Historic District Commission Minutes 12/05/2013 ADOPTED

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES

DECEMBER 5, 2013

REGULAR MEETING

I.          ROLL CALL

Commission members present were Acting Chairwoman Diane Mead, Jonathan Laschever, Marc Lubetkin, and Marguerite Carnell Rodney.  The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.  Also in attendance were Howard Beach, Conservation Officer; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.

II.        APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES

Chairman Mead appointed alternates as regular members.

III.       DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE

a.         Application #13-05 of Donna Caldeira, Owner, for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a fence along the property line on the property located at 2 East Weatogue Street (Map G14, Block I09, Lot 014).

Commissioner Lubetkin read Application #13-05 into the record.

Currently, there is no fence on the property line.  This fence is like other fences on the street; specifically, the Applicant has a quote for a fence like the one in front of St. Mary’s.

Commissioner Lubetkin made a motion to approve.  Commissioner Mead seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

b.         Application #13-06 of Robert McCusker, Owner, for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a 10'x14' shed on the property located at 45 East Weatogue Street (Map H14, Block I08, Lot 008).

Commissioner Laschever read Application #13-06 into the record.

The Applicant is currently in Denver, but provided to Town Staff a picture of two sheds in the same style, one of which is without dormer windows; the proposed shed would also have a cupola on it. The Commissioners viewed the location of the shed on the property layout and discussed negative historic aspects of the dormer.

Commissioner Lubetkin made a motion to accept the Certificate of Appropriateness with the barn as described and pictured conditioned upon it not having the dormer.  Commissioner Mead seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

c.         Application #13-07 of Rosanne Poynton, of Tower Generator, Agent for Mark Willis, Owner, for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a standby generator on the property located at 11 East Weatogue Street (Map G14, Block I08, Lot 001).

Chairman Mead read Application #13-07 into the record.

The Applicant proposed shielding a generator off the side of the house where it would be wired into an electrical panel in the basement; existing Boxwood trees have been moved into a line and more would be added to screen the fence.  The fence under consideration blends in and weathers naturally in a horizontal and vertical English Lattice.  The Commissioners indicated the need to see the fence to determine whether it is historically appropriate.  The Applicant showed a brochure and schematic of the fence with a wood border around it and posts in two six-foot sections.

The technical issues of putting the generator behind the barn were discussed.  The Applicant wanted as small a generator as possible, and the generator company engineer advised it can only be wired into the main electrical panel.  The house is heated from a 1000-gallon existing propane tank located behind the field behind the barn and the tank is not connected to the barn.  Regarding visibility from the road, the proposed location for the generator is not desirable.  There is a private stone patio behind the house that is actively used by the residents, preventing locating the generator in that area.  It was confirmed that the pump house on the property no longer exists.  The generator would be placed to the side of the existing air conditioning unit on the layout; the new fence would start at the house and also screen the air conditioner.  A split-rail fence is located on the side of the house and will come within a foot of the two new six-foot sections, with the four-foot tall Boxwoods in front of the fence.

There is an abutting neighbor and the Commissioners discussed whether the fence should be solid to block noise.  The Applicant selected a propane generator because it is very quiet and efficient, and the proposed location is the most cost-effective.  The Commissioners complimented the Applicant on the overall attractiveness of their home, but noted they cannot consider landscaping as part of the historic approval process.  The Commissioners discussed the long-view to be considered if the fence were ever removed, making the generator more visible, versus not being onerous.  The Applicant felt the generator engineer considered various options and this location was technically the most viable, allowing use of the gas through the main regulator.  The Applicant felt the aesthetics would be fine and any future owner would keep the property up.  The Applicant felt that trying to look 30 years out is not reasonable.

The Commissioners noted that they need to approve the location of equipment placed on an historic property, excluding solar panels under federal law.  Because this 1717 home is a significant historic landmark, the Commissioners were concerned that it be appropriate and the fence and generator be viewed as a package.  The Applicant would use a simple capped cedar post that fits the home's architecture.  The cedar fence would be Falmouth posts with lattice in between with framing top and bottom, which is flat and not scalloped, with a teepee-style cap; a picture of the fence would be provided by the Applicant for the file.

Commissioner Lubetkin made a motion to approve the Application of Mark Willis for a standby generator as described and fence as described; if the generator exists on the property, the fence must be maintained as presented, and it is contingent upon a picture being presented to the file for posterity's sake, so that the Commission can manage that moving forward. 

Commissioner Laschever amended the motion to add:  The description of the fence to be 5x5 cedar post, as per the Falmouth style shown on this Cape Cod brochure with the caps as shown, and that the English Lattice as described is vertical horizontal, not diagonal.

Commissioner Mead seconded the motion as amended, and it was passed unanimously.

