City of Burlington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes: December 2, 2015 The City of Burlington Historic Preservation Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, December 2, 2015 at 7:00 PM in the City Hall Complex, 525 High Street, Burlington, NJ. 1. Introduction: The meeting was called to order at 7:04. Chairman Van Sciver opened the meeting and introduced procedures of the Historic Preservation Commission. He then led the Pledge of Allegiance; Secretary Cindy Crivaro then conducted the Roll Call. 2. Roll Call: Present: Chairman Chance Van Sciver, Vice Chairman William Buehrig and Commissioners Emma Jean Morgan, Milton Smith and William Stewart. Commissioners Baird, Pawlenko and White were absent. Also present: Commission Secretary Cindy Crivaro and Historic Preservation Consultant John Hatch. 3. Consideration of Minutes: Chairman Van Sciver asked if the Commissioners had reviewed the minutes from November 2015. Commissioner Buehrig stated that he had found a minor typo. Commissioner Stewart made a motion to approve the minutes, with the correction; Commissioner Buehrig seconded. The vote was 5 to 0 in favor. 4. Applications: HPC Application 2015-25: Owner: Applicant: Change dormers and main entry on the river side of the house. Matthew Kent James and Dawn McCreary Site: 43 Riverbank Road, Block 10 Lot 3 Designation: Non-contributing, Burlington City Municipal District a. Description of the Property: 43 Riverbank Road is a 1 ½ story, side gabled, free-standing, Cape Code style house, apparently constructed in the mid-20th century. It has two main facades: The side facing Riverbank Road has a central dormer with paired windows at the upper level, and an offcenter entry door with single and paired windows on the first floor. There is a deck with railing at the door, and a carport to the right side. 1
The north elevation faces the River. This side has two dormers with single windows, a centrally placed projection with the entry door, bay windows to either side, a deck on the left, and an exterior, brick chimney on the right. b. Documents Submitted: An application, including a description of the proposed work, photographs of the house, a sketch of the proposed changes, a site plan and aerial, was provided on October 26, 2015. c. Scope of work proposed by applicant: The applicant proposes to make changes on the River side, or north elevation of the house. These changes include removing the two existing dormers and installing a long shed dormer across most of the building, and reconfiguring the entry with an arched roof. d. Discussion/ Public Comment Mr. James McCreary of 316 Hill Avenue in Langhorne was sworn in. He has an agreement to purchase the house and is proposing the changes described above. He explained that he wants to add the shed dormer along the river side to make the upper floor of the house more usable. He plans on replacing the asphalt shingle roof with new roofing to match the existing. He also stated that new dormer would have hipped sides to make them appear less obtrusive. He indicated that he plans to use vinyl windows. The Commission agreed that the window material is appropriate given the age and character of the house, as long as the new windows match the scale and character of the existing. He then described the proposed work to the entry on the river side, stating that he and his wife would like to upgrade the appearance of the house and that they believe the curved copper roof will be very attractive. Chairman Van Sciver asked Mr. Hatch for comments. Mr. Hatch repeated the concerns that he d expressed in his memo about the scale and character of the new dormer, and the character of the curved roof. He asked if more detailed drawings had been completed. Mr. McCreary stated that he does not yet have detailed drawings, but that an architect would be completing them prior to the start of work. There was additional discussion among the Commissioners, with Mr. Smith asking for additional details about the configuration of the dormer and the arched roof. There was general consensus that, since the house is not a contributing structure in the Historic District, there is more leeway regarding its design. Commissioners agreed that the arched roof made sense given the desire for the upper dormer, and stated that the proposed windows should match the scale and character of the existing windows on the house. Mr. Hatch suggested the possibility of giving a conceptual approval, with the requirement to provide additional detail for the next meeting. Chairman Van Sciver stated that he thought that this would violate the HPC s requirement to give a decision within 45 days of submission. He suggested that the Commission approve (or deny) the submission and that any additional details be confirmed by the applicant with the HPC s consultant, Mr. Hatch. 2
Mr. Hatch agreed that this would be a workable solution, and that he would suggest a new application only if he thought that the details did not match the current design and the intent of the Commissioners. e. Commission Decision Commissioner Stewart made a motion to approve the application as presented, with the stipulation that the final details should be confirmed with Mr. Hatch prior to construction. Commissioner Buehrig seconded. Vote: 4 in favor, with Commissioner Morgan abstaining. f. The Historic Preservation Commission has made its recommendations for the following reasons: The Commission believes that the proposed work will not have a negative impact on the historic character of the building and the Historic District. HPC Application 2015-26: Owner: Applicant: Repair the existing clock tower, repaint the exterior, install new awnings, install new doors and change entry. Jim Watt; Smith Group Thomas Phillips Site: 19 East Union Street, Block 118 Lot 31 Designation: Key, Burlington City Municipal District a. Description of the Property: 19 East Union Street is the former Endeavor Firehouse, now renovated as the Brickwall Tavern and Dining Room. The building consists of an older, front-gabled, two-bay brick structure with a prominent clock tower. This part of the building has Greek Revival detailing (the cornice and eaves are wood and have prominent moldings) and large wood windows, six over nine, double hung configuration. The former truck bay now has a large steel awning over it, and the opening has been filled with wood planking to create a multi-paned window and a bench. According to a recent article, this part of the building is from the late 18th century. The addition on the left is brick with a flat roof and three bays. On the first floor, these former truck bays now have metal and glass windows that fill the openings. The right hand opening also has a door and is covered with a steel awning. Like the original part of the building, the upper floor windows are also six over nine, double hung. A large sign, running almost the entire width of the addition, has been placed close to the top of the building. The left side of the building is stuccoed and has steel awning windows. A large graphic of a trowel has been painted on the stucco; new rooftop equipment is visible over the parapet. 3
