Category Archives: Historic Preservation

Historic preservation, Newburyport, MA, preserving, conserving and protecting buildings, objects, landscapes and street-scapes of historical significance in Newburyport, Massachusetts

Newburyport, 30-32 Marlboro Street

If we are lucky enough, Matthew Pieniazek, who bought 30-32 Marlboro Street (the property that goes all the way back to Hancock Street,) might not demolish the front of the c.1850 house. His own engineer says the historic house is structurally sound.

For me, the first thing we as a community could do is lobby Mr. Pieniazek not to demolish 30-32 Marlboro Street.

A big “thank you” to Newburyport’s Historical Commission for putting on a 12 month demolition delay on this project. Personally, I appreciate that a whole lot. What an incredible loss that would be.

I think the neighbors are very fearful that something really terrible will happen to that property, that massive condominiums could go in, and that Mr. Pieniazek is rescuing them and that he is their only hope.

It is my understanding that the property is not zoned for a massive condominium unit. So I think the neighbors could relax and start thinking about what would be good for them and what would be good for the City of Newburyport, MA.

Whatever ends up going there, Mr. Pieniazek plans to turn a deeded two family home into a one family (roughly 4,000 square foot) house. That’s a big house.

Why is this a bad thing?

This one goes back to trying to keep Newburyport’s local neighborhood character. And this is having a McMansion in a neighborhood that is not about McMansions.

For me, this is an example of one of those projects that incrementally erodes Newburyport’s economic base for short-term economic gain.

It is also one more example of how Newburyport’s Historic District has absolutely no protection. And it is just one more reason to start lobbying our public officials for zoning amendments that protect our historic heritage, which is vital to our economic survival.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, What Has Happened to a Beautiful City?

I don’t believe I know Ellen Sklar-Abbott, but she wrote a terrific Letter to the Editor in yesterday’s Newburyport Daily News, August 29, 2006.

The letter is headed “What happened to my city?”

To quote from Ms Sklar-Abbott:

“When I first moved here, there were very strong efforts to keep the downtown from being torn down and a Kmart from being built in Market Square! First it creeps in slowly, a McMansion here, a franchise there, then the charm and the land are gone forever. Don’t say it won’t happen here—it already has and it is so sad. Maybe some call it progress, I call it thoughtless.”

I couldn’t agree more.

And a very big “thank you” to Stephanie Chelf and the Newburyport Daily News for the front page story on Save Our Town in today’s Newburyport Daily News, August 30, 2006.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Our Luck Has Changed

We had been amazingly lucky for a long, long time. After Urban Renewal started in the 1970’s, people already in town and people who moved here were excited about restoring the rest of Newburyport’s Historic District.

People were rescuing old, often neglected properties, some that had been broken up into apartments, and would repair and restore the structure.

For quite a while we were pretty good stewards of our own unique American Story. We were lucky. And somehow our luck has changed.

And, for a whole variety of reasons, we have no protection. There are no zoning amendments that protect our historic heritage. That’s crazy.

I know I am going “on and on and on” about this, but I don’t want to lose what makes Newburyport MA unique.

I think about what could have happened to High Street back in 1999. Part of what makes us economically vibrant would have been wiped out and we never, ever would have gotten it back.

All the trees would have been gone and the road would have been straightened and narrowed. All the carriage steps and hitching posts that are scattered along the roadway, which are like hidden treasures, would have been wiped out. Along the Ridge from State Street to about Temple Street, people would have lost part of their property and a large retaining wall would have been put there to create another turning lane. Who knows what in the world would have happened to our statue of George Washington, no plan for that one.

The same thing is happening now, only it’s happening incrementally. We are losing a house here a house there. Large oversize structures pepper Newburyport’s Historic District changing local neighborhood character. It is happening so slowly, we hardly notice that it’s happening at all until it is too late.

What if we took all those changes and put them along High Street, the damage would not seem incremental—it would seem dramatic.

So why aren’t we pestering our City government for amendments to the zoning code that protects what we have left? It seems like we need to start thinking about doing that.

