|
ENFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
JULY 23, 2008
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Historic District Commission was held on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Tatoian called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
PRESENT: Richard Tatoian, Chairman
Russell Meyer
Roman Polaski
Nancy Smyth
Marie Troiano
Lillian Troiano, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Town Planner
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Matters regarding pending litigation, specific employees, acquisition of real estate, and/or matters exempt from disclosure requirements, as needed. The specific reason should be stated for each session. HDC#309, Order to Restore, 1443 Enfield Street.
Ms. Smyth made a motion, seconded by Ms. Lillian Troiano, to go into Executive Session to discuss HDC#309, Order to Restore, 1443 Enfield Street. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote and the Commission went into Executive Session at 7:10 p.m.
Ms. Smyth made a motion, seconded by Ms. Lillian Troiano, to come out of Executive Session. Following a unanimous vote, Executive Session ended at 8:20 p.m.
Ms. Marie Troiano requested that the Commission receive copies of pictures of the Ingraham house. Mr. Alsbaugh stated Chairman Tatoian has the original photos from the beginning of the district. There are also photographs taken eight years ago and photographs taken over the last four years.
HDC#340 Request for attached American Legion Dedication sign for EMS at the Old Fire House, 1296 Enfield Street. EHDO Section 8
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission has pictures in front of them. They also have Mr. Alsbaugh’s email to Dave Tuttle who is in charge of Building and Grounds which he never responded to. In the original communication, they said what the sign materials were. They constructed the frame out of wood and used a composite material for the balance.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated he took pictures of the sign in place for the Commission to view. The bottom picture shows the condition that the Commission was worried about and that it needed painting. Dave Tuttle noted they were under pressure to put the sign up rather quickly. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission has to make a decision this evening regarding this application.
Mr. Meyer expressed his displeasure with the existing sign. He doesn’t think the Commission has any authority to have them take it down and paint the gables. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission has the authority to comment on the sign. The Commission has to determine whether they find the sign appropriate.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the photos that he had done show that the gable was freshly painted. That was six or seven years ago. However, it presently is in poor condition and needs to be painted. The Commission can recommend that the gable be painted.
Mr. Meyer stated he recommends that the sign be removed and the gable end painted and the sign reinstalled.
Chairman Tatoian asked if that recommendation could be a condition of approval. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it could not but it could be a recommendation.
Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Lillian Troiano, that the American Legion Dedication sign presently on the Old Fire House, 1296 Enfield Street, be approved with the recommendation that the sign be removed, the gable end painted and the sign reinstalled. The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote.
Discussion Items
· Suffield Historic District Handbook; Enfield Local District Guidelines
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Suffield Handbook makes some cut and dry comments on certain things. They say neither vinyl nor aluminum siding will be approved on structures built before 1900. Mr. Alsbaugh stated this Commission has not set that policy. What Mr. Meyer might have been impressed by in the Suffield regulations was they are making it pretty clear what you can and cannot do up front. They’ve made the same kind of delineations for what you don’t need a certificate and at the same time pretty much expressed what you do need one for. Mr. Alsbaugh stated they have used extensively the terminology “recommended” or “not recommended” when commenting about procedures or materials. If you look at the whole process closely, in the instances where an applicant has to come for a certificate of appropriateness, even though the handbook says ‘recommended’ or ‘not recommended’, it doesn’t mean that the commission would not actually go through a process of approving or disapproving a proposal. The ‘recommendation’ term is used to give property owners guidance of what they should be looking at. Where the commission felt it was necessary or appropriate to exclude things, they did so.
Mr. Polaski felt the Suffield handbook is well assembled.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the title addresses what Ms. Dean was concerned about at the last meeting. She said she had heard people respond to the term ‘guidelines’ in a negative manner because they felt people (the commission) would be telling them (the owners) what they cannot do. Mr. Alsbaugh felt the Commission might consider calling the regulations a handbook and not guidelines. Chairman Tatoian thought that the handbook was a good format for the Commission to follow and modify.
Chairman Tatoian stated he thought the Suffield handbook was the most readable and clear as far as the format and this is what he thought would be appropriate for this Commission to follow with modifications.
Mr. Meyer stated there were the Commission’s own guidelines that were given to the Commission in February. In addition to that, last October the Commission was given a copy of a revised application form. He thought both should be reviewed at the next meeting because there are many changes that he would recommend.
Mr. Meyer asked what does it take to get these guidelines approved. He noted the cars for sale in the District and how the guidelines would address this. He would like to see the guidelines implemented since they began in 1996.
Mr. Meyer asked if the Commission could review this and come in at the next meeting and discuss it and make a decision.
Mr. Alsbaugh asked how the Commission feels about using this format and putting things in like no cars for sale like Suffield’s regulations have on page 16. Mr. Alsbaugh reminded the commission there would be resistance from some property owners who will resent that kind of authority being taken.
Mr. Meyer stated he likes the way Suffield has it printed. It is very clear and very concise. Mr. Polaski agreed.
Chairman Tatoian asked that this be an agenda item for the next meeting. He also asked that the staff report be postponed to the next meeting.
· 1380 Enfield Street, review of completed garage project approved under HDC#328, 5/23/07
Mr. Alsbaugh went to the Clark House and saw the person working for the contractor doing the spray painting. It is high gloss latex water based paint. It is very shiny. Mr. Alsbaugh asked him what he was going to do about all the overspray on the roof. He said they were going to wash it all off. Ms. Troiano stated originally the house was stained. Further discussion followed.
MINUTES
Mr. Polaski made a motion, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to approve the Minutes of June 25, 2008. The Minutes were approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairman Tatoian stated he has one observation regarding the Clark House at 1380 Enfield Street. The door doesn’t look like it is appropriate at all to a house of this era. The house was restored by Sunderland. The door is not appropriate to a house built in 1702. Some discussion followed regarding the Georgian architecture and the portico.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Smyth made a motion, seconded by Ms. Lillian Troiano, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________
Nancy Smyth, Clerk
Enfield Historic District Commission
jmr |