Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-10 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF September 10, 2015 MINUTES Commission Members Present: Sonia Mallar (chair) Elizabeth Rettenmaier (vice chair) Reese Perkins (Secretary) Marie Grady George Burgoyne City Staff Present: Jen Boothroyd Chair Mallar called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 1: Approval of HPC meeting minutes from the August 13, 2015 meeting Chair Mallar initiated the reading of the August 13, 2015 meeting minutes for review, noting that she had just now received the minutes, giving her no time to review them before the meeting. Secretary Perkins began to read the minutes. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to forego the reading of the minutes and approve them as written, which was seconded by Commissioner Grady. Commissioner Perkins suggested that he might read aloud just the “Item No. 4” portion of the minutes, relating to the Commission’s review and discussion of the 60 May St. property, which is before the Commission again at this meeting. Commissioners Rettenmaier and Grady agreed to amend their motion and second to reflect this, and Commissioner Perkins proceeded to read that portion of the August 13, 2015 meeting minutes. The meeting minutes were then approved with members Perkins, Grady, Rettenmaier, and Burgoyne voting. Item No. 2: Consider a request for Design Review approval for façade changes at 60 May St.; Louie Morrison/The Point Group, LLC, applicant Louie Morrison, property manager for The Point Group, LLC, approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. The applicant proposes a complete renovation of the façade, to include new paint, siding, and replacement doors and windows. The concrete areas of the façade will be painted a warm gray. The new siding will mimic the look of the historic glass block openings, with painted plywood and applied pine trim. The plywood will be painted a shade of gray darker than the surrounding concrete. The new first-story windows will be aluminum-extruded frame replacements with insulated glass. The applicant also proposes a new glass-front garage door at the loading bay. 2 Commissioner Rettenmaier asked for confirmation that the new plywood panels would have physical trim, painted black and applied to the plywood. Mr. Morrison confirmed this. Commissioner Perkins asked if the second-floor windows would be vinyl replacements as stated at the last meeting. Mr. Morrison stated that they would be, and that the second-story window replacement had been started by the previous owner of the building, and who had left the replacement windows for those windows that had not yet been completed. Commissioner Perkins asked if the replacement windows would be white. Mr. Morrison said that the window trim would be painted gray to match the trim in the surrounding areas. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if any of the old glass block of the building was salvageable. Mr. Morrison stated that it was not. Commissioner Mallar asked if the applicant is proposing to paint the brick, noting that Mr. Pullen had previously suggested that the historic look of the brick be maintained. Mr. Morrison referred to the renderings included in the packet, noting that, where possible, the brickwork will be maintained unpainted, and where necessary, will be painted the same color as the concrete. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to grant Design Review approval for façade changes at 60 May St., with the condition that work be started within six months, completed within a year, and that photos of the completed work be submitted to the Planning Office for the file. Commissioner Burgoyne seconded the motion. Mr. Morrison noted that the applicant hopes to be completed with st the project by November 1. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Burgoyne, Rettenmaier, Grady, Perkins, and Mallar voting. Commissioner Perkins asked if the “1912” numbering on the building in the old original photo was still there. Mr. Morrison said they don’t know for sure, but if it is, they plan to keep it. Item No. 3: Consider a request for Design Review approval for a new drive- thru island, step replacement, and concrete plaza at 3 State St; H. E. Bridges, applicant Jason Donovan, facilities manager for Bangor Savings Bank, owner of 3 State St, approached the podium and summarized the proposal. The applicant proposes to replace a drive-thru island at the rear of the bank building. The island, currently concrete with steel banding, is in poor repair due to damage from vehicles and snow plows over time. The applicant proposed to replace it with a new concrete island, edged with granite. The applicant will also replace the pavement in the drive-thru lane with new concrete, and will restore the adjacent concrete plaza, replacing the old concrete with patchwork repair with new concrete. The plaza is owned by the city but maintained by Bangor Savings bank, and the applicant has the support of the City for this work, and a signed indemnity clause allowing them to do the project is in place. As part of the project, some existing concrete steps with steel nosing will also be replaced with granite steps. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if there was already some granite existing in the wall adjacent to the steps proposed for replacement. Mr. Donovan confirmed this, stating that the wall contained large granite blocks. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if the applicant’s intent is to use granite that is close in shade to the existing granite. Mr. Donovan stated that it is. 3 Commissioner Perkins asked if the plaza work would involve new concrete pads with construction joins, similar to what’s there, just new. Mr. Donovan stated that that is what is proposed, and the applicant is hoping, through this method, to remove the patchwork effect that exists in the area from piecemeal repairs over time. The only part that won’t be replaced is the potion closest to the stream and rail. Mr. Donovan clarified that the concrete plaza repair would extend all the way up to the State St. stairs back to the street. He added that the new plaza work would involve necessary repairs to the grade of the plaza, and would incorporate a new pattern, with 5-foot by 5-foot squares accented by 4-foot by 4-foot squares set at an angle in the center. Those accent areas will also have a coarser texture to add interest. Commissioner Mallar asked if the stairs from State St. would be repaired by the applicant. Mr. Donovan state that those are not part of this project. Commissioner Mallar asked if the handicapped ramp would remain as is. Mr. Donovan confirmed that it would, but added that the functionality of the ramp should be improved by the repaired grades being proposed. Commissioner Rettenmaier disclosed that, although she does not feel that she has a conflict of interest with the project, her husband is an employee of Bangor Savings Bank. The Chair recused Commissioner Rettenmaier from the vote. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the application for Design Review approval for a new drive-thru island, step repair, and concrete plaza, as presented. Commissioner Grady seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Burgoyne, Grady, Perkins, and Mallar voting. Item No. 4: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for a new vent stack and window infill at 18 Broad St.; Bangor Blaze, applicant Rob Ervin, architect for Bangor Blaze, approached the podium and summarized the project for the Commission. The applicant is proposing to expand the business at 18 Broad St by adding a wood- fired grill. This addition will require a new vent stack to be mounted on the exterior of the building, on the rear façade. The placement of the stack will also require that the top panel of a double-hung window on the rear of the building be filled and painted. The proposed vent stack is similar to other venting equipment and ductwork mounted on that part of the building. Commissioner Mallar asked the applicant to clarify where the infill is proposed. Mr. Ervin pointed out the proposed second-story window infill, referring to the architectural drawing submitted in the packet. He stated that the window is a double-hung window, and they are proposing to fill in the upper panel of the window only. It will be painted gray-green to match the other filled in window. Commissioner Grady asked how long the proposed project would take. Mr. Ervin stated that the applicant hopes to have the new grill open by Halloween. Commissioner Mallar asked Mr. Ervin to show the location of the previously filled-in windows on the architectural drawing, which he did. She asked for confirmation that the applicant proposes to remove the glass pane only, and will in the window frame. Mr. Ervin confirmed this. 4 A member of the public, Wayne Mallar, stepped to the podium to ask some questions. He stated that, per his recent visit to the Hammond Street Senior Center, adjacent to 18 Broad St., the previous infill panel had never been painted. He added that, currently, there is a door in the window space proposed for infill at the back of the building, and asked if the Commission had ever approved that. Mr. Ervin stated that the infill panel has been painted. He noted that the door is temporary, and provides necessary access associated with ongoing construction inside the building. Mr. Mallar asked if that work has been permitted. Mr. Ervin stated that it has been. Mr. Mallar asked Ms. Boothroyd to confirm this. Ms. Boothroyd stated that she did not know whether there was a permit for that work. Mr. Mallar asked the Commission if they approved a door in the window space. Mr. Ervin stated that the temporary door did not need approval. Mr. Mallar disagreed. Mr. Mallar stated that he thinks the vent stacks at the rear of the building would blend better if they were painted to match the building, rather than left stainless steel. Mr. Mallar asked if there have been any permits issued for heat pumps at 18 Broad St. Ms. Boothroyd stated that she did not know. Mr. Ervin stated that the applicants did get approval for the condenser units. Mr. Mallar asked the Commission if they reviewed the heat pump condensers. Mr. Ervin stated that he did not believe any of the existing Commissioners were on the HPC at the time of the approval. There was some discussion about when that review/approval might have taken place. Mr. Mallar stated that he feels the City has become a place where applicants “ask for forgiveness rather than permission” and he feel that it should not be so. He stated that he feels that if the Commission votes to approve this application, it should be contingent upon verifying whether prior approvals were received. Commissioner Burgoyne stated that he feels if the application before them is complete in its own right, it should be reviewed by the Commission as such. Mr. Ervin reiterated his commitment to historic sensitivity through enhancing infrastructure while respecting history. Commissioner Burgoyne asked if the proposed vent stack would be cylindrical or rectilinear, both types of which currently exist on the back of the building. Mr. Ervin responded that the new stack would be rectilinear. Commissioner Mallar asked about the size of the proposed stack. Mr. Ervin responded that it is 14 inches by 14 inches, which is the same dimension as the largest vent stack existing on the building now. Commissioner Mallar stated that she doesn’t remember whether the Commission formerly required that the vent stacks be painted. Mr. Ervin responded that the thermal properties of the stack would cause paint on the outside to peel off. Commissioner Mallar asked if there were any way to enclose the stacks so that they would not be so unsightly. Mr. Ervin stated that the stacks face a back alley, and that propomtion of revitalization of historic properties requires some give and take. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked about mounting the stacks. Mr. Ervin stated that it is his standard procedure to mount hardware and equipment into the mortar of the building, and not the brick. Commissioner Burgoyne stated that he feels that it is important for the HPC to support the viability of historic structures so that they continue to be inhabited and maintained. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for a new vent stack and window infill, as presented. Commissioner Burgoyne seconded the motion. The motion was approved with Commission members Burgoyne, Grady, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting to for approval, and Commissioner Mallar voting against, stating that she does not have enough information on the project. 5 Other Business: Commissioner Rettenmaier asked about the status of follow-up photos being submitted by applicants. Ms. Boothroyd stated that some have come in. The Commission expressed an interest in reviewing these follow-up photos. Ms. Boothroyd stated that, going forward, she would place an item on the agenda for review of any new follow-up photos that have been received each month. She noted that more letters are coming in, now that reminder letters are being sent. Commissioner Burgoyne asked if they could ask for details about the history of a property from the Code Enforcement files. Ms. Boothroyd stated that she could look up information, as long as she receives the request with enough time to obtain the information. Commissioner Rettenmaier noted that all the Commissioners need to receive the same information. Commissioner Mallar stated that she cannot receive e-mail attachments, and she is concerned that she is not getting all the pertinent information prior to the meetings. She added that she did not receive the August draft meeting minutes up for approval. Ms. Boothroyd apologized for the oversight in mailing Commissioner Mallar a hard copy of the draft minutes. Commissioner Burgoyne asked if the City provides any way for Commissioners without a personal e-mail address or home computer could get access to HPC meeting materials electronically. Ms. Boothroyd stated that she would investigate this. Commissioner Burgoyne stated that he does not believe it should be a requirement for every volunteer for a board or committee for the City to be technologically savvy. Ms. Boothroyd stated that it has been standard practice at the beginning of each year to ask Commissioners for updated contact information and e-mail preferences. Some Commissioners only receive hard copies of applications, and some receive only digital. Currently, all Commissioners have confirmed their use of e-mail, so that has become the main way of communication. Commissioner Mallar stated that it was good that Commissioner Perkins read the section of the draft minutes pertaining to the 60 May St. project, so that she was able to be caught up with what had happened prior to the discussion at this meeting. Commissioner Rettenmaier added that it was important to review this month’s application in its own right. Commissioner Mallar noted that she was the only Commissioner present tonight that hadn’t had the benefit of reviewing the minutes prior to the meeting. Mr. Mallar stated that when a Planning Board member is recuses him or herself from a review, he or she must leave the room. He asked if that were not the same case for the HPC. Ms. Boothroyd stated that she would ask Assistant City Solicitor Nicklas for his opinion on this. Commissioner Burgoyne stated that the Commission is still waiting for the draft rules of order from the legal department. Ms. Boothroyd reminded the Commissioners of the annual CLG training in Topsham next week, noting that three commissioners have confirmed attendance. Ms. Boothroyd reminded the Commission about previous discussions about removing the Waterfront Design Review district from the façade ordinance and the Commission’s purview. She noted that if there are buildings in the district whose historic character should be protected, such as the 60 May St. project reviewed at this meeting, the City and the Commission could consider placing them on the list of historic properties, rather than relying on façade review. She added that the number of projects the HPC reviews in the Waterfront façade district is relatively small, and that the objective of the Waterfront Design Review District is fairly removed from the overall goals of the HPC. She asked the Commission to consider their opinions on the Waterfront Design Review District, in preparation for future discussions about it. She also reminded the Commission about ongoing consideration of 6 removing façade review altogether, in favor of reclassifying downtown properties as historic or not, to reduce confusion about historic preservation ordinance review vs. façade ordinance review. Commissioner Burgoyne stated that he would like to see the draft changes, noting that any removal of review should be replaced with another sort of review. Commissioner Mallar stated that she believes the City wants to give its employees more control over projects, rather than relying on commissions and residents. There was some further discussion, with Ms. Encouraging the Commissioners to give these ideas some consideration in advance of further discussion on the topic with the City’s legal department. Commissioner Burgoyne made a motion to adjourn the meeting, which Commissioner Grady seconded. The motion was unanimously approved. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M.