HOLLISTON — The new owners of a late 19th-century farmhouse will need to wait up to six months on their plans to demolish the home, after the Historical Commission voted last month to invoke the town's demolition delay bylaw.
The home, at 147 North Mill St., was constructed in 1890. Owners Reza and Emerald Jalinous, who bought the home in 2022, are seeking to demolish it and then replace it with a new colonial-style house.
The Jalinouses submitted a demolition application to the town in November, which led to a conversation arising about the home's historical value.
According to Holliston bylaws, the demolition delay "is adopted to protect and preserve buildings and structures within Holliston which reflect or constitute distinctive features of the architectural, cultural, economic, political or social history of the Town."
The bylaw goes on to read that its intent is "not to permanently prevent demolition but rather to provide an opportunity to develop preservation solutions for properties threatened with demolition."
The property itself was traditionally farmland, at one point covering more than 100 acres. Thomas A. Burns and Nancy J. Coolidge-Burns, who acquired the property in 1958, gradually sold off much of it as separate parcels, leading to increased development along North Mill Street.
Seller claims verbal agreement was made to preserve farmhouse
What's left is the farmhouse, which sits on just under 7 acres of land. In 2022, the Burnses’ children sold the property to the Jalinouses for $787,000.
Stephen Edward Burns, one of the sellers, said he and his siblings and the Jalinouses had a verbal agreement that the existing farmhouse would not be demolished, as there was plenty of space to construct a new home on the property if that was desired.
But the Jalinouses deny any such agreement was made, adding that they would not have purchased the home if it was viewed as a historic property.
“When we purchased the property, we did check on the Holliston register and made sure that nothing on the land was classified as historic," Emerald Jalinous told the Daily News. "Otherwise, we would not have been interested in buying the land."
Jalinous added that their real estate agent didn't mention anything about a requirement to keep the structure on the land.
"Furthermore, there is nothing in the sale contract that limits what the buyers can do with the property,” he said.
Owner says home is in poor condition
Jalinous described the home as being in poor condition, as well as containing a mix of old and new elements that wouldn’t register as historic.
“The house in question has parts old and parts new, most of it in very poor shape," he said. "When we purchased the place, a window had fallen out, several others were broken, wallpapers were hanging loose, holes in the walls, the house did not have a septic system — we had to shut off the water, as it was leaking."
On the other hand, Jalinous said there appears to be "new siding panels, roof tiles and some windows have been replaced, but since the Town of Holliston has no permits on its files, there is no official record of these changes.”
Jalinous said that after removing the asbestos from the house to comply with town requirements, "it became quite obvious that the place may not even be safe for walking on, and that we could fall to the floor below if we are not careful where we step.”
He said a contractor quoted a restoration of the home at $275,000, but even that would only bring the home up to a minimal standard. That makes demolition and reconstruction the most sensible option, he said.
Frank Chamberlain, chair of the Holliston Historic Commission, said the demolition bylaw can be applied to any structure that is 75 years or older.
"In accordance with Holliston bylaws, the Historical Commission is required to make a finding as to whether the building(s) should be preferably preserved and whether the town's demolition delay bylaw should be invoked or not," he said.
The Historic Commission is scheduled to address the issue at its next meering, which is Jan. 17.