oh yeah Okay All right Thank you everyone for coming today This is the Historic Preservation Commission meeting for Princeton uh Monday April 7th 2025
Um pursuant to section 13 of the Open Public Meetings Act adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting was given by posting prominently on the official bulletin board in the municipal complex 400 Witherspoon Street a schedule of the regular meetings of the
Princeton Historic Preservation Commission for the year 2025 which posting is to be maintained throughout the year and by transmitting a copy of such schedule to the Princeton packet town topics Trenton Times and Comcast cable of New Jersey and by filing a copy
with the clerk of Princeton New Jersey Elizabeth do you want to take the role yes Miss Satderfield Mr Shatskin here Miss Howard here Mr Shaw present Mr Endersby I'm here too
Miss Freriedman here Chairperson Capazolei here Thank you everyone for coming today Um Elizabeth do you have any announcements i don't Okay So I guess I just wanted to
say that we changed our meeting date So this is our only meeting for April We're not going to have another meeting in a couple weeks or something Um we have two sets of minutes uh May 13th and May 14th
Um Shirley Roger Charlotte David and Elrich are all eligible to vote on the minutes Um does anyone have any changes or
corrections alri right on the 13th Yeah I don't have any point I thought
about there were two there were two facilities which were available for the construction of 344 and one was a brickyard giving the jug town its name and the other was a stone quarry from which a lot of the stone and the
foundation was taken So I wanted to make that clear It talks about a gourmet shop Um it actually was called the gourmet shop for for local residents Um and then it later on it says something about the
soldier course That wasn't what I was talking about at the time I was talking about the glazed headers which appear every fifth course on the two gables which distinguish it as as one of these houses
with decorative brick work which are prevalent in South Jersey but not here And those are my two comments Okay Thank you And those pertain to the 13th because I remember that was the date that you gave me Yes it was the first of the two days All right Any
other changes to either the 13th or the 14th julie I don't know which ones are which because I read them online and I made my notes on a little piece of paper but on page seven of one of the minutes it's a section where Christine Luwendowski is making a comment and
it's oh it's just little stuff It's um we have the word registry when it really should be register Okay that's all something we all know And then later on Don Denny talks about the historical ordinance Is that the historic preservation ordinance i think that's what he was talking about Get that
cleaned up And then on under Quaker Road I guess on another section of the minutes page two demog um demolition and reconstruction third line under Christine it says I think it's supposed to be a dimension or something about the
wagon house It just has the letter M and I don't know what that referenced to And if I had the minutes in front of me I could do that So I don't know if you want to just have me get back to somebody on that or you can have a markup and send it to Ian either a hard copy or electronic Okay
I've got I'll give it to him Anyway that's that's all I had Everything else looked great Okay Do you think we could still vote on it Elizabeth i do I think that David has touched on those but he'll give uh more specific
comments to Ian so he'll make sure he has it in the right section Okay Any other changes comments if not would someone like to move the minutes for the 13th and the 14th so moved Okay Thanks David Second Second
Thanks Roger All in favor please say I I I Opposed Motion carried Thank you so much We're going to move on to our applications Our first one is the Historical Society of Princeton 354
Quaker Road the wagon shed barn demolition and reconstruction Um um anyway I know Elizabeth did send out a report and I'll give her a chance to
uh summarize that if uh she'd like to So the Historical Society of Princeton has filed an application for an administrative waiver and historic preservation plan review to demolish and reconstruct the existing lean two of the wagon shed barn and replace the barn
foundation roof framing and windows This structure is contained within the property identified on the Princeton tax map as block 100201 lot 11 in the R HFW sub area F2 zone The property is
also identified with the address of 354 Quaker Road containing approximately 6 acres and is further known as the Updike Updike Farmstead The site is situated in the south side of Quaker Road between Mercer Street also known as Princeton Pike and Province Line Road Neighboring
properties are institutional in ownership The property is located in the local state and nationally registered historic districts It is classified as type one historic district in the Princeton ordinance which is subject to preservation plan review for any proposed work visible from anywhere
within the type one district or from the public rightway including any new or changes of surface coloring Um I think that everyone here we've had a lot of applications within the the um the Princeton battlefield So I'm not going to go over the history of
that or the King's Highway Um but I will go down to um the project on the demolition and reconstruction of the lean 2 and the other improvements to the wagon shed barn So the uh the applicant has actually been discussing the proposed
demolition of the lemu for a while Um this was when the um other um Izzy was a director of the historical society So it has been a conversation but obviously they have a lot of other um sequencing
of work on the project So they take it as they feel um needs to be done Um unfortunately there was an urgency on this application The applicant did submit however they found that there was a structural stability problem as the
ground started to thaw And in my report there's an attachment from their structural engineer who talks about going to the site and stabilizing And I know um um Miss Banjer can talked to that about um how they stabilize it from the interior and that it is pretty
unsafe So that's why we're looking at this application as an emergency review Um the applicant has received minister approval for roof shingle replacements on January 21st 2022 to replace the roofing material on four the outuildings
the wagon shed the garage potting shed and the storage shed And they had used a a specific type of cut diamond shaped shingle in antique black and it was approved for all of them Unfortunately the wagon shed roofing was not replaced within the
24month requirement of approval Therefore they are coming back and asking for that approval again since it had expired Um um and um we are under this understanding that the applicant is requesting the same type of shingle that
they had originally been approved for Um so the demolition of the leanto and the reconstruction of the new lean tune is going to be at the same location of the same size and height to match what was existing The new foundation will have an exterior facing stone veneer and a black
color asphalt rolled roofing shingle sorry roofing material The wagon barn will have a new framed gable roof to match existing roof also and the ridge will not exceed what is existing today the diamond shaped asphalt shingles that
we talk about is uh where that material would be applied Um in addition the uh the existing second floor windows will be replaced with new wood windows which will match the size shape type and
mullion pattern as exist Um all new foundations will be constructed of masonry with exterior stone veneer and they'll be utilizing salvaged rubble stone to the extent feasible Uh the siding and trim will is also proposed to
be replaced and again where salvaged siding and trim boards are available They'll be reused otherwise they'll be replaced with new thermally modified popler um again matching existing siding and trim size and profiles
So as part of the demolition and reconstruction there are six existing trees that are required to be removed One is a multi- trunk three trunk cherry tree and a walnut which is encroaching into the lem too So that has to come out
In addition there are two other cherry trees where which are in the close proximity but also they asked to be removed Um the land use engineer Mr Weissman had talked with the arborist and he concurred that they could be
removed and I believe there were two of them that were substandard sizes So there was no compensation required Um so as the commission knows we have the preservation obligation to be reviewed according to the to the preservation plan application and the
historic structures Um and those standards are set out within the report and they're just three questions that um is provided in the report um or comments Actually there in my search and it was very quick but I could not find anything
within the sandboard maps which is usually a go-to for me Um they didn't go out to Quaker Road It actually stopped on the north side um or right at the street So it didn't go down south on Quaker Road at all So there was no um
mapping information on those properties Um and I know that the applicant had also said in her applications that she had done research and who else but the historical society would have so much information that they were not able to find anything because they were actually looking to find what the age of the
leanto was when it was constructed to give us some type of reference Um one of the questions I have for the applicant is does the wagon shed um proposed to be painted i might have missed it on the plan but I didn't see it or was it just going to be natural um
the applicant is also asked that the wagon shed barn is the only out building that did not receive that new um roof shingles that was approved And if it wasn't did you want to include that as part of that application to include the
other out building this was the only one that was outstanding Okay And that's all I have Thank you Madam Chair Thanks Thank you I'm going to turn it over to the applicant All right Fantastic Thank you Madam Chair members of the board And
it's Anthony Teddaro an attorney with the law firm Fakery Drinker Bid on Wreath and representing Historical Society of Princeton So I don't want to uh reiterate a lot of what was just mentioned in historic preservation officers report We agree with all those items So I'll just try to keep it brief
and honestly limited to the housekeeping questions The one item I just wanted to confirm in the beginning is that um since obviously this public meeting but also there was a demolition component So I just wanted to confirm that we our notice and uh publication requirements were
satisfied So I didn't think there was any issue but I just wanted to confirm it before I Thank you kept going And Lisa did you want to swear is his mic on is your mic on can't hear you Oh how about that is that better that's great Thanks Thank you There were no issues
with the the publication Okay Thank you And we should Do you mind if we swear in any witnesses you're going to sure I'll run through them So because we're so excited for this project It's a worthwhile opportunity It's been a long time coming Um and so our whole team is
here tonight So what I I want to do is just start off with Leanne Hunter from the applicant just to give the board an understanding and some backstory as to um what the applicant's all about provide the mission and how it kind of dovetales into this specific project
Should do you want to swear in all of our witnesses at the same time that's what I was just going to say If if um anyone who's going to be giving testimony if you could raise your right hand and we'll just do it all at the same time so we don't have to repeat ourselves Okay Okay Um do you swear that the testimony
you're about to give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes Okay Thank you Anthony Um I'm actually Leanne Hunter I'm a staff uh member I'm um the private events manager at Historical Society of Princeton been there for just
over seven years Um I've worked very closely with the folks at Baxter and with Ronnie over well quite a while now on the wagon shed project and um I just wanted to start by giving you a little background about our mission As you all know Princeton has a fascinating history
and our mission is to develop programs and collections that share that history with local and international visitors and develop a passion for history um and appreciation for the past especially in children in our community Um HSP
purchased Updikeke Farmstead in 2004 and have been responsible stewards of the historic property It contains a large barn and a farmhouse as well as five outuildings one of which is the oldest building on our 6acre property the wagon shed Parts of the wagon shed date back
to 1720 and would have been standing during the Revolutionary War It has always been our intention to restore the wagon shed When we re-roofed three of the outuildings in 2022 we ordered extra roofing shingles for the wagon shed
Unfortunately we learned that we could not simply re-roof the shed and the damage to the wagon shed was more extensive than we had originally thought The entire building had to be reinforced in order to restore the structural integrity As a nonprofit we simply did
not have the revenue to do this immediately In the process of looking into grants and fundraising projects we we were approached by a very generous donor who agreed to fund this project We hope that we can continue to tell the rich story of Updikeke Farmstead through
the self-guided signage on our property especially the historic significance of the wagon shed which may have served as a landmark when Washington marched his Continental troops past the farmstead to the Battle of Princeton Thank you Great
No thank you And then what I'll just confirm real quick is that so there was a prior application and dur in connection with that prior application the other buildings the roofing materials were already completed uh or the installation I should say for the new roofing we even have the shingles
quite frankly for the wagon shed barn and just because of the extent of uh of the improvements that need to be made roofing wasn't been done quite frankly we even have the same samples that we used at the prior application so um they're going to be obviously consistent same exact ones And
so pending of course approval we'll be able to actually effectuate the roofing as part of this project And so absent any other questions from uh to the uh uh Miss Hunter specifically I'll turn it over to our architect to run through our
plans real quick All right Thank you If you could just give the board any questions for I don't think so No So any if you could just give the board the uh benefit of your qualifications just introduce yourself Ron Brightenser architect
licensed in New Jersey been practicing my own practice for 33 years testified in front of this group I think before and zoning and planning and worked primarily in Princeton And as far as historic work at historic
Morvin I've done 18 separate projects there over the years as well as I did the u big updike farm barn that we turned into a a what we call an assembly space and prior to that I did the windmill and the
little pump house building there as well So and did you prepare the plans in connection with this application yes I did Would you be able to discuss those or run through those plans with the board yes We will start with the photos So first
photo just in context here I think you're all familiar with it but the green area surrounded by all the brown fields is the Historical Society of Princeton Um and then as we move into it basically north is the road give or take
It's kind of skewed in an angle but we're calling the road north just for uh clarity So here is the wagon shed barn It's a twostory frame barn with a rubble stone foundation uh with a lot of repairs to
that foundation drop leaf siding You can barely see it but it has that diamond asphalt shingle shape which is why we selected the other shingle which was as close as we can possibly get after a big search Um so this is looking from the
street at the building This is what we call the front facing east U the door on the right actually goes to a stair that leads up to the second floor the smaller uh build not building but the extension on the
left side which is one story is a corn crib And then the other doors lead into the main barn as well as a door up on the second floor This is the view of the corn crib south
