historical Commission, and I appreciate that. But is there a plan to sort of, again, there's a handful of houses who sort of fall into what we're talking about. Is there a plan to sort of get ahead of it so we don't end up in the situation where there's a lot of hurt feelings-

▶ 5:57:16 Speaker 14: Yeah ... about this? So oftentimes, getting the energy to designate a property comes with this exact process. That a property is put up for sale and- Fair enough. Okay ... so I didn't know the history of this site, and when the realtor came into my office a long time ago, while he was there, I looked up the property, and I knew it was a special building. I didn't know all the history of it, and said, "This is going to be a difficult-" You know. Yeah. So, we know of those buildings. I think a lot of people just going around the city notice these kind of special buildings. And so, I think it would be a good thing to explore. We do have the Demolition Review Ordinance right now, so that is a tool. It is something that really helps to preserve the special properties, and I think it's the combination of the Historic District Commission and the Historical Commission to do that. But it is a difficultIf the property owner isn't willing to have the property designated, it can be a challenging thing. And so it often is the sale or something like that that triggers it. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

▶ 5:58:56 Kimberly Vandiver: Thank you. Next, I have Councilor Carmody.

▶ 5:58:59 Manjula Karamcheti: Thank you. I'm in support of the historic designation. I really appreciate it. I also very much appreciate the recognition of the true history of the family and the connection to the house. I think in Massachusetts, we forget we also had slaves, and it wasn't just in the South. So I think it's important to us to have reminders of our real history and our true history. The question that I have is, does this designation impact the family that was trying to sell the house in any

▶ 5:59:35 Speaker 14: way, and how? Yeah. Because I think that matters, too. Right. If whoever is going to buy this property would have this designation, so they wouldn't be able to make any exterior changes without getting the approval, a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic District Commission.

▶ 5:59:54 Manjula Karamcheti: Okay. Thank you. It's just important to note that as well, like- Yeah ... a family who lives in a house is also impacted.

▶ 6:00:04 Kimberly Vandiver: If I can, I'd also comment. I think one concern I have about this is that my understanding is that this designation would not prevent a 40B project if we didn't have Safe Harbor. Is that correct?

▶ 6:00:16 Speaker 14: Right. So, yeah, an example is across the street, 12 to 16 Essex Street is in the local historic district, and the demolition was denied by the Historic District Commission, and then it came back as a 40B project.

▶ 6:00:30 Kimberly Vandiver: So, my concern about this is this kind of makes this property an all or nothing, right? It means that we cannot have any normal development there. We can only have 40Bs, right? We either keep it as is or 40B, but there's no in between if we go forward with this.

▶ 6:00:43 Speaker 14: So, the designation doesn't mean that nothing can happen. Okay. We get applications all the time for downtown. We had the Caffe Nero building built in the local historic district. So it's not a prohibition on change. It's just a review of what additions can happen, and it's a review of should they look similar to the existing structure? Should they look very modern so you know what's historic and what's not. It's a discussion about what's proposed, not restricting anything from happening on the property.

▶ 6:01:19 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay, interesting. Thank you. Any other councilors?

▶ 6:01:24 Speaker 10: Councilor Park.

▶ 6:01:25 Speaker 11: Right. I'm torn on this one. And I think you touched on just now, you and Chair Vandiver touched on what I think pivotal for my decision on this. So number one, let's call a spade a spade. It's not a house that was built in 16 whatever. It's a house that was rebuilt in 1919, which loses a little bit of its luster for me because my house was built in 1890. 1890. So, it loses that ability to say this house is the oldest house in Melrose. Second of all, it's come to our attention that this family owned slaves, and that also makes you wonder whether we should be celebrating someone who owned slaves to some degree, much like the South has statues of Confederate generals. The third point, I think, is that my question to you is, in this sort of single-family housing zoning, are we preventing housing that can actually be useful for lower income or people who are looking for affordable housing? Because I'm concerned that in the same breath that we want to have affordable housing in Melrose and Massachusetts, we are holding up that very process by celebrating somebody who may or may not have been questionable character. So I wonder, what exactly can they build on this property to allow for other people to take advantage of housing that they could not otherwise afford?

