GREENFIELD – Despite a contentious — and at times profanity-laden — public hearing Thursday night, the Historical Commission voted unanimously to not delay the demolition of the fire station on Main Street.
“All those people who spoke about persevering didn’t present any new information about why it was historically significant,” Chair John Passiglia said after a Historical Commission meeting that followed the public hearing. “We’re not just going to stand in the way of progress.”
As a result, the demolition process began Friday morning.
“The function of this hearing is to receive input on the historical significance of the Greenfield Fire Station, in accordance with the demolition delay ordinance this town has,” Passiglia said.
Several residents who spoke Thursday night, including Brickett Allis, a former city councilor, however, felt the hearing was “for show” and that a decision had already been made.
Allis said what most concerned him was the letter sent by Passiglia in May 2017 to the Massachusetts Historical Commission that stated the Greenfield Historical Commission supported the project to build a new library, “which would necessitate demolition of the current Greenfield fire station.”
“That was not a publicly shared letter,” Allis said. “I can find no minutes that indicate that (support) is, in fact, the case, but must believe he has been in contact and consultation with you.”
In a review of minutes from the June 1, 2017 meeting, however, there is a line indicating a “final draft of the library project (firehouse) letter to the state was approved and the letter has been sent.”
That letter, which is now available on the city’s public record’s archive, is the one Passiglia sent to the state commission.
Resident Dawn Morin, also against the demolition, referenced emails between Passiglia and Vicki Baker, building inspections and enforcement coordinator. In an email dated Aug. 21 of this year, Baker informed Passiglia that the Building Department received an application to demolish.
Two days later, Passiglia responded via email to say the commission had reviewed the fire station, and approves of its demolition.
“Did you guys discuss it?” she asked. “Because he responded two days after he got the building permit.”
Speaking after the meeting, Passiglia said he was disappointed that people don’t think the Historical Commission is, or has been, transparent.
“I’m disappointed that people didn’t follow this process over the five years, or come to a meeting,” he said. “We meet every month. Nobody came once to any of our meetings to bring up either the library project or the demolition of the fire station, and that’s over five years.”
Patty Perry asked commissioners to consider the impact demolishing this building would have on the Greenfield Cultural District created more than 30 years ago.
“After 33 years of protection of the firehouse as a significant building, what characteristics of the architectural importance have changed?” she said.
Richard Roth, who also asked the commission to delay the demolition, said he would have expected the Historical Commission to be the one informing residents of the building’s historical value.
Roth said if the public had been told the library project involved the demolition of the library, “people would have spoken up about it.”
“It is a fact that the fire station is in our national and state register Main Street Historic District, as a contributing building,” he said. “This means it is recognized as an important part of the district and our history.”
Library Building Committee Co-chair Ed Berlin told commissioners that despite complaints from some, the city did, in fact, follow the law with respect to the process for both projects.
His comments prompted a disruption at the meeting, with individuals arguing that his comments were “off topic” for the subject of the fire station. The disruption that ensued — which came from people on both sides of the debate — resulted in a call for police officer backup.
After a tense back and forth between Passiglia and a handful of attendees, Berlin continued.
“We followed that process,” he said, referring to a section of Mass General Laws. “We made notification of this project in 2017 to the state Historical Commission. It was at that time we learned about the preservation agreement.”
In early 2017, the city received notice from the Massachusetts Historical Commission that stated the demolition of the station constitutes an “adverse effect” and that the town should explore alternatives that would avoid demolition.
Berlin said that the property boundaries had mistakenly included part of the fire station in the parcel for the library — a building constructed in 1797 — and that the city followed the process outlined in the law to amend the agreement to remove the fire station. The fire station, he and other officials explained, had been protected for the fact it was built on the same property as the library.
“The purpose there is to involve a process to mitigate the problem, and still be able to demolish the building,” Berlin said. “We went through this process with weigh-in from this commission, the (Greenfield ) Historical Society, the fire chief, and the mayor. No one objected at that time, and the (state) commission agreed to it.”
Berlin said a memorandum of agreement was made, whereby the fire station could be demolished if four artifacts in particular were saved.
“And the fifth one we’re now planning to save, which is the 9/11 memorial,” he said.
Resident Paul Jablon also spoke Thursday night to support furthering efforts to demolish the fire station.
“Since the 1990s, the firefighters in this town have looked forward to the demolition of this building and building a new building,” he said. “I, like many people in this room, for three years spoke about the building of the new library and the demolition of the fire station.”
He said after years of public meetings and letters written to the Greenfield Recorder, “everybody knew” that the library project, and the grant funding making it possible, entailed the demolition of the station.
Precinct 5 Councilor Tim Dolan said he wanted to emphasize that imposing a delay would cost the city more money — in part because it would result in the loss of the $9.4 state grant supporting the library.
“We’ve known about this project for the last five years,” he said. “The voters of the city of Greenfield voted for this library and this project, which involved the fire station.”
In 2019, Greenfield voters approved building a new library with a 61 percent positive vote.
He said in his role as a councilor, he has seen many “fantasies” about what the fire station could be, but none that were viable projects.
“I don’t think there are project owners chomping at the bit to take over a building that needs major structural work — a brick building that needs major structural work, at at,” Dolan said. “That is not a burden I want to put on a Greenfield tax payer.”
Fire Chief Robert Strahan, who said he was asked to speak on the condition of the building, said as fire chief, he was in a difficult position. In addition to a floor that cannot support the weight of the fire engines and structural deficiences with the walls. He added that there is asbestos and lead throughout.
“I understand everybody here understands that, but there have been a couple people who have suggested rehabbing it and keeping the fire station there,” he said.
Margo Jones, a member of the Historical Commission, said because committee members were signatories of the memorandum of agreement described by Berlin, they had signed a contract. A former member of several state and local boards, agreed with Berlin that the process had been followed according to the law.
“It would have been a breach of contract to vote to delay the demolition,” she said.
Reporter Mary Byrne can be reached at mbyrne@recorder.com or 413-930-4429. Twitter: @MaryEByrne