ENFIELD HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 24, 2008
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Historic District Commission was held on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Tatoian called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Richard Tatoian, Chairman
Russell Meyer
Marie Troiano
Nancy Smyth
Lillian Troiano, Alternate
Raymond Gwozdz, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Roger Alsbaugh, Assistant Town Planner
Some discussion followed on the identification badges. Pictures are to be taken on Saturday morning, October 4, 2008 at the Police Station.
MINUTES
Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Lillian Troiano, to approve the Minutes of July 23, 2008. The Minutes were approved by a 5 – 0 – 1 vote. Mr. Gwozdz abstained.
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Alsbaugh reported the Executive Session scheduled for this evening is going to be postponed because Attorney Elsden never got a response from the Town Attorney about the issues.
Mr. Meyer asked that the design guidelines be added to the agenda this evening. Mr. Alsbaugh stated they can only be added by a three quarter vote of the Commission. Mr. Meyer would like to add the design guidelines and he would like to see a vote of the Commission.
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. The Executive Session was postponed to a later meeting since a town attorney was not present for discussion.
A brief discussion on how to proceed was held. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he had formatted a letter to send to Mr. Ingraham explaining the situation and what he needed to do to come before the Commission; he forwarded it to Head Assistant Town Attorney Elsden at her request for review. At the same time, Ms. Elsden had asked the Town Attorney to weigh in on the issue. She hadn’t heard from him so there is no point in the Executive Session going forward. Attorney Elsden is reviewing the letter and Mr. Alsbaugh hoped that it would be sent out in the very near future. The process to this point is all court ordered in relation to the original File #309 which was the violation file.
Chairman Tatoian asked how the Commission has supervision over what Mr. Ingraham is going to do to the property. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he is waiting to hear from the Town Attorney. Further discussion followed on the events that have taken place thus far.
Mr. Meyer stated this court case has been going on for at least four years. He would like Mr. Alsbaugh to supply the Commission with a synopsis of what has occurred by year so that the Commission can have it whenever the Town Attorney comes to talk to the Commission. Mr. Meyer stated Mr. Ingraham has had a cease and desist order issued at least three years ago which to him says that he cannot do anything without having the proper application filed and a public hearing. Mr. Alsbaugh stated what has happened is Mr. Ingraham’s application has been modified slightly through the court process with the judge. He noted we are at a point where discussing it at this time is pointless until the Commission hears from the Town Attorney. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he provided a synopsis to Attorney Elsden and he will provide a copy to the Commission.
CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Alsbaugh reported receipt of an attachment from the Town Attorney’s Office to the Mayor about posting minutes and agendas on the web site. He noted the department already provides this service.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission has an update to the Enfield Forum to the Future which was begun by the Mayor and the Council. Some discussion of this document followed.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Mr. Meyer nominated Nancy Smyth for Clerk of the Commission. Chairman Tatoian seconded the nomination. Nancy Smyth was elected Clerk of the Enfield Historic District Commission by a unanimous vote.
Chairman Tatoian nominated Russell Meyer for Vice Chairman. Ms. Lillian Troiano seconded the nomination. Russell Meyer was elected Vice Chairman of the Enfield Historic District Commission by a unanimous vote.
Ms. Smyth nominated Richard Tatoian for Chairman. Mr. Meyer seconded the nomination. Richard Tatoian was elected Chairman of the Enfield Historic District Commission by a unanimous vote.
APPROVAL OF 2009 MEETING DATES
Mr. Alsbaugh had a concern about the Commission being bumped from this meeting room in 2009 by the Board of Education. If the meeting dates do not turn out to be the final meeting dates, Mr. Alsbaugh will let the Commission know. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the dates are the fourth Wednesday of the month except for August and December. November is changed due to the Thanksgiving holiday. Mr. Alsbaugh stated some of the meetings may have to be held in alternative locations if they are available.
Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Smyth, to approve the 2009 Meeting Dates as published. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Ms. Smyth, to add to tonight’s agenda the discussion of the Commission’s adoption of rules and regulations for the Historic District. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated Mr. Meyer had requested a copy of the Suffield Handbook which everyone has received.
Mr. Meyer stated every member of the Commission has a copy of the Suffield Handbook. He noted the Commission has been discussing the guidelines for the last thirteen years at least. Mr. Meyer questioned why can’t we adopt the majority of the Suffield handbook and ask Mr. Alsbaugh to review the minutes of the subcommittee meetings and feather that in with what the Commission would like to include from the Suffield handbook. Mr. Meyer stated information on page 15 and 16 of the Suffield handbook is relevant to this Commission. He suggested the Commission receive a summary in October and vote on the guidelines in November if the Commission agrees with the composition by Mr. Alsbaugh.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated that would mean the blending in the formatting that Chairman Tatoian had put together plus the sheet of exemptions the Commission had put together as a group and any amendments to the ordinance. There were a couple of things that were added to Section 9 and Section 14, Exempted Acts. Mr. Alsbaugh read those changes for the Commission’s information. Mr. Alsbaugh stated this would be the Commission’s list added into the ordinance also and then the guidelines will be appended as Appendix I in the ordinance. The Commission will have their guidelines as a document but they will also be attached to the ordinance to make certain sections enforceable.
Chairman Tatoian asked about the procedure. Mr. Alsbaugh stated October and November will be public hearings. The Commission will discuss them in October and in November vote on them to approve them. From there, it will be forwarded in total to the Town Council because they have to approve and vote to amend the ordinance itself. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission is empowered to create guidelines independently of the council process so after November the guidelines, in part, would actually be valid. To further incorporate them into the legal structure and make the prohibited activities enforceable requires that they go into the ordinance itself through amendment by the Town Council.
Mr. Alsbaugh reiterated under the statute the Commission is allowed to create guidelines. The Commission can do that independently of the ordinance. As discussed in the past, to make them a more concrete form within the legal structure, the guidelines are incorporated as an appendix in the ordinance. The ordinance that the Council created is what the Commission uses for the Historic District booklet. Separate from that, under the statute the Commission can create guidelines to help residents and property owners. It makes sense to formally incorporate them into the ordinance so that they are a permanent structure.
Mr. Meyer asked if these changes that the Commission is proposing create a legal entity. If the Commission reviews the ordinance in October and approves it in November, does it then have to go to the Town Attorney? Mr. Alsbaugh stated that would be part of the process of going to the Town Council. Mr. Meyer’s concern is if the Commission makes these changes, some may say it is not a legal document. He asked if the Commission approves these changes, should they go through the Town Attorney to see whether the Commission has a legal foundation to put them in force.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated the document is valid in its function as a set of guidelines. The sections in it that actually lay down a restriction or prohibition make it necessary to go forward and become part of the ordinance that’s approved by the Council. It then becomes a legal instrument in its entirety.
Chairman Tatoian stated there would need to be a public hearing with a notice in the newspaper. Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Commission would create a formal public hearing file like an application. Chairman Tatoian asked if the Commission approves it and it goes to the Town Council, does the Town Council also conduct a public hearing. Mr. Alsbaugh stated they would. The Town Council cannot prevent the Commission from having guidelines but they can prevent the Commission from having components in it that would be construed as being a legal prohibition. That is what has to get passed by them. Mr. Alsbaugh stated this has always been proposed as a two step process to make sure that anything more than a simple recommendation gets approved under the ordinance so that it becomes local law.
Chairman Tatoian stated this would be reviewed by the Town Attorney before it is presented to the Town Council. Mr. Alsbaugh stated he would submit it to the Town Attorney’s office in anticipation of the Council having it on their agenda so that they would have the information as quickly as possible.
Mr. Meyer asked if next month Mr. Alsbaugh presents a document for review and the Commission schedules a public hearing in November, it then goes to the Town Attorney before it goes to the Council. The Council has another public hearing so this is a six-month period to approve this ordinance. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it could be four months if the Council entertains it in January. It depends on the Council’s agenda.
In response to a question from Mr. Gwozdz, Mr. Alsbaugh stated the Council would have to approve the portions that are amended into the ordinance. They cannot keep the Commission from having guidelines. If there are components in the guidelines that are prohibitions, they can prevent that. This is why the Commission wants them in the ordinance as law.
