2026-08-20 - Historical Commission
Summary
Based on auto-generated captions plus the posted agenda and official minutes; names and details may be misheard.
Time on topic (from transcript timestamps; approximate, includes side talk):
| Topic | Minutes | Share |
|---|---|---|
| 6 Ashland Street (Pleasant Street Baptist Church) | 19 | 57% |
| 58 Elm Street, Unit 3 (BDDW-26-19) | 6 | 18% |
| Other business | 4 | 12% |
| MHRTC Letters of Support | 2 | 6% |
| 20 Washington Square Demolition Delay | 1 | 5% |
| 1 Westminster Street Garage Roof | 1 | 2% |
- Thursday, August 20, 2026.
- Hybrid meeting at 25 Meade Street; all seven commissioners present (Commissioner Burnett remote).
- Adjourned about 6:04 p.m. Votes were by roll call.
1 Westminster Street Garage Roof
2:46-3:25
- Taken first as old business with no presentation (petitioner shown as Luis Castro for Brian Major, BDDW-26-17).
- Continued 7-0 to the September 3 meeting, with the constructive grant deadline extended to September 18.
58 Elm Street, Unit 3 (BDDW-26-19)
3:25-9:19
- Robert Michel (captioned "Michelle") asked to replace his windows with six-over-six, bronze-colored vinyl double-hung windows, matching units already approved in the same condominium.
- His unit is at the back of the U-shaped building; the condo trustees require identical windows and color.
- No public comment. Demolition delay waiver approved 7-0.
- Michelle H. Johnstone said the written decision would be filed with the city clerk within about a week, then uploaded to the permitting portal, so a permit could issue in about two weeks.
6 Ashland Street (Pleasant Street Baptist Church)
9:19-27:50
- Charles Crovo (a consultant from Boston, captioned "Crover") presented a new wood side deck, stair, railing, paneled wood door, wood-and-glass transom and hood, as a second means of egress for the upper unit.
- He said the church "got a little out over their skis" and started work without permission; a $1,400 fine was issued, after which the owner applied.
- Pastor Jhorman Rivera (captioned "Jordan Reetta" and "Yorman") said the building houses two families (pastor and worship leader), that a door once stood further along the wall, and that it was already closed in when he arrived two years ago. A 2023 photo showed a door there.
- Commissioners asked who chose the location and whether there was ever a door; the chair kept to design and said the older enclosed door is a separate issue.
- Public comment: Nancy Quinlan (captioned "Quinnland"), a trustee of the El Dorado condominiums next door, called the occupants poor neighbors, questioned ownership and whether a licensed contractor was used, objected to a porch close to the driveway, raised the lead law and young children, and mentioned a vinyl fence and an ongoing fence/wall dispute.
- Johnstone confirmed from assessing records that the owner is Pleasant Street Baptist Church and the building is a two-family.
- Pastor Rivera replied that Quinlan had confronted him at his door; the chair said personal disputes are for other boards.
- Johnstone said the vinyl fence needs Commission approval and she would check aerial imagery to learn when the old door was closed, which may also require a return visit. The new work should be compatible but not look historic.
- Waiver approved 5-2 (Commissioner Livoti and the chair voted no). Certificate of Appropriateness for the Crown Hill Local Historic District approved 6-1 (Livoti no).
- The fine must be paid before a permit is issued.
MHRTC Letters of Support
28:18-30:20
- Updated letters of support approved 7-0 for 1 Exchange Place (Heritage Consulting Group), the J.C. French Building, Slater Building, Taylor Farley Organ Factory and Worcester Boys' Club (PAL, Inc.), and the Worcester Art Museum, War Memorial Auditorium and 32, 42, 47 and 50 Lagrange Street (Ryan, LLC).
- Staff advised voting per request; the commissioners combined them in one motion.
20 Washington Square Demolition Delay
30:49-32:18
- Johnstone said the owner's counsel and Patrick Maloney of Preservation Worcester met the day before and are keeping options open with no plan in any direction.
- She noted about nine months remain on the delay and suggested revisiting on October 29; no vote needed.
Other business
0:00-2:46, 27:50-28:18, 30:20-30:49
- No comment on housing division projects at 26 Lanark Street, 3 Anderson Avenue, 14 Indian Lake Parkway and 23 Orne Street, nor on 11 Lake Avenue (EBI Consulting) or 50 Murray Avenue (Trileaf).
- No policies and procedures discussion.
- Minutes for May 14 through August 8 were again held for a later meeting.
Official Minutes
Posted on PrimeGov (summary of actions, not verbatim). Page numbers and the remote-participation boilerplate removed.
Historical Commission
Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2026
Worcester Inspectional Services, 2nd Floor, Room 109, 25 Meade Street, Worcester, MA
Attendance:
Commissioners Present: Erika Helnarksi, Chair
Ana Santos Restivo, Vice-Chair
Vanessa Andre, Clerk
Jeffery Burnett (remote)
Kristen Gutierrez Livoti
Michael Baker, Alternate
Daniel Forster
Commissioners Absent: None
Staff Present: Michelle H. Johnstone, Historic Preservation Manager
Amelia Clark, Intern
Call to Order – 5:30 pm
Old Business
Building Demolition Delay Waiver
1. 1 Westminster Street (01-013-00003) – BDDW-26-17
Petitioner: Luis Castro o/b/o Brian Major
Petition Purpose: Replace garage roof
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the Commission voted
seven (7) in favor and zero (0) opposed to continue discussion to the September 3, 2026 meeting with extended
constructive grant deadline of September 18, 2026.
