ENFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING

MARCH 26, 2008

A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Historic District Commission was held on Wednesday, March 26, 2008, in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Tatoian called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.

PRESENT: Richard Tatoian, Chairman

Russell Meyer

Marie Troiano

Nancy Smyth

Lillian Troiano, Alternate

Raymond Gwozdz, Alternate

Sonja Dean, Alternate

ALSO PRESENT: Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Town Planner

Public Hearings - NONE

HDCR – Review files, determinations of need for certificates of appropriateness: NONE

HDCR2008-001 Report on request to inspect 1207 Enfield Street regarding tree house constructed without COA.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated he could not recall when the tree house at 1207 Enfield Street first appeared. The tree house is located right in the front to the side of the house in one of the side trees. It is about one half way back on the side of the house on the south side of the driveway.

Chairman Tatoian asked if there was a request to check into this tree house. Mr. Alsbaugh stated Commissioner Marie Troiano asked that he look into it. He did so and it is definitely there. He described it as large and unsightly because of the materials and lack of design. It qualifies as a structure under the Historic District Ordinance.

Ms. Dean stated it looks very weathered.

Mr. Meyer asked if there has been any contact with the owner. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he wanted to hear from the Commission first regarding if anyone remembered it. He will go forward and make an inquiry as to what is going on. Mr. Meyer asked if this would demand a letter from the Commission. Chairman Tatoian suggested Mr. Alsbaugh contact the property owner by phone first.[1] Once Mr. Alsbaugh finds out the specifics, the Commission can then send a letter to the property owner. Mr. Meyer stated the owner should be informed that the tree house requires a certificate.

HDCR2008-002 Report on request to inspect 1435 Enfield Street regarding potential blight issue, collapsing porch, general deterioration of house exterior

Mr. Alsbaugh stated 1435 Enfield Street is the house on the east side of the street just below the four-family house which is just below the Longhi house (the new house). The owners of the 4-family previously wanted to expand the parking lot toward the street and the Commission denied the request. The home is the gambrel south of the 4-family and they came in for a roof replacement a couple of years ago. The home at 1435 Enfield Street was in bad shape then and there were rumors that the owner was not in the best of health. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the front porch is collapsing.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the town doesn’t have a demolition by neglect ordinance, nor is such a tool included in the Historic District Ordinance. Chairman Tatoian questioned what can be done about this house or any other house in the district that becomes deteriorated. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission can make inquiries and try to find out facts and see if there is any way to work with the property owners to encourage them to either make repairs or come up with a plan for repairs.

Mr. Meyer asked if it would be in order to officially write them a letter about their intention because the property is in disrepair. Mr. Alsbaugh stated demolition by neglect has been discussed recently but the only thing the town has right now is a blight ordinance. It is a town ordinance that is enforced by the Zoning Enforcement Officer or whomever the Town Manager appoints. Mr. Alsbaugh is presently the one enforcing the blight ordinance since the Zoning Enforcement Officer retired. Some discussion followed on what the blight ordinance accomplishes by certain criteria of appearance and things that occur on the property. Mr. Alsbaugh explained the blight ordinance allows the town to fine people and they have a right to appeal. The town is currently making a concerted effort to go forward with bight ordinance enforcement and is working through the anticipated administrative complexities.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the blight ordinance addresses a quality of life issue. He is currently trying to make it clear to everyone involved in the blight ordinance administration that we need to be considering some form of demolition by neglect concept within the blight legislation. They have started a formal enforcement process with the first property located on Cedar Street in Hazardville. The town put together a group for code enforcement where all the different agencies work together. That turned into this central group of agencies who work on the blight ordinance. Mr. Alsbaugh further discussed the procedure of the blight ordinance.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated there are almost thirty properties throughout the town that are on an informal preliminary list for blight ordinance action. They are presently focusing on the structures that are vacant, but have also noted structures that are occupied. In response to a question from Ms. Marie Troiano, Mr. Alsbaugh stated none of the thirty homes are in the Local Historic District.

Chairman Tatoian asked that Mr. Alsbaugh contact the owner of 1435 Enfield Street. Mr. Alsbaugh stated as the Historic District Commission they don’t have any tool to deal with blight or demolition by neglect. Until there is something related to demolition by neglect within their ordinance, the Commission might consider utilizing the blight ordinance.