Mr. Meyer brought up the application form. He asked where in the guidelines or the ordinance a revision to the application would appear. Mr. Meyer stated many times people come without drawings or costs and the Commission doesn’t know who their attorney is. He asked where would that come in these revisions. Mr. Alsbaugh outlined what the Zoning Board of Appeals did. They worked to produce a concise application and then put it into their bylaws so that it is semi-permanent. The changing of the application, if it’s done at all, is a function of the Commission’s consideration every two years of their bylaws. It would take it out of the hands of the administrators and puts it in the hands of the Commission but it still leaves an opportunity to change it by a review of the bylaws.
Mr. Meyer asked if the application would be a part of this revision and if so where would it be printed. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it can be included in the guidelines but he doesn’t think it would formally be part of the ordinance or the guidelines. It would be part of the Commission’s bylaws so that they retain control over the application. Under statute, the Commission determines what is necessary for an application to be complete.
Mr. Meyer stated let’s assume that in early 2009 this whole thing gets approved. Would that mean another publication of these ordinances for every household? Mr. Alsbaugh stated depending on the printing costs, they have always anticipated a publication and print run for property owners within the district. That’s been part of the Commission’s budget. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it would be available in the Commission’s budget to at least mail it to the district residents and if the full amount is not available, the Commission could request a further allocation from the Town Council. Mr. Meyer believes everyone, including new owners, should receive a copy of the new ordinance. If the funding does not support that, only new owners should receive a copy. Mr. Alsbaugh stated there would be enough to do some publication. Also, if the town becomes a certified local government, they can get technical assistance and grants for this sort of thing.
Mr. Alsbaugh summarized the Commission’s direction. They want to adopt the format in essence of the Suffield document. They want Mr. Alsbaugh to blend in specifically on their pages 15 and 16 the items the Commission worked on. Mr. Alsbaugh is going to put together the recommendation for an amendment to the ordinance. The Commission wants the summary in October and a vote in November. They want it to go to the Town Attorney and concurrently submit it to the Town Manager’s office to be placed on a Town Council agenda. Some discussion followed on how interaction with the Town Council should be expected to occur.
Mr. Alsbaugh asked if anyone on the Commission has applied to be on the Steering Committee of the Enfield Plan of Conservation and Development. Mr. Alsbaugh stated it is the most important document done every ten years and it is vital that every board and commission is represented. The Commission automatically has a place on the Steering Committee. Also, if anyone else is interested in any of the subcommittees, they should let him know.
Special Guests Mayor Scott Kaupin and Council Member William Lee to present a review of the Hazardville Streetscape process (arriving approximately 8:00 p.m.)
Chairman Tatoian stated the Commission invited William Lee to present a review of the Hazardville Streetscape process.
Mr. Lee stated as he recalls, the Streetscape subcommittee was borne out of the Route 190 Corridor Study that had been put together by the state and the town. This goes back to 1999. There was at the time a group of members of the Enfield Revitalization and Strategy Committee that were from the neighborhood. A few of those folks had been talking to the Council and the Town Manager about wanting to move forward with sidewalk replacement. Among them at the time were Councilman Carol Hall and Scott Kaupin. It had been a CIP budget item for a couple of cycles. Folks from Revitalization said we’ll take the ball and run with it because we have ideas about sidewalks. They wanted to further the concept of the paver sidewalks or the stamped concrete. The idea was to look into paver sidewalks a little further because they have a longer life and they are lower maintenance.
Mr. Lee stated it blossomed into a streetscape plan after the Route 190 Corridor Study was presented. Planimetrics at the time, the design team that was part of the state contract, presented some ideas. They were involved in furthering some of the technical data with respect to the concrete pavers. The town at that time agreed a fuller plan might be warranted. The additional element to that was CL&P’s new program at the time which allowed for the rental or lease of decorative street lights in communities. They had come and presented to this group as well. The group was an ad hoc committee of the Revitalization and Strategy Committee. There were some discussions along the way about what authority they had.
Mr. Lee stated there was a series of informational meetings that were held where the different vendors of different elements of the streetscape design were presented. The Committee’s ultimate charge was to make a few decisions about certain design elements such as the street pole choice and the lamps. There were choices for some planters and benches but those two elements never made it on to the streetscape.
Mr. Lee stated the formal subcommittee was disbanded after the substantial project was completed. Parts of that group that formed went on to become part of the Institute Conservancy.
Chairman Tatoian stated what came out of this was the paving of the sidewalks and the lighting. He asked if there was anything else.
