##VIDEO ID:MGgVuqidfDM## e good live okay thank you good evening everyone and welcome to the December 19th regularly scheduled meeting of the Monclair historic preservation commission this is a regular meeting of the Montclair histor preservation commission notice has been given in accordance with the open public meetings act by posting a copy of the notice on the first floor of the municipal building and by sending a copy to the Montclair times the start Ledger and The Herald news we are also being broadcast live on Channel 34 Monclair TV and remotely streamed on YouTube uh could you please call the role chair Bennett presid Vice chair of Graham is not present uh Mr ryit here Mr Rooney here Mr Sweeney here Mr Juliano here Mr mixer here miss Floyd here Miss Bower here Mr SMY here okay thank you and um Mike Hy a uh family emergency tonight so he's not here with us um and I would just like to mention uh that uh Mr Pierre has resigned from the commission uh effective on November 21st so uh just make sure that you put those that in your notes first order of business is the approval of the minutes from November 21st 2024 does anyone have any changes um or additions no I do on page four line 115 the first line says the roof May extend over the property line and it may not I remember we were talking about the cornices projecting over the property line no did I get that wrong no they can't no you know what yeah it was we were pointing out in the design that it it was in the it was in the discussion it was in the on the on the uh plan that it may yeah like the plan showed them projecting which was going to go over the property line but I'll I'll re check to make sure that's clear but what you can say the Commissioners noted on the plans that the projecting cornices on the roof extend over the property line that would make sense okay thank you um anyone else uh so I think that um as I requested that that it be noted in these minutes that Mr Pierre resigned as of November 21st um on page five on N line 170 page five um [Applause] just in addition that the commission approved the increase of uh per Perman landscape in the rear of the property because that was something that we on page three uh line 94 you uh you mentioned Mr Taz tasler but could you just put Mr tasler speaking on behalf of Mr spolan as the architectural as uh consultant should should I include that in the notes as well it's in the attendance list oh you didn't put that on there I put uh Mr tagler substitute for Steven smolen right yeah it's already in there it's already in there yeah so should I include it in the written part as well yes because I think it's it's confusing when you when you read it you don't you don't know who who it is I didn't know who it was understood um um and then I have a question for The Architects on the on the board um the uh on page5 line 164 to 165 he clarified that not all the real Windows have the same Arch so Soldier course so is a soldier course on the facade not over the course is standing course but it could be it could be over a window as well over a window okay then strike w i i didn't that was for my edification okay so um anybody else no may I have a motion to approve Mr Sweeney second Mr Rooney all in favor I I okay great we have three resolutions that we're voting on has everyone had a chance to read them there for our Consultants one is for um our our uh preservation consultant architectural Heritage Consultants one is for our attorney cmn CME Associates and one is for our engineer strand engineering so I think what we'll do is we'll go over these individually and vote on on them just uh uh Mr Rooney do you want to look uh at the our HPC consultant right I don't have any I don't have any U resolutions in PR of me okay you don't have a res you don't you they don't come in the mail to us to me oh you haven't had a chance to look at it no I had that conversation with sen okay so do you have copies of these I have one copy wa didn't we talk about this at the last meeting well these are the resolutions are the resolutions so I just want if everybody got a copy to read it we have to vote on them MH I haven't seen it I'm sure it's all good but I have resolutions you have mine came in the mail with the drawing packages so who doesn't have in the mail but not digitally you're getting hard if you don't get hard copy you don't get it that's the problem right it's actually the email okay so Mr mixer do you have you have them and Miss Floyd you have them and you have them I have them I okay and you have them yeah and Steve and John this looks like what we it's what we spoke about but I just want I think if we go we have to vote on them like see if we get the right name do we have to vote each individual one is that no start at the top I think we should so we'll start at the top with um resolution to retain schaer L lenine bloomstein and bladder is HBC attorney which is our Janine Bower would would someone any discussion on that no well I propose it we accept it you want to have discussions well no before we okay okay so a motion to accept second second all in favor I okay and then the second one would be resolution to retain architectural Heritage consultors as HPC architect is there any is there any uh see I move to accept okay Mr Ryan second second second okay all in favor I and then a resolution to retain strand engineering as the HPC engineer right has everyone had a chance to look at that yes somebody propose to move this motion to approve okay second all in favor I okay now we move to public comments is is there anyone in the audience that would like to get up and speak come forward please you hello so just identify yourself my name is offal on counil and I want the microphone's not on let's do that again my name is Frank raki I'm here as a resident and in my official capacity on behalf of the council and I just wanted to acknowledge what a productive and successful year this commission's had and you have our appreciation mine personally and I think many in the township really appreciate the work you've accomplished this year and I just thought it was a good way to end the year and recognize all that you've done thank you thank you thank you wow well let's go home that's right it's better than pitchforks head anyone else we're we're open okay uh seeing nobody else for public comment I'll close that section um old business we have nothing under old business business new business we do have something that's been added to the agenda uh which is a referral to the zoning board on the board of education buildings that are on Valley Road and there's two buildings so we'll be reviewing those uh number at the third one but before we get to that we have a uh total demolition of a detached to garage at 144 Union Street this is application 2024 34 it's a certificate of appropriateness which the uh HPC uh determines uh for demolition so I would like to now turn it over to Miss Bower our attorney so she can list um go over the uh demolition application and the terms that are on [Music] that well I I'm not going to go over uh the application that's that's for you to do but I want to explain what the law is uh for the ordinance before you um start hearing the evidence so you can have in your mind uh what the criteria is that has to be proven by the applicant um and then of course you'll have your own Q&A and uh discussion and so forth um the review criteria for total Dem demolition there too I'm going to read it and then I'm just going to discuss it for a tiny bit it says and I'm quoting with regard to application to totally demolish or remove an historic building site or structure such application to demolish shall be granted if the applicant demonstrates that one the preservation of the historic building site or structure is not warranted two the preservation of the St building site or structure would impose an undue burden or hardship on the applicant um what follows uh and that's an E3 uh one and two what follows those two criteria are exemplars uh that say and um the planner uh sent around a memo as I I did too I think you got it both uh so there are exemplars uh that say uh the first element may be demonstrated by and then there's a list and that doesn't mean that your imagination is limited by what the list is but you you know there are exemplars and then it says the same thing for uh the second criteria second criteria can be demonstrated by you know and it gives uh examples of evidence um so uh I just want you to keep those criteria in mind they're not the uh I mean they're very simple criteria whether it's warranted or not and whether it would impose an undue burden or hardship or not but because they're worded in the negative it I you know drafters like to word things like that so I just wanted to make it really clear what your uh purview is in uh judging whether the burden has been met by the application thank you do we have that sorry do we have that in the memo yeah so the one that I put on your desk the one that I put on uh each of your desks includes that full review criteria is that dated nov December 19th yes dated today okay so uh we're going to hear from Mr smallen next about his review of the uh the the the building and the property but before we hear from him I just like to I usually do a little historic overview and the historic significance so the subject property which is at 144 Union Street is a pot is a potential historic resource located in the first residential historic district on the New Jersey register of historic places ID number 1128 the first residential historic district nomination report lists 114 Union Street as a contributing resource to the district the primary structure on the property was constructed In 1902 and the garage was construction constructed in approximately 1922 so what the the um what we are looking at tonight is whether or not the demolition will be um approved and before we do that I'm going to call on Mr smullen to go over his review and let's just make sure we have it all here I does everyone have Mr smen's review okay it's it's uh dated November 11th uh 2024 it's for the subject property which is 144 Union Street for this application and my review um back in November was based upon two things the development application from mid October and a set of drawings uh dated uh October 15th related to the proposed work as uh the chair just said it's a contributing resource to the first residential historic district which is identified as a potential um historic district in the Township's uh master plan element the subject properties tutor Revival style the original building was built around 1902 and then the Garage which is the main focus of the hearing was built around 1922 based upon an announcement for a building permit that I dug up from the Monclair times so that would mean that this garage uh first and foremost was certainly present during the period of significance uh for the historic district as identified in the state Register of historic places the two materials that I I reviewed um the application against I I tried my best to work with what I was given um in mid November but really overall um it was it was difficult for me to make you know a complete assessment here as to whether or not the burden had been met B because I think essentially the set of application materials that that we were given originally and then even factoring in some of the subsequent materials that have been provided since overall I don't think that this is a complete application for demolition um the burden of proof and the amount of um evidence that needs to be submitted in Monclair is is quite significant for a demolition um which is part of a a recently enacted ordinance so the evaluation um of the building's historic Integrity is contained in my report ultimately I found that most of the seven criteria were either medium or high so this subject property certainly retains a high degree of historic architectural integrity and it continues to reflect its original purpose connection into the main house Etc and as um the attorney just said there's the preservation criteria that one must consider and the hardship criteria I think even factoring in the um let me see if I can try and identify these exhibits the photos of the existing garage which is two pages and then this three-page uh revised statement of need and purpose for proposed total demolition I don't think the um overall that the applicant substantiated the need to remove this structure and I think some additional information uh beyond what we have in totality is is really necessary to make a more informed uh decision on this on this application okay can I ask you a questions sure so what do you think is what do you think is missing that they have not expressed the the need to U uh tear this garage down and what else you think there short what did when you reviewed what did you find shortcut so it was the hardship criteria I think that was most difficult to reach firm opinions on um the condition and feasibility of restoration we've certainly gotten some information um to that effect I I'm a little confused by annotated pictures that say existing garage has no Foundation pointing to something that kind of appears to be a foundation um yeah I had the same same reaction yeah the the images within the garage um while they certainly you know imply that it's difficult to park a car there um I can't really make an assessment on the historic fabric of the existing garage Beyond like you know there's a overall picture the East facade it says that there's a a rotted seill it's certainly not evident in that picture honestly that there's any rot of that wood so typically we get closer pictures to substantiate things that are significantly deteriorated um I haven't seen any type of report from a structural engineer saying that the garage is an imminent uh risk of of collapse or that uh the footings if they're existing or or severely undersized or anything like that there's I think discussion about a seill plate being rotted again no evidence beyond the text was submitted to that effect um and I think I would probably take some issue with a typical car from 2024 that's one of the largest cars I've ever seen so that gets it maybe more of the the practicalities of the application but and may I ask the the neglia report that was was this uh that's related to the variance application it it relates to water it relates to water okay perious Services okay so we now we're here um I I have a I have a question if we believe uh this I guess is a legal question if we believe that they haven't submitted the necessary documents we don't even have them in front of us are we looking at this that's up to you but um I don't know whether there was uh an administrative completeness determination or it just sort of looked why it's here exactly exactly but I had the same uh reaction that uh Stephen did my reaction doesn't count as much as yours or even his in fact it doesn't really count at all except for the jurisdiction question so you've raised it so um if the board uh you know wants to um entertain whether you should hear it or whether you should give the applicant an opportunity to um satisfy the criteria at least having heard your opinions or you know or just Mr smoland that's entirely up to you okay okay well just for the record the um the report we