|
ENFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 28, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Historic District Commission was held on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Vice Chairman Russell Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
PRESENT: Russell Meyer, Vice Chairman
Roman Polaski
Eileen Russell
Nancy Smyth
Raymond Gwozdz, Alternate
Sonja Dean, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Planner
PUBLIC HEARINGS
HDC #295: Frank & Beatrice Troiano: repair and replacement of three porch roof wood railing systems with synthetic materials at 1221 Enfield Street. EHDO Section 8
Frank and Beatrice Troiano appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Frank Troiano stated they are looking to replace the three porch roof wood railing systems with synthetic materials. He also is putting a new roof on the house and repairing the chimney.
Mr. Troiano stated the porches are known as cat walks because they are strictly ornamental. Instead of repairing them, he would like to replace them with this new synthetic material. They would stay cleaner, last longer and look better. The wood has to be painted every two to three years. The railing would be duplicated exactly as it looks today.
Vice Chairman Meyer read from a memo dated April 19, 2004 stating that the roof replacement and the chimney repair are normal repair/maintenance items. Mr. Troiano confirmed the roof would be replaced with the same color and architectural design.
Vice Chairman Meyer read further from the memo about the synthetic material proposed for the railings. Vice Chairman Meyer asked if, when these replaced railings were viewed from the street, they would look the same as the originals. Mr. Troiano stated they will look better because they will be new but architecturally they would look the same.
Mr. Gwozdz asked how high these railings are from the ground. Mr. Troiano estimated approximately fourteen feet from the ground and 150’ from the street. They do not enclose an actual porch at any of the three locations as there are no access doors to those roofs.
In response to a question from Ms. Smyth, Mr. Troiano stated the three cat walks are located on either side of the home and one in the rear. The one stated as on the rear of the house is actually on the south side and it is visible from the street.
Vice Chairman Meyer asked if they intend to make any changes to the base support of the railings. Mr. Troiano stated it is not his intention to make any changes to these.
Vice Chairman Meyer opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Vice Chairman Meyer closed this public hearing.
Ms. Russell made a motion, seconded by Mr. Polaski, to approve the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace three porch (2 sunrooms & 1 rear porch) roof railing systems with synthetic products (vinyl) of the same dimensions, profiles, and configuration, all at 1221 Enfield Street. EHDO Section 8
All construction and site work will conform to the plans, photographs, and elevations submitted, and to all discussions and conditions as recorded in Public Hearing HDC #295.
Mr. Gwozdz stated while he is unsure about vinyl versus wood, based on the distance from the street and because the replacement designs are proposed to be duplications of existing conditions, the architectural integrity will remain the same.
Ms. Dean echoed Mr. Gwozdz’s comments regarding vinyl versus wood especially with this type of an application where it is in an exterior area and is proposed to be replication regarding the look of the porches. In her opinion, it will be a good move from a maintenance standpoint.
Vice Chairman Meyer stated wood is prone to rotting. Plastic has longevity but it gets as dirty as wood but is easier to clean. He would have no difficulty approving this application.
The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote with Alternate Gwozdz voting.
Vice Chairman Meyer reported he received a call from close neighbors to the Deziel’s. They indicated to him that the Commission may not be looking seriously at the Commission’s mission, to preserve the Historic District. They objected to this Commission allowing a change to the doors of the Deziel house. They said both of those doors are historic to the area. They said if that is the way the Commission is operating, it was their opinion that the Commission is being too lenient to the people who own the property rather than being historically minded. Vice Chairman Meyer stated he does not disagree with them but there may be a time when this Commission is faced with a deteriorating condition of a building when that particular portion may be preserved by some extra cost.
Ms. Dean stated she previously rented on the properties. As she recalled, the garage doors there and the bulk of the interior of the garage were probably built around 1940-50. The exterior doors to the houses have been changed since she lived there. She would be a lot more concerned about preserving the original doors of the house rather than the garage doors.
Ms. Dean stated it is important to be consistent with structural changes to a house and minor modifications. She questioned the argument to preserve the garage doors when they are clearly not original to the garage.
Vice Chairman Meyer stated the garage door frontal width is probably three-fourths the width of the house. Therefore, when people pass the street, they see the garage door before they see the house.
Mr. Gwozdz commented that the legal notices for these applications are posted in the newspaper. He invited whoever made these comments to appear before the Commission to express their concerns to the entire Commission so it will be a learning process from both sides. Vice Chairman Meyer stated the callers chose not to come to express their opinion at the public meeting.
MINUTES
Ms. Smyth made a motion, seconded by Mr. Gwozdz, to approve the Minutes of February 25, 2004. The Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote.
STAFF REPORT/CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Alsbaugh stated he has been attempting to work out a way to do the reviews for normal repairs and maintenance allowed in the ordinance. His primary concern was how to keep a permanent record of such activities. He has formatted a new file recording system to address this. When people call with items for normal maintenance or repair, Mr. Alsbaugh contacts Chairman Tatoian or Vice Chairman Meyer for consensus. He goes out and confirms what they will be doing is a repair or maintenance. A file is created in order to keep track of these routine activities. Mr. Alsbaugh suggested an addition to the agenda tonight regarding the ordinance. The Commission may want to discuss formalizing the administrative review so that these things get done properly in the District.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission’s packet includes the review letter for the McGovern (1150 Enfield St.) roofing and a picture. There is also a memo for the Troiano’s (1221 Enfield St.) for the normal repair and maintenance of the roof and the chimneys along with a picture.
