City of Hallowell Planning Board Meeting Remote Meeting via ZOOM October 21, :30 pm

(1)

City of Hallowell

Planning Board Meeting

Remote Meeting via ZOOM

October 21, 2020

6:30 pm

1. Call to Order

Ms. Obery called the meeting to order.

2. Roll Call / Quorum

Ms. Obery took the roll call and established a quorum.

Present: Danielle Obery (Chair), Richard Bostwick, Darryl Brown, Judith Feinstein, *Andrew Landry, Melvin Morrison (1st_{alt.), Jane Orbeton, Lisa Rigoulot, Matthew Rolnick (2}nd_alt.)

Doug Ide, Code Enforcement Officer

Mr. Morrison will be voting; Mr. Rolnick will not be voting.

3. Public Comments (The Board has agreed to limit the time allotted to Public

Comment to fifteen minutes.)

Mr. Ide explained that he has two applications to be added to the Agenda: one from Benjamin Hitchcock which he received before the deadline but omitted from the Agenda; and one from Ted Wiederhorn. The Board agreed by consensus to add the applications as Item 10a for Mr. Hitchcock and 10b for Mr. Wiederhorn.

4. Approval of Minutes of the August 19, 2020 Planning Board Meeting

Mr. Bostwick noted that under Item 9 he is listed as both voting Yea and Abstaining; he asked to have his abstention removed.

Motion to approve the minutes of the August 19, 2020 meeting as amended.

Moved: Bostwick Seconded: Brown Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Obery, Orbeton Nay: None

Abstained: Rigoulot Motion carried.

5. Public Hearing and Review for Minor Subdivision Application, Hallowell II, LLC,

132-136 Water Street, Map 5 Lot 179

Ben Murray represented Hallowell II, LLC in presenting an application for a Minor Subdivision. Mr. Murray explained that this is a condo conversion of an existing building. The Hydeout at the Wharf is in the lower level, there are two retail areas on the first floor, and six apartments on the upper floors. The condo conversion requires a subdivision under state law. He noted that they have provided plans showing all boundaries for the site and floor plans showing the boundaries of each apartment. He told the Board that there are no proposed changes, no new construction, no change in the footprint of the building, and no changes to the apartments.

Mr. Bostwick asked if the two retail areas are separate units; Mr. Murray said the two areas will be separate units, but they will remain retail. Mr. Bostwick asked if the separate lot on Front Street counted toward parking; Mr. Murray explained that there are two parcels under the same ownership. Mr. Bostwick noted that there are six units with twelve parking spaces; Mr. Murray said that was correct. Mr. Murray reiterated that there are no proposed changes, just a change of ownership. Ms. Feinstein asked if a commercial unit could be purchased and converted to residential space; Mr. Ide explained that the ordinance prohibits residential space on the Water Street level.

(2)

Mr. Rolnick asked if there are any weird zoning or compliance issues that the Board should be concerned about; Mr. Ide said there were not. Mr. Ide added that renovations will be dealt with through a building permit. Mr. Brown pointed out that even if residential use was permitted on the Water Street level it would still be a change of use requiring Planning Board approval.

Mr. Ide pointed out that there were a number of requests for waivers.

Ms. Obery opened the Public Hearing on the application at 6:36 PM. There were no comments. Ms. Obery left the Public Hearing open.

Mr. Bostwick noted that if the number of dwelling units is five or greater the ordinance requires a major subdivision and asked if the Board could lower that to a Minor Subdivision Review. Mr. Ide noted that this application does not create any new dwelling units; Mr. Bostwick agreed that the Minor Subdivision Review fits the project. Mr. Ide pointed out that it would be a good idea to memorialize the Board’s decision to treat this application as a Minor Subdivision. There was additional discussion.

Motion to treat the application as a minor subdivision, rather than a major subdivision, because the application is to subdivide a building, not a lot, and no new development is proposed.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Orbeton Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot

Nay: None Motion carried. Motion to approve all waiver requests.