elevation The part sadly there on the on the left is what is um left of the lean tube which has collapsed It was a singlestory lows sloped roof Uh basically this side was open so you
could I guess drive in store materials The other sides were closed with the drop leaf side Just another closer picture of of the shape of the building Now you can see the shingles are failing also on the
roof Um more closeup You can also see here how the leanto is twisted in The barn has also started to twist out foundation started to move in So we're having a a
multiple uh multiple problems here next And then some context coming from the parking lot uh looking at the building Um coming from the main barn this is the larger corn crib But then you see the wagon shed in the distance
Thanks Some This is looking from the wagon shed What else do you see you see the other out buildings the ones that did receive the diamond shingle roof the main house the main barn and the corn crib Again looking on this there's a a raised
bed garden behind the barn And then looking out into the fields which are owned by the Institute for Advanced Study but are still farmed And then this is a view from the street looking um at the building and sort of
see it back there behind the uh I guess that's a spruce tree That's fine So this is a diagram site plan just to show the buildings on the property Um the buildings are tan Um pavement is gray and the building in the
upper left corn upper right corner with the notes that's the ex that's the location of the wagon shed barn the corn crib The dark brown portion is the lean to which is proposed to be removed It's approximately 46 feet away from the
property line So it does comply with zoning um as as it stands and as it will stand because we're putting it back exactly in the same spot A more detailed um view of the barn The I don't know if you can zoom in The
the trees that are talked about to be removed are directly behind the wagon shed uh lean to probably hard to see but they're they're back there And I did meet out there and we went over that
Next these are the plans for what what we proposed to do This is the demolition um removal plans You can see upper left we are removing the foundation in its entirety It's rubble stone
The the the lean to is block on the top but if you dig a hole it's rubble stone underneath So it's a mixed foundation There's a lot of repairs to it with cinder block in and out Mortar that's been there taken away Stones are
falling out and I as I said it's it's a bit twisted on itself It's starting to lean uh pretty badly So we're proposing a new foundation with a veneer Um we're also removing the roof uh all the way to down to the framing You might have
noticed in the pictures the building kind of sways like this It's beyond the point of being able repair that and also to get it to meet code globally Okay Um these are the removal elevations Things that are dashed in are
what we propose to take down right is it is it on So these are the removal elevations again You can see the foundations corn crab The windows will be removed and replaced exactly as they were We'll be
milling them in wood Same size same grid same everything Next these are the proposed drawings You can see the upper left is the foundation plan which is concrete block with a footing underneath down
three feet with a stone veneer on the outside Part of the reason for this type of foundation is we don't know what the future of this building is Right now the historical society believes they would continue its use of just some simple storage I think they
have some shingles in there and a few other things So initially it would be simple storage but in the future they do have you know hopes that this building may be something else and we don't want to limit ourselves to what that could possibly be Um one of the things that
was talked about was an interpretive center for a possible trolley car Long way off lots of ideas but again we want to make a building that has a safe foundation meets code and uh we'll be here a long
time Looking at the building again you can see the new roof with the diamond shaped shingles You could see the windows as we discussed will be custom made to match exactly what was there The corn grip we did I'm sorry the glean
tube we did measure all the members that are there We're putting back the same size pieces except for the roof which does not meet coat So we're using slightly stronger material for the roof rafters However the height of this will
not change The size will not change So we'll be going back basically as it was The same applies for Go ahead One So here's a section through the new roof framing for the barn will be conventional framing So it
will be a paralant ridge conventional uh two by material for the rafters Same on the corn crib that will be conventionally framed roof as well And there you can see on the right side details of the foundation showing
concrete footing concrete block The stone facing um the piece with the X is a plate The wood plate is basically deteriorated and rotted that will also be replaced Anywhere where we can
salvage things we will If we can salvage part of the plate we will If we can salvage pieces of siding we will If we can salvage rubble stone to be used as the veneer we will Uh but a lot of the building is in in pretty rough shape at this
point One of the new materials we propose to use is what's called the thermally modified coupler which is this which I can pass around It's a material that's been treated through flame
What that does is it takes away all the the moisture and then this will now be a piece of wood that's not going to rot The piece in the corner was actually what was there So you can see again we're matching the profile exactly and
the barn is proposed to be painted The color would be white and the interior currently is just dirt We're proposing to dig down a bit and put gravel there so at least they have something of a floor And again for
future that would probably become a concrete slab similar to what we did in the other barn if and when they decide to continue with something else as far as the use Think that's it All right Um thanks I'll open it up Um Albert do you have
any questions this is a tough one for me because I like everybody who's involved in this project but I don't like the project at all Um let me just give you a little back First of all it's not a barn A barn
has to have a threshing floor Barnes have traditionally have a threshing floor They have an an a space for animals and a hay loft This building was not intended to have any of those three It is a wagon house crib Um and I did I
hunted up drawings I did 20 years ago um about the time that the society um bought the building bought the bought the farm Um I think that whoever took a look at this building missed a lot of its
history and I wanted to wanted to tell you a bit about that Um this originally was a 24x 24 foot building with two cribs one which was partially under the stairs going up to the loft to the north and one to the
south the threshing the the the uh the wagon space in the middle was consider was narrower and eventually somebody determined that the build that it was too narrow for the for the build for the vehicles that were being um stored there
and so they added the crib to the south Um if you were to look up at the floor joist from the original building you'd see mortise holes defining where the where the uh the second crib was originally located And if you look on
the in in bent C you'll see how the the um the frame the the the the stuing is was is still there which defines the depth of the the of that feature
Um this is a remarkable building I agree with that the fact that this is the oldest of the outbuildings on the farm I said it then a date of about 1800 I think that's a lot closer I don't really see any evidence I know that the
historical society had um dendocchronology done on the barn Um we I had suggested about uh 1890 I think it's 1895 something like that Um the the
the um straw barn the the dairy wing is by far the oldest the older of the two sections of that barn Um Wagen House crib I've
measured at least a hundred Um so I know them pretty well Um this is an English version If it was a if it was Dutch you would have the the framing on the interior would be considerably different But it does have some remarkable features which I have not seen elsewhere
One is if you look at the um the section for bent wide the side bent for side Y and the section where the crib the existing crib is and the stairs and there's this lovely curve that that that
is a a grace a grace feature underneath the stairs that that's um quite quite quite uh distinguishing But there's another feature which is rare and I don't expect anybody to
notice this but um if you get become accustomed to look at barns and outbuildings you'll see that very often at the top of the posts at about 2 feet below the plate level there's a hole which has nothing to do with the framing
and it is a raising hole and I one of the timber framers in the timber framers guild some years ago gave a talk on 11 or 12 different possibilities ities because nobody's around to who really who really use those holes
Um initially the there it's been determined that there would have been a larger size peg but it would extend almost 2 feet beyond the the posts into which it was riven
Um that could be useful for in the raising for the for the uh for for for the uh the the the various lines which help to to to uh advance the the
structure from horizontal to vertical Also though because these holes are about 2 ft below the plate it seems that they could have put scaffolding boards along those um and to hold the scaffolding boards from slipping off Um
in some cases the rare cases there will be a vertical peg driven into the other peg that would keep the board from slipping off It could also help if you had ropes attached to it from in place I've only seen three examples in New
Jersey and Alex and I have been through something over 2,000 barns and and you know probably an equal number of outbuildings Two were Dutch barns up in Somerset County This is the third and on the second floor at the top of the
stairs you'll actually see one of those pegs in its original position which is really quite a lovely feature Um I would encourage uh the notion that you should you should uh do some dando on it Um I do think I
doubt that it was I'd love to think it was there the day when January 3rd 1777 I'm doubtful of that Um there there are plenty of hume timbers in the building Um the spacing of the rafters as wide as
they are is an early feature Um you'll however um first of all I'm I I have to question pres preserving that lean to I think of all the of all the structures
on the farm is the least contributing uh to the history of the farm even over the full scope of maybe 200 years Um and the very slight angle of the of the the
leanto roof is such that I think it's you know it's certainly not earlier earlier than 20th century and I'd say it's somewhere fairly deep into the 20th century I just don't see the usefulness
of preserving it and sinking any money into that that could be better served on some preserving some of the original features in in this structure Um the building is small 24x 24 is a pretty
standard size for a medium-sized farm Um the leanto extends it by another four feet the the the subsequent lean to uh for the for the existing southside crib Um the some a lot of these wagon houses
would have a plland system which would reinforce the roof Um um and we've seen a lot We moved one from Hunter County down to the to opposite David's place on 206 a few years ago This does not have that But it does have features which
help to reinforce the frame and and and prevent the the uh spplaying of the posts which would which could potentially um be a significant structural defect There there are down
braces um and they're rare on outside walls but bents A and C have them Even though I don't think I see them on your drawings they help to keep they take the the the they they attach the tie beams the lower the low tie beams to the to
the plate level And in the middle the middle bend uh they're not just pegged but they're actually half dubtales which is a very strong joint And and that's the most critical place to have that connection and it's there Um the the
notion of the ridge beam Alex and I have probably seen as I said a couple of thousand barns in New Jersey I can only think of three that had ridge beam You'll find that in New England You don't find it in New Jersey It's very rare And it would be it would be um and
an it would give a false impression of the interior The whole new rafter system might question that as well It may be that some of the rafters need to be repaired and because you're repairing the replacing the roof the opportunity is there to to uh to do so I certainly
know where there there there are a quantity of of raptors of those dimensions If in you wanted to reinforce the roof from any potential um spplaying in the future what they would have done
in the 18th century would be to have one or more collar ties And if you look you'll see that there the original rafters that the middle set is almost directly over bent B And that's where I would suggest if you wanted to add that
it could be done Um there are very few uh um structural engineers that are comfortable with timber framing We have worked with John Harrison in the past I see he's been there Um I I I've been a
little disappointed of late in some of his in some of of his um attributions Um but in any event um I know Alex and I would be happy to come out and walk through the building and answer any potential questions but I
would just the the structure itself is too important to me to see the whole roof system the whole second floor um sacrificed to what may be a false impression of of of deterioration
Um I I I don't see any particular value in a roof in this this um angled roof shingle um um suggestion The the the roof that that the roof that's there was
typical of the 1930s and early 40s Um I if you were going to put extra money into it I'd put it into a higher grade wood shingle roof which would be appropriate for it for what the way it was built and the way it probably
survived into the 20th century Um don't mean to be negative really mean to be I I just I care for the building and I and I I'm I'm sure that you wouldn't have spent as much time and effort as you have um if you didn't feel
like the building was significant Um I just feel like it it it it bears more scrutiny Thank you for your time Now the extent of your knowledge can I I just have a question Were you relying on anything because I have another set of
drawings over here that weren't part of us Okay So I don't almost everything you said I'm sorry No So there's another set of drawings and a narrative in here Was that what you were relying on because I I mean I' I've got a copy of that Okay
And what is it here we go Yeah There Okay And what is this Oh I prepared them on my own And the other buildings on the farm I actually did it in a snowstorm when it was very
cold and very wet And the my only companion for the morning of doing the bar the the two barns and the other crib um was a barn cat Okay And and recently that was uh I think that was more that
was about three years later This was done just I think I saw this morning I did the drawings in 2004 and drew or the I did the measurements in 2004 and the drawings in 2006 May be wrong on that 2003 and
2006 Okay I was I I went out there when the updes were still living there and um before the historical society took it over So anyway thank you for your time All right I don't think anyone else is going
to have comments as extensive as Elri No So um but I'm giving people a chance Are there other uh members that have questions or comments
um and if not I guess Elrich could you enumerate what you would suggest their approach be i mean obviously you want the building to be
preserved as is but I don't know if that's possible given that it's more than 20 years after you measured it Um so I'm just kind of trying to work out I hadn't seen these draw I got back less than a week ago Yeah I didn't see these
these drawings until this morning So I'm just wondering like maybe in that 20 years what cannot be repaired and what can be repaired I mean it's it's sort of a that's why I say I'd be happy to to do
a walk through Just to be clear we're not all those nice elements you mentioned we're not taking them away We're keeping all of those The only thing that we're removing is the roof framing So from the top plate down