got from uh the plan from the planning department on is this we have two reports right November we have December 19th which says it it's complete the application's complete this is for the demolition okay so um Commissioners uh you you deemed it complete yeah so after an administrative review with the planning director and the zoning officer and based on the scope of the demolition we deemed it complete so it's up to the commission if you know you believe you would like to proceed I I'll just have to drill down on that because I'm hearing different things like we need this and you're we don't have it but you're saying it's complete do we have a structural engineering report from the structural engineer we don't then it's not complete right and rather than go through a hearing um because this is what happened with the at the last we didn't and it went it we deliberated for we could we could I guess we could listen to whatever they have they're here to present stuff but I would say well I don't know I would defer I believe it's also within the board's purview to wave some of the requirements so that's up to you to move forward with it or not to wave some of the requirements on the so it's essentially the same as like the planning borderers Zing list there's a checklist great um and that's why I said there's been an administrative review that uh deemed it complete but that doesn't mean that for your substantive review you're satisfied that it's complete because for instance remember the last time the garage I had to call the engineer and say well give us more information about this Foundation question so we're sort of in the same place completely different facts and circumstances but even just on that one issue we're kind of in the same place and so there's completeness and there's completeness and that's what I'm bringing it's it's not two different things she's right but and I'm not saying whether I'm right or not because I don't have an opinion I'm just placing the question before you before we spend another 2 hours for instance which is what we spent on the last one and I don't even know how many hours on the little house with the architect dad and the daughter I forget the name of that or the address of that one or something like that and I just suggested that the applicant might want to and you could also treat it as a conceptual review if you wanted to I would that's what I'm saying so that you could hear what they have to say and they might want to hear what you have to say um yeah I would I would suggest we look this is my suggestion we look at this but we can't judge it now because we we've been told we have certain checklist things we're supposed to be looking at that are supposed to be submitted by law right so how can we do that until we have everything even if it maybe doesn't make a difference maybe down the road I don't know but we don't have it in front of us I think we can give some direction about what else we need that's that would be helpful so people have come here won't have have wasted their time u i certainly have some questions and and um both legal and otherwise but I think uh be I think we should proceed ahead initially with the recognition we probably cannot make a determination if we make a determination it would have to be rejection because the burden of proof is on the applicant so so who is here to speak for this uh application okay um would you come up then and and just identify yourself for the for the record and I think we so you've heard the so identify yourself hi my name is Aaron kissell I'm a resident at 144 Union Street okay and you're the owner of the property I am okay so you've heard the quandry we're in I have okay so if we go ahead with uh hearing what your uh with your expert I guess you have your architect here architect is here my wife and my in-laws are here as well okay um and then let me just clarify this procedurally Miss bow if we listen to this now will they have to come back um well we we can ask them if they'll agree to carry it okay but if you find it to be wanting then I would think they would want to come back mhm that's what would happen okay so do we have to uh have a uh a majority of people that want to go forward to hear this tonight yeah happy to hear it I would like to hear it okay all right so um you're been uh we'll swear you in as the expert Miss bow swear you in and then you could proceed with the application if that's a if that's agreeable to you well I have the architect here so I don't know uh I'm the owner of the property and can explain what we're trying to do and I have our architect here as well as the expert right so your expert would have to be sworn in but do you understand what Miss bow has said that if if we find if the commission finds that there's more um information that we need to make a determination then you would you would come back with the with or with the uh uh with that information with whatever we ask for next month which I understand okay is that acceptable to you then we go forward yes okay so why don't you bring your architect up and then he can be sworn in hello even hello can you just raise your hand and Miss bow where you in and what is your name Francis Klein uh Mr Klein and Mr kissell do you uh swear or affirm that the testimony you'll provide on the application tonight will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do I do good okay so do we have I think Mr Klein you have some images correct well you were going to say something yeah I was just going to do a quick context setting of why we're and then uh Francis and I can try to answer questions so my name is Aon Kell we live in Monclair I live with my wife we got three kids my in-laws Shaya and yorg are also residents of Montclair um and with the new Adu law um we are looking to create an Adu so that they can age in place at home and with us um we need to combine the Adu with the garage for a host of reasons one being uh other zoning issues within modclair and we'd like them to be able to have a wheelchair that can go from the garage into the Adu um so that's uh the designs you see sort of the main purpose of that is so that they can age in place and that the garage and Adu are one structure rather than multiple structures on the property um the context for like the hard ship elements of the request um as as context for those there's really a couple that we identified one being um attaching the Adu to the structure requires foundation work to connect the two um and so the the cost and burden of sort of preserving or connecting those two is sort of5 to $20,000 as I understand it versus doing it properly from a start um there's an element around the usability of the current garage um it's quite narrow yes we do have a large car we have a large family but it doesn't uh fit in terms of a normal standard car now um with the addition of the Adu we also would like an additional space for the additional people that are going be living uh on the property so that would uh require an extra Bay so going from two bays to three Bays um and lastly our kids are bikers so we would wanted room for the bikes and we also have an electric car and we would want to be able to charge them indoors rather than Outdoors which we have to do now so those are the main elements of both what we're trying to do and why in partnership with our architect we've come up with the design that that we have and the hardship elements if that is a criteria to make largely revolve around the usability of the current structure and the cost and complexity of adding an Adu onto the current foundation and structure of the grow yeah okay um and then if you've got questions or Francis you would like to yes please come up and you can um walk us through the plan I I we fully support uh the family and their desire to have a multigenerational home and I think it's really important that Montclair is one of the few municipalities that has uh Gone forward with the Adu there are some other ones but it's rare um it's a very very good thing to do to bring families together I'm in complete support of that and I'm also completely supportive of you and the historical preservation commission it's very important to me and to the town to preserve uh the Beauty and the idios all the various varieties of architecture that we have in the have in the town um the we have to make the garage bigger um it it it's Al Ada right so when we get out of the car we need a 3ot aisle and we don't have that now um on both sides and it has to be flat um there's a half inch discrepancy uh with the garage because of carbon monoxide you have to have it a little bit lower but basically it's flat into the into the foyer of the Adu and uh we need to maintain those the three- foot isleway so we need to increase the garage from 20 foot4 I think to 256 we we need another 5'2 and in order to do that uh we we need to remove the eastern part of the garage and part of the front um you can hear me yeah and move oh if I want to move around thanks uh and we we need to keep the west side and add on to the east side so that it's bigger and it can handle somebody getting out of the car and having an isway out into the foyer with respect to the architectural Integrity of the house and town we have used the the front porch uh it's a beautiful front porch from the 1902 house as a model uh with tutor half timbering um and we have uh brought uh the plan drawing shows 3T car 6 feet car 3 ft and then and then into the into the front hle and that shows the 256 and the existing is 20 fo4 and if um dropped I'm sorry okay the screen um you can see that you can see the the half timbering design of the front porch and can I just ask you sorry do you is that the same plan that that you have sure I can do it from there too it might be easier okay um thanks just grab the M FR um you can see the the halfing front porch uh on the thank you on the left and we're using the half timbering design tutor design and the proposed new expanded garage there are also these really cool flat pters with a lentil with a little curve um I haven't seen that anywhere else uh there it's a little dark but you can see in the drawing um they're real they're really wonderful and um the garage doors are proposed Carriage House style uh with the top row is glass with the uh the old-fashioned Hardware uh as as part of the uh as part of the design and well you can see the windows that's the Adu we also have similar Windows around the back of the garage but staying there the house has these beautiful uh Diamond pane windows uh which yeah San Zella I think you can see him up there yeah you can see it on the right um they have these beautiful Diamond paint windows and we want to uh replicate replicate them in slightly different dimensions Marvin will make them uh on you you go back to the the elevation of the of the garage yeah and there's some single ones around around on the back yes there they go alling types um we love the three coats stco and and the brick um and uh we are going to use that uh in the rebuilt Adu part of the garage uh extension into the Adu we've tried everything we can do to make this empath atic with the house that's there it's a beautiful house and uh we we fully support Monclair historic preservation we've tried to make something uh for the family as an Adu and integrated into the garage so that it's useful for the family and conforms with ADA requirements for awith okay does that complete your testimony yes it does thank you thank you very much before um now what we do is that we open the Commissioners will ask questions but before we do that I would just like to go over the submission requirements for total demolition you could sit down I um so the The Matrix for the required contexts of applications for total demolition as outlined in Monclair code 34714 7.1.2 and whether and how the applicant has sa satisfied those requirements and this was an addendum to the planning uh memo that came out I believe it was on December 11th correct that's the most updated one we have right there's one from December 19th today okay it it it says the same thing does okay so the required application content is a complete photographic record of all exterior elevations interior spaces and details of all existing building sites or structures and any addition adjacent properties pertinent to the history of the building site struct structure of surrounding neighborhood that has been satisfied statement of the need of purposes for the proposed total demolition or removal that has been satisfied and in fact you wrote a very compelling um letter to that um the estimated cost and and timing of restoration a rehabilit itation of the building s or structure so as to allow for its reasonable use that has been satisfied um and you estimate that the cost and timing of rehabilitating the garage is up close to $200,000 um the next one is the evidence of good faith offers to sell it at a sale price uh that's not uh applicable because it's an access accessory structure a written and pictor pictorial record of the building site or structure history and Architectural features for archival purposes including without limitation all exterior facades as a whole a street view with surrounding properties pictures of all features identified in all historical architectural surveys of the property on file with the township the dates of original Str construction of the building and um architectural features and a description of the building CER structure through photographs Maps and and plans and that has been satisfied but it also says the statement of need contains the information on the garage's construction site and oh pictorial record shows the the uh photos which was in the memo from um the planning department and we also got additional information from Mr smolin's report uh architectural study of the land is not applicable preservation of architectural elements that are proposed for removal and photographic documentation is up to the discretion of the commission cost estimate of the proposed total demolition or removal cized by site preparation is satisfied the demol would gave us a demolition cost of $7,400 and then conceptual designer plans for any building or structure proposed or planned by the applicant to replace the historic building site or structure sought to be totally demolished or removed including a design of the replacement building or structure and a statement of how the replacement structure will affect the character of the neighborhood at the request of the applicant the HPC shall Grant a waiver of this requirement Upon A finding of good cost but we don't need to do that because that um that requirement has been um provided so what before we open it up I just want to make sure that we were all on the same page for to know what that is the review for total demolition um for Monclair code 347-1424 says that with regard to applications to totally demolish or remove an historic building site or structure such application de to demolish shall be granted if the applicant demonstrates that number one the preservation of the historic building site or structure is not warranted and number two the preservation of the historic building site or structure would impose an undue burden of or hardship on the applicant so with that in mind um we also have a and b which is um evidence that