• 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

June 16, 2011

The Historic Preservation Commission met on Thursday, June 16th, 2011 at the City Council Chambers, 305 Gay Street.  A work session began at 6:00PM to discuss Administrative Review Guidelines and policy/procedural issues. 

Summary of Work Session Topics: Mr. Brandewie reviewed a draft map showing the contributing status of properties within the Historic District.  With Ms. McCoy's assistance, a copy of the original photographs of the District as submitted with the original nomination report is now available.  Mr. Roche and staff reported on a conversation with Karen Theimer Brown on suggestions to improve the process especially as it related to administrative review guidelines.  One concern raised was the issue of whether staff can legally approve items administratively if they don't meet an education requirement which basically requires a graduate degree in a related field or an architectural degree/license.  We are waiting on a legal opinion from the State as to whether to proceed with the draft as submitted.  Staff reviewed changes to the draft.  It was also suggested that it could be modified to move some of these items to a "Consent Agenda" status or have the Chair sign off on minor items.  The need to advertise or post the property was discussed also as it relates to minor review items.  Mr. Corvan and Ms. McCoy reported on a meeting they had with Sherri Marsh Jones, a consultant, to explore the idea of conducting a re-inventory of the District or new areas.  Funding would be an obstacle.  Mr. Corvan also reviewed standards for review of demolition requests from Eastport Maine that would help the HPC review this item.  It was reported that there are an estimated five (5) properties that are in extremely poor condition within the District.  The work session ended at approximately 6:55PM.

Chair Kathy Manicke called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.  Ms. Manicke began the meeting by taking roll call and swearing in the persons to testify.

Commissioners Attending: Kathy Manicke, Chair; Brian Roche; Jay Corvan, Farrell McCoy.

Absent:  Katie Clendaniel; Gary Young, Vice Chair

Other Representatives Attending: Daniel L. Brandewie, City Planner II.  Odie Wheeler, Public Works Director.

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:    May 3rd, Special Called Meeting.  April 21st, 2011.  March 17th, 2011. 

Mr. Corvan moved to approve the minutes of May 3rd, 2011 as submitted.  Ms. McCoy seconded.  Motion carried.   

Ms. McCoy moved to approve the minutes of April 21st, 2011 as submitted.  Mr. Corvan seconded the motion.  Motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Corvan moved to approve the minutes of March 17, 2011.  Ms. McCoy seconded the motion.  Motion carried unanimously.  

 

NEW CASES                                   

HPC#53-11, 211 Oakley Street, Shawn and Laura Ridgley, (by Haddaway Home Improvements); to replace front porch columns, install exterior door going to basement, replace exterior door on 2nd story in rear with replacement window, remove rear chimney.  Branden Haddaway spoke on behalf of the applicants.  They would be replacing all the columns on the front wrap-around porch with a fiberglass tapered 8" column to match (HB&G PermaCast with a Doric base and cap).  The specifications were reviewed.  A second item would be to replace a deteriorated wooden door on a side basement entrance with a fiberglass replacement door (specifications provided).  A third item would be to replace a 2nd story door with a 2 over 2 vinyl replacement window.  The next item was a request to remove a chimney on the rear portion of the dwelling.  Discussion followed.  HPC members expressed concern over removal of the chimney and staff reviewed the guidelines on this item.  After no further discussion from the public, members asked that the issue of the chimney be voted upon separately.

Ms. Farrell McCoy motioned to approve the first three items as submitted, seconded by Jay Corvan.  Motion carried 3-0, with Ms. McCoy, Mr. Roche and Mr. Corvan voting affirmatively in a roll call vote.  Ms. Manicke did not vote.   

Mr. Corvan motioned to approve the removal of the chimney with Brian Roche seconding the motion.  A roll call vote was taken.  Mr. Corvan: no.  Farrell McCoy: no.  Mr. Roche voted in favor of the motion stating that overall benefits of the house being repaired and the expense involved by the applicant outweigh the need to preserve the chimney.  Motion failed with a 2-1 vote against the proposed removal of the chimney.  Ms. Manicke did not vote.