And since Christopher Ryan has decided not to be our next Planning Director, maybe it would be a good idea to start lobbying the Mayor (who picks Newburyport’s Planning Director) for someone who has a strong background in Historic Preservation and would know how to help us keep what we have—what makes us economically alive.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Vertical Sprawl, Historic Heritage

I keep thinking about an earlier post on the “positive aspects of infill.”

It is my own impression that in the 1980’s and early to mid 1990’s we did experience positive infill. Houses in Newburyport’s Historic District were repaired and restored, reasonably sized additions were built; one could argue that the infill on a street like Lime Street, whether or not one agrees with the architectural style, actually helped lower crime in that area. In fact “infill” and restoration helped cut down on crime in Newburyport, something that “positive infill” is supposed to do.

We are not alone in the fact that we are at the edge, if not over the edge of over development. Gentrification and displacement of lower and middle class families, along with the loss of neighborhood character are happening in other places the United States along with Newburyport, MA.

There is now a new buzz word for what we are experiencing –“vertical sprawl.” From what I gather not everyone in the planning community likes the term “vertical sprawl,” but it appears to be catching on. People are sighting places like Brooklyn, NY…slightly larger than Newburyport, MA.

And people are wrestling with this issue and what to do about it.

I think in our community we could say, “wait a minute, there is a problem, let’s slow down and think about what is happening to Newburyport, MA.” That is my hope for Save Our Town—that we could raise public awareness and change the climate of demolition and replication to one of the protection of our historic heritage, which would include, historic structures, historic landscapes and local neighborhood character.

I’ve talked to many folks who think that it’s too late—too much of Newburyport has been destroyed. It is my own opinion that there is still plenty left, and that if we speak up, we can make a difference. But we need to speak up now.

So take a free bumper sticker and put it on your car. Take a flier and pass it on to your neighbors and friends. Sign the petition and let other people know about it. If we each do one small thing, I think that together we can make a really big difference.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Save Our Town—Newburyport, MA bumper sticker

Save Our Town—Newburyport, MA

Ok folks, there’s a new citizens’ group—“Save Our Town.”

Save Our Town came about one day when Sarah White, Steve Rudolph and Mary Eaton (yes, that’s me) were sitting around discussing issues in Newburyport, MA and were wondering what in the world to do.

Save Our Town—Save Newburyport’s historic character, charm and beauty—Be the voice of responsible growth.

Preserve Newburyport’s historic character, charm and beauty

Save Our Town has its own website www.saveourtown.us .

There are also free bumper stickers.

Save Our Town—Newburyport, MA bumper sticker

There is a Save Our Town flier and a Save Our Town petition.

The Save Our Town petition says:
“We the undersigned wish to preserve Newburyport’s historic buildings, landscapes, and local neighborhood character. We support responsible growth in Newburyport, Massachusetts.”

You can contact Save Our Town at:
info@saveourtown.us
www.saveourtown.us

Mary Eaton
Newburyort

Newburyport, Protecting our Historic Heritage

When I first moved here back in 1981, as I remember it, it never would have occurred to anyone to demolish an old building. Downtown Newburyport had been restored and restoration was spreading to the rest of Newburyport’s Historic District.

The idea was to remove years, if not centuries, of wallpaper, skim-coat the old plaster walls, update heating and electrical, put in much needed insulation, repair sills and rotting windows, sometimes remove years and often centuries of accumulated paint.

As far as I remember, demolition was never even on the radar. Preserving local neighborhood character was a given.

So what has changed?

People write PhDs on the subject and PhDs on the solution, this blogger doesn’t have the answers. One heartening thing, however, is that the Newburyport Preservation Trust has among its membership the kind of brain trust that could address these kinds of issues. And for that I am quite relieved and grateful.

I think we are definitely at a crossroad. Depending on your point of view our unique historic heritage is already eroding or is on the verge of eroding due to over-development. I feel that it has happened slowly and incrementally and that some of us now look around us and say, “What in the world has happened or is happening?”