the building sites are do not warrant its preservation based on the following factors which um I think they well we'll listen to that how but what the history historic character is and nature of the building and the second element may be demonst by evidence and consideration the following factors that the preservation of the building of structure denial of the permit would impose an undue burden or hardship upon the applicant so that's what Miss Bower was talking about about um uh uh the burden of proof would be upon is upon the applicant um and then we have the we have five conditions uh for that so everybody has this in there oh everybody has this correct so with that we we've already heard Mr smolin's report and now we'll we'll start with questions from the um Commissioners to you Mr Klein okay so do you want questions um I'll start um the require there is no Ada requirement for adus in Monclair that I know of there is if you want to expand the square footage but you're expanding the square footage footage well beyond the up up upper in limit of what it and we're not here to look I'm not here to look at adus but I do have a question because it relates to some comments about the garage and wids and access and Ada but that's not a requirement for adus um if for this family okay that's a different story I understand that okay okay so in order to give them uh but it's not a requirement per se for adus um did I understand did I hear something that in order to keep the existing garage it was a $15 to $20,000 uh uh uh Foundation fix have to underp it okay and it's still too small uhhuh but I did hear the F the the that cost so I'm I'm looking at hardship and it versus the whole job to 20,000 so I'm trying to just get that in my head a little bit um and you're saying there is there someone said there is no Foundation to this garage foundation I think we need to Def I would just well those are my questions I have comments but those are my questions do we need a definition Foundation something that Carri something it doesn't it's not structurally carrying it's it's flab on grade no Foundation I I'm looking at a photo at the rear at the taken from the rear of the property looking at this garage and I see a foundation below the slab in fact I can see evidence of the slab sitting on that Foundation unless it's wood or something I guess it's sitting on is it what's it what's that Foundation sitting on at the rear of the garage not the current code it doesn't go down what's that doesn't go down 3 feet below [Music] frost are you that's your so there is a foundation but it doesn't go deep enough is that what you're saying that side yes so an inadequate foundation and you're referring to figure six right okay yeah those are my questions Steve um is there any part of this structure that can be saved and reused yes we're using the West Wall absolutely we do everything we can and and part of the back wall the the South Wall we really try okay and the West Wall is is is on the property line it's a 2 or 3 feet from it okay anym Mr Giuliani just one um was there any looking at possibly keeping the two bays that are there and adding a third Bay we're adding a third Bay in the back yeah but what if they were all three side by side um it's a good question but keeping the roof that's there and adding to the left well then I have something where I have a roof like this and something else next to it and I get this trap for snow right like tomorrow night and ice and freezing and also if we had the Bay on the side I I mess up the kids play area cuz it goes this way into the yard but if I put the bay in the back that area is underutilized and it's out of the way and instead of a three Bay garage you still see a two Bay garage and you don't see the one in the back if you're on Union Street so I think we thought that was better for the town's point of view okay thank you that was my only question Mr Sweeney yes first as to the overall um your options were to build an integrated garage and Adu or to um rebuild or do something to the garage and have a separate Adu is that your option okay so is it you looked at those options and and uh concluded and what was your conclusion that you went to the the single combined uh project that's a good question because because we have to get out of the car in perhaps the handicap situation undercover right into the front hall and we we don't want to Gap and if we put an accessor another third building it' be out on the field where the kids are playing so it takes up way too much of that space they need to be next to each other you need to be able to drive in and get out of your car with space and get into the front hall um that's important okay second um is the garage currently used for any cars are the cars parked in the garage occasionally have one car occasionally you'd have uh one car and do you your parents uh they drive also okay car they have one car and do you had three cars all together is that what you're uh oh you will have three cars all together okay um the I I think uh the question is how much space do you really need I the question asked over here about whether you could have expanded it you're saying you really couldn't expand the garage without changing its overall appearance yeah um but we kept the Gable and we kept the trim and and the and the materials the three the the garage structure currently is visible from um from uh Union Street but not it's in back of the house uh is it a wooded area is it uh it's a long driveway if you're paying attention you and you're walking on Union Street you say oh yeah that's a garage okay if you had two buildings to me the question is if you had two build a garage which is not of the right size if you put the money into you to uh fixing the foundation and uh cleaning up you still have a garage that may not be large enough and it doesn't have enough of the uh units so um so uh would it be a hardship for your um not yours but the owners's uh parents to uh have to go out of the car and go into a different uh building and it'll be minimize the hardship by having access directly to that yes exactly you have it right okay so looking at the uh the cost issue to make uh the garage uh and I don't know how you would do without expanding some element of the roof of the height or otherwise and putting in a New Foundation um that itself uh did you say the total cost to to fix it up uh not that it would be necessarily usable be the same size as 15 to 20,000 is that all that that was for fixing it as it is but it's not usable yeah no I agree with that I I understand that if you had it if you put that money and you still have a garage that doesn't have enough units and isn't isn't long enough and even wide enough I certainly would like to see more um information on the size of cars and the size of normal garages um what is a standard um because the garage that is described here does seem small but that's sort of a feel I don't have any real data do you have data on on the the size of the typical SUV which is well and I'm assuming the owners have SUVs you have SUVs yeah okay so if you go to this report here yes that's what I'm looking at I couldn't really see the the whole numbers wait which which report is that this is the uh application this report that oh that was uh generated by Mr Klein yeah so and dated there's no date on this is there um no there's no date [Applause] on should we uh why don't we pass this to I have it I looked at it but I but I didn't see the uh yes I think right I was looking at the typical dimensions of uh of an SUV that's what I was looking at uh I'll tell you what an expedition is I just looked it up 17 ft long for expedition picture I saw 17 ft long okay um I think typical garages are used for a lot more than uh Vehicles so so I know you have to have space for other things and of course I'm basing on my own experience with a three car garage and the content seem to uh sometimes exclude automobiles as your picture dep picks okay those are the questions but I but I think the way I would say I'm looking at this thing is is the relative hardship um can take into account not just the cost of doing it but what you would end up getting and uh the inability to have a function a fully functional integrated unit that would Pro provide the uh Adu services for parents while also providing a garage so uh the other thing is I think we can perhaps uh balance the amount of impact on uh the loss I I do uh note the observation that it's it's minimally observed and the loss of the building would have a minimal impact what do you have any other further questions excuse me any further questions no I I andone my questions I was trying to explain why I was thinking Miss Floyd so uh I have a question as it relates to the Ada maybe attorney Bower could help me with this a little bit but if the garage originally was designed and it wasn't taking into consideration ADA requirements and then they do any build it I know we're not an Adu in the Adu business but the township does allow it to be attached to a garage so that would be acceptable on the on the township side then on our side the fact that they can't get wheelchairs out you know there's not a comfortable accessibility for elderly people living in there would that then require them to have to structure the garage to be acceptable for ADA requirements if they're adding an Adu ultimately anyway no okay that was my question thank you Mr mixer um I have just one question and again this this goes back to the the total demolition request um if there's if they're preserving a wall or several walls of this building they still require a total demolition request from the perspective of historical preservation I can answer that um so if they are raising or de demolishing more than 50% of the visible walls then yes 50% of the exterior walls so we tried but no fair enough um I have no further questions I'll wait till commentary so just picking up on what M Mr mixer said you're retaining the short wall and then the West Wall isn't that 50% it's um not completely all of the back wall because there's a drawing oh because you're blowing out the back yeah there's a drawing which shows the the Shaded part which is what we're trying to keep password what I need her password you need her password password of course right because it's the one which has it shaded on the demolition plan I s um so the gray area here is what we're keeping right and these are the walls which we removing and the roof right so by % should be right okay thank you questions any do you have another question go ahead I have a question about your drawing D3 [Applause] y basic the basic on that [Applause] I understood that the existing Foundation was insubstantial but what's drawn does not look insubstantial to me well looks like it looks like a found it looks like a Foundation wases pretty deep into the ground with a footing is what I'm reading in these drawings that's what we is that just a is that just a that's that was that's what we thought it was going to be there but when we had the engineer look at it when we did the construction drawings as we're developing right now we know that their Foundation it's not low off in relationship to the Abu so it would have to be fully on the PIN oh underpinned where you're making the connection to the ad correct yes the garage has a a foundation but it has a it has like a slab on Gray and a retaining wall in one side because of the drop from 0 to five I got it difference do all the cars that I see in the garage that you're drawing do they all have this uh Ada accessibility to get out the side of the garage of the car door and get in so there there's two things on it it's Ada and then there's clearance for regular people right so even for like a regular person you still need 3 ft and the old garage doesn't have it I'm asking a question about what you drew I see three cars in here one car for sure you'd never get out and and if you were handicapped uh well one is considered a tandem which would be just parked in there and be taken out and that car you can get out of as it's drawn and have the clearances you claim you need that's all I'm asking yes and the car below it looks like a smaller car and then I see a car to the right that you can barely get around there's three ft there's three feet on ITT yeah and then there's the middle aisle in there you between the end of the car and the garage the the wall above and the but you don't need you don't need the clearance in front of the car you need it on the doors I'm asking if can get around so with the door closed you could not get around that car I'm looking at it I'm just trying to understand you're claiming something I'm just trying to understand what you're claim a good question yeah but that's not really a requirement did you uh I'm trying to get to to some comments I'm going to make did you ever explore opening up the north Southeast the West Wall of the garage so that youd have more clearance for someone to get out of the car and into an Adu that's so close to the property line that's the oh I guess I'm talking I'm maybe I'm doing the wrong direction are you talking East no the West Wall this wall no that's the East wall on the right this wall door right here yeah that if you move that wall over 3 feet you'd have additional three and open it to the garage you'd have even more room in the garage to get out of the car that makes everything bigger though right the whole thing which SL slide over already over but you wouldn't necessarily have to tear down the I'm just you're going to see I'm going to make some comments but that's those are my questions you can see the garage that we're proposing is 256 and the old garage is only like 19 20 inside 20 fo4 I think yeah it's 24 to the outside and the walls themselves how far is it to the outside 20t 4 20t 4 uhhuh so and that excludes the wall itself so if you move if you did a little indentation without touching the front facade of that garage and took four more feet and threw it into the garage space you'd have your TW you know 24 ft inside not all cars I've you haven't drawn all these cars that you can get around it looks like to me one car you can get out of get out get get uh handicapped access in so that's all we we're talking about well that's a good comment but one car is better than none yeah yeah yeah okay th those are my questions John you'd still have to you still if you expanded one side the bay would still be offset so you'd have to either drive it at an angle or car no we're talking about getting out of the car if it's too close for the door oh just for the the opening get out get out you know then you have yeah from a a comment perspective I I have a similar old garage and not none of the three cars I own fit in them and they're much smaller than an expedition all right and do we have any other questions from the commissioners before we open it up any questions from the um public come forward you guys will remember me right uh Frank wecky um so I have questions for the architect and I have a question for your expert okay so with the architect um I not clear on the dimensions some key dimensions of the garage and if you could help me with that one is the height of the garage the other one um is the garage door width okay the openings and then the slope of the roof uh the the existing garage