ENFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING

APRIL 25, 2007

A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Historic District Commission was held on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Richard Tatoian called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: Richard Tatoian, Chairman

Russell Meyer

Nancy Smyth

Marie Troiano

Raymond Gwozdz, Alternate

ALSO PRESENT: Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Town Planner

PUBLIC HEARINGS

HDC#327: Eileen Hargreaves, 1352 Enfield Street, replace two single sash windows with two double sash windows on the southwest corner of the rear el of the main structure. EHDO Section 8

Eileen and Gary Hargreaves appeared before the Commission regarding this application.

Mr. Hargreaves stated they are in the process of doing some interior renovating and in the process they are doing some rearranging inside. They want to move the eating area to the back of the house and would like to have a few more windows in the back to let more light in and have a view of the back yard. He noted the pictures that have been submitted to the Commission with the top picture as it exists today and the lower image as it should look when completed. The proposal is to install double windows.

Chairman Tatoian asked about the renovation of the kitchen. Mr. Hargreaves stated the kitchen is staying where it is but at the back of the house is a laundry room. They plan to go through the kitchen into the laundry room and that will be the eating area. The current eating area is on the Bridge Lane side of the house. They plan to wall that up and make that area the laundry room.

Chairman Tatoian asked if the existing windows on the home are new. Mr. Hargreaves stated the windows are probably as old as the house is. He added the new windows will replace the two windows that are there. The windows being replaced would be standard Andersen wood windows with twelve over twelve grates to match the rest of the house. Ms. Hargreaves presented the specifications of the windows to the Commission.

Ms. Hargreaves stated the design they are suggesting duplicates the front portion of the house where there are currently two windows on the south side and two windows on the west side. The appearance from the back will not change and be very similar to the front section.

Mr. Meyer asked as viewed from the street if the new windows would match the existing windows including the moldings on the outside. Mr. Hargreaves stated that is the goal – to have it look identical to what is there right now.

Mr. Meyer was impressed by the doctored photographs presented. He asked if page number two is a front view of the house. Mr. Hargreaves stated that would be a side view. You would be walking in the yard on the south side of the house, walking half way down the house and then turning to the right and looking at the house. On the other side of the house at that point is Bridge Lane.

Ms. Hargreaves stated from Lillian Troiano’s house, you can see the entire south side of their house. As you get closer to their property, the view of the back el diminishes.

Mr. Meyer asked if the view on page two would be visible from Enfield Street. Mr. Hargreaves stated you might be able to see that corner of the house from Enfield Street. You would not see the back side of the house from Bridge Lane.

Mr. Gwozdz stated because they are mirroring what is on the other side of the house, it will be well balanced. He asked if this was originally a double window. Mr. Hargreaves stated as far as he knows. Ms. Hargreaves noted the back section of the house was an addition and not part of the original building.

Chairman Tatoian requested input from the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman Tatoian closed this public hearing.

Mr. Gwozdz made a motion, seconded by Ms. Smyth, to approve the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace two single sash windows with two double sash windows on the southwest corner of the rear el off the main structure, 1352 Enfield Street, as shown in the product sheet submitted for this application.

Such products to be installed, and the areas and manner in which they will be installed or used, shall be as described and as discussed in the public hearing under HDC#327, and as shown on any site plans, in any product sheets or site photographs, and per any samples as displayed during the above mentioned public hearing.

Mr. Meyer had a concern that what was said about the windows looking identical on the outside as they do now does come full term. If there is a change to the width or design of the molding, this would require another appearance before this Commission. The applicants agreed that it was their intent to reproduce the moldings and trim and accepted this as a condition of approval.

The motion was approved by a 5 – 0 – 0 vote. The reasons for approval are the materials are going to be in kind, it will have minimal impact and balances with the existing configuration and any additional molding required will match the existing.

MINUTES

Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Mr. Gwozdz, to approve the Minutes of February 28, 2007. The Minutes were approved by a 4 – 0- 1 vote. Ms. Smyth abstained.