It’s not like our City government is sitting idly by. It is not. In fact our City government has been very proactive over the last 4 or 5 years. We now have a 12 month demolition delay, a site plan review; we have a host or zoning changes and amendments that address the problems, including the zoning amendment that is coming up that specifically addresses “infill” in Newburyport, MA. We now have various zoning overlays and are working on our first local historic district—the Fruit Street Local Historic District. Good for the City of Newburyport, MA. I don’t think anyone in our City government would like to see the erosion of our historic heritage.

But in spite of everything that the City of Newburyport has and is doing, the climate, attitude towards protecting our historic resources appears to have changed.

It seems that the first thought is to demolish historic buildings instead of valuing there worth. I find this disturbing and I know that a lot of other people feel the same way.

I also think that if this trend continues it will have short and long term economic consequences for our City, because Newburyport will no longer be a exceptional place to live, visit, work and play.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Demolition Delay Granted for 30-32 Marlboro

The Newburyport Historical Commission last night told Matthew Pieniazek of 36 Marlboro Street, who purchased 30-32 Marlboro Street that there would be a 12 month demolition delay on the property. For the moment, there is a reprieve.

While I’m relieved that a neighbor bought the property, one who has his and his neighbors’ interests at heart, I was very disappointed that demolition was the name of the game. Apparently Mr. Pieniazek’s own engineering report says that the front part of the c. 1850 building is sound.

As I understand it Newburyport’s Historical Commission had no problem with the demolition of the back part of the property. However, they hope that Mr. Pieniazek will restore the front part of this historic home. The Historical Commission hopes that they and Mr. Pieniazek can have an ongoing dialogue.

The Historical Commission pointed out that all the modern amenities could be placed at the back portion of the property. It is my understanding that there was some talk of the central chimney being in the way. It was pointed out that the central chimney was the heart and hearth of historic homes of this period, and to remove it in the name of restoration would destroy its historic heritage.

Newburyport Massachusetts has a unique history. If builders/ developers in town or out of town have the attitude that the wear and tear of an historic home is an inconvenience to making money, our unique historic heritage will be lost. And this, in the long and short term will adversely affect our economic survival, because Newburyport, MA will no longer be a distinct community in which to visit, work, live and play.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Historic Preservation

A reader of the Newburyport Political Blog sent me this information on Shaker Heights, OH.

“Shaker Heights is a PLANNED “garden community” that sprang up beginning in 1912, and became a city in 1930. It was the vision of two developer brothers, M.J. and O.P. Vam Sweringen of Cleveland. The community began with a strict and uniform zoning code, and a master plan that worked around the natural topography of the area and designated specific locations for houses, apartments, commercial areas, public and private schools, municipal and religious buildings, and parks.

Building in Shaker was controlled by a set of restrictive covenants and building guidelines established by the Van Sweringens and known as Shaker Standards. Shaker Standards prevented the community from being developed in any way contrary to how the brothers intended. Standards limited commercial development, rental property development, and residence style and size.

Standards set roof slope angles, materials, finishes, and garage placement. All residences were required to be unique and designed by an architect. Duplex residences in the community were restricted to designated areas, and were required follow guidelines designed to give the impression that the structure was a single family home.

While there is architectural variety throughout the city, most of the houses are in the style of Colonials, Tudors & Georgians. It is very lovely and very predictable.

To this day, Shaker Heights maintains stringent building code and zoning laws, which have helped to maintain the community‚s housing stock and identity throughout the years. According to the city’s website, the building department inspects every property on a revolving schedule to make sure that property owners don‚t violate any of these codes. This makes a Local Historic District seem tame by comparison.

Granted, like Newburyport, much of Shaker Heights is a National Register District, however, it is based on very different criteria than those for Newburyport. In Shaker Heights there is no hodgepodge of architectural styles nestled against each other; there are no REAL 17th, 18th or even 19th century homes. You would NEVER find a 1950s ranch house next to the 18th century mansion of a ship‚s captain in Shaker Heights.

