Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-2-10MINUTES HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY June 2, 2010 A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chairman Chris Horst called the regular monthly meeting of the Historic District Commission to order on Wednesday, June 2, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room 1 of the Washington County Administrative Annex, 80 West Baltimore Street. Members present included: Chris Horst, Charles Stewart, Merry Stinson, Robert Bowman II, Sandy Izer, Tom Clemens, and Gary Rohrer. Also present were Staff members Stephen Goodrich and Debra Eckard. B. MINUTES Ms. Izer made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 5, 2010 meeting as presented. Seconded by Mr. Clemens. Unanimously approved. C. COMMUNICATIONS AND BILLS None D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mr. Goodrich reminded Commission members that during their April meeting, a request for information for the effects of a cell tower on historic sites was discussed. The proposed cell tower is proposed to be located at 14145 Breezy Acres Road near the National Register District of Leitersburg. The Commission reviewed the application; however, additional information was requested from the applicant. The applicant has submitted the requested information including photographs taken during a balloon fly visibility test conducted on April 23, 2010 and tower simulation photographs from several historic sites as requested by the Commission. Mr. Goodrich pointed out that Site # 3, which is on the northwestern edge of the Leitersburg National Register District, was of utmost concern to the Commission. From the information submitted, the cell tower would be visible from this location. Mr. Goodrich stated that the applicant is proceeding with an application that will be heard by the Board of Appeals. Discussion and Comments: Mr. Rohrer expressed his opinion that the proposed lattice tower would not be as obtrusive as a monopole or as visible from a distance. He believes that lattice towers blend into the background better because they have open areas. Ms. Izer expressed her opinion that a monopole in the same location would not be as obtrusive as the proposed lattice style tower even if more monopoles would be needed nearby to achieve sufficient coverage for the area. Ms. Stinson expressed her opinion that a monopole would be less obtrusive. Members discussed the various photographs and areas from which they were taken noting that if the angle were changed slightly at the same location, the view would be very different and the proposed tower visible from more locations. Motion and Vote: Ms. Izer made a motion to object to the proposed 199 -foot lattice tower because it is highly visible, as proven by the submitted photographs, from the view shed of the National Register District of Leitersburg. The Commission acknowledges that cell towers are a part of everyday life. However, it recommends the use of a monopole at this location even if more monopoles are needed because they are less obtrusive on the view shed of the National Register District. Seconded by Ms. Stinson. The motion passed with Ms. Izer, Ms. Stinson, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Clemens and Mr. Bowman voting "aye" and Mr. Rohrer voting "no". [Mr. Bowman and Mr. Stewart object to the lattice style tower because it is visible from the National Register District of Leitersburg (as shown from Views #3 and # 7). Mr. Rohrer voted "no" to the motion because he believes that the lattice style tower would be less obtrusive in the view shed of the National Register District.] Comments: Mr. Bowman and Mr. Stewart believe that a monopole would be more visible because of its diameter; however, the height of the lattice style tower is a concern. Mr. Clemens expressed his concern regarding the height of the tower, which he believes will make the tower more visible from the National Register Village. Ms. Izer and Ms. Stinson concurred. E. BUDGET None F. NEW BUSINESS Permit #2010-01909-18846 Sandyhook Road Mr. Goodrich presented for review and approval Permit # 2010-01909 for property located at 18846 Sandyhook Road, a contributing structure, in the Sandy Hook Rural Village zone. The applicant is proposing to construct a 138 -square foot covered front porch made from pressure treated lumber with a shed roof. Discussion and Comments: Members reviewed the submitted plans, which they believe did not provide sufficient detail to determine what the porch would look like when completed. Members would like to see more details including the proposed railing, trim, roofing material, etc. The porch should be designed so it will be compatible with the existing building and other contributing structures in the Rural Village. Motion and Vote: Ms. Izer made a motion that the Commission should not review Permit application #2010-01909 for property located at 18846 Sandyhook Road in the Sandy Hook Rural Village zone at this time because the design elements necessary to review and approve the application are omitted from the application. The applicant should provide the following details: the type of roofing material to be used; the type of handrails to be used (the Commission recommends pickets and a rail and prefers that a deck - type railing not be used); interior ceiling material, if proposed; will there be any ornamentation and if so what style; will there be lattice work underneath; will the steps be enclosed; the type of finish; and any other elements that will add to the historic character of the structure. Seconded by Mr. Stewart. Unanimously approved. G. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Goodrich reported that the easement document for the French Lane house is currently being reviewed by the Maryland Historical Trust's attorney and should be finalized in the next week or two. Ms. Izer and Mr. Clemens reported that they attended the Paula Reed Conference in Frederick to fulfill their educational requirement as a member of the HDC. H. EXECUTIVE SESSION None I. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Rohrer made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Bowman. So ordered Respectfully submitted, Ste h n T. Goodrich „ Chief Planner