I didn't testing. >> Now I want to find testing. Jim, >> I don't know. I thought he was going to be here. >> He might not be here. I'd [Music]
>> like to call to order the City of Kate May Historic Preservation Commission meeting on October 20th. It is currently 602. And if we could please um first I need to ask in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act of 1975,
adequate notice of this meeting has been provided. If any member has reason to believe that this meeting is being held in violation of this act, they should state so at this time. >> Hearing none, if you could all join us, please in the pledge of >> allegiance.
Pledge of the United States of America and to the forsisible and justice for all. You have the roll call, please. >> Mr. Becker. >> Is that me? >> Yes.
>> Here. >> Mr. Ta. Mr. Carol >> here. >> Miss Pagno. >> Yes. >> Here. >> Miss Wilson Strick >> here. >> Mr. Stevenson >> here. >> Mr. Hammeran >> here.
>> Mr. Curts >> here. Okay, so everybody has received copies of two sets of minutes. The first was from two meetings ago, August 18th, which had some revisions in it. Like to entertain a motion to approve
those minutes, please. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Bagno, seconded by Mr. Stevenson. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. Miss Bisagno, >> yes. >> Miss Wilson Strick, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson,
>> yes. >> Mr. Hamaran, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. Similarly, we also received copies of the minutes from our September 15th meeting. Like to entertain a motion to approve those minutes as well, please. >> Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
>> Yes. >> I would like to note that uh I am mentioned several times as having voted in this. However, I was not here. >> Okay. So, we need to revise those minutes. Let's table the approval of those minutes and we'll bring it up at the next meeting. Thanks, be
>> okay. Payment of bills. We are in receipt of a bill from Chris Gillan Schwarz Law LLC for services in September. You've all seen that bill. Like to entertain a motion to approve that payment, please. >> I'll second. >> Moved by Mr. Curts, seconded by U. Mr.
Carol. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Yes. >> Miss Pagno, >> yes. >> Miss Wilson, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hamaran, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts. >> Mr. Becker.
>> Did you vote? >> Um, could everyone turn the mics on, please? >> And I also vote yes. >> So, Mr. Curts, yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Resolutions from our prior meeting.
Suture at 124 Decar Street. Resolution 202536, SA Properties LLC, 394 Congress Street. Resolution 202537, Cohen, 16 Reading Avenue. Resolution 202538, 413 to 415 Washington Street LLC,
resolution 202539, Umbrech, 162nd Avenue, Resolution 202540, Courier, 398 Congress Street, Resolution 202541. You've all received copies of these resolutions. like to entertain a motion to approve them, please.
>> So move. >> Second. >> Moved by Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Hammer. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carroll, >> yes. >> Miss Bagno, >> abstain. >> Miss Wilson, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hammer,
>> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. Applications approved and denied and review. Of course, we all have a list on the agenda. Like to entertain a motion to approve or ratify those applications approved and denied in review.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved by Miss Wilson Strick, seconded by Miss Bagno. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Yes. But I abstain on at 701 Columbia Avenue.
>> Miss Pagno, >> yes. >> Miss Milson, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson. >> Yes. But I abstain on 219 North Street. >> Mr. Hamaran. >> Yes. >> Mr. Curts. >> Yes. >> Mr. Becker. >> Yes. Although I need to abstain on Hemway to Satnik at 11:05 Washington
Street due to proximity to my home. Okay. So, all that sort of business is out of the way. You might recall that this year we've had three alignment workshops with all of our commissioners. presented the first one of those in March. We aligned around a very specific purpose statement for our
work here at HPC. And in order to set the tone for tonight's review of applications, I'd like to ask Mr. Stevenson if you would please read the purpose of our work. >> To serve as a catalyst for guiding and valuing Cape May's historical, cultural,
and natural resources in ways that inspire and unite our community to steward these resources for the benefit of all. so that present and future generations continue to express the unique quality of life we share in this
place we love. >> Thank you. So moving on to applications. First application on our agenda is Kry and Kerwick at 8:30 Washington Street. If you would please come up and make your presentation.
>> Mr. Chairman, I must recuse myself as close proximity. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Curts. Hi there. Please welcome. If you could please state your name and your role in the project and your address, please.
>> Oh, yep. Make the light green. >> Great. >> Caitlyn Kerwick, uh, 8:30 Washington Street. >> Great. >> Sanjay Kendry, 8:30. And we're, uh, co-owners. We own the property. Y. >> Okay. So, it looks like you are have an application to for a demolition,
correct? >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Proceed, please. >> Okay. >> Um well, I'll let my wife who is the visionary of the project kind of take it from here. >> We previously owned 906 Washington. Sold it um 2023.
Saw that the property was for sale 830. um found out that it was non-contributing and uh we proceeded to put an offer in, sell our previous property um in hopes of building something at 8:30 because it was non-contributing.
So over the last few years, we've been uh interviewing different builders, architects, getting different plans, um trying to decide what vision we saw. As for us, it will be a permanent home eventually. We currently live in
Pennsylvania, but we have children that are in high school, and once we send them off into the world to college, we plan on living here full-time in Kate May. Um, so we want to make sure that whatever we build will be something that is not for rental or anything like that.
It will be a home that we will live in permanently. So, we do have the plans. I don't know, this is new to us. We don't know if you want to see the plans now or how this will work. Um, >> yeah, we just we so we've worked with an architect to get some preliminary plans on what it will look like kind of the
layout. We didn't know if that's necessary for I have them on my computer if that's that's helpful, but um >> well, thanks for asking. Um, when there is a demolition involved, it's required that there be two separate applications. One for the demolition alone, which is why you're here this evening. The second
application would be likely a conceptual submission to us for whatever it is you're proposing. And I would invite you if you'd like to come and see us on Tuesday mornings. We meet every Tuesday morning. If you'd like us informally to review with our subcommittee what it is you're proposing before you come before
the public hearing. If you would find that useful, I would invite you to do that. All you would need to do is call our secretary, Lauren Emer, at the HPC office and make an appointment. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay. >> So, in order to process this demolition, um there is a a
a portion of our zoning ordinance 525-40 about demolitions and relocations. And there are nine criteria that need to be met for demolition relocation. Only the first seven apply to you because you're not relocating it. So, we do need to hear testimony with regard to um the
application for demolition meets all of these seven criteria. So I have highlighted them for you. >> Great. >> So if you could just go through those one by one and your statement can be very brief. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Wait. Um maybe for the first one I think so this would be something that we would definitely want to design something that was that fit in with the historical aesthetic and kept it very consistent. >> This is only about the demolition not the new proposal. Okay. >> So this is the degree to which the demolition that you're proposing meets
those seven criteria. >> So it's not historic building. So >> do you want us to go through each one and just say yes or no it applies or >> we just sorry >> it's okay. So the the chairman's trying to help you with this a little bit.
>> We we have to make a record about the criteria because that's the the standard for issuing a demolition permit. We're not even into new construction yet. >> So you're just speaking of the criteria of the current building, >> right? So I'll give you an example. It the first is it's historic, architectural, cultural, or aesthetic
significance. We're not talking about what you're planning to do. We're talking about what's there now. >> So >> for example, >> it's listed as non-contributing. Correct. >> Correct. >> Correct. It's a >> and the historic property survey report says that it was built around about 1950
to 1960. Yes. >> Is that correct? >> Correct. Correct. >> Which is outside the period of significance. >> Correct. >> Okay. Perhaps. >> Yes. >> You follow me? That's that's the kind of stuff we're trying to get at. >> Okay. Okay. >> So, you've just answered number one. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> It's historic architecture significance.
>> Okay. So, for number for number two, it'll be >> I mean, no. Right. Its current and potential use is not for Right. >> Wasn't it a dentist office? >> It was It was a dentist office. Correct. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, this would be for, you know, a residential.
>> Number two would be residential. >> Okay. So, it doesn't suit the purpose, right? So, >> correct. >> Okay. Next. >> Number three, please. >> Okay. >> Correct. So >> you're proposing that it's not important
to the historic fabric of Kate May. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> And and similar to your answer in number one, it doesn't have any >> lasting architectural value at least in in your correct. Do you have any >> Right. I mean, it's not a historical
building. And I feel like the questions are related to um if we were restoring something and which you know we don't want to do any of that obviously >> right so it doesn't have any historic architectural value that its removal
would be detrimental to the streets or the town great number four >> the question is whether it has any old or unusual uncommon craftsmanship or material that could not be reproduced >> except with great difficulty. Is that accurate? >> Yes. >> Okay. So I'll I'll maybe guide you
through this. Might be a little easier. Okay. >> Okay. >> Number five. Would the would its retention increase property values, promote business, create new positions, etc., etc., or make the municipality a more attractive or desirable place in which to live if it were retained?
>> Yeah, we don't believe so. >> Okay. >> Number six, the impact of its removal upon the historic district. Would it have an impact? >> No, we don't believe so. >> Okay. Number seven, and lastly, the structural soundness and integrity of the building and the economic feasibility of restoring and rehabilitating the structure so as to
comply with the requirements of the applicant building applicable building codes. >> Yes, we don't believe so that that would Yeah. >> So, it meets criteria number seven as well, correct? >> Correct. >> How's the shape of the building? You've
been in there to do an inspection, just walk through. >> Yeah, it's actually it's it's in pretty good shape. I mean it was I think the previous previous owner had renovated it recently before he you know moved on. It >> was well maintained. There's no major issues with the building itself. >> Do you know what the flood elevation is?
Just out of curiosity. >> I do not know. >> It could be on the design. >> I mean it probably would be in the >> Yeah. Sorry. I don't know. >> That's okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, are you have you concluded
your presentation and your testimony? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Great. So, I would like to entertain a motion to unless there's somebody who has questions. Let's ask if we have anybody has questions. >> I just say one. Are you intending to take down the trees that are around the building at the same time you demolish it? >> Um, I think just with our experience of
the previous house that we owned, um, I know there were some trees that were protected. Um, so we would obviously look into that and see what needed to be taken down, but we would obviously keep whatever we could. >> I would just point out you you really should go to the tree shade the shade
tree commission. I always get that reversed and make sure that you're you know any trees that you >> I know there are issues with the sidewalk there as far as like the roots and things like that. Um, especially in front of that building in particular, but >> you just want to be what Mr. Hamron's
point to is demolition permit from HPC does not necessarily equal like a site clearing permit for the entire site. So you might be able to get the building down, >> but if you wanted to do some site work and there's some trees that has to go to the shade tree commission. That's actually a standard condition in all of
our resolutions. So it's an FYI now for you for your planning purposes, but we don't issue tree removal permits is the issue. >> Makes total sense to remove them now when you're demolishing the property rather than separately. So >> yes, >> just saying if you have if you find you have some of those, you have to go to
the commission to get approval there. >> Kevin, could you just move your microphone a little closer? Thanks. >> Okay. Any other questions from anybody? So I would like to entertain a motion to approve this application for demolition. >> I'll second that.