STAFF REPORT

Mr. Meyer asked if the Commission was doing an update on the Ingraham matter. Mr. Alsbaugh stated that is on hold until the Commission receives an update from the Town Attorney’s Office. The Town Attorney’s Office has received the request to proceed with enforcement. As soon as Mr. Alsbaugh hears from them, he will notify the Commission.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission has received their various publications and the other enclosures are the request to go forward with the enforcement action for Mr. Ingraham, a letter from the architects for the Felician Sisters regarding their informal presentation tonight, and a few documents about the adopt-a-spot program.

Chairman Tatoian reported he attended the budget hearing with the Town Council this past Monday and presented the Commission’s budget to them. He has had no response yet. The increase from last year was $150.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Alsbaugh reported receipt of the email from Mrs. Cross about meeting with the Commission tonight regarding the adopt-a-spot signs. There is also the letter from the Felician Sisters’ architect.

DISCUSSION ITEMS:

Adopt-A-Spot signs – with members of the Enfield Beautification Committee

Colleen Cross, Chairperson of the Beautification Committee and Jack Hartley, a member of the Beautification Committee, appeared before the Commission for a discussion on the adopt-a-spot signs.

Chairman Tatoian stated the Commission has had some discussion of the concept of the adopt-a-spot. Ms. Cross stated the Historic District has two adopt-a-spots, one on Fairview and one on Oliver Road at the farm. Ms. Troiano asked if someone can approach the Committee about an additional spot. Ms. Cross stated no one has. Mr. Meyer asked if there are any potential spots that would be subject to beautification. Ms. Cross stated they haven’t discussed this. The Commission provided a list and she would like some discussion on that. Ms. Cross stated she would love to see more adopt-a-spots in the Historic District. The concern is that many of the areas are located on private property.

Chairman Tatoian asked how these spots are designated. Mr. Hartley stated anyone wishing to adopt a spot would approach the Town Manager’s Office. They will get in touch with him or Colleen Cross. They would go out and meet with the party and give them the rules and an application. The spot is overseen by Jeff McAlmond and Dave Tuttle in the town offices. The agreement is filed and the spot is done. If the applicant is a non-profit organization, the Beautification Committee buys the sign and installs it. If a business wants one, the cost is $100 for the sign and it is up to them to install it. An individual can also come forward and request to adopt a spot.

Chairman Tatoian asked about the responsibility of the people concerning their adopt-a-spot. Mr. Hartley stated they are provided with guidelines.

Ms. Marie Troiano asked if there are any restrictions on what types of plants can be placed in an adopt-a-spot. Mr. Hartley stated it depends on the location because if it is close to an intersection, you cannot obstruct the line of sight. He discussed the adopt-a spot at the intersection of Elm and North Street which is set way back so that the owner can do just about anything. The size of the adopt-a-spots are as big as someone wants to make them. Mr. Hartley discussed the adopt-a-spot going in by Smyth’s Ice Cream and it will be approximately fifty feet in length.

Regarding the number of adopt-a-spots in the town, Ms. Cross stated there are 27 spots with only two in the Historic District.

Discussion followed on the two adopt-a-spots in the Historic District. Ms. Cross stated the one on Fairview is sponsored by a new group that obtained the spot late in the fall. That is the family of John Stewart, a hit and run accident victim who was struck and killed in front of the Parkway Pavilion around Thanksgiving. His friends have adopted this spot as a place where they congregate on his birthday and on the anniversary of his death. Ms. Cross stated the adopt-a-spot on Oliver Road is sponsored by the Allied Rehab Center located near the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Mr. Meyer asked if there is a restriction on what can be put in this adopt-a-spot. Ms. Troiano asked if it has to be plants or can it be statues. Mr. Meyer discussed a South Road private residential property with a large quantity of landscaping rocks in the yard and he asked if that could be done in an adopt-a-spot. Mr. Alsbaugh felt this question is something the Commission should try to come to an agreement on tonight. Ms. Cross felt a decorative rock garden done well would look good. Mr. Meyer asked if there is a time limit for the spots. Ms. Cross stated once a year the Beautification Committee sends a letter. If someone decides not to continue, they would try to find someone else to take the spot. Ms. Cross stated she has personally worked on the Fairview location when it was in a state of disrepair.

