LOWELL HISTORIC BOARD

PUBLIC HEARINGS

September 10, 2007 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                         OTHERS PRESENT

 

Reynold Ilg, Chairman                                                                           John DeAngelis, Loft Properties LLC

Peter Aucella                                                                                        Elaine Finbury, Overlook Associates      

Rachel Edlund                                                                                       Karl Frey, 122 Western Avenue

Jeffrey Harris                                                                                       Barry Ganek, Ganek Architects

Richard Lockhart                                                                                  Mark E. Goldman, 58 Oakland Street

Martha Mayo                                                                                        Carrie Hiltscher, 122 Western Ave

                                                                                                            Rainer Koch, Koch Architects

                        Ken Koornneef , Nobis Engineering

                                    Michael Viveiros, DBVW Architects     

Ed Walsh, MIRA Dev./Perkins Place

Elaine White, Bridgewell

Mark Wilcox, Gavin & Sullivan

Dan Winny, MIRA Dev./Perkins Place

Stephen Stowell, Administrator

                                                                                                            Kim Zunino, Assistant Administrator

                                                                                   

1.   PUBLIC HEARINGS

 

      A.  DLHD-08-05: 585 and 607 Middlesex Street 

The Italianate style Davis & Sargent Building, built ca.1880. Application for a Historic Permit for exterior rehabilitation, construction of new accessible addition/lobby, and associated site improvements.

 

The Chairman read the published Public Hearing Notice and declared the Hearing open to those wishing to speak in favor of the application.

 

The Chairman recognized Elaine Finbury from Overlook Associates, developmental consultants for the project.

Also recognized were Michael Viveiros from DBVW Architects and Ken Koornneef, a manager of Nokode Holdings, LLC and principal of Nobis Engineering.  

 

Ms Finbury said that as adjunct faculty at Boston University, she had her students undertake a feasibility study for one group that was targeting 585 Middlesex Street for reuse but that the building was better suited to Nobis Engineering.  She stated that Nobis was growing and was searching for space that could house their expanding workforce, that they are a forward-thinking company that is strongly committed to community service.

 

Mr. Viveiros said that the project would be LEED certified and be one of only a few preservation projects in Massachusetts certified to the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards of the U.S. Green Building Council.  He noted that the project would include removal of the existing rooftop billboards as well as a deteriorated addition to the rear and that preservation work included masonry repair, replica aluminum windows, and replica wood doors.  A rear rooftop deck was proposed along with rooftop mechanical units.  Mr. Viveiros noted that “green” elements on the historic structure would include a new roof garden consisting of low-growing pre-planted modular trays on a rear, later one story addition.

 

Mr. Viveiros said that a major change will occur on the west elevation through the addition of a two-story contemporary entrance foyer, elevator tower, and office structure.  Mr. Viveiros said that the addition will also include some “green” elements such as planting trays on the canopy and solar panels on the roof.

 

Mr. Aucella asked Mr. Viveiros to explain exactly which part of the building would be removed.  Mr. Viveiros explained that it would be the one story shed roof portion to the rear that would be removed.

 

Ms. Mayo asked what materials would be used for the new addition. Mr. Viveiros responded that it would be a   steel structure with horizontal metal siding with mitered welded corners.           

     

Mr. Aucella asked about the status of the site plan.  Mr. Viveiros said that a final plan would be submitted for next month.  Both the used car lot on the upper level and the lower level to the rear would be targeted for upgrading.

 

Mr. Lockhart asked if Planning Board approval was needed.  Mr. Viveiros stated that because they are only increasing the square footage of the building by a small amount, and less than 11 parking spaces are being created, they do not need approval as stated in a letter from the Planning staff.  They do need to contact Conservation Commission because they are working within 25 feet of the canal.

 

Mr. Aucella asked the Administrator about the reference to the site plan. The Administrator stated there was not enough time to review the site plan so it was decided to wait for the next meeting.

 

Mr. Aucella asked if any of the green elements would be visible on the building.  The Administrator explained that they would be on the new addition, with the exception of some planting trays on the rear roof of the historic structure.  He said that the trays would be set back far enough to be unseen and would only grow a few inches in height.