>> Are you making the motion? >> I'm sorry. Okay, I'll I'll make the motion. >> Great. Thank you. >> Second. >> Okay. So moved by Miss Wilson Strick, seconded by Mr. Stevenson. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carroll, >> yes. >> Miss Pagno, >> yes.
>> Miss Wilson Strick, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hamaran, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. And welcome to Kate. >> That was so much easier than we thought it was going to be. >> Yeah. You're very welcome. >> We'll make something beautiful. Don't worry. >> I'm sure you will.
>> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Next on our agenda is Havland at 137. Oh, I'm sorry. at ACTG holdings at 909 Corgi. Well, welcome back. >> Great. >> Hey gang,
>> so we had get we had approved the u >> Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I have must recuse myself on this one as well. >> My whole neighborhood's changing. >> Is that is that a message? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, um we had approved cons uh this proposed application conceptually at our last meeting and all we asked for was just a few things and you have submitted those in this final application which includes
revised elevations and um the materials for or the change of the post to 6x6 and the materials. Is there anything else that you would like to bring forward tonight and answer whether or not anything from your conceptual submission other than the revisions
proposed by the final application have changed? So, are there no other changes? >> No changes. >> No changes. >> So, is there anything else that you'd like to bring forward? >> Nope. I'm just shutting my mouth. >> So, um likely don't need to go around the room, but does anybody have any
questions for this applicant? Just just one actually more for us. Did did we get the cut sheets on the other aspects? Yes, we did. I did not recall that. So, I just want to make sure we did. >> So, they gave us two separate submissions. One that we Yeah. One that we approved in review for the cut sheets
and then there were a couple of the things that we needed the elevations and the and the post which we also have. >> So, just so everybody knows, these folks have been before the review committee I think three times. >> I don't know, >> maybe four. And >> I think this is second here, but I've met with you several times.
>> Yeah. So, the review committee on Tuesday mornings four times. This is your second time here. And you made uh this is the second supplemental submission since the conceptual review. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions? >> Yes. Uh the drawing of your front
exterior. I know we discussed we discussed shutters and shutters have to be mounted properly at the edge of the window. They have to as if closed meet in the middle. >> Okay. >> And they can't look like this like
little chicken wings on either side. >> Okay. >> And I think you picked that up at the last time. Yeah. >> This drawing does not reflect that. >> Right. Okay. >> And since this is what you know the city uh inspector is going to be getting, we want a drawing that actually reflects
exactly how those shutters are going to be used. And you should also label that your columns are going to be six feet uh six inches wide rather than the smaller ones that I think you first proposed. >> Okay. Last time we were here, there were
only shutters on the top. You told me to add them on the bottom. So that's what I did. >> I think the issue is it's not the scale. >> Yeah, the scale. >> You just want them to look as if they were original shutters. Okay. >> And would close together. >> Okay. >> So maybe one way to handle this. So
Teresa, I believe you you did these drawings yourselves, right? >> So these are not quite the scale as our solicitor has pointed out. Um there is a note on here that says it's a 6x6 post. So that is satisfied. I would just simply state that we could
consider a a final approval, a motion for final approval, if you would give us one more elevation that properly depicted the shutters, >> depicting them as as wide as the windows are if they were closed. Do you want me to put the exact measurement or can I just state?
>> You could put a note on there that the shutters will be sized to be appropriate so that when closed they would cover the entire window. >> Okay. >> And a note would be fine. >> Okay. >> Just because I understand the that you're not creating a CAD drawing to
scale as an architect or as a builder. >> One way of doing that too is you're going to keep the the two windows that are at the top now with shutters are going to stay the same, right? Same size. And then you're going to do two on the bottom that are going to match with also with matching shutters, same size.
So maybe if you just measure that top window, you can, you know. >> Okay. >> I don't I don't know what program you've used to do that, but that's the outcome. I think the HPC wants so that the zoning officer can look at that and say, "Yeah, that's that's what we're looking for." >> Do you want me to redraw it or can I put
the note that says >> the best will close? >> Best of you could redraw it. >> Best move would be to redraw it. That way it's visually accurate. >> And maybe you can shrink the window and and increase the size of the shutter just to show that or >> Okay.
>> Any other questions, comments? >> I think it's really good to see that this is a house that's going back back towards its original appearance. I think that's a really exciting thing to see. >> Do I have to come back? >> No.
>> Okay. >> All you would need to do So, what we're going to do right now is entertain a motion for final approval with the condition that you submit one more elevation properly depicting the size of the shutters. >> Okay. >> All you would need to do is submit a copy of that to our secretary. We can
review that on Tuesday morning in our review session and you're done. >> Okay. Okay. >> At least with us. >> Beautiful. >> So, we'll make that motion. >> Please, Tom, what's the motion? >> You just said it. >> Okay. So, the motion is for final
approval. uh with the condition that we receive an elevation drawing with the shutter size properly depicted. Moved by Mr. Carol. Do I hear a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Miss Pagno. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Pagno,
>> yes. >> Miss Wilson Strick. >> Yes. >> Mr. Stevenson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hammer? >> Yes. >> Mr. Becker? >> Yes. >> Well, thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Keep up the good work you're doing. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. It's really nice that that that you're opening up that porch. It's quite
wonderful. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> See you guys. Bye. >> Okay. Next, please on our agenda is Havland at 1317 New York Avenue.
So, I would like to note for everybody that on our um agenda it states that this is a non-contributing property, but it is a contributing property according to the property report. Okay. >> So, if you could please state your name and your address and your role in the project. >> Hi, Karen Havlin. 1317 New York Avenue.
>> And are you the owner? >> Yes. >> Great. Thank you. >> Christina Amy, architect, 761 Aspbury Avenue, New uh Ocean City, New Jersey, 08226. >> And you are the architect? Yes, I'm >> the architect. >> Great. The floor is yours. >> Okay. Um we're here for uh final
approval hopefully. Um when we were last here um you asked for cut sheets uh for the addition uh of the back of the house regarding the um roofing, the windows, the siding,
and let me look at that checklist. I think that was it. Um the siding um es especially mentioning that was wood prime. Um and then roofing. Yes. Um so the finishes of the house would be
for the addition will all be wood >> um with the and we last discussed because part of the existing house has nonwood materials um and the asphalt um shingle roof. Uh there's a cut sheet in
the packet that was um last which is the Camelot 2 shingles from GAF. Um the uh fascia would be painted wood uh to match existing as well as the sophets. Uh the siding is a stained
cedar bevel siding. Uh there's a cut sheet from Maybach in your packet. >> Um okay, sorry Tom flipping through maybe think you couldn't find it. I think it wasn't there. Um the windows will be gelin allwood windows six over one to match
the existing. Um the allboard windows are uh have primed exteriors. Uh we have both the cut sheet of the windows as well as the um the mutton bars. And on the final page of your packet should
also have a cut profile section of the windows as well. Um the window trim is a painted wood to match the existing which is a uh 1x4 flat uh panel with a crown at the top which is also on that very
last page there's a photograph. Um there's no new doors, no new columns, no new railings, no new decking. Uh the foundation will be a painted stucco similar to the existing. Um the HVAC
enclosure will be 1x six cedar board uh slats that uh AC platform is shown in the sorry I can't remember if I did plan elevation. Yes. So it's on sheet four. If you look at the upper right corner um
it's in both the right side elevation as well as the rear elevation. It's tucked away behind the house. >> It is. It's tucked in kind of the the corner created by the houses's uh the addition is narrower in the rear. So, it's tucked in the corner of the joint
of the addition and the existing house. Um there's no exterior appendage outdoor shower. Um the driveway is being extended to accommodate uh all the parking behind the front line of the house. So we are
extending those pavers to match the existing pavers. Uh there's no new fencing, no additional proposed lighting, exterior lighting. Um nothing to the sheds or outuildings or garage. Um and no changes proposed to
the landscaping beyond uh you know the intrusion by the addition. Okay. Okay. So just like to note that we granted conceptual approval of this project and we had asked to see cut sheets for the roofing, the siding and the window and the um also the type of
materials being used for the fascia and sophet and lattice which has all been included in this submission. My only comment is that on HPC4, the elevations are still listed as existing and they should be proposed. >> Yes.
>> So, if we approve this this evening, I would just like to request that you submit a revised HPC4. Yes. >> That label corrected to say proposed for all four of those elevations. >> Okay. >> Yes. So again, um not necessarily
thinking we need to go all the way around the room for everyone because it appears as if nothing else has changed from the conceptual review. Is that accurate? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Okay. Any questions or comments for this applicant? >> One question, Christine. There's no change in the railings on the front of
the house. >> No, no change to the existing railings or actually any portion of the front of the house. If you ever do decide to change those, look around at houses of that era and the railing systems have a
much heavier look to them rather than all that skinny stuff. So, keep that in mind as you uh maybe get in need of changing the railings that that would be something that would really bring that house back to the era that it's from. >> Sounds good. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks, Okay. Any other questions or comments for this applicant? So, hearing none, I would like to move that we grant final approval with the condition that HPC4 elevations be resubmitted properly
labeled as proposed. >> Second. >> So moved by Mr. Becker, seconded by Mr. Hamron. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Bagno, >> yes. Miss Wilson, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hamaran, >> yes.
>> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. >> Thank you very much. Well, you're very welcome. >> Thank you. >> Next on our agenda, please, is Perry Street Associates LLC, 29 Perry Street.