Mr. Meyer stated his concern is if it is in the Historic District, it should be maintained by someone or some group in perpetuity. Mr. Meyer asked if the signs are a standard size. Mr. Hartley stated they are. The sign lists the name of the group or individual and the words “adopt-a-spot.”

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the process tonight is to try to coordinate policy between agencies. Ms. Cross and her group are doing an excellent job but they are proceeding on a very limited amount of information and criteria. Mr. Meyer is trying to determine what the criteria are. Mr. Alsbaugh stated in talking about rock gardens and walls, the Commission is getting ahead of itself trying to make that something permanent. You need to go back to the original intent of the program which was vegetative beautification mixed with a litter reduction program. If both agencies come to the agreement that that should be the limitation on the adopt-a-spot sites, it would refocus the process to what was originally intended and make the job of coordinating between the Commission and the Committee easier and simpler.

Ms. Cross stated they previously discussed at their meetings the Fairview adopt-a-spot and trying to get someone to take over that spot. Mr. Meyer stated his question is does the Committee have an outline of what is acceptable or not acceptable. Does the Committee have the authority to reject a proposed adopt-a-spot? Ms. Cross stated the rules are kind of subjective. She discussed specific rock gardens like Japanese gardens. However, she would not want someone to dump a ton of rock on an adopt-a-spot.

Mr. Meyer stated if anyone wants to put something in the Historic District, it has to be in good taste and consistent with the District. Ms. Cross agreed and noted the Fairview spot is presently looking pretty good.

Mr. Hartley stated the Committee doesn’t have many requests for adopt-a-spots within the Historic District. However, if they should in the future get an application for a spot within the District, after approval by the town they will present it to the Commission.

Mr. Meyer asked if the adopt-a-spots in the District need state approval since they are located in the state right of way. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the process is Jeff McAlmond gets an encroachment permit from the DOT as part of the town procedure. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he doesn’t think this occurred for the Fairview location since there is nothing in the record.

Chairman Tatoian brought up the adopt-a-spot sign and the size and depiction of it. The sign presently conflicts with the Commission’s desire to maintain a different look. The District signage is generally two feet square and this is a larger sign. Ms. Cross stated the same sign is used for all adopt-a-spots and the sign was adopted through a national program. Mr. Hartley discussed the history of adopt-a-spot signs which were previously on metal poles in 1999 equivalent to traffic signs. He has since replaced them all with square pressure treated wood for a more aesthetic look.

Ms. Troiano asked if it was possible to change the picture on the sign. Mr. Hartley stated it is a nationally adopted picture. This exact sign is in Maryland and in Maine along with several other places. This sign was adopted as part of the Make America Beautiful project in the eighties. Ms. Troiano asked if the sign could just have the words and not the picture. Mr. Hartley stated the bouquet of flowers and the trash can have been a standard for the sign.

Mr. Meyer felt the signs should be consistent throughout the town. Mr. Hartley stated all the signs are the same except the Home Depot spot which is printed in orange instead of blue.

Mr. Alsbaugh suggested he have a discussion in the future with the Beautification Committee about what is appropriate for the Historic District and the Commission can then look at the suggestions. Mr. Alsbaugh added any sign that goes in the District either has to come to the Commission or there has to be a process up front that the Commission has already approved to allow the Beautification Committee to go ahead with an adopt-a-spot.

Mr. Meyer would like to see the adopt-a-spots more permanent than the one-year time limit at least in the Historic District. Mr. Alsbaugh stated this is something that can be discussed and he can bring back some recommendations for the Commission to consider.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked if the Commission members would like to consider some potential new designs or are members happy with the consistency of the national design. Also, does the Commission want to consider some different configurations and size? Chairman Tatoian stated this is something that can be discussed.