these are all exist the existing garage what the dimension those are good questions um 12T to the ridge on the garage that we're proposing because the land the exist the existing the existing this are all existing questions existing is 15 it's 15 well I just want to confirm that no no that's right and the openings the garage door openings are widthwise we don't if this is about4 they only about yeah they're probably I do you want to what's that you want to swear her in if she's going to testify oh yeah oh you weren't WN in please I'm Jazelle I work with Francis I'm an architectural designer and so would you please uh if you speak you have to be sworn good my name is j Al buzali I'm an employee for Francis Klein I'm an architecture designer for the project and do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll provide tonight on the application and have provided so far is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes okay thank you what is your name jelle Jella buzelli buselli okay thank you they're drawing at 8 ft 8T they're 8T okay um and the slope of the roof rise over the run if my recollection is correct it's about 123 excuse me it's 12 to3 it's steep steeper than just use the mic it's steeper than the one that we're proposing because ours is wider and to so it's well the your proposal is 312 your the exist seems like it's doubled that so that it's that 10 11 over I so it's about it's more than double what the proposed is the only reason I that is because I I don't know what the inspiration in the front of the house the vest in the front the empty way and the house itself but they all seem to have steep p and and I just want to make sure there's a relation that relation I understand that relationship right okay so I'm sorry we we could I couldn't understand what you were saying could you well my point was that the slope of the the slope of the existing garage is an important stylistic element that relates back to the principal structure and that removing it and replacing it with a 31 12ths roof would be comment Wise It's like squishing it's like the garage I have I have an 1880 house and I have a 1960s garage because the ordinance says it can only be 15 ft blah blah blah and the way you built well anyway it looks stupid um so I could speak to that if it's 15t to the height to the Ridge Top of the ridge but this this site slopes on so that U Dan and her his planning board you have to take a spot elevation every 10 ft all the way around so if it's 15 ft on the west side it's going to be more than 15 ft uh on the downhill side so we had to average all those every 10 ft spot elevations uh in order to make the 15 ft uh average my my issue was the slope it wasn't how high it was I mean I shouldn't have no no it's fine you rais a good point and then on the photos of the um existing garage that page page the second page of the photo document is this the latest is this the latest dece where December 19th I've never seen a December 19th document so I don't know what it's that doc um yeah page two the second page there's a second page but it's Staples this one the inside this one right here the inside yeah oh this one so to me the second photo looks like the West Wall is that the West Wall that's the the wall of the sard that's closest to the other property so that's the West Wall right and that's the one that has the silver yeah and that's the one of the justifications for demolition is the sil R issue yeah you have that in all all the walls but that one in particular they had roded replace it a couple times my question then is why is that the one full wall you're keeping because we we can the other ones idea that's the one that we can keep and fix which we want to do if we can keep something we'll keep it we can fix I'm just I'm just confused because this was a justification I'm trying to get myself if you clarify for if it's a justification for demolition Sil Rod yeah but we're going to provide whole new foundation and and the and the break knall but you're asking to demolish the garage because of Sil you show an example of that wall that's the reason why you need to demolish the garage correct but that's the one wall that you're keeping and can repair no we're keeping and racing the sill but okay okay but maybe that's technically more accurate but the one wall you're not demolishing is the one you're showing that is the problem we want to fix that one and keep we want to keep everything that we can okay but the expansion for the Adu was on the other side I I don't I'm not con the Adu is not my concern I understand my concern is this is a demolition permit I don't care what the Adu looks like it's really um not no it's a good I mean essentially what I'm looking at is in very basic land use terms I'm looking at a house with an attached garage that's what this application is about it's 2000 square ft of dwelling and with an attached garage whether I like or not as IM material to this where I'm trying to go to tonight um the I'm sorry um so on D2 on your sheet D2 D2 y you have an outside Dimension a depth of 21 and 2 and2 21 ft 2 1/2 in that's right the back right yes yeah and you have a width outside dimension of 20 ft 4 in that's the one that's the problem right but I just want to confirm this if we could go to sheet A1 [Applause] Y and could you scroll to the front of the garage it's the same front to that without counting the ex well that well that's let me just get to my question the dimension front to back is still 21 and 2 and2 in correct you are fitting a design style car that's what they're called the it and other people call it's the model car you use to figure out dimensioning spaces that looks like a 17x 6 1/2 ft design design style that box I'm I'm talking about the drawing what you drew there yeah right yeah that guy mhm that look is that 21 ft am I correct is that 21 ft by well the 21 ft is the outside of the building not the inside of the building this 17t check it I don't know that for just reminding everyone for the record please stay by your mics when you're speaking thank you essentially Mr raki it's the same depth as the existing Gage they're putting a much larger car into the same space they're saying they don't have space for well no because we increasing the size of the door and we increasing the size adjacent to the car so that's how you get more clearance because you don't have the same door you're saying the width front to front to back I'm just working on the depth right now let me get to the width issue I'm getting there it scaled at 17 yeah and okay so it's so you can keep the existing car and lengthwise you can get a large SUV Expedition size X Su SUV and fit it in the existing okay I just want to be clear that because that's how I read it okay the standard parking lot in mon ordinances pretty much everywhere parallel 90° is 9 by8 that's correct okay so from a width point of view okay maybe 8 ft's a little bit tight but if your standard car is only 6 and 1/2 ft you can get a large Expedition siiz car pretty much all the cars are around six less than 6 ft but you can get a 6 and 1/2t car into an 8T spot that's outside don't no that's parking lot is outside that's it okay and this is inside but I'm just talking about the opening to get inside well if you're in the street you have the sidewalk to open the door you have the street to open the do talking about getting the car into the garage okay okay how my understanding is you only need 2 and 1/2 ft to open a car door which is 30 in okay it's 30 in which is not adaa that's I'm not going there okay so what I'm getting what I'm trying to get out without going to the commentary is an understanding of what could fit for my understanding in the existing garage and I don't understand with the dimensions that you are providing why a very large SUV could not fit in the existing garage you can't fit two cars and I just pick a bay I don't care just why can't you fit two cars both openings are the same they're both the same width it's not the same width of the opening it's 256 the opening of the garage door is yeah but clearance inside I'm just talking the clearance inside is we just I thought we covered that is sufficient Yep this is okay so I'm confused I am that's the new one this is the new one with the same depth you are putting but the depth is not the problem please don't interrupt okay you're putting a 17t car in here so the depth is not a problem okay fine so now it's a width issue as far as getting the car into the garage and this opening this car is this large SUV is 6 and 1/2 ft that's how you're allowing for it mirrors and everything this opening you said is at least 8 ft so I don't understand how the car cannot enter the garage when you do inside no the car entering the car I'm in I the existing please please I cannot get the car does he have to be I already he's been SW oh um I can't get the car in without putting the mirrors in and we already have three scratches on the side it's about 3 in on either side and it takes me out 3 minutes of going back and forth to get it in so if the current width is 8 ft I would be very surprised but the my my current car fits in by less than four 5 in on either side of the retracted mirror so I don't mean I'm not being argumented about I just want it as far as information sharing information what you have drawing wise what you're sharing in personal experience and what I'm trying to understand is we're on three different places you can't get your car in the garage without scratching it they can get a Expedition siiz car in the garage without scratching it and I don't understand how you need to take how you can need to take down this garage to fit your cars I I understand you can build backwards do all kinds of things build side but that's not a demolition permit issue this is a question of is the I'm trying to understand why this is no longer viable um and then I think I just have one more comment and I'll finish up thank you for your patience is that a question uh a question I'm sorry um um I and I have a question for the expert real quick did you um do any kind of substantiation of the comment about what the cars lengths and widths were in 1920 uh because I had you know you're you're in a historic building you're in a historic dist district and you kind of threw out some information and your justification that was I didn't think was highly accurate matter of fact I didn't think it was accurate at all um okay what do you know about well when you're in you I just this is commentary I I just I don't want to get into commentary I just want to know what kind of substantiation you are had that said cars in Monclair in the 1920s Roaring 20s post-war 20s pre- depressant 20s in one of the more affluent parts of town were small I I just don't know how you made that rationalization Google search okay thank you um a question for the expert you had used a phrase in one of your in your report where you said something that it was the garage was minimally visible from the street I want to understand I have a pet peeve with that phrase um but I want to understand what was the criteria to determine what minimally is or largely because there's nothing in the ordinance that deals with that adjective and our ordinance is predicated it lives on the visibility issue if it's not visible of a public right away we're not even here so I take it very seriously I just want to understand what your criteria was to to make that claim so minimally visible is certainly visible okay um it was something in in Glen Ridge just anecdotally we spent a long time defining and they eventually came around to a very specific definition for the term you don't have that here in Monclair but it is the term minimally visible used throughout the National Park Service standards for um rehabilitating historic structures specifically when you're talking about additions okay it's um common to suggest that an addition is is appropriate because it's minimally visible so I think it's important just to temper the commission's review of this application it's a garage in a rear yard that it's minimally visible this isn't like the front of the facade of the main house we're talking about no I understand I'm I'm just going to just make one quick comment if you go there and if this commission goes there you might as well give up reviewing all accessory structures because you just undercut your whole reason for being if it's minimally visible and I've did it and the reason why I know is because I was on this commission and we did that a few times I'm just saying be careful where you go well having said that can you put the the uh photo up from the street I think if you put it up on the screen it'll be more Vis it'll be more visible to us is that a good question well it's it's important it's visible because they're trying to replicate the front of the house with the half timbering so clearly it's an important element the one which has the pictur [Applause] then when you find that I have a a question about uh the preservation [Applause] criteria she this doesn't have Wi-Fi on I'm sorry there's no Wi-Fi on the laptop he it went out we've never had Wi-Fi oh it's like very slow it doesn't connect I connect to my phone 5G you're looking for the picture though that's on D1 of the set right the from the street what the building looks like it's page three or the planner report right the December 19th right I have to report okay oh is that why we can't find it okay he was nice enough to find it which page that page three it's the December 19th memo and it's page three figure three where from the the uh the street the way that this is photographed um there's part of the Gable on on the left which is a little bit cut off sorry do you have that Rec all right that was my request if you can't fill it up every everyone has seen seen it okay so my question uh is uh Mr Klein on the the preservation criteria the use and feasibility of continued use um the exterior photographs that that that we've seen don't indicate that there are obvious signs of the subject properties uh compromised structural soundness no report by a structural engineer was submitted by the applicant is there a reason why you didn't submit a a a structural engineers report and the reason I'm asking is that we just recently reviewed a garage uh that we denied the demolition based and that was one of the uh criteria that wasn't supplied do you think we can get that we could ask the Lee we can ask the Le get we can ask the stru engineer okay I think I mean would that yes for sure that's what we started this with missing a few things here but right okay so I'm just curious why um it's not in part of this application but okay so um any other questions or uh Mr Smalling you just quickly could you just summarize again what your report was before we go into discussion the outcome of your report rather well the the outcome of my report um was that the applicant did not adequately substantiate the need to remove the building um partially or in totality um based upon the ordinance I think um something that may be productive here would be to have a better discussion about adaptive reuse Rehabilitation adding on to the existing building and if not that um looking at a reconstruction of the facade maybe 5 10% wider with the vertical half timbering as opposed to what's proposed in the