Meeting Minutes for Holyoke Historical Commission Public Special Meeting
City Hall Annex- 4 th Floor conference room
September 29, 2015
Commissioners in attendance:
Olivia Mausel (OM)
Intiya Isaza-Figueroa (IIF)
Alexandra Puffer (AP)
Joseph Paul (JP)
James Sheehan (JS)
Frances Welson( FW)
Associates in attendance:
Paola Ferrario (PF)
Dan Fitzegerald (DF)
Jean Jonker
Others:
Mr. Gallivan- abutter
Meeting called to order at 7:00.
Vote on Proposed Demolition of 109 Lyman St / Mackintosh Mill Site / Lot ID #023-01-017
Commissioner Intiya Isaza-Figueroa recapped and handed out copies of her previously prepared notes titled “Research on Lot ID # 023-01-017 Proposed Demolition”. Intiya I-F made a motion to attach notes to these meeting minutes. Unanimous vote in favor. See notes attached.
Commissioner Olivia Mausel described the rules of the meeting. A split vote would mean that the demolition goes ahead – a majority is needed in order to issue a Demo Delay. If a Demo Delay is ordered, then the letter will be attached to the minutes and sent to owner, James Curran. There will be no public comments and only Commissioners will participate and vote.
Commissioner Joseph Paul reiterated doubt that demolishing this building would save The Wherehouse.
He noted that Mr. Gallivan was willing to sell and that site was preferable for demo as the buildings are hidden and not part of the streetscape. He said James Curran claimed the smaller building running along
Lyman St. was the original one, but Joseph Paul noted there was no evidence of that presented and that the Mackintosh Mill dated to at least 1880. He dismissed Curran’s claim that the building running along
Lyman was more significant, or that it could be singled out as the precise location in which industry innovations were made as Curran claimed in the previous meeting.
Commissioner Alexandra Puffer stated that she had visited the site and felt personally unsafe walking in the building given the hole in the roof and leaking floors within. That said, she noted she feels committed to the cause she committed to before the City Council – to preserve historic buildings. She expressed admiration of Mr. Curran and his efforts on behalf of the City, but was not prepared to agree with a building being torn down.
Intiya I-F seconded the assessment of the building conditions from the same site visit, adding that there was a strong smell of oil from the wet floors throughout.

Commissioner Frances Welson noted that there was no third party assessment of the condition of the building provided by Mr. Curran and she expressed doubt over his assessment. She made some suggestions for the building’s continued use:

She suggested that the building might be used as parking on the bottom floor, with only the shell of the building remaining. She noted she does not know the structural feasibility of this option, but would like to see the option explored, which a Demo Delay would allow.

She noted that the City is initiating a solar roof program, and was hopeful that this was a potential location.
Fran W noted Mr. Curran’s record of preserving Holyoke artifacts, but stated that it is a private collection.
Commissioner James Sheehan opened by stating he has been a resident of Holyoke his whole life and remembers when the mill district was vibrant but there was a steady decline over time, resulting in a period of time when buildings were suddenly and frequently burning down. He noted that in that last few years there have been numerous building collapses resulting in property damage, or injury in some cases fatal. He noted that he has committed much time to thinking about these challenges and believes this building poses risk if left as-is.
Fran W noted that two developers have expressed their interest in the redevelopment of this project.
IntiyaIF noted that one of these developers failed already and that many projects that are claimed to be viable do not actually reach completion.
Jim S stated that many developers come before the Commission with plans but most never come back with a completed project, typically due to lack of availability of financing for these types of projects.
Olivia M stated that she analyzed the situation in terms of The Wherehouse as a business, which is iconic. She noted the hundreds or thousands of artifacts that have been preserved throughout the building and creatively arranged throughout four floors where they are viewable by the public. She commended Mr. Curran for a lifetime of work honoring the history of Holyoke. She noted that he had already salvaged the historic building currently housing The Wherehouse and that other parking locations are not viable. She expressed concerns about the building being a fire hazard within a few feet of other buildings. She expressed distress over the decision calling it the Commissions worst nightmare.
She agreed that the building has historic value, but that redevelopment is risky and unlikely, whereas
The Wherehouse is an existing business. She noted that he is running a business and that he is in need of parking. She noted that as business development in the mill district increases, this issue will come up again.
Intiya IF noted that the alternative site cited by Joe P is also part of the historic mill grouping of buildings. She expressed disagreement that it is less impactful on the streetscape in terms of the loss of a historic feel, because the views of the chimney on that site are an important visual anchor. She also noted the extreme costs prohibitive of removing a brick chimneystack, which Mr. Curran had previously noted.
Joe P disagreed saying the lot in question for demolition has more street view value. Intiya IF noted that it depends on the point of approach and sight line – she expressed belief that from the Race St approach the alternate site would be a more significant loss.

Fran W noted that in terms of the ordinance language a demo delay is justified. She believes there are many reasons a demo delay is appropriate.
Fran W asked if Jim S had a conflict of interest.

Jim S addressed the questions by stating that the Ancient Order of Hibernians, of which both he and Mr. Curran are members meet at The Wherehouse. He presented a written exchange with Nora Mallam, and attorney for the State Ethics Commission, including an official “Exposure of Appearance of General Interest” filed with the Mayor’s office. Jim S was informed that he could perform his duties objectively and fairly. He was eligible to vote on the matter of a Demo Delay.
Olivia M made a motion to have a vote. IIF suggested the language used be a motion to “issue a demo delay in the question of 109 Lyman (Lot ID #023-01-017), known as the Mackintosh Mill.” OM clarified that a “yes” vote would mean a vote to issue a Demo Delay.
In favor: Commissioners Alexandra Puffer, Frances Wilson, Joe Paul
Not in favor: Commissioners Olivia Mausel, James Sheehan, and Intiya Isaza-Figueroa
OM clarified that a tie vote is a vote against a Demo Delay. No Demo Delay was issued.
IIF made a motion to adjourn. Meeting was ended.