Ms. Troiano asked if a sign is not being maintained, what is the procedure followed. Ms. Cross stated in general the spots are taken care of and it is very rare that they fall into disrepair. Regarding the Fairview spot, when it did fall into disrepair, they were contacted. They made promises but they were not maintaining the spot and they were looking for someone else to maintain the spot. Ms. Cross stated they can take a spot away from someone if it is looking poorly.

Mr. Hartley discussed a spot at the corner of South Road and Hazard Avenue where the adopt-a-spot sponsor, Beebe Landscaping, presented a plan for approval that was going to cost a significant amount to beautify the spot. Nothing was every planted and only the grass is being maintained, therefore the agreement was breached. Ms. Troiano asked if such a spot could be taken away. Ms. Cross stated it is maintained and neat.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked if part of the contract is to remove litter. Mr. Hartley stated it says twice a week the property should be maintained and litter removed.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated perhaps the contract used by the Beautification Committee can be revised to more clearly define what must be done and at what point the contract is breached. In the instance previously cited, the result would be the immediate removal of a commercial sign.

Chairman Tatoian thanked the members of the Beautification Committee for coming before the Commission and he noted further discussion is necessary.

Informal discussion with Glenn Gregg about conversion of day care building (old high school) into apartments at Felician Sisters’ property on east side of Enfield Street

Glenn Gregg from Gregg, Reiss and Gardner Architects in New Haven and Tom Smith from the F. J. Day Hill Company appeared before the Commission for a preliminary discussion about converting the former high school on the Felician grounds into apartments. Mr. Gregg stated drawings have been submitted to the Commission showing what they would like to do.

Mr. Meyer discussed the site plan and where South Road is on the plan as well as the building known as the Mansion.

Mr. Smith stated the apartments would be in one building and the building is connected to the adult day care center. They would plan to close off this connection if the building is developed as apartments. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the building known as the Mansion is in front of this building.

Mr. Gregg pointed out the building on the site plan. He stated this back building was built in 1937.

Chairman Tatoian stated this building they propose to convert was a convent. Mr. Gregg stated it was a high school for many years after being converted in 1957 and in 1989 it was renovated as a day care center which was run by the town until about four years ago. This portion of the building has had no use since that time.

Mr. Gregg stated the high school would be converted into 22 apartments. The building has been abandoned for the last four years and the Sisters’ intention is to protect their building which is still in very good condition on the outside and put it to some good use. It would be a non-profit entity. Mr. Gregg noted the building was designed in 1937 and the architect for the building was Anthony DePace.

Chairman Tatoian asked if any portion of this building is visible from Enfield Street. Mr. Gregg stated you can see the edge of it as you go by. The building itself is a masonry building, well designed and well built. The intention in the renovation is to leave the building exactly the way it is on the exterior. There will be new roofing and they will replace the windows with windows in kind. The only visual change on the outside would be a masonry shaft which is for an elevator. That would be built on an existing foundation / pad. There are some aluminum canopies on the building which will be removed.

Mr. Gregg stated they are required to have two parking spaces per unit or 42 parking spaces. They also have one handicapped space which will be increased to two. They have a direct sidewalk at the area where the elevator is proposed.

Mr. Gregg stated they have given up spaces in the parking lot so they can preserve the existing mature trees. They also plan a row of fruit trees between the building and the parking lot. The parking lot area is presently a grassy field.

Mr. Smith stated the parcel is 33 acres. Chairman Tatoian stated it was probably larger before I-91 took some property. Mr. Smith stated St. Joseph’s may have been part of this complex at one time.

Mr. Meyer asked where the historic line runs relative to the building and the proposed parking lot. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the line goes around the entire building. Mr. Gregg confirmed this and stated they have a copy of the current official Local Historic District map. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the map matches the description in the written description of the District.