>> Mr. Chairman, I'm going to recuse myself due to a very close board membership with the owner of the building. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Carol. So before we begin, I'd just like to note that on the application, it's not indicated whether it's contributing or not. This is a contributing property. So
if you could please state your name and your role in the project. The floor is yours when you do that. >> My name is Robert Shakansky. I'm a project manager for Perry Street Associates. >> Okay. Are you representing the owner this evening? >> Yes. >> Um
Mr. Shapansky, can you just give us a little bit of a relationship with the >> Here we go. >> Got it. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Well prepared. >> Okay. Uh for the record, appointment of representative the undersigned being a
manager of Perry Street Associates LLC hereby authorizes Robert Chapensky to appear as representative of the company before the HPC for approval involving the property lo located at 29 Perry Street, Kate May, New Jersey, October 20th, 2025. Curtis Bashaw, managing
partner. Thank you, Mr. Chapensky. >> And the floor is yours. >> Okay. Uh, we have an application for a fortune closure on 29 Perry Street. This is the building known as the inn. The building known as the inn at a uh on the
front of the property. Um, the detailed plans show wooden framed enclosure that would be behind the railings and columns of the existing porch
um with doors leading down. >> Is that it? >> That's it. >> So, I just have one question. It says seasonal porch enclosures. the intention that this would be removed um during the summer and warmer months and it's only installed seasonally or is this a
permanent installation? >> We want the option to be able to take it down. You know, I don't know why we wouldn't be able to, but um it's seasonal because it's not heated out there. So, >> okay. Because it appears from the details that with a few bolt removals,
it could be removed. >> Yeah. >> Without too much difficulty. >> Right. Correct. >> Okay. So, um, shall we go around the room? Kevin, do you have any questions or comments? >> I really don't. I I think it was important that it be behind the railing so that the the architectural elements
of the building are visible from the street. Um, it does look like it's removable. It's got the divided lights. It's meets all the codes for a normal window. So, I think we're we're right. >> Okay. >> No questions. Now, I do like the fact
that you're not just putting up like screen panels, you know, putting all the different um muttons in there really, I think, adds something to the streetscape. >> Great. Yes. Well, I actually missed the seasonal
part of your application until you came before us and I went to the street and I looked at all those porches lining up. And you know, that is a very important part of what our streetscape
is all about is open porches. So, I'd really I'd like to understand a little better. Um, it doesn't it's it's a very elaborate type of seasonal enclosure, which makes me wonder, would
it be taken out or is it going to be a threeseason room or something? >> It's a threeseason room, you know. Um, like I said, there's no air conditioning in there, so it might not work in the summertime, >> right? >> Um, but the plan, you know, we called it
a seasonal porch enclosure. We don't want to state that we're expanding our building or trying to sneak anything in. It's just to have a space for guests. >> I like open porches. I think they're really an important part of our
streetscape. Um, and it is one of the design guidelines in our book to maintain open porches. So, I just feel like we should um state that and consider it.
>> Mr. Shapansky, did you run this by uh Bruce Britain, the zoning officer, yet? Okay. Um, and the the only reason I bring that up is because it indicates here that you're looking for final no zoning board or planning
board approval, but we have seen some applications with, and I'm just thinking off the top of my head, se uh 7 Ocean, the end of Kate May, they had a proposal for something kind of similar. um the the use of the porch. I'm not
saying you you need relief or you don't or another board application, but we've gotten in the habit of just confirming that before we even issue a final and I want to let this discussion play out with the other board members. But I just want to flag that as an issue for you
that we usually want to confirm that the zoning officer has reviewed it and confirmed yes or no that they need a trip to the board for what it is that you're proposing to do before we issue final. >> Okay. >> But just flagging that as an issue for
the board and for the applicant. Um but >> Okay, Janice. >> Well, I it doesn't matter what I like. I'm simply stating that our design guidelines strongly recommend open porches. And this afternoon, I went and
I looked down the street and I see all those open porches. And that building is part of that streetscape. I I was in my mind I was thinking it was behind the parking lot, but it's not. It's right there on the sidewalk, right next to the Star and
Wave building. So, just wanted to make that clear. It's not about my taste. >> Well, if I may, I feel the same. The Virginia was open and then they closed it, although it's seasonal, but I don't
think it has impacted the look of that street that much. I think it kind of um complements in some ways the streetscape. >> And it's open, but it it's open during the summer and closed >> closed in the winter. And most of those porches are open and I think it works.
So that's only my opinion. >> Yeah. And that batter is closed. >> So >> now, right, >> sort of the appearance of the Fairthorn Cottage on on Ocean, >> Kevin, >> is what this would look like. I'm sorry. >> I can't I can't can't keep up with that.
I don't know why. Um, no, the Fairthorn Cottage on Ocean, I think, is going to be similar to what this would look like. Um, >> but that's but that's permanent. >> That's not re That's >> that's permanent. it, but it would have that same kind of an appearance. >> It look like it has actually become a
part of of the evolution of that building. >> I agree. >> So, we're we're now in charge of deciding about the future evolution of these buildings and and how and why. And that's the only reason I brought it up. I
>> I just wanted to clarify. I I also remember something in the standards about um that they had to be e if it could be easily removed or not and that was I I think part of this that it can be relatively easily removed.
>> Anything reversible is better. >> Much better. Y >> green neck >> and Yogi. >> Yeah. I I have a couple of quick things because you did say it was easily able to be removed, but the some of the
sections I'm thinking are not um accurate to that. It it talks about, you know, the angles bolted to the jam post and beyond. And then another just I want to make sure that the sections the way that they're on here are um correct and
they are able to be easily removed. It doesn't look like that with what I'm looking at. >> As you if you look at um number six um plan details, you can see that we will install a post on the inside of the railings and columns. There's an
aluminum angle bracket with a thumb screw >> to hold the panels in place. >> Detail six. So that corner you're talking about that corner um with that L angle you're easily able to remove that.
>> Yep. >> Okay. >> So in other words, the angles would stay in place. It's just the wooden >> wooden glass panels would be removable. >> Yeah. >> I would imagine it would all come out if we were to take it down for the summer, but >> Well, >> it depends on
>> the way it's detailed. That's not the case. Yeah, it doesn't look like that. It looks like it's permanent. >> Mhm. >> Um, and if your testimony is that you're able to easily remove it, what I'm seeing here really doesn't accurately
depict that >> it's a surface mounted screw. I mean, this is how the easiest way to install it and remove it. If we didn't use these fasteners, then we would have to nail it, caulk it, attach it to the building in a, you know, a permanent fastener. >> Okay.
>> Well, I think the point is that based upon the details, it appears as if each of these panels could be removed by unbolting them from the angle, but the angle can't be removed. That stays in place. >> Is that accurate? >> Yes. So, if you can do that in reverse
>> so the angles come off with the panels. >> Okay. >> Does that make sense? >> Yes, Mr. Chair. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Okay. Mr. >> I'm kind of in agreement with everyone on the board. It it's a really nice design for the front porch, but I think it should be open in in the summer at
least June to the end of September. And that's what that street is and that's what Kate May is. Uh it's great to have it in from October on and it does work on the Ebbit
room so it would work there I'm sure. >> Yeah. I just wanted to comment that you know this is not the first time we've seen the word seasonal used on an application. I don't know whether there's something we could do where we could provide further definition to that term. Say for six months a year or
>> we could limit limit from from June till uh September 30th that it must be open. the board I mean the board could prescribe that here if you have a you know uh acceptable kind of time period of when
it should be on when it should be off then it becomes an enforcement issue then >> yeah and I don't know whether zoning has something addressing that term as well or >> there's a couple different definitions out there for seasonal but my point is
that the board this board could determine and you know what that appearance should look like you know seasonally right and and if what I'm hearing from the board is that we don't we wouldn't necessarily be looking at this as a permanent thing because we
like the appearance of porches you know at least in the summertime but it doesn't sound like the applicant is looking to do that necessarily but it just could be one of those things that if there's other projects that are you know on the the front burner
these things might remain on just not for any other reason than there's other things going on. But that's kind of more of an operational enforcement issue. >> If I can ask a question sort of in in another way, is there an intent or is there you know any thought by the owner
about um making turning these um uh replacement windows into into replacement screens so that you know during the summer you would have a screening panel that goes in. During the winter, you would have a a glass and panel going in.
>> Uh the intent of the enclosure is to make it more comfortable in the shoulder seasons. So, I mean, when it's going to be hot out, they're just going to have to come down. Yeah. >> If it's too hot, >> you can't imagine it's not going to trap heat in that, you know. But but the alternative then is to put in a a um a screen panel. >> Screen panels. Yeah.
>> You know, which is not necessarily, I think, what we're thinking of today and not what we're seeing today. Um, and I can certainly understand that given that we have plenty of mosquitoes in this town. So, I'm just wondering if there's a, you know, if this is like the first
of two steps or if that's at all in their thinking. >> It could be, but it's not my not our intention. >> Is a divided like removable panel, >> right? >> Wood construction that would be put up in the shoulder seasons and taken down
in the summer. >> Okay, >> Rob, this is going to sound silly. I have to go back. I have to make sure I heard this correctly. All right. The original intent is to keep it this way all year or you are going to make it seasonal. >> It's seasonal. >> Yeah. >> Seasonal. Yes.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Seasonal. About to be closed in season. when we were saying >> you look down the street it's >> there's two houses with open porches and
then the you know cottages I mean I like I said earlier >> Mary's house is enclosed >> it works beautifully at the Virginia um I had another question on just >> I think the hotel guest like that even more >> open in the summer myself >> absolutely
>> can I just say for the people who work here seasonal is usually the So, this would be shoulder seasonal, I guess, what you're proposing because I was confused, but I wasn't going to say anything.
>> If if we would say seasonal, I think we would have to do May through September because Memorial Day, you don't want it all closed up for Memorial. >> That's the thing. I mean the and that's why the board should if if you're going to go forward with this you should give clear direction on what the season is that you would expect your what your
expectations are because the summer is June 20th to September 22nd right >> but everybody thinks the summer down here is Memorial Day to Labor Day and it it can be some combination of that but we just if you're going to consider this it should be clearly set forth so that
the board knows what to do the enforcement officer knows what to do and the applicant knows what they need to do like hey it's whatever date we got to take these things down because that's what the condition is. But I still think we need to double check and I'm not here fishing for issues, Mr. Chapensky, but
you just need to double check with the zoning officer about what your proposed use is and that he's okay with it. Um, so I comments this is not a matter of opinion. This is straight from our standards.
states explicitly, the full enclosure of a porch with glazing is not appropriate. However, our standards also allow for, and that's on page 34 of our standards under porch and entrance standards. However, recessed and temporary transparent enclosures that preserve the
porch are appropriate. So, I think what you're hearing is two things. One is I'm not convinced from the details that it is easily removable particularly when we start to look at the uh the the set because I the sophet is in fact
with two angles attached to the structure. Therefore, it's a whole new surface that's part of this construction to which the vertical members of the wooden panels are attached. And there are um the posts themselves. I don't know how those are attached to the
decking or whether or not they are simply by gravity being held in place because they're bolted at the top. It appears that that's the case. >> Yes, that appears to be the case. >> Okay. So, I think what we need to be sure of in order to at least
conceptually approve this and I think that I can state clearly that we cannot give final approval tonight because there might be some zoning implications here because you are enclosing a space. I don't know whether there are or not, but that needs to be checked with the zoning officer. But it appears to me
that if you could two things, and I'll just propose this to everybody. Provide us documentation that clearly indicates that this is in fact easily removable and that it will be removable from let's
say the June 1st through September 30th. Does that sound reasonable? >> I think we have to go May 15th. like the prominade. >> Oh, so May 15th to >> Well, you're talking about it should be
it should be open from >> May 15th >> to September 30th or something like that. >> I agree with that. >> You cannot you cannot eliminate Memorial Day. You cannot it's got to be open for Memorial Day. >> Good point. Okay. So, um,
would you be willing to go back and ensure with these drawings that they are revised in order to indicate that these panels are easily removable and the means by which they're removable and commit to removing them from May 15th through September 30th.
>> Possibly. >> Possibly. Okay. Well, that's your choice. Um the but I think what you're hearing from us is that's our recommendation and our our direction and I would invite that we make a motion accordingly if anybody would like to make that motion.
>> Do it just sounds like they may need to gather some information and present to the board. So, do we want to consider maybe adjourning this, giving the applicant an opportunity to confirm those things and they can come
back and present? We can confirm the zoning. We can confirm the removal. We can confirm the timing of that. >> It's going to work for the board, work for the applicant, and then maybe they can come back here >> requesting final after having a conversation with the zoning officer as well.
>> So, I was proposing that this be conceptual only. So the question is do we want to table this or grant conceptual approval based upon those conditions that I set forth? I think
maybe the it might make sense just to table it so that we're not because I don't even know that we have a concept to approve yet because he's going to >> have to confirm the angled you know you want to confirm that not only the panels can come out but the angle things that
they're connected to that it's going to have a basically the way it looks now is the way it's going to look when these things are removed I think is the way that the board is looking at it >> right because the the I can I can speak specifically about where I think your your temporary issue is. When we look at
the details, it shows that the vertical members are solid wood and that embedded in those is an angle and the panels are actually bolted to the angle that's in the vertical piece. So that I guess what that means is the vertical piece also is removable as well. It's just not
indicated anywhere. We don't know that. So would it would it be acceptable to you to table this for this evening, check on the issues that we're questioning and come back again and see us next month or um a and by the way that would require so the just the
applicant would wave the time for decision indefinitely so that you can come back and address those items rather than proceeding to a vote tonight. you kind of have a little bit of a homework on those items and then you come back come back to the board next month or the following month whenever you're ready
you can just pick yourself up um out of you know you're going to remain in queue. >> Okay. >> So I do want to comment that I think that aesthetically and historically this is beautiful so long as it's removable. It's really well done because it's also all it appears as if it's all custom
fabricated. We're not purchasing any windows off the shelf. made specifically for this application which thereby makes it even more easy to be removable so long as you can justify with your drawings and details that it is indeed removable seasonally and the means by which to do that. So my compliments on
the on the project itself so long as it's removable >> to set the time frame now so Mr. can take that back yes kill all the birds with one stone. So, are we in agreement? Are we in alignment that May 15th to September 30th is are the proper dates?
>> I just think May I ask a question. What do you think would be reasonable? >> May 1st or May 15th? >> Probably May 1st. >> I can't hear you. >> May 1st. >> That's what I was thinking. The the only thing I would say about
that is we should probably >> this it's good to discuss this but let's see if another board has to take a look at this too because the seasonality may impact another board's review too and it and it could still be a recommendation or that kind of thing but we just want
to see procedurally what we're >> think we get some really lovely weather in May and >> yeah and additionally I think we need to have a definite standard because it becomes an enforcement issue if one person it's May 1st the other it's May 15th we made a standard. >> Yeah. The reason I said that is because if he's going to go back and get
approvals from the owners of the property, let's get everything approved for us at one time. So when we come back the next time, you're going to say, "Okay, well, okay, we're going to take them off." But we all agreed on the dates. I mean, this just seems like not
that we're approving anything, but it gets approved. These are the dates. >> Well, and we don't know their highs and lows either. Whereas May 1 may be much more beneficial. date here. Everyone has to be on the same line. >> Or you can just do an honor before
because if it's removed before, that's not an issue. >> Correct. >> So I think that we look at that instead. So even if we still go with May 15th, we do honor before. If you're saying May 1st, >> I think that that makes sense. >> We'll have dates.
>> There's no penalty for removing it early. >> That's right. Yeah. I I think the other thing just to keep keep for all of us to keep in mind is the idea of the removability is what keeps this from being a a permanent addition which then in turn could
trigger the contributing status. >> Correct. >> So you know that's why this is so important. It has to be removable. >> That is the issue actually and it's why our standards prohibit a full enclosure of of open porches. So, um I think the
question that we have for the applicant is, are you willing to wave the the 45day time limit in order for us to proceed with tableabling this project? >> Yes. >> Do we have a document for him? >> Uh I mean I
>> can I forms, but I accept the representation on the record. You're authorized to be here and present this and you're also authorized to uh grant a or consent to an or a uh waving the timing requirements. >> Okay.
>> So, our applicant has waved the time. Yes. >> Can I ask a question? Will we be using the same application at the next meeting? If so, we'd like to collect them or we'll keep a record of who kept them. So, will will we have a new submission or just use the ones that we
have? I don't think it'll be a revised uh detail. It's probably going to be more of a verbal explanation possibly from the architect. >> All right. Then we'll we'll collect them or let if people want to retain them, we'll do that when it's over. Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So, um I would therefore move that we table this project for this evening. >> Do I hear a second? >> Janice, you second it. B, you second it. Both of us did. Okay.
So, >> double second. >> Motion is that this this application be tabled uh made by Mr. Becker and seconded by Miss Pagno. >> Roll call vote, please. >> Miss Pagno, >> yes. >> Miss Wilson Strick, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson,
>> yes. >> Mr. Hammer, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. >> Thank you. And by the way, if you would like to come and chat with our review committee on any of the Tuesday mornings um as let's say further issues start to
arise for you, you're welcome to do that and we can chat about it. All you need to do is call our secretary and make an appointment. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next on our agenda is McGawan, 263
Grant Street. Do you want to keep >> Are there representatives here from McGawan at 263 Grant Street? >> Looks like no. >> Okay. So, why don't we do this? Why don't we collect these as well?
>> Yes. >> Already made my note >> because they're not present. >> Um, >> I would like to mention, however, >> that >> go ahead. >> Just a quick question because there are there's a demolition on this as well. That's the comment I'd like to make as well. >> Then go ahead and continue to make it.
>> Yeah. The point here is and and what we should do is is notify these folks that since they are proposing both installing an underground pool and demolish an existing garage and deck that they will need a separate demolition application for demolishing the garage and deck.
>> Okay. >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. >> You know, also regarding this, I mean, this this really should have been should be deemed an incomplete application. And there's really not much information on here. >> Correct. >> And uh you know particularly like fencing would be required around a pool,
surface material surrounding the pool and I guess zoning as well because would have to come first. >> Yes. So, I think one of the ways we could do this is we could ask the secretary if if she would notify the applicant that it would probably be in their best interest to come visit us on
a Tuesday morning so that we can describe how the application is incomplete and explain that a separate demolition application will be required. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Moving on. Next on our agenda, Swain's
Hardware Incorporated, 305 Jackson Street. This is for a solar panel installation proposal. >> Good evening. >> I'm sorry. Can I can I make one comment for >> Yes, Kevin. the uh last page of the
property report on that last page of the property report also says um you know and when it speaks to it's a contri contributing property it also speaks to the historic frame garage. So that garage is part of the historic
contributing factor of the house. >> So that's what's interesting. When I looked at the property report it appeared as if the garage was installed after the period of significance. It's unclear. It's unclear other than other than in that paragraph, >> right? >> All right. Which says, let me read it
here. It says, "This property is a contributing property in the historic district because it retains integrity and key character defining historic features such as historic massing and fenestration patterns, exposed roof, rafter tails, the open brick porch and
front steps, molded concrete block foundation, the historic frame garage. That to me implies that all of those are in that." Yes, it certainly does, does it not? Okay, thanks for that, Kevin. So, that's a that's also a discussion we should have with the applicant when they come on Tuesday morning about the
demolition. >> And the other thing I I I think just to call into question here for the commission, we've kind of gone back and forth on this a little bit, but my recollection is we've talked about the idea of no more pools in the historic district. Now, I don't know we've ever
coalesed around that, but I think that that has been a subject of discussion here. So, >> it's something that we can discuss, but our current standards address it simply by saying that they are permitted as long as they're not in the front yard. And yeah. Okay. And there's other there's other stipulations than just
that, but that's certainly an item for discussion if we want to entertain that idea, but currently our standards do permit pools in the historic district. Okay. Gentlemen, if you could please state your name and your role in the project.
I am Kyle Gagliardi, owner of Swains Hardware. >> Welcome. >> I'm Joseph Kiss, electrician and NAPSAP certified solar designer uh for the project at 305 Jackson Street. >> Okay, I can maybe um
move this along fairly quickly. Unfortunately, gentlemen, our our standards state very clearly that any photovoltaic solar panels must be not visible from a public ride
ofway. And unfortunately, I went and looked quite carefully at this. It's visible from everywhere. I mean, you can see those the roof where you're both both sides of the roof actually from Bank Street, from Broad Street, from Jackson Street, from West Perry Street,
and from Myrtle Myrtle Avenue. So, unfortunately, the way you've proposed this currently, there's no way we can approve it or even entertain approving it because it's in violation of our standards. However,
there may be other places on your property. I I didn't want to poke around too much because it's not my property. There may be other locations on the property where a photovoltaic installation could meet the the KW requirements you're seeking. I don't know. So, I do need to state though rather
than waste our time making a presentation that the the way it's currently proposed would not be appropriate according to our standards. >> Okay. Unfortunately, >> and with that, we do have, you know, I wanted to check with that because I was
almost certain that that was the case, but yeah, >> we do have an area that has a parapit um on the on the older side of the building and it it's not going to produce the KWS that we're looking for, but it it would end up being an option. We would just have to re-evaluate that and see if the feasibility is there. >> So, it's a couple of thing. Are you are
you the the photovoltaic installer? >> Correct. >> Okay. So my question is um there there are numbers of different I'll call them efficiencies of panels in terms of KW per square foot. Are these the most efficient that you have available?