In Newburyport, property owners can pretty do whatever they’d like to a building, and woe to the person who tries to interfere. These folks would never survive a day in Shaker Heights, where slate roofs and wood windows are ardently protected by the CITY government, hard as that might be to imagine for residents in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

The historic preservation issues of Shaker Heights, OH are unlike those of Newburyport, MA.”

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Planning Director, Newburyport

I think it would have been unrealistic to expect that the appointment of Christopher Ryan, the mayor’s choice for Planning Director, to pass on the first reading at last night’s Newburyport City Council meeting. City Councilors appear to be listening to their constituents, and constituents still have lots of questions.

Residents are concerned about Mr. Ryan’s time commitment. They are concerned about the fall teaching commitment. And they also want to make sure that the teaching job this fall is a onetime deal, and that teaching is not going to be an ongoing activity. Reasonable questions.

Residents want to give Mr. Ryan time to really study the Newburyport Master Plan and they would like very specific answers on how he feels about specific issues. I think that is a reasonable request

And then there is the question of historic preservation. For many the preservation of Newburyport’s unique history is one of the most important issues facing our City. Residents want to make sure that Christopher Ryan is committed whole heartedly to historic preservation in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Mr. Ryan has cited his work in Shaker Heights, Ohio. Shaker Heights, OH was designed and built as a planned community (1912?) whose buildings were erected over a specific period of time and their style and character reflect a particular era. Newburyport obviously is quite different, having evolved over more than three centuries.

Councilor James Shanley at last night’s Newburyport City Council meeting said a very import thing. I’m paraphrasing here. Councilor Shanley said that the Planning Director is a key position and that decisions that are made would affect the City for decades if not centuries. I couldn’t agree more.

As I understand it there will be a sub-committee meeting held on Monday, August 21, 2006 to find out more about Mr. Ryan and then a special meeting on Monday August 28, 2006 to vote on Mr. Ryan’s appointment. All of this sounds very reasonable to me.

In today’s Newburyport Daily News, August 15, 2006, Mayor John Moak appears to be uneasy about losing Mr. Ryan as a candidate for Newburyport’s Planning Director saying that “Ryan has turned down other offers to accept the Newburyport position.”

I would think that this whole process would give Mr. Ryan the beginning of an idea of what it would be like to be Planning Director in Newburyport, MA. It is, as Council Shanley stated, a key position, and one that we as a City value. I think the process would indicate to Mr. Ryan that the expectations of Newburyport’s Planning Director are very high.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Vertical Sprawl or Inappropriate Infill

I came across a really interesting article on the Web talking about what’s happening when developers turn away from “suburban sprawl” to urban areas and create “vertical sprawl,” new buzz word for me. We are not alone by any means in our fight against inappropriate infill. And I am reassured by this.

These quotes are from an article in The New York Times, Week In Review, August 6, 2006, “Cities Grow Up, and Some See Sprawl” by Nicholas Confessore. The subject is “vertical sprawl” or what we in Newburyport, MA are dealing with and would call inappropriate “infill.”

“We want to protect these places from being taken over by infill and driving out working-class people.”

“…in working-class urban communities, it means displacement and gentrification, often by redevelopment…”

“…high-density infill projects are too often tilted toward affluent buyers, which forces lower-income families out…”

“…vertical sprawl can differ from the suburban kind in the particulars, the general issues are remarkably consistent: traffic, parking and the cost of supporting new projects with schools, water and other municipal services.”

“..the battles over vertical sprawl tend to pit neighborhood associations against wealthy developers and builder-friendly politicians.”

(Infill) “…a stalking horse for developers…”

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, the Emphasis on Newburyport’s Planning Future

Well, it seems as if the last couple of posts have hit a nerve and not just in Newburyport, MA.

In response to my “under whelmedness” post concerning the Mayor’s pick for Newburyport’s Planning Director, I got an anonymous email from someone who does not know Christopher Ryan and does not “currently work in MA.”

