The commission began its session with the Brett and Annette Federo application concerning 66 Normandy Avenue. The proposed project involved demolishing the existing structure to make way for a new 3,200 square-foot home. This application had been previously reviewed informally on July 27, leading to substantial discussions that prompted the applicants to modify their plans. The representative for the applicants, Mr. Koras, presented updated design changes, including the addition of a gable to the rear of the house to enhance visual balance.

During the review, the commission and the applicants delved into specific design elements, such as the siding and roof materials. The applicants had encountered issues with incorrectly sent siding samples, clarifying that the correct material would be smooth rather than textured cedar mill. The porch design was also discussed, with a decision to use tongue-and-groove mahogany flooring with exposed ends, consistent with historical styles. A double front door, similar to those in the neighborhood, was included to enhance the aesthetic appeal. One commission member commented positively on the design, stating, “I think the house is going to be beautiful,” acknowledging the collaborative effort that led to the revised design. The existing home was noted as a non-contributing structure, being a later addition to the area.

Following thorough discussions, the commission approved the application with stipulations regarding the use of smooth clapboard siding and the specified porch material. The motion passed unanimously.

Next on the agenda was an application from Chad Diet concerning 36 Normandy Avenue. Although categorized as new business, this application continued previous discussions and faced challenges with zoning approvals that delayed progress. Initially approved for a full second-floor addition over the garage, the applicants had to modify their plans due to questions about the historical context of the house and its construction history. The revised proposal involved a more modest addition rather than a full second-floor structure, reducing the overall massing of the house to fit within regulatory limits.

The commission reviewed the new design, which aimed for a one-and-a-half-story appearance, integrating dormers to create functional bedrooms. The architectural adjustments sought to maintain visual balance and reduce the addition’s appearance compared to the existing structure. Discussions included the alignment of eaves between the old and new structures, with one participant suggesting that slight misalignment might enhance aesthetic appeal. The design also incorporated historic elements like real window sills and roof returns, emphasizing the importance of these details for maintaining historical accuracy.

Commission members expressed support for the revised proposal, leading to a unanimous vote in favor of the application. The discussion acknowledged the property’s historical significance, with parts dating back to the 1880s or 1890s, while much of the existing structure was built in 1993.

The commission also discussed the historical architecture of other local properties. A crawl space investigation revealed remnants suggesting the age of one house, while another structure on Clay Street, demolished in the mid-2000s, was noted for its notably low ceiling height. A historical incident involving a “mass murder” in the 1940s added intrigue to one property’s background.

Attention turned to construction projects underway, including one expected to begin in about a month and a half, and a grant process delayed due to improper wording in a submitted application. Progress was reported on an initiative for a black heritage marker, described as “exciting.”

The chimney of Bicentennial Hall, which had reportedly shifted from its original position, was also discussed. An email from an unavailable commission member suggested a site visit to assess its architectural significance. The members deliberated on the necessity of this visit and the chimney’s historical relevance, considering it was not a issue.

The Fair Haven master plan, due for reexamination, was acknowledged as a complex process needing collaboration among members to gather input and recommendations for future preservation efforts. The last revision occurred in 2016, and the process aimed to be completed by August 2026. Historical concerns, including the regulation of “McMansions,” were referenced, emphasizing the need for balance in architectural aesthetics.