Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-20 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF March 20, 2014 MINUTES Commission Members Present: Donald Lewis III Sonia Mallar Reese Perkins Robert Reid (associate) Elizabeth Rettenmaier (associate) City Staff Present: Jennifer Boothroyd Paul Nicklas Chairman Lewis called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 1: Approval of HPC meeting minutes from January 9, 2014 meeting Chairman Lewis initiated the reading of the meeting minutes for review. Commissioner Mallar made a motion to forego the reading of the minutes and approve them as written. Commissioner Perkins seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, Reid, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 2: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for removal and replacement of light fixtures at 20 Broad Street, Connie Boivin, applicant Connie Boivin approached the podium and summarized her proposal for the Commission. She is seeking to remove three existing floodlights from the outside of her building at 20 Broad Street, The Charles Inn, and install five new light fixtures instead. The fixtures she is proposing will be energy-efficient LED fixtures. Reference was made to the memo provided by Sara Martin, advisory consultant to the Historic Preservation Commission, in which she suggested a more contemporary-style fixture might be more appropriate. The applicant would prefer to use the fixture she applied for, if the Commission will allow it. 2 Commissioner Mallar brought up an additional item from Ms. Martin’s memo, in which she suggests that the conduit for the lighting be hidden or camouflaged. The applicant stated that the conduit will be hidden behind painted trim. Associate Commissioner Reid asked if the conduit and junctions for the fixtures would be centered on the architectural features on the façade of the building, or if they would be offset as the conduit is now. Ms. Boivin stated that the fixtures would be centered on the columns. Commissioner Mallar made a motion to approve the removal of three floodlights and the installation of five new light fixtures as proposed, with the condition that the fixtures be centered on the columns. Commissioner Perkins seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, Reid, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 3: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for two new signs and an awning at 72 Columbia Street, Harvest Moon, LLC, applicant Keith Manaker approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. Harvest Moon LLC currently operates a restaurant in Orono, and is expanding into a new storefront at 72 Columbia Street, the former Montes Catering. They are seeking to add two new signs, one flat sign attached to the end of the wall facing Cross Street, and one projecting sign that will hang from a wrought-iron bracket. They also proposed to replace an existing awning with a new awning which will feature their logo in several places. Mr. Manaker provided handouts which clarified the final design and colors of the proposed sign and awning, which were unavailable at the time of application. The signs he is proposing are also larger than the dimensions which were proposed in the application. No illumination of signage is proposed at this time. Ms. Boothroyd stated that the Commission is free to consider the signs as designed and proposed, but that HPC cannot guarantee that any sizes that deviate from the sizes on the application are compliant with the sign code. New sizes must be verified to be allowable by the Code Enforcement Office. Reference was made to the memo provided by Sara Martin, in which she suggested that the Commission condition approval on (among other criteria) the sign fasteners be drilled into the mortar and not the brick of the building. Bob Kelley, the owner of 72 Columbia Street, stated his familiarity with this requirement and confirmed that this would be the case. Commissioner Reid asked how the existing awning is attached to the building. Mr. Kelley indicated that it was attached to the surface with “lags” through the mortar. Commissioner Mallar made a motion to approve the installation of two signs and an awning, as clarified during the hearing, with the following conditions: 3 1. That the mounting hardware for the signs & the awning will be attached to the mortar of the building & that no holes will be drilled into the brick 2. That the projecting sign should be made of a material that harmonizes with the building 3. That the wall sign should be made of a material that harmonizes with the building 4. That the awning hardware match the original if possible 5. That all the existing extraneous & unused awning hardware be removed. Commissioner Perkins seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, Reid, and Rettenmaier voting. After the vote, Mr. Manaker asked for clarification that the signs he is proposing are considered by the Commission to be consistent with the second condition. The Commission agreed that they felt this condition has been met by the signs as proposed. Mr. Manaker also affirmed that his intent is completely remove existing unused awning hardware, as set forth in the fifth condition of approval. Item No. 4: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for a new projecting sign at 89 Central Street, KahBang Arts, applicant Meg Shorette, executive director for KahBang Arts, approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. Kahbang Arts is proposing to relocate their office from the existing Harlow Street location to the vacant space at 89 Center St. They are proposing to erect a projecting sign, circular in shape, with their logo in blue and white. The sign will be double-faced, and will sandwich and conceal the bracket within the two sides of the sign. Ms. Shorette provided samples of the sign and bracket material, and pointed out that the bracket would be black in color, not white as shown in the application. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the installation of a new projecting sign at 89 Central Street, as shown in the application materials, but with a black bracket rather than a white one. Assistant Commissioner Reid seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, Reid, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 5: A discussion of the hazardous building at 324 Union Street, which is located in the Whitney Park Historic District. Jeff Wallace, Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator for the City of Bangor, approached the podium and summarized the issue for the Commission. A house at 324 Union Street has been severely damaged by fire, and has been determined a hazardous structure by the Code Enforcement Officer and will be demolished by the City. A small garage on the property was not damaged by the fire, but is in bad repair and does not appear to be historic. The City would like to demolish the garage along with the house in the near future, regrade the lot, and sell it. By statute any demolition of a building in a Historic District usually requires a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Commission. Due to the hazardous structure declaration, the house is exempt from needing a Certificate of Appropriateness, but the City was not clear on whether the garage could also be cleared in this case, and is seeking 4 guidance from the Commission on the matter. Photos of the garage and lot were provided to the Commissioners for review and consideration. Ms. Boothroyd mentioned that anything that gets built on the lot in the future would need to come before the Commission for review and approval, and is not part of the discussion at this time. Mr. Wallace stated that the garage has suffered considerable water damage, and probably could be saved, but at considerable cost. He does not know the garage’s date of construction, but is sure that it is much newer than the house on the lot, perhaps built as recently as in the 1950s. Mr. Reid quoted from the Historic Preservation Code (Chapter 148-13-B): B. Demolition or Removal. (1) An historic landmark or any building or structure in an historic district, or any appurtenance thereto, shall not be demolished or moved and a certificate of appropriateness shall not be approved until either: (a) In an historic district, such building or structure has been identified by the Commission as incompatible with the historic district in which it is located; or (b) The property owner can demonstrate that it is incapable of earning an economic return on its value in its present location as appraised by a qualified real estate appraiser. (2) If such a demonstration can be made, issuance of a certificate for movement or demolition shall be delayed for a period of 180 days. Such time period shall commence when an application for certificate and the statement of sale, as outlined below, have been filed with the Commission. Mr. Wallace stated that the property has not been evaluated by a real estate appraiser. John Pickering, an abutting property owner, told the Commission that, in his opinion, the garage does not seem consistent with the historic district, and is worthless. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to allow the City to proceed with the demolition if the Code Enforcement Office allows it to proceed. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion. Associate Commissioner Reid asked for clarification of the inclusion of the Code Enforcement Office in the motion. Commissioner Perkins suggested that perhaps the motion did not accurately reflect the process. Several Commissioners stated that they do not feel that they have enough information at this time to determine whether or not the garage in question is or is not incompatible with the Whitney Park historic district. Further discussion led the Commission to conclude that they could not approve the demolition of the garage without going through the process outlined in the section of the Code cited earlier. 5 Mr. Wallace stated that the discussion provided enough clarity that he feels confident about how to proceed. He will put together an application and return to the Commission at a future meeting. Commissioner Perkins asked if he could withdraw his motion. Chair Lewis suggested that they just go ahead and vote on the motion on the table. The motion was denied unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, Reid, and Rettenmaier voting no. Item No. 6: Election of Officers Chair Lewis asked for nominations for the position of Chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. Member Mallar nominated Don Lewis for the position. There being no other nominations, Don Lewis was elected Chair of the Commission. Chair Lewis asked for nominations for the position of Vice Chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. Member Perkins nominated Sonia Mallar for the position. There being no other nominations, Sonia Mallar was elected Vice Chair of the Commission. After some discussion of the duties of the position, Chair Lewis asked for nominations for the position of Secretary of the Historic Preservation Commission. Member Mallar nominated Robb Gordon for the position. There being no other nominations, Robb Gordon was elected Secretary of the Commission. Additional Discussion Paul Nicklas provided guidance to the Commission on the issue of site visits. Commissioner Perkins asked for clarification on the consideration of colors for Harvest Moon’s project. Ms. Boothroyd clarified that while colors were not to be considered under Historic Preservation review, they are considered under Design Review, and Harvest Moon was being reviewed under both, so colors were taken into consideration. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the installation There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 P.M.