Historic District Commission
Minutes
Land Use Meeting Room
March 4, 2014
Members present: Acting Chair Lucy Kennedy, LK; Ken Fowler, KF; Kameron Spaulding, KS
Absent with notification: Jason Berger, JB
Absent without notification: Elaine Steinert, ES
Staff present: Peggy Ammendola, PA
Our Commissioner, Steve Sample, passed away the end of February after a brief illness. The Commissioners expressed their appreciation for his contribution to the HDC. Steve was on the Planning Board and assumed the collateral duty of being the PB’s representative to the HDC for the past few years. At their February 25th meeting the Planning Board members agreed to rotate to fill in Steve’s position until a new Planning Board member is elected and a new representative agreed upon. Kameron Spaulding agreed to sit tonight.
67 Church Street, LLC, 67 Church St., Map 43 Parcel 181. Request to remove the grills on the large window which will create a display window.
Drew Davis presented the application. He said that he gained approval in the fall from the HDC for the replacement of windows, but that work has not yet been done. A tenant who wishes to occupy a space has requested that an approved window with the mullion be exchanged for one of the same size and material etc., but without the mullion as the tenant proposes to use the window for displays. Mr. Davis said the windows that were approved in the fall would be replacing windows that were not original to the building which were in fact vinyl.
KF made a motion to allow the window replacement as proposed but without the grill. KF added he would like to see an example of what the window replacement would look like. Mr. Davis explained he had provided the example of the proposed window when he came before the Commission in the fall and the HDC approved. This window, he said, would be exactly the same as he had presented, but without the mullion. KF requested to amend his motion. KF made a motion to allow the window replacement as presented in keeping in style with the previous window. KS seconded the motion and the Commission voted 2-1 with LK casting the dissenting vote. The application was approved.
LK said that the HDC was formed in part because people don’t like picture windows and it is supposed to be historic.
KF said that “If it were an existing window and the same kind of elements that were consistent with that building, which is very old, I would like to see the maintenance of that look, but this building has already stepped away in the windows from the original.”
LK, said that the Commission encourages the restoration or the appropriate window patterns and “there were no picture windows before 1950”.
67 Church Street, LLC, 69 Church St., Map 43 Parcel 180. Request to add new signage.
Making the presentation was Allison Crane who is the new owner of Mary Stuart, a shop which has existed in the District for 31 years. Ms. Crane said she would be replacing the existing signs. They would be in the same locations, but she would be “simply refreshing” maintaining the font and the look.
KS calculated that one of signs, the one which shares space with other businesses on the community sign, which measures 4 feet by 16 inches is 6.4 square feet, which exceeds the six square feet allowed.
LK suggested the size be reduced to be six square feet. Mr. Davis pointed out that the sign request is to replace an existing sign with one that is the exact same size. He added that this sign is a historic sign, and that Mary Stuart was perhaps one of the longest standing merchants in the District. LK continued that she would vote against this also as “we keep trying to bring things more into compliance”.
Mr. Davis asked LK to look at the character of the existing sign and to take in account the span between the uprights, pointing out that this will be a smaller sign in a wider opening. LK said the sign would have to measure no more than six square feet.
KS made a motion to approve the sign as amended to a maximum of 6 square feet. KF seconded the motion and the Commission voted to approve 3-0.
Historic Markers on the following buildings: Lenox Academy located at 65 Main Street, Map 43 Parcel 61; Lenox Town Hall and Firehouse located at 6 Walker St.; Map 43 Parcel 10; Library located at 18 Main St., Map 43, Parcel 173. Originally scheduled for February 18th, but rescheduled for March 4th.
LK disclosed that she is a member of the Historical Commission, but stated she could be fair and impartial in her participation.
Presenting the applications was Jim Biancola, a member of the Historical Commission. Also present was Olga Weiss, Chair of the Historical Commission. Mr. Biancola provided two additional sheets which were dated January 25, 2014. Page one gave an up to date history of the HC’s Historic Building Marker Project. Page two gave four examples of Massachusetts bylaw examples of exemptions or exceptions related to installation of historic markers.
