Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-03-10 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2022 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, OR VIA ZOOM MEETING MINUTES Commission Members Present: Liam Riordan, Chair Edmond Chernesky, Zoom Nathaniel King Anne Marie Quin Karen Rand, Assoc. Member, Zoom Matthew Weitkamp, Assoc. Member, Zoom City Staff Present: Melissa Bickford, Development Assistant Jeff LaBree, Housing Rehab. Coordinator Chair Riordan called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. Old Business: 1. Certificate of Appropriateness – 41 Thomas Hill Road – Thomas Hill Standpipe – Map-Lot 021-084 – Thomas Hill Historical District – Applicant: Smart Link Group, Joseph Rollins o/b/o T-Mobile LLC; Owner: Bangor Water District - Approval for installation of a 25KW standby generator to support wireless equipment. This will allow wireless facility to continue to operate in event of power-loss. Installation includes a 4x10 cement pad upon which generator to be placed at property located at 41 Thomas Hill Road, Map-Lot 021-084, in the Thomas Hill Historical District. (Item moved to April 14, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting) New Business: 2. Certificate of Appropriateness – 17 Pond Street – Map-Lot 033-005 – Whitney Park Historical District – Applicants: Richard Bauer & Danielle Buchma – Approval for removal/replacement of existing shingles on the front of the home, and the replacement of approximately 20 windows at property located at 17 Pond Street, Map-Lot 033-005, in the Whitney Park Historical District. Applicants presented the following in part and in substance: Property acquired in November 2021, addressing several years of deferred maintenance of property, inside and outside Today, discussing windows and roof o Intricate windows, picket-fenced patterns will not be touched – most are old, drafty, in disrepair, cracked, dilapidated storm windows – wants more energy efficient windows 20 new windows for the property, which is an upgrade Roof was previously covered entirely in slate o Many years ago, a leak must’ve caused prior owner to make repairs – installed metal roofing product (interlock), options reviewed, and they can obtain a product which is both practical and cosmetic that would improve the house Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 o Shingles must be at least 30 years old and need to be replaced o Smith Builders will be performing the work, provided examples to Commission as requested by the Consultant Chair Riordan reviewed the Consultant Recommendations: 1) Color of the “front” to where new roofing will be located – applicants wish to have the color match as best as possible a. Synthetic slate is a metal amalgam, shiner slate look, which is impossible to match due to materials being different – wish to do something closely complimentary b. Pewter gray has been selected at the recommendation of Smith Builders, reviewed other slate alternatives and nothing closely matched The Commissioners discussed the following in part and in substance: Previous roof was not historical, colors closely match, also discussed that the pewter gray was the best 2) Metal apron along the eves – common feature of this period – per applicants, this will be retained Jeff LaBree noted that the metal roofing on the left side of the house, the metal apron was eliminated and appears to have been eliminated along the left of the bay area as well. Applicant indicated that it had been eliminated on the rear as well. Gutters had been boxed in, no metal drip pan. 3) The wood trim will remain – proposed mutton width will be the narrowest version that Anderson produces 4) The aluminum storm windows are part of the reason for the new windows, looking to get rid of them 5) New exterior wrap, L-Channel – showing that the L-Channel is a component of the fibrex frame that is securing the actual window to the frame, and is part of the fibrex window from an optical perspective Jeff LaBree noted that it’s more of a fastener, and provides a bit more leeway from side to side. When the window backs against the frame, it helps fill some of the gap. Will be the same color as the sash, which will be black Chair Riordan opened public comment, no public in attendance in person or via zoom. Closed public comment. Chair Riordan opened up questions and/or comments from the Commission and the following was offered in part and in substance: Commission wanted to be sure that the muttons were similar, and that the thinnest version possible would be used, discussed the cornices across the top of windows – applicant indicated that the cornices would be retained o Applicants indicate that the mutton measurements are ¾” wide – unsure how that compares to the existing grill width. Muttons are only on a few of the windows currently, on 3 of the dormers in the rear of the house. Currently 2/2 design. Anderson has 2 widths, and this is the narrowest width. Similar, almost identical product has been used in other historical properties in the neighborhood. Commissioner King moves approval for Certificate of Appropriateness at 17 Pond Street, Map-Lot 033- 005 in the Whitney Park Historical District, seconded by Commissioner Quin – Roll Call Vote – Quin, yes; King, yes; Rand, yes; Chernesky, yes; Riordan, yes. Approved unanimously. Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 3. Certificate of Appropriateness – 41 Thomas Hill Road – Thomas Hill Standpipe – Map-Lot 021-084 – Thomas Hill Historical District – Applicant: Transcend Wireless, Russell Palmer o/b/o T-Mobile LLC; Owner: Bangor Water District -Approval for removal/replacement of (6) antennas, removal of coax cables, removal of amps, relocation of antennas from flagpole to ballast, replacement of (2) equipment cabinets and addition of (3) radios at property located at 41 Thomas Hill Road, Map-Lot 021-084, in the Thomas Hill Historical District. Agent Russ Palmer provided the following in part and in substance: rd Transcend Wireless, 3 party vendor that works with T-Mobile for modifications for many wireless sites around New England Realizes that Thomas Hill Standpipe is a National, Historic Landmark, and understands that this revision is not promoting the aesthetics – wants to present it and all that