 

Mr. Aucella asked about the billboards on the roof of the building.  Mr. Koornneef stated that he is seeking support from the City to assist in their removal.  Mr. Aucella explained to the Board that he had attended meetings with Matt Coggins and Adam Baacke from DPD and Clear Channel Communications, who were open to the relocation of multiple billboards in a package.  There is a pending proposal to the State Outdoor Advertising Board.

 

Mr. Koornneef said that letters have been sent to Clear Channel stating that there are structural repairs that need to be done to the roof and that the boards would have to be removed.

 

Mr. Lockhart asked about the landscaping plan and how the applicants plan on improving the landscape of the site.  Mr. Koornneef stated that as an engineering and design firm, they wish to demonstrate good landscape and environmental design in the plan that will ultimately come before the Board.

     

Having asked aloud 2 more times if anyone else wished to speak on behalf of the proponents and hearing no one, the Chairman declared the Hearing closed to proponents and opened the Hearing to those who wished to speak in opposition.

 

Having asked aloud 3 times and hearing no one, the Chairman declared the Hearing closed to opponents and opened the Hearing to comments or question from Board members and the staff.

 

Mr. Harris asked about the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits and if they have received Part Two approval.  Ms. Finbury stated that they have submitted their Part Two but have not received approval as of yet.  She stated they did receive a commitment of State Historic Tax Credits in the last round.

 

Mr. Harris asked about the replacement windows and how old the windows are.  The Administrator stated that the existing windows are from the 1960s or 1970s and are not original.

 

Motion by Mr. Aucella, seconded by Mr. Lockhart, to:

 

vote to issue the Historic Permit for the exterior rehabilitation of 585 Middlesex Street and construction of a new entrance foyer and elevator tower in the Downtown Lowell Historic District conditional upon the following:

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of the site plan, landscaping, and other site features including, but not limited to, fencing/screening, site signage, lighting, planting schedule, and paving prior to commencement of individual work items.  Proposed site and landscaping plan to be submitted to Design Review for analysis/recommendation and to be approved at a future Historic Board meeting.  Coordination to take place with National Park Service regarding design interface of proposed Pawtucket Canal walkway and the proposed site and landscaping plan;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of the replica window scope of work including, but not limited to, shop drawings, paint color, interior storm/screen system (dark frame), and blinds (dark color) prior to commencement of individual work items.  Plans of existing window installations (sashes, frames, moldings, etc.) to be prepared for comparison with proposed aluminum replica shop drawings in order to ensure consistency in dimensions and sightlines.  No build out of existing window frames is allowed, nor is wrapping of any elements (all existing window elements to be removed so that new units fit within dimensions of masonry openings);

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of material and color samples for masonry repair/reconstruction, repointing, metal work, and paint.  On-site cleaning, mortar, masonry, metal, and paint samples will be required for review and approval prior to commencement of individual work items;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of the proposed west elevation addition including, but not limited to, foundation (if exposed, light sandblast), siding material/color samples, canopy details, ramping details, and door specifications;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final design and construction details for all aspects of proposed “green” building elements (solar panel array and roof top planted module trays) prior to commencement of individual work items;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final design and details including, but not limited to, replica wood door shop drawings (and related hardware); mechanical equipment (roof and/or ground placed); railings; gutters/downspouts; roofing/flashings; any proposed roof elements such as headhouses or decks/railings; light fixtures; and building signage prior to commencement of individual work items; and

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of any scope of work alterations and final details prior to commencement of individual work items.

 

Work is consistent with Sections 2.301 and 2.303 of the Downtown Lowell Historic District Design Review Standards.

 

      Unanimously approved 6-0.

 

 

      B.   DLHD-08-06: 15 Kearney Square; 36 and 36R Prescott Street

The Courier Citizen Building (1889), Lowell Sun (ca. 1965-1970), and Massachusetts Cotton Mills Storehouse (ca. 1887).  Application for a Historic Permit for exterior rehabilitation.

 

The Chairman read the published Public Hearing Notice and declared the Hearing open to those wishing to speak in favor of the application.

 

The Chairman recognized John DeAngelis representing Loft Properties LLC and Rainer Koch with Koch Architects.  Mr. DeAngelis said that the proposed project consists of completely rehabilitating the former Lowell Sun complex for commercial, retail, and residential uses.  He noted that work at 15 Kearney Square would include repair of the existing windows, masonry repairs, and new storefront glazing and doors on the Eastern Canal elevation while work at 36R Prescott Street would include masonry repairs, replica aluminum windows, and entries.  Mr. DeAngelis said that the proposed design for the elevation of 36R Prescott Street was arrived at after extensive consultation with Chuck Parrott of the National Park.