set is essentially an entirely new kind of interpretation um of the pseudo tutor style like with the fan light half tempering which I I get you're pulling from the front the front porch but I I'm not sure why we're moving away from from what's there already so significantly is that I mean is there anything specific you no no I just wanted to the Commissioners to understand what the preservation criteria was um so and as far as adaptive reuse I think that's something we could what we could speak about during our our uh during your comments as well okay so do you want to start John sure I'll start um if there's no other questions I don't have I may develop a question but you know I have to believe that you can I see some issues you have here and and there's some information even missing on these drawings which is the average grade shown on the elevations so we see the elevations running around and you're trying to keep the average I get that but that would just require yet another variance which seems to me uh probably probably is easy as easy to get as increasing the size of this thing threefold over the or twofold over the uh amount um what is it 1,800 ft is that what I saw uh and the max is is 800 twice as twice again as um so uh I have a problem with changing the slope of the roof changing the nature of it I gotta believe you could so I gota believe there's a design solution where you can get cars there even if even if you took those two doors down and you installed one big door across a 16 ft opening so it made it easier to get in and out of the garage I I believe there's other solution ions there for keeping the basic structure the basic shape of that garage and so on um I'm still trying to wrap my head around the foundation issue because uh some places it says you're doing a New Foundation some places is saying it's adequate I think I'd want to see this I'd want to understand what's going on there um yeah I'm not convinced it can't be solved but that's that's it those are my comments thank you Mr I do have one more comment on the flip side of that and this goes to Mr raki's comments about minimally seen it there's nothing saying here that they couldn't have applied for a whole another accessory structure between the house and this garage and planted it in such a way that you couldn't see the back garage as of right so they could block The View if they so desired so that's that's just another way of looking at this St um I don't see why we can't adapt the existing garage to match to match um what you're trying to do um the garage is going to be wider looks like it's going to be 5 ft wider um you just make the roofs just a little wider and have the same slope on it and i' see that you going know you're going to probably run into height limitations but doing so many other things is I don't think that'll be so much of a problem I think it's important to keep the Northern facade as much actually Southern facade and uh Northern facade should be as as much as it should be which is the doors the doors this is actually the southern facade I think no the northern doors of the north but the point is is you're saying that the the the do should be kept well the doors I think they're pretty see from the screen you larger doors right okay Mr Juliano um yeah I mean I just I I would Echo commissioner Ry nits and Rooney I mean I think that the existing garage can be preserved I think we could even widen it you know there's nothing that says you couldn't take out the left wall of the garage replace the two doors with one large door still keep the Gable that's facing the front the Gable that's facing the front doesn't have to be the width of the garage it could continue to go in further towards the left with the addition on the left side while still just preserving that whole North facing facade um and I think there's a design solution to get the roofing to work out I think even if the garage becomes wider than what the front-facing Gable is right now the Gable doesn't have to change you can just have a side Gable going the other way and you don't see see where the garage widens from the outside it still just appears at the same scale that it's at now um you know that still doesn't have any effect on doing the tandem spot in the back that could still be achieved um by getting the double deep um you know and then there's a way to just work the apartment design to to work with that and I think you could get the roof lines to work um you know with crickets and whatever you need to do for for the intersecting Gables but I think it's worth it and I think it's definitely feasible to keep what's there you know at least the front wall the side wall and half of the back wall and you can blow out the left wall and still do the tandem in the back and get everything to work so I would not be in favor of the demolition but modifying what's there and adding on to it um I think keeping the pitch that's there is really important because it matches with the house I think the proposed one is a little too shallow and it's looks even shallower than the front porch on the front of the house and again you know even with all the Varian is that you're going for for the size of the Adu I don't think it would be a tough argument for you to make to the Varian board that you would need maybe a height extension if you're doing it in good faith to match what's on the house you know a lot of towns I don't know specifically if Montclair does but I know there are some that allow accessory buildings to be taller if you're making a pitch roof on the accessory building that is designed to match a historic pitch on the main house they give you kind of a bonus to go up a little bit taller so I think you could definitely make a good case for that on on this house if you're preserving a historic structure and doing so so those are my comments thank you thank you Mr swoony the uh the object of the the ordinance was to prevent destruction of uh an elimination removal of buildings that had true historic value or significance um without having a good purpose or without um without a good reason for it here you have you're putting in an adapted use facility and when I phrased it before the Alternatives you had either two separate buildings uh which would require you to do something to the U to the garage and or have one integrated building I think one integrated building is more likely to preserve the historic character of the area particularly if you the building appears to match the uh the appearance at least the the appearance as visible from the main street of the current garage second I so so I uh look at this thing and I I say um the garage itself I don't don't believe has it has history it has some significance but I think it's marginal significance in relationship to the house and the whole the whole area it's a pretty um um I won't say boring is not the right word uh garage it doesn't have a whole lot of uh character except for the garage door I think and the the the uh dective sorry so I don't think there's the uh well well the test is uh whether the historic structure preservation is warranted uh I I question whether it's warranted in light of the Alternatives and the need to to uh create and build an Adu that's functional for senior citizens I I do think yes you could modify the uh the existing garage and you could uh you could lengthen it you could probably create the width or something but you but but and you redo the foundation but that itself you might as well rebuild and create a whole new building I rather than make those minimal things as to uh hardship I I think um preserving a building that doesn't have the real functional uh character for which garages are needed is a hardship in itself and I think the small size at least the small length the short length and the uh the small width of it right now make it a nonfunctional garage so I think uh there's a hardship in forcing you to keep the garage um that will not uh function in the way of a modern garage so they can put their uh their vehicles and I look at SUVs SUV is probably the most popular vehicle now it's not and people just a uh some of the uh uh the larger SUVs are 18 1/2 ft some of the the mediumsized ones are 16 and A4 feet um 16 and 1/4 ft that gives you 3T you know a foot and a half on each end that's not a great deal that's not a that's not an adequate so so clearly whatever you do you have to modify the length and width of that garage and so I I to me it's a hardship to have to preserve it thank you those are my comments Miss Floyd uh I would have to concur uh with Mr Sweeney on that in reference to the minimal amount of work that would need to be done in order to uh not uh not knock it down demol demolition on the property I'm more in favor of minimalists designs that are complimenting the the home as well the materials that you're using are you know I I wasn't sure if I saw in a clear but are going to complement the design of the main home as well so for me I I find that to be um a much more appealing um process particularly the fact that the property is historical overall um I don't know are we making a decision this evening or we waiting for an engineering report on well that just based on the consensus of what our comments are yeah I think then we'll we'll decide whether or not we would require more documentation so my only other my only other question with that was the foundation like I I am a little unclear on that like so of an engineering report but from my perspective I would basically concur with Mr Sweeney with what his P perspective was yeah concur with Mr Sweeney that that he feels that it would be best to demolition than to try to do the minimal work on the on the existing Garage in order to keep it um particularly because the Adu is being added to it as well so we're not just looking at a garage we're looking at two different buildings on a piece of property but we are just looking at a garage we're just looking at the garage for Demolition and the and the fact that it's a historic structure right so and we did look I just want everyone to remember that we've we've looked at something very you know uh close to this that that and we made a decision so please remember were you here I was definitely here for that I feel that garage was very different than this one but but in the Simplicity of the garage I feel it can be duplicated properly with like materials and I feel with the Adu being attached to it and considering the fact we don't have control control over that I think that it would be appr propo for the consistent consistency to go across the board so again I I would agree that I think that if we could avoid um if we could not if we could Demolition and allow it to be built out properly and consistently I would prefer that that's from from my from my perspective Mr mixer um I tend to agree um with both um uh Miss Floyd and Mr Sweeney here in this particular case too I think um one of the elements which at the at the outset you um uh Madam chair said um that the re review criteria were the preservation and historic building site or structure is not warranted and the second CR criteria is the preservation of the historic building site or structure would impose an undue burden on hardship on the applicant when you said it in the beginning you use the word and in between there um I I read it as or is that correct yeah it is so um in agreeing with Mr sween's comments I I I believe too that there's some limit to the historic significance of this particular structure um as the um you know as a as the garage versus what we already have established as a historically significant main property or the house itself um in addition I think the sheer amount of work being done to to essentially preserve and I do agree that the the slope and the pitch and the and the facade as much as could be saved and this might get us into a slightly different scenario too if you save the front facade and that West wall and half of the the uh Southern Wall you're probably over 50% at that particular point but that's a that's besides you know again we we can have a different discussion but that's a that that might you know change from a total demolition anyway but um but in terms of the undue burden I think the the sheer amount of work going into simply preserving the building's facade and its insignificance um is is a burden to have to um to have to bear for the for the homeowners being able to you know add this which I think is really good cause accessory dwelling on their property so those are my comments okay so um I am a proponent for adus I think there I think you know we really need probably to have more of those in in uh not only this town but all over the place uh so but I think what we're looking at now is really this building this structure so I think we we really need to tease out that the Adu I mean that's something that if we do not agree on the uh if we agree on the demolition then it would go forward to our recommendations to the zoning board for the Adu but I think that I I don't think that that should be part of the of the determination whether or not this structure should be saved or should be not Tor you know completely demolished um and I do I do think from the from your uh testimony that you could get two cars in and I think John's point about using one door as opposed to Two Doors while it may not be as convenient it I think it it it is something that would save uh the the look of the neighborhood the look the view from the street so honestly I'm not in um agreement with tearing with demolishing the the garage so uh uh what do we have four to three uh do we we're going to defer this I was talking about that first we're going to see this structural report yes and if you're if you're you know but my opinion might change if I see a structural report that we talked about before that you haven't provided so if you could bring that you know that that might add to a compelling reason uh for for the the building to be demolished do you I I know I feel that way you feel I think to me well either we're a stickler for the process and what we're trying to do here or we just right you know and that guess you were saying we can Veer off the road and make our own decisions but we're supposed to have certain things that presented to us and brought to us that we can judge and we don't have all that information so I would say I'd like to get all that information before I say one way or the other or I have an opinion one way I would suggest um uh the budget estimate BEC the backup for the budget estimate because uh it seems to me that the applicant has founded uh the um uh the evidence on undue burden or hardship uh there really hasn't been any evidence presented that the that the building uh doesn't warrant present uh preservation so we're soling on the uh uh the undue hardship so say that again I'm sorry do we we we have to ask for more I am suggesting the backup for the budget estimate okay and then procedurally we ask if them to come back to us as a full commission correct do consent with a stru J report and back up with a budget estimate that's what I'm hearing yes but you have the consent and any okay yeah got okay okay there would be a motion to carry without further notice without further notice correct okay so you've consented and then is there a motion to carry