Historical Commission

RECEIVED By City Clerk at 11:30 am, 4/11/22 Amesbury Historical Commission (AHC) Meeting Minutes 03 March 2022 Location: Amesbury Council on Aging Senior Center, 68 Elm Street, Amesbury MA Commissioners Present: Joseph Finn, Richard Joltes, Steven A. Klomps, Chris Akelian, R. Scott Penoyer The meeting was called to order at 7:01 PM. The 06 May 2021 minutes were reviewed. The minutes were moved to be accepted by R. S. Penoyer, seconded by C. Akelian and were approved unanimously. The 09 December 2021 minutes were reviewed. The minutes were moved to be accepted by C. Akelian, seconded by R. S. Penoyer. A correction was proposed to edit section 1C to add J. Finn’s vote yes and correct section 3i to state “Lowells Boat Shop”. The amended minutes were moved to be accepted by S. Klomps and seconded by C. Akelian and were approved unanimously. The Demolition Application for 452 Main Street was then brought to the public hearing. The property had been deemed historically significant at the December 9th meeting. Deborah Hayes, the owner of record, was present and Attorney Phillip Schreffler presented proposed plans for the property. Greg Green, who is doing construction at the house, was also present. Nick Cracknell spoke to provide the opinion that a shed style dormer would not be appropriate for the style of the house. He also believes the 3 “dog house” dormers would be innappropriate. He felt the 2 “dog house” style dormers would be the most reasonable option for the roof facing Main Street. As a matter of clarification, a full shed dormer is also proposed for the roof facing away from Main Street, but would still be visible from Clark’s Road, a public way. G. Green stated the purpose of the Main Street facing dormers was to provide better views for the master suite of the house. Neighbor Thomas Hall spoke, stating that he does not object to the “dog house” style dormers, but dislikes the shed dormer. Neighbor Eilleen Linda Hall said that the property already blocks their view and was opposed to any external addition. Nick Cracknell added that the shed dormer facing away from Main Street should be positioned in such a way as to minimize the obstruction. It was unclear from the diagrams provided how this “rear” dormer would appear. John Hickock spoke as a resident of the neighborhood, saying he supported maintaining the historic character of the district. Neighbor Halide Hatick wanted to register his opposition to the modifications if the property was going to be used for rental income. Attorney Schreffler stated the home would not be a rental property. Neighbor Greg Noyes asked the commission to decline to approve the permit in order to preserve the historical neighborhood. Graham McKay, Executive Director of Lowells Boat Shop, was opposed to the modification, because of the historical nature of the building. Attorney Schreffler wanted to rebutt the rental issue, as that is not the perview of the Historical Commission. He also stated that he did not believe the modifications proposed were “random and whimsical”. J. Finn agreed that the rental issue was not within the perview of the Historical Commission, but rather they were to determine if the proposed changes impacted the historic nature of the building. Neighbor Christine Miller stated she loves the historic character of the house, is opposed to the shed dormer, but is less opposed to the “dog house” style dormers. S. Klomps stated the appeal of the neighborhood is the variety of historical character. Each style has its own aesthetic. For a Georgian style home, a “dog house” style dormer is more appropriate. He stated that for this home, he prefers 3 rather than 2 dormers. He also stated the 6 over 6 style window is typical and would prefer single 6 over 6 windows for each dormer, rather than the 2 windows side by side in each dormer shown in the diagrams provided. R. Joltes and C. Akelian agreed. J. Finn stated that just because the house is not “pristine” in its original style, that is not a reason to change again. The building has had the same roofline since 1750, and he feels preserving it is the best course. J. Finn asked for a motion to either preserve or to accept the demolition at some level. C. Akelian stated he prefers no demolition, but mentioned we also need to consider the rear dormer in our motions. R. Joltes moved to preserve only the Main Street facing roof, but not the rear. No second was heard, and the motion failed. R.S. Penoyer moved to continue the discussion to next month’s meeting. R. Joltes seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Nick Cracknell then presented his proposal for 20 Maple Street. He is looking for support of a Historical Preservation Special Permit Project for the site, which he discussed. S. Klomps moved that we support the project, R.S. Penoyer seconded and the motion passed unanimously. At 8:37 S. Klomps moved that we adjourn. R.S. Penoyer seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, R. Scott Penoyer