▶ 6:03:18 Speaker 14: So the building was rebuilt in 1819.

▶ 6:03:23 Speaker 11: Oh, was it 1819? Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I heard 1919.

▶ 6:03:27 Speaker 14: I'm sorry. I probably am mumbling my words a little bit at this point. But, so this is a residential zoning district. And so, I don't remember the zoning analysis off the top of my head. There's also the properties next door. So we've kind of looked at this in different ways. If these two properties were purchased together, then there's potentially more development capacity even within the residential zoning district. But single families are allowed in that district. It's not a multifamily zoning district. If it came in as a 40B project, they don't have to follow the local regulations, and so, therefore, they could build more units on the site. But even with a 40B project, we have a handful, and most of them, we've worked with the developers. And so for this potential purchase of a developer that's worked locally, developers are willing to work with staff, and so if-... and the boards. And so, it's not an all or nothing. It can be using the existing building, moving it on the lot, which is a typical outcome of historic preservation to make room for building something new on the lot as well. But this isn't a zoning district that we allow for multi-family housing and we want housing, but we want it in the areas where it makes most sense. This is along Main Street. I think it has a lot of benefits if it did have more housing there. But there's just different priorities for different sites, and this one has a historically significant building, and so we are moving forward with the designation.

▶ 6:05:45 Speaker 11: So, I just want to be clear. Is this preventing potentially affordable housing, a larger complex or structure with more units to be built on that property?

▶ 6:06:01 Speaker 14: As a 4 project?

▶ 6:06:03 Speaker 11: Yeah, a portion of a 4 project, yeah.

▶ 6:06:09 Speaker 14: So, the Historic District Commission, if it's not a 4 project, then they would be looking at the proposal for whatever it may be. If it's this one lot, or if it's this lot and the next lot. We don't have any application before us, so it's hard to lay out all the scenarios. But local historic districts aren't preventing any exterior changes. It's just a review of what is proposed on that site.

▶ 6:06:46 Speaker 11: Okay. But they can't tear down the house, essentially, which is smack on the property, which would limit developers to build around that house, correct?

▶ 6:06:58 Speaker 14: Right. They could allow demolition. I don't think that they would for this property, but they could allow for demolition of the structure.

▶ 6:07:09 Speaker 11: Okay. Thank you.

▶ 6:07:11 Speaker 10: Next, I have Councilor Abramski. Yeah, I just want to clarify something that a yes vote on this, we're not necessarily celebrating the family or slavery in any way. We're acknowledging that the Historical District Commission has done their due diligence in researching this specific property, and that we acknowledge the fact that the family did in fact hold slaves, and I think that's one of the most important components of the report, that they're pointing that out. So, I just want to clarify that it's not a celebration of the family or of slavery in any way.

▶ 6:08:03 Speaker 10: Thanks. Okay. Anybody else on discussion?

▶ 6:08:08 Kimberly Vandiver: Okay, I believe we do not have a motion on the floor yet. We do. We do? Okay. Yes. We do. All right, in that case, let's- Do we have a second? Who seconded it? Yeah, it was- I did ... Councilor Jamaleddine. Okay, so let's vote on this motion. Councilor Chen? Yes.

▶ 6:08:30 Speaker 10: Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. Councilor Karamcheti?

▶ 6:08:37 Speaker 14: Yes.

▶ 6:08:38 Speaker 10: Councilor Kohl? Yes. Councilor Abramski? Yes. Councilor Park?

▶ 6:08:44 Speaker 11: No.

▶ 6:08:47 Speaker 10: Councilor Williams? Yes. President Freeman? Yes. Councilor Romanul? Yes. Chair Vandiver? Yes. All right.

▶ 6:08:57 Kimberly Vandiver: Motion passes. All right. That will go back to the full council with a recommendation for approval. Thank you. We have completed our- Mayor Pro-Tem ... significant agenda. Thank you. I'll take a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn.