HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
DECEMBER 3, 2014
Chairman Michael Lane called the regular meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. In attendance were Commission members John Ames, Rob Busler, Alexa Cawley, Lucy Maddox, Nancy Maguire and Ed Minch, Kees de Mooy, Zoning Administrator, Jennifer Mulligan, Town Clerk and guests.
Mr. Lane stated that the Chestertown Historic District Commission takes its authority from Chapter 93 oft~e Code of the Town of Chestertown and operates under the Historic District Design Guidelines that were adopted by the Mayor and Council of Chestertown on October 7, 2002 and revised March 7, 2012.
Mr. Lane asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of the meeting of November 5, 2014. Mr. Ames moved to approve the minutes as submitted, was seconded by Ms. Cawley and carried unanimously.
Items on the consent calendar were as follows:
- a. BP2014-121 – Robert Tacher, 209 Philosopher’s Terrace – ratify roof approval.
Ms. Cawley moved to approve BP2014–121 for a roof as it was in accordance with the Design Guidelines for the Town of Chestertown, was seconded by Mr. Minch and carried unanimously.
The first item on the agenda was BP20 14-122 from Christian Havemeyer at 117 S. Cross Street for paver steps. There was no one present for the application and the matter was tabled.
The next item on the agenda was BP2014-129 from Robert Dean at 541 High Street for renovations. Mr. Dean was present for the application. Mr. Lane read the application into the record. Mr. de Mooy reviewed the past approvals for the property. Mr. Dean stated that the entire house was 16′ x 20′ and he would like to put a 2-story addition on the rear of the property, remove the chimney, and install a deck on the side of the house where the small addition formerly known as 541 A High Street had been partially demolished.
Mr. Dean stated that asbestos siding covered the structure in some areas and the rest was just building paper. He said that he would like to install Hardiplank siding with a 6″ reveal on the new addition and the sides of the original building. He would restore the wood clapboard siding and porch on the front facade.
Mr. Lane stated that 541A High Street appeared on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps and did have a presence on the street. Mr. Dean stated that it was completely rotted and only the front facade existed. He said it was not salvageable. Mr. Ames moved to approve demolition of the facade known as 541A High Street as it was in accordance with the Design Guidelines, was seconded by Mr. Minch and carried unanimously.
Mr. Dean stated that the body of the chimney on the interior of the house and was deteriorated and had large holes. Mr. Lane stated that the chimneys were a defining feature along the block. After discussion, Ms. Maguire moved to deny the removal of the chimney from the roof up, was seconded by Mr. Ames and carried unanimously.
Ms. McGuire stated that she did not like the idea of the deck off of the side of the house as decks were a more modem invention. Mr. Dean stated that he would have a fence in front of the deck so it would not be visible from the street. After discussion, Mr. Dean decided to table the fence and the side deck until he moved further along with the renovation.
Mr. de Mooy stated that the existing windows in the building were not original. Mr. Dean stated that he was proposing 2-over-2 wood windows for the renovation. He said that the rest of the front facade would be restored, including the front door.
Ms. Maguire moved to approve the 2-story addition with Hardiplank siding with a 6″ reveal on the addition and on the sides of the main house, 2-over-2 PlyGen wood windows with placement as shown on the drawings, parged cinderblock foundation and Timberline architectural roofing shingles to match the front roof with at least a 4 in 12 roof pitch. The front facade, including the siding, all woodwork and front door will be restored as submitted as it was in accordance with the Design Guidelines, was seconded by Ms. Maddox and carried unanimously.
Mr. Dean stated that he would return with a submission for the rear door at a future meeting.
The next item on the agenda was BP2014-131 from Edge Construction and Patricia Berlen for exterior renovations at 620 High Street. Mr. Alex Edge of Edge Construction was present for the application. Mr. Lane read the application into the record.
Mr. Lane stated that the Commission did not permit vinyl siding in the Historic District. Ms. Maguire stated that the existing siding on the sides and back of the building looked to be in good condition. Mr. Edge stated that there was a 10″ exposure on the cedar and old siding under it. Ms. Maguire stated that the sides and rear of the building would look very nice painted. Ms. Cawley moved to deny the portion of the application regarding vinyl siding replacement on the sides and rear of the house with an invitation to resubmit, was seconded by Mr. Minch and carried unanimously.
Mr. Minch moved to approve the portion of the application having to do with replacing the 3-tab shingles with architectural shingles on the porch roof, was seconded by Ms. Maddox and carried unanimously.