Moved: Rolnick Seconded: Feinstein Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Orbeton, Obery, Rigoulot, Rolnick Nay: None

Motion carried. Motion to find the application complete.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Rolnick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Orbeton, Obery, Rigoulot, Rolnick Nay: None

Motion carried.

There being no further comments from the public, Ms. Obery closed the Public Hearing at 6:58 PM. Motion to approve the subdivision application.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Orbeton Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot

Nay: None Motion carried.

6. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Robert Whisenant d/b/a

Bruno’s Wood-Fired Pizza, 188 Water Street, Map 9 Lots 179, 180, & 181

Robert Whisenant presented an application to enclose the lower deck and install two 10" to 12" vent pipes. He explained that they want to install two wood-fired pizza ovens on the rear deck. They would enclose the deck with material similar to existing materials and install two vent pipes running 15' to 20' to the roof level. Mr. Ide added that he has consulted with the Historic District consultant and they have found that the vent pipes will not be visible from Water Street.

(3)

Mr. Whisenant explained that the deck is 12'×19' and will be fully enclosed to convert it into kitchen space. He clarified that it is the rear deck that will be enclosed, not the patio area beside the building. Mr. Bostwick asked if the siding will match other siding; Mr. Whisenant said the siding will be horizontal shiplap to match the existing shiplap siding, and the double-hung windows will be the same as or similar to the existing double-hung windows.

Ms. Rigoulot asked what will protect people and the building from fire. Mr. Whisenant explained that the pipes will be double-lined and will be extended about 12" from the railings of the deck. There will be a steel grill to prevent people from touching the pipes. Mr. Bostwick asked what the oven support structure will look like; Mr. Whisenant explained that it will be constructed of 6×6 pressure-treated posts and designed by an architect; he provided photos of a similar structure constructed in his Bath location. Mr. Bostwick mentioned that Mr. Hansen has suggested using a darker color for the vent pipes; Mr. Whisenant said they could paint them black. Mr. Ide noted that there are numerous utility installations along Front Street.

Mr. Brown asked if enclosing the deck would trigger any problems with Shoreland Zoning. Mr. Ide explained that the deck is compliance with the 50' setback and enclosing it does not create any problems. Ms. Feinstein asked if the first floor deck will be used for seating; Mr. Whisenant said it will not.

Mr. Landry arrived.

Motion to find the application complete.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Rolnick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

Motion to find the application in harmony with Historic District standards and approve the application as presented.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Feinstein

Ms. Orbeton asked if Mr. Brown intended his motion approve the application without requiring the vent pipes to be painted; Mr. Brown said that was his intent.

Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Morrison, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried. Mr. Landry will be voting; Mr. Morrison will not be voting.

7. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Pamela Lane, 8 Union Street,

Map 9 Map 153A

Deb Fahy represented her sister, Pamela Lane, in presenting an application for removal of an existing deck and installation of granite steps. She explained that the deck will be removed and granite steps installed. There will be a 3'×2' landing with two steps. The application includes a photo of manufactured steps, but Ms. Lane hopes to find reclaimed granite. Mr. Morrison asked if the steps would require a railing; Mr. Ide said they would not if they are less than 30" high. Ms. Orbeton observed that calling the existing structure a deck is an overstatement.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Bostwick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

(4)

Moved: Landry Seconded: Brown Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

8. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Barbara Vetry, 38 Central

Street, Map 9 Lot 30

Hossein Vetry, 38 Central Street, presented an application for removal of an unused chimney and covering the hole with roofing. He explained that the chimney is not used at all and has deteriorated so that it is causing water damage to the building. They would like to remove the chimney to below the roofline and roof over it. Ms. Orbeton noted that there are several chimneys on the house and this one is a minor chimney toward the back. She asked Mr. Vetry whether they would remove the entire chimney or retain a shortened chimney that they do not use; Mr. Vetry explained that they may eventually remove the chimney entirely, but initially they will only shorten it and roof over it as a first step to protect the house. He told the Board they plan to do extensive restoration and will be returning to the Board when that occurs.