 

Mr. Aucella asked if there are any other elevation plans for the building besides the one the one presented from 15 Kearney Square and 36R Prescott Street.  The Administrator stated that it is the only elevation presented as no work is currently proposed for the former Lowell Sun print plant at 36 Prescott Street.

 

Mr. Koch stated that on 15 Kearney Street that two ground floor windows are proposed to be enlarged with storefront glazing while another window is proposed to be replaced with a glass door and sidelights.  Mr. Koch stated that while there are no definitive plans for the reuse of the Mass Mills Storehouse (36R Prescott Street), that they did work with Chuck Parrott to develop the openings along the Eastern Canal to closer match the historical plan.

 

The Administrator stated that the plan was difficult to implement because of the numerous alterations done to the building when it housed the Lowell Sun print plant.  The Administrator explained that floors were inserted and windows blocked and filled in, which then caused problems when the original symmetry and order of the building was desired in the new plan.  The Administrator stressed that that the applicants and the staff worked through many versions with Chuck Parrott.

 

Mr. Koch asked the Board to note the floor changes in the elevation.  Mr. Koch stated that in 15 Kearney Square the first floor level was built up after the original four levels were removed.  Mr. Koch explained that the remnants of the original beams caused additional problems in designing a plan.

 

The Administrator reiterated that the building had many problems due to the many alterations that were done in previous years.  He stated that this plan will be an improvement to what is seen now.

 

Mr. Aucella asked about the treatment of the alleyway next to the canal and the fence that is now there.  The Administrator stated that he and the applicants are talking about the refurbishment and repair of the fence.

 

Ms. Mayo asked whether the area would be a drive area or not.  Mr. DeAngelis stated that the area must be kept open for dumpster access and trash removal.  Ms. Mayo then asked if there would be tables in the alleyway next to the restaurant.  Mr. DeAngelis stated that there would be tables during the day and evening.  Mr. DeAngelis stated that he would like to see dining right across the Eastern Canal.  Mr. DeAngelis also stated he would repair the fence and pave but that they need to keep the dumpsters there.

 

The Administrator stated that there were remnants of two piers on East Merrimack Street and the applicants were discussing using a gate to limit vehicle access to the alleyway for trash removal or delivery trucks but keeping it accessible to the public.

 

Mr. Aucella asked, in regards to 36 Prescott Street, what was planned for repairs on the other side of the building facing Prescott Street.  Mr. DeAngelis responded that there were no plans to alter that elevation.

 

The Administrator stated that if in the future there was a need to modify the Prescott Street elevation, they would come back to the Board, but it would in the spirit of what is there now, the ca. 1960s commercial building.

 

Mr. Aucella asked about the use of the buildings.  Mr. DeAngelis stated that they are cleaning the space and selling it to a new user.  They were approved for 19 residential & commercial units at the Zoning Board of Appeals.  However, they may just look at all commercial in all three buildings.

The Administrator stated that the façade of 36R Prescott Street would remain painted because of the condition of the underlying masonry.

 

      The Chairman asked aloud again if anyone else wished to speak if favor of the project.

 

Mark Goldman, 58 Oakland Street, wished to speak in favor of the project.

 

Having asked aloud 1 more time if anyone else wished to speak on behalf of the proponents and hearing no one, the Chairman declared the Hearing closed to proponents and opened the Hearing to those who wished to speak in opposition.

 

Having asked aloud 3 times and hearing no one, the Chairman declared the Hearing closed to opponents and opened the Hearing to comments or question from Board members and the staff.

 

Mr. Harris then inquired about the entry doors for 36R Prescott Street.  Mr. Koch stated the entry doors would also wood framed, and particular attention had been given to the design of the doors.  The Administrator stated that designs would have to be given to the Board for review.

The Chairman clarified that there are ten new windows for the upper three floors of 36R Prescott Street, including removal of the louvered windows and installing replacement windows to match the original windows.  Mr. DeAngelis said that they had found original doors and windows to work with.

 

The Chairman then remarked about all of the window work and asked about the first story windows.  Mr. Koch said the new granite sills will be projecting and the lintels will be flush.  Mr. Koch said that masonry work will have to be controlled. 