New Business
Building Demolition Delay Waiver
2. 58 Elm Street, Unit 3 (03-28E-058-3) – BDDW-26-19
Petitioner: Glynn Norgan o/b/o Bob Michel
Petition Purpose: Replace windows
Robert Michel appeared before the Commission in person. Mr. Michel described the proposed project to replace
the windows in his unit to six over six, vinyl, double-hung windows. He stated that his proposed windows had
been installed by the same installer in his complex several times. Chair Helnarski confirmed that Mr. Michel’s
unit was at the back of the building.
Public Comment: None
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the Commission voted
seven (7) in favor and zero (0) opposed to close public comment.
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the Commission voted
seven (7) in favor and zero (0) opposed that the proposed demolition at 58 Elm Street, Unit 3, consisting of
replacing the windows, would not detrimental to the historical or architectural resources of the city of Worcester.
Having received a majority affirmative vote, the motion passed and the Building Demolition Delay Waiver was
thus approved.
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Building Demolition Delay Waiver for 58 Elm Street, Unit 3, dated and received July 20, 2026.
Certificate of Appropriateness & Building Demolition Delay Waiver
3. 6 Ashland Street (03-028-00018) – COA-26-26
Petitioner: Charles Crovo o/b/o Pleasant Street Baptist Church
Petition Purpose: Install new deck and door
Charles Crovo appeared before the Commission in person. Mr. Crovo described the proposed project, which
consisted of a new deck on the site plan in which the door and roof will be removed and destroyed and then
rebuilt. Mr. Crovo stated that an initial fine was issued for $1,400, at which point the property owner came forward
and submitted the application. Mr. Crovo stated that the proposed new entry will consist of a new wood door
hood, paneled wood door, a wood and glass transom window, and a wooden stair and handrail. It is being proposed
for additional egress.
Commissioner Livoti inquired who determined the new location for the deck and hood.
Pastor Jhorman Rivera, pastor of the Pleasant Street Baptist Church, also appeared before the Commission in
person. He stated that there used to be a door further along the wall. Pastor Rivera also stated that the building
was used by the church for housing for the pastor and the worship minister. Pastor Rivera stated that the door had
been closed in at least two years ago. He stated that the current door leads directly to the second floor, and without
this door and staircase, the second floor residents would have to go through the first floor resident’s living space.
Ms. Johnstone stated that the Commission’s purpose was to determine the design for the existing egress door.
Public Comment:
Nancy Quinlan of the El Dorado condominiums appeared before the Commission in person. Ms. Quinland stated
that the residents of 6 Ashland Street are bad neighbors and suggested that the petitioner does not own the
property. Pastor Rivera interjected, stating that the church owns the property.
Ms. Quinlan expressed her concerns over the close proximity of the new door to the driveway and claimed that
the home was not cared for. She stated that there was an ongoing shared fence disagreement. Ms. Quinlan stated
that she was unaware that the building was a two-family home, and had thought it was a single family. Ms.
Quinlan stated that there was not a licensed contractor being used in the project and that the workers had claimed
that they did not need a permit to work on or around the building.
Ms. Johnstone stated that the owner of record is the Pleasant Street Baptist Church and that, according to City of
Worcester assessing records, the building is a two family.
Ms. Quinlan expressed her concern over potential non-compliance with the lead law and young children living at
the building and mentioned that there was also a vinyl fence that had been installed. She also said that the proposed
new entry doesn’t look historic to her at all.
Ms. Johnstone stated that the newly constructed vinyl fence required the Commission’s approval, and that the
petitioners would need to return to a later Commission meeting. Ms. Johnstone also stated that the petitioners
needed to figure out when the door was enclosed and may need to come back to the Commission for that. Ms.
Johnstone stated that the new door construction should not look historic but instead be compatible and
differentiated.
Pastor Rivera responded to Ms. Quinlan’s claims and confirmed that the building is a two-family home. Pastor
Rivera stated that Ms. Quinlan confronted him in public and said that he was only there for the money, to which
he disagreed.
Chair Helnarski stated that the purpose of the Commission was to discuss the architectural elements of the historic
buildings in the City of Worcester.
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the commission voted seven
(7) in favor and zero (0) opposed to close public comment.
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the commission voted five
(5) in favor and two (2) opposed that the proposed demolition at 6 Ashland Street, consisting of creating a new
opening on the side of the building to accommodate a new door and transom would not be detrimental to the
historical or architectural resources of the City of Worcester. Having received a majority affirmative vote, the
motion passed and the Building Demolition Delay Waiver was thus approved.
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the Commission voted six
(6) in favor and one (1) opposed that the changes at 6 Ashland Street, consisting of the construction of a new
deck, an associated stair and railing, and the installation of a door, transom, and hood, are appropriate for the
Crown Hill Local Historic District. Having received a majority affirmative vote, the motion passed and the
Certificate of Appropriateness was thus approved.
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Certificate of Appropriateness & Building Demolition Delay Waiver application for 6 Ashland Street,
July 30, 2026.
Other Business
A. Policies & procedures.
B. Request from Heritage Consulting Group for an updated letter of support for MHRTC allocation for 1
Exchange Place.
C. Request from PAL, Inc., for updated letters of support for MHRTC allocations for the J.C. French
Building, Slater Building, Taylor Farley Organ Factory, and Worcester Boys’ Club (Lincoln Square).
D. Request from Ryan, LLC, for updated letters of support for MHRTC allocations for the Worcester Art
Museum, the Worcester War Memorial Auditorium, and 32, 42, 47 & 50 Lagrange Street.