The rear of the building faces onto public parking. This side also has steel windows and a stucco façade. Ventilation ducts have been attached to the exterior wall. The equipment or water tower has been left in place. Signage has also been painted onto this elevation. b. Documents Submitted: An application, including a brief description of the proposed work and photographs of the completed work on the building, was provided on November 13, 2015. c. Scope of work proposed by applicant: The applicant has already made extensive repairs, renovations and changes to the exterior of the building, including repairing and repainting the clock tower, repairing and repainting the existing windows, adding signage, changing the configuration of the former truck bays, etc. They are seeking retroactive approval for this work. d. Discussion/ Public Comment Mr. Jim Watt of 222 Wood Street, the architect and one of the owners, was sworn in. He first apologized for coming before the HPC after other approvals were received and after the start of construction. He stated that he was not aware that he was supposed to come before the HPC for comment prior to going before the Land Use Board. Commissioner Van Sciver stated that the Commission understood and that they appreciated him coming to the meeting, even if after the fact. Mr. Watt thanked the HPC for its work preserving the character and architecture of Burlington City. He stated that the HPC s success was one of the reasons that he and his partners have moved to the City and that they are doing development projects here. He stated that he had read the review memorandum prepared by Mr. Hatch. He gave some additional information on the infill of one of the truck bays, stating that this wood bench is stand alone and doesn t replace the roll up door (i.e. it can be easily removed and is therefore a reversible change to the building). He also stated that the wood would be painted black and would therefore be relatively unobtrusive. He intends to install similar benches in the other truck bays. He stated that the clock tower would be made functional, and that he also intended to add additional steel awnings over the other doors. These awnings are intended to be light and clearly different from the character of the building (also reversible ). He also clarified that the wood windows on the front of the building had been replaced with new, wood, six over nine windows. Commissioner Smith showed an historic photo (from the late 19 th century) of the firehouse, showing two-over-two windows. There was then some discussion about the correct configuration of the windows. Mr. Hatch stated that the original, 18 th century windows would not have been two over two (these would have been installed in the mid-19 th century). The six over nine configuration could have been the original configuration, but were certainly the configuration of the windows that were replaced under this renovation (likely installed during a mid-20 th century renovation and expansion). 4
There was some discussion about the appropriateness of the color scheme (ochre and black). Mr. Buehrig stated that he thought the colors are dramatic and appropriate, and that they play up the industrial aspects of the later addition to the building. Mr. Smith asked about the cladding of the clock tower. Mr. Watt stated that the existing cladding was kept in place and repainted; they had not made changes to the material or configuration. Commissioner Morgan stated that she appreciated the quality of the renovation and the new development happening downtown. e. Commission Decision Commissioner Morgan made a motion to give retroactive approval to the application as presented and described. Commissioner Buehrig seconded. Vote: 5-0, all in favor. f. The Historic Preservation Commission has made its recommendations for the following reasons: The Commission believes that the proposed work will have a positive impact on the historic character of the building and the Historic District. 5. Old Business: a. City-owned historic properties: Commissioner Morgan stated that she would like the HPC to be advocates for the repair and re-use of City-owned historic properties. Chairman Van Sciver agreed, stating that the ordinance includes this is as one of the duties of the HPC. Mr. Hatch stated that he had reached out to various members of the administration who had expressed interest in meeting with a sub-committee of the HPC. He will follow up. 6. New Business: a. Chairman Van Sciver noted that a replacement for Commissioner Johnston needs to be found. b. He also noted that the next meeting will be the reorganization meeting, and that the Commission will consider proposals for consultant to the HPC. 7. Correspondence: a. None. 8. Presentations: Mr. Hatch gave a presentation on building design issues relating to sustainability and historic preservation. Using a PowerPoint, he discussed the installation of solar panels, green roofs, rooftop HVAC equipment, interior insulation, etc., and how these features affect the character of historic buildings. After the presentation, there was discussion regarding several of these issues. This presentation was intended to meet the requirement of the Certified Local Government program to provide educational opportunities to members of the Historic Preservation Commission. 9. Public Comment: 5
a. NA 10. Adjournment: a. Commissioner Morgan made a motion to adjourn the meeting; Commissioner Stewart seconded. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:30 PM. Respectfully submitted on December 10, 2015 by John Hatch, historic preservation consultant to the Burlington City Historic Preservation Commission. 6