Mr. Meyer suggested writing a letter to the property owner to make an inquiry to find out what his intentions are.

Mr. Meyer stated a few houses to the south is the Ingraham’s and the Commission has gone on record about it and it is now in legal hands. He doesn’t think 1435 Enfield Street is any different. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it is not the same issue because in the case of the Ingraham’s, they violated the regulations.

Following additional discussion on the way to proceed, Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Mr. Gwozdz, to instruct Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Town Planner, to send a letter to the property owner at 1435 Enfield Street on behalf of the Commission regarding the condition of the property and that the Commission will then request the Secretary to send a letter to the blight enforcement official to begin proceedings under the blight ordinance. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote.[2]

Ms. Lillian Troiano asked what if the issue becomes a dead end issue and the property owner cannot afford to repair the house or pay the fines. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the same issue was brought up at the code enforcement meeting today that it is legally not an issue of whether someone can afford it or not. If enforcement proceeds to court, a judge will tell them if they cannot afford it, they may need to consider selling the property. Mr. Alsbaugh elaborated on this point. He also noted that the Commission does not have to confine their concerns to the Historic District only but can comment and act on historic properties throughout the town under CGS Section 7-147c(j).

Executive Session legislative document: Mr. Alsbaugh stated these papers were included in the packet for the Commission’s information. Executive session came up with the Conservation Commission because they have a permanent item, ‘Executive Session’, on their agenda. It had been discussed previously with the Wetlands Commission that you can’t have an Executive Session without stating the reason why. It was Mr. Alsbaugh’s understanding that, the way it was discussed with the Wetlands Commission, you couldn’t have Executive Session on the agenda unless you had something to discuss under Executive Session. Mr. Alsbaugh did some research and found out the Conservation Commission is on legal grounds to have a permanent item on their agenda. The statute doesn’t require that the reason be stated in advance. You have to state what the subject matter is going to be as you enter Executive Session, but you don’t have to put it on the agenda previous to the meeting. Having it on the agenda as a permanent item is therefore allowable.

Mr. Alsbaugh shared this information with the Commission should they need to know about it in the future.

Approval of Meeting Minutes of January 23, 2008 and review of Joint ECC and HDC Meeting Minutes of February 12, 2008

Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Smyth, to approve the Minutes of January 23, 2008. The Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote. The Commission had no comment to pass along to the ECC on the Joint ECC and HDC Meeting Minutes of February 12, 2008.

Staff Report

* Update of joint meeting with Conservation Commission (Scantic River Greenway State Park; 464 Hazard Avenue access point; archaeological issues)

* Update of Shaker property – Hired Men House; other resources on State property

* Update of Certified Local Government program/discussions with Mary Dunne

* Update of historic GIS data program

Mr. Alsbaugh reported on the joint meeting with the Conservation Commission regarding the Scantic River Greenway State Park. A letter under both Commission’s names is going to DEP and the final version will be ready tomorrow. It will state that the Commissions support the concept of the Scantic River Greenway State Park but that they want to make sure that the state is aware that it has always been from the earliest form of the state park concept that Enfield would take under consideration the historic and cultural resource aspects of the Enfield section of the state park system.

Mr. Alsbaugh has been in discussions with a private research company who is getting the town an exceptional amount of maps and data. These people have access to maps in Massachusetts and Connecticut that are from the original mapping done on both the Powder Hollow area and the Shaker properties. The town will be getting copies of all these original maps. There will also be the potential through this company to get all the historic data and archeological data, the list of properties and anything that is on the National Historic Register. The decision hasn’t been made to pay for these items yet but it is Mr. Alsbaugh’s hope that the town can get a layer for their GIS system that has all the information on it. This would include the Powder Hollow survey data that Edward Allen had (1903 tracing of the 1886 map survey that Dupont did when it was acquiring the Hazard Powder Company).