Upon a motion made by Vice Chair Santos Restivo and seconded by Chair Helnarski, the Commission voted
seven (7) in favor and zero (0) opposed to provide updated letters of support for MHRTC allocation for 1
Exchange Place, to provide updated letters of support for MHRTC allocation for J.C. French Building, Slater
Building, Taylor Farley Organ Factory, and Worcester Boys’ Club (Lincoln Square), and to provide updated
letters of support for MHRTC allocations for the Worcester Art Museum, the Worcester War Memorial
Auditorium, and 32, 42, 47 & 50 Lagrange Street.
E. Invitation from City of Worcester Housing Division to comment on proposed projects at 26 Lanark Street,
3 Anderson Avenue, 14 Indian Lake Parkway, and 23 Orne Street.
No comment.
F. Invitation from EBI Consulting to comment on proposed project at 11 Lake Avenue.
No comment.
G. Invitation from Trileaf Corporation to comment on proposed project at 50 Murray Avenue.
No comment.
H. Discussion of status of ongoing demolition delay at 20 Washington Square.
Ms. Johnstone stated that she had heard from both the owner’s counsel and Patrick Maloney of Preservation
Worcester. Ms. Johnstone stated that the two parties met and that they are keeping their options open and have
no current plans, but conversations will continue. The discussion of future plans for the demolition was continued
to the October 29th meeting.
Approval of Minutes
May 14, 2026; May 28, 2026; June 11, 2026; June 25, 2026; July 9, 2026; July 23, 2026; August 8, 2026
All minutes were held for a meeting at a later date.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:04.
Sources
- Video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xnpB4LZhly0
- Minutes: https://worcesterma.primegov.com/Public/CompiledDocument?meetingTemplateId=75995&compileOutputType=1
Video
Transcript
Auto-generated YouTube captions; names and terms are likely misheard.
Transcript
0:00Let's begin.
0:06>> Call to order. Good evening and welcome
0:08to the Thursday, August 20th, 2026
0:11meeting of the City of Worcester
0:12Historical Commission. My name is
0:14Erikica Helarski and I will chair
0:16tonight's meeting. Before we begin, I
0:18have a few brief announcements
0:19concerning how our meeting will proceed
0:20this evening. Tonight's meeting is a
0:22hybrid format, which means that
0:24attendees may participate in person here
0:25at 25 me Street or remotely. You may log
0:29in via computer by going to
0:30worcestermass.zoomv.j1604873519
0:37and entering access code 160-487-3519
0:42and the Zoom application or by calling
0:43in at 1669-254-5252
0:47and entering access code 160-487-3519.
0:52To manage remote participation during
0:53our hybrid meetings and to prevent
0:55disruptions, all participants are
0:57automatically blocked from unmuting
0:58themselves, turning on their video, and
1:00sending chat messages. For remote
1:03participants who would like to comment
1:05on an item on our agenda, we ask that
1:07you use the raise hand feature in Zoom
1:08during the discussion of that item. If
1:10you are joined by phone, you can raise
1:12your hand by pressing star9. Staff will
1:14then call on members of the public one
1:16at a time and give them permission to
1:17unmute themselves. You will then be able
1:19to unmute yourself by pressing star six.
1:22This is a public meeting, which means
1:23that it is being recorded and that
1:25minutes will be taken and published at a
1:26later date. To help with this process,
1:29we ask that all speakers participating
1:31in person use a microphone and to please
1:33clearly identify yourselves each time
1:34you speak. The first time you speak,
1:36please state your city or town of
1:38residents for the record. To help
1:40maintain an orderly meeting, please
1:42address all comments and questions
1:43through the chair rather than directly
1:45to any of the other speakers or
1:47applicants. If you are here for an item
1:49that will be postponed or continued,
1:50please note that no additional notice
1:52will be sent to you before the next
1:53meeting. You're encouraged to call the
1:55planning department the day prior to our
1:57next meeting to confirm if the item will
1:59be heard or postponed that night. Once
2:01an item is called, there will be a brief
2:03presentation followed by any additional
2:05comments and clarifications from members
2:06of the city staff. Then an opportunity
2:09for anyone from the public to speak on
2:11that item before we proceed to board
2:12discussion and action. Please also note
2:15that all approval votes will be by roll
2:17call which will be administered when the
2:18time comes. I will now take a roll call
2:20of commissioners and city staff present
2:22this evening. Commissioner Andre
2:25>> here.
2:25>> Commissioner Bernett
2:27>> here.
2:29>> Commissioner Gutierrez Lavod
2:31>> here.
2:31>> Commissioner Forester
2:33>> here.
2:33>> Commissioner Baker
2:34>> here.
2:36>> Commissioner Santos Rivbo
2:37>> here.
2:38>> And Chair Helarski here. City staff
2:40Michelle Johnstone
2:42>> here. and Amelia Clark here.
2:46Great. So, now we are on to old
2:48business, which is one Westminster
2:51Street, which is um asking for a motion
2:54to continue.
2:57>> Okay. I'll make a motion to continue
2:58this item to the September 3rd, 2026
3:01meeting with an extended constructive
3:03grant deadline of September 18th, 2026.
3:08>> Second. And on the motion to continue,
3:10Commissioner Baker. Yes.
3:12>> Commissioner Forester.
3:14>> Yes.
3:14>> Commissioner Bernett.
3:16>> Yes.
3:17>> Commissioner Gutierrez Leavote.
3:18>> Yes.
3:19>> Commissioner Andre.
3:20>> Yes.
3:20>> Commissioner Santos Ribo.
3:22>> Yes.
3:22>> Chair Holarski.
3:23>> Yes.
3:25>> Okay. Now on to new business. Item two.
3:27We have 58 Elm Street. Are the
3:30applicants present?
3:31>> I'm here.
3:33>> We just need you to come up to the
3:34front, please.
3:35>> Thank you.