that's significant That really is the character of the second floor of the building Um it's in bad shape It's in it's it's very bold It's been cabled together The cables did not work That's failing But
virtually right now we have walls built from the first level through to the bottom from the plate up to the rafters just to simply to support it because it's it is spreading like you mentioned going down Um it's also moved on I think
both is happening The foundation is moving and the building is moving So it's it's in shape Um oh one one thought about the foundation and we've used this approach on buildings What's tough is is on top of that what what our architect
just testified to is that the structure itself's an imminent threat of of failure There's serious chance that it fall down at any point So what we're trying to do is maintain to the greatest extent possible the
historical integrity of the entire structure So I mean opinion there great feedback and we appreciate it However what we are looking at now is is not
just restoring it to or keeping some of these elements and and f subjecting this structure to further review It's what needs to be done as quickly as possible to make sure that the building stays up and we could keep the building in our
historical inventory There's there plenty of ways in which that can be done but I would say and we've proposed approach is more a renovation than a restoration at least from the in the interior And I I anyway I I wanted to say your point
thing is we might not have an interior That's the issue is what we're trying to make sure is that we we make sure we have an interior to keep a lot I mean it's going to be on the ground We're past snow season but um the um scrutinize it As far as the foundations are concerned if future
plants might include uh conditioned space what we've often done is we've actually had the foundation extend about 6 in to the outside of the of the plane of the bu of the existing building below
grade So that at some point if they added six inches of insulation you wouldn't have the foundation six inches be the the new foundation six inches behind And that also allows you to I' I'd like to think that it wouldn't just
be a veneer above ground level but that that's you know it's a farm I understand block work and all that I would love you to come and and take a look at it Um we're actually have like a fence around it because we're afraid that people will go inside of it because
it's very dangerous Um but I think you would be surprised at how far how much it's disintegrated Great So but for certainly I I would love to schedule that with you and and have you walk through Good Just to go
back on the shingles So when we had the prior approval for that that was what the diamond shape was what people seemed to have wanted So we own them or I should say the historical society does
own the shingles for that Um so that's the first decision So they have them the lean too Interestingly I I agree it's it's been rebuilt for sure over the years It is a rubble stone underneath
all of that So it could have been through many lives It might have been a drive-thru Who knows what but currently yeah it's it's probably early early 1920s maybe at the best I would guess
Um so because we could find or the historical society after extensive research couldn't find a date when it was added or how important that it was They thought they should leave leave it in place because it's there Um you did a
similar barn at 1920 That's getting fairly old now 100 years So that was the thinking Mhm Um we had to make that decision um a few years ago with the Barnett in that's
now part of the Farm Museum in Monroe Township And again the the leanto that had been added to it actually was contributing to the to deteriorating features of the original building It was mid 20th century and we we did not
restore it All right So I'm concerned about um you we have two more applications and I would like to find some kind of resolution here and I do know that the condition of this building is critical
like it's about to fall down So I guess one more uh question for you Elrich is given the situation and given the application how how would you want to move forward how would I want how would
you want to move forward as I said I'm be I'm trying to get through tax season but it's uh um but the I happily go out there with my business partner and take a look at it whenever it's convenient for you all
there But but we we do have an application So we have to consider the application like what they're asking for We can ask for modifications of the application
I would I would think that if is it's possible for those modifications to be taken up administratively rather than before the whole um commission decisions could be made more expediently
Um Elizabeth I just want you to weigh in on on that situation I guess it depends on what type of modifications we're talking about Well if if if I can it's a matter of
we've submitted an application to address the serious condition concerns which also still satisfies Princeton's historical ordinance specifically 10B-386 And so what we've submitted we believe
meets all of the criteria for approval And so we're willing to consider feedback but it's we're we can't necessarily agree to to prolong this for um other modifications like Miss Kim just noted is that we don't know about
Yeah I think that the decision I I was on the board at the historical society when when the farm was bought I and I don't remember our setting a time setting a a date for interpreting the
farm My assumption from this is that it was to cap it was to encapsulate the the entire sweep of its history rather than a specific date Um but that's I still think that that
lean to it doesn't really it's not original It's also there's no it's whatever you're restoring is is pretty insignificant by comparison to most of the other buildings on the
property If it was a chicken house I'd say go yes of course there were chickens This is important But this looks like something was put up for a piece of machinery that that Anyway so that's one consideration I do strongly feel like the roof is another and and
um it may be that things have to be replaced differently but I would I would suggest particularly that that that glue lamb not be a part of the of the uh of that of that scheme
And you know we don't have um any real jurisdiction over the interior I mean given the ordinance and stuff so Okay Yes Um we're we'll get to public comment in just a second Okay Thanks Um so as
far as um so do you want maybe to list all the things to you know whether it be Elrich or anyone else that we can list the things and the commission can vote on those components of it
yeah I guess we would um just go to um specifically what you would object to Well those are the two areas that Okay So the one is the the glue lamp
Um it's the it's the roof system including the but the glue lamp in particular is a false note and and and as far as interior is concerned yes I know we have no purview over the interior but when original features are
being removed then I think we have we have the right to comment Yeah Oh yeah absolutely And that's you know we're we're really here to to work it out I just want to ask the applicant how you guys have interpreted
Elrich's comments and if you have any changes in approach or Well I certainly respect Elrich's opinion He knows that Um and not yours Thank you Um as far as the leanto
um I think the historical society is willing to say we don't have to keep the lean too So we would agree to change all the little dots on the drawing till the lean two is gone So we would certainly abide by that Um as far
as the roof framing happy to meet you there and Mr Harrison and Wayne who lives and breathes this building and knows every inch of it and and look at it We can certainly talk about it I just don't know if I couldn't ask more
at at the point that it's at and I didn't look at it with without the parallel can guess that So there are other ways of doing it Um and maybe somewhere in there we'll find middle ground but it's not this but it's not with the ties that go across because
then your height is limited to five feet which you made No but the collar ties would be higher on the rafters Yeah they weren't doing anything up that high They're too high They weren't they weren't keeping it from doing this But we could sit there with John and go
through this Um but that's that was his opinion So I think we're we're willing to sit and and meet and talk about the roof and then if we come up with a different approach then perhaps Elizabeth would be willing to look at it administratively
I thought we had another meeting in two weeks but in fact that's not So that's why I'd say administratively would be the most expedient Okay So would you um what if we
accepted their proposal with the a condition that no lean to would be built and that a consultation would happen before the roof is constructed
that's acceptable Do you think and Ronnie maybe because the lean two was not going to be rebuilt and I think that you talked about there's a lot of rubble underneath um maybe there'll be extra to be used for the foundation for the barn Yes agreed That's fine And we right
because we'll we don't have an issue removing that lean to portion from the project itself Uh just one clarification that we don't have a problem sitting down and consulting on the roof aspect but um just wanted to confirm it wouldn't be something that would be
subject to further review This means we what we're submitting otherwise is what we intend to actually proceed with Right So we we would not be returning to the full commission anything any changes would be done
administratively but there would be a general approval but um if there are changes we could do it administratively Does that sound okay
what what what i'm I'm confused What's What changes well the only thing would be if after the site meeting you came up with a better idea than what's proposed then that could be
an easy change if you wanted to Okay Yes When maybe we could set a time now Leanne asked that would mean we couldn't start the construction until this is figured out and I would say yes to that We would need to do this relatively soon
and and figure out what we should work on like two weeks very very quickly for this this I agree this week or next week there's nothing left of this week
next week Yes But and that's what I'm saying and but again for not a problem We're always willing to sit down and speak with anybody at Princeton whether it be historic or otherwise But what would
what I'm concerned about is that there might be some confusion as to how this would be sequenced and what that means going forward with further discretion and past approval It's not a matter of there being any discretion at that juncture
If we decided from the applicant standpoint that there's another approach that made sense that would be something that would be subject to an administrative review for this briefing Otherwise we would be proceeding with whatever the board ultimately decides right so we we would
have at this meeting um an approval with the condition that if Elbert can get there in a timely manner a discussion will happen and then
that's all we'll put in the condition That's that's fine We're obviously oops sorry we're always willing to talk with anybody that's we just wanted to make sure that what happened post cut discussion
that wouldn't impede our abilities to make the the repairs and the renovation work that's subject to this propose on our application Mhm And how do we feel about the diamond shaped shingles which are already
purchased and sitting in a garage and referred um well it's sort of like paint I people talking about paint well paint's paint you know it can be replaced but the I know you need a roof and we're also trying to make sure that all of the
buildings three of the four were already with luck people to see the building and not not necessarily the roof but that was okay Yeah I mean as you said it's reversible which is part of the goal of this door You can always take the shingles off and put wood shingles on if
and when they have the dollars do so Well in fact you'd probably want to put a second roof on top of that with insulation So that's at that point if that was the decision you you you do it you put you put you that's when you can
introduce a ridge pole that nobody sees because it's above the the sight lines inside if there are um other questions or comments uh from the board Go ahead Roger
I just have a it's not a direct comment but I would hope that um the historical society will document this whole process I mean I think it would be uh an important feature to add to um your
arsenal of of history of the site Um and secondly you may already know about this but I walked around the property yesterday I guess it was and flushed out two turkey vultures who seem to be nesting inside the building So yes
they are Yeah I will do a selfguided tour on the property and one right in front of the wagon shed that documents it history Um we would of course update that to show that we had recently done the restoration
Okay Okay Thanks Um any other questions comments if not I want to open up to the public if there's public comments questions Um please go ahead Do they need to be sworn in oh
yeah Just uh I I mean we can um Can you raise your What's your first name doug And your last name cha Can you spell that c H I A Okay Okay Um is the um do you swear that
the testimony that you're about to give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do Okay Thank you Um so my name is Doug Cha I happen to be the president of the board of the historical society
Um I was coming here as a spectator but uh feel compelled to speak and ask some questions I guess Um Elrich is it so are you proposing that we just
demolish the lean to and that's it or are you saying that we just leave it until it crumbles no I it would come down in about an hour I think from what I can tell Okay So so that's the I just
don't see the value in you can record it I'm interested No no I I understand I just want to understand what your That's worth recording I I just want to understand what your counter proposal is Okay Um and then the the
rafters I I don't think anyone's going in there to see what the thing looks like inside It it is that I obviously ADA would would prohibit that Yeah But as far as
as the history of the building and the history of the farm is concerned um it's important if there are elements that survive that they that they be retained if at all possible Sure Okay
Um you know as as the president of the board the board is the ultimate steward of this property We have a fiduciary duty Um we also have legal duties um to
make sure this structure which is the oldest structure on the property um stays up And we don't want to be irresponsible Um we've been trying to do this project
for many months now Um as the months go on it deteriorates and gets more expensive We've actually already had several uh uh several
proposals from you know the builders and everybody else where the price keeps going up much to the alarm of the board I might say Um obviously it's not going to get any better Yes snow season is over but rain
season is upon us and there is water leaking in to the structure So it's not a matter of the snow carrying weight on the on the roof Water is going to you know water is not our friend Uh neither
are windstorms Um so I am concerned every time it rains that this thing is going to cave in Um you know like I said we're the ultimate stewards I kind of feel like
Eldrich when you have some really good points You know the saying don't let the perfect be the enemy of good comes to mind immediately And so I don't want to you know discount too
much but there are some things that are just nicities um really nice to haves And yes I would like the whole thing to look exactly like it did in 1720 or 1890 or whatever Um but we just don't have the luxury of
doing that And at some point the whole thing's going to be moot because they won't be a structure anymore Now that might take a lot of burden off the hands of the board of trustees but that's not what we want to
happen So that those are my uh my thoughts Thank you Thank Thank you Thank you Obviously there's been a huge amount of deterioration over the last 20 years Um
it's not just over that I also have pictures from then to now in the last three months Every time we go out there it it's worse Um the water is deteriorating The shingles the shingles are all over the ground It's it's worse
every time you see it unfortunately Right And so you guys need to act quickly So with that um I think we can agree that they need
