Historic Resource Commission

Schenectady Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes September 18, 2017 I. CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Wiles called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Vice Chair Wiles explained that he would be chairing the meeting in the absence of the former Chair, Commissioner Britt, who had recently resigned from the Commission. He stated that because the Commission has seven members, a majority of the full Commission (four votes) is required to take any action regardless of how many Commissioners are present at the meeting. He noted that although there were only five Commissioners in attendance four votes would be needed to approve an application. II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dr. Dean Bennett; Jackie Craven; David F. Lowry; Ben Wiles; Patricia Yager STAFF: Avi Epstein, Zoning Officer; Ashlynn Savarese, Assistant Corporation Counsel; Jennifer Mills, Secretary III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST None. IV. ADOPTION OF MEETING MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Craven, seconded by Commissioner Yager, to approve the August 14, 2017 Meeting Minutes as submitted. Motion carried, with Commissioner Wiles abstaining from the vote because he was not present at the August meeting. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Consideration for approval submitted by Adam Farquharson to paint front façade and side of building. The premise is located at 21 North Ferry Street. Bob Farquharson appeared before the Commission on behalf of his son Adam. Mr. Farquharson explained that they would like to paint all the blue portions of the building Behr Ancient Pottery (N250-5), with the trim remaining cream (Behr French Crème S300-1), and the accent color dark red (Behr Dark Crimson M140- Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 1 of 10 7). He stated that they feel that these are historically appropriate colors and that they will complement the surrounding properties. Commissioner Wiles asked what color the accents that are currently blue will be painted. Mr. Farquharson stated that they will be Ancient Pottery. Commissioner Bennett asked if the wood shingles on the gables will also be painted Ancient Pottery. Mr. Farquharson stated that they will be. Commissioner Wiles asked Mr. Farquharson if they plan to do repairs to the roof, and what material it is constructed of. Mr. Farquharson stated that the roof is in good condition but the aluminum flashing needs to be repaired; he explained that it will be replaced in kind. He noted that the roof is stamped metal. Commissioner Wiles stated that he does not believe that the foundation wall below the first floor should be the same color as the rest of the façade. He noted that along the street the neighboring houses all have a foundation wall of a different color. Mr. Farquharson noted that on the other three sides of the house the foundation wall has been left unpainted and the stone is gray. He asked if the Commissioners preferred that the front foundation wall be painted to match the other sides. Commissioner Bennet stated that without seeing the other sides he did not feel comfortable requiring an exact color, but that he believes that a dark gray would be more appropriate than the Ancient Pottery color. Commissioner Wiles noted that the cellar windows also have a dark gray trim, so painting the foundation wall a similar color would result in the windows having less prominence, which he believes would be a desirable effect. He asked Mr. Farquharson if they propose to keep the steps red. Mr. Farquharson replied that they do. Commissioner Wiles stated that he had no objection to this. The other Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Craven asked if they proposed to have the water table band (the stone band between the foundation wall and the first-floor façade) the same color as the foundation or if it would remain dark red. Commissioner Bennett stated that he would prefer it be left red. Commissioner Lowry agreed, stating that many other buildings in the area use the accent color on that band. Commissioner Wiles stated that he would be comfortable allowing the applicants to choose whether to paint it the same gray as the foundation wall or let it remain red. The Commissioners concurred. Motion by Commissioner Wiles, seconded by Commissioner Lowry, to approve as submitted the application with the following modifications and conditions: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed within one year. 2. The front foundation wall below the water table line, which is currently blue, will be painted a dark gray color chosen by the owner. 3. The water table line, currently painted red, may remain red, be painted to match the gray foundation wall, or be painted the French Crème trim color. Findings: Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 2 of 10  1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The owner is introducing a new color scheme which is historically appropriate and is consistent with many of the other colors used on the street. Motion carried unanimously. B. Consideration for approval submitted by Nate Germain to create a new patio with metal railing, paint the façade, and install a sign. The premise is located at 617 Union Street. Nate Germain and Reza Mahoutchian appeared before the Commission. Mr. Germain briefly reviewed his application, explaining that he would like to paint the body of the building (currently yellow) Benjamin Moore Stonington Gray (BMHC170), install a new sign, and construct a new patio which will be raised from the sidewalk level and surrounded with a new metal railing. He stated that the raised patio with the railing will accommodate additional dining tables, while allowing the continued use of the existing handicap ramp. Mr. Germain added that the brick used to raise the patio will be similar to that which was used on the brick wall on the site. Commissioner Yager asked if the new sign will use the same brackets as the former sign, so that no new drilled holes will be required in the brick façade. Mr. Germain