Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-10 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Minutes of June 10, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Third Floor Council Chambers MINUTES Commission Members Present: Charles Boothby, Chair Don Lewis III Wayne Mallar Denise Simoneau Associate Member Present: Kay Blanchard Historical Consultant Present: Bob Kelly City Staff Present: Jeremy P. Martin PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 158 Main Street – Arthur P. Brountas To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to cover the clapboards on the rear addition with “Carriage House Slate” asphalt shingles. This application was brought to the Commission last month, but was withdrawn and the applicant was instructed to revise the application. After looking into numerous options, the applicant is proposing to go back to asphalt at this location. The rear addition was asphalt prior to the applicant removing it this Spring. Action Taken: After much discussion about the inappropriateness of using asphalt roof shingles for vertical wall siding the HPC denied the Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval by a vote of 3 to 2. Four affirmative votes are required for approval. 2. 51 Thomas Hill Road – Matthew and Jody Bourassa To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval to install three 18”x24” white aluminum gable end vents to be installed on either end of main house and one on gable end of ell section, one roof vent installed on back side of ell roof near main house. Action Taken: The application was amended at the meeting the revised proposal as presented is to install approximately 105 3” aluminum midget louvers into the existing soffit and to install four black Lomanco 770-D off ridge exhaust vents into the existing roof. After discussions about the size of the Lomanco vents the Certificate of Appropriateness approval was granted by a vote of 5 to 0 with the condition that the applicant commence the project within six months and complete within two years and that the applicant must notify the Code Enforcement Office within thirty days of completion of the project. 3. 116 Main Street – Haymarket Main St. LLC To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to install 64 feet of ornamental fence on a vacant lot. The fence will be three feet high. Action Taken: Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval granted by a vote of 5 to 0 with the condition that the applicant commence the project within six months and complete within two years and that the applicant must notify the Code Enforcement Office within thirty days of completion of the project. 4. 57 Penobscot Street – Miki Macdonald/Myer Taksel To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval for alteration of roof, including the use of copper standing seam to replace worn asphalt and slate. The addition of copper gutters where there are currently no gutters. The possible replacement of an existing metal-lined wooden gutter with a copper gutter. The replacement of metal downspouts with copper ones and the addition of new downspouts. Action Taken: The HPC spent much time discussing the issue of the removal of slate off of the roof. The applicant reminded the HPC that the existing roof is a hodge-podge of asphalt, rubber, metal, and slate roofing material. The applicant continues to struggle with multiple leaks in the roof that are causing damage to the structure. There was discussion of keeping slate on the “cheeks” of the dormer(s). The applicant indicated that he would not propose to keep the slate at these locations. The HPC voted 3 in favor and 2 opposed. The initial request was denied as four affirmative votes are required for approval. Staff then reminded the HPC of its role in identifying and protecting character defining elements of the house and it was determined that the remaining slate was not character defining. The HPC then voted on the same proposal, but adding the slate to the “cheeks” of the dormer(s), the applicant agreed to the slate on the dormer’s “cheeks”. The Certificate of Appropriateness was granted by vote of 5 to 0 with the condition that the applicant commence the project within six months and complete within two years and that the applicant must notify the Code Enforcement Office within thirty days of completion of the project. 5. 34 Main Street – HAT Properties To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to install an awning and proposes a wall and projecting sign for Bella Hair Studio. Action Taken: Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval granted by a vote of 5 to 0 with the condition that the applicant commence the project within six months and complete within two years and that the applicant must notify the Code Enforcement Office within thirty days of completion of the project. 6. 84-96 Hammond Street – Hammond Street Courtyard LLC s To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness approval to replace light fixtures. Action Taken: The HPC determined that the proposal was maintenance and did not require Certificate of Appropriateness approval. 7. 30-32 Central Street – Central Street Farmhouse To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to install a wall and projecting sign. Action Taken: Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval granted by a vote of 5 to 0. 8. 24 and 30 Central Street – City of Bangor Community Development To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to stabilize wall and corners; apply skim coat; apply elastomeric coat; replace roof flashing; and water-proof coat below grade. Action Taken: Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval granted by a vote of 5 to with the condition that the project commence within six months, be completed within two years and notify the Code Enforcement Office upon completion. 9. 30-32 Central Street – Central Street Farmhouse To consider a request for Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval to add windows and balcony to side facing wall at third floor level. Action Taken: Questions were raised about the appropriateness of the of the balcony and door proposals. In the end the HPC requested that the applicant come back at a later date with a refined proposal on the balcony and door. Certificate of Appropriateness and Design Review approval granted by a vote of 5 to 0 with the condition that the applicant bring back at a later date a refined proposal for the balcony and door. In addition the project was approved with the condition that the project commence with six months, be completed with two years and the Code Enforcement standard condition was thrd The next scheduled meeting is Thursday, September 9 , 2010 at 7:00 p.m in the 3 floor Council Chambers.