without further notice motion to carry second second all in favor okay any opposed oh okay all right all right thank you thank you for your comments sure we appreciate the commission's work so you'll come back to us and then we we have the rec the uh okay so you're coming back January 16th at 7:30 there's going to be no further public notice this application will be carried to January 16th at 7:30 thank you okay thank you that's why you have that yeah let's say he wants to make this bigger keep the same your G much taller he already has a problem where this goes around the side and this way around the back and okay before we go on to the um to the uh next item I was remiss and that I didn't do the committee reports uh which is usually number five in our in our uh in our agenda so I just wanted to let everyone know that we the minor applications committee has met on December 5th and um we did a we have application 2420 20 24-27 which is at 11 South Fuller Street they were in violation number of violations but that that has all been solved now and and reviewed application 202 24-32 Bliss Nails at 334 Bloomfield Avenue was approved with conditions application 202 24-38 uh Duncan Donuts on valy Road was approved with conditions and today we um we reviewed application 202 24-39 at 608 Valley Road which had been previously approved and they came forward with uh new plans uh with amend amended plans and they'll be heard in the future um as far as much simpler much much better so far so the um Outreach um uh we had a meeting a virtual meeting with Andrea Tingley David rensy cassid D Dugan and the Maplewood HPC members David Wright and Susan Newbery with myself and zanab and we were do we had a discussion about shared HPC commission training and um we're hoping that can take place in on January 16th the reason it didn't take place today is because we need to notice it uh for the open public meetings act so if we have a um an agreement that we can um move forward with that on January 16th um we had notice that the educ yeah even though it's training yeah we more than three people because we have a quar we're all hanging around together all right so um so we would go back to what we had planned to do tonight which is to have the training in this building at 6: p.m. on in the conference center and we'll ask zanab to make sure that it is noticed a week to 10 days prior which would make it like January 8th or whatever that date is yeah yeah we'll put it in the paper a week or okay the open public meetings requirement is 48 hours but we'll do a week okay great so and our our consultant is going to uh do the training session and we'll we'll um he'll be discussing the design guidelines how we apply those to what our discussions and uh are and also because we're inviting the planning board and the zoning board members that um they just to see what the interaction is to get a little clearer view of how the three land boards interact together um within the the municipality so that's that for community outreach we have a CLG update the CLG Grant I'll hand it over now that's at the end of the agenda no what's that isn't that at the end okay anyways um the CLG Grant uh rfps have been sent or the RFP is out till January 17th 2025 we've invited qualified Consultants to apply um and we will review proposals when that is complete this the grant agreement is being finalized and is almost finalized um on by New Jersey historic preservation office and once that is finalized we can execute a cont a contract with our consultant okay but we haven't chosen the consultant yet yeah no no it's just is has it been posted the grant agreement gets um finalized we'll select our consultant uh shipo reviews that contract and then we'll enter into a contract with the okay consultant um and then the grants committee met prior to this meeting um because the next round of CLG grants the due date is uh March 25th I believe and we've got a couple of ideas that we're working on that um we will uh I guess we'll present at the next at the next meeting uh because again now that the state has gone on to a a um computer uh uh uh uh application Zab being the the uh person who's actually employed by the municipality she'll be the one that is doing all the work on that so she's you've got a lot of work on your hands so um that's that's a CLG update for the future if anyone has any ideas of a of a grant please let either Zena Steve or myself know and we could certainly uh you know discuss that before we we uh propose something to the entire commission okay all right so without further Ado our next our next point is the uh our next item on the agenda is the board of of adjustment referral application 299 education sorry board of education oh wait this is sorry all right sorry this was something that was put on the agenda and I didn't um I'm just I I didn't ask Z to uh make a anyway it's the board of adjustment it's a recommendations and for the board of sorry sorry it's a board of education and there're two buildings and these are they've asked for the hpc's input into what they're proposing at the two buildings uh for the Board of Education one is at 22 Valley Road Road and the other one is at 49 Orange Road so um we have two buildings before we start we'll have the three just s principles if you could come to the podium and identify yourself in relationship to the projects because there's two and then our attorney will swear you in all together okay good evening and thank you for for having us um I am William Ross senior associate with PR s Architects and with me I have Matt Walco our senior architect and Trevor youngl uh one of our designers gentlemen do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll provide tonight on the um projects for the Board of Ed will be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth yes and just uh for a little bit of background uh we met with you Steve Rooney and I met with you when was that in June it was June or July yes June or July for the initial um consultation with what you would were proposing to do with these two buildings so before you begin I just as I said it's a recommendation to the board of ed for what you're what you're proposing to do the first property at 49 Orange Road is in the Town Center historic district it's it's considered a key contributing um structure it's the original is 1878 to 1879 with an addition of 1884 it was it's considered the first primary school and the second oldest of montclair's EX existing public education buildings it's a blend of vernacular and early classical Revival Styles and this is the one that deals with the koua that you're um work going to be working on the second building is that 22 Valley Road which is also in the Town Center historic district it's a key contributing building it's an 1860s building with an 1869 and 1873 Edition this is the property this subject this structure rather is known as montclair's oldest existing public education building it's a restrained example of the Italian a style and uh you're working on the cornis and the roof on this building so why don't we start with the um bard of the uh 49 Orange Road is that what's up yes yes that's a Koopa if you could just tell us what you're doing and um and we'll we'll give you some feedback sure so um thank you for having us a little background to get started these two projects are capital maintenance and repairs um these projects are being funded by uh the recent board ofed education referendum so it is uh publicly funded with some Debt Service aid from the state um which has already been approved the project at 49 Orange Road is the community prek and it can be broken down into three components it is the existing shingle roof being replaced in kind the Koopa replacement and wood cornis repairs um the wood cornice um would be uh coated uh paint removal um and then inspected and then the Cornet will be replaced with um newer wood the shingle roof um is a slate line shingle roof asphalt that was done in the probably 60s we're going back to replace that in kind with a new slate line shingle and the existing coua on the building um is been deemed structurally uh in disrepair uh and would be replaced yeah I just wanted to clarify one thing and you're looking at this building 49 Orange Road in the school as a singular entity which really isn't quite correct because it's part of a complex in 1999 uh that building was extensively modified and an addition built to connect that building to a Circ of 1930s structure which was the maintenance building so there has been a major alteration an expansion of that building with a linkage to connect it to the other the Circa 1930s building so it's really part of a mass even part of that Foundation uh Bears down onto the uh to the coal bunker of the central heating plant so to look at that building as as a standalone really isn't quite correct because it's I mean the the building literally had the one of the end walls sliced down and removed to put the addition and make the elevator connection so that there has been an extensive modification to it to accommodate this connection to the other building and create the pre so I think the the question and a lot of what we're we're looking to do as far as capital maintenance to the building uh we also have to acknowledge that there's already been major changes to the building additions to the building and that a lot of the fabric of the building even before the prek was constructed that a lot of the original fabric was removed for example the the one view that you have up and you see these skylights on the on the roof and I'll get out of the way of the projection you see all these skylights in through here those were originally dormers on the side and this entire entrance over the the fan and the windows in through here there was a projecting porch on the SEC and bay on the second floor and through here so we we were able to locate some historic pictures and even before the prek Edition was built there were substantial changes made to the building so that what we're looking to do is try and say get your your feedback but we're trying to maintain the the building try and make it a stable and is maintenance free as possible for the Board of Education we want to continue um I'll like to go back to the to the issue of the kopala you okay um as far as the the CPA that we've looked at and I think my friend Trevor has been we've all been inside the the Koopa and the base of the Koopa and looking at the the structure internally that the the drum and the base that some of the members were so skewed well we're talking about you know mitered Corners angled Corners that form that multi-sided drum that you're talking about a quarter inch or better Gap in the angles that have opened up so what we were looking to assess is like okay we've we have this structure that's 140 years old old T original Timber and what are we going to do because when we had the structural engineer go in there and look at it that this whole drum had so racked that you know once you take a wood structure like that and you if you're going to use commong or something to try and make it square and Plum again what's going to happen to it we're talking about old nailed connections from who knows when and one of the other issues that we had with this was that the you see that there are louvers on the for for ventilation into the attic that a lot of the blades of the louvers are broken disintegrated there really wasn't a lot of recess to these louvers so that there is ventilation that's going through that attic it's not just there for show those l or to to ventilate some of the attic space so it really wasn't providing great weather protection to the interior of that Attic So when we assessed the structural conditions um what were the options for trying to you know trying to repair it in sidu um you're working 30 something feet up in the air you're not really sure about the connections you know they put in some temporary uh Simpson ties just to ask some stability to it but you know what are the options are if you're going to try and remove it and get it on the ground is it going to fall apart by the time the crane takes it down we looked at a bunch of options and say well okay and I think we had in one of our earlier discussions that there have been several uh other school buildings Edgemont um Mount I still call it Mount he uh buz Al that have had or CPAs that date from early 20th mid 20th that have been replaced by with prefabricated units and I think one of the uh the other comments that came up is that some of folks weren't really happy with some of the how should we say offthe shelf um available options to replace those other coulas so what we had done is like okay let's do a light R scan of the existing koupa and get an exact replica that we went did the lar scan sent it to the manufacturer campbellville they came back with a proposal to get us a replica in size and shape we can update to get better or weatherproof louvers we can salvage The Weather Vein and cap from the original and have that rein installed in a duplicate so that we're talking about an item that's going to be 30 some much feet in the air but it's going to be new it's going to be maintenance free and it's going to be something that nobody's going to have to worry about probably not in any of our lifetimes and that's I think one of our charges is that when we're looking at these buildings we're trying to yes be respective of the fabric we understand these are some of the original buildings from the district but we're also looking to figure out how we can best serve be good stewards of public money and not create maintenance problems that are you know who wants to repaint that every 10 15 years so we're looking for we're looking to do something that is going to be long-term as and not create a maintenance problem so we looked at a bunch of options we looked at different things we know it is a beautiful old building with with some good bones in some places but we're looking to do the the best thing that we can for the for the a reasonable amount of money small comment it's actually 82 ft 82 ft okay any so um the uh we your microphone's off oh is that the end of the I don't know if there's really anything else to discuss about uh 49 orange that were I think one of the other uh questions or comments that came from the report is that we're looking to uh and I think there was a uh a good picture in the the later letter where you see the condition of some of the the wood trim on there it's in bad shape that so there's going to need to be some replacement I think this is even some of the the better I think you have it in the uh in the letter that that you can see that's a that's a number three rebar probe so you get a feel for you know if that's a 38 of an inch diameter metal bar going up there you can just see how much is gone mhm and we're going to have to do something so if we can get up close and personal to that we can get a better idea of the species and uh we're probably not going to be able to get good old growth wood which is probably the only reason it it exists in as good condition it does now but we're going to look to try and and replicate the it looks like there is a a metal some kind of a a tin that's worn away a cap on it so we're we're not looking to try and reinvent the wheel