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the town will also be accessing the research done by the State Archeologist’s Office. In addition, Dr. Bellantoni is coming April 1 to do a site walk at the request of the Conservation Commission who is concerned about the newly approved subdivision on Powder Hill Road. The plan involves installing a sewer line along the east side of Powder Hill Road to the bridge. There are known powder company drainage tunnels still in existence along that roadway. They wanted an archeological review done before anything occurs.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the gentleman that worked for this private company also worked very closely with the state archeologist on a number of projects including Powder Hollow and the Shakers. Staff will also attempt to address the concerns brought up at the joint meeting regarding development impacts on any Native American resources.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated he will be getting information about the Shaker properties. They will have access to the original 1914 maps, the Buck and Buck surveys that were done of all the Shaker properties. These are not just the representational inset maps that were reprinted by the Historical Society but are the actual full-sized surveys. Mr. Alsbaugh also was given the name of the gentleman in Farmington who actually bought the originals of those maps from Buck and Buck. He would like to contact him about the possible acquisition of the originals for an eventual Enfield repository. All of this data will be also able to be placed on the town’s GIS system.

Mr. Alsbaugh brought up the Hired Men’s house. They did have a site inspection that was coordinated by Senator Kissel. Mr. Alsbaugh made it clear that the town’s position would be that it is indeed a Shaker building. What is happening with the prison is as the regime changes every ten or twenty years, less is known about what it is that is there. It had gotten to the point where the prison personnel didn’t even think it was a Shaker building. Mr. Alsbaugh confirmed it is a late nineteenth century Shaker building for hired workers. The building is unoccupied and has been empty for years. Mr. Alsbaugh is not sure the state ever used the building. Regarding the actual building, he noted the corner cabinet is definitely original. Mr. Meyer stated there was a rumor that they want to tear the home down. Mr. Alsbaugh noted that it was not a rumor. When he first contacted the DOC about the condition of then front porch he was told that the prison intended to tear down the structure within the next 2 or 3 months, and that the State Historic Council staff had agreed that there was extreme termite damage. Chairman Tatoian questioned if the state could sell this property. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the building could be sold if the State wanted. He noted at this time the DOC doesn’t have funds within their budget to do extensive repairs and restoration, but is cooperating while options are explored and will not tear the building down in a precipitous manner.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the house is not in danger of falling down. As far as the stated worst termite infestation ever seen by the State Historic Council’s Historic Architect, damage is confined to the porches, most notably the back porch. The front porch is collapsing but it is original. It has excellent architectural detailing that should be saved. Mr. Alsbaugh noted that the deteriorated condition of the home is due to lack of maintenance and the effects of uncontrolled runoff rotting wood components and drawing termites to the wet and dry rot. He added that both porches are on brick piers which are representational of porches from the late 1800’s. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the building should be mothballed until a final decision is made, including the deconstruction and storage of the porches within the structure or garage. He told those attending the site visit that he would ask if the town had any capability to help with this aspect. Mr. Alsbaugh recognizes that the Department of Corrections budget is continually reduced, as are all state agencies, and they may not have the wherewithal to steward this building or other Shaker structures under their control. He recommends doing a complete survey of the remaining Shaker buildings, including the barns, and locating and designating on a map all the underground remains. Finally, a long term plan should be put together to either preserve them on the property or remove them from the property and locate them elsewhere under an umbrella organization such as a Trust.

Mr. Alsbaugh also discussed the continuing recommendation that Enfield apply to be designated a Certified Local Government. He reminded the members that they received paperwork explaining the program in the packets for the joint meeting with the ECC on 3/11/08. It is something that the ERSC has been recommending for the last five years. It is important at this time because the town would be eligible for technical help and grants. Also, the state is very interested in having more communities join. Chairman Tatoian asked if this is something the Town Council has to vote on. Mr. Alsbaugh stated yes, they have to vote to apply to the state to become a certified local government. This Commission would be a supporting agency for the concept. It has been on hold but because of Powder Hollow and the Shaker properties, it happens to have brought the concept of becoming a certified local government to the forefront.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the most important thing he has learned recently about the certified local government program is the town goes up a level in dealings with the DOT and other agencies. The town would no longer be simply an applicant to state agencies; it would now function as a consultant. We would be consulted on any project that is proposed within the town. The town would be an equal player. Mr. Alsbaugh finds this idea very appealing and hopes the Town Council sees the same positive aspect.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Alsbaugh noted receipt of the follow-up letter from Representative Jarmoc about 464 Hazard Avenue. This is the site where the building was torn down and the property earmarked by the DEP as an access point to the river and state park. There were a lot of concerns expressed by the neighbors. The access point discussion generated all the discussion uncovering the thirty-year history of the state park and what Enfield’s park was intended to be in this project. The letter and the current resolution contained in it points out that the DEP has scaled back for the moment what is actually going to occur there as an access point. There will be four to five cars, a vegetative buffer and a gate to block off access to the lower level. The DEP has accomplished what they wanted to do by establishing an access point. Representative Jarmoc and Senator Kissel were able to talk with the DEP and address the majority of the concerns of the local residents.