stated that the sign company he is using, Olson Signs, installed the previous sign as well so he is hopeful that they will at least be able to use the existing holes, if not the same brackets. Commissioner Bennett agreed that he would not like to see further holes made in the façade. The Commissioners concurred. Commissioner Wiles asked what the dimensions of the proposed sign will be. Mr. Germain stated that it is 30 inches wide and 105 inches long. Commissioner Craven noted that the previous sign was longer and skinnier, and that it was made of fabric. Commissioner Wiles asked how the sign will be illuminated. Mr. Germain responded that it will be externally lit from the bottom. Commissioner Wiles asked Mr. Germain if the sign depicts the logo for the business. Mr. Germain stated that it does. Commissioner Wiles stated that there had been a feeling among some of the Commissioners that the recently approved Rare Steakhouse sign, located a few doors down from this property, looks much larger now that it has been installed than it did in the drawings that were presented to the Commission. Commissioner Bennet agreed. Commissioner Wiles stated that since this sign is wider than the previous sign he feels that it could be made even shorter and still have the same visibility. Commissioner Craven noted that in the mock-up photo provided the large black area of the sign makes it appear very dominant and heavy. Mr. Mahoutchian stated that the sign at Rare Steakhouse is much larger than what is being proposed here. Mr. Germain noted that the Rare sign also hangs further Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 3 of 10 away from the building, while the inside edge of this sign is proposed as flush with the façade. Commissioner Wiles noted that one of the arguments given for the Rare Steakhouse sign was that it also would be using the same brackets as the previous sign. Commissioner Yager stated that she does not object to the design of the sign but feels that it feels very heavy on the building and she would not like to have it hang down past the top of the first-floor portion of the façade. Commissioner Wiles agreed that the way the sign is hung could be adjusted so that it would sit higher and not block a portion of the first-floor window. The Commissioners agreed that this would look better. Mr. Mahoutchian asked if other brackets could be used. Commissioner Yager stated that the Commission would prefer that no new holes be made in the façade. Mr. Germain stated that he would be willing to consult with the sign company to see if they could modify where the sign would be mounted without requiring a different placement of the brackets, and that if necessary he would come back to the Commission for further consideration. Commissioner Lowry asked the other Commissioners if anyone thought it would be an issue that this would be the only raised patio on the block. He stated that he does not have any objection to it but wondered if the question of how it would look as part of the streetscape should be considered. Commissioner Wiles stated it was a good point but that he believes that the patio will still look appropriate for the building and will blend with the other restaurants in the row. The other Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Bennett asked if the Commissioners supported the idea that the sign should be reduced in size. Commissioner Wiles stated that he would approve the sign if the length is reduced, and it is hung higher on the building so that the top aligns with the shadow line above the second story window, as shown on the provided photo, and the bottom does not hang below the top of the first floor. He stated that perhaps what is now the middle bracket for the proposed sign could be the bottom bracket. The Commissioners agreed. Mr. Germain stated that this modification was acceptable to him, explaining that the sign is not meant to draw people in from the surrounding area but simply to identify the building. Motion by Commissioner Craven, seconded by Commissioner Wiles, to approve as submitted the application to replace the roof, with the following modifications and conditions: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed within one year. 2. The sign portion of the proposal is modified to allow the sign to be hung from the top point identified at the meeting (where the roof shadow line falls in the provided photo) to no lower than midway between the first-floor window lentil and the second-floor window sill. The sign length will be modified so that it will fit between these two points. New sign brackets Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 4 of 10  may be used but no further holes will be drilled into the façade for the brackets without first obtaining approval from City staff. 3. The raised patio is approved as submitted. The brick used will match the brick used in the side wall on the property. 4. The repainting of the body of the building in Benjamin Moore Stonington Gray (BM HC170) is approved as submitted. Findings: 1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The restaurant is under new ownership and they would like to display the new sign for branding and identification purposes. 3. The raised patio will provide increased functionality as it will allow more seating in the same amount of space. 