If I had had the “mood watch” checked on my email, it would have given me a 3 hot red pepper warning. Two hot red peppers is “probably offensive” and three is “on fire.”

One angry human being. “Like it or not, it is a well accepted role and responsibility of planners to find common ground between the desires of developers and the needs of a community. Get used to it.”

I rather like Audrey McCarthy’s quote in the Daily News Article, “Planning Head’s Appointment in Limbo,” by Stephanie Chelf, August 9, 2006:

“Councilor Audrey McCarthy said she is willing to support Ryan’s teaching job because it is temporary, but is still undecided on whether to support the appointment.

‘A lot of it has to do with uniqueness of Newburyport’s history – we’re on a fine line of overdevelopment,’ McCarthy said. ‘That’s what I’m hearing from constituents; they want someone who values historic preservation, there is no compromise there.’ ”

Thank you Audrey McCarthy, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

The Meeting with Newburyport’s Proposed Planning Director

Proposed Planning Director for Newburyport, MA, for a meet and greet, Christopher Ryan.

I don’t know, I’m singularly under whelmed.

What I’d like to hear is someone who wants to protect Newburyport’s historic character, charm and beauty. I’m hearing vague references to historic preservation, nothing with any teeth to it.

I’d like to hear that Mr. Ryan has already studied the Newburyport Master Plan backwards and forwards and is looking forward to its further implementation. (I’m not hearing that. I could be just down right “catty” and say what I’ve heard is that Mr. Ryan has gotten around to downloading it.)

I’d like to be hearing that Mr. Ryan as Planning Director is ready to drive out “bad apple” developers out of town and looking forward to working with developers who have Newburyport’s best interest at heart. Let me tell you, I’m really not hearing that one at all.

“To address the issues of ‘conflict of development.’ Ryan said he wants to ‘look at the various groups and be as inclusive as possible and find common ground. Divisiveness is not good moving forward.’ ” (Newburyport Daily News, August 8, 2006.)

Let me tell you Newburyport, Massachusetts is polarized when it comes to inappropriate development. There is no common ground. I doubt that there ever will be common ground with development that is seen as destructive to Newburyport’s authenticity.

From what I can make out, Mr. Moak’s point of view is that (it sounds like all) development is vital for Newburyport’s tax base, a balanced budget is crucial…historic character, beauty, charm, environment, all things that in my book ensure long term economic health, take second place. (Can you tell that the Mayor and I have a difference of opinion on this one?)

And it sounds to me that Mr. Moak has found a personable and “amicable, engaging” appointee, one who is qualified enough for the Newburyport City Council to eventually approve.

And I think Mr. Moak has found someone who would be what a friend of mine would call a “silencer.” People who have questions concerning certain projects and players in town could be seen as “uncooperative” if they were not willing to seek “common ground” and address “conflict of development.”

Can you tell that this blogger is not what someone might call a “team player” when it comes to inappropriate development that destroys the authenticity of Newburyport, Massachusetts. I think you can definitely count me out on the “developer common ground” thing, the “conflict of development” thing. No offense or anything, but those don’t work for me.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, A New Breed of Developer

A frightening new breed of developer for Newburyport, MA, Ouch.

Mr. Minot Frye apparently has set his sights on Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Mr. Frye is a developer from Wenham, Massachusetts. The address I have is 16 Grapevine Road. (Minot is an old Massachusetts name, going back to the 1600’s.) As I understand it, Minot Frye has formed an equity firm, private money (“old money” I would suppose) to reinvest, I gather in this case in Newburyport real estate, to make investors even more money.

Minot Frye is the gentleman who bought 11-13 Ship Street, yes, that wonderful federalist with the orchard that so many of us love.

No ray of hope apparently. It appears that the plea for restoration has fallen on deaf ears.

Demolition, I gather, is the name of the game and yes, the orchard goes. And I gather, not even building a replica in kind, (alas, how far my bar has fallen.)