to move ahead to save this building So let's make a date Given that [Music] um would Elrich did you want to form a motion
to accept the proposal uh I would I would um I'm very bad at this Um I I I think that the building deserves further scrutiny and that attention should be paid particularly when it seems like the
lean to is has now got into the general fund for possible gutters Um but in any event that the that existing conditions be assessed and and um and
uh some some possible alternatives be be um examined in terms of the the restoration of the roof Now that means that they would not be getting an approval
Oh I think well I think that we've it seems like around the table at least half of my concerns have been addressed and um and I can't I can't speak because I haven't been in that building for probably seven eight years something like that and I if you're what you're
saying is deterioration is rampant then our examination should be rampant too Yes Y this week is really tough for me So we could be but I don't think we have time to I don't think they have the time or
luxury to come back to our commission Um well that's why I thought these decisions could be made administratively if we can come up with a with some agreement So what about this what about if there is a time frame that
you know that the applicant and Elrich meet within 2 weeks because I mean we're here because of the emergency review obviously we don't want to drag it out Everyone wants to do the right thing to preserve the building the best we can So if two weeks is acceptable and within
that time frame a meet an agreement made if there's an alteration If there is no alteration then maybe to agree to let the applicant go as proposed and um meet your the other components which is a
lean to would be removed and not rebuilt The um the the cascade shingles would be allowed to be installed uh the foundation construction would stay as proposed and as was told use as much of the rubble to um to be incorporated into
the foundation I don't know what other comments you know that Elrich might have Well so is that okay okay So so your motion is to approve the application with the condition that um if a meeting
can be arranged within the next two weeks that we would administrative administratively approve anything that changes that approval right there's a twoe time frame Yes Okay And then if there is no agreement then they would
just go ahead as planned Okay So Yeah if I may what we've agreed to do tonight is remove the lean to thinking from practical standpoint we have to update
our plans to uh reflect the uh the concession made by the applicant tonight that they're going to willing to remove the lean to That will probably take a week or two What we could also do in the meantime is should the board vote to approve it tonight it would be a
condition upon revised site plans which would also still need to be submitted to um to Princeton for because we also have an administrative waiver application that's pending as well which is the other issue here with timing It was approved subject to the board's approval
So we'll be submitting revised plans to reflect the concession that the applicant was willing to make tonight We will then send the applicants further willing to sit down and meet with whoever We'll extend the invitation
within the next two weeks um hear any concerns that they might have And if the applicant were to consider some type of different approach then it's something that they could evaluate how to how to make that approach administratively but it
wouldn't be binding upon the applicant to some further agreement when we're not quite sure what that meeting would avail as to what might still be suggested So if the board were to approve it tonight it's what we've submitted absent the lean to Okay that makes
sense Is that I wouldn't want the building collapsed because I hadn't done my part I would feel very guilty I want to make this happen fast Okay All right So I think that's a
[Laughter] motion Um and everyone is clear on what we're doing So are we do are we setting that timeline i mean the drawings are going to be revised uh to show the lean to
removed and not rebuilt We'll give a a twoe period for the applicant and Elrich to meet at the site If there's a um an alternate that could be agreed upon for the roofing it will be done But if within the time period it doesn't they
can proceed with what they had proposed Right Correct And that would be what would be approved tonight I just want to be clear because obviously we'll we'll sit down meet with anybody hear any considerations or uh feedback we might get but I don't want anybody to think that we're going to be changing anything
We might but if we but that would be administrative We can add to the if if that motion and and the resolution that any changes would be within the applicant's discretion Okay Okay All right Is there a second
okay Charlotte second The mo the motion was from Elrich All right You want to take a vote miss Satderfield yes Mr Shatskin yes
Miss Howard yes Mr Shore yes Mr Endersby yes Miss Freriedman yes Chairperson Capazolei yes Thank you so much Thank you I know this was a little complicated but I think we got to where we needed to go Thank you
Okay [Music] L All right Thank you so much Now we're going to Nassau Presbyterian Church But I I almost a lot of Dominican not a
lot but Dominican money in those hoping [Music] Yeah No I look forward to it And I I think I got Alex's interest this morning and he's usually reluctant to get
involved in anything that I'm talking about And just note we have hundreds of sash and we have plenty of the same siding that you're talking about and we have got to dispose of barns full of
stuff when the time comes back All right Hi thank you for coming Again we're we're looking at uh Nassau Presbyterian Church 61 Nassau Street Thank you so much for coming
in Um Elizabeth has a short report so if she could uh summarize it maybe that would be great It's really short because I don't have a
copy of it Oh you don't does anyone have one that's printed that could kind of summarize i have uh house in the Dominican Okay let's see I might All right
So um Okay Are we set yes Okay Okay Um so the applicant Nassau Presbyterian Church has filed an application pursuant to the Princeton land use ordinance to alter the building by replacing auxiliary
double doors that face Nassau Street and the parking lot off the west facade The project as identified as block 45.01 lot 40 on the Princeton tax map with the address 61 Nassau Street It is
located in the E1B zone and situated in the south side of Nassau Street across the street from Palmer Square The property lies within an educational neighborhood with the business direct business district directly across the street The property is located in the
local central historic district as known and shown on the municipal overlay zoning map of historic districts and buffer district It also falls within two designated New Jersey National Register of Historic Places Princeton Historic District and the Kings Highway Historic
District This historic district's classification is type two which is subject to preservation plan review for any changes visible from the public right away and painting or adding other surface color to an unpainted surface or adding prep and prefinish material Um
again as with this project we've had many applications that have come before us that are in both these um state and national districts and the local districts I'm just going to kind of move along I will add a little bit of information on the building though Um
according to the 1981 architectural survey Nassau Presbyterian Church was built in 1836 in the Greek Revival style by Charles Steedman However the design was based on William Stickland's design who was an architect in Philadelphia The
building is one story with a stucco foundation stucco exterior walls and a gable standing seam metal roof It is three bays north street facing facade Uh oh sorry Six bays across the side Yeah Oh
I read it You did but I can't get rid of this now Something [Laughter] happened Hold on Oh god This comes up sometimes I know I don't know why it's mine does that too
How about there i have it pulled up I can't hear you I'm sorry Oh has it pulled up on my computer if you want if you want it at least gave it to hers but sometimes something shows up Thank you Um let me see Um okay Yes And as
Elbert says six bays on the west side There are tall vertical stained glass windows and regular fenestrations with a c center mullion There are two enormous wooden iconic columns and corner pyister strips are on each side of the recess
portico with large double entrance doors supported by a small and tablet There there are auxiliary doors on the east and west sides of the porch walls and unadorn penmen and tabletures An octagonal shaped chapel was added to the
west side of the church in 1953 Um on the 19 excuse me 1895 through the 1906 Sanbour maps um you can see that there was a chapel present on the southwest corner of the
building at that at one point Uh the church was once known as first Presbyterian Church which is one of Princeton's most important institutions Historically church and college have always been related The church has had four houses of worship on this site
which was west of the original college property where the president's house Mlan House and Nassau Hall stood When Nassau Hall was built the church was organized organizing in 1755 which made Presbyterians a dominant
religious faith at the time The first meeting house was completed in 1766 and the third was built around 1803 as the first revival building in Princeton although it burned down in 1835 So the erection of the present church building
was constructed in its place and came at the time when the black population was excluded from the congregation uh which resulted in the creation of the Witherspoon Presbyterian Church Further division within the church resulted in the organization of a second
Presbyterian church in the mid 19th centuries But by 1973 these two congregations re reunited to form the Nassau Presbyterian Church So that's the history of that propert
[Music] one they address as entrance A which faces north south that sorry Nassau Street on the east side edition at the rear of the building Currently there are double wood doors with single panels on the bottom and eight panes above It has
four panel type of a transom no wood above that The proposed replacement window will fit into the existing door opening with a wider single steel door and a side light and a fivepane transom
And that was included to fit within the rough door opening The new door will have two recess panels on the bottom which will nearly double the current panel height with six panes of glass above The side light will mimic the location of the panel and glass doors
glass pane to the door with one raised panel below and three glass panels above Um they are proposing a white finish on the door which will match existing door and the hardware will be brass So within your package you could see uh those drawings that they have for exhibit um
for um entrance A and also for entrance B which again is on the west side and I'm not really going to go into that um that one seems to match uh more consistently Um and they are making that door wood because it's protected Um however that's not visible from the
right of way So HPC doesn't really need to be reviewing that So again the criteria that HPC reviews for this um application with the with the design
criteria um I can't get down any further on this However I think that there were only two questions I believe one question that I had which had to do with was the um the wood panels
above to remain and not part of the the new transom that was proposed That's the only question I had So obviously um entrance a the door system is going to be different Right now there are two doors that are that open that are the
same dimension They are putting one wider door with a side light and then a transom to fit within that um door opening So it's up to HPC if they feel that is appropriate or not Um it seems
like that is um a later addition I don't know when that is um but perhaps when that was added on Okay So okay Thank you All right Thanks Elizabeth Um I'll turn
it over to the applicant Thank you for coming Sorry to interrupt Can we just swear you Thank you Um can you raise your right right hand please do you swear that the testimony that you're about to give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and can you just
state your full name for the record again all right thanks for coming Thank [Music] you As I said this is a 1940 addition to the building and the doors in question
are approximately 100 Oh thank you Um like most houses of worship we're very concerned about safety and security these days And this entrance leads to stairs that go directly down and up to where our
nursery and classrooms for children and youth are The entrance is visible essentially only when you're directly in front of it I provided a few additional photos that show when from different angles that it's actually kind of disappears Um while this is not a point
of entry for people attending our programs by virtue of this less visible location it is an actual point of potential vulnerability for the building We have had a security review with the local police department and were advised that hardening our entries was one of
the more important things for us to do We're also very conscious of our energy use and these doors are old and despite efforts to repair the repairs have never lasted long and the doors are not at all weathertight This entrance is not
sheltered at all from the weather which has caused the repeated need for repair So we have proposed the steel doors to maximize both their security energy efficiency and durability We did get a quote for steel doors that were double
of the same dimensions Um but that would have been a custom order and the quote was approximately four times the cost of what we've currently proposed We were quite determined to maintain the raised panel Um we also got proposals for steel
doors without the raised panels because that's more standard Um and we didn't feel like that was in character with the building which we are very conscious of Um so we have proposed these doors um because they accomplish the um
durability security and weather tightness um while still maintaining the character of the existing entry um at a reasonable cost As stated before the decorative woodwork above the door will be retained the transom the um is added
because the existing doors are 90 inches which is not a a standard steel door So to fill that so the rough opening will not change at all Okay All right Thank you
Um All right So qu So really we're just talking about that one door because the other one isn't really visible So I think you can see from the photograph where how much you would see on Nassau Street
Um so I'll open it up to the commission members for questions Um I I'm just trying to get oriented on this Um the two doors are next to each other The new proposed door shows a
transom above it Does that then replace the transom that I think is blocked in no that the the scale of the two things that are side by side is not So this is under that Yeah So the wood sort of transom area will
remain that's below the light fixture and then the glass transom will be just below that and the doors will be shorter by you know 9 to 10 inches than the current doors Thank you Right So this is a 68 door and the doors
you have right now are 90 They're 90 Yeah Okay The numbers I figure that Yeah All right Thank you Other questions for the applicant Uh Elrich go ahead
I I find the the um the replacement awkwardl looking and I think it and I'm not dictating anything here but I I would look to the window immediately above on the on the landing I presume
above it and take take and and and try to make try to make it feel as if they that they go with each other I would also I can understand why you wouldn't want two doors but the the the new door
looks too narrow to me And it seems to me like if it was broader and it had it had nine lights instead of six that is three across in addition to three above and eliminate the sidelight it would feel more compatible Um and the same
thing with the panel with the transom above It's not directly above the the the glazing on the on the window above the lantern there I would follow that exactly if possible And the and then there would be more space on either side