Mr. Biancola said that they would like to get approval for the four markers, which he said are essentially identical to the one he has on his home which was approved by the HDC in 2010, but he also wanted to bring the Commission up to date on the Historical Commission’s Historic House Plaque Program. In 2010, the markers were not considered a sign, but recently the Building Commissioner, Bill Thornton, has said that the markers are in conflict with the zoning by law. Mr. Biancola said that he has met with the PB twice since this discovery and the PB has agreed to change bylaw and make an article for the ATM in May. The proposed change would be to add a sub paragraph #7 to Section 5.2.4, Signs in All Districts, which would read:
Historic Building Markers approved by the Historical Commission. Markers for public buildings must also be approved by the Board of Selectmen and Markers within the Historic District must also be approved by the Historic District Commission. Mr. Biancola said that in other towns historical commissions and historical societies have given exemptions to putting these markers on buildings.
Mr. Biancola said the markers will always have the historic name and the year built, with no other data planned. One of the 36 buildings doesn’t have a historic name, and it will only have the year built stated.
With respect to the four markers before the Commission tonight, Mr. Biancola reviewed the placement of each and said that either he or Ms. Weiss have reviewed with the building owner or primary representative as to the best placement for the marker on the building.
LK said that she has an issue with proposed bylaw. Mr. Biancola said that a public hearing will be held on the wording, so there is opportunity for issues to be brought forward and discussed.
He feels that the four markers before the Commission be approved today as signs, that they do not meet the bylaw yet, but what the HDC reviews has to meet the bylaw, and he suggests there be a motion contingent on passing of the bylaw.
LK stated that she felt the HDC should first have a vote on whether or not to accept these signs per current HDC guidelines, but if not approved, the Commission should be prepared to go to the public hearing to voice its opinion on any changes to the bylaw. She added that there should be an agenda item for the HDC to discuss.
Discussion ensued on how to proceed. KS said that what the actual proposed zoning bylaw is to accomplish is to prevent the markers from being counted toward the square footage permitted in the District.
KS made a motion to approve the signs pending Town Meeting approval of the bylaw change. KF seconded the motion and the Commission voted to approve 3-0.
KS explained that it is fairly rare that a main commercial district is also a historic district which is the case in Lenox. He said the proposal to change the zoning bylaw has no effect on the Historic District bylaw and the Historic District bylaw is allowed to supersede the zoning bylaw and be more stringent. He said that to propose to allow these markers by right in the Historic District, another article would have to be placed on the town meeting warrant and would have to go before the state for approval.
Mr. Biancola referred to Section 3.3 of the HD bylaw, and said that he feels that section addresses the Commissioners’ authority to make the markers exempt. He questions then, the wording in the proposed zoning bylaw change, which reads that the signs should go before the HDC for review. This he feels should be removed, but he said the HDC should always be informed of every marker, but be exempted from a formal HDC review.
LK asked that the discussion of the proposed bylaw change be put on the next HDC meeting agenda when JB can be present, and asked that KS inform the HDC when the Planning Board will have their public hearing on proposed zoning bylaw amendments so the HDC can participate. She would like to start the process for having a public hearing to have historic markers be exempted from HDC review
LK thinks that the proposed bylaw is so carefully written that it doesn’t save anyone any effort. Mr. Biancola said that the Building Commissioner reversed his decision because the zoning bylaw specifies the contents of what is allowed on a sign.
KS spoke of the timing for the Planning Board’s public hearing for proposed zoning bylaw changes, and a possible public hearing by the HDC. The public hearing would have to be advertised, but, he said, a change to the HDC bylaw is not as permanent a decision as a zoning bylaw change.
PH has to be advertised, give extra notice put on agenda for next meeting to discuss and start the process on having a public hearing on exempting markers from the HDC review.
KS made a motion to adjourn. KF seconded the motion and the Commission voted to agree. The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 pm.
Approve minutes:
These minutes were submitted, but the meeting was closed before they could be approved.
September 17, 2013 JB, SS, ES
October 15, 2013 KF, ES, LK SS
November 5, 2013 JB, LK, SS
December 3, 2013 JB, SS, KF, LK
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