3:45And so just make sure that the light on
3:47that mic is on. So if you just tap the
3:50push button.
3:53>> There you go.
3:54>> Okay.
3:56>> Can you please explain um your project
3:58to us? And just before before you do
4:01that, state your name and your address.
4:03>> Okay. I am Robert Michelle. I reside at
4:0658 Elm Street, Unit 3.
4:09The project involves the replacing of
4:12the present windows to uh 60 over six
4:18double hung windows.
4:21They uh have been uh uh installed by the
4:26same installer
4:28uh at the same required prescription uh
4:32in our uh in our uh condo group multiple
4:36times. So I am more or less replicating
4:41uh a request that has been put for you
4:44forth to you before uh regard.
4:49So I might also add a comment that the
4:52trustees are extremely attentive to any
4:56such work and would would uh and require
5:00that everybody follow exacting
5:03procedures and uh precise uh
5:07requirements of this particularly in
5:09terms of the exteral color and the fact
5:13that they are 6 over6 double hop
5:17>> and your unit is also located towards
5:19the back of the building as well.
5:20Correct.
5:21>> Yes. Is the center building a kind of a
5:23U configuration? Yes. Yes.
5:28>> Does the commission have any questions
5:29or comments about this project? We've um
5:32we've approved the same windows um for
5:36other units in this building prior.
5:38>> The same vinyl windows.
5:41>> Yes. Uh right above me, two floors above
5:45uh a couple of months ago had them
5:47installed.
5:49They're a particular color of bronze
5:51which um is uh we we uh
5:57which is required and matches all of the
6:00other ones. It also is very appropriate
6:04looking for the age of the building and
6:06and the brick work and so on.
6:10Uh further even if you were not here the
6:13trustees would not allow it anything
6:16else. [snorts]
6:17Well, we like that.
6:20>> Do any other members have comments about
6:22these windows and placement?
6:25>> All right, I'm going to open it up for
6:26public comment.
6:31>> Yeah, nobody online either. Okay, a
6:34motion to close public comment, please.
6:35>> I'll make a motion to close public
6:36comment.
6:37>> Second.
6:39>> And on the motion to close public
6:41comment, Commissioner Bernett?
6:43>> Yes.
6:43>> Commissioner Baker,
6:44>> yes.
6:45>> Commissioner Forester,
6:46>> yes. Commissioner Gutierrez Lavodi.
6:47>> Yes.
6:48>> Commissioner Andre.
6:49>> Yes.
6:49>> Commissioner Santos Rivbo.
6:50>> Yes.
6:51>> Chair Harkski.
6:52>> Yes. You're all set.
6:53>> Nope. That was public comment.
6:55>> Oh, the public comment. That was public
6:56comment.
6:57>> Yes.
6:58>> Okay. Now we're moving on. Can I have a
7:00motion for demolition delay waiver for
7:0358 Elm Street?
7:04>> Okay. I'll make a motion uh for a waiver
7:06of the 12 month building demolition
7:09delay.
7:10The commission finds that the demolition
7:12at 58 Elm Street, unit 3, consisting of
7:17replacing the windows to match the
7:19existing windows, i.e. 6 over6, would
7:23not be detrimental to the historical or
7:25architectural resources of the city of
7:28Worcester.
7:29>> Second. And on the motion on the
7:32demolition delay waiver, um,
7:33Commissioner Bernett,
7:36>> yes.
7:36>> Commissioner Baker,
7:37>> yes.
7:38>> Commissioner Forester,
7:39>> yes. Commissioner Gutierz Leavote.
7:40>> Yes.
7:41>> Commissioner Andre.
7:42>> Yes.
7:42>> Commissioner Santos Rousivo.
7:43>> Yes.
7:44>> Chair Harkski.
7:45>> Yes. Now you're all [laughter]
7:49>> So uh I uh they want I have to show
7:53something.
7:54>> Yes.
7:54>> So through you, Madam Chair. Um I know
7:57you're working with Home Depot on this.
7:59So what's going to happen now is I'm
8:02going to um prepare a written decision
8:05which is going to be signed and filed
8:07with the city clerk. Once that's done,
8:10statutoily, we have 14 days to do it. It
8:12usually doesn't take me that long. You
8:13can probably expect about one week, like
8:16seven days from today. Um, it will be
8:19filed with the city clerk and then your
8:22contractor will get a copy of it. It
8:24will be attached to the building permit
8:26application, which I believe he already
8:28filed, and it will continue in the
8:30permitting process, and then he can get
8:31started on the job.
8:33>> Okay. If uh if I can repeat the time
8:36frame that you said it would be about a
8:38week.
8:39>> So you can expect about a week. So
8:40probably by next Thursday or so you can
8:42expect having a copy of the decision and
8:45then it will like I will go into the
8:48permitting portal and I'll upload that
8:50and I'll sign off on historical. If
8:53there are any other steps in the
8:55permitting process like fire or building
8:58that still need to be done, those will
9:00happen and then your permit will be
9:02issued. So, I I don't know how many
9:04steps are left, but you can probably
9:06expect within two weeks.
9:09>> Okay. So, I guess we're done.
9:11>> Yes.
9:12>> All right. Thank you all very much.
9:14>> Thank you. Have a good evening.
9:19>> All right. Our next item is 6 Ashlin
9:22Street. Our our
9:24>> Come on up.
9:31>> Hello. Hello.
9:33>> Um, my name is Charles Crover and I live
9:36in Boston, Massachusetts.
9:39>> Can you please just explain the proposed
9:40work for the um, new deck and door?