HPC#54-11,  204 West End Avenue, Melvin L and Helen Schneider; to install full length glass storm door and repair front porch entrance hand rails (after the fact construction).  Mr. Brandewie provided the staff report.  This is an after-the-fact installation of front step porch railing and the installation of a front full glass storm door.  Mr. Brandewie noticed the work while assisting another owner across the street.  There were square balusters installed when the predominant pattern are turned balusters on the front porch.  The rails and balusters were painted white recently and it is less noticeable.  Metal caps were installed on the two end posts as shown in the photographs.  The applicant has indicated a willingness to change out the balusters if required and remove the caps if required.  There was no one else in attendance to speak in favor or against the application.  Discussion followed. 

Ms. Farrell McCoy motioned to approve the application as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Corvan.  Motion carried 3-0 in favor with a roll call vote with Mr. Corvan, Mr. Roche and Ms. McCoy voting favorably.  The Chair, Ms. Manicke did not vote. 

HPC#55-11, 317 West End Ave., Shore Home Associates, LLC (Jim Chaney); to install 2 over 2 vinyl replacement windows for entire house and wrap windows.  Mr. Chaney reviewed the application which is to install vinyl replacement windows in the entire house and re-wrap the sills.  The lead base protection requirements are driving a number of owners to consider vinyl replacement windows and this is major issue.  Mr. Frank Cooke concurred on this issue.  Ms. Anne Damianos asked a question about the window replacement process.  There were no other comments from those in attendance.  Discussion followed on how the vinyl replacement windows were to be installed.  There appeared to be no outside trim or details affected by the replacement windows and the windows were in a poor state of repair.

Mr. Corvan motioned to approve the application as submitted, seconded by Mr. Roche.  A roll call vote was taken.  Mr. Roche-yes; Mr. Corvan-yes; Ms. McCoy abstained because she is opposed to vinyl replacement windows.  Note:  A voting irregularity was discussed with Ms. Manicke later and Ms. Manicke voted in favor of the motion.  Motion carried. 

HPC#56-11, 105 Oakley St., Tresh Warner, by (Randy Bell Home Improvement); to install 18 vinyl replacement windows (9 over 9) on both floors on front and sides, and on the rear 2nd story; install retractable awning in rear.  Mr. Brandewie provided a staff report as the applicant was not present.  Mr. Bell then appeared at the meeting and gave an overview of the project.  Mr. Bell reported that all the windows except on the lower rear façade of the house would be replaced.  A retractable awning was also requested to be placed in the rear of the house near the sliding doors due to sun exposure.  Mr. Bell discussed some concerns with the dormer window trim and sill work that may be affected.  He will match the trim and details as the windows are replaced.  HPC members asked for clarification. 

Mr. Corvan motioned to approve the application as submitted; seconded by Mr. Roche.  A roll call vote was taken:  Mr. Corvan-yes; Mr. Roche-yes; Ms. McCoy-abstained.  She is opposed to vinyl window replacements.  Motion carried 2-0 in favor with one abstention. 

HPC#57-11, 305 Glenburn Ave., Bill and Eugenie Rada; to install asphalt architectural-dimensional shingles over 3 tab shingles on residence (original shingles were cedar shake shingles).  Mr. Rada presented the application.  They seek to install dimensional shingles over 3 tab shingles although there are cedar shake shingles underneath.  They propose to use an Owens-Corning Oakridge shingle-estate grey.  No one else spoke in opposition or in favor of the application. Mrs. Rada commented on their effort to contact the Maryland Historic Trust and apply for a tax credit but MHT insisted on a number of change and they decided not to pursue a tax credit.  HPC members discussed the application.

Mr. Corvan motioned to approve the application as submitted; seconded by Mr. Roche.  Roll call vote was taken:  Mr. Corvan-yes.  Mr. Roche-yes. Ms. McCoy-yes.  Motion carried.  The Chair, Ms. Manicke did not vote.