Ms. Smyth asked if the nuns are going to occupy these apartments. Mr. Gregg stated they will not. They would be occupied by public renters. This is not a shelter or elderly housing but market rental apartments. The nun’s interest as a non-profit is not in making money but in protecting their property. They are hoping to break even.

Regarding the timetable, Mr. Gregg stated they are in a feasibility study at this time. They have met with Planning and Zoning who was supportive. As soon as they finish the feasibility study, they would come back for a site plan approval. Since the renovations are interior, they are not really tied by weather. They would like to get the roof done prior to next winter. They don’t have an overall timetable but Mr. Gregg estimated a completion by next spring.

Chairman Tatoian stated the exterior changes to the building would be a new roof, the elevator shaft and removal of the existing canopies. Mr. Gregg stated they plan to take down the aluminum canopies. And while there are many entrances that will be left, the main entrances will be in just a couple of places.

Mr. Gwozdz asked if the elevator shaft will be replacing some existing windows. Mr. Gregg stated it does cover a couple of windows on the inside but there’s not an apartment or anything behind that. It covers three windows, one each on the three upper floors. The elevator is on the entry side near the parking lot side on the inside corner.

Mr. Meyer asked if the elevator shaft will be exterior to the building. Mr. Gregg confirmed it will be exterior and said there’s actually a foundation. It will be built right up on that on the west side of the building. The elevator will be on the Enfield Street side of the building but behind the mansion. For construction of the elevator shaft, they would match the brick and mortar that is there.

Mr. Meyer discussed the plans and asked if there are any other exterior changes to the building. There will be no porches or columns or anything like that other than exterior lighting. Mr. Gregg confirmed that to be the case. At the handicapped ramp, they may install a canopy over that area to give handicapped patrons protection. Mr. Gregg noted the entry ways are very elegantly designed and he would say the building is red brick Georgian with very nice detailing.

Mr. Gregg stated there are a series of stained glass windows and their intention is to leave the stained glass there. The other windows would be replaced. Mr. Gregg pointed out the stained glass windows on the plans.

Ms. Troiano asked if these apartments are going to be market value rental units and not low income. Mr. Gregg stated the nuns on the site are very concerned with who is living on their property. This is not publicly financed. They are also not interested in competing with anyone else in the market. They are looking to rent these at reasonable rents to people that are compatible to their community.

Mr. Gwozdz asked if there will be a third party manager to manage the apartments. Mr. Gregg stated there would be and they have been asked to design a place for an office.

Mr. Gregg stated the units will have individual heating and air conditioning. There will be a laundry room on the lower level. There would be the typical appliances – refrigerator, stove, range top and a dishwasher.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked if they are allowed, as a non-profit, to create an endowment that would allow them to maintain their properties. Mr. Gregg stated they would be. Surplus is the term that is used because as a non-profit, you can’t have profit. Anything they have in addition to what they need to run it becomes surplus. Mr. Gregg stated they depend very much on the Day Hill Company for a lot of their advice. They have full-time people on the property right now to help them take care of it.

Mr. Meyer asked when Mr. Gregg would be coming back with final plans. Mr. Gregg stated probably June or the early part of the summer. They have to look at what the rents might be that are reasonable for this area. This is not an inexpensive venture for the nuns but they feel they have to do something to maintain their property value.

Chairman Tatoian asked if there would be any restrictions on the apartments. Mr. Gregg stated there wouldn’t be any restrictions. You would choose who you want to rent to and they have a real concern with nuns living on the property.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked what the current use of the mansion is. Mr. Gregg stated the mansion is run as an adult day care center. He was not sure about the use of the upper floors.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated there will be a full application submitted sometime in June. He asked if the Commission wants him to work with this applicant to let them know what a complete application should include. Chairman Tatoian was in agreement with this course of action. Mr. Alsbaugh stated there would need to be some documentation of the exterior of the building to a degree along with the actual location of the district line in relation to the building.

Mr. Gregg stated they would also be going to the Planning and Zoning Commission for site plan approval so that all the legal aspects of the property will have to be a part of the application. He can duplicate that for the application to the Historic District.