by by any stretch we're just looking to be able to replicate repair and sustain what's there but in the most uh maintenance freeway possible okay so you've spoken about the cornice the roof replacement did well I think the the roof replacement is that right now um best we can guesstimate is that these angles got to be some play time from the the' 607s I don't know if there's anybody uh there's a couple of pieces of slate lying around in the attic and I believe the the top of the the Copa has got the original slate on it some of it looks like it's coming loose but it's got some of the original slate so I would think any replication uh we would use uh an IM imitation slate an echo star something of that nature that it at least we would get the Slate look on the on the the cap of the kopa but I think what we're really considering the the cost difference between uh a 50-year a slate line shingle an asphalt shingle and you go to the echostar the imitation slate you're you're probably talking close to double the cost so and again our charge we're we're stewards of public money so we're trying to to do the best we can for the lowest cost and again that's our that's our purview and that's our charge all the way through and that's how we approach it okay thank you so um should we talk about this one first and then go on yes so let let's talk about this one first if that's if you're if that's a conclusion for 49 all right so then we'll open it up for questions I don't have any questions oh Steve the um since we spoke this summer and you've got a a different manufacturer you've done lar scans of the Koopa and it's a lot more detailed than it was before yeah I think from this point and and that was was at the actual from uh from campbellville so since our initial discussion we've done additional due diligence we've done a full light R scan um and went to the manufacturer and they've generated a a close to identical replica okay good yeah it looks much better than what you showed us in June um Mr Juliana I just have one question on the coupal replacement in the proposed drawing um where it says CI simulated shingle pattern so is each like plane of the Koopa roof is it one surface that's got like a routed pattern into it or is it actual individual tiles we can we can have good um I've been working with the manufacturer on this issue I've been working with the manufacturer on this issue so they detailed it in this drawing according to the light r scin that we had their labeling was provided based off of their playbook essentially for submitting it I reviewed extensively the options with them for the finishes uh both on the cou itself and the roof and uh there are a variety of options they can provide one continuous surface that's routed to look like shingle tiles I assumed that that would not be adequate for the town of Monclair so I confirmed that there are several other options in which they will essentially prefabricate the roof and then they will attach the shingles on site okay so it will it will functionally look identical to what is there now with the added benefit of being more stable okay thank you that was my only question Mr Sweeney only question is a KOA just canot be repair there's nothing can do about that say that I'm sorry there's the Koopa cannot be repaired it has to be replaced I think the the whole issue is that uh right now the condition of it is so that it is so skewed and it spent 140 years or so of tilting and finding some kind of equilibrium so that it's still up there so when you you take a wood structure and you've got all these little pieces and cross braces and through there so once you start to pull that back you're re you know you're reconfiguring the Jenga and once you start moving something all the other the connections that opened up you close them now you open up other connection so you've got this whole thing that's sticks and nails in different places with different angles different cross braces once you start moving that back once you close something something else is going to open up and I think the other question is that are you if you're try and do this up in the air working from man lifts Cherry Pickers trying again it makes that that more difficult the option is to cut it off remove it it drop it down and then you get the same issue you're just how much is going to be left how much is going to be salvageable and what are you going to end up with you're going to end up with some pieces that have been reassembled others that have been replaced because they're they're rotted out the louvers are you know a quarter of the blades are gone how much are you you actually saving and you're then you're creating a long-term maintenance issue because once you get done stripping off all the paint and replacing what's underneath there that could be deteriorated you're still left with this 140 year old and a lot of clamps and braces on the on the inside and louvers that don't really keep the rain out you you you take that down you're you're going to lose the slates so what have you got left and I think that was the the whole the whole position was that it's probably going to fall apart anyway if we try and move it and that let's bite the bullet and let's do the replication because then at least we know we're going to have something that's going to be solid stable and say and is going to be pretty much maintenance free and the replica will be will appear to be identical it's again we we're talking painted wood as opposed to uh painted was is a a metal or a composite they offer both options those the the the aesthetic will be an exact match materiality is something that we would pick in the middle of the design process but the the bottom line is from from ground level uh it's going to be this it's going to look virtually identical because it's going to be a painted material so you're you're not going to know the difference unless somebody tell you that that's a that's a new a replacement couple or replication thank you Miss Floyd so uh are we looking at this primarily or is Aesthetics or is it doing some of the functionality that a c is supposed to do for the build for the roof you know is that is that being taken into consideration at all I think it it handles uh a bit of both because we want to match the a right and where Again The Weather Vein where you're not going to go and and get you know something out of brass you're not going to replicate that and that that's something that we can salvage and at least have a piece but you also have it where that coua is not just for show it does ventilate the attic and you want some you want louvers that are going to keep the rain out correct so and what's there now really isn't doing a very good job of it so it serves both purposes I just want to make sure that we're not then ultimately dealing with mold and the attic you know and things along those lines that would be you know occurring it's uh there's not a lot up there that is um how should we say supportive um and it's guess the other thing is it's it's not habitable space and believe me once you up there in the summer oh yes I was up there in the summer on a has been up there during the time when it's been raining really badly though that we you know in terms of how much water is being captured or that's a difficult ask um specifically because to access the interior of the Copa without I I mean so just to get into the interior you have to go to the third floor of the building you have to set up an 8ft ladder inside of a active classroom because you want to go during the day you're not going to see anything at night you have to crawl up through a two uh twoot X twoot access hole walk across uncovered uh Rafters and then find the framing for the roof so then you have to shimmy up like a squirrel the rafter at a 50 60° angle and then pull yourself into it it's it's it's very difficult once you do that just let us know how it looks yeah sounds like you I have I have the pictures there's a wonderful view of the sound there will say that short people do have an advantage at that particular moment okay and then one last question I know you mentioned in reference to materials and wanting to be cost effective but I also want to make sure we are dealing with our babies in town that um cost effective does it mean that in like the next 10 15 20 years I mean what what's our warranty looking like on it and that type of thing and is the material conducive for making sure that it's going to be lasting for another 150 years like the last this credit card one I'm just joking the right now the the Slate line uh asphalt shingles 50 year warranty so we're talking about something that is going to to give an extended warranty on that the the the coua itself I don't know if the the standard on the Finish is what 15 20 years on the yes just a finish warranty you're talking 20 years before you even start to notice the paint May some chalking or something the same the same um it's it's the same warranty on the roofing material there and the aspect that is uh that I was considering because having been on the roof and the existing original slate shingles are starting to come off yeah uh is that even the uh the eostar imitation slate material is still roughly one qu the weight so it's easier on the structure and if it does detach it far it poses far less of a hazard in that regard I think the what it still comes down to is a lot of the the labor intensive work is going to be on that wood trim so thankfully it's uh it's a relatively simple profile but uh the the metal covering on the the Skyward facing surfaces that's starting to uh you can see the staining the deterioration so we're looking to to figure out how we're going to get keep that watertight and then it's just you know water dripping metal bending up driven rain that's going to be the biggest issue and I think that were I think we all concur that we'd like to try and keep as much of the original wood as possible um it's just a question of getting a good assessment and where we can do uh patching and repair uh and fillers we will do that where where we have to do uh where we have to cut out and replace things that are rotted and there's definitely some rotted sections in through there that to to get a a matching or a suitable species that's going to go with it and then to to get it everything stripped down to be wood and get the best possible Coatings we can on that Rec recognizing that you know that's something that's really not very negotiable mean that's the wood trim is something that we're going to need to to replicate and we want to come as close as possible to mashing the original and you know paint in that case painting is painting uh that's going to be an issue but you know that's the one place where we we kind of have to bite bullet Mr mixer uh no uh questions for me thank you um I have a question about the the uh The Weather Vein have you determined that that's in relatively good shape and can be is it going to be restored or just re I think that's something that we're going to need to to get it down on the ground but you see with with I mean the the finals and and the you know in that respect we're talking about an original artifact we're talking about a limited amount of materials I mean if we need to get somebody to do repairs on brass and and for one that's a limited scope so and I think just from our perspective that that's something that should definitely be saved you're not going to get an imitation of that right so but I think that's something that we're going to have to get it on the ground and and do a good cleaning and a good review but Ian again we're talking about you know brass copper materials if we if we have to do something to to solder to repair we're talking about brass we can we can do something and it's not such a great uh amount of material that we can uh that I think that's something that's certainly it would be beneficial to say yes we kept that and we're we're going to carry that forward but until we get it down on the ground it can really assess it up close so your best efforts would be towards that's I think that's and then um you testif or you uh spoke about the material whether it was metal or some composite did I hear that and then and then I think Mr Young Blood you said that would be decided at the at the dur during the design process so right we're that's right so at this point obviously we're here to get your approval and consent to what we're proposing and so in that regard we didn't want to go too far down the wrong path so certain aspects such as you know those very fine details that get worked out with the manufacturer we haven't discussed what their final decisions are we just wanted to know what the options are so there are options for composite materials uh there's also options for metal materials and we will do a complete evaluation to see which is the most appropriate for the longevity and maintenance of the building and as Matt said afterwards they will be painted so at that distance and with sufficient detail they should look identical to what is already there is there much of a cost differential between the two materials there there obviously is a uh a a uh there obviously is a cost difference between them however because it's one stop from the manufacturer we're not having to coordinate multiple materials by multiple trades it's not the most uh prohibitive increase we believe it's it should be well within the project budget to be able to accommodate the many options okay and when we met um I I think what you um Matt you you spoke about the original slate that was on there I think when we had met in June we there was some hope that the original slate that was on the Koopa could be maintained but you just said that you don't think it can or or I think at that point you're talking about um so many pieces and we're 80 feet to the Top If we're going to remove that and take it down I'm just thinking mechanics wise of it was one thing to keep slate maintained and keep it nailed into a roof that you can walk on or you can get you can get roofers mechanics on you're talking in and a case like that the only way somebody's getting up there is either cherry picker or to put frame scaffold on the hole so salvaging slate of that size at that height in that I'm not sure how much um how much we would be able to save once we start moving that and again you know slate um if the your holes if you get cracks a lot of the any delamination of the the piece pie may not be evident from until you get up and close so really not completely sure what the condition is and that's something to really can't assess until we we do get up close um I think at that point the the preference for the Koopa would to be go back with a fully composite Koopa or go back with um the ecoline Slate on the Koopa all being new and that comes from what all now was saying with the conditions unknown and once you start disassembling what's going to be really left and then once it gets reassembled on a new Copa how what's the longevity of that and knowing that this is the prek safety being number one nobody wants a chunk of slate or a full tile to be coming off of that roof so eror on the side of caution we would go with full composite or the Eco uh so would you consider saving the Slate that that you can pull off to maybe use it in some other