HISTORIC
DISTRICT COMMISSION
Public Meeting
October 11, 2006
Judge Welsh Hearing Room
2:30 p.m.
Members
Present: Polly Burnell, John
Dowd (arrived ~3:p.m.),
Marcene Marcoux, and Carol Neal.
Members
Absent: Nathan Butera and E. Clothier Tepper (both excused)
Staff: Maxine Notaro.
Business Meeting 2:30 p.m.
Discussion
on past decisions commenced at 3:00 p.m.
Minutes for Approval:
Motion: Approve May 24, 2006 minutes.
Motion: Carol Neal Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 3-0-1 ab JD
Motion: Approve July 26th minutes.
Motion: Carol Neal Seconded: Marcene Marcoux Vote: 3-0-1 ab JD
Motion: Approve August 9th minutes.
Motion: Polly Burnell Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 3-0-0.
Motion: Approve August 23rd minutes.
Motion: Carol Neal Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 3-0-0.
Motion: Approve September 13th minutes as
amended.
Motion: Polly Burnell Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 3-0-0.
Motion: Approve September 27th minutes.
Motion: Polly Burnell Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 3-0-0.
Working Procedures,
Application Process, and
Historic District Commission
Guidelines
The
above three topics were discussed. The commissioners discussed the new
guidelines.
Administrative Reviews
Maxine
Notaro said Administrative Reviews are basically for work that is replacing
"in kind" or also called "one for one," i.e. taking out a
window that is 6 over 6 and replacing it with exactly the same style - but
new. Maxine’s question was: What does
the Commission want to have come before it?
John Dowd said the Commission does not have to be burdened with applications that are a replace in kind. However, sometimes the Commission members may have the opportunity to improve a property if it comes before the Commission. However, if it's a straight "one for one" you cannot suggest more appropriate design changes. Marcene Marcoux stated that we’re presently over-burdened with administrative review cases.
Carol
Neal said she'd like to be in the loop for certain aspects of administrative
review. Marcene Marcoux suggested the
group have another business meeting and write up procedures.
Motion: Have another business meeting to set up
policies and procedures for the Historic District Commission.
Motion: Carol Neal Seconded: Polly
Burnell Vote: 4-0-0.
The
Commissioners decided that the Building Commissioner will review some windows but
it needs to give Doug Taylor direction on what we want.
Roofs
and additions that are not within the Historic District do not need a
review. However, demolitions do need to
be fully noticed and the commission needs to set forth firm policies.
Maxine
asked, "If something deviates from the policy, what is your role and what
do you want to review? – And what do you want to leave to the community development? Maybe we should review each application on a case by case
basis."
"If
I know that a 1 for 1 is administrative” then that is for administrative
review. But Maxine asked – “What about a case of skylights?" referring to
an earlier case that eventually needed more information than was presented to
the commission.
With
Zoning and Planning Maxine knows that everything has to go before the
boards. She needs to know how to advise
people regarding Historic. What needs
to go before Historic and what doesn't?
These were the questions that Maxine asked. The Commission said that
they would resolve these questions.
The
business meeting closed at 4:00 p.m.
Public Meeting was opened at
4:01 p.m.
Rick Pozzo, 383 Commercial
Street
Rick
Pozzo from the JC Donald Company was representing the Bull Ring Condo property
here and he attended with Laurie from Peters Property Management. He was invited to speak to the Historic
Commission by Doug Taylor.
Rick
Pozzo said that he asked someone to come down and look at the Bull Ring from
Historic and no one showed up. Rick
Pozzo said: "Doug Taylor advised that we come to see you. Doug wants everything to be put back up
according to code and with the rot we've encountered, we can’t do
it." Rick Pozzo was informed by
the Commission that no one on the Historic District Commission was ever formally
notified by the Building Department to request a specific site visit in July.
Commission
members are always available to do site visits when they are notified.
Rick
wants to cut the section out that is rotten and then rebuild it. At the last
meeting, Rick said that John Dowd said if there was ever a time for this
property to be improved, it is now. However,
that change specifically involved then pertained to windows and doors—not the
demolition of the building.
Rick
Pozzo said he wanted it on the record that he asked for a site visit from HDC
over 2 months ago and it never happened.
John Dowd answered that this should have been filed 2 months ago and if
Rick wanted to come to a meeting two months ago we could have dealt with this.
Again, Rick Pozzo was told that the Commission never receive notification of
his site visit. Mr. Pozzo was informed that the Commission takes seriously site
visits and would have set one up in a timely fashion had they known and had
they been notified.
Rick
wanted to know if the Commissioners want elevations of the entire building on
the plan he will submit.
John
Dowd said, “If you are going to change things then you have to have a
drawing/plan to show us what you intend to do for our approval."
Rick
said, "If we have a site visit and it’s determined that we can knock down
the house, it will take me 8 weeks from that time to order and receive
materials."
Marcene
Marcoux and Polly Burnell set a date then for a site inspection and it will
happen on Friday, October 13th at 10:00 a.m.
It
was decided to continue the case until the next meeting on October 25th. At that time new drawings of window size,
placement, elevations, etc. will be presented.
Deb Paine, 59 Commercial
Street, Cottage
The
main building is the old Center for Coastal Studies building which abuts the
West End Parking Lot. They’ve been
working on the main house and now she wants to begin working on the cottage
located at the rear on the water. She
has pictures. The owners and I, as a contractor, want to know if you have any
pictures of the original building?