of the door but that's just my take on it And as far as the other ones are concerned that's fine And I I agree I know people don't really look at it Um it it opens out and I guess it there's a reason for it opening as it does to the
right So it would be uh I have no problem with that There is the the wall is to to the right looking at this and there's actually a walkway to the university Do the kids use it to get out or is that really It's rarely used It's it's an emergency eress
but it's really hardly used I see And um is it's a custom door or is this just off the shelf this is not a custom door That's what we're trying to avoid for
practicalities of budget in the church Yeah Um so are there um any suggestions um or it is pretty far off in Nassau Street
So you're you're you're going way back there I do understand your security concerns because yeah you don't want if somebody were trying to get in those doors it wouldn't it wouldn't be very obvious
especially in the evening like Yeah The doors are not very visible at all Even from the university driveway they're really not visible Yeah Right Right So I mean I'm all all about health
safety and welfare So I I get with kids behind that door you definitely want something a little more secure Um so I understand that Bar do you push a bar to open the door probably Yeah we
have to have the panic hardware by code for the egress Yeah Right I have a question Yes I have a question about the door The glass in the door Um is that frosted or clear it'll be clear glass
It's currently clear and it will be clear glass It will be Yeah I'm just thinking about the whole security issue If you wanted to have a little more security I mean we could consider frosting the glass but again we were trying to keep the appearance as much as
close to the same as we could Yeah Okay It seems likely with kids you'd want to be able to see through that glass so you're not banging You you want to have it so you you could see if there's a kid on the outside of the door that you were opening it into I do think from a safety
standpoint exiting you need at least some clear glass to be able to see out Yeah Okay Right Any other questions um how how wide is this new door i know
It's Is this a three-foot the new The door itself is 42 in wide This how many the door is 42 in wide The single door Yeah Okay And I think that on your drawings you said that that the rough opening is 60 in The rough
opening is 60 by 90 So well I'm not going to press my point It just seems It does look awkward to me but I'll keep my eyes diverted I see So the proportions of the doors right now are a little
strange Um yeah they're very tall narrow doors now Yeah Right And you're saying this was built in the 1940s 1940 was the date of this particular addition There's multiple additions to the building Yeah Okay So
this isn't anything I mean obviously it's older than a lot of things but it's not Yeah As old as not nearly as old as the main part of the main parts of the building
Okay Um any other thoughts questions comments on this door replacement i I think it has a um institutional or functional look to it which is really what was there
previously just to a different architect's eye and perhaps at that time more custommade and you know uh so there couple of thoughts that go through your mind is um one the cost and and the security it's an upgrade of security which is probably
driving a lot of the cost and then to try and make it custom back to what it was may not be as functional Anyway um an approach that someone might take on putting a a newer door in an older building would be let's say it's a new
door and and pick it out in some way But I I I don't recommend that I think trying to have it be white and just disappear into place is about the best we can do And again it's a changeable element you're not you're not cutting into the structure of the building We're
not losing any of that trim above it you know someday when there's Yeah There's no structure change Yeah Yeah So I think that we all can be looking at it and people can say why didn't the commission think of these things i I think we have thought of them and this is the the
solution that's in front of us right i mean I do think that there's um the whole issue of having doors that are not like the t the standard 68 by
whatever Um makes security a lot more difficult and expensive Um so I understand why Yeah you have to actually pretty awkward to use you know because one is not very wide but opening both of
them is difficult So right Yeah One additional thought and that is just take the door that you've ordered and put it right in the middle And if you did that then that when you with a swing of the door given the the way the building
projects out it's going to be pretty straight But if the door was centered it could be folded open further which might be an advantage rather than have it and forget Then would you recommend that they get rid of the the light on the
side just get rid of that or Yes And just fill it in with paneling I I mean you could do the very Stemann would use these really narrow pieces of glass on either side that could be done but you're you're introducing a transom
above and and a and the it's there lights in the door itself Um I didn't think it was 42 in wide It doesn't look it on the drawing but the but in any event I just feel like that would be more compatible
And I should shut up Sorry Do you Did you ever look at a a door without a a a sidelight we were trying to keep the rough opening the same So we were trying to fit the opening there So we didn't actually get any proposal for that
option to of filling in and the part of the opening Okay Um yeah I'm I'm torn between the uh the fact that this is 100 feet from the street and the the proposal does
kind of screw up the symmetry of the upper window and and the doors Uh I think our work's idea of centering the door would solve that to to some degree or to to a great degree But uh do you know if
you centered the door would you be able to infill it on either side of it i'd have to go to the contractor and find out I assume there's a way It's just a matter of what the cost is to to construct more framing
there in the opening because obviously the rough opening we're not is going to stay the same and right you have to they're they're definitely keeping with the opening So we'd have to add framing on the either side to fill in the space that
the sidelight would fill in Right I mean I this is awfully far off the street I don't know I I definitely get the point that you're a church and it's not
easy and you've got a security concern and you need to use the standard door So I totally get that Um so I mean I agree that the if the door was centered it would read better
with the windows above it Um and as long as you don't make the opening larger is more of a problem for retaining that you know Yeah We Yeah Yeah But if you fill it in that actually you still are able to
retain the original opening to an extent like it could always be opened up again if you want to If you didn't want to get two narrow side lights and you just wanted the center of the door I mean I agree I think that that would actually look better I mean another thing is if you center it though then the hinge is
exposed and that does make it slightly less secure the hinges What i mean you know it's right now they're showing the hinge all the way in the corner of the opening
whereas you know if you move the door over but then they fill the side the framing for the the the door jambs would take care of all Yeah I mean I guess that then there would be no you know it's just a lot more custom work Yeah it's
we'll definitely change the cost Yeah Yeah Okay So I guess that's the um the concern is if if we ask for them to go to custom work then there's perhaps other issues we don't
know about I'll turn a blind eye I mean let and a time and I don't know if there's a time issue either So we would love to start as soon as possible Possible right i know Cost of everything
I know Isn't that what everybody wants yeah Yeah So I don't know I guess the question is do you feel strong enough that it needs to be custom or do you feel like they could go with this plan
they've worked out i I drop any objection Let's just let's be practical here Okay I didn't I didn't hear that last part So
um So what others are are you feeling it needs to be custom and they should um move the door or is this or is this approach acceptable for this location i guess I'm trying to get a person
byperson sense of where we're going with that So David do you do you I I was going to ask if Mrs Gilmore could get you know a proposal on the center door no sidelights because that's
where the cost could actually be saved And then if you could approve it administratively if it comes back that's something that could be done That's that's just what I'm thinking I'm just trying to cover all the bases understanding the need and um but I have trouble looking at it I think everybody
sitting here is having trouble looking at it the way the way it lines up So if there was like one more option that could be asked for and then let you guys make the decision when it comes in and let them move forward Um Charlotte do you have
any comment yeah I mean I I think it would Sorry Um I mean aesthetically I think it would be nicer with centered in two solid skinny solid panels Um I would hope that
wouldn't Yeah jack up the cost I Yeah I'll just have to find out We haven't pursued that option Okay Any other uh Freda i mean I agree that obviously it would look better if it were centered I
do Um but I think for where it is you could go with what you're what you've already sourced but it's worth getting a quote on There's a lot out there so it's worth getting a quote on that
Uncentering it Shirley did you have any feelings about it no I agree with everything I think it needs a renewal Yeah it needs a new definitely new door I think we can all agree it needs a new door Yeah Roger did you have anything
no Okay So if we would recommend approval we could recommend the approval of us of the doors shown but centered and and then
anything any anything that would work with that would be acceptable either glass or solid So that would preclude going back to
this if the Yeah So you would have cost prohibitive right so you wouldn't have to come back here You could just go forward My question was are you precluding this design if the other option of centering the door is significantly more costly for us yeah I
mean we're not we don't take into consideration finance Yeah We're not supposed to like really make our decisions based on finance Um but I know you're a church and I know that this is not an easy task There's a
lot of demands especially for that building It's a that's a lot of building to take care of It's a lot of building to take care and there's a lot of need in the community right now and we're trying to there's a lot of other direct our resources to the need of the community resources
definitely So um let's see So if they can't find a solution that centers the door can can we say
like we can do this administratively i guess I'm not understanding um when you say that they can't find a solution to center the door Well let's say that they want to center the door but it they can't find
appropriate sides to fill in like it you mean side lights Yeah Okay So I guess the question is is the commission saying that the preference is to have it centered with two side lights or is it are they saying um centered with no side
lights i wasn't clear right i mean if so I mean I So we would have some solid fill there So just solid on either side of the door Okay and then approve this door but just have
it centered Okay Okay So this would be an approval without the the sidelight It would just be an approval as this door but centered Is that what that Okay I'm I'm looking at the commission I'm seeing if that's
what I think I think it would it wouldn't draw as much attention to itself and and the simpler the better Okay Okay Okay Okay So so is there a motion madam Chair did you want to open to the public what's that did you want
to open Oh sorry I'm opening it up to the public if anyone would like to speak Okay Nobody wants to speak on this one All right So is there a motion to approve the door and the glass transom
above but have the door centered say that again Julie So the door would be centered the one we we have in the application We'd be approving that door and we'd be approving the the transom glass above it but the applicant would
be filling in either side of the door with however they want to fill it in Um question is the transom the width of the door that's what I'm wondering Or is it the width of the opening the the trans the width of the whole thing
because it has to fit in that opening Well and that mimics the five panes of the window up above it Also do a sketch Yeah All right So so moved Okay Thanks David Is there a second second Thanks
Shirley Okay Thank you Miss Satderfield Yes Mr Shatskin Yes Miss Howard Yes Mr Shaw Yes Mr Endersby Yes Miss Freriedman Yes Chairperson
Capazolei Yes All right Well thank you so much for coming in and good luck I hope this ends up being even less than what it would cost It might cost less I appreciate your time Sure Thank you
All right we're moving on to our next application which is 342 and 338 Nassau Street And oh you can take it Thank you And I see Tara Thank you
Lisa All right Sure All right we have a little legal change Ryan I think you think Tara just follows you around If you if you were fully familiar you'd probably think she does even more
actually All right Thank you for coming Thank you for coming back It's good to see you All right So um Elizabeth you have a report Thank you So
I'm really going to just briefly talk about what's happened since the last time that HPC had reviewed this application And those of you who had attended you may recall that this was done at the end of the year December 16 2024 where HPC had reviewed this
application And at that time um the applicants adding a one-story addition to the back of the existing building at 342 Nassau Street A portion of the building's exterior wall and porch required demolition The existing parking lot was going to be reconfigured to
accommodate the new addition and it to extend the parking into the joining parking lot at 388 Nassau Street Um there were shared amenities between the two properties which included construction of a new plaza a new pedestrian and vehicular access and
other improvements um proposed were to the existing building at 344 342 Nassau Street And from your package you can see um and also they they had also gone to um the planning board meeting on February 20
20125 with a memorandum from the HBC dated February 19th Um and as you can see from the revised plan which is very appreciated that the applicant did consider many of the comments that HPC had made to come up
with an alternate design Um the proposed building has been pushed further away from North Harrison Street um to provide uh more visibility of the
existing historic structure Um in addition the height had been reduced so you able to see more of the building fenestrations in the rear Um they had changed the design just to have a simple gable roof I believe the dimensions of
the conference room are about the same Um but they do have a new glass enclosure kind of a um one and twostep level with a flat roof that's mostly glass with some paneling Um but I will leave that the applicant to talk about
Um they had also proposed relocating some of the Hawthorne trees Um with the new design they had removed the the um plaza area and instead within that area placed um a
4-oot walkway and they had also receive 5T There is a new patio in between where the residential unit is at 342 and the new building addition Um so the there
are other details I think the applicant is is prepared to present so I don't want to take his thunder away Um there was lack of detail on this So really I believe that this is more of a feedback from HPC if I'm correct Mr Kennedy Um
and I'm not sure how you want to proceed with that and that could be discussed later whe whether you're coming in just to kind of get the feedback and then come back with a more formal application or I guess that's to be talked about Thank you Uh thank you Elizabeth Um and
thank you board uh for hearing us again Ryan Kennedy from Stevens and Lee for the applicant Uh to my left your right we've got our two witnesses that we'll have this evening Our architect from uh Pos and Architecture Tom and um our planner engineer Jim from Kenshow