Ms. Rigoulot noted that this house is a significant structure and asked if Mr. Hanson has been consulted. Mr. Ide said he had not consulted Mr. Hanson. There was further discussion. Mr. Vetry reiterated that the chimney would be below the roofline.

Mr. Bostwick suggested construction of a fake chimney to preserve the appearance. Mr. Ide said there is not currently a precedent.

Ms. Feinstein agreed that this is a danger to the building and that there is some urgency. She asked if it was possible to approve the application but require Mr. Hanson to weigh in on the application. She stressed that this would be an effort to protect the building. Mr. Bostwick pointed out that there are two major chimneys that are equally as decorative. Mr. Brown asked if the chimney was original to the building; Mr. Vetry said that his engineer observed that the chimney was modified at some point because the type of brick changes

between the base and the top.

Moved: Orbeton Seconded: Bostwick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

There was continued discussion of conditioning the approval on consultation with the Historic District Consultant.

Motion to find the application in harmony with Historic District standards and approve the application conditioned on the Code Enforcement Officer obtaining approval from the Historic District Consultant. Moved: Orbeton Seconded: Brown Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein,

Landry, Obery, Orbeton Nay: None

Abstained: Rigoulot Motion carried.

Ms. Rigoulot asked what will happen if Mr. Hanson does not approve the application. Mr. Ide said he expects that Mr. Hanson will provide several options.

(5)

9. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Justin Underwood & Hallowell

Seafood, 197 Water Street, Map 9 Lots 132 & 134

Justin Underwood and engineer Jim Coffin presented an application for the installation of a cooler behind the shop. Mr. Coffin explained that Mr. Underwood proposes to install a 10'×14' cooler on a concrete slab at the back of the building in order to create more floor space inside. The cooler is steel and is 7'7" high. There will be an 8' cedar fence on three sides of the cooler with a canopy above it as shown in the drawings provided with the application. There are currently two condensers behind the shop, and installing this cooler will allow them to remove the two existing condensers. They will also install a small retaining wall along the abutter’s driveway to allow them to access the cooler by vehicle. He added that the abutter has approved the plan and that the retaining wall will be entirely on Underwood Realty’s property. He also informed the Board that a portion of the lot owned by Mr. Underwood will be transferred to Underwood Realty.

Mr. Ide told the Board that he consulted Mr. Hanson, and Mr. Hanson’s reply has been provided.

Mr. Bostwick asked if paving the parking area is part of the application; Mr. Coffin said it was. Mr. Bostwick asked if there was any increase in impervious area; Mr. Coffin said there was. Ms. Rigoulot asked if this would create additional parking or just for Mr. Underwood’s trucks; Mr. Coffin said it was just for access, not for parking and agreed to having it posted for delivery vehicles only. Mr. Ide said there was nothing in the ordinance that either requires or prohibits the area from being used as parking or delivery.

Moved: Landry Seconded: Brown

There was discussion about additional images that were received after the application was posted on the website. Mr. Bostwick asked Mr. Landry to amend his motion to include those. Mr. Landry amended his motion to include the supplemental documents provided prior to the meeting.

Amended Motion Seconded: Bostwick

Vote on the amended motion: Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

Moved: Bostwick Seconded: Feinstein Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried. Mr. Rolnick recused himself from the next application.

10. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Matthew Rolnick, 146-148

Second Street, Map 9 Lot 127

Matthew Rolnick presented an application for installation of an awning over the front steps. He explained that the dripline from the roof runs across the front steps and creates an icy hazard in the wintertime. He would like to install an awning to keep the steps clear and protect people entering. The awning will not extend beyond the steps.

Mr. Brown noted that the application says Central Street but the Agenda says Second Street. Mr. Rolnick said the application should be corrected to say Second Street.

Mr. Bostwick asked what material would be used for the awning; Mr. Rolnick said it will be canvas. The supports will be straight and will attach to the steps just outside the railings. He added that at one time there was a shed-style roof over the steps.

(6)

Moved: Bostwick Seconded: Brown Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

Moved: Landry Seconded: Feinstein Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

10a. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Benjamin Hitchcock, 5 Lincoln

Street, Map 5 Lot 92

Benjamin Hitchcock presented an application for replacement of an existing deck and to add a sliding glass door.