Mr. Lee stated there were also street signs but some have disappeared and been replaced with standard municipal signage.
Chairman Tatoian asked where the funds came from.
Mr. Lee stated they were part of the sidewalk CIP program. It went a few years before it was sufficiently funded. The Council was setting aside sidewalk money. This group came in and their opinion was you could make your dollars go farther in the long run if we consider a different program. They were looking at a thirty year return on their investment. The sidewalks were in such deplorable condition that the position was to do this with pavers. They first used stamped concrete as a trial between Kelly Fradet and the SNET station. It was unsuccessful. The decision was made to go with pavers. There was a study done to come to this conclusion.
Mr. Lee stated the sidewalks have held up very well. The only problem is where it goes through a couple of dirt driveways where the edging is starting to appear. The pavers themselves are in great condition. Mr. Lee stated in some years time it would be wise to put crushed stone over them to hold them in place. The town does one stretch of weed control on the edges each year. They have sent out notices reminding the residents how salt can affect the pavers and that you don’t put salt on them.
Mr. Lee stated what is interesting about the paver product is because they are compressed concrete, they hold heat longer and they reflect sun in the winter better. The street can be soaking wet and the pavers will be dry.
Mr. Lee stated there was a secondary appropriation to extend the project a little further out than what was originally envisioned. There was something called the Village Core and then there was an extension of that. The realignment of Elm Street and Hazard Avenue was occurring and there was an infusion of state money that was associated with sidewalks. To tie it where that sidewalk boundary was ending and the beginning of the sidewalks required an additional funding of CIP money and the Council made the decision to do that because they were able to get it at the state rate.
Chairman Tatoian brought up the lighting. Mr. Lee stated the lighting was funded by the town. There was a lot of discussion going around about the decision making process to arrive at whether the town should buy that stretch of lights or enter into the CL&P decorative street light leasing program. Mr. Lee believes they chose to buy or lease the lights. Today the town owns the lights.
Ms. Lillian Troiano asked if there is state lighting along with the decorative lighting in that stretch. Mr. Lee stated the whole discussion about the lighting came out of the committee’s desire to improve the pedestrian lighting along that sidewalk. There is a pretty wide apron in parts. The cobra lights were hanging over the road. The stretch of pedestrian friendly sidewalks was getting no light at all. The study that was done or the experts that came and talked discussed the whole lighting in terms of federally recommended foot candle levels for a commercial district along a state highway. Mr. Lee believes at the time this was all put in, they ended up with a much brighter situation than was necessary. The levels in the roadway shouldn’t be what they are supposed to be for that stretch of road. They offered to turn off all the cobras and the state DOT made recommendations that certain cobras should remain on at the intersections. You will see them at School Street and a few other places.
Further discussion followed on the brightness of the lights in the area.
Mr. Lee stated they went through and discussed foot candle readings and it was through that kind of study that they determined what the distance would be between the decorative poles. It was between 70’ and 200’. Ms. Marie Troiano asked how many decorative poles there are. Mr. Lee stated the Institute group maintains thirty and they are on every other pole. There are at least sixty poles between the Hazardville Fire Station and Enfield Federal which is approximately one-half mile.
Mr. Meyer stated in 1998 or 1999 he brought before the Commission an idea to change the lights in the historic district to be more colonial. At about the same time, he noticed the lights in Hazardville were changed. His question is why the Historic District can’t do something on Enfield Street. Mr. Meyer has heard that we can’t do that because it is a federal highway and there’s so much right of way. There were all kinds of roadblocks put in front of the Commission. Mr. Meyer asked what can the Commission do to at least match what has been done in Hazardville including the removal of the overhanging lights and installing lights like in Hazardville. Mr. Lee stated at the time through some of the meetings with the state, the group taking an interest in this was making the point to the folks at the DOT that their philosophy of respecting context sensitive design in historic districts was something that this group was interested in taking seriously. That was how they were able to inject some of these ideas at the time. It was probably the result of a lot of political wrangling about the choice of sidewalks that really formalized some of the discussions that led to the street lights.
Mr. Meyer applauded what was done in Hazardville. His only concern is they are in a commercial district in Hazardville which requires more lighting. Enfield Street is strictly residential and he doesn’t know if they need that kind of illumination. The difficulty is Enfield Street is a federal highway and has a wider right of way than Hazardville. He asked what direction this Commission can take.