Resources U maybe we could swear them both in probably round robin as we go through this That'd be great Okay both just uh raise your right hand Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give this evening is the whole truth to the best of your knowledge i do I do
Thank you Um they were both I guess accepted as experts last time I don't know if it's necessary to go into any any more detail there but thank you Um um so first off uh when we were here last uh we got a lot of comments Um and um ultimately went back to the drawing
board Um I think it will not surprise you that uh the planning board um essentially uh I'll I'll say and and madam chair you could you could probably um do this better than I since you were there but ultimately took the opportunity since we had been scheduled
with the planning board to get feedback on essentially your comments and a drawing that we had done um as an interim kind of progress uh towards what we think we were hearing from HBC and essentially we're back here to to take you through it um hopefully to see that
we're close as we get towards the end Um we'll note that we do have to finish engineering before we can go back to planning So there will be revised submissions Perhaps we can discuss about how close we are on the details If if it's uh perhaps on on our end here if
there's a subcommittee that's appropriate or if it's some small level of detail or if it's a big level of detail we can talk about what what your expectations are But our our hope would be that we have gotten close or close enough um that we're in the right ballpark that we could finish the engineering part of things Um the the
big things we heard uh one were the the design itself of the addition uh to the building on the corner That's been radically changed um both visually in scale and size and uh most importantly we think in the setback from Harrison
Street So it's been staged and stepped back considerably from its prior configuration uh and designed in a way that it it is ultimately its own thing from a design perspective It's not trying to be necessarily um blending in uh to any particular part of history or
the type of building that's there um but designed in an almost uh um unique way um independently We heard um both from here and the planning board to look at the ingress and egress and essentially we've agreed to relook with the the
professionals comments to to keep uh ingress and egress um as it is now on Nassau Street If you recall we'll show you in a second The one of the big ideas of this project is to combine the two parking lots so that the uh um corner
property is a much safer and easier uh entrance uh onto Harrison pulled back from the from the corner Uh we also took a lot of efforts to preserve and in some cases relocate the row of trees that was between the property and only kind of
having a very minimal interruption there Uh there was some discussion of a I'll call it a a water feature or or some type of plaza that was between the two buildings We did not get good feedback on that Um and we've come back with something much simpler closer to you
know essentially a sidewalk type plaza to to connect um the buildings Um those are the the core changes We've we've eliminated and and reduced the core variances that were needed Um there will be a few um once it goes back to
planning particularly one of the feedback comments we got there was there were a few I'll say technical variances for parking setbacks and some of the buffer areas that were alleviated or reduced greatly by um reducing the size
of the parking spaces That's a a common thing that is done in a suggestion we got from from the board's professionals there uh that reduces or perhaps eliminates some of those variances um as well and helps us keep more of the uh row of trees between the properties at
the same time Uh some of the other things we uh you know there will be a spot for an electric vehicle charger uh as part of the design um closest to the new u addition And um also you'll you'll hear from our architect uh a um desire
or kind of re sliding over of this addition allows us not just to see more of the building um and its and its windows you know covering up less of it but have a much um more um scalpel-like intrusion into the building using the existing um I believe the existing
doorway um as as part of the staircase So with that we'll we'll kind of slide through um again uh just a reminder of where we are in in Jugtown in the RO uh district Uh just technically since I'm not going to testify here Jim we're looking at the slide here that this
shows where the property is Correct Yes Again here's the uh historic map That arrow points to the two properties there in the Jugtown district Yeah In that overlay historic overlay Uh next we've got some aerial views here showing the
two uh existing um properties that we will be looking at and essentially combining into one site uh in this photo You can also see in the back the uh enclosure uh for the generator that this board may remember from a couple years
ago as well Correct Uh next Jim we've got kind of oriented uh you know rotating 90 degrees you could see it from the North Harrison um street perspective Uh I guess unfortunately this this photo was taken uh from space at a time when the there
weren't wasn't a lot of greenery on that row of trees but you can kind of see if you squint perhaps between the lot lines the uh that row of trees right and I think on that side too you can see where the existing parking is where there's limited backout area um
where those stalls pull head in the existing condition And so we'll be turning those 90° and then shifting the the apron to the right to make better ingress to connect to the adjacent property Uh so then this this diagram Jim might show that as well This is the existing
um conditions at the site Yes uh two-way entrance up off Harrison as well as on Nassau Street and then that separation currently of the properties with the hornbeam hedge and some uh curbing on
338 All right this is the original design that we talked about last time um not not much to we don't want to focus too much on it but you can see in in uh orange was the original location of the proposed addition and um you could see
between that addition and the existing building at 338 the um more elaborate plaza kind of connection that was um initially proposed Um Tom um we we'll just again
not to focus too much on on the original design but just as a reminder of what was proposed last time this is the um elevation of the addition uh to the building on uh 342 on the corner uh from
uh Harrison Street That's correct And then have to look at it again Uh good point Uh we won't uh I don't want to burn it into your anyone's uh retinas unfortunately or but again this is the rear prior and now abandoned rear elevation uh and then the internal
elevation um if if you were looking from that that plaza area u so uh Tom briefly um on left is the original I'll say kind of basic of the site plan and the layout of the addition
uh on the right is the proposed and revised want to just take the board quickly through um the the you know major changes from a layout perspective uh in the program here Sure One of the big moves was uh moving the the addition further away from Harrison Street which
is one of the requests that this board made So we slid it over We're we're setting the building back the same distance as the residential structure um on the Nassau Street side Um parking comes around this the conference room if
you will to the entrance um to the in the rear There's a new sort of smaller patio formed between the entry into the new addition plus the entry into the residence the small residential element Uh we're also providing a connecting piece which we're calling the foyer
which has a a barrierfree toilet room to make that lower level at least accessible Um the entrance from the main house comes through the door existing door and then down the steps into the foyer And we're suggesting another set of stairs because we're at a mid-level
at this point that would go down to the basement level to provide a more secure access to the basement level than what exists uh today The Is it correct that the primary way to actually get into the basement now is is through some build code doors There's been some I'll just say problems with
with using it that way That's that's right There's been I guess some vandalism on those doors and plus when you open those doors it's pretty treacherous to get down to the basement Um next we've got a a kind of rendering uh from this is the internal view of the
building looking as if you were at the 338 building across the parking lot That's correct You can see the connecting link which is a a flat roof uh structure that connects the main house to the the new conference room The conference room is much smaller in scale The roof comes down significantly Now
the ridge is only at about the window sill height of the second floor windows So from the second floor you can look straight out across it Before it was somewhat constricted by the taller element there Um we're trying to make the connecting piece more glazed almost
a little bit more of a contemporary feature connecting the existing historic structure to the new new conference room Now on the on the bottom right that uh kind of enclosure I know there was some discussion last time about the air conditioning condenser units that were at one point perhaps proposed for the
street side Those will be relocated to this side and and enclosed and and shielded That's correct That's correct Uh next this is the other side from uh from Harrison Yeah You can see in this view that the the new addition has been
pushed over quite a bit The majority of the north facade of the existing historic structure is now visible um because the ridge line is much lower And you can see the connecting link which is more glazed with some raised panels where there isn't any glazing but again
it's it's meant to be you know a light connection between the existing building and the new conference room Um here we have some um with apologies of needing to look at the prior um proposal I suppose but some side by
sides um of the um original proposal and the proposal to the right you know showing the relocated and and downsized Yeah you can yeah you can see from the elevation on the right that much more of the existing house is now exposed
uh since we've have slid the building over As I mentioned the ridge line of that new piece has come down significantly to the tune of six or seven feet So now it's at about the height of the sill of the second floor windows So again it's much more I'll use the word dimminionative in in structure
much more reduced in scale You can also see from the sideby-side comparison here looking at the the older version of the conference room and the newer version to the right you can see that the scale has been reduced significantly So the house really the existing house really does take
precedence I'll say um and really you know stands out Um one other thing just to to note on the far right here you can see the the existing front porch The plan uh following the HPC's comments um is is essentially to repair that um in
kind That's correct Yes Could you repeat that the plan for the front porch is to repair it in kind Good Would you mind repeating that no All kidding aside we we we our our goal here is to hopefully that we
heard you guys and and the planning board and uh to the extent we missed something you know please let us know But our um our hope is that we've we've heard your comments and are incorporating them into the revised plan Um uh next time last one um again this
is the side view uh from the uh from the street but I guess with with also you know some context of the additional setbacks kind of overlaid uh as well Also you can see the diminished size which you can see from the elevations but also the the setbacks which you
really need to see from the the top down view Now now Jim here we've got a um a before and um an original and revised of the site plan What could you take the the commission through some of the the major uh changes from a site perspective
sure As we mentioned before increase those setbacks um greater than previous uh for the addition as we're pointing to there on the right hand side of this particular slide as well as um adjusted the width of the parking
stalls uh reduce them slightly so that we could increase some distance to number one the rightway line and then number two um for the hornbeam hedge trees that are adjacent to the generator building and um in the central area
along that common property line Uh you can see that there was a obviously you recall that there was a desire to try to maintain um those horn beam trees as much as possible for some visual obstruction from Harrison Street as
someone may look across that apron towards 338 um and create sort of maintain the separation that exists Um and what we found was adjacent to that generator building when that was constructed um
those several of those hornbeam trees were dug by professional diggers and moved slightly and they've performed very well and that was successful Therefore we felt confident that we could um make some minor adjustments to
the location of these trees as shown there in the central portion just to the left of the ADA stall on uh 342 and then sort of tapering them in to the corner of the existing building on 342 to maintain that visual barrier where the
AC units are So I think that was an important point that we wanted to add to the plan and incorporate We also did simplify the pedestrian connection from the egress door on the side of 338 coming across the driveway down to a um
a paver walk that's 5 ft wide that's more um streamlined in terms of getting onto 342 um going left to right And then we're just uh highlighting obviously the revised addition uh footprint and layout And you can see that um some of the
patios have been reduced and the impervious surface and hardscaping um have been reduced in this particular plan and we're maintaining that 2-way access out to Nassau Street the way it is today Thanks Jim Um again the the goal was hopefully to capture the the
comments from um from HBC here as well as um the planning board A couple other um minor more minor items Uh we believe the sentiment coming out of HPC was an an agreement that um keeping the
existing um gravel parking lot was was appropriate both from a speed reduction There was some concern at planning but from a further engineering look and particularly with the addition back of the the trees we're we're not that concerned that this is going to
become some type of cut through It is a actually going to be some a challenging series of turning movements to get through here That is not going to be easier than going to the the corner um at at Harrison uh and Nassau Uh but uh to to match the existing gravel rather
than technically it's a a waiver if not a variance actually to to not pave the parking lot We prefer to uh to to keep it um uh in its its current uh current condition And again as Jim said we would be um seeking variances as we received
on the property next door uh to have uh smaller parking spaces than the 9 by19 than are customary That allows us to increase those setbacks and and have a additional um uh buffer area between the adjacent property and the uh the right
of way um from the from the parking So th that's uh those are the the highlights of the changes Um we hope um we've we've caught what the board was looking for Um there is as as uh Miss Kim said if this is the right direction and we are quite close but perhaps
there's a um a further discussion on on some of the final details on the um materials that I I don't know if it's something that's appropriate for a subcommittee if the planning board agrees that um the variances in the project is is appropriate
We hope they would but it's not a not a you know not a given that uh this would even um make it that far Um but ultimately we're um hopeful that um the the direction we're taking is indicative of of what of
the the direction we got here from the board So with that thank you Well we really appreciate you um listening to us and there are quite a few changes here I see are very positive
Um but I would like to open it up to board members Um first I just have one quick question So in the um the historic building um there won't
need to be any kind of increase in uh like cutting through the the envelope right i mean so the entrancing entrance and exit will be
the from that back doorway as it is Yes that's currently what we have planned The only the only cut openings are respected Yeah Yeah Yep The the only cut we will have is if we do have this basement these stairs going down to the basement we would have to cut a hole in