is proposed, obtain the feedback and make any necessary changes that will work for all Existing equipment plan shown with current racks and cabinets – plan is to remove two and add two new ones. The biggest thing is that there will be three sleds – current antennas are on the flag pole now. Proposing to take antennas off the flag pole, and put them on non-penetrating sleds, which will be balanced by concrete blocks Reviewed drawings which show existing antenna locations o Proposed antennas are bigger, will be on the top of the structure, not the flag pole – they’re larger, and will be more visible as they’re on the sleds o Quantity of antennas will not change – proposing to reinforce roof to handle the weight of the sleds – detailed included in materials provided to include the framing plan and structural analysis, providing even more detail o The whole look will change, which will make a significant difference o Details on antennas, weight, sizing, and bracket usage shown with the photo-simulations Sims shown with proposed sleds, would also be concrete blocks to hold the sleds Three sleds with two antennas on each, spread out on the three sleds Structural analysis completed to show how they wish to frame Chair Riordan reviewed the Consultant Comments: 1) 3 sleds are proposed, only one shown 2) Approx. weight 390 lbs. with addition of concrete blocks; structural changes to the roof, adding additional framing under each sled 3) Review Standard §148-9-B.2.states, “Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use which will require minimum alteration to the structure and it’s environment.” a. Agent indicated that the structural supports are out of view, not changing the overall look, T-Mobile needs to maintain certain standards and in order to do that, an upgrade to equipment is needed. Current antennas are not made for this type of traffic, wind speeds tested by structural engineers, and signed off on the modifications proposed i. Commission inquired who covers the cost of the structural supports, Agent advised that T-Mobile general contractor will do all of the work ii. Commission inquired about modification of the structure of the roof, and if it would do anything to the historical integrity of the structure, potentially impacting the national register listing, and how much impact that will have on the Standpipe. 1. Jeff LaBree indicated that usually this applies to the exterior only, visible from the street, but will follow up on this to be sure 2. Agent indicated that the reinforcement to the roof rafters would happen on the inside of the structure Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 3. Commissioner King indicated that there was a set of guidelines from the Secretary of Interior for rehabilitation standards that have to be met, which might be outside the scope of the local Historic Preservation Commission, curious on impact to the integrity of the structure that it might have, which might be outside of their purview 4. Chair Riordan said that there is critical language in the review standard, and will require minimum alteration to structure and environment, and considered it a red flag considering the physical modifications to the most iconic structure in the City of Bangor, and was amazed that a previous commission allowed antennas to be placed there. Chair Riordan concerned about structural changes to the building, especially the visual impact which is also quite striking 4) Proposed change in antennas from existing to new ones, as the new ones are larger, thicker and more visible. Review Standard §148-9. B.2.h states in part; “Mechanical equipment such as heat pumps, solar panels, communication devices, HVAC units, or similar shall be located in such a way as to minimize its visual impact.” a. This installation would have significant impact when viewing this historical structure from many vantage points b. Commission discussed that the sleds stood up higher, and that the antennas looked like giant boxes i. Agent indicated that in order for the level of service they need to provide, equipment needs to be located where it’s proposed. Lease with T-Mobile indicates that tenant is allowed to alter, for the term of the agreement, and that a happy medium is needed, as they did lease the space and are paying for it. Agent understands the visual impact, and will return the feedback to T-Mobile. ii. Jeff LaBree inquired if FCC guidelines would allow them to place equipment inside the building 1. Agent believes so, but unsure on the impact on the signal from a “RF” standpoint, indicated that they are located in some church steeples, so it’s a possibility, but unsure of the impact on performance or coverage issues. 2. Commission inquired about moving the equipment inside the colonnade at the top or inside, as there would be considerable public dislike on the proposed modifications. Agent will withdraw application, and return at a later date with an updated design. Chair Riordan encouraged agent to make clear to T-Mobile that they need to make as minimal structural changes to the historic building, and that the visual impact not exceed what is currently on site. Ideally, if this can be done in a way with no structural changes to the historical building. If it has to be done, it will need to be strategic and, in the least, invasive way possible. Agent feels that this is the best proposal that T-Mobile could come up with, and that it will be a long road, but will return the feedback to T-Mobile. Agent indicated that as the technology grows, so do the antennas, and for the different frequencies and 5G, the antennas they’re coming out with now are much larger. Chair Riordan requested to have a representative from the City legal department available at the next Historic Preservation Meeting for the lease comments. 