Mr. Alsbaugh stated Commission members received copies of Connecticut Forum News and the Forum Journal.

Mr. Alsbaugh sent a memo to Paul Censki regarding the Masonic building. It is not listed although it is eligible for listing. Part of the inside is from the 1920’s when the building was acquired and renovated. The developer that purchased the building is going to avail himself of historic tax credits and technical assistance. He is also eligible for certain building code requirement waivers if the house is judged to be eligible for listing. What Mr. Alsbaugh was able to do was submit testimony to the fire marshal that it was eligible for listing. It is information on what the building is, when it was built, the condition of the building, and the extent of the original fabric of the building. Mr. Alsbaugh noted this is the kind of thing the Commission should be doing on a regular basis. This will help people who buy the buildings become aware of the resources available, while allowing the town to properly administer it’s stewardship duties.

Ms. Dean asked if there is anything that can be done before buildings such as these are put up for sale. Mr. Alsbaugh stated in this instance he was making the best of a done deal situation. Four to six months ago, the ERSC asked the Planning and Zoning Commission for a moratorium on conversions. They stated they didn’t need a moratorium on conversions because they don’t do then very often. Since that decision, there have been three approved. To answer Ms. Dean’s question, no, currently there is nothing in place. Mr. Alsbaugh would continue recommending a moratorium on conversions in general and supporting the recommendations that come out with the guidelines for rezoning the entire census tract to a tiered Thompsonville Village Zone. There would be a need to amend the regulations to deal with these issues. A moratorium would result in amendments that would better handle the potential for any future conversions.

Ms. Dean asked if there is any way to keep this property from losing historic fabric like 125 Pearl Street. Mr. Alsbaugh stated there is nothing that can be done to retain the integrity of the historic fabric. The developer has approval for the conversion to multiple residential units and office use. Also part of the approval is the ability to market the meeting hall. A part of marketing the hall involves advertising how architecturally unique the interior is; it would be pretty ridiculous for the developer to gut the original fabric that is there. Mr. Alsbaugh noted the interior is extraordinary. His main concern is that the second floor is going to be the area where a substantial amount of the trim and other interior is going to be compromised. The second floor of the main house is just one big L-shaped room on the south and west side. There is also an original commercial-sized type kitchen and an office and storage. There is also an access way to the balcony of the meeting hall. The main staircase is all open. That will have to be cut up for fire separation for the units.

Mr. Alsbaugh explained to the developer that the house has all the original windows. It was Mr. Alsbaugh’s opinion that the developer understands the plusses involved in retaining as much of the original fabric as possible. Some discussion followed on whether the Commission should comment on this building.

Mr. Alsbaugh reported there is nothing to report at this time regarding the signal light post that generated a letter to the Town Council.

Preservation Month 2008/Barn Survey Project in concert with the CT Trust/Barn Grant Program

Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Conservation Commission is working on farmland preservation. The Connecticut Trust has a new barn grant program for private owners to preserve historic barns. The Trust also has a barn survey program. Mr. Alsbaugh is recommending to this Commission that Enfield participate in Preservation Month in concert with the Enfield Conservation Commission and coordinate activities and seminars that will support taking part in a barn survey in Enfield and getting information out to local property owners about the survey and barn grant program. The survey also involves submitting the data to the Connecticut Trust barn survey database. By recording the barns that still exist, Mr. Alsbaugh felt we could begin to stem the loss of barns in Enfield.

Mr. Alsbaugh discussed the many different types of barns located in the town. He would like to see this Commission get on board and get the Council to issue a proclamation announcing the town’s participation in Preservation Month this year. Further discussion followed regarding particular barns in the town. Mr. Alsbaugh pointed out the dedicated grant program for the private property owner regarding barns which is important to the Town of Enfield.