9:43>> I can. Um, so basically that door is
9:45going to serve as an egress to a new
9:47landing and the the church had gotten a
9:49little bit out over their skis and and
9:51started this without permission. So, uh,
9:53then I got brought in. I've been doing
9:55this for a long time. So, I immediately
9:57um put the the new deck on a on a site
10:00plan so that could be approved with the
10:01building department. They did approve
10:03that and then I had the pleasure of
10:05meeting Michelle and realized that we
10:06hadn't gone through historical. So, the
10:09the door and the um
10:13uh I guess the apron above it, it's it's
10:15all going to be in wood right now. ounce
10:16of composite material that that's going
10:18to be removed and destroyed and uh be be
10:21all done in wood including the door and
10:24the uh pediment above the door.
10:28So um through the chair just going back
10:31in time um this was stopped um several
10:35months ago now
10:38the um the commission has at this point
10:41issued a fine of $1,400. Um as soon as
10:46that was done, as soon as that was
10:47issued, um the property owner came
10:51forward, they have um submitted this
10:54application.
10:55As you can see, what's there right now
10:58is not appropriate. Um they used some
11:01composite material and some um looks
11:04like maybe pressuret treated wood. So
11:06what we see on the right is what is
11:08actually proposed. I spoke with the
11:11contractor, the builder um before the
11:13meeting started. So, the door will be
11:15wood, the transom will be wood and
11:18glass, the hood will be wood, and then
11:20the staircase and um deck and handrail
11:24will also be wood.
11:26>> We like that.
11:27>> Does the commission have any comments or
11:29questions about the new proposed design?
11:33>> I just have a question. Was there
11:34originally a door there?
11:36>> No.
11:36>> In the past? No.
11:38>> Okay.
11:38>> Just just just wait until public
11:40comment. [laughter] We we we will open
11:42for public comment.
11:46Um anyway, so no, there was not a door
11:49there. Um
11:52egress is proposed at this point.
11:55>> Okay. And this is just to allow as like
11:57a a safety egress to have a second one
11:58for is that what it is the unit that's
12:00in the back or is that what I'm
12:02understanding? What is the purpose of
12:04the
12:05>> second means of egress for the unit
12:06above?
12:07>> Okay.
12:07>> I'm sorry. I can't
12:08>> We have to wait for public comment.
12:09>> Sorry, I can't even hear now.
12:11>> Oh, okay.
12:11>> Uh yes, that's correct. It is a the
12:13second means of egress for the for the
12:15unit above.
12:17>> Okay.
12:18>> Do we have any any other um comments or
12:20questions from the commission on this
12:22before I open it up for public comment?
12:24>> I have a quick question. Um so the
12:27proposal the proposed location for the
12:30egress who determined this location? Was
12:33it the building department?
12:36the the new deck that you see on the
12:39proposed section was was put on a site
12:41plan or a survey. Can you hear me? Okay.
12:43>> Yeah.
12:43>> And that was submitted to the building
12:45department.
12:46>> The egress location. I think she's
12:48asking why determined that that area.
12:53>> Yeah. Who made the determination that
12:54that was the spot for the door?
12:56>> I'm also joined by Pastor Yorman here
12:59and my son.
13:00>> You can
13:01>> who's not a pastor.
13:02>> Just make sure to introduce yourself at
13:04the [clears throat] microphone, please.
13:10And pastor, just make sure make sure
13:12your microphone is on.
13:14>> You have to press that button till the
13:16light. There you go.
13:17>> Okay.
13:18>> So, we just introduce yourself, please.
13:20>> My name is Jordan Reetta and I'm the
13:22pastor of Pleasant Street Baptist
13:24Church.
13:25>> Okay.
13:25>> So, I think our question at hand right
13:27now is um who determined where that
13:30egress was going to be located? Um yeah,
13:34first there's there there used to be a
13:36door on that same wall just a little bit
13:39further to the corner, but there used to
13:40be a door there to the kitchen. Uh we
13:44determined that and me and um a brother
13:48from the church um based on that we have
13:52a a house that have been used for two
13:55families for many years. There's always
13:58been the pastor and sometimes associate
14:00pastor. Right now we have a worship
14:03leader because the church is a very poor
14:05church and doesn't have how to pay a
14:07salary for somebody. We offered living
14:09there as a there's two kitchen
14:12>> the chair before we continue. When did
14:13you get rid of that door? Cuz I'm seeing
14:15the door in this photo here.
14:17>> When did you close that in?
14:20>> This photo is from um I believe 2023.
14:25>> Yeah, there used to be a Doria back
14:27there. I have I have been the pastor for
14:28two years
14:29>> now. Okay. I have been the bus for two
14:31years and it was already closed when I
14:33came the first time.
14:34>> Okay. So after this meeting
14:38just wait until public comment and then
14:39you can say everything you want.
14:41[clears throat] Um so at you know I will
14:46do I can look at near map imagery and
14:48I'll figure out exactly when it was done
14:49because that might be a problem that
14:51shouldn't have been closed in. But go on
14:54about the proposed door
14:56>> and then where the door is. It's right
14:59at the end of the stair way that go to
15:02the second floor where the other
15:04apartment is. So without that door right
15:07now, this family in order to go out need
15:10to needs to go through the kitchen or
15:13through the bedrooms aisle of my family.
15:17So it's been like that for many years,
15:19you know, like like there's two family
15:21but sharing one house and that's been
15:24the situation and that was what we were
15:27trying to to solve. So, the reason we
15:29put the door right there is because it's
15:30it is right at the end of the stair that
15:33goes to the second floor where the other
15:36apartment is or the other family is
15:38living.
15:42>> Okay. So, my question about the proposed
15:45deck and everything now if what if the
15:48the the whole egress is an issue?