Mr. Alsbaugh noted receipt of the announcement for the Hazardville Institute Conservancy trip to Vermont.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated there is some correspondence about insurance problems (potential red lining in the historic districts) a resident in the district has been experiencing. The subject is relevant nation wide, and is something the Commission may wish to review and discuss in more depth in the near future. As staff receives further information, it will be forwarded to the Commission. The Commission can then place it on an agenda for discussion
Vice Chairman Meyer noted receipt of a memo from Helen Higgins, Director of the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, to Roger Alsbaugh dated December 29, 2004 regarding red lining. He asked for additional explanation.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated what initiated his involvement was an inquiry from a resident in the District who was looking for lower priced insurance and who was told by two insurance companies that they were not going to issue insurance in a historic district. The implication was that because structures require approval for anything from a commission within a historic district, if they had damage, the companies have issues with that. Mr. Alsbaugh promised the resident he would look into this. He emailed the Director of the Connecticut Trust and her response was it is not uncommon across the country. Mr. Alsbaugh stated his main concern was whether or not in Connecticut the Insurance Commission would allow a red lining of historic districts where companies would be allowed to refuse coverage. Further discussion followed by Commission members regarding their experiences with homeowners insurance.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated there seems to be a contradictory policy being allowed when the government at all levels is trying to put in place tax incentives to encourage people to improve older homes.
Mr. Meyer stated if people have difficulty paying for their insurance, or getting insurance in the District and then are subject to a catastrophic loss, then the District could lose a historic home.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated he would appreciate receiving a short memo stating this from the Commission and he will pass it along to the Director of the Connecticut Trust and also to the National Trust. He can see this being a major discussion issue at state and national conferences. Mr. Polaski outlined his personal experience and noted with some insurance companies, owners lose control of how an older home is going to be reconstructed should there be a fire or other occurrence.
Ms. Dean noted plumbing, wiring and the condition of the furnace may affect the procuring of insurance for older homes.
Vice Chairman Meyer requested that Commission members share their individual knowledge about homeowners insurance with Mr. Alsbaugh. Mr. Alsbaugh felt if there was a formal request from the Commission specifying two or three main points of concern, this could be sent to both the Connecticut and the National Trust. Vice Chairman Meyer saw a need to get the information and he asked that Mr. Alsbaugh put this item on next month’s agenda.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission received copies of the original nomination packet property list. Vice Chairman Meyer stated this list has an address for the Enfield Congregational Church on page three as 1291 Enfield Street. This is incorrect and it should be 1295 Enfield Street. [Addition to minutes: review of the staff-updated district property list shows the church property correctively listed as 1295.] Also, the monument is not on the Church property but it is on State property. A further review of the property list followed.
Vice Chairman Meyer stated the Enfield Historical Society is listed as 1387 Enfield Street with a date of 1782. He noted this is also incorrect. The property was moved in 1849 and was built in 1775. Vice Chairman Meyer stated there are a lot of errors contained in this listing and he asked where this list originated. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the nomination packet is prepared by a professional. Also, the officially appointed study committee members, as required by statute when a District is being nominated, would have searched for these dates. Mr. Alsbaugh noted the difficulty in getting primary documentation on any historical structure.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated in order to change any of the dates on the listing that he would need a document confirming the date the home was built. He noted the federal government accepts what is submitted to them and assumes there is a level of certainty from the certified historian. The government would not change a date unless there is documentation to prove a date is incorrect.
Ms. Dean proposed that the Commission members themselves identify those dates that are incorrect as known to them and if they have documentation to support this, that it be provided to Mr. Alsbaugh. Ms. Smyth noted Joseph Petronella’s house which is located between the Smyth residence and the Santa Croce residence is not even on this list.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated he will provid the Commission with the full listing of homes as originally approved for the Enfield Historic District. He noted this listing was done 35 years ago and things have changed. Further discussion by the Commission of particular homes followed.
Vice Chairman Meyer stated he would like next month’s agenda to include the following items:
(1) Discussion on the general deterioration of some of the significant houses on Enfield Street.
(2) A meeting of the subcommittee to revise the Enfield Historic District Commission ordinances.
Ms. Dean brought up the property on Frew Terrace and requested that this also be added to the agenda for the next meeting. This property was not included in the Historic District because it faced Frew Terrace and not Enfield Street. However, Ms. Dean noted there are other properties that face a side street that are in the District so there is an inconsistency. Mr. Alsbaugh stated one of the criteria for homes in the District is that they have frontage on Enfield Street; it doesn't matter whether their homes actually face Enfield Street or a side street. Vice Chairman Meyer requested that items such as this should be included in the Commission’s discussion of revisions to the ordinances.
Ms. Dean noted the two homes on Orbit Drive that are included in the District. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the hired consultants that prepare the nomination are not familiar with an individual town and the homes on Orbit Drive must have been visually more obvious to the person working on the Enfield Local Historic District.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission may not have to do anything specific to have a questionable property included in the Enfield Historic District because the property fronts the District and meets the requirements. However, until he hears from the Town Attorney’s Office, he does not know the specific procedure the Commission would have to follow.
Ms. Dean asked if letters are being sent to homeowners who purchase homes in the Enfield Historic District. Mr. Alsbaugh stated such letters are being sent to real estate agents when new homes come up for sale. Regarding new homeowners, he stated he does not always know when such new homeowners move in. He is dependent upon the Town Clerk’s Office who is doing this. Ms. Dean asked if Commission members can provide information to Mr. Alsbaugh if they know particular homes have changed ownership in the District. She noted there are a lot of homes that have recently been put up for sale. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he would welcome this information. He added he has fielded many calls from potential buyers in the District that are asking about the implications of buying a home in the Enfield Historic District.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Polaski made a motion, seconded by Ms. Russell, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________
Nancy Smyth, Clerk
Enfield Historic District Commission |