>> Uh because it could maybe reduce the size of the array. >> They are higher efficiency. They're uh 20 about 21%. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um the most high efficients are like 23%. >> Yeah. And how many how many watts per square foot do you think you can get out of them? >> Uh well we're getting I I don't have the square foot exactly for what it is.
We're getting currently we're getting 87 kilowatts. Uh we're producing about 100,000 watts per year. Um but we're also sloped on that roof. It's also very nicely uh east and west fac uh facing >> unfortunately with the flat side. We'll
go over this. Um there's a lot of shading. There's a lot of roof angles on the older roof. Um we would maybe be able to put five or six KW probably on that. So there I'm caught in a bit of a dilemma here because in every way I
would like to support photovoltaics and solar energy and renewable energy. Unfortunately it's in violation of our standards. So is there any way you might be able to consider groundmounted photovoltaics behind the buildings in ways that might gain you the same amount
of square footage you're looking for to produce the kilowatts annually you're looking for? Um, I guess it really wasn't something that we originally considered. >> No, >> additional cost and stuff like that, but we definitely can review it. Uh, thin film might be an option that you might
be open to. So, thin film is a little differently. We would roll it in between the seams of the metal roof maybe. >> Um, it is more costly and it is less efficient. Uh, but it may be acceptable if you uh, you know, if it's something you're interested. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, and that would be something that would be visual. So,
>> so you're you're raising a really interesting question. Um, if there is a material, there are shingles, for example, that are getting very, very close to not being able to tell the difference between a regular shingle and a
photovoltaic shingle. If you could find a material that you would propose using that was almost indistinguishable from let's say a shingle or a in this case this is a um a standing sea metal roof. >> Correct. Correct. And we're not asking
you to change the material of the roof, but if you could find a material that basically is a referred to as a building integrated photovoltaic material or or a thin film that was virtually undetectable as a photo photovoltaic
material, we would consider that. >> Okay. >> Using the language from our standards which talk all about visibility. So the issue is is the visibility here, gentlemen, unfortunately. And there's not much we can do and still stay in compliance with our standards
unless you guys can find a a a a great technology that works. I would love it if you could find one that we could use that you could use or ground mounted. >> I believe we there are solutions that would probably be acceptable. It's whether it's worth your investment. That's what correct down to because there's going to be a greater inve
greater >> um investment with a lesser payoff. So that there's definitely options and opportunities. It's >> whether at that point if it's worth it. Yeah. >> Well, I mean it's something I feel pretty strongly about. So I think we're just keep you know keep plugging away.
>> Yeah. Yeah. For sure. >> So is there any anything else you'd like? Sorry I cut you short, guys. No, that's fine. >> Didn't feel like there's no reason to have this discuss. >> Yeah. We know it's yeah the information we needed. So >> Okay. >> All good. >> So we'd love to see you back here with a great solution.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. >> Before Before we go ahead >> do one of the options is we can table this indefinitely. The applicant can wave the time for decision. Obviously if they took a vote tonight probably wouldn't
work out the way you wanted. So but if you table it and wave the time for decision indefinitely. What that allows you to do is stay in queue. You guys can retool the plan and see if you can come up with something re like a revised plan and then you can let the secretary know
come in with a revised submitt get it on agenda so we'll keep you in quue rather than just getting a denial tonight. Is that something you'd be interested in doing? >> I think that we should um I mean not that it's really worth saying but some of these tax credits run out before the end of the year. So after in the next couple months it's not even going to be
feasible at all. Um, so maybe we should throw it into a queue and see if we can get something. >> You're already under contract, so you can save harbor the tax credit and you don't have to use them this year. And >> you figure when do you do, you know, tax returns? You know, you have a few months before you'll do the 2025 returns.
>> The accountant, too. >> Not a bad guy to have on. >> Yeah. >> So, shelving is not a bad idea. We'll know in the next I think that that's worth doing because again, we it's something I do feel really strongly about. Um, but you know,
obviously if it can't be done, it can't be done. And yeah, >> kind of knew that going into it, but >> figured we'd throw it at the wall. So, >> all good. >> So, so with the applicant's consent to waving the time for decision indefinitely, if you if you want to
revise your submitt and come back, you can basically bring this back to life and let the secretary know and be asked to put it on agenda. >> Yes. >> Um, let's do that. And then the the board can entertain a motion to table indefinitely until that happens. Are is that acceptable to you? >> Yep.
>> Okay. So Tom, >> when we use the word contributing building, that basically means the architectural u impact that it has on the community. I'm sure everybody around this table feels that Swaines
contributes in so many ways, even just to the old time feeling of this community. And I'm sure I for one and everybody here would be anxious to do everything we can as long as we don't go against our standards. And I and I think
there's options. You're talking about them and we certainly want to work with you in every way we can. >> 100%. Yeah, definitely. Well, this isn't a contributing building as of right now, is it? >> Are are they non-contributing? >> No, we're >> the home is contributing, but the
>> but but also Swaines is a standard bearer for the town. >> Yes. >> And if you can figure this out, you'll be a hero. >> I guess you will. >> I may have it actually. >> You know, and guys, just so you note, I just want to state this that with regard to solar technologies, it's irrelevant whether it's a contributing or
non-contributing property with regard to visibility. It's still >> uh something you guys can think about and I'll bring uh either on a Tuesday or something. There is a uh there is a product out there. It's called skins uh and we'll lose a little bit of the efficiency, but we can basically use the whole same setup uh same system size and
it'll we can wrap the solar panels to match the existing roof. >> Okay. >> Wow. If you guys could solve this, we'll be heroes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. No, I mean it's definitely something that's, you know, >> now the panels will still be, you know, lifted. They'll still be above the roof, but we can make the panels instead of seeing the black blue lines of the
panels, it'll look basically just like the existing roof now. So, >> if that's something that you think might be acceptable, that's something I can put together. >> How do you do that? >> Uh, so we we we send them the solar panels first. They skin them and then send them back to us. >> So, they put a they put a um a I don't
want to call it a decal, but it's a kind of like a decal, but it has pin holes all through it. So you still and that's why you lose some of the efficiencies, but they kind of from down below it'll just look like that. >> So they become translucent in us. >> Not translucent, but they kind of look the same as the roof, the same color.
They can actually they take a >> a photo of the roof basically. And then they map it out, they print it out, and then they lay on top of the panel. >> And they would fit between the standing seams. >> No, no. Right on top of the panels. >> Raised. >> Yeah. That's why I'm asking if that would be acceptable because the panels
would still be raised and seen. >> Probably not. Gotcha. Okay. That's before I put time and energy into probably not. >> But I mean if if if we are going to consider if it would be a consideration for you guys um to do something like you had just mentioned um is there the
possibility of utilizing that and actually making it be a graphic of shingles? You could you could >> I know that the roof is not black as of right now, but I would be willing to paint the roof black so that it would almost resemble shingle, you know, so
that that skins would resemble shingles and then the surrounding area would also be black so that it wouldn't, you know, stand out so much. So, what I what I would invite you to do is keep going with those creative ideas and come and chat with us on Tuesday morning with a couple of ideas that you're discovering
and exploring and we can give you some guidance. >> Okay, >> I'd love to do that. >> I can put a presentation together. >> That'd be great. >> Yeah, for sure. Definitely. >> Okay. >> Especially and this is something that we need to look at >> as well because to to have renewables
but yet um have them as you know being able to fit within our guidelines. That's >> that's the solution we're looking for. >> Yeah, we're looking for We are >> Yeah. I'd be curious. I'll present to you skins and what it looks like. And I mean, they do decals. They can like some people do American flag on their solar
panels. So when you look overhead, you see the roof. You see the American flag. It doesn't look like solar panels. It looks like an American flag was painted on your roof. >> Uh but then you could also make the skin look exactly like the roof. >> John, just for my knowledge, if they put a in the backyard, this is a pretty big lot back. Yeah.
>> They put a bed of panels and then fence them around so you couldn't see them. Would that be acceptable? >> Well, the ground mounted ones would be acceptable as long as again they're not visible from a public rightway. And the way that lot is configured, they probably wouldn't be if they're in the
back. >> Yeah. And that may actually be even less expensive than the specialty that you're talking for. >> Um, it depends what I can fit in. I have to do the redesign, but the additional cost of the foundation and all the, you know, you're usually looking at, you know, a considerable cost for a ground mount versus a roof mount system. you're
talking about a dollar watt. So, you know, $80,000. >> Yeah. >> To do a ground mount versus the skins might be under $10,000 and we lose a little bit of efficiency, you know. So, >> so it sounds like a little bit of a little bit of exploration is in order and let's keep talking about it. I mean,
it would be fabulous if we could come up with a solution that meets both our need for renewable energies and our historic preservation standards. I It's kind of like the gold standard we're looking for here. >> Yeah. Yeah. One of my last trips across the Ben Franklin bridge heading out of the city, I was looking down on the
parking lot that is huge for uh Ruckers and it's a cover over a parking lot and the whole top of that has uh solar panels slightly angled and enough of an
edge around it that they're they're hidden in there. So, they have great parking and uh in the shade so your cars aren't burning when you get back and the solar panels up there. Uh it look to me like a really great solution for them too.
>> Oh, for sure. For sure. It's the absor if you can absorb the cost. That's really the additional I don't I mean if you guys would allow something like that I mean I >> Well, that would certainly visible. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if if that was
something, we're going to propose some some options. >> Keep thinking. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> And we got to consider what like you have logistics coming. >> Everybody parks there already as it is. Now they're going to be parking in the shade.