15:53>> Well, this commission um exists for one
15:57reason. and it exists to figure out
15:58whether or not the design of what is
16:00proposed is appropriate. So we have
16:04discovered something here that we didn't
16:05know before. So the other egress um as
16:09we can see in this image, it appeared to
16:12be um covered by a modern storm door and
16:17then it had some kind of um I mean it's
16:19difficult to see in the picture, but it
16:20had some maybe kind of lentil over it.
16:23>> That is a separate issue. What you're
16:25determining right now is whether or not
16:27the design of that egress is appropriate
16:30for the district keeping in mind that it
16:33is um behind a bay and behind a
16:37bulkhead. So it's yeah
16:39>> I mean I from what we gather the
16:41designed proposal of what's in front of
16:43us tonight I don't think any of us have
16:45an issue with like you said it's a
16:47separate issue of whether
16:48>> that we'll get there.
16:51>> Okay. So, based off of the proposed
16:53design tonight for the egress that
16:54stands today,
16:56>> does anybody else on the commission have
16:58questions or comments?
17:00>> What type of door is it?
17:02>> What What's the material that
17:04>> all wood and then and the glass transom
17:06at the top?
17:07>> Oh, okay.
17:08>> It's a paneled wood door.
17:10>> Panled wood door. Um, and then a stained
17:12wood, which I I might have suggested or
17:17I said it was a good idea because we
17:19don't want the staircase and the deck to
17:21appear historic.
17:22>> Um,
17:24>> yeah. You want to marry in the new with
17:26the old. Yeah.
17:29>> Which is, you know, what we're supposed
17:31to do.
17:32>> All right. So, with that, I am now going
17:34to open it up for um public comment. And
17:38if you want to make comments, you can
17:39just go up to that podium. Just make
17:40sure to state your name and
17:42>> and make sure the microphone's on.
17:43>> City of residence before speaking.
17:47>> It's not.
17:48>> Is it green?
17:50>> It's green now. There we go. Okay.
17:52Hello. My name is Nancy Quinnland. I'm
17:54going to butter. I'm a trustee of the
17:56Elorado condominiums, which you can
17:58probably see. See the red brick
18:01building.
18:03>> These are our neighbors now. And just so
18:06we can set the tone, they are the worst
18:08neighbors we've had in 25 years. And
18:11they don't own that building. So when we
18:14say who owns it, isn't it the New
18:16England Baptist Association or the
18:19Southern Baptist Association? You own it
18:22now.
18:22>> Bless Street Baptist Church. The church
18:25own.
18:25>> When did they buy it?
18:27>> I have the papers and property if you
18:30want to come and see us.
18:32>> I'd be happy to.
18:33>> Oh, I'm sorry. Um it seems
18:34>> the church owned the property
18:36>> it seems
18:37>> it's registered in the document I have
18:39come here to deal with uh documents for
18:42the properties and it says right here
18:44that is Pleasant Street Baptist Church
18:46the honor you can find that if you
18:49>> Okay well good um
18:53but it seems very close to the driveway
18:56which we've also filed many many
18:58complaints about that they do not take
19:00care of they also we've also also had an
19:04ongoing disagreement about the fence and
19:07the wall. So, we really do not have a
19:10good relationship at all with this um
19:13pastor. I also didn't know that was a
19:15two family home. When I moved in there
19:1825 years ago, it was one pastor and his
19:20family, not two families.
19:23So, I don't know when it was agreed to
19:25be a two family home. And if it is a two
19:28family home, who haven't made it into a
19:30two-f family home, wasn't didn't they
19:32have to determine if it had proper
19:34egress? I don't understand why the
19:36egress is now a question to go out into
19:39the a porch that goes right into the
19:41driveway. It's like literally right in
19:44the driveway.
19:46In addition to that, um
19:51we've we just I was the one that went
19:53over. They were It wasn't a licensed
19:56contractor that was building this. I
19:58went over one day and saw these men
20:01building a porch. I said, "Um, where's
20:05the permit?" They said, "We don't need
20:07one." I said, "Yes, you do. In Western,
20:09Massachusetts, especially on a
20:11historical building, you need a permit."
20:14Now, they're putting in this porch,
20:16which I don't think looks historical at
20:19all. It just looks like,
20:22okay, they put up a porch that goes
20:25right on onto the driveway. So,
20:29those are my problems with it. Thank
20:32you, Michelle. Do we have record of
20:35there being permits pulled for it to be
20:37turned into a two family?
20:39>> So, through the chair, I did just check
20:41the assessor's database, and the owner
20:43of record is Pleasant Street Baptist
20:45Church, and it is a two family.
20:47>> Okay. Okay.
20:49Okay.
20:54>> I mean,
20:56it it it as a two family. I mean, we
20:59would have to contact um the building
21:01department about it. I don't believe it
21:03needs to be deleted. There are three
21:04deckers all over the city that
21:06>> there's children, they need to be
21:09>> I I don't believe in a two family.
21:12>> Yeah.
21:12>> There there's there's just a disclosure.
21:14There's
21:15>> it's not the owner. Pleasant Street
21:16Baptist Church is the owner.
21:19>> Can if you're going to keep Can you get
21:20back up?
21:22>> So I I believe that there needs to be a
21:25disclosure um if there are children
21:27living under six. And most people do the
21:29disclosure anyway. But I mean if if that
21:32was the case, nobody with a baby in the
21:34city would be able to live in a three-
21:35decker. Most deckers,
21:36>> I'm sorry. I worked in housing for many
21:38years. I know that the lead law is
21:40strict and there have been many, many
21:42little children living in that because
21:44they come and go. but they don't take
21:46care of the property. They It's like
21:49they think they live in a little island.
