Westminster Historic District Commission
Agenda for Next Meeting  |  Minutes of Previous Meetings

Historic District Zoning
Tax Credits for Historic Rehabilitation
Other Financial and Educational Resources for Historic Preservation Projects
Holiday House Tour

MINUTES

February 2, 2004

On the evening of February 2, 2004 at 7:00 p.m., Chairman Camlin called to order the meeting of the Westminster Historic District Commission (HDC or Commission).  Chairman Camlin; Members Walters, Goodell, and Stevens; Technical Planner Fisher; and members of the public were present.  The Chairman opened the meeting with a "Statement of Authority" for the HDC. 

The minutes of the January 15, 2004 meeting were approved as presented on Motion of Mrs. Walters, seconded by Mr. Goodell.

Under new business, Mr. Fisher presented Preliminary Historic Tax Credit Application No. 04 – 1 for 156 Willis Street.  Mr. Fisher stated that eight of the proposed projects had been substantially completed and recommended that the Commission deny those projects as preliminary approval is required before work begins.  Mr. Fisher stated that the renovation of the third floor, the replacement of double-hung windows, and the installation of storm windows qualify for consideration of preliminary approval by the HDC.  The applicant, Mrs. Margaret McPherson, stated that the storm windows would be installed on the interior side of the existing windows and would not alter the historic character of the existing windows.  Ms. Stevens stated that in-kind replacement of the double-hung windows includes matching the existing materials; therefore, the new windows should be wooden.  Mr. Goodell clarified that the proposed storm windows in the sunroom would not need to be wooden.  Mrs. McPherson stated that several of the projects in the application were necessary to mitigate immediate threats to the structure.  Chairman Camlin responded that the preliminary approval allows the Commission to comment on the methods of mitigation.  Mr. Goodell noted that an emergency hearing provision exists for such scenarios.  Chairman Camlin clarified his position that the replacement double-hung windows would need to match the existing wood windows, but that two-pane glass would be acceptable.  Ms. Stevens then explained the ‘view from the street’ guideline.  Mr. Fisher suggested that the Commission not act on the double-hung window replacement to allow the applicant time to adjust the project description and estimate.  Mr. Stevens asked if the bump-out in the third floor renovation would involve an historic wall.  Mrs. McPherson stated that she did not know the significance of the wall.  Mrs. Stevens stated that the removal of an historic wall is irreparable.  Mrs. McPherson stated that the goal of the bump-out is to make the bathroom usable.  Chairman Camlin stated that a floor plan drawing would clarify the extent of the modification to the wall.  By consensus, the Commission decided to defer action on Preliminary Historic Tax Credit Application No. 04 – 1 (156 Willis Street) to the next regular meeting of the Commission.  The Commission requested that the applicant provide a floor plan drawing of the third floor renovation and revise the estimate and project description for the replacement of the double-hung windows.

Mr. Fisher then presented Demolition Permit No. 03 – 4058 for 25 Carroll Street.  Mr. Fisher stated that the Commission must review the impact of the demolition on the historic fabric of the surrounding area and return a recommendation to the Director.  The Commission must also review the enclosed archiving report for conformance with the Rules of Procedure for the Documentation of Historic Structures.  On behalf of the applicant, Grace Lutheran Church, Mr. David McGinnis stated that the demolition was necessary to accommodate the construction of a 600-seat sanctuary and columbarium/courtyard on the existing grounds of the church.  Ms. Stevens verified the presence of the photographic documentation and negatives.   Mr. McGinnis stated that he had met with staff for conferences regarding resources for preservation of 25 Carroll Street; however, the need of the church could not be reconciled with preservation of the structure.  At the request of Chairman Camlin, Mr. McGinnis and Mr. Jim Helm, Facilities Manager for Grace Lutheran Church, described the site plan and landscaping plan for the site.  The Commission and the applicant discussed visual and pedestrian flow concerns for the new sanctuary and columbarium.  Ms. Stevens expressed her concern that the structure was being demolished primarily for a visual connection between Carroll Street and the sanctuary.  Mr. McGinnis responded that the demolition would allow the church to continue to operate at its existing location, preserving the most significant historic resources on the site.  Chairman Camlin stated that he agreed with the determination of Mr. Jerry Trescott, consulting architectural historian to the applicant, that 25 Carroll Street is not that special or unique in the region.  Mr. McGinnis expressed his support for the archiving process and standards adopted by the Commission.  Ms. Stevens stated that the archiving report provided by the applicant was comprehensive and exemplary.  On Motion of Ms. Stevens, seconded by Mrs. Walters, the archiving report for 25 Carroll Street was unanimously approved as presented.  Ms. Stevens then made a motion that the Commission recommend that the demolition would adversely impact the historic district, stating that the demolition would represent a loss of an irreplaceable historic resource to the community, and that the sanctuary could be functional while retaining 25 Carroll Street.  Chairman Camlin clarified the advisory nature of the Commission’s recommendation.  Mr. Trescott stated that Carroll Street and the structure at 25 Carroll Street are not unique examples of any historic attribute.  Ms. Stevens responded that significance is a prerequisite for inclusion in the National Register District.  Chairman Camlin noted a photograph in the archiving report showing the house in context and stated that it looks isolated from other historic elements in the City.  Chairman Camlin stated that he does not believe the loss of the house would negatively impact the historic district.  Mrs. Walters agreed, stating that the building stands out of place due to the loss of other historic fabric in the area.  Mrs. Walters expressed concern that the new construction not harm the historic nature of the existing church.  Mr. McGinnis stated that the new construction would be faced with brick to ensure compatibility.  Mr. Goodell expressed his belief that removing a small section of the historic fabric would not damage the integrity of the district in this case.  He further stated that the archiving report should be considered when determining the significance of the structure.  Mr. Trescott stated that the County did not have an historical record for the structure, and that the house was not associated with the church until the 1950’s.  Ms. Stevens stated that the demolition would have less of an impact on the district with the correction that the property did not have a CARR number.  On Motion of Mrs. Walters, seconded by Mr. Goodell, the Commission found that the demolition of 25 Carroll Street would not impact the historic district.  Ms. Stevens voted against the motion.

Under old business, the Commission discussed a form produced by Ms. Stevens for an inventory of the historic structures in the City.  Ms. Stevens explained that the form was based on the National Register form, and that some modifications were necessary to ensure the Commission captured data relevant to an inventory update.  The Commission decided to run a test utilizing members’ own properties in March.

Under Report of the Director of Planning and Public Works designee, Mr. Fisher noted that the Commission is invited to comment on the update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.  Mr. Fisher stated that a public hearing would be held later in the spring.

Under citizen comments, Mr. Jerry Trescott of 2 Ridge Road stated that he is considering an addition to his house and inquired as to the Commission’s role in such matters.  Chairman Camlin responded that the Commission would not be involved with the project unless the homeowner applied for historic tax credits.

Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. by consensus of the Commission.