Marblehead resident alleges conflict of interest on historic districts board

MARBLEHEAD – Charles Bridges’ long battle with the Marblehead Old and Historic Districts Commission will come to an end tonight win or lose, but even if the Board of Selectmen deny his final appeal to install double pane windows at his Middle Street property, they certainly won’t leave the meeting without another serious issue to consider.Eternally frustrated by the MOHDC’s, and specifically Chairman James “Pat” Patrick’s unwillingness to budge on the issue, Bridges is now highlighting a potential conflict of interest taking place between Patrick’s personal membership on the commission and his business dealings in the restoration and repair of historic windows.The disagreement between Bridges and the MOHDC began years ago when he first applied to add new double pane windows to the second and third floors of his 275-year-old property at 17 Middle St. as part of a complete building renovation.The commission, which holds jurisdictions over historic homes in the town, denied the request, citing a preference to keep windows in the area uniform as original single-pane divided light windows, despite Bridges’ argument that the double pane windows look the same and are more energy efficient.The Board of Selectmen delayed an appeal of the matter to tonight’s meeting, but Bridges says now he has a better idea of why Patrick may be so reluctant to grant his request for new windows.”I think the potential conflict with the chair is quite obvious,” Bridges said Tuesday. “It is something that I think needs to be known.”In a letter to the Board of Selectmen, Bridges alleges that Patrick’s business, Old Town Repair, is in direct conflict with his position on the board given the business’ description as providing “historic window and door restoration” and because it does not promote window replacement.In addition, Bridges points out that Patrick is the chair of the New England Window Restoration Alliance, whose mission statement reads “dedicated to the preservation of historic wood windows.”On the Old Town Repair Web site, Patrick also boasts that his business helps with MOHDC applications and presentations, something that Bridges believes to be a misuse of his position as commission chair.”I believe that Pat’s business creates an obvious conflict between his attitudes on the repair, rebuilding and restoration of windows versus the replacement of windows,” Bridges wrote. “I further believe that it would be impossible for Pat not to have his personal beliefs adversely affect his decisions on replacement window applications that come before the MOHDC.”Bridges and Patrick have gone back and forth about the MOHDC’s reasoning, which he calls “outdated” and “inconsistent,” on several occasions in recent years. One meeting became so heated that Patrick had to issue a letter of apology after describing double pane windows as “tinker toys” and suggesting the town was turning in to “Disney World,” which offended some selectmen.”The windows that I want to install look almost identical to single pane windows, you can’t tell the difference until you get up close,” Bridges argues. “It is so hard when you do a project like this (he says he couldn’t have done more work to his house if he started it from scratch) to try and keep single pane windows and add those storm windows they want.”The MOHDC allows for storm windows to cover the single-pane historic windows that are in place, something that Bridges says looks worse than any new window he would put on his house.”No one thinks storm windows are historic,” he said.Patrick, who declined to comment on the allegations until after the hearing, has said in past meetings that the decision to reject Bridges’ request is based on the MOHDC guidelines, which he says are not in writing and applied on a case by case basis.The guidelines allow for leniency when a window faces the ocean and may be subject to harsh weather and do not apply to municipal buildings, such as Abbott Hall, which has double-paned windows.Patrick ar