21:51So, they'll maybe take care of their
21:53yard. They also put up a big vinyl
21:55fence, which
21:57>> Well, that's something else that now I'm
21:59going we're going to have to follow up
22:00on.
22:01>> So, in regard to the the
22:02>> So, okay.
22:03>> Okay. I'm sorry. I'm done.
22:04>> So, so this is this is multiple issues.
22:06So, vinyl fence you need to come back
22:09for. You couldn't have done that without
22:10getting approval. You can't do anything
22:12on your property without getting
22:13approval like at all. on the outside.
22:16So, the vinyl fence, you're coming back
22:17for the door. I'm going to figure out
22:19when that back door was enclosed, and
22:21you might come back for that. Today, the
22:24purpose of this meeting is to discuss
22:26whether or not the proposed deck and
22:30door are appropriate for the district,
22:33understanding that we don't want it to
22:34look historic because we don't want
22:36somebody to make to see it as a
22:38conjectural element. So, we don't want
22:40somebody to see it and and think that it
22:42might be historic. We want it to be
22:44appropriate but not look or we don't
22:47want it to look like the age of the
22:48building. So that's what we're talking
22:50about today. I'm going to have to go
22:53look at the fence. So you're going to
22:55have to come back for that if there's a
22:57vinyl fence at that property.
23:00>> Okay. Is that it?
23:02>> Okay.
23:03>> Thank you.
23:03>> Yep. And I Is there anybody online for
23:06public comment? I'm not seeing anybody.
23:09>> Can I answer to something about She said
23:12>> Sure. You got through the closer to the
23:14mic please.
23:16>> First um there is registry of more than
23:20one family living there before way.
23:23>> Yeah. She just determined that it is a
23:25two family.
23:26>> And um since Miss Nancy,
23:32I haven't have the opportunity to talk
23:34to her, but she came to the front of my
23:36door shouting that I was there just for
23:39money and I was the worst pastor and
23:41intimidating my children. And this is a
23:43public uh
23:47uh event. I just wanted to
23:52first I am the pastor here. I was a
23:55pastor in New Orleans for before that in
23:57the Dominican Republic. That's where I
23:59by the way she said that the worst
24:01pastor the Dominican pastor who is there
24:03is the worst pastor that have ever been.
24:06I am working in this church and I don't
24:08have a salary from the church. Um I I
24:12quit a church of 7,000 people in New
24:15Orleans Celebration Baptist Church to
24:18came this for a mission. I would love if
24:21I have the opportunity to know Miss
24:24Nancy in another circumstance. I tried
24:26to talk to her. She didn't. She was just
24:28shouting and and I just wanted her to
24:32know that I am not in this for money and
24:36the church doesn't have any. Not we
24:39don't have a penny in a bank account
24:40right now and the money we get for
24:44paying gas and everything is money I'm
24:46asking to my family or brothers from the
24:49church. So there's nothing about
24:51business concerning this church or
24:53whatever we are doing here. I just
24:55wanted to make that clear and thank you
24:58very much for allowing
24:59>> I mean that's not the purpose of this
25:00commission and I and I no that's okay
25:02and I understand you know we weren't
25:05there we didn't witness the interaction
25:06but the purpose of this commission is to
25:09save our architecture in our city
25:11[snorts] and whether you're from here or
25:13not we don't question your motives or
25:15what you're doing but we've lost a lot
25:17in this city and it's very important to
25:19us whether you're a newcomer or not that
25:21we make sure that it stays. So, a lot of
25:23people are very passionate about that.
25:25Um, and that's, you know, kind of what
25:28we're really only here to discuss is the
25:30architectural elements of our historic
25:32buildings in the city being saved. And
25:34that's really as far as we're going to
25:36go with it. Um, the all the rest is
25:38hearsay, personal issues that might need
25:40to be solved with other boards, but we
25:43can't get into that. We're already under
25:44enough scrutiny. [laughter]
25:46Um, are there any other public comment
25:48online or anything? Okay. So, can I have
25:50a motion to close public comment,
25:52please? I shall make a motion to close
25:54public comment.
25:55>> Second.
25:56>> And on the motion to close public
25:57comment, Commissioner Bernett.
26:00>> Yes.
26:00>> Commissioner Baker,
26:01>> yes.
26:01>> Commissioner Forester,
26:02>> yes.
26:03>> Commissioner Gutierrez Lavod,
26:04>> yes.
26:04>> Commissioner Andre,
26:05>> yes.
26:06>> Commissioner Santos Recivo,
26:07>> yes.
26:07>> Chair Harkski,
26:08>> yes. And now, may I please have a motion
26:10for a demolition delay waiver?
26:12>> I'll make a motion for the waiver of the
26:1412 month building demolition delay.
26:18The commission finds that the proposed
26:20demolition at 6 Ashland Street
26:22consisting of creating a new opening on
26:26the side of the building to accommodate
26:28a new door and transom would not be
26:31detrimental to the historical or
26:34architectural resources of the city of
26:35Worcester.
26:37>> Second
26:39on that motion. Um, Commissioner
26:41Bernett,
26:42>> yes.
26:43>> Commissioner Baker,
26:44>> yes.
26:44>> Commissioner Forester,
26:45>> yes. Commissioner Gutierrez Lavodi,
26:47>> no.
26:48>> Commissioner Andre,
26:49>> yes.
26:50>> Commissioner Santos Rustbo,
26:51>> yes.
26:51>> Chair Harkski,
26:52>> no.
26:56>> That passed.
26:58>> And now
26:59>> And now, can I please have a motion for
27:00a certificate of appropriateness?
