Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-03-31 Historic District Commission Minutes N R[90i TOWN CLERK F ED Town of Reading fi � 4i� "'(' cMeeting Minutes ' MA•� r 2021 APR - 1 PM 2: 3G �Jfr IMpOP ' Board - committee - commission - council: Historic District Commission Date: 2021-03-31 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Location: Remote Meeting - Zoom Address: Session: Purpose: Meeting Version: Final Attendees: Members: Pino D'Orazio, Chair; Amelia Devin-Freedman, Vice Chair; Everett Blodgett, Virginia Adams, Greg Maganzini, Ilene Bornstein, Carl Midnight Members- Not Present: Others Present: Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Julie Mercier Topics of Discussion: MEETING HELD REMOTELY VIA ZOOM Chair D'Orazio called to order at 7:03PM and went through Zoom protocols. The rest of the Commission members introduced themselves. 187 WestStreet Tom Prendergast, property owner, was present for the application. Chair D'Orazio shared the application on the screen. Mr. Prendergast explained that the awning will be steel with a fabric cover, retractable, and a color like green or beige that matches the house, and probably a solid or striped pattern. He would like to install a TV on the exterior of the house under the awning. Mr. Prendergast oriented the Commission to the house. The awning and TV will be viewable from West Street. Mr. Blodgett asked if the awning and TV are being applied for together, or if the Applicant would be satisfied with one without the other. Mr. Prendergast said he thinks that he and his wife want both together. The TV will be 50" and the awning will be 17' wide and extend out IT, which will be enough to cover the deck underneath. The West street frontage has a fence, so the deck is screened. Mr. Maganzini noted that he lives at 168 West Street and joked that he will be able to view the TV if it's on. He noted that the TV is going to be placed up pretty high and asked if it will come down in certain seasons or be up all year. Mr. Prendergast stated that it is high but that it will angle down. He noted that the TV needs to be protected by the awning, so they won't install the TV unless the awning is also approved. They would install the awning without approval for the TV. Ms. Bornstein stated her concern with what this will look like and commented that it will turn the side yard into a recreation area that will impose on the neighborhood. Mr. f � Fq ' Town of Reading �1y - s Meeting Minutes �; - .lty Prendergast stated that his purpose for doing this is so he and his wife can watch TV while their kids play in the yard. Ms. Bornstein opined that the height, sound and glaring screen will be a disturbance to the neighborhood. If she were a neighbor she would find this highly objectionable. She wonders whether the neighbors would agree with this idea. Mr. Prendergast clarified that having abutters weigh in is part of the process. He also noted that his neighbor, who lives just outside the district, has a similar set up at his house. Ms. Adams asked whether the awning will extend over to the main house, noting that the drawing makes it look that way. She asked how much room there is along the facade, and whether the facade projects or is on the same plane. Mr. Prendergast replied that it is all on the same plane. He noted that the left side of the awning will fit before the bump out. She stated that she feels reluctant to support the application until the Commission has heard from the abutters. She noted that pushing this onto the abutters can also cause problems, because neighbors like to live in harmony and may withhold their true feelings. Ms. Devin-Freedman asked if the applicant had considered whether the TV could be a potential distraction to neighbors. Mr. Prendergast explained that the TV will be on an arm and can tilt down and from side to side. Ms. Devin-Freedman asked if the road is straight or on a curve. Mr. Prendergast said the road is straight in that section. Mr. D'Orazio screen shared a google street view of the property to better understand what it might look like to a driver. The views are not completely obscured by trees in the spring and summer. Ms. Devin-Freedman expressed concern that at night cars will see the light shining through the trees and may find it disorienting. Mr. Blodgett noted that this might not be an ideal location if it distracts drivers. He asked whether the awning could cover it more and noted that it might be hard to know what it's really like until it's done. He noted the downspout is in the way of the awning. Mr. Prendergast stated that he will relocate the downspout. Mr. Blodgett stated that without the awning down, there will be visibility concerns from the public way. Mr. Prendergast asked whether there could be a condition that the TV won't be on unless the awning is down. Mr. Maganzini asked whether this is really under the HDC's jurisdiction, or if it's considered a sign or something else. Mr. Blodgett noted that the application may need to be in two parts. The HDC has jurisdiction over awnings, but not over temporary satellites. If the TV would only be up at certain times, then it may be able to be considered temporary. Mr. Maganzini asked if