4. While not identical, the patio is similar to others in the same area and will be constructed in a manner that is consistent with the character of the building. Motion carried unanimously. C. Consideration for approval submitted by Dennis Meyer to paint exterior siding, trim, and doors, and install two pairs of shutters in front. The premise is located at 31 North Street. Dennis Meyer appeared before the Commission. Mr. Meyer explained that he would like to paint the house the Sherwin-Williams colors proposed: Clary Sage (SW6178) for the body of the house, Indian White (SW 0035) for the trim, and Toile Red (SW 0006) for the door and shutters. He noted that the application had been amended to only include the single first-floor pair of shutters as it had been determined that there is not enough room for shutters on the second floor. Commissioner Bennet asked if the proposed shutters are wood. Mr. Meyer stated that they are. Commissioner Craven asked if the shutters are large enough that theoretically they could close and cover the windows. Mr. Meyer replied that they are not. Commissioner Bennett stated that he does not feel that shutters that could not actually be functional are appropriate. Mr. Meyer stated that the building dates to 1900 and he does not feel that it is particularly old or historic. Commissioner Wiles noted that when he went to see the building he thought it seemed to be an informal structure with a very nice rhythm to the windows and felt that the shutters where neither necessary or appropriate. He added that he believes that with the new colors the windows will be accented very nicely and significant interest will be added to the building. Commissioner Wiles noted that the appropriate shutters would have a hinge so that they could fold back and when unfolded they would extend over the entire window. Mr. Meyer stated that he was not insistent that the Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 5 of 10  shutters be allowed and agreed that the new colors would give added interest to the windows. Commissioner Craven asked if he plans to paint the window sashes. Mr. Meyer stated that he was not proposing to because the windows are fairly new and have white sashes, which he felt was close enough to the trim color to blend nicely. Commissioner Craven agreed. Commissioner Wiles asked if the building had always been this same footprint. Mr. Meyer stated that it had, but that the porch had been enclosed. He explained that after Hurricane Irene the house required total renovation, as it had been severely damaged by flooding. Commissioner Bennett asked if he had considered raising the house. Mr. Meyer stated that he was considering it, but felt that he needed more information. He explained that originally the house was a two-family with a second floor that burned during the 1920’s and was never replaced, so he believes that raising it another level could be very appropriate. Motion by Commissioner Bennett, seconded by Commissioner Yager, to approve as submitted the application with the following modifications and conditions: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed within one year. 2. Both sets of shutters have been removed from the application and are not approved. 3. The body of the building will be Sherwin-Williams Clary Sage (SW6178), the trim will be Indian White (SW0035), and the door will be Toile Red (SW0006). The window sashes will remain white. Findings: 1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The proposed shutters are not appropriate as they would be solely a decorative element, and would not be functional. Motion carried unanimously. D. Consideration for approval submitted by John Samatulski to replace existing slate roof with architectural shingles. The premise is located at 28 Ingersoll Avenue. John Samatulski appeared before the Commission. Mr. Samatulski explained that this is the last of three buildings his company is restoring on Ingersoll Avenue. He stated that the slate roof is in severe disrepair with many leaks, and that he had consulted with ten roofing companies but none felt that it could be saved. Mr. Samatulski stated that the cost of replacing the slate roof would be an inappropriate expenditure for a building of this value. He noted that many of the houses on the street have shingled roofs. He stated that he had chosen The Cambridge Collection shingles in Harvard Slate, as submitted with the Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 6 of 10 application, and that he had chosen a very reputable contractor who will also repair in-kind the fascia and trim as needed. Commissioner Craven noted that while it is unfortunate to lose the slate roof she believes that the Commission has been having an on-going issue with finding appropriate replacement shingles. She explained that architectural-style shingles, like those proposed, have a very definite irregular pattern and texture, which might be appropriate for some historic roofs, for instance, where wood shakes might have originally been used, but which do not mimic the look of a slate roof as a more traditional three-tab asphalt shingle would. She noted that products are available, like the Slateline brand shingles approved at the August 2017 meeting, that more closely mimic the original slate pattern. Commissioner Wiles agreed, stating that the architectural shingles are a relatively new idea, and a very simple three-tab shingle would more appropriately mimic the original slate. Mr. Samatulski stated that the shingles he had chosen did indeed look more like a slate roof when applied, and he believes that they look more like a three-tab shingle than an architectural style. He explained that he does not believe that they have the pronounced texture and irregular pattern that many architectural shingles do. Commissioner Bennett stated that he agreed with Commissioners Craven and Wiles, but that he would not object to these shingles for this application. Commissioners Yager and Lowry agreed. Commissioner Craven noted that she has issues with the shingles, but that she is happy to see this building saved from demolition and she does not believe that these particular shingles in this case are objectionable enough to keep the restoration from moving forward. The Commissioners agreed. Motion by Commissioner Wiles, seconded by Commissioner Bennett, to approve as submitted the application to remove the slate roof at 28 Ingersoll Avenue and replace it with Cambridge Color Blends shingles in Harvard Slate, with the following condition: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed in one year. Findings: 1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The roof on the building is remnants of the original slate roof that was installed over one hundred years ago. The roof is in severe disrepair and the slates are nearing the end of their lifespan. Repairing the slate roof would be difficult and less effective than installing the asphalt shingle roof proposed. 