Enfield Plan of Conservation and Development

Mr. Alsbaugh brought up the Enfield Plan of Conservation and Development. He asked that the Commission begin thinking about the Plan. He noted there were a significant number of historic related recommendations, goals and actions that were contained in the last Plan of Conservation and Development. He will be bringing copies of that to the Commission. He asked that the Commission think about any items they want to keep and any new items they want to bring forward as recommendations.

Other Business

In response to a question from Chairman Tatoian, Mr. Alsbaugh stated he will continue to report on all the items he highlighted this evening. He noted everything is coming together and things we have been talking about for the last six to eight years may begin now to come together into functioning programs and policies.

Mr. Meyer referred to page nine of the last minutes where there was an action item for next month as to why the Commission cannot get the southern district sign re-installed. Mr. Alsbaugh stated a memo was sent to the current Town Manager over a year ago. He brought it up at least three times since that memo. Mr. Meyer asked if the town cares about it. Mr. Alsbaugh stated that the previous Town Manager said to go ahead and get the sign replaced after it was knocked over. Delays happened because the sign person had some scheduling problems but that was resolved. What concerns him is that the traditional location of the Historic District sign is being used for commercial signage. The Enfield home show was advertised with a large temporary public information sign placed on the triangle where the Historic District sign was. He questioned whether this area was appropriate for public information signs, especially since we can’t seem to get the district sign put back. It also bothers him that after a year he has not received a response regarding the sign. Ms. Marie Troiano asked if the sign has been made. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it has not and he elaborated on the reasons for this. It took him over a year and a half to get a response from the original fabricator and then it was only because Mr. Meyer contacted him. Regarding funding, Mr. Alsbaugh stated there have traditionally been discretionary funds available through the Town Manager’s Office. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it is up to the current Town Manager to okay the sign with the sign maker. Ms. Dean asked if it would be a problem for her to call the Town Manager’s Office about this sign. Mr. Alsbaugh had no problem with her doing this.

Mr. Meyer noted the Minutes of the last meeting on page 9 which indicated the Commission would receive a compilation of the revised ordinance. Mr. Alsbaugh apologized for not getting this to the Commission and stated he will try to get it to the Commission in next month’s meeting packet.[3]

Mr. Meyer noted that Mr. Alsbaugh was going to contact Scott Kaupin and Bill Lee to come before this Commission to discuss the Hazardville area. Mr. Alsbaugh stated they are both aware of it but he has not been able to get them on the agenda. He will try to get them on the agenda for the next meeting.[4]

Mr. Meyer asked what constitutes a requirement for the Montessori people to come back to this Commission for any approvals. Mr. Alsbaugh stated for anything outside of what has already been approved or outside of the court case that was remanded back to the trial court, nothing changes. If they were going to propose something new, they would have to come back to the Commission. They are not exempt from the Commission or Ordinance. Mr. Meyer noted there were surveyors on the property. Mr. Alsbaugh reported there has been a property transfer. They acquired the property behind the red house. However, this property is not in the Historic District.

Mr. Meyer asked if Montessori School wants to widen their driveway, would they have to come back to this Commission. Mr. Alsbaugh stated whatever is contained in the last application that was denied but went to court is what will be reflected in any eventual approval this Commission will be directed to make. Mr. Alsbaugh noted he is still waiting for the trial court to communicate. He has a request in to the Town Attorney’s Office on this issue and the Ingraham issue but has not yet received a response.

Chairman Tatoian thanked Mr. Alsbaugh for the architectural design books presented to the Commission this evening A Field Guide to American Houses by Virginia & Lee McAlester. Mr. Alsbaugh detailed the selection of this book and its educational value to the Commission, especially related to any potential appointment as a design review board.

Ms. Dean thanked Mr. Alsbaugh on behalf of the Enfield Historical Society for getting the sign back in front of the Enfield Town Hall Museum.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Marie Troiano, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

___________________________

Nancy Smyth, Clerk

Enfield Historic District Commission

jmr

[1] Directive to staff #1

[2] Directive to staff #2

[3] Directive to staff #3

[4] Directive to staff #4