the TV could be located in the nook between the deck and behind the entrance bump out. Mr. Prendergast noted there is a casement window there. Mr. Maganzini opined that if it could be installed lower, there would likely be fewer concerns. Ms. Devin-Freedman read from the Bylaw - the Purpose section. She asked what year the house was built. Mr. Prendergast stated 1920. Ms. Devin-Freedman noted that a TV is not compatible with a 1920's structure. Ms. Adams asked whether there are any Town bylaws related to sound. Mr. D'Orazio stated that he doesn't think sound will be an issue. Mr. Prendergast noted that the house has 2 � Mq Town of Reading r Meeting Minutes nO�aJa:pp4 speakers outside already, which are also not compatible with a 1920's structure. He opined that Ms. Devin-Freedman's logic is Flawed. Ms. Devin-Freedman noted that the person who put them up may not have sought permission, and that things that occurred in the past are not necessarily correct and do not necessarily provide justification for current or future applications. Mr. Blodgett mentioned that if the TV were temporary, there may be some relief to the situation. He noted that awnings can fade and that maintenance is needed. The Bylaw has specifications about maintenance, but that they are silent on awnings. Mr. D'Orazio noted that the application doesn't fit neatly into the Bylaw or Design Guidelines, and Is not something they have dealt with recently. Mr. Blodgett asked whether a TV could be considered 'furniture'. The Commission discussed how this could fit into the Bylaw or Guidelines. Mr. Blodgett noted that he has heard talk of people having TVs outside during the day, that they bring in at night. Mr. D'Orazio said in the past year there has been a surge of outdoor televisions for pandemic reasons. The question was raised as to whether the awning requires a building permit. Ms. Mercier stated that she will check with Kim and Glen in the Building Division. Ms. Adams said that a decision on this application will have implications and that she is inclined to deny it because the Applicant has not demonstrated alternatives that may be more appropriate. Mr. Blodgett said he wants to allow a broad discussion so that the Commission can understand everything that's happening in the District. He noted that traffic concerns are not necessarily a reason to deny the project. Mr. D'Orazio agreed and suggested there may be some middle-ground solutions such as not on in the winter, only on during the day, rolling the awning up when not in use, etc. A 50" TV is large and the Applicant is not going to want to take it down every night. Mr. D'Orazio opined, unrelated to HDC jurisdiction/review, that a 50"TV outside is not outrageous. Mr. Blodgett asked whether the Commission can add stipulations or conditions to a Certificate of Appropriateness. Ms. Adams stated that they can. Ms. Mercier chimed in that it's important to understand whether there is an enforcement process in the Bylaw as well. Mr. Blodgett noted that the Building Commissioner is responsible, but that enforcement has not been needed often, and not provided in certain circumstances. Mr. Mittnight asked how this application is appropriate in a Historic District. Mr. Blodgett asked where the casement window is located and whether the TV can be kitty-cornered into the corner where views of it will be blocked. Mr. Maganzini noted that he has an outdoor TV that he brings in every night. He reminded the Commission that someone down the street wanted to put in a billboard and that was denied. He opined that if the awning were to cover the TV completely while it's on, the application might be more favorable. He opined that the awning is like a table umbrella, and that he's inclined to approve it, especially if it can completely cover it. The Commission discussed how to move forward. They agreed that they could take each item up separately. They could move ahead with the awning, and then schedule a public hearing for the TV. Ms. Devin-Freedman asked if a public hearing is necessary if the Commission just determines that the TV is not applicable and isn't in favor of it at all. 3 �\ Town of Reading ;I Meeting Minutes Mr. Blodgett stated that he has no problems with the awning. Mr. D'Orazio agreed. Mr. D'Orazio summarized the options: (1) a hearing, (2) a vote of non-applicability. Ms. Adams noted that if something is insignificant to the district then the public hearing can be waived. She feels that both the awning and TV are significant and that a public hearing for both should be the course of action. Mr. Blodgett stated that he is ok with the awning and that this could go either way. Ms. Adams noted that even though awnings have been around for a hundred years, they were window awnings or commercial awnings. She feels this proposal is a whole new kettle of worms they'll have to muddle through. Mr. D'Orazio said that the N is new and definitely clashes with the purpose of the Historic District, but he did note that it's in his backyard. He asked how many back yards are visible from West Street, and whether this would open the flood gates if they continued to allow it for everyone. Mr. Blodgett noted that it's really the side yard, not the