Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-12-11 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF December 11, 2014 MINUTES Commission Members Present: Donald Lewis III, chair Marie Grady Sonia Mallar Reese Perkins George Burgoyne Elizabeth Rettenmaier (associate) Andrew Saucier (associate) City Staff Present: Jennifer Boothroyd Paul Nicklas Chairman Lewis called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 1: Approval of HPC meeting minutes from November 20, 2014 meeting Chairman Lewis initiated the reading of the meeting minutes for review. Secretary Perkins began to read the minutes. Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to forego the reading of the minutes and approve them as written. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously. Item No. 2: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for replacement of windows, steps, and an awning at 163 Broadway; Donald and Claudia Lewis, applicants Chair Lewis noted that he will not be taking part in this item, as he is related to the applicant. He stepped down as chair and Vice Chair Mallar took over as Chair. Donald Lewis, owner of the property at 163 Broadway approached the podium and summarized the application for the Commission. The applicants propose to replace two boarded-up attic windows and two deteriorated front bedroom windows with vinyl replacement windows. The applicants chose vinyl replacements for economy and visual appeal. The applicants also would like to replace a circa-1970’s aluminum awning which fell 2 off in a recent storm with a wooden replacement awning. These projects are part of an ongoing restoration of the building. Vice Chair Mallar asked about the replacement of steps which is also outlined in the application. Mr. Lewis stated that the step replacement is also part of this application, although the work has already been done. The old wooden steps in the photos were deteriorated to the point of being a safety hazard and could not have been left through the winter, so they have been replaced with steps made of pressure-treated wood. Mr. Lewis noted that he had turned in the application several months before, but had missed the deadline for the October meeting, and could not appear on the November agenda due to a lack of quorum. Commissioner Burgoyne asked if the steps that were replaced had been painted. Mr. Lewis stated that they had been. He added that the new steps have not yet been painted yet, but that they will be painted in the spring. Commissioner Perkins asked if the steps that were replaced were those at the same door where they are proposing to replace an awning. Mr. Lewis stated that it is the same location. Vice Chair Mallar asked if the applicant knew that vinyl replacement windows are generally not appropriate in a historic district. Mr. Lewis stated that he was aware that they were considered inappropriate at one time, but that they are often accepted now. Vice Chair Mallar stated that the Historic Preservation Commission continues to discourage vinyl replacement windows. She referred to personal experience, noting that she regrets replacing glass windows with vinyl replacement windows in her own home, which is older but not in a historic district. Mr. Lewis noted that two of the windows he is proposing to replace are currently plywood, as they are boarded over. He noted that the nationally, Historic Preservation Commission has relaxed their opinion on vinyl windows. He added that in this situation, change in appearance is not an issue, since two of the windows have storm windows on them, and that the house is covered in vinyl siding. Vice Chair Mallar noted that those changes must have been done prior to the establishment of the Bangor HPC, and that the Commission is now in place to prevent changes like that from being done. Commissioner Perkins asked if the two windows that aren’t boarded up are the original wooden windows. Mr. Lewis said that they are wooden windows; one has a storm window in front of it and the other doesn’t. The storm windows on the house are white, which is why the applicants are proposing white vinyl replacement windows. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked Mr. Lewis to identify on the photos which second-story windows he is proposing to replace. Mr. Lewis pointed them out; one on the front and one on the side (the one on the side is the one without a storm window). Mr. Lewis noted that, as these are second-story windows, the change to vinyl would hardly be noticeable from the street. He stated that his business is such that he is familiar with wooden windows, and if he thought they were appropriate, he would use them in this situation. Vice Chair Mallar stated that, in her opinion, the vinyl replacements don’t seem congruous with the historic district, and the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines. Mr. Lewis noted that some of the other buildings in the neighborhood are “rough shape”, but that his building is still “pretty decent”. 3 Vice Chair Mallar stated that the owners of those buildings will need to come before HPC to make changes when they are ready to. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked if the original attic windows that are now boarded up are still in existence. Mr. Lewis stated that one of them is actually still in place and broken behind the plywood, and the other is totally gone. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked how the replacement awning would be attached to the house. Mr. Lewis stated that it will be braced into the house down near the foundation. Vice Chair Mallar asked why a wooden replacement awning has been chosen rather than aluminum. Mr. Lewis said the existing aluminum awning didn’t look appropriate and did not prove to be sturdy, but noted that he had considered replacing it with another aluminum awning. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked for clarification of the note in the application that the new awning would be shingled to match the garage. Mr. Lewis said that they had to put a new roof on the garage when they purchased the building, and that the awning will have asphalt shingles to match those on the garage. Vice Chair Mallar asked if anyone had further comments. Mr. Lewis stated that he hoped the Commission would allow the vinyl replacement windows. Vice Chair Mallar asked for a motion. Ms. Boothroyd clarified that a motion should be made to approve, and then further discussion on the motion can take place. Mr. Nicklas confirmed this. Commissioner Grady made a motion to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness approval for the replacement of four windows, steps, and an awning as submitted at 163 Broadway. Commissioner Rettenmaier seconded the motion. Commissioner Rettenmaier stated that she has concerns about approving the vinyl replacement windows as proposed. She thinks the steps, if painted in the spring, and the replacement awning, if installed in a way that does no damage to the structure of the house, would be congruous with the ordinance, but that replacing the wooden windows with vinyl is a concern, even if they are covered with storm windows. She noted that the applicant may wish to amend his application. Vice Chair Mallar stated that she is not in favor with the proposal to replace the wooden windows with vinyl ones. She stated that it is against the principles of historic preservation to use vinyl replacements in these windows which are “easily seen from the street”. She noted that she could not vote in favor of that. Commissioner Perkins stated that he knows in some situations vinyl replacement windows are appropriate and allowable, and that it is largely due to the vinyl windows being exact visual replacements of the original windows. He said that if the applicant were to come before the commission with a vinyl window representative or sample which showed that replacement vinyl windows that were exact visual matches to the existing ones, he would 4 have no concerns with them. He stated that maintaining the spacing of the glass in historic buildings is key to preserving their character. Vice Chair Mallar added that replacing original windows with vinyl as proposed usually changes the size of the opening. Mr. Lewis stated that he picked replacement vinyl windows for the second floor that are very close visual matches to the ones that are there, and that because the windows are so large, there is very little opening space lost by using the vinyl replacements. He said that with the storm windows in place, the area of open glass will be the same, since the storm window covers up some of the glass. He also stated that, nationally, replacing non-first-story windows with vinyl replacements has been generally more acceptable, since they are not so easily seen from ground level. Vice Chair Mallar stated that she still could not vote to approve it. Vice Chair Mallar called a roll vote and the motion was turned down, with Commission members Perkins, Rettenmaier, Grady and Mallar voting no, and with Commissioner Burgoyne abstaining, stating his inexperience as a new member and with the guidelines and standards. Ms. Boothroyd noted that the applicant could choose to amend the application or resubmit at a later date, which may be an option since there were three different aspects of replacement in the application. Vice Chair Mallar asked about how to move forward with the step replacement, since the work has already been completed. Ms. Boothroyd stated that the Commission should review it as if it had not already been done. Mr. Lewis stated that he did not believe the replacement of the steps needed to be reviewed by the Commission, since he had replaced wooden steps with wooden steps as regular maintenance. Vice Chair Mallar noted that since a different material was used (wood vs. pressure-treated wood), the change needed to be approved by the Commission. Mr. Lewis said that he would like to amend his application to include just the replacement of the steps. A member of the public, Wayne Mallar, approached the podium with a question for Mr. Nicklas. He wondered if an application had been made and turned down, could the application at that point be amended. Ms. Boothroyd noted that the motion that had been made had been turned down, but that another motion might be made and voted on. Mr. Mallar stated that he believed an application that had been turned down could only be overturned by the Board of Appeals. Mr. Nicklas stated that the applicant does have the option of appealing the decision, but that if the Commission is willing to take up a separate motion, that is allowable. Commissioner Perkins made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of wooden steps with pressure-treated wooden steps at 163 Broadway. Commissioner Grady seconded the motion. Vice Chair Mallar stated that she would like the replacement steps to be painted gray to match the original steps when weather permits. Commissioner Rettenmaier suggested that the motion be amended to include a condition that work be started within six months, completed within a year, and photos of the painted steps be submitted to the Planning Office. 