Middle Haddam Historical District Commission
Regular Meeting
June 26, 2008
Eaton E. Smith Meeting Room – Town Hall
East Hampton, CT
Minutes
1. Call to order: Nannette Woodcock, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
2. Roll Call/Seating of Alternates: Nannette Woodcock, Chair, Douglas Mackeown, Vice-Chair, James Royster, Clerk, Richard Walsh; Alternates Christopher Dart, George Coshow, and Gina Ritchie. Alternate Gina Ritchie was seated for the meeting. Also present was Theodore Rossi.
3. Public Hearing.
The public notice was read into the record by Doug Mackeown.
COA App. #416, 94 Middle Haddam Rd., Theodore and Ruth Rossi, Install a granite post and iron fence around the pool; install a pergola and outdoor seating area pool side.
Theodore Rossi was before the commission to discuss plans to install wrought iron pool fencing and two pergolas. The kidney-shaped pool was installed reversed from the original plan, flip- flopped since the first application. The larger curved pergola is now planned for the NE back corner of the pool. A new drawing was supplied with the corrected location. The height of the fence is 56” supported by 8 x 8” granite posts of the same height; one gate for entrance on the house side. A section of the fence will be able to be opened for access. The wood for the pergolas will be Douglas Fir, either 4’ x 8’ or 6’ x 10’ for standing members; 9-10’ high. Applicant is not sure whether he will paint, stain, or let it grey (most likely will let it
grey). The circular/curved pergola is 8’ x 25’ and the rectangular one is 10’ x 30’. Half of one of the pergolas may possibly have a screen cover for shade. The fence will consist of 275 to 300 linear feet of ¾” solid iron fencing (pictures provided) – length approximation due to final landscaping and grading around the pool). The gate may not actually be a rectangle, but may be horseshoe-shaped with a special latch and alarm on it. Photographs were shown (and are made part of this application) showing the height of the pergola and how it would be shaped. The existing garage building in front of the project is approximately 30’ x 60’ so the portion of the pergolas would be visible at the corners and may be able to be seen from the N end of Rte. 151. Pictures were provided to approximate visibility from the road. No lighting fixtures on the pergolas however there may be soft, low-voltage lighting along the
wall and walkway. There may be a small, low structure within the fence area in the NW corner to cover equipment approximately 2-3’ tall which should not be in public view. The gazebo proposed in the previous application #408 denied without prejudice is no longer a part of the installation, nor the white fencing originally planned.
There being no public comment, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:35 p.m.
The Commission agreed to hear two motions, one for the fencing and one for the pergolas applicable to this application.
James Royster moved to grant the application #416, 94 Middle Haddam Road, submitted by Ted and Ruth Rossi to install a fence surrounding their pool, consisting of 8” x 8” granite posts located 8 feet a part, with a total height of 56” with wrought iron members in between, all as depicted on a certain drawing by Green River Forge, submitted with the application; the fence not to exceed 300 linear feet, the precise contour of the enclosure to be determined by the applicant in the course of construction. Seconded by Richard Walsh.
Motion carried 5-0-0
James Royster moved to grant the application #416, by Ted and Ruth Rossi to install two pergolas within the pool enclosure that is also the subject of application #408, as depicted in a computer-generated drawing submitted with the application constructed of Douglas Fir, each pergola no more than 10’ in height. The curved pergola to be approximately 8 x 25 feet and the rectangular pergola is to be approximately 10 x 30 feet, the Douglas Fir members to be of a dimension of 4” x 8” or 6” x 10”for upper members of both pergola, and the rectangular pergola may include a sunshade or cover of the applicant’s choosing that will not be visible as a roof. Motion was seconded by Richard Walsh. Motion Carried 5-0-0.
4. Approval of Minutes and Motions
a. May 29, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes and Motions
Richard Walsh made a motion to approve the May 29, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes as presented, seconded by Mr. Royster. Motion Carried 5-0-0
b. May 29, 2008 Annual Meeting Minutes and Motions
James Royster made a motion to approve the May 29, 2008 Annual Meeting Minutes as presented, seconded by Richard Walsh. Motion Carried 5-0-0
5. Public Remarks for Items Not on Agenda – None
6. Correspondence – None
7. Reports
a. Map, block and Lot Listing – District Maps
Midstate Regional has supplied map information (the colored 2004 version seems to be unfinished, and contains discrepancies). There are discrepancies between the 1976 and 2004 maps. Midstate has yet to locate the 2006 version referred to in their letter to the Commission on Culture and Tourism. On completion of the town GSI project in a few months, generation of an accurate map including new subdivision or lot changes and accessing information will be easy to complete. Possible subdivision boundary changes must be resolved before it can be put in place as part of the Ordinance. The 2004 maps provided by Midstate do not reflect the mid-river boundary determined to be correct. After discussion it was agreed that the 2004 version will be considered a work in progress. Nannette Woodcock provided Town
Assessor’s listings for the District by property owner and by location/address in addition to the map/block/lot listing for cross-reference.
b. Ordinance Revision Update
This summer, Ordinance revision may be addressed by the Town Council. Previously there were issues regarding the inaccuracy of the State Historic Properties listings which also differs from the National Register historic property listing therefore the national register listings can provide more accurate detail on properties within the district. The Commission on Culture and Tourism may offer grants for this type of work.
c. Other
Doug Mackeown reported expenditures for recording clerk and public notice publication.
8. Unfinished Business
a. Bylaw Revisions – Review and Adoption
James Royster previously distributed by email the final Bylaw Revisions, sent 6/11/08, marked #1 and #2, the only difference being “and shall present correspondence at meetings” was taken out of version #2. Considered at this point was Rev. 1-9, as distributed on 6-11-08. The majority of the revisions are for the purpose of more evenly distributing work among officers.
James Royster made a motion that the Commission adopt the amendments to the bylaws as set forth in the proposed amendments, distributed to the members on 6-11-08, being the first distribution, with the exception that section 4, article 7, revision to read as follows, “the clerk shall be responsible for preparation and posting of legal notices for all meetings, shall receive and promptly distribute to the commissioners all correspondence, shall present correspondence at meetings, and shall ensure that all documents required are filed in accordance with the FOIA, MHHDC Ordinance, and State Statute are duly and timely presented and filed. The clerk shall coordinate with and monitor the work of the Commission’s secretary.” Seconded by Richard Walsh. Motion carried 5-0-0
Revisions adopted and effective 6-26-08.
b. Handbook – Special Meeting Arrangements.
After polling members, a meeting will be scheduled for 7-17-08 at 6:30 p.m., place to be determined based on availability of a meeting room.
c. Delay of Demolition – Sample Ordinance
It was agreed that this item will be taken up as part of the Handbook discussion. This represents an opportunity for communities to define as it is not defined in the State Statutes. This would be a way to recommend to the Town minimal repairs, etc. be accomplished in cases of historic properties throughout Town that are suffering neglect providing a vehicle to prevent demolition of those properties through neglect.
d. 36 Middle Haddam Road
Questions were brought up previously regarding this property – an exterior door was removed without a permit. Several inquiries were received regarding the numerous commercial vans
parked at the property. The Town Building Department received a complaint and is addressing the issue through Zoning at this time. As yet, no COA application has been received but the homeowner has indicated his intent to comply and indicated he will submit an application as he has plans to undertake numerous projects for the home.
e. Other – None
9. New Business
a. Revision to COA Application Intructions
As a result of the changes made to duties and responsibilities, one alteration to the COA was suggested by Nannette Woodcock. Line 4, the words, “the clerk” would better be “a member of the Commission”.
A motion was made by Doug Mackeown, to correct the application instructions, dated 1/08, referred to in Section 2, the words “The Clerk may contact the applicant for additional information to better support the application and” be deleted; the sentence then to read “The MHHDC may postpone scheduling a public hearing, etc. as long as the 65-day requirement is met”. Seconded by Richard Walsh. Motion carried 5-0-0
Revision date 6-26-08.
b. Other – None
10. Public Comments – None
11. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:23 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Jennifer Carducci
Acting Recording Secretary
6-28-08
| 