From what I know an architectural firm (I believe it is Dyer Brown and Associates in Boston) has come up with several versions of what might go on this piece of property. I’ve been told that the latest version is two Georgian style condos, connected and to be built back to back. Ouch. (11-13 Ship Street is a deeded two family.)

I’ve also been told that Mr. Minot Frye had his eye on 96 High Street, but the owner who sold it didn’t want to wait and see if whatever the project Mr. Frye had in mind (3 units, I’m told?) would go through the Newburyport Zoning Board of Appeals (apparently there were other more appealing offers.) Ouch, one more time.

And I am also told that Mr. Frye is actively looking for property to develop in Newburyport, MA. Look out folks.

Moneyed people with “taste,” “old money” and deep, deep pockets, looking to make yet more money off Newburyport, Massachusetts. It is the opinion of this local Newburyport blogger, that clearly if Mr. Frye is planning to demolish 11-13 Ship Street, and my, my putting up who knows what, that in my book, this is not a good sign.

If one can hire an architectural firm and go through several versions already, surely the money for restoration would be possible. Don’t folks with names that go back to the 1600’s care about historic preservation?

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Endangered Historic Resources

hsgarden.jpg
Sally Chandler © 2004
Wheelwright Historical Garden

The gardens of Newburyport’s Wheelwright House have been nominated for Preservation Massachusetts’ (formerly called Historic Massachusetts) Ten Most Endangered Resource Program.

Endangered Resource Program “chump change?” No.

High Street was nominated and won in 1999. The only roadway ever nominated. It was a very, very big deal. (Fenway Park made it to the top ten that year too, and it’s still standing, thank you very much.)

People bellyache about the Federal Street Overlay, but in 2001 the two historic houses, the William Barlett House and the William Johnson House in the Federal Street Overlay District made it to the top ten. Not only are they still standing, but they both have been lovingly restored, with deed restrictions no less.

(If we can’t have a large Local Historic Districts anytime in my lifetime, maybe people with historic properties could think about deed restrictions for the benefit of the future generations of Newburyport, Massachusetts.)

The “Common Pasture” made it to the top ten in 2004, and the Common Pasture has had many successes. So all of you out there in web land who are sick of acquiring Open Space, don’t forget that one.

From what I can make out, deed restrictions are being placed on the Wheelwright dwelling itself, but nothing that I’ve heard protects the historic Wheelwright gardens.

So what’s with the gardens anyway? Who cares? Parking lots are practical. And how much work would it take to keep that thing up anyway. And who even gets to see it, good grief.

You can hear the rational. Yes?

But historic gardens, like open space or any other historic resource in Newburyport, MA, add to the intrinsic value of the place that we all live or love to visit. To pave over this little piece of paradise would be an incredible travesty and the garden is something that could never, ever be replaced.

So the Endangered Resource List is an incredibly powerful tool. And just because a garden has never been listed before, doesn’t mean that Preservation Massachusetts wouldn’t think it wasn’t just a dandy idea. It wouldn’t be the first time that they thought “outside the box.”

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Speculation, Newburyport’s New Planning Director

Let’s take a look at the quote by Mayor John Moak concerning the he names of the 5 finalists for Newburyport’s Planning Director that are in the Newburyport Daily News, July 24, 2006.

“I’m not looking for an architect or engineer, I’m looking for a manager. Each has exemplified more of a full service type of planning directorship. That’s what I’m looking for.”

Mayor Moak always said he was looking for a “team player” and a “manager,” so that’s consistent. However that he’s not looking for an “architect” or an “engineer” is quite telling. I gather this must mean he doesn’t want a “big picture” person. He wants someone who will do what he tells them to do.

It’s interesting that only two of the candidates are from Massachusetts. Not only is it going to take 6-9 months to begin to get a handle on all the “players” around here, but I would think (and I’m in unchartered territory here) that the planning and development stuff for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would be pretty complicated.

Would hate to see the existing personnel in the Newburyport Planning Office bring someone up to speed on all of that stuff. Would add quite a bit to the “job description” for Julie LaBranche and Geordie Vining. If that happened we would definitely have to give them a raise.

