Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-07-16 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF July 16, 2014 MINUTES Commission Members Present: Donald Lewis III Sonia Mallar Reese Perkins Elizabeth Rettenmaier (associate) Advisory Consultant: Sara K. Martin City Staff Present: Jennifer Boothroyd Paul Nicklas Chairman Lewis called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 1: Approval of HPC meeting minutes from June 12, 2014 meeting Chairman Lewis initiated the reading of the meeting minutes for review. Ms. Boothroyd began to read the minutes. Commissioner Mallar made a motion to forego the reading of the minutes and approve them as written. Commissioner Rettenmaier seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously. Item No. 2: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for garage door replacement at 162-164 Broadway, James Van Uden, applicant James Van Uden approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. The applicant plans replace an existing wooden garage door that has fallen into disrepair. He would like to replace it with a metal door which offers the advantages of quicker delivery, easy maintenance, and lower cost. For security reasons, he would also like to change the window configuration of the door to a row of windows along the top of the door, rather than along the middle as they are now. Mr. Van Uden also proposes to paint the door. 2 Commissioner Mallar asked if the applicant also proposed to replace green entrance door on the front of the garage. Mr. Van Uden stated that he is not proposing that at this time. Commissioner Mallar asked why the applicant is proposing to change the color of the garage door if the trim on the garage will remain green. Mr. Van Uden stated that he plans to change the garage’s trim color in the future. Commissioner Mallar stated that a steel door is not preferable in the historic district. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked about the nature of a panel on the existing door, visible in the photo exhibits. Mr. Van Uden replied that it is a metal plate used to repair the door at some point. It has been there since he purchased the property. Ms. Martin noted that the replacement door that the applicant is proposing deviates from the panel pattern that the existing door has, which is six panels by four panels. She believes that the panel pattern should be maintained. Mr. Van Uden stated that he is amenable to this. Ms. Martin stated that she thinks the original window profile of the garage door should be maintained at eye-level, rather than moved to the top of the door. The applicant is willing to do this. Chair Lewis stated that, in his interpretation of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and the City’s historic preservation ordinance, the replacement of a wooden garage door with a metal garage door is not permissible. Mr. Van Uden stated that he was prepared to replace the door with another wooden door if necessary. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of a garage door at 162-164 Broadway, as amended to be a wooden door with a four-by-six panel pattern with windows at eye-level as the existing garage door, with the condition that work be started within six months, finished within a year, and that photos of the completed work be submitted to the Planning Office. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 3: To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for fence relocation and installation at 29 Hayward Street, Kelly Greer, applicant No one was present to represent the applicant, so this item was skipped. Item No. 4: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for window replacement at 187 Exchange Street, House Revivers, applicant No one was present to represent the applicant, so this item was skipped. Item No. 5: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for roofing, masonry, trim repair, and landscaping work at 31 Pond Street, Gary Wozneak, applicant Gary Wozneak, owner of Custom Creations in Bangor, approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. The applicant plans replace roofing and some trim on the building at 31 Pond St., as well as re-point the chimney and re-construct a 3 deteriorating retaining wall along the driveway. All trim work will be replicated to match the existing trim. The existing retaining wall is made of pressure-treated lumber; but the applicant is proposing to replace it with a wall made of paver stones. The owner of the property, Mr. Hartell, was also present. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked for clarification about an item in the memo prepared by Ms. Boothroyd, whether the retaining wall should be considered as “repair/rehabilitation” or “reconstruction”. After some discussion, Ms. Martin recommended that the whole project be considered on the whole, and be considered as “rehabilitation”. Commissioner Mallar asked if the existing retaining wall is anchored at all. Mr. Wozneak stated that it is not, and that’s why it’s leaning, and why he recommends replacing it with a paver-block wall with a poured concrete frost wall. Ms. Martin stated that she does not feel that the retaining wall is character-defining, and that what it’s made of does not matter as much, as long as the wall won’t obscure the house. Mr. Hartell noted that he is open to replacing the retaining wall with a pressure-treated wall like what exists. Ms. Martin asked how tall the proposed retaining wall will be. Mr. Wozneak stated that it would be approximately 2 feet above ground, out of a paver-block product made of concrete. After some discussion, the applicant and owner agreed to revise the application to construct the retaining wall out of pressure-treated lumber to match the existing one, rather than use paver stone. Mr. Wozneak stated that he has been in contact with Owen Gray & Sons in Brewer and the trim work pattern will be replicated for broken, deteriorated, or missing pieces. Commissioner Perkins noted that several areas of the house appeared to be without gutters. He asked if gutters would be added/replaced, and if so, would they be wooden. Mr. Wozneak stated that he would be adding wooden gutters where needed. Commissioner Perkins asked if the applicant is proposing to use architectural shingles in the roofing work. Mr. Wozneak stated that three-tab asphalt shingles are being proposed, but could do architectural if the HPC requires it. He also noted that he will need to replace flashing and add it in some areas where there is presently none or not enough, to prevent the roof from similar deterioration in the future. Ms. Martin clarified that since three-tab shingles are existing, it is fine to use three-tab shingles for the roofing replacement. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to approve the application as amended, using three-tab asphalt shingles and drip-edge and flashing as needed for the roof replacement, repoint the chimney, repair/replace trim as needed, and replace an existing retaining wall with one made of pressure-treated lumber. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 6: Consider a request a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for door replacement at 25-27 Broad Street, Robert Perry Builders, applicant Telford Allen, owner, approached the podium and addressed the Commission. The applicant proposes to replace two exterior doors and install a light fixture. The application had been 4 before the Commission in June, and now was back with additional information about the history of the doors that is proposed to be replaced. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked what in the doorways currently. Mr. Allen stated that it was just plywood. The original doors are not available. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if the sidelights would be glass. Mr. Allen confirmed this, and stated that they would match the appearance of the existing door. Commissioner Mallar stated that she thought the proposed light fixture had been previously approved by the Commission. Ms. Boothroyd stated that the sign below the light had been approved, but the light fixture itself had not been. Chair Lewis reiterated that any drilling associated with mounting the fixture must be done through the mortar, rather than the brick of the building. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve application for door replacement and light fixture installation as proposed. Commissioner Rettenmaier amended to add the condition that work be started within six months and finished within a year, and that pictures of the completed work be submitted to the Planning office, and that any drilling be done through the mortar rather than the brick. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Item No. 7: Consider a request a request a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval for window replacement at 28 Broad Street, Roy Hubbard, applicant Roy Hubbard, owner, approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. The applicant proposes to replace 22 windows (18 arched and 4 square double- hung) on two sides of the building at 28 Broad St. Mr. Gabe Baker, a representative of Pella, provided models of the proposed window product, and provided further details on the type of replacement window being proposed. The applicant proposed to use Pella Architectural Series double-hung replacements. They are aluminum-clad wood, which differs from the existing windows, which are entirely wood. This creates a more energy-efficient window with much lower maintenance. The resulting replacement is that ¾ of an inch of glass is lost on each edge, but the look of the existing windows is predominantly maintained, especially at a distance. A slight sill modification will be needed for the second-floor windows, which are 86 inches tall. The replacement window’s maximum size is 84 inches, so a two-inch block will be added to each window sill to make up the difference on the second floor. This will be covered with trim and not be visible from the street. No window keystones or lintels will be affected. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if the new windows would have screens. Mr. Baker affirmed this. She asked if the existing widows are screened. Mr. Hubbard stated that they are not. Commissioner Perkins asked if it were logistically possible to screen a single-hung window. Mr. Baker stated that it was not possible in this situation as proposed. Ms. Martin asked if the muntin profile of the proposed windows match those of the existing windows. Mr. Baker stated that it does not, because the original windows are clay-glazed, 5 which held the glass in place. Although a clay-glazed muntin can be matched, it is not preferable in terms of maintenance and strength. Ms. Martin asked if the existing windows are deteriorated beyond repair. Mr. Hubbard confirmed that they are, and provided photos that demonstrated this. Mr. Baker confirmed it. The applicant also confirmed that existing single-hung windows will be replaced with single- hungs, and double-hungs will be replaced with double-hungs. Commissioner Mallar noted that the windows on the back of the building have been replaced. She asked the applicant what the previous owners had used as replacements. Mr. Hubbard stated that those windows are all-aluminum, with no wood. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked Ms. Martin if there should be any concern over the screens. Ms. Martin stated she did not believe there should be concern. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for window replacement as proposed. Commissioner Rettenmaier seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to approve Design Review for window replacement as proposed, with the condition that work be started within six months and finished within a year. Commissioner Perkins seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with Commission members Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Chair Lewis asked if anyone was now present to represent the two skipped items (#3 and #4) on the agenda. No one was. Additional Business: Commissioner Mallar stated that there appears to be newly-mounted cameras in the wooden panels above the main entrance of the Bangor Public Library, which should have been before the Commission for review. Commissioner Mallar also noted that the “Superintendent’s House” on State St., which the Commission has required in the past to be secured as it is unused and in disrepair, has now had some of the boards removed from the windows. Ms. Boothroyd said that she would bring these concerns to the attention of the Code Enforcement Officer. There being no further issues for consideration or discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 P.M.