the in the foundation to get through That's okay Um Alic do you have any thoughts on that yeah Um I was certainly the most critical when you last came Uh this is
definitely an improvement although what was proposed before was so awful that that's something almost anything would be an improvement but I I appreciate the fact that a lot of scrutiny went into it and I think that particularly when you see
the elevation with the silly garage doors before and then you see that this profile of this this conference room is low enough that from the north side the original fenestration on the second floor is revealed I appreciate all of
that Um and I don't object to the fact that the hyphen between the two structures is is you've made an attempt to make it lighter to feel light Um when I first looked at it it looked as if the
bathroom had floor to ceiling windows but I I see that that's actually just um that that's an optical illusion I am curious about what will replace the glass um on the lower section there Um I
think the solution of the stairs going up and down is good Although when I first w encountered this project there was some provision for a lift um to get between the two levels which I don't see here unless it's that open area below
the word foyer Um I I have a couple of thoughts minor thoughts basically I I I know you're trying to respect this this um hedger row but I honestly think both
buildings would be improved by just a looser sense of landscaping I I think it seems too rigid to me and and unnecessarily so It seems like there are opportunities just to have some some complimentary um
landscaping particularly along Harrison but also in that sort of um hatched out area for instance between the front and back be between the two properties The the hedge running down the middle tends to make me think both properties will
feel smaller rather than more expansive if there was if there was less attention to that And I I do very much appreciate the fact that you want you're dropping the notion of the very heavyduty um entrance from Nassau to the to the
John Scott House My greatest concern even though we have no um purview over the interior is the fact that you still have that you've altered the original winder staircase
That in itself looks fairly innocent But you've got to understand that the framing for the all three floors is going to be compromised by by that um feature And I would just strongly advise
that that not happen Um that you know this building was offered to the to the Continental Congress for its delegates in 1783 Who knows who tread those those um stairs and um I I I it is a it is an
important building and um what you've done now respects it far more than what you did before but I I really feel like that would be an intrusion on from the cellar all the way to the attic And it would not it
would if you look at the ramifications on each level you'll see that that is going to make it very it's going to be very cumbersome in the cellar It's going to be very cumbersome where the stairs go by the windows Um I just think that's a big
mistake Thank you for your efforts Enough from me Okay Thank you Uh other other comments or suggestions and go down the line David Um just so I I understand because I don't like to be
um not understanding uh in this drawing at the back of the or the the conference room the wall that faces the parking lot the windows I don't I'm not familiar with what that that reference is with those little circles inside the building It could be an interior detail that
doesn't matter to us but I don't know what it is The the four circles you're seeing there Yeah those are actually seats Chairs Oh yeah Those are excess chairs in the conference room for visitors Okay Water feature Not a water feature You'd be surprised
what we fooled with Okay Anything else uh Charlotte Oh oh could you talk into the mic i'm playing catchup a little bit because I wasn't at this first meeting So if you could come back Sure All right Roger Did
you see this the first one Yeah Yeah Um I like the distinction with the the glass in conference room to to distinguish from the original historic building but is is it will it be tonally
tied into the building in terms of the coloration of the glass is I didn't catch those details Do you mean the link structure that connects the the two people yeah Um the glass would match the glass color would match what exists It's probably clear glass We would use clear
glass probably with a a low E coating for energy efficiency but it would look the same as the existing glass utilized And the framing the framing is is it's all wood It's not it's not going to be aluminum It's going to be wood framing And the panels below the um the toilet
room windows are actually a raised wood panel that would be painted It's hard to see in the in the drawing but yeah it would be a a raised detail panel So yeah keep in mind everything is not going to be the gray that we see now
the charcoal color It's all going to be a kind of a light cream with dark green Dark green That's correct Dark green trim Um kind of similar to the other
buildings in the on the corner right so I have a question I just need clarification Is that gray going away from that building or Yeah Yeah Yeah It's going to now be a light a light color They repaint the whole thing Oh good Oh my god
Yeah Um so go ahead Did you have any other comments no I love I love it I love the uh transition between the two buildings I think that as somebody who sits there and that's my view that gray building Um
I I think is going to be such a an improvement um on Harrison Street I Yeah I like I like it a lot You you could consider putting and I don't know how it'll work or if you did sun
studies um like a skylight or something in a conference room I don't know Just just something to consider I'm sorry Freda What did you say i couldn't hear Oh I suggested a skylight in the conference room Make it brighter
Yeah Shirley Um I think I'm on an island by myself because um we have historic districts and every little space that we have is taken up with buildings We have two apartment buildings on on Harrison
Um and I know this is going to pass but I vote no Okay Um Charlotte no I I I very much like the the connection between the two buildings and
um I just a question about your So the the smaller new building is Clabber Yes that's correct Okay Just uh Yeah Curious why and
and why not stucco like the the building on the corner is Stuckco right yeah Actually this this committee suggested that it shouldn't be the same that at our last meeting it was the suggest suggestion was to change the material of the addition Oh I say at the
last meeting from stock collaborative essentially to to be I'm paraphrasing but essentially to have a different transition to something that was clearly meant to be a different building rather than I see I see this is the problem with not being at the original meeting
by Okay got it No it it looks quite nice And um I'll point out with the landscaping that came up in the planning board there was a lot of concern about the potential for people to cut through
because the traffic on Harrison Street can back up a lot And so people were concerned about someone on Harrison going through the parking lot and coming out on Nassau Street And having that
landscape makes it clear that that's not a road that's not a it's just it makes it maybe um not clear if it goes through or not And I think that was a major
concern I mean traffic is a major concern for the neighbors in this area So um at the planning board there was a request Uh also these hedges have survived and done well which is you know
a lot of times in a new um planting you'll get a lot of trees that'll die And so because these hedges have done so well people really um were hesitant to remove them
I I didn't know that and I appreciate that One thing I might think about that one area which was hatched If you put something else in front of it that solid green is could could work with some
something flowering this time of year for instance in front of it so that it so that it feels lighter and and uh and and and less rigid Mhm But as a backdrop and I I mean the traffic issue is I mean
I see it happening all the time when people do cut through parking lots right but that's a good point is maybe a flowering tree or something Um I I I think that's an excellent point and um you know that's it was pretty binary
It went from they weren't there at all to they're they're back you know as a way to try to save them Ultimately I suspect that we'll probably be back before a subcommittee for landscaping perhaps a review uh later on and we'll we'll keep those notes and see what the best solution is But that's a good good
comment and appreciate your recollection Madam Chair about the at least the perceived impact of splitting up the the lots to to make it not appeal visually like a place that someone should turn off Harrison to sneak on to Again we're
not that concerned with it because we there's a lot of turning movements and it's gravel and a lot of reasons that you're not really saving much time there but each of those elements adds to keeping people from doing that So thank you Great Yeah Okay Yeah Elizabeth
sorry So I just want to add for that Hawthorne when they were proposed um one of the conditions was that the height had to stay at five feet uh excuse me 8 feet So obviously it has not been maintained but one of the other reasons it was that it was screening part it was
helping to screen the addition on the adjacent building which if it's removed or as Mr Kennedy had in his um slideshow you could see that it's pretty visible when uh it's winter time So I think that um the height can be maintained because
these horn beams are known to be hedges so they have been sheared down So if for some reason um people feel that it's too tall it could be sheared down to the 8 ft that was part of the requirement Um the other
thing is I guess I'm looking at the drawing and I'm just wondering maybe it's just a um a drawing area error but it seems like the horn beans that are adjacent to that emerge um that transformer building whatever the
generator building are moving or is that just a superimposed thing that shouldn't be like that they've they've already been moved They have already been moved Was it because of the generator that's why I say they were shifted So we're just reflecting that those are already
moved and then we they would make it we would make adjustments for the other two areas closer to Nassau Street Okay And so the so I see that you're relocating the other ones Um you have the ADA loading area Was that
there before i mean it seems pretty wide Did it get wider it did not get wider We need 16 Slid slid down a little bit more Uh maybe not No it was always open But what we did was we extended the landscape strip between the existing
curb on 338 and that ADA loading area where before it was all pavement and that curb was to be removed So now we basically have an island there and we're going to relocate those trees into that island
But we do need it that wide for the 16 ft for ADA accessibility Okay And then where the planting starts to veer back into the corner lot towards the AC units I would probably just recommend keeping it on the same property I'm not really
Yeah The only issue with that is that we do have underground drainage piping there Oh so it's in the way So it's in the way So just as that piping kind of goes on an angle it it really is best to keep the roots away Tie it in So just from a practical standpoint that'll be
difficult to do Okay Um another question I have and I thought that maybe Elrich was going to address this but when you put the staircase to the basement how does that affect the wall because I know that the construction of that exterior wall was a big concern Um it's you know
once you open it up you don't know what's going to happen to it Is it necessary to have that basement staircase there the client would our client would like that because it's first of all it's difficult to get to the basement either from either from the Bilco actually from within the building
You're able to remove part of the floor and and move and go down these very steep stairs But it's pretty treacherous to get down to the basement either of those ways So he's trying to make a simpler more safe way to get to the basement Okay I I'm I think that I'll probably It was safer before it got
changed recently But anyway I take your point and it's just the opening for it's a new door It's not you're I mean before it it was a 10- foot wide space that had been removed Yeah This is just not a good notion This would just be an opening and we'd have to have a
structural engineer look at it and advise us and all of that The the significance too is that the kitchen in this case as opposed to the one across the road um was in the cellar Yes And um before I
mean eventually the wing that was moved became the kitchen but that's that's one of the original features and and significant So I still can't find the date on it but I know it's there somewhere I've had it
pointed out to me um 50 years ago So I have a question about your hyphen You have the two heights So if I'm looking at the floor plan is the um the the higher height the area that goes across the stair system in the back Is that
where the height it's compensated for that the whole foyer is at a lower is the grade Is that grade level right No I understand Right But but you you have two levels of the flat roof So there's a higher level that disappears I mean the
there's a heavy heaviness at the top that I that um well it's because the the house the main floor of the house is up about three or about three feet right so that's that roof brings it across So you when you come out of the main house then start stepping down If we didn't have
that there wouldn't be enough headroom Okay No I that's what I thought because I saw a dashed line on there I just want to understand that that relates Right That's the high that's the higher portion Correct Okay Um and the other thing is that I guess I'm interested because of certain details I mean I I
really do like the transparency but I don't know what those panels are like You know I I mean I'd love to be able to see what that is and how that they would be able to be compatible with each other Where's the door it's hard It's on the side here
That's it Yeah it's So here's the parking So it's by the residential unit back here I meant the door from Harrison Street Is there no door there is none No no more Um and then the other thing is I'm just thinking that the hyphen is
getting kind of large and I'm wondering um the connection to that with the new conference room just from the view from the street is a little bit awkward And I'm just wondering that bathroom are you able to perhaps flip it and put it next
to where the staircase is and then that way you could actually have a connection that meets at that corner there just wasn't enough We looked at several options There just wasn't enough space there to get a barrierfree toilet room So that's why it is where it is right
now Um Okay All right All right Plus we were trying to get the toilet room door like a little bit out of the way so you're not looking right into the toilet when you enter the enter the building Important Understood Okay that's it Thank you All right Thank you Are there
are no other comments i want to open it up to the public Uh so come on up Clifford Oh no Thank you Julie Should should I swear in oh yeah
Oh there we go If you would raise your right hand do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the whole truth to the best of your knowledge i do Thank you And uh please state your name for the record Uh Clifford Zinc Z K on Aken Avenue in
Jugtown So um several uh board members uh have congratulated the applicant and I agree I'd like to reinforce that that the applicant has made significant changes
which result in a much improved project Uh and um I don't need to go through them all because they've already been discussed Uh preserving the rear stone wall is
particularly significant and avoiding that very wide opening that's been discussed When you do cut the the cellar door opening through there that stone wall is probably 18 in thick and it's rubble stone
uh probably from the quarry down the street almost certainly And so it's going to be a very delicate operation to cut that through carefully and not cause any damage Um the Elrich has brought up the interior which is not part of HPC
but and I realize the existing stair is pretty suboptimal but to Elrich's point uh all three floors are framed If we were to open up those floors well you've been in the basement They're all probably handun