 

      Ms. Edlund stated that the regularization done to the façade was very good.

 

Motion by Mr. Lockhart, seconded by Mr. Aucella, to:

 

vote to issue the Historic Permit for the exterior rehabilitation of 15 Kearney Square and 36/36R Prescott Street in the Downtown Lowell Historic District conditional upon the following:

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of the replica window scope of work including, but not limited to, shop drawings, paint color, interior storm/screen system (dark frame), and blinds (dark color) prior to commencement of individual work items.  Plans of similar historic window installations (sashes, frames, moldings, etc.) to be prepared for comparison with proposed aluminum replica shop drawings in order to ensure consistency in dimensions and sightlines.  No build out of existing window frames is allowed, nor is wrapping of any elements (all existing window elements to be removed so that new units fit within dimensions of masonry openings);

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of material and color samples for masonry repair/reconstruction, repointing, metal work, and paint.  On-site mortar, masonry, metal, and paint samples will be required for review and approval prior to commencement of individual work items;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of the new ground floor element (storefront glazing, doors, windows) at 15 Kearney Square including, but not limited to, shop drawings and color samples;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to all aspects of any proposed work along the Eastern Canal including, but not limited to, fence restoration and/or replication; paving; landscaping, and entry pier restoration;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final design and details including, but not limited to, mechanical equipment (roof and/or ground placed); gutters/downspouts; roofing/flashings; any proposed roof elements such as headhouses, elevator penthouses, or decks/railings; light fixtures; and building signage (applicant to submit building number signage for review and approval; commercial tenant signage to be responsibility of the tenant and to be applied for separately) prior to commencement of individual work items; and

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of any scope of work alterations and final details prior to commencement of individual work items.

 

Work is consistent with Sections 2.301 and 2.303 of the Downtown Lowell Historic District Design Review Standards.

 

      Unanimously approved 6-0.

 

Ms. Mayo asked if there was a target date for the restaurant opening.  Mr. DeAngelis responded that he expected it to be open by this November.

 

      The Public Hearings were closed at 6:40 p.m.

 

 

 

 

      .

ATTEST: ______________________________________________

                                                                                                    Kim M. Zunino, Assistant Administrator

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTEST: ______________________________________________

                                                                                                        Stephen R. Stowell, Administrator

 

 

 

 

LOWELL HISTORIC BOARD

REGULAR MEETING

September 10, 2007 at 6:00 p.m.

                                                           

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                         OTHERS PRESENT

 

Reynold Ilg, Chairman                                                                           Karl Frey, 122 Western Avenue

Peter Aucella                                                                                        Barry Ganek, Ganek Architects

Rachel Edlund                                                                                       Mark E. Goldman, 58 Oakland Street

Jeffrey Harris                                                                                      Carrie Hiltscher, 122 Western Avenue

Richard Lockhart                                                                                  Ed Walsh, MIRA Dev./Perkins Place

Martha Mayo                                                                                        Elaine White, Bridgewell

                                                                                                            Mark Wilcox, Gavin & Sullivan

                                                                                                            Dan Winny, MIRA Dev./Perkins Place

                                                                                                            Kim Zunino, Assistant Administrator

                                                                                                            Stephen Stowell, Administrator

                                                                                                                                            

 

2.   OLD BUSINESS

 

      A.  AND-06-03: 94-106 Rock Street

Application for a Historic Permit for exterior rehabilitation, construction of approximately 6,900 +/- square foot building on adjoining vacant lot, and associated site improvements.

 

The Chairman recognized Elaine White, Director of Housing for the Middlesex North Resource Center, which is a subsidiary of Bridgewell.  She stated that this project had been previously approved by the Board at a Public Hearing on 11/14/05 and a Historic Permit had been granted on 12/15/05.  Ms. White stated that several issues have delayed the project but have recently been resolved.  Ms. White is requesting an extension of the same Permit under the same terms and conditions.  Ms. White stated that there have been no changes to the plans that were originally submitted to the Board and that she understands the conditions that were originally agreed upon.

 

The Chairman asked if there will be any other delays that Ms. White has knowledge of that would affect the project.  Ms. White said that there are no delays expected.

