• City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland
  • City of Cambridge Maryland

Print this page

HPC Meeting Minutes

July, 27, 2011

The Historic Preservation Commission met on Thursday, July 27, 2011 at the City Council Chambers, 305 Gay Street.  Chair Kathy Manicke called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00PM. Ms. Manicke began the meeting by taking roll call and swearing in the persons to testify.

Commissioners Attending: Kathy Manicke (Chair), Brian Roche; Farrell McCoy (who arrived at approximately 7:10 p.m.)

Absent: Jay Corvan; Katie Clendaniel

Other Representatives Attending: Daniel L. Brandewie, City Planner II; Commissioner Frank Stout.

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:  June 16, 2011

Mr. Roche moved to approve the June 16th, 2011 minutes.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carried unanimously.

 

Consent Agenda

Ms. Manicke stated she would like to move the consent agenda items to the end of the meeting.  Mr. Brandewie noted that the intent of the Consent Agenda was to approve certain cases in an expeditious manner and that is why they are at the beginning of the agenda.  Commission members agreed. 

Mr. Brandewie said the consent agenda was used back in March 2011, but have expanded its use with some improved guidelines.  Basically the process that Staff is recommending is to nominate certain cases that are fairly straightforward, clearly meet the spirit of the guidelines and can be generally approved without discussion.  The Chair normally announces early in the meeting that they have placed items on the consent agenda.  The Commissioners may also nominate other cases if they feel they are appropriate for the consent agenda.  If no Commissioners object, the item is moved to the consent agenda.  The Chair then should ask the members of the public and Commission members if they have questions or feel the need to speak on these cases.  If so, the cases would be pulled off the consent agenda and put back onto the regular agenda.  Otherwise, the HPC can take action on the cases collectively.

Ms. Manicke asked if anyone wanted to address these consent agenda items.  Ms. McCoy has a concern about the shed on 114 Oakley Street; she would like to hold this case off.  Ms. Manicke announced that this case will be moved back to the Regular agenda.  There were no comments from any one about 420 Race Street and 301 Mill Street. 

Ms. McCoy moved to approve the two consent agenda items as submitted.  Mr. Roche seconded the motion.  Motion carries.       

HPC # 5-12, 114 Oakley Street, Christopher Markin, property owner, requests installation of 12' x 20' shed in rear of property; install 15' wood picket fence on right side entrance of house (height 4 ft.).  Staff provided background information on the application. 

Mr. Markin said he is going to buy a prefabricated shed, 12 x 20 shed to put in the back corner of his yard.  He does not have any existing shed.  Ms. McCoy had a question about the photo in the application and wasn't clear where the shed was going to be placed.  This was clarified.  She does not have any objections to the shed after hearing from Mr. Markin.  Ms. Manicke said she does not have a problem with the shed because it is a typical little yard shed and is not generally visible from the street.  No one else spoke in favor or against the application. 

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carries. Ms. McCoy moved to accept this application as submitted.  Ms. Manicke seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

 

Regular Agenda Items

HPC # 2-12, 211 Oakley Street, Shawn and Laura Ridgely, property owners, request to remove rear addition and concrete slab (not original to house), construct new addition over crawl space with roof pitch and overhang to match existing kitchen roof located on rear/side of building; install double hung windows to match existing windows on house-trim to match; install double door in rear; install HardiPlank (fiber cement) siding to resemble existing siding; install solar panels on rear roof addition (not visible from Oakley Street).  Branden Haddaway is the applicant.

Mr. Brandewie provided background information on the project.  He noted that they do not have the specifications on the solar panels yet; staff would recommend as a condition for approval that the applicant bring back specifications to the Department of Public Works (DPW); verify the location and its fit or placement on the roof. 

Mr. Branden Haddaway, applicant, 2001 Bloomingdale Road, Queenstown, Maryland 21658 said he only thing he saw was the 1 over 1 window.  He was hoping to match up to the existing sunroom on the side of the house and go with the 2 high, 3 wide with the full pane on the lower sash to match the windows on the side porch (opposite the kitchen). 

Shawn Ridgely, 211 Oakley Street, said the solar panels are flat, they would lie on the same pitch as the roof, and they are not going to be elevated at all.  They are going to be for hot water.  It is going to be assisting the base board heat and the radiators.

Ms. Manicke asked if any one wished to speak for or against this application.  There was no one.

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carried.

Mr. Roche moved to accept this application as submitted with the exception that the windows are to be 6 over 1 on this addition and that the applicant provide more detail to DPW Staff on the solar panels.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carried. 

HPC # 4-12, 115 Vue de Leau Street, James Bliffen, property owner, requests to remove 13 existing windows and aluminum storm windows and install thirteen (13) vinyl clad replacement windows; original frame and exterior shutter brackets to remain.

In Mr. Brandewie's opinion there is minimal historic character in the outward appearance of the existing windows.  The windows have been covered with storm windows.  There is little in the way of exterior window trim and detail that is affected.  Mr. Bliffen is replacing the windows with 2 over 2 which are consistent with the existing windows.

Mr. Bliffen said he has most of the original shutters, but they are in bad condition.  It is his intent to clean them up and put them back; it is a project at a time.  Mr. Roche encouraged Mr. Bliffen to put back the shutters on the street facing side of the house first since that will bring back the original streetscape look.      

Ms. Manicke asked if any one wished to speak for or against this application.  There was no one.