But actually that's a not that's a really interesting idea because in the southwest of course most of the parking in public buildings is shaded and most many of them have photovoltaics on them and if the slope is slow low enough from the street at eye level you can't see
the photovoltaics all you see is a shading device >> that would be acceptable >> right >> take it away. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Great. So, shall we collect these and give them back to our secretary for um our table purposes? >> So, we do need to actually
>> have a motion >> and I will make it. Um move that we table this application indefinitely. >> I'll second. >> Seconded. >> Okay. So, motion is to table this application made by Mr. Becker, seconded by Mr. Hamron. >> Roll call vote, please.
>> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Bagno, >> yes. >> Miss Wilson Sturdy, >> yes. >> Mr. Mr. Stevenson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hamaran. >> Yes. >> Mr. Curts. >> Yes. >> Mr. Becker. >> Yes. >> I'm sorry.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. >> Oh, I think she likes to write the name. >> Yeah. I just >> I know mine >> I missed part of mine. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. walking out here with a lot of stuff. >> Yeah. But how about the other one?
>> Yeah, we're giving everything back. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Is that true? >> Yeah. >> I believe not. Let's ask. >> Okay. So, next on our agenda is uh
cottage at 37 LLC, 37 Jackson Street. Do we have representatives of that project here? Well, good evening. >> Your your photo will take on the other hand are not visible. >> Right. >> No, they are not. >> So, please can you please state your
name and your role in the project? >> My name is Rebecca Gordon. I'm a contractor EMT. >> Okay. And do you have authorization from the owner to represent their interest this evening? >> Yes, Miss Sito should have uh submitted those.
>> Um, >> you said Rebecca Gordon. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> With EMT. >> Yeah, I've received an email. >> Okay. Okay. Great. >> Okay. Table is yours. >> Sorry, the floor is yours.
Would you like to make a presentation? >> A little closer so we can hear. Sorry. >> No, >> it's okay. So, it appears as if your application is relatively self-explanatory, but you have an opportunity to present anything you'd like to present. >> Um, I would just love to get her some
solar, save some money, and make the planet greener. >> Okay. Just for the um for the other commissioners, I also went and looked carefully at this property. So, the roofs at the um the taller building and
the one-story edition in the back are not visible from anywhere from a public ride ofway, not from Carpenter Lane, not from Jackson Street, nor from Decatur. So, I just wanted to throw that into the mix. >> Any questions or comments for this
applicant? Well, hearing none. Would I I'd like to entertain a motion to approve this application. >> So moved. Second. >> Approval moved by Miss Wilson Stritic. Seconded by Miss Pagno. Roll call vote, please.
>> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Pagno, >> yes. >> Miss Wilson Strick, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hammer, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. recorder. >> Yes. So, it wasn't that easy.
>> So, don't tell those guys. >> It wasn't. They got out. I was like, "Oh, goodness. Thank Thank goodness they're before me." >> I was the first one here and the last one out, too. >> That's it. Yeah. Well, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good luck.
>> Only because you offered to hold the door. >> Okay. So, on our agenda, we have uh I believe that the last applicant, Ryan, at 8:24, has been removed from the agenda. Correct. and they plan on coming to see us in November. Is that accurate? Okay. Um, seeing as how there's nobody
in the audience, there are apparently no public comments to request. So, discussion period. Um, we do have, as you know, uh, Lauren Emer serving as our HPC secretary. However, as a matter of
protocol, um I believe that it would be highly appropriate for us to actually vote on that appointment. So, I would like to entertain a motion to appoint Lauren Emer as our HPC secretary. >> Motion.
>> Who made the motion? >> I'll make I thought that was the motion you were making. >> I didn't have a motion. You made so many. >> I'm just I'm just trying to entertain a motion. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. This is about entertainment. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Motion made by Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Curts. Roll
call vote, please. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Pagno, >> yes. >> Mr. Wilson, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hamaran, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. Okay. Reshuffleling our um our let's say
configuration of our commission. Um, as you know, we are missing a commissioner because Steve Johnson resigned as an alternate. Um, we've all had chats individually about the appropriateness of um,
recommending that Judy Decker become a commissioner. Um, however, this the issue there is that she would not qualify as a class C commissioner. Just to make this perfectly clear, we have classes A, B, and C. That is in no way hierarchial or ranking. It's almost they
could be colors green, blue, and purple, right? All it means is that all our alternates must be residents of the of the municipality. Furthermore, four of the voting members, four of the seven voting members m must also be members of the municipality. Therefore, in order
for Judy to be appointed by the mayor to become a new commissioner, somebody who's currently on the commission would need to become an alternate. and Mr. Hamron very gracefully has offered to make that
move. It would also mean that one of our other commissioners and likely you Tom would need to shift to a class C in order to be a um because you are a resident qualifying as resident. You're currently listed as class B. Therefore, we would have four C members um because
Judy is not. So, we can't make that decision. I just wanted to let you guys know that um I have received a letter from Kevin stating his position and forwarded that on to our mayor with um my recommendation that we proceed
accordingly. Just wanted to inform all of you about that. Most of you I think I've discussed this with all of you actually, haven't I? Yeah. Okay. So, we all good? >> Good. >> Okay. >> I have a question. Kevin, if you become
an alternate, will you still be on the review committee? >> Oh, yes. >> Yeah, I was on it before. >> Good. >> I I I assume assuming John wants me there still. >> Oh, yeah. >> That's a call. That's chair's call. I mean,
>> yeah, you were there as an alternate when you first came on and that's been really incredibly useful. Thank you. And even as an alternate, you're involved in everything if all of the members are here, all discussions and everything. >> Correct. >> So, we're not losing
>> only if there is >> short. Okay. >> If we're short one commissioner, then he votes. >> His vote, as far as I'm concerned, is very valuable. >> I totally agree. And you would become alternate number two. Well, you are alternate number two. >> No, I'm number one now >> cuz Steve's not here. >> Oh, that's right. You go back to number
two. >> Okay. Hey, just >> but again, this is not our call. This is the mayor's call. All right. The mayor has no problem. >> I have no problem. >> Great. Okay. Would like to just give you a brief update on the Columbia Capstone. Um two weekends ago, we had 13 students
from the um Columbia Graduate School. And these are not kids. These are uh adult educators. They're professionals in their own right from a number of different I would call it disciplines. And they kicked off the weekend by meeting at my house and we all had um
coffee and and treats from um Sheay Michelle. And then we took a three-hour walking tour and they got to get the lay of the land. Then they met with several officials, folks in positions in the city. Kevin was there and Janice was
there and Lorraine was there and Tom I think you were there as well um at the science center to begin working on their capstone project essentially looking for ways to help resolve and understand and make recommendations regarding the
intersection between resilience for coastal communities and historic preservation. So they're doing a significant amount of research. Um they then on the following day they had they had done some initial research and I
guess they made a brief presentation. I was oh no they did not. >> No >> that got that got postponed right. They weren't quite ready yet. Um but there is a scheduled presentation. I don't think the actual dates been given to us yet but sometime in late October or early
November they will be making a presentation. I'll I'll let all of you know about this because it'll be on Zoom and that'll be sort of their midterm before the end of the term work and they'll be receiving comments from us and uh anybody who would like any further involvement please let me know.
This is essentially being driven by um um uh Laurel, I'm sorry, Laurel, Justine McGario. Um and she's been instrumental in bringing forth Lynette, the professor from Colombia, because this is sort of a
repreeze of the last time they did this with regard to the um desalination plant. and the work that they did was really helpful in identifying some technologies that had not previously been considered. So, this could be very significant for us. And it's essentially,
I guess I could say this, hundreds of thousands of dollars of free work that we're receiving from um highly skilled professionals. So, >> a lot of that work could be attached to grants. No, a lot of the work that they're doing could be attached to grants um and
really further uh and and validate a lot of what we were looking for as far as um resiliency in the city. There were a lot of discussion items that we came up with on that Saturday, which was um it was interesting because they broke out into four groups and each one of those groups
had their own specific expertise and then they're all going to get back together. Uh so it I'm really curious to see the >> so the four groups were if I remember right energy water uh funding >> funding and policy >> and policy and what's the last one
>> and then historic >> historic yeah great yeah >> communication there was one on >> right communication >> otherwise the communication >> so looking to look what what's really lovely about this is they're looking at this as a whole living system as opposed to each of these as separate entities
and finding out where are their sweet spots for integrating these ways of of policym and um I would say uh developing capacity for further resilience in a coastal threatened community. >> Well, threatened by things like climate
change and sea level rise and flooding and all that which we just experienced a couple weeks ago, right? Dodge that bullet a bit. Okay. Um >> can I just add to that? >> Yes, please. Uh Sunday when we were kind of wrapping up, several of them approached me and I I said, "So, you
going to have a great report for us?" And one of them said, "Don't change anything. You're perfect." They they came out and said, you know, we were are surprised how well things are going here and so many different
areas. Uh they certainly had picked up the fact that we have fabulous government in town. Uh one of our members right here Zach's leadership. Uh so it made me feel real good that they got to say scrap everything and we're
got to start over. We're we really are on the right track and some fine-tuning will help a lot. >> And I can testify to the three hours I spent with them, they were enchanted with this wonderful place that we're all fortunate enough to live in.
>> Okay. Thanks, Tom. Any other comments about um you guys all attended. Do you have any other comments? because I wasn't able to be there on Saturday afternoon or Sunday. >> Very very inquisitive and very good questions for people who really don't know us, you know. >> No, they were great and I do look
forward to their report and uh since then I've done a webinar from the National Association of Preservation Commissions that was part of a summer program on priorities and it was four cities much larger than Kate May. their
preservation staff people talking about many of these same questions. And >> one of the questions that the capstone people had asked us was how much flexibility do we have in interpreting
the the department of interior standards and we frankly don't completely know. Um on the webinar there was a lot of discussion of this because these are cities like Portland, Maine, right on the coast.
Um Louisville, Kuck, Kentucky, Wake Forest, North Carolina, and um I forget what the other city was. >> Was it Savannah by any chance? >> No, but one of the person's names was Savannah, so I keep messing that up. Anyway, it might have been Charleston.