 

The Chairman then clarified that Ms. White stated that the issues that delayed the project have been resolved.  Mr. Lockhart commented that as a member of the Planning Board the issues were related to two or three of the Planning Board’s public hearings and that the issues were resolved last week.  Ms. White then said they were granted site plan approval.

 

Mr. Aucella asked about the plans.  The Administrator reviewed the previously approved plans.

 

Mr. Lockhart stated that the only outstanding issue had been the site of the parking lot which the applicant is in the process of purchasing.

 

Ms. White stated that the applicants had met with Design Review previous to the original approval and discussed how the exterior of the building should look as well as how the parking should be set in back.  Landscaping was also improved and dumpsters had been moved to the rear.  Ms. White stated that she believed that they have addressed all of the issues Design Review had raised prior to the Board’s original approval.

 

Motion by Ms. Edlund, seconded by Ms. Mayo, to:

 

vote to reissue the Historic Permit for 94-106 Rock Street (AND-06-03) with all prior conditions previously voted and approved remaining in effect.

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final design and construction details including, but not limited to,

specifications for door and window systems, brick, paint color, shingles, light fixtures, signage, and foundation treatment of new building (light sandblast) prior to commencement of work.  Material and color samples will be required for paint (on-site paint sample), brick, and shingles;

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of final details related to the site plan, landscaping, and other site features including, but not limited to, planting schedule, fencing, dumpsters/screens, retaining wall, signage and lighting; and

 

·         Submittal, review, and approval of any scope of work alterations and final details prior to commencement of work.

 

Work remains consistent with Sections 3.1, 3.101, 3.12, 3.13, and 3.2 of the Acre Neighborhood District Design Review Standards.

 

      Unanimously approved 6-0.

 

      B.   DLHD-06-48: 21-39 Perkins Street-Lawrence Mfg. Co.

Storehouse No. 14 (1876) and Mill No.12 (1907). Application for an Historic Permit for exterior rehabilitation and site improvements.

           

      C.   DLHD-07-38: 40 Perkins Street

Site of Lawrence Mfg. Co. boardinghouses. Application for a Historic Permit construction of an approximately 279 space parking garage and associated site improvements.

 

The Administrator stated that the Historic Permits have already been granted for the two projects and that the development team asked for the opportunity to provide the Board with an update on the status of the project.  He said that the presentation would be about the redesign of the parking garage and the introduction of the new leadership of the project team.

 

The Chairman recognized Ed Walsh from MIRA Development/Perkins Place LLC.  Mr. Walsh stated that there is a new leadership team in place but that he and his partner had been involved in the project from the beginning. However, in April the former leadership team separated from the project and Mr. Walsh and his partner assumed control.

 

Mr. Walsh stated that there were design modifications with the two mill buildings, but mostly in the interior. Mechanical engineering had to also be advanced.  Mr. Walsh stated that the drawings are 97% complete.  He stated they are choosing a contractor this week from two contractors with experience in historic buildings.  Barry Ganek is still the lead architect for the project.

 

Mr. Walsh said that they have brought in Dan Winny of Cambridge to be the architect for the garage.  He noted that he and his partner have designed and constructed a number of garages in Cambridge and Boston over the past decade.

 

Mr. Ganek presented the plans that had previously been approved by the Board for the two mill buildings.  He said that the dilapidated wooden and concrete block loading dock addition would be removed from the recessed corner of the two buildings and that the previously approved new entrance is still planned.

 

Mr. Aucella asked if the new entrance was in the same location that had previously been approved. Mr. Ganek replied that it was.

 

Mr. Ganek stated that windows are still proposed to be aluminum replica to match the existing on both buildings.  The same dimensions, configurations, and brick molds would be replicated.

 

The Administrator said that Design Review is working on an ongoing basis resolving the final design details of many items including the entries and windows.  The Administrator noted that the project is also utilizing federal and state historic rehabilitation credits and will be subject to an even stricter review.

 

Mr. Ganek noted that the west elevation of the building will be treated, as it was originally, with a metal sheathing of some sort.  Ms. Mayo asked if it would be corrugated or flat panel.  Mr. Walsh said that it had not been determined yet as federal reviewers may require it to replicated the pressed brick appearance there presently.

