Historic Preservation & Architectural Review Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COHOES HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD HELD IN CITY HALL ON July 17, 2018 at 6:30 pm MEMBERS PRESENT: Daniele Cherniak, Chairperson Herbert Hyde Thomas Rifenberg Barbara Hildreth, Vice Chairperson ABSENT: Robert Langley ALSO PRESENT: Robyn Reynolds, Dep. Dir. of Economic Development and Planning Chairperson Cherniak called the meeting to order at 6:28 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM THE MAY 15, 2018 MEETING Chairperson Cherniak asked if anyone had any questions about the meeting minutes from the July 17 meeting. With no questions, Member Rifenberg made a motion to approve the minutes, which Chairperson Cherniak seconded and the motion passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF FAÇADE IMPROVEMENTS AT 30 WHITE STREET Chairperson Cherniak noted that the application mentioned a couple of different types of façade improvements at 30 White Street. The applicant, Mr. Jeremy Krug, explained that the front façade facing White Street would be his business in the first floor and that the current window is 3’ by 5’ and he would like to expand this into a 5’ by 5’ window. He explained further that these are very small windows but that he would like to have the front area host a conference room and that the windows would be tempered glass with an antique bronze frame. Mr. Krug noted that most of the building in terms of the glass and doors are no longer original and that it has been neglected over the years. Mr. Krug noted that he would like to replace the current door with a tempered glass door and replace other windows with glass. Chairperson Cherniak confirmed that the door was not original and the applicant noted that the door would be swinging out rather than swinging in as it’s more in compliance with the new use of the space. Mr. Krug noted that on the Main Street side of the building, they are planning on taking the steel door with the garage and making a 8’ by 6’ door at some point with bullet lights and that they would plan on storing materials and cleaning up that area. Member Hyde asked what was there before he owned the building. Mr. Krug confirmed that it was a cheap metal door that was put in and was not original. Chairperson Cherniak asked what would go in as a replacement and Mr. Krug noted that it would be panels that would be much nicer. Member Hyde noted that he could accent features of the building with this design and Mr. Krug noted that there’s a bit of a lack of space and that the final implementation would be in concert with the building design. Member Hyde suggested mimicking design around the top of the building, and Mr. Krug noted that he could make that happen. Mr. Krug futher explained that on the front of the building where the bump out is, he was intending on installing a gabled roof that would divert water, which is currently impossible with the rubber roof. Mr. Krug intends on installing decorative wainscoting to reduce the flooding from rain and that the previous owner simply installed plywood as it was a cheap fix. Member Hyde asked if there were any ideas on the bottom of the structure and Mr. Krug noted he had not thought about it yet. Member Hyde asked about windows and Mr. Krug showed a window with an architectural bronze frame. Mr. Krug further pointed out that the current windows were broken in and that he would be looking for a prairie grid window as he would like it to be consistent with all other installed windows. Member Hildreth asked if he was intending on replacing all windows, to which Mr. Krug responded and noted that all windows would be replaced and additional work would be done to the floors and there would be significant work done to the inside of the building. Chairperson Cherniak asked about the slope of the gabled roof, and Mr. Krug noted that the roof would likely be terra cotta and that he did not want to interfere with the other designs of the building. Mr. Krug noted that it would be a slight angle to divert water and that there are other areas of Remsen Street that have this design. Mr. Krug believes this design would look sharp and have curb appeal. He noted that he believed that the building may have had this feature at one point, but that it had fallen into disrepair. Member Hyde noted that the view of the top of the building should be retained and accessible from the street so that the top detail was not obstructed. Mr. Krug noted that it would be a low gable and Member Rifenberg confirmed that it would be a low arch to which Mr. Krug agreed. Chairperson Cherniak agreed that Mr. Krug should retain the trim and Member Hyde asked about the gable color to which Mr. Krug confirmed that it would be the same color as the trim. Member Hyde noted it would be good to be consistent. Chairperson Cherniak asked if there were any further questions, which there were none. Member Hyde made a motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness for the façade improvements at 30 White Street, which Member Rifenberg seconded. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION OF THE COMMUNITY BUILDERS PARK PROJECT – SARATOGA STREET Chairperson Cherniak mentioned to the Board that she had talked to Melissa Cherubino of The Community Builders regarding plans to install a public park at the site of their future development at roughly 385 Saratoga Street. The site is home to a portion of Champlain Canal Lock 2 and The Community Builders would like assistance with interpretive signage on the site. Chairperson Cherniak will keep the Board involved in discusisons around the proposed project. CONSIDERATION OF SIDING REPLACEMENT AT 2 WHITE STREET Chairperson Cherniak noted that she had done some research on providers of clapboard in the area and provided a list to Mr. Wadell, the applicant, so that he could follow up with those sources to move forward with replacing the current clapboard with new clapboard. Mr. Wadell noted that he has gone to mills in the past and that tailor-made clapboard is very expensive and he was wondering if there was any pre-made clapboard? Mr. Waddell also noted that the Board in the past had mentioned that they were concerned with how the windows might be affected by the new siding, which he could mitigate. Chairperson Cherniak noted that that Board was more concerned over the preservation of the historic character of the building. Mr. Waddell asked if the rest of the Board could weigh in on the siding. Member Cherniak provided background on prior applications and how the Board had approved the back of the house being sided as that was an addition and not part of the original structure. Mr. Waddell pointed out that the clapboard that’s affordable does not match the size used for the rest of the house and that the other clapboard is very expensive. Member Hyde asked about past applications for siding for the rest of the house and Chairperson Cherniak noted that in the past, the recommendation was also to use clapboard instead of vinyl siding. Member Hildreth noted that she understood it was difficult to side in clapboard based on cost. Member Hyde noted that he did not have additional comment as this had been resolved in previous applications. Mr. Waddell explained that he understood that the back of the house wasn’t part of the original building, but that the alternatives to vinyl siding are cost prohibitive and that vinyl siding would make the house look neater than the condition that it’s in right now. Mr. Waddell noted that he would retain the structure of the windows to not damage them and that currently there’s an “alligator” pattern on the clapboard due to the need for repainting. Mr. Waddell discussed how the building would look like it’s in better shape with vinyl siding and that he’s noticed vinyl siding in other parts of the district. Chairperson Cherniak pointed out that some had been sided without Board approval, others had no siding, and every building has had its own unique circumstances. Mr. Waddell expressed that he wanted Board approval, and that’s why he came back with this issue. He noted that he has looked at Curtis Lumber and that it’s far too costly and that vinyl siding would be an appropriate alternative to improve the building. Member Hyde asked how much clapboard would be needed for this project. Mr. Waddell confirmed it would be 30 or 35 linear feet. Member Hyde asked what percentage of the building would this be for and Mr. Waddell noted he was sure it would be 35 linear feet. Chairperson Cherniak asked the difference between pre-fabricated clapboard and tailored clapboard and Mr. Waddell noted it’s roughly 1” difference and he could not afford to go to a mill. R. Reynolds noted that there are some funding sources which may offset the cost of this project. Member Hyde asked if there was more information that could be sent and R. Reynolds noted she would send along materials from the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation. Member Hildreth confirmed that this would be for the remainder of the building that isn’t the back portion. Member Hyde noted it would be best to come up with funding to ensure it was sided with the correct clapboard. Member Hyde made a motion to table approval of this project and Member Hildreth seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. R. Reynolds noted she would send along grant information to Mr. Waddell on sources she’s aware of that may fund this type of project. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Member Hyde made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 6::59 pm. Chairperson Cherniak seconded the motion which passed unanimously.