back yard. Mr. Maganzini asked the Applicant if he could install it on a table, or just put it lower to the ground. Mr. Prendergast noted that one installer said it could go on a pole on the edge of the deck and that it would swing around. He opined that it would be more intrusive. Ms. Devin Freedman asked if it would be visible from the street in that scenario. Mr. Prendergast said that the back of the Tv would be visible. Mr. Maganzini held up a picture of his own N-on-a-post situation in his back yard. He noted that he removes the post and brings the N in each night. Mr. Prendergast said that type of installation is not favorable to him because he already has the wiring installed on his house for the N. Mr. Blodgett asked if they have a public hearing and neighbors are supportive, if the Commission can still vote it down. Ms. Adams affirmed that yes, they can do that. Ms. Adams also noted that an Applicant can ask for more time to address concerns, rather than just being denied. Mr. Prendergast said that adding conditions could be one way to avoid a denial. Ms. Devin Freedman asked why the Commission doesn't just say no when everyone is thinking that the N is not appropriate. Mr. Blodgett said that it might be good to let the Applicant alter the application rather than flat out denying it. Mr. Prendergast noted that he is amenable to altering things if they give him guidance on what they want. Mr. D'Orazio outlined options for the Applicant, and noted that it could be good if the Applicant were able to change the proposal and come to another meeting. Ms. Adams commented that the Applicant has been very amenable and that the Commission appreciates that. She stated that she doesn't want the Applicant to put in a higher fence. Mr. Prendergast asked if they will move ahead with the awning, and if he can reconsider the N proposal based on the feedback. He said he wants to give his property another look to see if there is another location that could work. He said if there is no other location, he could provide some clarity on seasonality, etc. 4 0�.�,OrR�i gy Town of Reading ( �' _�j' y Meeting Minutes \ "a�INCOP�� Mr. Blodgett suggested they keep the two things together and push this out to another meeting. From a paperwork standpoint, this will be easier for the Commission. Each separate Certificate of Appropriateness requires an abutters letter. Mr. Prendergast asked whether a letter from the neighbor would be helpful to the process. Mr. Maganzini pointed out that there are a lot more abutters than just the next door neighbor. Mr. Blodgett pointed out that the ambience of the district is really what is under discussion. Ms. Adams asked Ms. Mercier whether the Commission should ask the Applicant to "withdraw without prejudice" or extend the application out. Ms. Mercier explained how this works with other Boards and Commissions and suggested reserving withdrawal until the point that it looks like an application might be denied. Mr. Blodgett made a motion to have the Applicant come back to Commission on date certain. Mr. D'Orazio seconded. EB, ADF, PD, GM in favor, IB abstained. [4-0-1] The HDC scheduled their next meeting for Wednesday, April 21n at 7:OOPM. New Business Mr. D'Orazio asked if 7 copies of applications still need to be provided. He had an inquiry from an architect who plans to file an application in the next few months. Ms. Mercier stated that 2 copies is enough for the file and Town Clerk, as long as no one on the Commission wants a hard copy. The Commission agreed that electronic is fine for now, with 2 copies provided to Town Hall. Ms. Adams noted her workshop with Chris Skelly of MHC, and asked if the Commission could consider improving their Design Guidelines. She opined that they are pretty good but could be refined. Ms. Devin Freedman asked if it is time for the Commission to follow up with Criterion. She noted that it has been a handful of months, and that Criterion claimed to be visiting the property often and that they needed to rebid certain aspects of the project. They promised to follow up with a letter outlining the dates they visited the property. The letter came through in November 2020. The Commission agreed to discuss it with the Historical Commission and reassess things at their April 21st meeting. Minutes 9/30/20 Mr. D'Orazio made a motion to approve the 9/30/20 minutes as amended. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. 11/4/20 Mr. D'Orazic made a motion to approve the 9/30/20 minutes as amended. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. 12/9/20 Mr. D'Orazio made a motion to approve the 9/30/20 minutes as amended. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. 5 F Town of Reading 1� � = Meeting Minutes re'P+a,�xcoea°��y 3/31/21 Mr. D'Orazio made a motion to approve the 3/31/21 minutes as amended. Mr. Blodgett seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. Adjournment Mr. D'Orazio made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:39 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Maganzini and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Documents Reviewed at the Meeting: 0 167 West Street Application o Minutes of 9/30/20, 11/4/20, 12/9/20, and 3/31/21 6