The next item on the agenda was BP2014-127 from Washington College at 300 Washington Avenue for signage. Mr. Reid Raudenbush was present for the application. Mr. de Mooy stated that the College properties were zoned Institutional and the Planning
Commission was responsible for approving signage, which was done at the November 2014 meeting. The signage before the Historic District for approval was at the Custom House and the Alumni House and the proposed new construction at 215 Washington Avenue.
Mr. Raudenbush stated that the idea for the signage was to be uniform through the Campus, and to include buildings that had existing signage in the Historic District. Mr. de Mooy stated that the proposed signage would have to meet the sign requirements for the Historic District regarding content.
Mr. Lane asked if there would be new parking signs at the Custom House. Mr. Raudenbush stated that there would likely be new signs installed wherever there was existing signage.
Mr. Minch moved to approve the sign aesthetics as submitted, was seconded by Mr. Ames and carried unanimously.
The next item on the agenda was BP20 14-117 from Washington College at 215 Washington Avenue ~or a new building. Mr. Lane read the application into the record. Mr. Reid Raudenbush of Washington College, Ms. Suzanne Klein and Mr. Brian Tucker, architects from EYP Architecture and Engineering presented.
Mr. de Mooy stated that the Planning Commission approved final site plan for this project at their meeting of October 15,2014. Mr. Raudenbush stated that this project was subject to a matchingllvlaryland State Grant Application which was approved in the last session for a $3.6 million match towards the building.
Ms. Klein stated that since their last meeting with the Historic District Commission in July 2013 they have continued to make design improvements, taking into consideration the Commission’s comments at the entry door to the building and changed the back room to make it similar to the rest of the building instead of mostly glass.
Ms. Klein stated that the building would resemble other College campus buildings by using their standard red brick. The building features Hardiplank siding, a rubberized roof that mimicked slate and a granite base around the building, and painted white wooden windows (combination of fixed and double-hung). The landscape plan was well received by the Planning Combission and included adequate lighting for safety that would not spill over to neighboring properties.
Ms. Klein stated that this building would to be certified to a LEED Gold standard.
Ms. Klein stated thatrPhase 1 would be underway in the Spring of2015 but Phase II was included in the packet so the Commission could have an understanding of what the finished project would look like.
Ms. Klein stated that there would be an access drive off of East Campus A venue for faculty and staff parking only.
Ms. Klein stated that the peak of the roof was a little over 40′ but well within the height limit for Chestertown. Mr. Lane stated that there was a 10% difference allowed in a visual field where the majority of buildings were similar in height. Ms. Klein stated that the building would be set back 60′ from the neighbors to the south and the peak of the building was at 45′. She said that the existing building was 38′ tall and had a flat stretch the entire length of the building. She said that the proposed building was 38′ between the eaves and the ridge for the gable.
Mr. de Mooy stated that there was discussion at the last meeting regarding the rhythm and scale of the street. He said that the existing building presents a larger mass to the street than the proposed building would, adding that this was an institutional building so it would by definition be larger than the neighboring residences.
Ms. Maguire stated that even though this building did not fall within the 10% height differential, the mechanicals would be hidden in the roof which solved noise issues that have been raised in the case of another building. She said that the landscaping would also be a large improvement on the site, which included a low brick wall next to the sidewalk along Washington Avenue, similar to that on the main campus.
Mr. Raudenbush stated that the College was receiving credit for stormwater management because they were going from 1.5 acres of impervious surface to .8 acres of impervious surface. He said tha~ geothermal wells would be constructed under the field to the rear of the property.
Mr. Raudenbush stated that it was intended for this campus to be accessed primarily on foot. There would be no parking on site for students.
Ms. Klein stated that part of Phase I would incorporate all infrastructures, including mechanical services.
Mr. Busler stated that there he was not fond of the Italianate style cornices on the rear building and asked why they incorporated that rather than using a more Colonial style. Ms. Klein stated that they thought the Italianate style a nice touch for the eaves and cornices and they wanted to work with the vernacular of the neighboring buildings.
Ms. Maguire asked why the one wing of the building was at an angle. Ms. Klein stated that the angle would create a welcoming gesture to the main campus and help with the pedestrian path.
Mr. Minch moved to approve Phase I of the project for 215 Washington College as submitted as it was in keeping with the Design Guidelines for new construction, was seconded by Ms. Maddox and carried with four (4) in favor, Mr. Busler and Mr. Lane opposed.
There being no further business, Ms. Maddox moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:36 p.m., was seconded by Ms. Cawley and carried unanimously.
Jennifer Mulligan Michael Lane
Town Clerk Chairman