4. Certificate of Appropriateness – Design Review – 36 Central Street – Map-Lot 041-068-A – Great Fire Historical District & Façade District – Applicant/Owner: Delia, LLC c/o Annette Dodd – Approval for removal/replacement of windows on the second floor at property located at 36 Central Street, Map-Lot 041-068-A, in the Great Fire Historical District and Façade District. Applicant presented the following in part and in substance: Replaced old second floor windows; single pained, woodwork starting to rot Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 Concerned about safety at this point, want to be sure that the windows stay in place, wood is really bad Plan is to keep tile work the same, just changing the wooden part of the windows Marvin Clad windows, exterior wood to be white They will come as close to the ones that are currently there, does not wish to change anything about the building Chair Riordan reviewed the Consultant Comments: 1) Finish color not specified, applicant indicated that they will be white, which is consistent with the existing façade 2) Tall DH window in proposal, accidentally included a. Applicant indicates that the arch window or tall window doesn’t fit, and contractor thinks that it might have been a short cut on Hammond Lumber’s end, contractor will look into this. Hammond Lumber is aware that they are curved, and has discussed this with the contractor. Contractor contacted Hammond Lumber today, and they’re aware the windows are curved b. Applicant indicated that there is a high arch window above the door, which is a pricey window, and two of the large configuration windows – can only assume Hammond Lumber had a problem with the program, as when they came to measure the windows, they had it drawn correctly. Applicant indicated that they’re replacing two of the windows, and did tell contractor to be sure that the window was curved, and was reassured over the phone that it would be curved, as a square window would not fit into that space 3) 4” horizontal bar between middle stack of windows; applicant indicated that there is a space in the center two, decent woodwork trim between the two windows, but isn’t sure of the exact measurement, believes it to be an inch or two larger. Applicant advised that this was the closest they could get to that size. Wishes to replace the third-floor windows eventually, and they’ll match the entire building 4) Are the windows to be recessed as they are currently? Applicant indicated that yes, everything was to remain the same, only woodwork to be taken out and replaced exactly. Chair Riordan opened public comment. No comment from in person or zoom. Chair Riordan closed public comment. Chair Riordan requested questions and discussion from the Commission: Commission thought that the new windows were clearly needed, and the applicant had come as close to possible to having the same product, and that it looked good. Commission wanted to be sure that the exterior trim around windows as well as the ceramic trim was to stay intact, and applicant advised that it would be staying the same. Commissioner Quin moves approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for 36 Central Street, Map-Lot 041- 068-A in the Great Fire Historical District & Façade District, seconded by Commissioner Chernesky. Roll Call Vote: Quin, yes; King, yes; Chernesky, yes; Rand, yes; Riordan, yes. Approved unanimously. Commissioner Quin moves approval of Design Review for 36 Central Street, Map-Lot 041-068-A in the Great Fire Historical District & Façade District, seconded by Commissioner King. Roll Call Vote: Quin, yes; King, yes; Chernesky, yes; Rand, yes; Riordan, yes. Approved unanimously. 5. Discussion Regarding Development of Housing Located at 324 Union Jeff LaBree advised that 324 Union Street had burned several years prior and that the City took possession of it in 2015. This parcel is the last property within the Whitney Park Historical District that is a buildable lot. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued with no responses. Some time later, another Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes – March 10, 2022 RFP was issued, considering that the City was in need of more housing. Being in a Historical District, certain standards must be adhered to. In the most recent RFP, two submissions were received. Both designs were presented to the Historic Preservation Commission, and advised that additional information had been requested from both respondents as to how the proposed houses would be situated on the property. At this time, neither respondent have returned additional information. Both designs were presented to the Historic Preservation Commission for review, and consideration as to which design would best fit the area. An old garage was allowed to be removed from the property a couple of years back, lot is configured in a “L” Shape. A private developer would build and sell the home as a single-family residence within the Historical District. The City would enter into a Development Agreement with the developer. Exhibit A; is the white property, which would face towards Union Street. The remnants of the old driveway situated at the South Side of lot would be kept. Entrance to property would be in the rear, facing Hayward Street. Property would need to maintain setbacks. Exhibit B; is more of a conceptual design, to be inverted and the garage would be located closer. House would face Pond Street more than Union Street. The Commission provided the following in part and in substance: Exhibit B doesn’t “look like” the historical district Possibility of bringing in an old historic house onto the lot? o That is possible, but locating such a house would be a task Neither of the houses look like they belong in this historical district, nothing historical appearing about either Difficult to evaluate without seeing proposed materials and current facades of adjoining structures Renderings of where the house will be located on the lot would be helpful, based on how houses on Union Street are situated o Jeff LaBree advised that those specifications had been requested, however we had not received any additional information from the potential developers Railroad style houses due to the narrowness of the lots, mainly in that area, would like to see that sort of style No virtues of either presented option are historic Building that goes there cannot be contemporary, but needs character, this is a very historic area 6. February 10, 2022 Meeting Minutes – Commissioner Quin moves approval of the meeting minutes of February 10, 2022 with no revisions or corrections, seconded by Commissioner Chernesky. 7. Adjournment at 8:14. P.M. Respectfully submitted, Melissa L. Bickford Development Assistant Planning Division