 

HPC#58-11, 606 William Street, Ann Damianos, (Jay Corvan, Architect); to extend side and rear room addition four (4) ft.; install casement style new windows and door as submitted; install siding and shingles to match existing; request approval of design of accessory building.  Mr. Corvan recused himself from the Commission as he is representing the applicant.  He presented a revised set of drawings for both the accessory building and rear addition.  The changes to the accessory building include an increase in height to approximately 20 ft. on one gable roof. Ms. Damianos intends to use the accessory building as supplementary dwelling unit but understands that they will need Board of Zoning approval.  Mr. Brandewie confirmed that they will need a variance to the height limitation of 15 ft. and that they have applied for a variance.  Mr. Corvan reviewed changes to the plans for the rear 4 ft. kitchen addition.  Changes reflect a new deck with railing, being added in the rear.  Changes to the window layout were also discussed.  A bay window is shown at the rear of the house.  Lattice work will frame in part of the lower foundation.  The deck appears to wrap around the left side of the house looking at it from the rear.  Mr. Brandewie inquired about the setback to the side yard from the deck and noted there is no left side elevation drawing from the rear to better understand the changes.  Mr. Corvan also noted that a chimney is proposed to be removed. 

HPC members noted they just rejected removal of a chimney on the previous application and asked why this change is being requested.  Ms. Damianos noted that it was primarily driven by the interior space needs.  The chimney is not noticeable from the street view.  Mr. Brandewie reminded members of the local guidelines.  Ms. McCoy questioned whether a rear deck is appropriate on a Victorian style house?  Hearing no further discussion, the Chair closed this portion of the public hearing.

After further discussion, Ms. McCoy motioned to approve the plans for the accessory building; seconded by Mr. Roche.  Roll call vote:  Mr. Roche-yes.  Ms. McCoy-yes.  Ms. Manicke-yes.  Motion carried.  It was recommended that the applicant provide further details and elevations of the left side of the addition. 

Ms. McCoy made a motion to approve the plans for the rear addition with the removal of the chimney; seconded by Mr. Roche.  Roll call vote:  Mr. Roche-yes.  Ms. McCoy-yes.  Ms. Manicke-yes.  Motion carried. 

Ms. McCoy motioned to re-open Case No. 53-11; Brian Roche seconded. Motion carried.  After further discussion, Ms. McCoy motioned to approve the rear chimney for the house located at 211 Oakley; seconded by Brian Roche.  Roll call vote:  Ms. Manicke-yes, noting that the chimney was in the rear at a lower elevation; Ms. McCoy-yes.  Mr. Roche-yes, noting that the overall improvements to the property outweigh the loss of the chimney.  Motion carried 3-0 in favor.

 

ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED/ROUTINE MAINTENANCE

RENEWAL/EXTENSION REQUESTS

HPC#52-11, 207 West End Ave., Frank Cooke, amendment to COA to include soffit and ridge vent on roof.   Mr. Cooke identified the need to install additional attic ventilation.  This is a request to modify the COA from last month.  His original intent was to install gable ventilation on the front and rear of the house with fans but has now decided to install a ridge and soffit vent.  He is looking to HPC for guidance.  Mr. Corvan discussed several product alternatives for both ventilation applications.  It was recommended that Mr. Corvan possibly meet on site with staff to review possible alternatives prior to installation.  It was also recommended that a sample of the ridge vent be supplied to staff prior to installation.  No one else spoke in favor or against the application.

Ms. Manicke made a motion to amend the COA issued last month to include the installation of a low profile ridge vent with the type of soffit vent to be determined upon consultation with staff and Mr. Corvan.  Ms. McCoy seconded the application.  Roll call vote:  Mr. Corvan-yes.  Mr. Roche-yes.  Ms. McCoy-yes.  Motion carried. 

HPC#42-10, 120 High St., Farrell McCoy (Jay Corvan, Architect), revisions to side porch addition and rear, extension request of COA.  Mr. Corvan and Ms. McCoy recused themselves from the Commission.  Mr. Corvan, who had been hired by Ms. McCoy, prior to both their appointments to the HPC, reviewed possible changes to the side porch/room addition and a window change in the rear.  It was noted that COA technically has not expired as long as the building permit is remaining active.  Work is progressing slower than anticipated due to various reasons according to Ms. McCoy.  She wanted to keep the HPC informed.  Ms. Manicke noted that the HPC could not take action on the request since they no longer had a quorum.  They were advised to bring the application at a future date when work is to begin to reflect possible revisions. 

Staff noted that many of the agenda items under other business had already been touched upon at the work shop.  

Meeting adjourned at approximately 9:45PM. 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Daniel L. Brandewie
City Planner II