 

Mr. Ganek noted that the entry at the base of the Hub Hosiery tower is proposed for restoration.  The existing 1930s Art Deco style entry will be removed and that they propose to restore the original arch.  The Administrator stated that this design would allow public access to the landscape of the Lawrence Mills.  Mr. Aucella asked if it was handicapped accessible.  Mr. Ganek said that it will be.

 

Mr. Aucella asked where the mechanicals would be placed.  He stated that this is important to be clear about their location on the plans.  The Administrator stated that the roof details still have to be finalized and that the exact locations have not been determined, but it will be centralized to minimize the chance of visibility.  He noted that the project’s preservation consultant conducted a visibility study to assure that mechanicals would not be seen from the street and that Design Review would confirm the findings and request any needed changes to design and/or locations.

 

Mr. Walsh stated that the boilers would be in the upper tower, hidden behind louvers.

 

Ms. Edlund commented on the use of a false replacement door in an old entrance of the McQuade building.  She felt it was inappropriate to have a  “floating” door in an unusable entrance.  The Administrator said that it was an issue previously noted by Design Review and that options were being explored.

 

Mr Winny stated that they would like the Board’s opinion on modifications to the parking garage.  They would like to rotate the garage 90 degrees so that the longer elevation would no longer be along Hall Street.  It would also be set back from Cabot Street to allow a margin of land for future commercial development.  The garage design would also be flexible, allowing for future expansion if needed.   The structure will be steel and open ventilated with a vertical emphasis.

 

Ms. Mayo asked about the levels.  Mr. Winny stated that there would be just a ground level and an upper level.

 

Mr. Lockhart asked if the garage had brick in the old design.  The Administrator said that there were brick in a few vertical piers and in the corners.  He stressed that it was the first time the revised concept was being presented and that they were looking for feedback.

 

Mr. Winny stated that the design is basically the same, just placed differently on the lot.

           

Mr. Aucella asked if they are suggesting that they can get a superior designed structure rather than the structure previously approved.  He asked if it is exactly the same design.  Mr. Winny answered that the details have not been decided.

 

Mr. Aucella stated that retail development may not occur for some time on the site, so they must take that into consideration when designing the structure.  Mr. Walsh stated that the garage would be designed well as they are investing a lot of money in the project.  Mr. Walsh asked for the Board’s understanding that it is a large burden to meet the two parking space rule and they fully intend to bring retail into the area in the future.

 

3.   OTHER BUSINESS

 

A.     150 Western Avenue Informational Presentation

 

The Administrator said that he requested that representatives from Vespera come before the Board to brief members on proposed upcoming work at 150 Western Avenue.  The site is part of the former Joan Fabrics complex and is more commonly known today as the Western Avenue Studios.

 

The Chairman recognized developer Karl Frey who introduced himself as the principal of Vespera, a small Conneticut-based real estate firm that owns Western Avenue Studios, part of the former Joan Fabrics complex. Mr. Frey introduced Carrie Hiltscher from Vespera as well as architect Mark Wilcox from Gavin & Sullivan.

 

Mr. Frey gave a brief overview of work done on the property.  Mr. Frey stated that the goal at this meeting was to seek guidance before they come formally before the Board at the next meeting.

 

Mr. Frey stated that Vespera had acquired the property three years ago and has proved financially disastrous. Collins and Aikman went bankrupt and Vespera desires to exit this project gracefully.  Three floors have been renovated in one building, and two floors of another building and now have 113 studios now rented.  They wish to sell the building they are renovating to an artist’s collaborative so the artists can own the building.

 

Mr. Frey stated that the specific part of the project the applicants wish to discuss concerns the saw tooth roof of a building built ca. 1930-40s as a weaving mill.  They wish to install a new entrance, install any windows needed consistent with those previously approved on the property, and preserve the saw tooth roof.

 

Mr. Wilcox stated that they are planning to have residential units in the two-story building.

 

Mr. Frey said that they had issues with the Planning Board when asking to get the building in the Artist District Overlay.  Mr. Frey stresses that Vespera searched for two years to find an industrial user for the building.  The Planning Board since voted to include the building in the Artist District and now they can continue. 

 

Mr. Frey said that they will, at a great expense, preserve the saw-tooth roof.  They would keep it as a feature on the roof, although it wouldn’t actually let light into the building anymore, and would have the interior reflect the dramatic roofline.

