Rather than voting on the legality of the Harvard Press’ occupancy of the third floor of the Harvard General Store building at its meeting Tuesday, April 28, the Board of Health (BOH) changed course and decided to seek the thoughts of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). BOH has extended the occupancy decision date to May 12.
Store owner and Press part-owner Adam Horowitz had written to BOH asking to be taken off this week’s agenda because he wanted to attend the Board of Selectmen meeting on the proposed town center sewer, which was scheduled at the same time. The topic remained on the agenda, however, and 15 minutes of discussion showed a board torn between the letter of the law and the desire to foster the vitality of the town center and the General Store. Members Lorin Johnson and Jack Spero sided with Nashoba Associated Boards of Health sanitarian Ira Grossman on a literal reading of Title 5 regulations, which does not bode well for the arrangement. Chairman Tom Philippou said he seeks a broader solution with more comments from Horowitz and ZBA.
Without the presence of Horowitz at the meeting, Philippou made a motion to extend the decision to the next meeting on May 12; it was supported by Johnson, and rejected by Spero. In addition, Philippou will draft a letter to Zoning Enforcement Officer Gabe Vellante and the Board of Selectmen informing them of the extension, and telling them that the change in use of the third floor is a zoning issue.
“We’re entwined with zoning,” said Johnson. “There appears to be a change in use, and I can understand giving them [the Press] the time to do something with the paper.”
The Press office has been on the third floor of the General Store since March, shortly after Horowitz became one-third owner of the newspaper. He offered the space to the Press because, he said, it was already zoned as office space. As a related business of Horowitz’s, the Press pays no rent for the space. If it is forced to vacate, it will have to seek alternative affordable office space, an almost insurmountable problem in Harvard, according to Worth Robbins, another part-owner of the Press.
“Where do you stop bending the rules?” asked Spero, to which Philippou responded, “How many people have come to ask for an extension and we’ve given it?” Philippou said that Horowitz might have some compelling arguments, but indicated that this is the last in a series of two previous extensions allowing temporary occupancy. Two and a half weeks isn’t a make-it or break-it, and it shows some respect.”
Resident Deborah Skauen Hinchliffe observed that the paper’s two and “one-half” people working a total of 100 hours on the upper floor “is such a minimum use,” that “the Press could go to someone’s house. Can you see an objection?”
Sanitarian Ira Grossman, who has gone on record saying that office use would trigger Title 5 requirements that the General Store could not meet, said yes, a problem would exist because if the Press relocated to a house it would become a home business. “If you’re creating an office in a home, you are creating a new use.”
Resident Carlene Phillips spoke up, identifying herself as an advisor to the Press, and said that it was clear that the board is not in agreement. “People elect a Board of Health to take care of our welfare, and not to insist on a piece of paper permitted a long time ago [the controlling septic permit goes back to 1971]. This seems a narrow approach to the problem.” She spoke of Horowitz’s integrity. “To feel that he’s not going to do the best thing doesn’t make sense.”
“It’s against the law,” declared Spero, who was supported by Johnson, who told Phillips that the board is “constrained by laws. If we don’t like it, we need to change it … People like the General Store, but it’s not a point of law. It isn’t a case of not wanting vitality or the store in the center of town.” He asked what would happen if others wanted to locate there.
“The last thing we want to do is be on everybody’s crap list,” said Johnson. “We’ve been looking at this since January 30. We have looked at this to figure out the fine points of the law. It’s more than one issue. We didn’t mislead the store.” (On Jan. 27, Grossman had told Horowitz that office use is not approved on a retail establishment’s septic permit.)
Philippou talked of the board’s obligation to uphold the law, but said, “When I sought this seat, I wanted as much wiggle room” as possible to allow reasonable modification of it. “That’s why they’re in the store now,” replied Johnson. “My purpose here is to be the Harvard Board of Health, not the state Board of Health. We don’t have wiggle room.”
The last cautionary words on the subject came from Jack Spero, who cited the tome given him on state regulations when he started on the board. “If there’s a failure of the Board of Health to enforce codes, the state may assume [the job].”
