The first notable discussion centered on Highland Avenue, a contributing property in the historic district, where the application involved adding a second-floor bathroom, modifying the existing detached garage, and altering the driveway. Architect Dave Rosen presented the proposal, which included transforming the garage from three side-facing doors to two front-facing doors. This modification aimed to better utilize the property while maintaining the architectural consistency with the existing structure. Rosen stated, “We would like to modify where the garage doors are… we would like to move the garage doors to the front.” He emphasized that the changes would improve the backyard aesthetics and reduce lot coverage by approximately 2%.

Rosen detailed the historical context of the house, built in 1920, and the garage, constructed in 1943, noting that the garage modifications would not detract from the property’s historic character. The commission members engaged with the proposal, asking questions about the garage’s new configuration and its impact on the property. Despite the change from a three-car to a two-car garage, it was clarified that the new design would still accommodate various household items. Further discussions touched on the structure’s visibility due to topography and the need for structural repairs to level settled areas of the house.

The commission’s deliberations reflected on the importance of maintaining the architectural integrity of historic properties while accommodating homeowners’ needs. The members acknowledged the historical significance of the house and expressed a desire to ensure any modifications remained consistent with its heritage. Rosen concluded by inviting further questions and comments.

Another application involved 85 Stewart Road, where the proposal was to build a freestanding metal roof structure over an existing tennis court. The applicants returned to address sound-related issues previously raised. They presented exhibits, including data on sound decibel levels associated with tennis, asserting that typical sound levels for tennis play remain under 55 decibels. They also hired a lighting expert to assess light spillage from the proposed structure, presenting updated plans that included a 24-inch wall around the court to enhance historical relevance and aesthetic appeal. The representative stated, “I hope you can appreciate the extraordinary detail that went into making the structure appropriate for the setting.”

The commission members raised questions about the lighting and sound implications for nearby properties, with assurances provided that light spillage would be virtually zero at a specified distance. The representative noted that the noise generated from tennis play largely originates from player grunts, which are infrequent and lower in decibel levels than other activities. The commission members appreciated the thoroughness of the revisions and the efforts to integrate the design with the existing architecture.

The discussions on Hobart Avenue also stood out, where the applicants sought approval to construct a one-story addition and reconstruct a previously demolished pier. The applicants, who have lived in the house for seven years, emphasized their commitment to maintaining its historical character. They explained that the pier was removed for safety reasons and aimed to reconstruct it using saved materials to match the original design. The house, built around 1850, had undergone various modifications, and the applicants highlighted their intent to preserve its historical fabric.

The commission engaged with the applicants, examining architectural plans and discussing the implications of the proposed changes. There was a focus on matching materials and ensuring the modifications aligned with the historical character of the area. The applicants expressed confidence in their ability to match existing materials, stating, “that is easy for us to do; we were already actually doing it anyway.”

The meeting also included discussions on a safety project proposed by Essex County, evaluating intersections for historical significance. The commission suggested that standard safety improvements would likely not face objections and saw the project as an opportunity to support educational programs focused on historic preservation.