2/19/98 747 words

Beacon Hill Architectural Commission

by ADM

Persistence paid off at last week’s meeting of the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission. Two
applicants who had repeatedly brought their applications before the commission have gotten them
approved, albeit with numerous modifications. Meanwhile, two other large projects that were presented
to the commission for the first time received a mostly friendly welcome.
Richard Morash, a local developer, had petitioned the commission to change the rear door at 52
Chestnut Street into a garage door two months ago, but the commission denied his application without
prejudice. After revising his plans, Morash appeared before the commission again last Thursday, and
this time met with approval. Although his plans called for an arched lintel over the door, he agreed to
an abutter’s request to make the lintel flat. Morash even said he preferred the look of the flat lintel.
The other persistent applicant at last week’s meeting was Steve Dinkelaker, of 1 Pinckney Street (a.k.a.
10 ½ Joy Street). Dinkelaker has appeared on at least two prior occasions before the commission,
seeking approval for a plan to install an air conditioning condenser on his roof. The commission turned
him down in the past because the condenser would be visible for a public way, which would be in
violation of the historic district’s standards. At the commission’s last meeting, the commissioner’s
suggested several creative solutions, and Dinkelaker apparently found a way to make one of them
work. Dinkelaker’s new plan is to build a trench in the roof of his home and install the condenser there,
where it would not be visible from a public way.
The commission felt this was an acceptable solution, but heard from representatives of Dinkelaker’s
abutters, who argued that the trench might be visible from a public way, even if the condenser itself
were not. Dinkelaker argued that the trench would be at most only “minimally visible”. Commissioner
Bradford Rowell said d that Dinkelaker had “made every effort to ameliorate the situation” and that the
commission “should put this to rest” by approving the application. The commission voted to approve
Dinkelaker’s application, but said at least one commissioner would visit the site to confirm that the
trench would be only minimally visible. Later in the meeting, after the involved parties had left, the
commission amended its vote to eliminate the proviso of sending a commissioner to the site. Before
doing so, the commission noted the abutters’ concerns.
The commission also considered an application from Rosalind Gorin, the new owner of 34 Beacon
Street, the former Little, Brown office building. Gorin proposes to change the property into her family
home, and turn excess space into condominium units. To make the building more appropriate for
residential use, Gorin proposed enlarging the Joy Street gate, creating new windows on the rear façade,
changing a metal loading dock door into a wooden garage door, replacing one headhouse with two
minimally visible headhouses, and installing storm windows. The commission approved nearly all of
these projects, but asked that the Joy Street façade be left unchanged.
The other large project the commission considered was a comprehensive renovation of 41 Phillips
Street, the recently-sold Northeast Institute building. The Grassi Design Croup and Modern Capital, the
developers of the building, hope to convert the 45,000 sq. ft. building into 19-25 condominium units.
Their plan includes a complete refacing of the Phillips Street façade; the removal of two wood frame
additions, fire escapes, steel sash windows, and a wood fence; the construction of a new 2 story
addition to the western wing, and adding new dormers, replacing all the windows, and reconstructing
the building’s original main entrance.
The commission listened to an extensive presentation by the project’s planners, asked many questions,
and suggested several architectural possibilities. The commissioner also solicited the opinion of an
abutter, who stated that she was concerned about excess traffic created by the development. The
commission also read a letter from the Beacon Hill Civic Association’s Zoning and Licensing
Committee that contended zoning issues related to the project should be heard before that committee
prior to the project’s being approved by the BHAC. The commission agreed, notified the applicant of
appropriate ways to apply for zoning approval, and denied the application without prejudice. Denying
the application without prejudice allows the applicants to appear again before the committee.
Commissioner Frank McGuire called the project a “great opportunity,” and all the commissioners
seemed eager to participate in the further planning and implementation of the work.

Originally appeared in the Beacon Hill Times