Chairman Tatoian asked that Mr. Alsbaugh work with Mr. Gregg on those issues. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the requirements would be comparable to what is required for Planning and Zoning.

Mr. Gregg stated the intention here is to respect the building that’s there. They expect to keep it pretty much as it is and they don’t expect to have any reason or need to make any changes to the outside. It will be an attractive place to live.

Mr. Meyer asked if their plans would include signage and exterior lighting. Mr. Gregg stated yes they will. They already show some exterior lighting which will be very discreet. The signage will be minimal. There will be a single main entrance and a single accessible entrance.

Mr. Meyer asked if there would be driveway lighting. Mr. Smith stated the roadway that would be used would be the one presently used for the day care center. Their application will include any signage planned.

Ms. Smyth asked how many apartments. Mr. Gregg stated there would be twenty-two. There would be thirteen two-bedrooms, 7 one-bedroom, and 2 efficiencies. There will be no large families occupying these units. They are set up in such a way that both the electricity and heating and cooling would be paid for by the tenants.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked if they are eligible for any grants for energy savings. Mr. Gregg stated there will be quite a bit that will come back as rebates depending upon the lighting fixtures and insulation used. They are somewhat limited with insulation to the outside. They have used insulated glass windows. They will have the opportunity to insulate in the roof area since they are installing a new roof. The interior of the exterior walls are all plaster and they would like to leave them in place.

Mr. Alsbaugh asked about things like thermal heat pumps. Mr. Gregg stated they have an energy efficient system they are proposing for this building. There are rebates available but they don’t pay taxes anyway so tax rebates would not help them. Mr. Alsbaugh was interested in cutting edge technology that would save them money rather than tax abatements. Mr. Gregg discussed heating and air conditioning in more detail.

He added how much they will be able to incorporate as far as new technology he doesn’t know. There are energy credits out there in a lot of areas. Mr. Gregg noted this is a very costly project.

Ms. Troiano asked if there would be air conditioners visible. Mr. Gregg stated no, they will have a central system inside. Ms. Troiano asked about the window treatments that will be used on the inside of the windows. Mr. Gregg stated they will be uniform with either a duet type shade or mini-blinds. What will be seen on the outside will be consistent.

Chairman Tatoian thanked Mr. Gregg and Mr. Smith for their presentation.

· Update on guideline editing by subcommittees

Mr. Meyer asked if the Commission has an update on where the revisions to the ordinance stand. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he has the updated changes and will present them at the next meeting.

OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Meyer asked about the historic district sign on Oliver Road. Mr. Alsbaugh stated that is in the hands of the Town Manager and he is waiting to hear about it.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated he is also waiting to hear about the Commission member identification badges. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he made final arrangements for the pickup of the Old Town Hall sign. It will be picked up by the freight company either tomorrow, Friday or Monday and go out to Ohio to be refurbished. It may be back by the first week in July in time for the fourth of July.

Some discussion followed led by Ms. Troiano regarding the components of the Commission’s budget. Chairman Tatoian stated at the recent budget hearing they were talking about making the legal notices of this Commission available on line. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it would not be a substitute for a legal notice but if the town wants to publish it on its web site it would be in addition to the newspaper legal notice requirement.

Mr. Gwozdz asked about any activities planned for Preservation Month. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he will coordinate something with the Hazardville Institute. He would also like to recognize the Pearl Street Library.

Ms. Troiano asked about fundraising. Mr. Alsbaugh stated while Commission members can participate in and support fundraisers as a community agency, they would not be able to co-mingle fundraising because this Commission is under the town’s budget. Ms. Troiano asked if the Commission could raise money that could be used for things like helping to renovate the theater downtown. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission could help to raise money for a particular cause but not for the Commission to use. Further discussion followed regarding particular projects.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Smyth, to adjourn. Following a 5 – 0 – 0 vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

______________________

Nancy Smyth, Clerk

Enfield Historic District Commission

jmr