Mr. Hitchcock explained that the existing deck is 14' wide and fills the space between the ell and the house. They want to reduce the width to 6' to provide access to an existing bulkhead. The deck is constructed of pressure-treated wood and is not historic. They plan to construct the new deck of cedar flooring with a cedar railing and corner stairs as shown in the drawing.

Mr. Brown asked if the new glass door would be visible from the street; Mr. Hitchcock said it would not. Mr. Landry asked if they would use the same style railing on the new deck; Mr. Hitchcock said they would not, that the new railing would be constructed of cedar 2×4s with a natural finish. Ms. Rigoulot pointed out that the existing railings are ornate and this would be a major change to the visual aspect of the house. Mr. Hitchcock explained that since the railings were not original to the house they were trying not to recreate what was not original. There was discussion of the railing and whether it was appropriate to mimic something that was mimicked and whether the simplicity of the 2×4 railing would be compatible with the ornateness of the house. Mr. Landry suggested that the simplicity is consistent because it does not detract from the ornate features. Mr. Bostwick pointed out that the ell itself is not consistent with the original Victorian style of the house. Ms. Orbeton suggested that this application should be reviewed by the Historic District consultant.

Motion carried.

There was discussion of the time frame for the project and how the Board wished to proceed. There was additional discussion on the compatibility of the railing.

Motion to find the deck and the sliding glass doors in harmony with Historic District standards and approve them, but not the railing, pending consultation with the Historic District consultant, with any changes to the railing to be approved by the Planning Board.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Bostwick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry Nay: Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot

(7)

10b. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Ted Wiederhorn, 235 Water

Street, Map 9 Lot 113

Ted Wiederhorn presented an application for replacement of a an existing shed. He explained that the shed is on his property at 233 Water Street and has started to rot out. He would like to replace it with a shed of the same style and color. The existing shed is 8'×8' and the new shed would be 10'×10'. Mr. Rolnick asked where it was located on the property; Mr. Wiederhorn said it was on the southeast side in the back. Mr. Rolnick noted that the photos and drawings that Mr. Ide emailed to the Board indicate that it will not appear from the street that the new shed is larger and that it is well within the setback requirements.

Motion to find the application complete with the inclusion of the supplemental images provided prior to the meeting.

Motion carried. Ms. Orbeton asked if there were any floodplain issues; Mr. Ide said there were not.

Moved: Orbeton Seconded: Feinstein Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

11. Findings of Fact from the August 19, 2020 Meeting

11a. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Michele Walsh, 118 Second Street, Unit #5, Map 9 Lot 164B2

11b. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Theodore Stevens, 118 Second Street, Unit #4, Map 9 Lot 164B1

Motion to approve the Findings of Fact and decision for Michelle Walsh and Theodore Stevens as presented.

Moved: Feinstein Seconded: Bostwick Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein, Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

11c. Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness for Susan Benner Shepherd, 20 Academy Street, Map 9 Lot 79

Motion to approve the Findings of Fact and decision for Susan Benner Shepherd as presented. Moved: Brown Seconded: Landry Yea: Bostwick, Brown, Feinstein,

Landry, Obery, Orbeton, Rigoulot Nay: None

Motion carried.

12. Other Business

(8)

Ms. Rigoulot noted the work being done on Mr. Luosey’s house and asked for assurance that they would not do anything structural without coming to the Board for approval; Mr. Ide said the work being done now is to secure the building. He added that Mr. Perry said the house is on the cusp of being salvageable.

Ms. Feinstein asked if there was any new information about the proposed condominium development on Gows Lane; Mr. Ide said he has heard from Jim Coffin that something will be coming eventually.

13. Adjournment

Motion to adjourn.

Moved: Brown Seconded: Bostwick Unanimously approved

Accepted as Corrected on November 18, 2020, by a vote of 7 Yea to 0 Nay.

Attested: S/ Judith Feinstein, Vice-Chair