beams Mhm And so you're going to be cutting a lot of beams uh through all those floors That's going to be a big disruption Uh going to destroy a lot of original material on the inside So carry them I mean yeah So if there's a way to
mitigate that uh it might be worth looking at Um the um I I assume the final application will have a preservation area designated on the site plan which I
don't don't believe it has right now It it will and we had proposed one um on on the plans uh when we were here last time essentially that uh covered the was the entirety of the front building u just kind of carving off the the new addition
So I I I appreciate um Elizabeth's concern about the hyphen Uh the fact that the the powder room is now projecting quite out towards Harrison Street makes the hyphen extremely
prominent Um I I would recommend um perhaps revisiting the exterior design of the hyphen because I think it's kind of busy the way it's designed Um it has a a lot
of panels I think it could be designed in a way that could be more compatible with the historic building certainly not to replicate the historic building in any way but to be a little more compatible so it doesn't draw so much
attention to itself It seems very busy Um Elizabeth brought up the panels what they're going to look like Uh I don't object to the fact that a lot of the uh exterior is glass but I think the way
it's designed is um is is kind of makes it too prominent on the site and I think it could be simplified a bit I think lowering the height of the conference room is really a great benefit and uh
pulling it back from the street is enormous because of the pedestrian issues there So I think overall um the applicant has done a great job and and the architect listening to a lot of concerns here I would just recommend
maybe uh taking a look at the um the design of the facade Maybe it could be simplified a little bit a little more compatible I modern is perfectly fine but I think it the way it's designed with all those all those rectangles kind
of draws attention to itself And the existing building is extremely simple It's a very vernacular design and the way you've designed the conference room is also extremely simple So I I think you could take a look at that That would be my
recommendation But otherwise thank you very much and thank you to everybody on HPC and Elizabeth for um really working hard to make this uh a really great addition to the town So thank you Thank
you All right Thank you Clifford All right Are there other questions comments yes Terra I just had a question about procedure because I know this was in Elizabeth's um review letter Is this the
application that's going to garner a decision or are we looking at this more like a concept and they're going to come back with that additional information that Elizabeth wanted or is the intent to give a conditional approval and they come back to a subcommittee i I'll say what our hope would be since
um ultimately this board's decision is advisory to the planning board and we would still be going back there is that if we we could get uh comments or something approaching a conditional approval that would allow us to come back perhaps to a subcommittee on on uh
the the materials question for example um again whether it's this subcommittee or if the planning board takes on with their landscape subcommittee for example um uh but there you know there still are some some questions to be to be answered there Um who's it whether it's honestly
this boards or or um plannings um I don't I don't think I'll get to win in in helping to to make that choice But that would be our our preference um because we still do we would like to take this and and finalize the engineering and get back to
planning would be our our goal Um and I I I didn't hear um other than the and I don't I don't mean to um overstate the the details of materials but on the on the big things I think I did hear that we we have gotten quite close to what
what the board was looking for Yeah Um Elizabeth um so there are some details that I think that the HBC would look like to look at I think that landscape is a big detail Um I think that there's a lot of planting though that goes on that even is ex existing on
the property that HPC members might consider actually not appropriate and they would probably want that not to be mimicked with this Um so I think that for HPC's benefits some details like that they would like to look at However
if you go to the planning board the planning board will most likely defer to a landscape subcommittee which would not include HBC So that's I guess that is a dilemma right i mean I think if we
um so maybe we could have a subcommittee look at the application uh before it goes to planning board Sorry the um that the subcommittee meet before um that that would certainly I
think that I mean u I think we could do that that would make sense to us and also we're also thinking I don't know this suggestion will hopefully would be honored but perhaps that um when the landscape subcommittee is created by the planning board that it could include a
member or two of HPC as well well I'm already on it so yeah that's not a problem but I definitely think to work out some of the details with HBC earlier is a better idea and having it worked out
before you get to the planning board since I think you know they defer to back to us So it would just make it more straightforward No that that makes sense And and the items certainly that maybe we could just go through what what type
of things would you be looking to see the the landscape plan in the subcommittee level before uh or Okay Yeah So the question I have is for our
attorney typically HPC presents a memo How does that get how does the subcommittee comments get incorporated into that because they would want to have the complete review right i think it's going
to depend on Do you know what your timeline is for getting to the planning board um it's subject to a a further submission So that essentially is on pause pending this board's advice essentially So we we have lots of flex
We'd like it to be soon but it's nothing pending They're um they're waiting for this process Well I mean not waiting for it but nothing's been scheduled at this point Okay So what we could do is provide them with a conditional approval subject to a subcommittee review within
30 days Would that would that work the final memo won't go to the planning board until that subcommittee has met And then it doesn't sound like it's the traditional way you guys do it but this is I'll say that we we would be maybe not happy to wave is
not the right word but we would imagine that we would provide this uh additional submission in detail for the subcommittee I don't know that from our timing we need a memo to get to planning before that point that we'd be happy to wait till the subcommittee has seen
everything before a pen is inked to paper I hate to say it Then if that's the if time is if we're not worried about timing if you're not looking to go to the planning board in two or three weeks what's to prevent us from just reconvening carrying the application so they don't have to
renotice um carrying the application to the next meeting where you can present that instead of presenting it to the subcommittee present it to the full HPC I was just thinking maybe you were already on the planning board's uh agenda We're not and we also didn't This is not a type of meeting that needed
notice either So that's is that something that the applicant would be willing to do to come back perhap i mean I'm not sure what your timeline is where you feel that the plans would be complete I guess we were we were hoping to submit this part of things and the
engineering detailed so that planning could start reviewing it simultaneously So um that would probably be um you know we'd like to be working on those both at the same time So if we were submitting coming back and then waiting for
comments for another submission that would probably be adverse to what you the timing that we'd be hoping for because I guess HBC's next meeting is May May 19 because obviously we're early now right um so maybe we should go back
to the 30 days I mean maybe that instead of waiting till the next meeting we have the subcommittee committee meet within the next few weeks or to just sort
of because the way that my report is it doesn't have anything in there Um what's what do you think your timing is to get the plans fully designed i mean I don't even actually know how many
variances have been eliminated or have been modified either We were thinking basically like on the on a three to four week time period something like that to finish up the engineering
for the landscaping the lighting and the rest of the material So that puts us in the beginning of May that we could submit where we sort of planned on finalizing the package pending positive input tonight Mhm Does is I know that at the planning board meeting they said that they don't need another
completeness review However they will be reviewing your documents Right So that's right If for some reason they feel it's lacking information or they need some clarification kind of like an informal completeness Is that correct i
mean I mean it is complete but you're right If we if we submitted information and they needed more they would essentially treat it as if it was not it wouldn't have an effect on the MLUL but um they would they would review it for a completenessless completeness like
submission I think just for it to be clean and it doesn't seem like it would be that much so if you're saying it's a month so it might be another two weeks that you wait to get on HPC and you could kind of finalize any type of additional information that maybe
planning or zoning might be looking for Um and I think that those incomplete items on their end HPC could probably look beyond that because they're looking for yes knowing what
those are but more you know they're all about detail HPC material color you know texture plantings light Right I guess the concern I have is we'd be we'd be waiting to get that material to your
subcommittee to complete engineering draw you know um a site plan submission Um so but my again my my hope and ultimately if it just if we're doing one submission we're here in May then that's that's that's the the board's um purview
I I I suppose it seemed to me that we would be submitting a a subset particularly of architectural details for the subcommittee that would not take as long to put together as our full planning resubmission So if we were to do the full submission we'd be here in
May We'd get your feedback after that Then we'd be you know waiting a month or two for for planning I suppose Um but again I I we've probably talked enough about it to ultimately so I I don't say either one
is it's it's it's the board's decision I think our preference would be if we could do a a subcommittee and a shorter time frame We think it's a more limited subset of things you'd be looking at rather than waiting for the entire full resubmission But it's it's it's the board's choice I mean I think we could
do that We could do a a subcommittee meeting in the next three weeks or month and then we would be only focusing on the issues we brought up that we have questions about and we wouldn't have
to you know assemble everybody again I think that would be good Yeah Within the next be seeing a lot of each other in the next month Yeah we're going to we're going to see a lot of you Elrich Okay if that's where the board is heading there then are three things I
want to put on the record One is I and the historic preservation officer we reviewed the notice and it was sufficient to give the board jurisdiction Two um we should mark the presentation that was given as exhibit A1 All of those slides just mark that
for the record Thank you And three we should also acknowledge for the record that for the purposes of deeming an application complete uh the board is I guess temporarily waving the submission of product specifications
and the delineated historic preservation area on the mapping uh and that will be deferred to a subcommittee because in the HPC ordinances it does say although there's not a formal completeness checklist there is a provision that says the application shall contain contain at
least these items and those were two items that weren't in this application understood and we'll also represent that the on the revised plans the um historic the designary will match what we had put on our prior more complete uh plans
So let me just clarify You're saying within a month that the drawings should be finalized and all the product information will be available Um you'd like to see if the subcommittee could review that as you submit it to the
planning office Correct As they look through it themselves to see if there's anything deficient before they schedule you on the planning board Correct That is correct Yeah All right And who's on the subcommittee there you go Elrich I guess I should be because I'm going to
I'm going to see it on the planning board And then we need one more person right right Okay Anyone volunteering okay David All right And that subcommittee will
meet The the plans will be submitted in about Yes How long one month They said that plans will be submitted in 30 days or less Oh certainly Yes Okay Uh and then do you want to say the subcommittee will meet within one week of receiving
those plans that seems reasonable Okay Thank you very much Thank you And then once we I get comments from them I will Elizabeth and I will issue a memo as soon as possible Great Thank you All right Thank you Thank you Thank you Thank you everyone Thank you
Really appreciate you guys coming back Oh and I just wanted to go over the subcommittee is going to review a landscaping plan a lighting plan product specifications Yeah And the delineation of the historic district added to the plan Is there anything else that they're
going to be re reviewing i think any any adjustments that are made let's say for the like ceiling heights and that kind of thing Um I don't I don't think so This is one I'm sorry I keep saying approval It's
issuance of a memo Yeah Wonderful Thank you Thank you Thank you so much Thank you Thank you Thanks everybody So we have two resolutions to get through and [Music] um uh let's see Princeton Nursery School
is the first one Did Did everybody get a chance to look at it elizabeth did you have any changes to the resolutions um not for the Prince not for the Princeton Nursery School but I got a um a comment
for seven green by the applicant a clarification on something So this one nothing on this So the first uh resolution the application of Princeton Nursery School I think everybody remembers that Um is there a motion to
approve the resolution okay thanks Roger Is there a second thank you Freda Do we have to have a vote um Elizabeth do we have to have a vote for the resolution i think a board vote Okay
Okay Hold on I got to find my list I'll just go I'll just go down the line Yeah Mr Shatkin yes Miss Satderfield yes Miss Howard yes Chairperson Capazolei yes Miss Freedman
yes Mr Shore yes Mr your enders be Yes Okay Oh yeah Never mind Sorry Never mind Okay Thanks All right Now we have the application of seven Green Street The resolution for that application And
Elizabeth what were your changes uh so Annabelle said that uh they weren't one over one windows They're two over two So that could be easy correction but otherwise no other comments They're two over two Mhm That's what she said
Okay that's right Okay So with that change is there a motion to approve the resolution for seven Green Street so moved Okay Thanks Freda Seconded by Shirley
Okay Mr Shatskin Yes Miss Satderfield Yes Miss Howard yes Miss Freriedman yes Mr Shore Oh thank you Chairperson Capazolei Yes
Thank you All right Thank you so much I think you're free Thank you We have public comment Would anyone like to comment on anything we're
open Okay Go ahead Just say hi just say hi All right Uh Elizabeth did you want to say anything for staff reports
um I didn't have anything on staff reports at all but I was interested because I know that Roger went to one of those conferences but he's not listening Uh oh right Yeah Roger went to a conference but and I think that he walked away I think the historic trust
conference is coming up right the the annual one I don't know Yeah In June In June in uh Burlington Right So everyone keep their eyes open for that Right Okay Is I guess that's it Is there a motion
to to adjurnn i think so Motion to adjurnn Okay All in favor Thank you Thank you Thanks so much for coming Sing