Historic District Commission

METHUEN HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Thursday, December 1, 2022 @ 7:05 pm Searles Building, Great Hall 41 Pleasant Street Methuen, MA 01844 MEETING MINUTES 1) Call to order Chair Lussier called the meeting to order at 7:05p.m., noting a presence of a quorum. Introduction of new member Diane Moore. 2) Roll Call Thomas Lussier, Chair Present Dianne Moore , Present Denis Webster Greene, Vice Chair Via Virtual OPEN SEAT Present Katherine Robinson Present OPEN SEAT Joseph Bella Present OPEN SEAT Others in attendance: Casey A. Dowgiert, RA, Consultant Historic Planner Consultant Kathleen Bradley-Colwell Planning Division Director, Dept. of Economic & Community Development 3) Acceptance of Meeting Minutes: MOTION by Commissioner Robinson to accept the minutes of September 22, 2022. Seconded by Commissioner Bella. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. 4) New Business: a. PUBLIC HEARING: i. Certificate of Appropriateness – Theresa Peterson LTD–Removal of approx.. 10’x15” rock wall, 1 Locust Road Chair Lussier is an abutter and excused himself from the meeting. Vice Chair Denis Webster Greene confirms Chair Lussier has left the meeting and Commissioner Robinson and Commissioner Moore confirm. 7:14pm Vice Chair Webster Greene asks applicant to present. Applicant was not there. Vice Chair Webster Greene opened the public hearing to those speaking in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness and hearing and seeing none. Vice Chair Webster Greene asks is anyone not in favor and hearing and seeing two asks them to step up and speak. 7:16pm 139 Lawrence Street abutter opposes, concerned it will be a safety hazard for people traveling the road such as first responders, schools, buses and people. May not see them backing up. 7:17pm 139 Lawrence Street abutter opposes due to no need for another driveway and taking away many years of history and that someone might see. (Speaking of the historic wall). 1  7:21pm MOTION by Commissioner Robinson moves to table the rest of the public meeting until the applicant follows-up or can appear and until next meeting Seconded by Commissioner Bella. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. ii. Certificate of Appropriateness – NB+C on behalf of DISH WIRELESS, LLC, Install new antennae and rooftop equipment located @ 51-57 Osgood Street. 7:24pm Chair Lussier opened the public hearing and asks the applicant to present. Applicant representative gives background on history of networks and the need for the new antennas and rooftop equipment. States that they are new quality antennas and not to conflict with existing structure or aesthetics of the existing building. It will not be visible by people at ground level and will be concealed. Chair Lussier confirms with applicant representative that they are installing a quantity of 3. The representative confirms yes, 3 will be installed and provides the range they need. Commissioner Moore asks for clarification with photos of the areas on the building and views. Photos were provided. Commissioner Robinson asked for further detail regarding the rooftop boxes. The representative states the antennas are concealed in the boxes and that they will go wit the design of the building. They are also not as tall as the existing T-Mobile antennas that are currently installed on the building. Chair Lussier to those speaking in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the antennas on the property located at 51-57 Osgood, seeing and hearing none, to those speaking unfavored of the antennas, seeing and hearing none moves to close the public hearing and opens discussion with commission members. Commissioner Robinson asks colors canisters and representative response they will be red or gray depending on where they are. Commissioner Moore asks what street they are facing. The representative states they are facing the water. 7:35pm MOTION by Commissioner Robinson to approve the application as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Bella. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. iii. CONTINUED– Certificate of Appropriateness – Jowar Companies, LLC- Johan N Lopez, Manager, New Building Located @ 269 Broadway & 2 Osgood St. 7:39pm Chair Lussier opened the public hearing and asks the applicant to present. Applicant’s architect Lagrasse Yanowitz & Feyl provides information on the updated drawings. Describes using bay windows and brick pilasters to frame the siding areas. The siding will be cementitious 4” lap exposure and then a mansard roof was presented to bring down the overall height. Chair Lussier states that he is pleased with the changes from the previous meeting, and it seems that the applicant listened to the concerns of the commission. Asks for update with Community Development Board and Zoning Board. Applicant responds that they went before the Community Development Board and stated that they let them know that HDC had concerns. The CDB also had concerns regarding parking and density. Chair Lussier asks Kathleen Bradley-Colwell (Planning Division Director) concerns with parking and density which seems to be twice the allowed amount. Kathleen Bradley-Cowell responded that there are those issues additionally there are concerns with storm water management and possibly other concerns. 2 Chair Lussier asks to those speaking in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 269 Broadway & 2 Osgood Street, seeing and hearing none, to those speaking unfavored of the project, seeing and hearing two people asks them to state their name, address and to speak. 