>> Yeah. Um, but they did talk about how the Department of Interior are very important to our understanding of the guidelines, especially as commissioners, new commissioners. However, they also emphasized the
importance of finding the pain points in the community and asking the community what they don't understand, what they would really wish we would ease up on before they did their guidelines. So, I thought that was interesting. and they
talked about how these commissions, now these are commissions, um these are staffed departments in cities, larger cities, but they talked about
bringing the problems forth from the ground up, talking to the saying, you know, we agree that we should have all wood windows, but in Portland, they allowed They allowed more um
latitude in the replacement of the windows that were against the ocean and not on the streetscape because if you've been to Portland, Maine, you've seen that streetscape is a big wall of old industrial buildings that back up to the ocean. Also, they made exceptions for
parts of the building that were out of the sighteline that were so high up that you couldn't really tell if it was a divided light wood window or not. So, I found it interesting and I would recommend I'll send I I have all the
slides. I took some notes. Um, but I'm really curious to see how these smart Columbia people are going to tell us how we can better adapt to the need for
passive solar, for flood mitigation, for replacing materials that we may not be able to replace exactly in kind with crafts people that no longer exist around here. I mean, we really do have
some challenges. So, as much as Tom said they thought we were great, they did. Um, I think we do still have challenges that we need to be able to help people meet. >> Yeah, that'll be
I'm I'm really looking forward to seeing what recommendations they bring forth for our consideration. >> Did anything, Janice, come up with fire? Was that an issue? >> I'm trying to think. They they did talk about it um
about fire suppression. Now, are you talking about the capstone or in the in the webinar that >> in in the capstone? We we all brought that up as far as fire. >> I know I brought it up, right? I'm always paranoid about fire. >> I know. But again, that's been the
devastation of Kate May. They were surprised to hear that because they were really much more in tuned in climate change in in sort of typical shore community problems. >> So I think it was good that we emphasized it to them. >> Yep. >> Yeah.
>> I think you brought up the question of um burying the power line. >> Yes. >> I know several of us echoed that. That would be a great thing to do that. >> You take a look at what happened in um >> in California and in um Hawaii. Yeah,
>> it's a big issue and if we could, you know, have that document to present to ACE, uh, we've had a hard time having them, you know, possibly look at doing something like that. >> So much better for aesthetics, too. >> It is. Yeah. >> Take a look at the prominade where they
go. >> Oh, I know. >> Yeah. And, you know, it sounds to me like some of these recommendations could form the foundation andor basis for some grant applications. Correct. >> Yes, that's what you were referring to. >> Exactly what I was referring to. Okay. All right. Um,
an update on the historic preservation awards. Janice, by the way, and her committee, just so everybody knows, have been working tirelessly on this for at least the last four to five, maybe six weeks, maybe longer. And it looks like you got the list down to what, 40? It's
if I'm correct that the those that have a uh final approvals but not a CO are still okay and we that's a question we've asked at um Paul Dietrich to clarify.
>> Yeah. So I the list that I got today from you I counted 41. >> Yeah. >> Right. And that that's for um category one which is basically rehabilitation reconstruction and category 2 additions. Actually, no. >> I don't know about new construction. >> I think you're maybe my list wasn't
clear. What I have down is 18 in category 1, >> 12 in category 2, nine new construction. Um, >> so what are those numbers again? >> 18 in category 1, 12 in category 2
>> additions, >> nine in new construction. the adaptive reuse. I have a question mark because um the one of the obvious contestants would be the library, but I don't have that
resolution in the in the group between January 1st, 2022 and December 31st, 2024. >> Just thinking about that, the library would only have been a letter to the city. It would not have been a resolution.
>> Oh, okay. However, it did come before us at at least two meetings >> and that would have fit that time frame, >> but we didn't have a resolution, so it didn't make my radar, >> right? >> And then the other question we had about it
was the appropriate, you know, the question of the city giving the city an award. I mean, we're trying to be transparent and inclusive. >> So, Janice, just to just to recap, there
are 18 rehab projects. How many additions? >> I have 18 renovation, 12 additions, nine new constructions. Okay. >> That made that have been completed that were uh seen before us as an HPC that
received a resolution. Um, >> in defense of that, Janice, it that that was a special case collaborating with, you know, the county library. So, it's a good, you know, evangelizing. >> It's an amazing project and, you know,
there's two ways to look at it. We've got we've already gotten a lot of public praise for that from the state and other places. Um, the reason we're doing the awards program is to spread the love and
and bring more people in. Um, any project we can highlight as something other people can look at and say, "Wow, that's really great. I didn't think of that or I didn't see that." Uh, you know, a sort of sleeper was this
project on Page Street where staggers took an old utility building and made it into a residence. So that's adaptive reuse. >> The adaptive reuse category will not be easy for us to do much in this town
because in a city it's happening all the time. >> Here it has happened where residences were turned into B&Bs. That was the really the beginning of Kate M Renaissance. That was adaptive reuse.
>> But it's a category that doesn't show up as as it used to. It's kind of going I don't know if adaptive reuse qualifies for B&Bs that turn into whole house rentals, but that that's that's a question.
>> I'm I'm sure we're going to have a new one come up with that tomorrow's building. >> That's a warehouse or whatever storage. And you know, is that going to be redone somehow? Most likely.
You mean the where Kate May Lumber is? >> No. >> No. >> Almyra. >> Oh, Elmyra >> flag lot. >> That'll be that'll be an upcoming >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean hidden back in there. >> So So Janice, then the next step is
there's a there are uh we have >> meeting on Monday, a week from today. >> Yeah. So um this is a question for you Chris. >> Okay. Um what we plan to do is have all
of the potentials scanned and and then a subcommittee nominee subcommittee that would be composed of Kevin John plus the committee. So that's uh Kevin, John, Janice,
all commissioners. Judy, not a commissioner. Lorraine, not a >> Jake. >> And Jake. Yeah. So there's four commissioners and two non-commissioners on the subcommittee. If we met in two separate rooms
and looked over and talked it over and brought it down to our top, say five to eight and then met as a whole team and decided which would be our what we want to do is boil it down to five or six per
category that the outside jurors would be reviewing to recommend for rewards. if there's I I I think that this qualifies as official business even if it's sort of like community engagement work, right?
>> Um so the conservative answer to that is >> if there's four members, we should just call a special meeting and you can, you know, meet and you don't have to worry about the sunshine. You can sunshine it and have your >> and do it here. Yeah, you could do it here and you could you could meet in
here and talk about it and not even have to have like this >> breakout room issue. >> Tom, what's your >> Great idea. I I So, the more transparent we could be about this, the better, I think. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, the the this the process for
doing that. >> We just need to somehow publish that within 48 hours or how does that work? >> Yes. Sunshine it. Um, posted, you know, the gonna be >> city clerk and the board secretaries that >> Janice, >> so the city clerk's office and the and
the board secretaries can help coordinate that. You just need to sunshine it at 48 hours notice and and you can discuss amongst yourselves, you know, a a kind of date that may be good for that discussion to happen. And then
um >> we already have identified a date which is a week a week from today. >> Yeah. Monday afternoon. We're doing it at my house. >> Yeah. >> Can we sunshine it at my house? >> No. Well, no. >> Well, we're going to do it in the I think in the community room.
>> Oh, okay. >> Okay. >> That's okay. >> No, in the community room here or the the council chambers. >> We just >> Great. We just need to make sure that there's minutes of it, too. So, you don't have to do it live stream, but it
does have to be um we do have to have minutes for it. >> Oh, we do have to have minutes. >> Yeah, but the but the minutes don't have to be transeneral. Can be be kind of we discussed it and these are the ones we landed on. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> I think that's the cleanest and safest
way to do this. Yeah. And it avoids you having to, you know, think about can we talk about >> just to just to let you know though, the public is invited at that point. >> Correct. There's have to have to be an opportunity for public comment. So you may have some people that want to come in and say, "Hey, it should be my house."
>> I don't think they will, but >> And do we have to um make any sort of newspaper notice of? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Got it. Okay. the the um >> Well, we can sunshine it, >> but we can't we can't publish it that
fast, I don't think. >> No, >> but we can sunshine it for sure. >> Yeah, you can sunshine it. It's not going to be published, but that's not the requirement of the law. You just have to have to have it sent. But >> Okay. >> Um >> Okay. >> So, it's a tight timeline, but it can be done. >> So,
>> can we So, what what is it that we need to >> Jake? Jake's concerned. Go ahead, Jake. You're concerned about what? The cat being led out of the bag. >> Yeah. I said, you know, if if it is public, you know, then the way we're coming who the winners are, is the cat
going to be out of their bag because the public's involved? >> Well, but these are only the nominees, not the winners. >> Yeah. >> So, the cat being out of the bag with regard to nominees is actually something we want, right? the in the HPC the board uh or at least you know a more than at
least a quorum of these members are going to be basically serving as the initial filter >> correct >> that non a non-HPC unit will be choosing from is that correct >> yeah preservation professionals will be looking at the >> full packets and you know the the
urgency is that we want to get these packets >> really well done and put together by before the holidays. >> Got it. >> So that we can have our nominees in February. >> Right. So just and that that might address your concern, Jake, which is
look, the HPC is going to have some nominees to discuss >> and serve as the initial filter, but ultimately the selections are going to be made by >> Yes. >> So if we could have a notice and the notice is just a public notice stating what the purpose of the meeting is. Correct. >> Correct.
>> And that needs to be given to our secretary to send to the newspaper. Correct. >> And if we could have what what would be the deadline for that in order to meet the >> 48 hours. >> 48 hours. So what's going to need to happen is there's going to have to be a
a posting in in the building. They'll put it on the website. Um it'll be available in the clerk's office and then the notice of the special meeting has to be sent to the paper, official paper, but it's not necessarily going to be published in time, but
that's not the requirement. we have to send it to the paper. We realize it's going to be published afterwards, but most people are going to see that it's on the website, posted on the bulletin board. >> Okay. >> So, just just that's why I was talk talking about what's the purpose of the meeting. HPC is going to serve as the
initial filter for these awards. Um, and that's the discussion that's going to take place at this special meeting. The place and time, if it's not going to be in here, it should be whatever room that it's going to be in. And, you know, there'll be an opportunity for public comment. Okay.
So, how do we want to move forward with that? Making that notice happen. >> It's done. I think she has >> I think Karen >> got it handled. >> She has it handled. >> Lauren have it. >> Yeah, Lauren has >> got it. Great. >> Do we need to confirm that we're going
to be in council chambers or >> It's going to be chambers. >> Okay. But just make sure that it's available or Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay, that's >> and that's uh >> Monday the 27th at 3:30 in council chambers of city hall. Great.