Let’s just take Chapter 91 for example and the waterfront. We would definitely want someone who understands that “tide-land rights are one of DEP’s most treasured tools for protection of Massachusetts shorelines and the DEP is not going to roll over and play dead.” (To quote and paraphrase from Jim Roy’s terrific piece in the Newburyport Current, July 21, 2006, “Chaos in Command.”)

And I would imagine that Mayor Moak would not want a big picture person like our former Planning Director Nick Cracknell. Been there, done that. No putting the breaks on folks who might have a loose interpretation of the Newburyport Master Plan. Or have the fortitude to “enforce,” if you will, a fairly literal interpretation of the Newburyport Master Plan.

What I’ve heard folks say is it’s not just Mayor John Moak who wants a more passive Planning Director for Newburyport, Massachusetts, but it’s also Byron Matthews, among others.

I’ve been told that Mayor John Moak does listen to some folks. Three in particular. Yes, Byron Matthews, Dick Sullivan and Josiah Welch (Josiah Welch-that one was a surprise to me.)

And I’ve also been told that Byron Matthews is playing a “Dick Cheney” to Mr. Moak’s “George Bush.”

Whoever the new Planning Director is for Newburyport, Massachusetts ends up being, I’m sure that my version of what is going on is a whole lot different than Mr. Matthew’s version of what is going on (not that I don’t respect Mr. Matthews for all his contributions), and I hope whoever it ends up being, has the fortitude to sit down with me and all those other people out there in Newburyport like me and have a little chat.

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, 11-13 Ship Street, A Ray of Hope

Apparently the folks at the Newburyport Preservation Trust have been in touch with Mr. Minot Frye, the Wenham developer who has bought that wonderful federalist home at 11-13 Ship Street.

It appears at this point that Mr. Frye is open to discussions with the Newburyport Preservation Trust about issues that the community has concerning this property and the issues of historic preservation.

Thank goodness that we as a City now have the Newburyport Preservation Trust.

And thank goodness that the Newburyport Preservation Trust is willing to act as a mediator on behalf of historic properties such as this one, the concerns of the surrounding community and the developer in question, in this case Mr. Minot Frye.

How lucky we are. And if something actually good comes of this discussion with Mr. Frye, boy do we as a City owe the Newburyport Preservation Trust one big “thank you.” (Personally, I think we all owe them one big “thank you” now for making this incredible gesture.)

George Cushing (of Frog Pond at the Bartlett Mall) the new political consultant for the Newburyport Political Blog was so excited even at the vague possibility that something positive could come about, that he has given the very attempt at negotiations a big “thumbs up.”

george8.jpg
George Cushing giving the attempt at
negotiations a big “thumbs up”

Mary Eaton
Newburyport

Newburyport, Please Do Not Demolish the Federalist Home on Ship Street

Dear Mary,

Tear down the Ship St Grandee (and rip out its orchard)? I hope it’s a baseless rumor.

The magnetism and magic of the house is palpable to one such as I who is easily lured off course by a promising pile of curbside trash (heaps that give off “value vibes”) and rotting majestic clapboard Federalist houses (with tired ghosts sighing “Save me … “.)

Doesn’t the building have a wonderful color (patina if it was a kneehole desk). It is a real life version of one of those Daily New photos of town in the 1960’s. Do the trees in back bear sweet fruit?

As it stands now, I suppose the house is a reminder of how far Newburyport has come in rehabilitating itself. Is it the last remaining unrestored old heap of a grand house?

I’m so happy to know that there is at least one other person who adores the grand duplex. I have been holding my breath for years in anticipation of this recent development. Ack, there’s that word again.

Thanks for your update. Keep up the great work.

PS. As you know, the design ratios of modern dwellings are based on measurements related to 4’x8′ (the size of sheets of plywood and dry wall). They are studded on 16 inch centers. The windows fit neatly in between. The roof line is nice and straight – never hogged looking. So calming to the eye. Not!

Ed Taylor
Newburyport