project or something I don't know how much is there um I was yeah was it didn't come up that that would be something that might be interesting to to to auction off or to um present for faithful service to the Board of Education k for putting up with screaming threeyear olds for uh but yeah no just a thought to to to I think that preserving and and it doesn't have to be preserved in situ but but preserve it to have some in the into the community and as John said even the Koopa once it comes down if it stays together you could auction it off as a chicken coop espe the weather on there too no no no the weather ve they're keeping the weather ve he's going to try to all right does anyone else have any questions no no okay maybe Mr smolan you could go over um sure your comments for 49 um so my review is fairly brief just due to the quick turnaround so unfortunately I didn't get to visit the site uh your response that we got I think earlier today or yesterday was very helpful answered a lot of the questions could you put the KOA comparison board back up just for a sec I'm not sure if it's like slightly different or now it's aligned but sorry it's slightly different for visual I wasn't the original understanding wasn't uh I mean the original thought wasn't towards how it's going to look in a presentation format is on on individual sheets so wanted to make it easier to read from a distance so starting if you could just briefly at the bottom can you explain what the finish of that skirting is versus what's proposed and just continue up to understand the difference visually between what we we have versus what you'll get because I believe the the existing the the base of the drum continues the shingles up to the to the loued portion uh and then the but the the top uh the cap of the the coupal that would be the the imitation slate to to carry that through is to replace or to take the place of the the natural slate that's on the original so the B is shingled now and it will be shingle proposed yeah that's the intention and the louvers in that middle section are still going to have like water composite horizontals or are you going to like a the the full assembly would most likely be composite the the louvers would also be composite still fully functioning uh with bird screens and be more water resistant but not intensive commercial driven rain resistant ugly aluminum lers we're we're not looking to get some kind of a deep Z blade L we we just but right now the existing louvers are very close to the face there's no there's no drip there's no recess so and the the angle is such that it's not giving a whole lot of of weather protection so just you know a few degrees here a little a little bit of recess there and so maybe you pick up a little bit of Shadow line from a recess but as far as the the the arrangement is it's not like we're uh it's not going to be something that looks like it's a Louver in a parking garage and the trim between will be composite or or metal that's all going to be the same uh the same material so it's all going to be finished in the same fashion so the same way is that everything from the the the drum up was the the painted wood finish it's going to be the the same appearance are you doing any lightning protection as part of this project right now uh there is not lightning protection on the structure I think that's something that we would want to discuss cuz now again it's not just one structure um once we start you start getting into lightning protection I think the the other issue and what you don't necessarily see um to compare you have the chimney flu from the central heating plant and if I'm not mistaken the chimney flu even though uh we've taken down the the flu by about 20 ft that is still the highest element and that does have lightning protection on it so that I think the the point is well taken uh I'm not sure if you get the yeah you you do get in the background you've got the you have the the chimney in the central heating plant and I believe that's still higher than the uh than the peak of the of the prek building I would need to to check that or get some scans on that to to see but I think I think the point is well taken that you know whether or not lightning protection is appropriate in the grand scheme of things and that's something that could always be retrofitted on if it does become retrofit if the cable could be routed on the back side of the coupa as opposed to on the front or internally or internal so that's something I think at that point I think the point again the point is well taken if the provisions are made for uh for to do lightning protection either to have it internal or internal I'm not the the expert on uh the lightning protection but once you bring uh bringing that into the building may not be the best way to go um if we keep it the if we keep that on the exterior and then you know figuring out how to get the downcomers um to to grade but I think again I think the point's well taken and um I think last question is Rec as recently as maybe the 70s or the 8 80s there were uh box built-in gutters on this are you doing Gutter and leader replacement as part of the project the um I don't think anything has been done to the to the gutters or I don't nothing was done I'm trying to remember from 2000 if anything was done if it was it was done primarily on the uh on the maintenance building the the 19 30's structure and not this building so if I think the question would will be that whatever is there our whole intention is to go back in kind to what's there to what's there now and to to again update it and keep it maintenance free so if there are any any box gutters or hung gunters I don't believe there's any concealed gutters on the building if that's what you're referring so uh you know everything everything is hung from the the structure so we would replace in kind at least something that we can have finished to uh to match out okay thank you does that conclude your remarks okay why don't we start with discussion joh um question this is just a referral to us from and we're going to give recommendations to the board and they're here uh because we made comments to the board of education on previous things that so and it's it's in the t uh District the historic district MH it's in the the so they have to come to us or they're coming to us because we're nice guys well how are they here they're from the board they're being referred by the board of education is that what I'm heing well you're here because it's in the town historic the these two buildings are in within your jurisdiction right so to obtain a building permit they would kick it back to you so we're here uh preemptively to get approval so when this does go out to bid and a contractor is on board and we go for permitting um it's a streamline process got it okay um I have no comments I think it's all great thank you thank you Steve no further comments Nick I have no objections I think it's all very well done and in good faith to you know improve on what's there and keep it consistent with the look of the rest of the building so I'm in favor of it Jerry I think it's necessary and well supported and uh I uh I support it thank m Floyd I agree I think it's very good idea thank you and Mr mixer no comment thank you um and i' just like to comment that since you've taken you took our uh recommendations when we met with you in June so I'm really happy to see the um the the Koopa and the design as opposed to what we what we saw before which I think is really good especially when I look at M Hein at at Buzz Aldren and see what was there and but what was there and unfortunately what's there now but anyway that's in new here and you're there but thank you for that um uh what we'll do now is go if we look at 22 Valley Road I believe the same you're looking at the at obviously there's no Koopa but there's a cornice and a roof and um you're looking at to repair restore repair in kind so um and as my understanding if you could just tell us a bit of what you're doing there it's but it sounds as though from what I've read and what I've seen and what I've heard that it's basically the same approach approach that you're doing at 49 so correct so to to save time um essentially is the same process um concerning the corners repair and then also the um the roof replacement um this roof is existing um a slate line shingle roof um best estimate is it was last replaced in the 60s um it's beyond its useful life um and like the prek want to restore it and replace it with a new um shingle slate look asphalt shingle line and and and the uh corn the Cornus as well it's the same process that you that you had yeah describe same process where we want to do the the paint removal get up close and personal uh with the uh with the the wood uh you do see that you do have um some areas you know the same probe that there is some wood that is in need of repair replacement uh so some trim pieces that are loose but we want it's you got a lot of the dental molding you have a lot of the brackets uh fortunately uh there's a good covering projection of the the eaves on this so it's a question we don't see the the rot like that we saw with because of the the metal cover on that one pediment on the other building so our our hope is that we're going to be in a better position and again if we can do some if we can do uh you know patching or uh fillers or if we have to do some some Dutchmen uh to be able to to repair out but it looks to be visually it looks to be in in better condition okay thank you so before we hear from Mrs Spen about this this building do you plan on using the same color you you're you're going to use the same material for the for the roof replacement is it going to be the same color or you going to use different colors on and I know we don't we don't uh decide on and Steve's going to tell me that but I'm just curious as to what what what your intent is we we have no intent to change the color it would be going back with a slate look but the The Bu The what you the uh brick building um has a very light color they're different they're different roofs right different different different Shades of Gray right so I think the idea is to and we can take down pieces and we can try and get some realizing how much granular loss you've had from that over the the decades but to get something that ideally when we complete this you're not going to notice a tremendous difference from what there is now other than it's been updated but we don't want to you know radically change anything and that's the if we were to go and you know put a put a green shingle on there it's going to look out of place MH so so it'll be some shade of gray yeah and to but to differentiate between the two buildings won't be necessarily be the same shade or gray yeah I think that would if we can get some pieces down and we'll you know I would imagine there's more than one shade of gray that we can get from from GF or somebody similar so it just to and to make it look like they're they're the buildings are different times and we can we can certainly get different types of shingles on there to differentiate between the two okay thank you Mrs swen do you want to um go over your report for uh sure it may have been this uh building that had the Box gutters I'm just trying to look on the historic picture if you find them try to preserve them don't just run shingles over them um I I will say this just because I I believe it is in my mind looking at the budget numbers there is mention of the gutters it's not for replacement of the gutters themselves but you can see in some of the photos that there were these kind of temporary PDC connections made I do believe that there that it is the intention to replace those with their original that's correct there were miscellaneous pieces shown in here here um that probably were lost in a past storm or or some damage that we're replacing with uh new either um cast iron or copper to tie into the ex Copper got it and this building used to have a belfrey tower until about a 100 years ago do your KOA folks in Kentucky also do belfree Towers or is that not part of the project it's not part of this project it may be in a future long range project but not in this one yeah I think the the other thing that you know when you look at the history of this building and I could probably go on but uh Circa early 2000s the windows you have double hung excuse me single hung thermally broken aluminum windows in this building uh the exterior doors are the F FRP acrylic wood grain um this building you behind some of the the down spouts you can see traces of the buff offwhite paint that this building was painted and then somebody came back and sand blasted the paint off and destroyed the fire skin on the bricks so you think about the history of this building it's it's evolved and that we're looking to H put the brakes on and make sure that it's it's well maintained and well kept and from there I think you know to to back date and the belf I think that's up to the boss who controls personal drains but um three or four years ago we did present to this commission um a masonry restoration which was completed uh trying to restore the um lentils the Sills and the the water table of this building and that came out well yes it did it came very well so I think the the whole idea here is that where we can repair in kind we can use restoration you know the proper restoration materials the repair mortars and the matching mortars and do the color matches and know we we set mortar samples out for for digestion analysis we're we understand what we're dealing with here and that we've got to be respective of the archaic materials it's getting the best bang that we can and getting the the best lifespan out of the the uh the repair materials thank you do that conclude um discussion John no support Steve support support Nick supportive as well Jerry support Zena okay all right no I think we have a I was making some notes and I think that uh Zan is probably making notes as well about the Weather Vein we'll we'll send a report to so just it was just Weather Vein um the roof the materials we were concerned about the materials but I think you've explained that um Mrs smolen brought up the lighting protection um and the uh gutters on 22 Valley road but I think everything that you're doing in terms of uh the cornice uh uh repair is up to uh preservation standards so thank you very much thank you all right thank you very much okay again I don't understand are we approving this is just reations well because of supp a good recomend since that whole a feeli yeah that's what I'm saying they' it's good for them to be here you know so um so I think being that Z is already given a grant update we don't have to do that correct no nothing else to add since we've been here um so I guess it's time for adjournment so I just want to thank thank everybody the collection of of people we have here it's been a very I think successful year um and um thank you to all the commission members it's been a pleasure working with everybody our consultant and our attorney and we look forward to next year and Zena we couldn't do it without you thank you so may have a motion to adjourn move to adjourn second all in favor I all right Mary mer Christmas everyone happy Holidays happy New Year happy New Year see you in January