>> And the purpose of it >> I think you captured that right. Okay, great. So Janice, the question I have is um do when do I need to have the scans done of the packets of the 41 projects or >> if we're going to meet next Monday, then
it's up to all of us to look over the PDFs at least briefly. Lorine suggested we do it the way we do our meetings where each of us, you know, get familiar. We don't have to have a decision by any means. >> So the PDFs, I'll make them. I have no
problem doing that. I just need the documents that I need to scan. >> You mean the the resolution numbers? No, the the so we talked about having a packet for each submission which would be the application that written down
>> materials checklist the resolution >> and the historic property report. >> Yep. >> And um any >> let's see >> drawings. >> Mhm. >> And >> first two pages of the application the property report the resolution and
whatever the submitted drawings were. Maybe not all the cut sheets and all that. >> We don't need all that. >> So, the packets for each of the 39 projects, I think, is what they are. Um, do we have those >> prepared? >> I the hard copies. I just need to get
the hard copies so I can scan them. >> They'll be in >> They'll be in office >> tomorrow. >> So, if you identify which ones they are, Lauren can pull them and get them ready. And we have a pretty good scanner. So, >> okay.
>> It could be done in the office. >> Scan them. You You guys will scan them. >> We can as long as they're the right size. >> It's easy on the copy. >> 11 by7 scanner. >> Yes. >> I It sounds like I'm a relief to this student. >> Will they be then hard copy for all of
us or will they be PDFs? >> Well, let me let me make a suggestion. If we're all meeting in one room, >> Yeah. >> we don't necessarily need to have everything scanned. we can just take the applications, the files with us because the only scanning that we really need to
do are the ones that were >> nominees >> nominees. So we don't have to go through this whole process if that makes sense. >> You know what the question is how we're going to be looking at 40 projects. So each group of three people
will be looking at 20, right? >> We can switch, >> right? And we're only three people. We can sit around them and look at them. We probably don't need I think you're right. >> Yeah, I don't think I don't think we need to do that until the end. >> I think you're probably right. And only scan the five or six nominees. >> Correct. But we're going to need to have
the applications pulled so we can use them here as we're going through. >> So all we need then is the original applications for next Monday. I think that's a great idea. Yeah. >> Furthermore, that's really selfish because now I don't have to scan them. >> Well, you'll have to scan the other ones that we
>> do that. Yeah. But but 10 is a whole lot better than 40. Yeah, didn't make any sense. >> I'm happy to do it either way, but it sounds like it would be unnecessary. >> I think so. >> Okay. I did document our first cut, our second cut, our third cut because I feel it's really important when we're finished this and we're clear about what
the process is that everyone in on the HBC understands it and that it's not really detailed in our publicity, but it's it's referred to in simple terms so that people who might think, "Oh, I should have been considered um when they
realize that no, we actually didn't consider roof replacements or garages or fences. They they you know this was about a more significant project. >> And we also had to not consider projects
that had unresolved violations. >> And that's the most sticky one because >> Yeah, >> that's what this list. >> Yeah. Got it. So there also I think everybody knows that you guys also
created a rubric for essentially scoring >> the nominees in order to or scoring the candidates to produce the nominees and then giving that rubric to the outside folks to score the nominees to select the winners. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Just to clarify that um the the people
who are going to be looking at these are are very experienced with this. So the rubric uh is a simple um it's it's more about expressing what our priorities are so they understand
and they'll be scoring them on a sort of a scale of zero to five and then talking together with each other looking after looking at the photos and and the um whole packet. >> Right. So it's not as if each project is going to receive a final score as it
were. Yeah, we're not doing a detailed u multilevel rubric like you might expect in an academic um situation. >> All right. So, it sounds like then we have a meeting public meeting going to be announced for next Monday at 3:30 in
council chambers to be attended by four of us as commissioners plus Judy and Lorraine. >> Yes. >> That way that way we can all meet together. We don't have to go into two separate rooms. >> Yay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Just a point of order. I don't know if
our solicitor needs a motion on that for a special meeting. >> Yeah, I think that's a good idea. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, um Janice, would you like to make the motion? >> Okay. I would like to move that we meet
as a nomination subcommittee on Monday the 27th at 3:30 here in city hall in council chambers to go through the 40 qualifying nominees and select the top five or six in the two main
categories and finish the job of defining the three oh three main three main categories. Yes. Thanks. >> I'll second that motion. >> Moved by Miss Wilson Strait, seconded by Mr. Becker.
>> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Miss Bagno, >> yes. >> Mr. Wilson Sturdik, >> yes. >> Mr. Stevenson, >> yes. >> Mr. Hammerman, >> yes. >> Mr. Curts, >> yes. >> Mr. Becker, >> yes. >> Anything else, Chanice, about the historic preservation awards or anybody?
I wanted to uh say that we haven't abandoned the idea of the stewardship and leadership awards, but due to the complexity of this level and the and the time frame, we've put that off and we're looking at um addressing that probably
the very beginning of the year because that process is going to involve public nominations. They're going to be handled coming in through city hall. um we don't have the details on that as clear as
they need to be in order to invite the public nominations. >> Okay, great. >> And we did I did reach out to Steven Smallen. He is going to be one of our jurors. So, we're going to have three jurors. They're going to be historic preservation professionals. Um we have
some very good candidates. I'm relieved because I was worried about the timing. Um, and Stephen said yes right away and he knows our resources very well. >> So Jake, did I miss anything? >> No, I think you covered it all. And if
not, we'll talk about it on Monday. >> Okay. Well, that's a good segue to you there, Mr. Stevenson. An update about all the work you've been doing in community engagement. >> Okay. Um, we didn't have an an official meeting this month. I mean, and largely
my fault because my daughter was married last Friday and it was three weeks of hell leading up to it. >> It all worked out well, thank God. >> And uh and then B was at a wedding in Marrakesh over the the month. Um but um
I did reach out to Adam Dunning at the um Cape May Tech and um haven't received a response from him yet, but I also spoke with um Jim Barnes who's the chair of West Cape May HPC and Jim Barnes thinks that the apprenticeship in um
historic renovation techniques for wooden windows, doors, etc. would be a great idea and he's on board to back it as well. And then additionally, I did um produce two public service announcements uh for WCFA
and I sent them to our chairman. Um they had to be 30 seconds long. So, you know, it took probably about a hundred different takes to get two that were passable. >> But, um the chairman feels that they're okay. And if they need a little more
polishing, I'm willing to do that. I >> I think they're better than okay. Um, it's just just one person's opinion, but they're little 30 second clips that are concise, clear, helpful, and change the tone of what HP they're really kind like
it's like a public service announcement here. We're here to help you, and they're really well done, I thought. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Hey, it's hard. >> I'm a frustrated DJ. So, >> well, so the hard part is to is to >> It's easy to write a long thing, but to get it consolidated into 30 seconds,
that was hard work. Call bet. >> That was the tough part. >> Yeah. So, what what do we do with those now? >> Well, I I'll send them over to um Cassidy over at WCFA. >> Great. >> And get his opinion on them. >> The other David Cassidy. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um you know, there is one thing I wanted to mention to you and I think I mentioned it to you, but so MAC is doing an exhibit in uh in their exhibit hall. Um, I don't know what the opening date is, but sometime next year
as the 50th anniversary of the historic preservation commission and in the middle of the space will be a one of those exo boards that'll have eight panels on it that'll essentially kind of tell the story of HPC. And Janet
Copelan, who is president of MAC, has had a couple discussions with me showing me just a quick outline of what she was thinking about. I'd like to bring you into that discussion and your committee into that because this is definitely a community engagement thing. So, soon as I have any more information, I'll connect you guys. Okay. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Great. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Um and I do believe, Mr. Solicitor, that the two latest proposals of amendments to our zoning ordinance were receive second
reading and approval by city council. >> Correct. And actually, we had a a young lady come to the microphone and speak in support of it, the demolition by neglect ordinance, saying that it was she thought it was a good idea. We rarely get those kind of comments at the council table,
>> so I was surprised, but usually there's a lot of other types of comments, but so anyway, HPC was HPC's proposals were received favorably and they've been adopted and will be enacted. >> Beautiful. Thank you for all that work. >> Sure. I think that concludes our
discussions for this evening. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring forth? Kevin? >> Yeah. One, just actually to couple on to that. Um, there were some questions were asked at the second reading and I thought Chris did a really nice job of handling the answers for that. So, >> excuse me, Kevin, please. Can you bring
that microphone closer so we can hear I did a nice job for the record. >> Yes. Congratulations, Mr. Gillan Schwarz. You did a good job. >> He did. He said it just right. >> Um, thank you, Kevin. is um for for those of you who don't don't happen to know on uh Saturday we had the 150th
anniversary of our fire company here >> um and the it playing in the in the um little conference room was all these just pictures from fires that have been taken over the years. Some of them go back pretty far actually. Um, I am
shocked at how many of our historic buildings have had a fire in them over the years, >> like the Bedford Inn, um, the house, Ry's house, the doctor that lives up here on on, um, >> Washington Street, you know, that caught fire a few years ago. Um, and it just it
goes on and on and on. You know, the the the the including the ones that were lost um, you know, that truly were lost in the fires. It's stunning when you see how many have been rebuilt and, you know, really emulate their their their past. So, I don't know if we ever get a
chance to see that thing, but it's because it's just a slideshow kind of a deal. Um, but it was really impressive and it was, like I said, striking about how many of those kinds of of our historic buildings have had a a fire incident of some sort. That includes things like, you know,
garbage trucks that run into the corner of the front porch and and some other things too, you know. >> Wow. Um only one other comment from me and that is I've allowed um to languish the historic district um amendment, the
historic district map amendment um mainly because of activities in the summer and also now focusing on the design or historic preservation awards. I want to jump back on that in November and December so we can maybe hit that hard right at the beginning of the year.
>> Yeah. Right. I think it makes sense to >> correct. Right. Okay. So, I'd like to be able to have my research done that I said I was going to do with regard to the the etmology, if you will, of how we got to where we are. And I'm I'm about
halfway through that. So I'll I'll be prepared and maybe propose that we have another alignment workshop in January amongst us to strategize the proposal of the historic district map amendment. Would that make sense to all of you? >> Okay. Thank you. Any other comments or
questions for this evening? >> If none then shall we have a motion to adjurnn? >> I make a motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> So moved. Thanks everybody.