Mr. Lee stated there is a very active sidewalk and pedestrian way on Enfield Street that is much further away from the roadway. Mr. Lee suspects the sidewalk is entirely dark. He asked if it is the Commission’s desire to improve the design element associated with the lighting or to make an improvement to both that and the pedestrian lighting along the sidewalk. Mr. Meyer stated it is his feeling that he would like to see it in character to the historic district. That means that the sidewalks would be no brighter then they are now. Mr. Lee stated now that the Town of Enfield owns all of its street lighting it might be easier to make a proposal. Mr. Meyer asked if they do on Enfield Street. Mr. Lee will check on that. It may just be non-state roads.
Mr. Alsbaugh stated Mr. Meyer is talking about the issue of period feeling and Mr. Lee’s statement of dark sidewalks could be interpreted as a safety issue. He is sure there are a number of property owners who have lost decorative elements to hit and runs.
Ms. Marie Troiano stated Enfield Street is very active. There are a lot of people walking and that a nice element for the neighborhood.
Mr. Meyer would like to see lighting in character with the district rather than these cobra lights. Mr. Lee stated one of the things the Commission has on its side is since they have done the Hazardville project, the introduction of LED street lights is notable because of the way you can control them. You can actually dim them like your dining room light. There is also a substantial savings in energy.
Mr. Meyer asked what it would take for this Commission to investigate what has to be done and the cost involved to change the lighting on Enfield Street to make it more in character with the area. Mr. Lee stated first it is necessary to address the question of whether the town now owns the lighting on the stretch of state road. If they do own it, he thinks a proposal from the Commission to the Council would be in order maybe with the input of the clean energy committee to use it as a pilot. Mr. Meyer asked if Mr. Lee would write a letter to this Commission through Roger Alsbaugh to let them know whether the town owns the lights or not. Mr. Lee stated the Town of Enfield closed on a large transaction with CL&P just last month buying the entire street light portfolio of the community. Whether that included the lighting on the state roadways is something he can find out.
If the state owns the right of way the Commission can state their desire to improve them by the replacement of cobra lighting to a more period sensitive pole. If the town owns it, the town could use it as a potential pilot through the clean energy committee and make a recommendation to include it as a program and appropriate the recommended number of dollars to make it happen.
Mr. Lee asked if there would be any large scale sidewalk replacements planned. Chairman Tatoian did not think so. Ms. Marie Troiano brought up the possibility of sidewalks on both sides of the street and some discussion followed on that. Mr. Alsbaugh stated this may be something to incorporate into a proposal for a long-term Historic District improvement plan rather than tying it into lighting design improvement for the district.
Mr. Lee will provide the Commission with a current linear foot installation rate for new sidewalk construction. He noted it is substantial.
Mr. Alsbaugh reminded the commission that, again, interest has recently been shown about street tree loss by residents on the street. He noted that there is a constant loss of street trees and there is no plan that has ever been fully realized for the replacement of trees. He recommended the issue of street trees should be tied in with the street lighting so logical placement of trees in relation to lighting can be coordinated. Mr. Alsbaugh stated if the town was a certified local government, they would already have been at the consultant level with the DOT when things like lights were decided. This might be another reason to approach the Council and ask again to pursue appointment as a certified local government because you could get grant money for technical assistance on issues like this.
Mr. Lee brought up the silver traffic control lights that were changed to black. Mr. Alsbaugh discussed what was done by the Commission. Mr. Alsbaugh reiterated that had the town been a certified local government, the town and the HDC would have been informed two years ago about design possibilities. The Commission wasn’t contacted at all when decision making was occurring regarding the design.
Mr. Lee stated he would recommend that the Commission check out some of the lighting vendors at the CCM Expo in October. Last year it was held at the Convention Center in Hartford. He attended last year and there were four or five different vendors displaying their street light capabilities. Mr. Lee will provide the Commission with information on where the Expo will be this year. There is a stipend to attend.
Chairman Tatoian thanked Mr. Lee for his input this evening.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Meyer made a motion, seconded by Mr. Gwozdz, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________
Nancy Smyth, Clerk
Enfield Historic District Commission
jmr |