Deb
asked, "What objections do you have for me to take down the
building?" Take down the building
seemed to be everyone's synonym for demolition. She then asked, "Would you please come out and take a
look?" Carol Neal said that
demolition is only approved under dire circumstances. Guideline 15-11-14 prohibits demolition or partial demolition of
buildings or structures except in extraordinary situations. Deb requested a
site visit. Carol Neal agreed, "Yes that’s the place to start." Deb thinks it’s warranted.
Charles Miller, 286
Commercial Street
This
case referred to the Board Stiff building.
They want to keep the same opening and put in a set of automatic
doors. All mechanics will be hidden
from the inside out. It’s much more
efficient. Three people were presenting
the case and they would want the doors completely open in the summer. They
intend on being open year round. The
doors will be white to match the wood trim and not the shiny silver.
John
asked if it would be possible to have a higher kick-plate in order to match the
existing windows. The ones that are in
there now are not the originals.
These
doors will be custom-made.
Motion: Accept the proposal of the 4 panel door with
the bottom kick plate matching the skirt of the window ledge in accordance with
Guideline 15-11-6. Entrances/Doors
Motion: John Dowd Seconded: Polly
Burnell Vote: 4-0-0.
(Later
on - near the end of the meeting - the applicant from Board Stiff came back
with dimensions and asked if the kick plate could match part of the front of
the building and be only 7 inches high "give or take and inch or
two." It was agreed.)
John Yingling, 183
Commercial Street
His
presentation involved inheriting plans that had been previously approved by the
former Historic Committee when the former owner, Hurst, owned it. John Yingling has already begun some
renovation and now Mr.Yingling has some slight changes to propose for the
building. 1) The wood on the front of
the building is on top of the pavement; he'd like to replace it with walnut
wood. 2) Also regarding the existing
alcoves which only serve to collect trash and finally 3) The apartment which is
on the top floor and will be rented to his help and needs to be remodeled. It’s not really livable space and he
proposed higher elevations.
Motion: Authorize the doors move flush with the street,
new wood on the sill, and elevation of the rear of the building from 5'8"
to 6'6" (the exact measurements approved by the ZBA) in accordance to
Guideline 15-11-8 Roof Dormers, Alterations, and Additions and Guideline15-8-1
Criteria for Determination
Motion: John Dowd Seconded: Marcene
Marcoux Vote: 4-0-0.
Fire Station (next to Adams
Pharmacy)
Bill
Schneider did a presentation to the HDC.
The Town and/or VSB proposes replacing the firehouse doors in kind. They will look exactly the same.
Motion: Approve the Fire Station door replacement
according to pictures shown given Guideline 15-11-6 Entrances/Doors
Motion was made, seconded,
and approved unanimously.
Neil Kimball – 14 Johnson
Street.
John
Dowd asked Neil, "What’s the explanation for the windows being
enlarged? And what about the fact that
they’re inappropriately scaled for the building?" After discussion, the following motion was
made:
Motion: 14 Johnson Street is in violation because
they deviated from the approved plan. The
HDC is seeking enforcement of the violation by the Building Commissioner in
accordance to Guideline 15-10-1 Enforcement and Penalties and Guideline 15-10-3
Fines and Guideline 15-10-4 Building Commissioner
Motion: John Dowd Seconded: Polly Burnell Vote:
4-0-0.
(We’ll
put a stop work order on it and they will have to replace the windows and put
in what had been approved. Fine
$250/day for as long as the violation exists.)
Doug Taylor plans on working a little closer with Mr. Anderson in order
to avoid problems like this in the future.
135 Bradford Street Neil Kimball
Polly
Burnell said she thought that the muntins on the Windsor window seemed to be
too wide and you could see through them.
Also, the interior of the windows seemed to be metallic. But, because the building has been so
compromised we could approve it.
Marcene
Marcoux worried that it’s a very visible building and she sees the Windsor
window as a model of and a model for Neil’s clients. Problematically, she told Neil, you’re going to have more clients
wanting this particular type of window.
That’s her concern.
Neil
Kimball said he really prefers aluminum or vinyl clad windows. Neil asked, "Do you have a choice on
the sash colors? Dark colors are more
traditional was the response.
Motion: Allow the Windsor windows (Pinnacle series)
on 135 Bradford Street based on the fact that the building is not historic nor
is there anything historic to retain in accordance with Guideline 15-11-5
Windows b, d, e
Motion: Carol Neal Seconded: John
Dowd Vote: 3-0-1 abstain
Marcene Marcoux
231 Bradford Street (Frank
Milby's former home)
Polly
Burnell doesn’t feel she can approve the request. She thinks it’s wrong to move a historic building just because
the new owner wants a parking spot. (20
Bradford Street set a precedent according to John Dowd). Marcene Marcoux suggested that we might have
a pattern occurring here. Move the
house and then it falls apart and then the applicant returns with a request for
demolition. Carol Neal feels this case might
be a possible candidate for such action.
The
case was continued until the October 25th meeting.
Adjournment:
The
meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Evelyn Gaudiano
E. Rogers Gaudiano
Approved by _____________________________ on ____________, 2006.
Carol Neal, Acting Chair