3. While there was a lengthy discussion of three-tab versus architectural shingles when considering this application, it was determined that the shingles proposed are less dramatic in appearance than most architectural shingles and thus could be approved as appropriate for this application. Motion carried unanimously. Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 7 of 10 E. Consideration for approval submitted by Michael Barron and John Allen to fix and replace the porch roof and to replace rotted section of pillars. The premise is located at 1147 Lowell Road. Michael Barron and John Allen appeared before the Commission. Mr. Barron explained that the porch roof had never been properly maintained or repaired, and thus water was being channeled the wrong way and the Philadelphia gutter system was not working correctly. He stated that the original roof was metal, but at some point it had been covered with rubber and the subsequent change in the grade of the roof caused water to pool and leak through the porch ceiling in some sections on one side and to eventually spill over the roof edge on the other side. Mr. Baron explained that they propose to remove the rubber and metal roofs, repair any damage, and install a new painted, rubberized roof which would not be visible from the ground level. He noted that some of the wood fascia is rotted and would also be repaired in kind. Commissioner Bennett asked the applicants if any changes would be visible from the public right-of-way. Mr. Barron stated that they would not. Commissioner Bennett asked why, in this case, the applicants came before the Commission. Mr. Allen stated that they felt they should because although the finished project will look the same the materials on the roof will be different. He added that their contractor is hopeful that the damage is not extensive and is limited to what is now visible, and that once the roof is repaired the water run-off will flow properly through the drain system. Motion by Commissioner Wiles, seconded by Commissioner Craven, to approve as submitted the application to fix and replace the porch roof and replace the rotted sections of the pillars with the following condition: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed within one year. Findings: 1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The repairs to the porch roof will not be visible from the public right-of- way and will result in the improved performance of the original drainage system. Motion carried unanimously. F. Consideration for approval submitted by John Samatulski to remove the majority of trees and shrubs in the front of the property and replace with new landscaping. The premise is located at 1322 Stratford Road. Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 8 of 10  John Samatulski appeared before the Commission. Commissioner Wiles noted for the record that he is a neighbor of the property and lives at 1302 Stratford Road. Mr. Samatulski distributed a plan showing what the proposed new landscaping will look like. He explained that when he acquired it the property was in a serious state of neglect, and the previous owner had planted hundreds of trees and shrubs which had become completely overgrown and were choking each other out. He pointed out the historical photos of the property which show very minimal plantings in the front yard. Mr. Samatulski noted that he would like to keep some of the trees that he feels are salvageable, particularly the large dogwood and the Japanese maple. He stated that he had already cleaned up the utility strip area of random planting beds, and plans to remove the trees in this area as well. Zoning Officer Epstein noted that Mr. Samatulski must obtain permission from the City before removing any trees from the utility strip between the street and the sidewalk. Commissioner Wiles stated that the plans will be a big improvement to what has happened at the property in recent years and will bring the landscaping back to a more historically accurate configuration. The Commissioners agreed. Motion by Commissioner Yager, seconded by Commissioner Wiles, to approve as submitted the application to remove the majority of trees and shrubs in the front of the property and replace with new landscaping, with the following modifications and conditions: 1. Once commenced, the project will be completed within one year. 2. The removal of trees within the utility strip, or street lawn, between the sidewalk and the street must be approved by the City before any trees may be removed. Findings: 1. This is a Type II SEQRA. 2. The current condition of the yard is not appropriate or reflective of the original landscaping concept for this property. The removal of the excess vegetation and installation of the new landscaping plan will greatly enhance the property. Motion carried unanimously. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Commissioner Yager stated that because of the issues with slate roof removals and finding appropriate replacement roof materials she had been prompted to do some research on the internet, which led her to a company out of Ontario, Canada, called Enviroshake, which makes composite shingles which look like traditional slate and Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 9 of 10  cedar shingles. She disseminated information about the company to the Commissioners and staff, and showed material samples that the company had sent her. The Commissioners agreed that this is an option worth investigating further. Commissioner Wiles asked Zoning Officer Epstein to see if SHPO has an opinion about the use of composite slate-look shingles. Commissioner Craven commented that one of the problems homeowners face when looking for slate alternatives is that the roofing contractors do not offer any alternatives to the standard architectural shingles. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Wiles, seconded by Commissioner Yager, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 pm. Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes –September 18, 2017 –Page 10 of 10