27:02>> I'll make a motion for a certificate of
27:04appropriateness.
27:06>> [snorts]
27:06>> The commission finds that the changes at
27:086 Ashlin Street consisting of the
27:10construction of a new deck, an
27:12associated stair and railing in the
27:14installation of a door, transom, and
27:17hood, all composed of wood, and the
27:21transom being composed of wood and glass
27:25are appropriate for the Crown Hill Local
27:28Historic District.
27:31>> Second. And on that motion, Commissioner
27:33Bernett.
27:35Yes.
27:35>> Commissioner Baker.
27:36>> Yes.
27:37>> Commissioner Forester.
27:38>> Yes.
27:38>> Commissioner Gutierrez Lavodi.
27:40>> No.
27:41>> Commissioner Andre.
27:42>> Yes.
27:42>> Commissioner Santoso.
27:43>> Yes.
27:44>> And Cher Harkski.
27:45>> Yes.
27:46>> Okay. So, that passed. So, you're all
27:50set with this. You need to pay your fine
27:52um before a permit will be issued. And
27:55we do have a few other business items to
27:57get through, but it might be a good idea
27:58if you just hang out so I can tell you
28:00what we need to do next after the
28:01meeting.
28:03>> Or you can call me to leave
28:05>> if I think that would make the most
28:06sense. So, just take a seat.
28:09>> Okay, moving on to other business. We do
28:11not have any policies and procedures.
28:15>> Thank you very much. Good evening.
28:17>> Thank you.
28:18>> Um,
28:19item B, we have a request from Heritage
28:22Consulting Group for an updated letter
28:23of support for MHRTC allocation for one
28:26exchange place. Um, can I group these
28:30together? You can group all of the ones
28:33>> B per No, you can you can group them per
28:37request.
28:38>> Okay.
28:38>> So B, C, and D. You you can do one for
28:41B, one for C, and one for D.
28:42>> Okay.
28:43>> Okay. Um,
28:46also a request from
28:48uh PAL, Inc. for updated letters of
28:50support for MHRTC allocations for the JC
28:53French building, Slater Building, Taylor
28:55Farley Organ Factory, and Worcester Boys
28:57Club in Lincoln Square.
29:00and also a request from Ryan LLC for
29:02updated letters of support for MHRTC
29:05allocations for the Worcester Art
29:06Museum, the Worcester War Memorial
29:08Auditorium, and 324247 and 50 Lraange
29:12Street. So, could I please have a motion
29:14for an um an updated letter of support
29:18for item B? I'll make a motion to
29:21provide updated letters of support for
29:24MHRTC
29:25allocations
29:27for one Exchange Street. A request from
29:31PAL, Inc. for updated letters of support
29:34for MHRTC allocations for the JC French
29:38building, Slater Building, Taylor Farley
29:41Oregon Factory, and Worcester Boys Club
29:45at Lincoln Square. and for uh updated
29:49letters of support for MHRTC
29:52allocations for the Worcester Art
29:54Museum, the Worcester War Memorial
29:56Auditorium, and 32, 42, 47, and 50
30:01Lraange Street.
30:04>> Second. And on that motion, Commissioner
30:06Bernett,
30:08>> yes.
30:08>> Commissioner Baker,
30:09>> yes.
30:10>> Commissioner Forester,
30:11>> yes.
30:11>> Commissioner Gutierrez,
30:12>> yes.
30:13>> Commissioner Andre,
30:14>> yes.
30:14>> Commissioner Santos Rivbo,
30:15>> yes. Yes, Chair Harkski.
30:17>> Yes.
30:18Now for item E, we have an invitation
30:20from the city of Worcester housing
30:21division to comment on proposed projects
30:23at 26 Lard Street, 3 Anderson Avenue, 14
30:27Indian Lake Parkway, and 23 or 23 Orange
30:30Street. Um, we're going to have no
30:32comment on that. Um, item F, an
30:35invitation from EBI Consulting to
30:37comment on proposed project at 11 Lake
30:39Avenue. Uh, no comment on that. Uh item
30:42G, invitation from Trileaf Corporation
30:44to comment on proposed project at 50
30:47Murray Avenue. No comment on that as
30:49well. And um item H, we have a
30:53discussion of status of ongoing
30:54demolition delay at 20 20 Washington
30:56Square.
30:57>> Sure. So through you, Madam Chair, um I
31:00heard from the council of the um owners
31:05of 20 Washington Square and I also spoke
31:08with Pat Maloney from Preservation
31:10Worcester. Um, the owners of 20
31:12Washington Square and Preservation
31:14Worcester met yesterday and at this
31:17point they just wanted to let us know
31:19that they are keeping their options open
31:21or Pat Maloney let me know that they
31:23said they're keeping their options open.
31:25They have no plan in any direction at
31:27this point. Um, and the council of the
31:31owner of the building let us know that
31:34they are planning on continuing
31:35conversations with Preservation
31:37Worcester. So, at this point, I would
31:40recommend um continuing the discussion.
31:44Um at this point, there's I think nine
31:46months left of the delay. So, if it's
31:49August 20th now, maybe you want to push
31:52out another discussion to the end of
31:54October. October 29th.
31:56>> Okay. So, would I make a motion to
31:58continue discussion?
31:59>> No, you can you can just ask me to put
32:00it.
32:00>> Okay. Can you please
32:02>> put that October 29th?
32:05>> Um we have no minutes this evening,
32:07correct? But we will soon.
32:08>> We will soon. All right.
32:11>> And um if that is it, I will make a
32:13motion to adjourn the meeting. All in
32:15favor say I.
32:16>> I.
32:16>> I.
32:17>> I.
32:18>> I forgot he was online for seven.