The Applicant indicated the generator would be done first and they would provide the fence photo for the file in the next couple of months.  They have owned the property since 1989.  The Commissioners further discussed relevant issues, how to properly deal with them in future compliance with regulations, and the importance of Applicants providing pictures of what is proposed and the precedents set.  Rules for Public Hearings prevent Commissioners from meeting ahead of time to discuss the Application; if a quorum of Commissioners is present at a gathering, it could be construed as a meeting.  Town Staff will require future Applicants to provide the Commission with pictures of what is proposed or the Application will be continued; Town Staff will check to see if there are circumstances where, after a certain time, the Application is automatically approved.  Under the State-sponsored program coordinated by Mary Dunn, it was learned that this Commission is a COG responsible for construction and renovation of buildings in the Historic District, and if requested, can offer opinions on other historic buildings in Town

Commissioner Mead made a motion to take up DISCUSSION ITEMS next on the Agenda.

Commissioner Lubetkin seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

IV.       DISCUSSION ITEMS

            a.         Informal discussion by Nancy Onken regarding the potential design of a house she may build in the Historic District

This Application would be for new construction in the Historic District at 120 East Weatogue Street.  A preliminary sketch was provided to the Commissioners for concept discussion and included a house, tennis court, and barn.  The Commissioners discussed previous Applications in the District and the goal of keeping homes visually compatible.  Regarding size, the proposed barn is currently 60'x60', the tennis court is 60'x120', and the house another 60' across; on page 22 in the Historic District Handbook under the Outbuildings section it is stated: "New construction, such as garages and tool sheds and such, should be compatible with the major building (which would be the house) in material, scale, design and location; if possible, try to locate the structures near the rear or screen from public site."  The Commissioners expressed concern about the scale of attaching the garage to the barn; the frontage of the garage and total length of the structures is about 140 feet.  The Applicant indicated the site is slightly less than an acre and the lot is an odd shape.  The Commissioners suggested considering a less massive scale for the barn in order to fit the community of barns and not overwhelm the house.  They confirmed the need to see the plot plan with the Application, as well as pictures of all sides of the buildings.  The square barn at 60'x60' would allow for playing basketball and because of lot shape cannot be moved further back; also, septic is in back.

It was noted that the State requires a special application for double driveway entries, as they like as few driveway cuts as possible.  A suggestion was made to reduce the size of the garage with a side entry or plane difference and potentially use a covered or enclosed walkway between the garage and house so the two remain distinct.  The smaller eyebrow Greek revival windows were commented on as consistent with 1940's-'50's style; it is not clear if porches could be used, but substantial columns would be desirable.  There is a 25-foot setback in the rear for the tennis court.  The barn proportion is not in keeping with the historic size of a barn from that era and causes the roof pitch to be less steep; there may be a Zoning issue for roof pitch as height is limited to 35 feet.  The Commissioners emphasized decreasing mass to improve design; suggestions included moving the garage back with side entry or providing more screening with a covered walkway.  While the Applicant thought the barn doors or porch would look better to people driving by, the Commissioners commented the doors would compete with the house and it is a question of visual priorities.

The Commissioners commented that Hardy Plank for the barn is a cement material and not appropriate; to be historically correct, tongue and groove pine boards are traditional.  The Commissioners suggested looking into:  material packages from old barns sold on the internet; the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation has a big barn program, Helen Higgins is Executive Director and Jane Montanello, is Program Director; and within the next year or two Griffin Land will take down 5-6 tobacco barns, which are dismantled and reconstructed with at least half the barn likely salvageable.

III.       DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE (resumed)

            d.         Composition of the Commission and filling vacant positions

The Commissioners discussed the importance of having additional qualified members from the Republican side to hear applications; the Acting Chair will follow up.    Town Staff provided the Commissioners with a copy of the amended Charter requirements, which state up to four members can be from the same party, which could allow the appointment of another Democrat; two full members and one alternate have to be owners or residents of the Historic District, and currently, that requirement is met.  It was noted the Chairman needs to be a full member, but it is not a requirement that they live in the District.  Discussion was continued to the next meeting.

            e.         Historic District Commission's 2014 Meeting Dates

Commissioner Lubetkin made a motion to approve the calendar, with the change to move the July 3, 2014 meeting to July 10, 2014.  Commissioner Mead seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

V.        OTHER MATTERS AS MAY PROPERLY COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION

VI.       APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 3, 2013

Commissioner Laschever made a motion to approve the October 3, 2013 Minutes as written.  Commissioner Mead seconded the motion, and it was passed with Commissioner Lubetkin abstaining.

Regarding III.a. in the October 3, 2013 Minutes being incorrect, the correct composition of the Commission is reflected in III.d. above and the revised Charter memo dated 6/7/2010 is attached.

The Commissioners requested Town Staff provide an update at the next meeting on the status of the old grant and the application for the next grant.  Also, a supplemental grant for $5K was to pay for GIS mapping of properties and submitting materials; the Town Engineer indicated they had not received it for either inventory.  The status of a second grant for the recently-completed study is also unknown.  The Commissioners will discuss how to move these items forward at the next meeting.  Town Staff advised the Assessor has not come online with records and access is currently not possible for GIS.  The subject of GIS mapping and Google is continued for discussion at the next meeting, as these databases have been set up and paid for.

VII.     ADJOURNMENT

Commissioner Laschever made a motion to welcome Marguerite Carnell Rodney to the Commission.  Commissioner Mead seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously. 

Commissioner Mead made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m.  Commissioner Laschever seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

_____________________________