As chair of the Lexington Historical Commission, I post this letter to The Observer to alert the Town and its citizens to the existence of an unhappy and vexing set of circumstances that have diminished the Town’s will to preserve its historic architecture and to limit the creeping cascade of mansionization that has already overwhelmed our Lexington.
The Historical Commission was created by Town Meeting in 1975, in accord with Mass. General Law Section 40 8D. At that time, the Town was intent on attempting to preserve its architectural integrity and heritage as a way of ensuring that Lexington would remain a desirable place in which to live in celebration and respect of its history.
For decades before I became chair of the commission, its members dutifully and painfully attempted to observe our charge and do what was best — in terms of historical preservation — for the Town.
Two years ago, the Historic Districts Commission, the Historical Commission, the Planning Board, and the Zoning Board of Appeals all agreed that moving the historic but nondescript nineteenth century Hosmer House from behind the old police station made sense — providing that it was historically preserved. Only one bidder submitted a qualified bid to the initial Request for Proposals (RFP), proposing to move the house to the vacant lot on the Green and create affordable housing — but the Select Board declined that offer. A second RFP was issued, with one response; that bidder proposed removing the Hosmer House to a nonconforming lot that he owned on Blossomcrest Rd, now actually Waltham Street, adjacent to an off ramp from Route 2.
As a condition of the removal of the Hosmer House and the agreement of the various Town boards and the ZBA, the applicant promised and signed a contract with the Town to preserve the Hosmer House, to set it down next to Route 2 in its then condition, and agreed to preservation restrictions on the property in perpetuity.
The House was moved. But its top floor was sliced off and destroyed and the windows and clapboards of the onetime house were removed and replaced. There is now very little remaining of the original to-be-moved Hosmer House. The Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) has refused to accept a preservation restriction agreement on the property since the historic Hosmer House no longer exists.
When your Historical Commission complained about this failure to observe the conditions of the transfer, the ZBA held a re-hearing and simply revised the variance permit that it had originally issued and declared (despite HC and MHC demurrals) that the new, remodeled, house was nonetheless historically preserved despite the clear violation of the protections agreed upon for the original house. The Building Commissioner concurred.
Left: The former Hosmer House being made into a new house on site Right: The former Hosmer House being completed on Waltham St.
The HC then asked the ZBA to instruct the Building Commissioner at least to impose substantial fines to compensate the Town for the applicant’s refusal to abide by the historical preservation agreement with the Town. The ZBA refused.
The result: The preservation authority of the HC and the MHC have been pushed aside. The Hosmer House is no more. A volunteer board (the HC) has been limited in its ability to preserve Lexington according to its original mandate. The town has gained another modest house but has lost a critical link to its past. The HC cares, because that is its job and that is what the Town at one point wanted it to care about. But if another Town board can simply nullify promises made, but not kept, and the Select Board ignores the issue, does the Town now want to let development run wild?
Robert I. Rotberg
Chair, Lexington Historical Commission
Mr. Rotberg’s letter reminded me of something one of my college history professor’s used to tell us. We are historians, not antiquarians. We don’t save things for the sake of saving them, we study history to learn lessons for the future.
The Hosmer House was unused and empty for years, with no viable proposal for it’s use ever put forth. I contrast that with the Stone Building. A group of Lexington residents — the Lexington Lyceum Advocates — had a vision for the Stone Building as a modern day lyceum, and they put in the work that was required to make their vision a reality.
The fate of the Hosmer House may be unfortunate, it may not even have been inevitable. But leaving it to sit unused just for the sake of preserving it did not present any lessons we can learn from for the future.
Seems like we are reviving the municipal tear down era of the 1960’s with the sad loss of Hosmer, the police station which might have survived with some reconfiguration, and the Stone House which seems to be setting a town record for sitting empty and neglected on our proud “Avenue”.
There was actually a viable proposal made for the Hosmer House proposed and supported by Lexington’s HC. It was to move the house to the empty lot at 4 Harrington Rd owned by First Parish. The house was to be restored by a contractor that had been selected specifically for his expertise in historic preservation. It was an appropriate spot for a historic house and the funds raised in its sale would have helped First Parish preserve its historic church as well as Hosmer House. This proposal only required a small variance in the amount of frontage required for a new home on the lot (which is currently much larger than most of the grandfathered-in surrounding lots and previously contained a home that was destroyed many years ago). This proposal was scuttled because the two immediate neighbors opposed it and two members of the select committee pocket-vetoed it for unstated reasons, even though the proposal had the full support of the historic commission. Perhaps the town of Lexington should explore the transparency of these processes to avoid completely avoidable, unnecessary losses such as this in the future.
Thank you Robert for bringing this important issue to light. I wondered what ever became of the Hosmer House. I know very little of the details, but this not a happy ending. I hope the Ellen Stone Building doesn’t suffer a similar fate. It has been sitting empty for 17 years.
Avram hits on a key point for saving any building, etc. It takes a group of dedicated champions.
In 2022 the Select Board appointed a committee to look at potential uses for the Ellen Stone Building. Few of us on the committee new much about the building other than it was a stunning example of Greek Revival architecture and it had something to do with Ralph Waldo Emerson & Abolition. After learning the amazing stories that the building holds, many of the original committee members, along with other supporters, were inspired enough to start a 501c3 nonprofit dedicated to putting the building back in use. The report recommends returning the building to use as a Lyceum, the purpose for which it was originally built.
Hardly any of us knew the history of the Lyceum Movement in America. If you want a quick primer on Lyceums, with what I believe is Lincoln’s most prescient speech – watch this short video: https://youtu.be/a3jJdrZamCc?si=1cPOhUSlXXcoMRq-
Thousands of Lyceums sprung up around America to help educate citizens who had recently gained the right to vote: non-landholding white males. Hardly any lyceums remain. I am convinced that the Ellen Stone Building is THE most representative example of the ideals and people that made the Lyceum Movement what it was.
– Built in the Greek Revival style to symbolically connect with Aristotle’s Greek school of the same name.
– Ralph Waldo Emerson gave over 60 sermons in the building during the period he was writing his Transcendentalist & environmental manifesto “Nature”. Emerson was THE leading speaker on the American lyceum circuit.
– Abolitionists who were not allowed to speak elsewhere in Lexington and surrounding areas held society meetings in the Ellen Stone Building. Notables include Charles Follen, Theodore Parker – grandson of Capt. Parker, and Lucy Stone – the first woman from Massachusetts to earn a college degree.
– The Lyceum movement was always about inclusivity and learning from foreign cultures. Women and educators were often given reduced rates to encourage their attendance at a time when women speaking in public was scandalous.
– Eli Robbins who built the Ellen Stone Building – for the people of Lexington – also built more that 20 homes along Mass Ave, for “reasonable” prices. An early example of workforce housing for the hundreds of people his enterprises employed.
– Eli’s granddaughter Ellen Stone deeded the building to the Town of Lexington and was also the first female elected official in Lexington. She is depicted on the LexSeeHer monument.
I could go on and on. This building contains so many more stories that need to be told. Lexington does a wonderful job presenting a tableau of the founding of a new country. We have an amazing opportunity, with the Ellen Stone Building, to illustrate the next period in the American drama and highlight the ideals that we embrace as a community.
regards,
Mark Manasas – President, Lexington Lyceum Advocates
ugh – “knew much”, not “new much” – need to slow down in the future…..
The house was approved to be demolished. The Hosmer house was an eye sore to the town. I think it looks beautiful now compared to what it was. It’s time to move on Mr. Rotenberg.