 

Mr. Aucella asked what would occur if a unit owner wanted to add glass to the roof structure.  The Administrator stated that it would be difficult because the proposed roof surface was rubber membrane.  Mr. Frey stated they would restore the side panels of the saw tooth structures and paint them the same color of the window frames.

 

The Administrator stated that Board member Taya Dixon had gone to the site and concluded that the building

 

 

 

should be restored with the roof preserved and covered with the rubber membrane.  The Administrator said the details will be decided over the next few weeks.  Mr. Frey said that the roof have a 20 year warranty so he does not want it cut into after installation.

 

Mr. Frey said that they will have 48 very affordable units for the artists.  They will voluntarily sell them at about 50%-60% of market price.

 

The Administrator asked how they intend to keep the units affordable.  Mr. Frey stated that they will have a deed restriction, and that they will require the condo association to determine that the units are only occupied by working artists.  Mr. Frey said that they have the complete support of the artists and they intend to improve the building from its current condition.  He noted that they cannot afford to fully restore the saw tooth roof but can restore what is there now.

 

Mr. Wilcox stated that there were broken windows and needed to be replaced.  Later replacement windows would be repaired as well and new ones would match existing.  He said that a new entrance way would serve the residents from the residential parking lot.

 

Ms. Edlund asked about the saw tooth roof and which part of the roof was going to be new.  Mr. Frey stated that the two “doghouses” would preferably be removed.  He would like to remove the large fans on the gable ends of the roof structure and replace them with new material.

 

Ms. Edlund asked if there would be an elevator added.  Mr. Wilcox stated that the first story has ramps and is accessible and that the second story doesn’t need to be.

 

Mr. Frey stated there are a number of penetrations in the roof, but many do not need to be kept.  New penetrations would be normal residential plumbing vents and other routine penetrations.  Those details will be worked out.

 

Mr. Frey their desire to put flat solar panels on the roof of the structure.  He noted that as they are flush with the roof, they would be invisible from the ground.  They are hopeful that a state grant will assist with the project.

Mr. Frey said that the solar roof would be white and generates electricity for the building.  He said that with or without the grant, the roof will be replaced and the wiring will be there if they do the solar.

 

The Administrator asked when the roof is going to be replaced.  Mr. Frey stated that the roofs of the C and D mills would be on before the winter.  The Administrator said the details must go through the Board staff first, a Minor Development Historic Permit issued, and then the applicant must get approval from the Building Department.

 

Mr. Frey stated that the applicants were stuck with many bills from the previous owners.  For example, they replaced the faulty heating system in the building.

 

Mr. Aucella stated that he and the other members feel comfortable about hold a Public Hearing on the project at the Board’s next meeting.

 

Mr. Lockhart stated that at the Planning Board meeting there were at least thirty people who came to support the project.

 

B.     Enforcement/Violations Update

           

The Administrator said that regular violation surveys would begin again once the new Assistant Administrator is brought up to speed.     

 

 

C.     Administrator’s Report

 

The Board welcomed the new Assistant Administrator, Kim Zunino.

 

The Administrator said that FY08 review and permitting is holding constant with FY07.  Work continues to be steady as many projects require post-permitting review and approval of design details, materials, and so forth while routine signage and maintenance applications continue to be submitted for review and approval.  The Administrator noted that there are also several projects in the Design Review stage that will need future public hearings.

 

The Administrator noted that there was nothing new to report on the status of the disposition of 26-28 Lawrence Street as analysis of it for potential municipal use is still ongoing.

 

Phase III of the Pawtucketville neighborhood survey and Acre Neighborhood District survey has been completed and includes determining National Register eligibility status for any identified properties and development of inventory forms for the subject areas.  Draft Acre survey forms of outstanding quality and detail have been submitted for review to MHC with Pawtucketville information having recently been submitted.  A Phase III project meeting will be held at MHC on September 11.

 

Peter Aucella and the Administrator will be attending the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s annual National Preservation Conference in St. Paul, Minnesota, October 2-6.

 

D.     Board Member Items/Inquiries

 

Mr. Aucella asked about the status of the design of 35 Market Street’s canopy.  The Administrator said that the property owner had indicated architect Phil Belanger would be working on the design.

 

Mr. Aucella asked how the recent meeting went at the Nuestra church.  The Administrator stated that Barry Ganek is the architect for Brian McGowen and that they may come in for the October meeting. </