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

Ms. McCoy moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Roche seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

HPC # 6-12, 1103 School Street, Keith and Kathy Wilson, homeowners, request replacement of front porch wood flooring with in-kind; replacement of three porch columns with Turncraft 6" pvc round tapered with base and cap; re-side house and garage with 4" vinyl double clapboard siding over asbestos siding; replace deteriorated, corrugated metal garage roof with corrugated asphalt shingle project (Ondura roofing product). Mr. R. T. Mills, Jr., 5 Oriole Drive, Cambridge, Maryland, applicant, is representing them.

Staff asked the applicant to explain why they needed to replace the asbestos siding as they appeared to be in reasonable condition.  Mr. Mills stated that there was virtually no insulation between the frame and shingles and this would be addressed if they are approved for siding.  Also, it would help the long term marketability of the house.  Ms. Manicke asked any one wished to speak for or against the application.  No one spoke. 

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

Ms. McCoy moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Roche seconded the motion.  Motion carries. 

HPC # 7-12, 707 Locust Street, Frank Method, Bonnie Cain and Rebecca Shannon, homeowners, request removal of two entry doors in rear and to close it in; removal of one window in rear and replacement with French style door; repair of roof with in-kind material replacements.  Knox Builders, LLC is the contractor.    

Mr. Brandewie said research shows this house is one of the oldest houses on Locust Street and while the guidelines generally discourage removal of the windows, in this case the impact would be minimal.  There are several doors on the back of the house that limit the interior space and replacing the doors with in-kind siding would have no material affect on the historical qualities of the home in the rear.  The siding appears to be a good match with existing siding.  The siding on the front of the house appears to be original.  Commission members spoke favorably of the changes. 

Ms. Manicke asked if any one wished to speak for or against the application.  No one spoke.

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

Ms. McCoy moved to approve this application as submitted on the basis if staff recommendations.  Mr. Roche seconded the motion.  Motion carries. 

HPC # 8-12, 430 Race Street, Anthony Calabro, property owner, Arthur Webb Jr., applicant, requests to add signage to windows, rear upper wall and new awning with logo, installation of new fence door in rear fence, removal of flat roof in rear; replace with pitched roof to match; installation of new glass exterior door in rear; installation of walk-in cooler and 7' x 8' storage shed in rear behind fence.  (Note:  this is the middle space of the commercial building next to Cannery Way for a new business).

Mr. Brandewie said Mr. Webb's intent is to start a restaurant business possibly with an oyster shucking operation.  He might combine retail and wholesale related services.  The bulk of the changes are to the rear addition which is not original to the structure and is substandard.  There are no redeeming historical features to this addition which is part concrete block.  The raised roof with a change in roof pitch would accommodate the business needs.  The awning design and signage appear to be appropriate to the district. Commission members concurred with these findings. 

Ms. Manicke asked if any one wished to speak for or against the application.  No one spoke.

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

Ms. McCoy moved to approve the application as submitted on the basis of staff's recommendations.  Mr. Roche seconded the motion.  Motion carries.

HPC # 58-11, 606 William Street, Ann Damianos, property owner, Jay Corvan, Architect, requests to modify plan to extend side and rear room; change in windows and porch addition on side of house. 

Mr. Brandewie reviewed the proposed changes which are to continue the extension of the kitchen addition along the remainder of the rear addition and to install a porch roof with a different design as previously submitted.  There are additional changes to the windows in both the rear and side additions.  Staff has concerns with the proposed windows on the side of the house where they do not match the style, size and spacing or rhythm of the existing window patterns.  He also noted that they do not have specifications on some of the proposed products such as for the windows, shingles, siding and porch design.  The HPC reviewed Ms. Damianos' drawings.  Mr. Roche said they don't need spec sheets if they match existing but did express concern about the side windows.  Ms. Damianos presented information on the shingles and siding.  No one else spoke in favor or against the application.    

Mr. Roche moved to close discussion.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carried.

Mr. Roche moved to approve the revised application as submitted with the exception that the windows on the side of the house that are shown in the drawing will be the size and scale consistent with the existing windows and they not be modified to three windows as shown.  The proposed changes on the back of the house are approved with the exception that the spec sheets are to be provided to the Department of Public Works and they should match closely to what they have seen in the sketch.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion. Motion carried.

ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED/ROUTINE MAINTENANCE

Mr. Brandewie reported that there were five cases that were administratively approved or were considered routine maintenance. 

Commissioner Frank Stout said his sincere appreciation for the work of HPC this evening.  He stated that this is the best meeting he has been to in over three years.  Honestly, he said the HPC members were on point, matters were taken care of, it was in the best interest of the City of Cambridge, and this was a model for how this should proceed.  He said did every individual get everything they wanted exactly the way they wanted it - no, but HPC moved through things impartially, expeditiously, properly and this is the way it should run.  He said thank you very much. 

Commissioner Stout said the City Council wanted to meet August 18th.  The Council has met with the Planning Commission.  He expressed concern about the HPC procedural vote on two cases last month regarding removal of chimneys although he did not object to the final outcome of their decision.    

Commissioner Stout reported to the Commission that Mr. Young has resigned.  There has been a nomination from a member of Council and an appointment made by Council to fill this position.   Professionally, he believed this individual has a real estate background. 

Ms. McCoy questioned why the Council took this action and commented on Mr. Corvan qualifications for this position.   There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.                

 

Respectfully submitted,

Daniel L. Brandewie
City Planner II