5 Commissioner Perkins amended his motion to add these conditions. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Grady, Burgoyne, Mallar, Perkins, and Rettenmaier voting. Chair Lewis returned to the room and resumed the Chair. Item No. 3: Consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of three heat pumps and associated ductwork at 225 Cedar Street; One Stop Home Repair, applicant Howard from One Stop Home Repair, approached the podium and summarized the proposal for the Commission. The applicant proposes to install three heat pumps at the Jansujwicz residence at 225 Cedar Street. Consideration was given to the placement of the outdoor units to maintain a discreet appearance. The applicant walked the Commissioners through the photos submitted with the application, and explained the installation process and the locations of the units and ductwork. He noted that the duct lines would be covered with “line- hide” that would be painted to match the house. Mr. Jansujwicz gave a summary of the history of the house and the property, noting that the house was most likely moved back from its original location at some point. He stated that the heat pumps will supplement the heat from the furnace in the home. Commissioner Perkins asked why the gas lines for Unit #2 run along the outside of the house and then go in, rather than run along the inside of the house as they do for Unit #1. Howard stated that when the heat pump unit is mounted indoors, the line comes into it from behind. To accommodate indoor lines in that case would involve cutting into, and possibly building out, the wall. He noted that with the duct covering painted that same color as the house, it won’t be any different than the look of a gutter or downspout. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked for clarification that the width of the outdoor line is 3 and five-eighths inches, and that the rendering in the application is not to scale. Howard confirmed this. Commissioner Mallar asked if the Unit #2 heat pump would serve the upstairs. Howard confirmed this. Commissioner Mallar asked why that unit might not be mounted under the window. Howard stated that it was located where it is for ease of servicing and installation. Commissioner Rettenmaier asked for clarification of the route of the gas line for Unit #3. Howard showed that in Photograph #7, an arrow shows where the unit will be. The line will run horizontally from there to the left, and then into the corner and turn at a right angle to the deck and up the wall. Commissioner Perkins suggested that some consideration be given to the effect of water and snow on Unit #3. Mr. Jansujwicz noted that they have a shoveling service in employ. Howard also noted that there is a significant overhang in this area, and the Unit falls under that. 6 Commissioner Rettenmaier made a motion to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for installation of three heat pump units and associated ductwork at 225 Cedar Street, with the conditions that the line covers be painted to match the house, and that work be started within six months, completed within a year, and that photos of the completed project be submitted to the Planning Office. Commissioner Mallar seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously with Commission members Grady, Lewis, Mallar, Perkins, and Burgoyne voting. Other Business: Chair Lewis read a statement regarding an article in the Bangor Daily News discussing a new committee which will review downtown outdoor seating areas. He noted that a similar proposal was discussed with the Commission last spring, outlining the formation of a committee to review projects in the Downtown Revitalization area, rather than have the HPC do that review. He stated that his concern then, as now, is that these Commissions are composed of City staff and members of the Downtown Bangor Partnership, who may or may not be residents of Bangor. He is concerned that these reviews might be done by anything other than a citizen committee. He also believes that under existing code, anything reviewed by this new committee in the downtown area would also need to reviewed by the HPC in their capacity, so now there is a layer of review added, contrary to the original argument that removing Design Review from the HPC’s purview would streamline reviews for applicants. Chair Lewis noted that this would be his final meeting after eight years on the Commission, and that he feels the Commission has done a good job working with applicants during that time, and maintaining the historic character of the City. He welcomed the new commissioners. Commissioner Mallar thanked Chair Lewis for his service to the Commission, and echoed the concerns voiced over the new downtown review committee. There being no further issues for consideration or discussion, Commissioner Mallar made a motion to adjourn, which was seconded by Commissioner Grady. The meeting was adjourned at 7:58 P.M.