8 Ditson Place (Brenda) states that she is not against the project but is not for it either due to the windows look into her backyard. She purchased the house in April of 2022 and knew that it was on the National Register and in the Historic District. She is concerned with social media and photos as she has children and a pool that they use. Her children’s father (Charles) is concerned about the density and children safety. Chair Lussier explains the commissions’ role in project review and approval and that they review for if the design is historically appropriate. The Community Development Board deals with size and density concerns. Commissioner Robinson added that the commission does review massing if its historically appropriate and depending on what a project is asking for relief on can use it as a reason why the project may not receive a certificate of appropriateness. Chair Lussier also reminded everyone that this project is within the Central Business District and is within a residential neighborhood under zoning. Chair Lussier also added that he was sympathetic to the abutters and their concerns. Kathleen Bradley-Colwell (Planning Division Director) confirmed that the applicant is allowed to build 4 stories. Commissioner Moore added that she sees that the design improved tremendously however would like to more information regarding the impact to the abutters. The architect for the applicant explains the reason behind the configuration, and the views to the abutters. Commissioner Robinson asks about the balconies and the architect responds with it was addressed per comments from pervious meeting. Both commissioner Bella and Moore like the change. All commissioners and chairs agree that the design has vastly improved. Commissioners Moore and Robinson would like more information on the details, materials, window and door selections, etc. Architect describes the following: 7” Gray Lap Siding, PVC trim and crown at eaves. Commissioner Moore asks setback questions regarding the sidewalk. Architect responds they are 8’ wide with 7’ patio area plus 10’ from the property line except on Osgood Street which is a 5’ sidewalk. Chair Lussier confirms that there is only 2 retail spaces and architect replies yes. Commissioner Moore states that it looks like parking goes to the end of the property line and the architect states that there is a 3’ parking strip buffer. Commissioner Robinson that asks if there is fencing at the property line and the architect states that there is an existing fence that shall remain. 8 Ditson Place asks if HDC looks at how the project fits in with the existing context. Chair Lussier responds that yes, we looked at in regard to the context, Broadway which is the core streetscape and again reiterates that due to location this isn’t going to look out of place. Which Vice Chair Webster green states that the overall area is commercial and residential, and the majority of the neighborhood is not a residential scaled neighborhood. Chair Lussier confirms that there is a commercial aspect to this project and to this area. 8 Ditson Place asks the applicant’s architect if this will go over the Lawyer’s office building and the architect stated “yes”. MOTION by Commissioner Moore to support this plan, the application as presented subject to final review and more details regarding materials, windows, door, trim, lighting, etc. but not approve and will continue application until further city board approvals. Seconded by Commissioner Bella. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. 3 iv. CONTINUED– Certificate of Appropriateness – River Road Auto, LLC, construct a new 3-Bay Garage within same footprint as the existing building and replace the roof and siding on the second building on site @ 9 River Street. Chair Lussier opened the public hearing and asks the applicant to present. The applicant’s architect apologizes for not submitting the updated information prior to the meeting. Provides summary and update on the project details. Existing building to be demolished and new garage to be provided. The existing is to be resided. Siding to be gray horizontal Hardie plank. Color: Stone paver Trim: Azek Chair Lussier asks to those speaking in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 9 River Street, seeing and hearing none, to those speaking unfavored of the project, seeing and hearing none moves to close the public hearing and opens discussion with commission members. Commissioner Robinson comments concerns regarding scale of elements on front side. Recommended windows slightly taller, provide windows @ 2nd story since there is an office space, the person doors to have transom to make it seem taller. Would move the windows off the floor to 3’-0” w/ larger scale trim (white) and then gray siding with white every where else. These have to be commercial garage doors and would like to have more glass however security would be an issue, so they are ok. States that the commission would like to discuss final colors selections if applicant’s representative is ok with that. Representative confirms. The applicant representative provided samples for the commission to provide selections and applicant’s representative agreed. MOTION by Commissioner Robinson to approve the application as submitted and per the following conditions: Siding” 6” Lap Siding Hardie Plank Color: Stone Paver Trim, Corner Boards, Garage Doors: White Corner boards to be same width as lap siding (6”) Windows: To be 1’-0” taller than presented w/ transom over front door. Windows along first floor to have transoms. Roof: GAL Timberline Architectural Shingle Color: Charcoal Fence: Black Chain-link w/ black supports Lights: Lanterns on bldg. Color: Black, Up lights to be provided @ sign x3 Seconded by Commissioner Moore. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. The applicant’s representative provided examples of signage to be used on building. It is not part of this application and applicant shall submit new application for signage following the HDC guidelines. The commission did provide brief comments and required a full signage package to be submitted per the HDC guidelines. Commissioner Robinson commented on the signs sizing, need to know materials, etc. Chair Lussier stated to update the schematic design with the signage placed and shared concern on the small print on the small sign. Commissioner Bella states that the sign should have the address and Chair Lussier was concerned that they had the same address number. b. Extension of Time Form 4  Kathleen Bradley-Colwell (Planning Division Director) explains the form and the use of the form. States that the commission agrees to delay 60 days and its clear in the rules & regulations that we can do it with the form. Casey Dowgiert (Consulting Historic Planner) will provide form to approve at next meeting. (No Motion required at this time) c. Methuen Historic District Commission 2023 Meeting Schedule MOTION by Commissioner Robinson to approve the application as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Moore. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. Schedule approved. 5) Old Business: None 6) Enforcement: 9:40pm a. 2 Charles Street: Still has stop work order. b. Osgood Street, 46 Hampshire Street, & 305 Broadway Street need to send letters. 7) Other Business 8) Adjournment MOTION to adjourn by Commissioner Robinson. Seconded by Commissioner Bella. UNANIMOUS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. Meeting Adjourned at 9:44PM. 5