HISTORIC AREA COMMISSION
Minutes of the November 16, 2006 meeting of the Historical Area Commission (HAC) held in the New Castle Town Hall at 2nd & Delaware Streets, New Castle, Delaware.
Present at roll call were: Mr. Douglas Heckrotte
Mrs. Sally Monigle
Mrs. Jane Miller
Mr. William Hentkowski
Ms. Robin Hegvik
Mrs. Deborah A. Pullan, taking minutes
The Acting Chair, Mrs. Sally Monigle called the regular meeting of the Historic Area Commission for the City of New Castle to order at 4:40 p.m. and the roll was called.
Old Application:
Tidwell 100 East 4th Street
Improvements: Slight change on Sub-division of property into 4 parcels
Involved Parties:
Discussion: Mr. Heckrotte: We are asked to confirm this plan because the 25’ setback was not provided for lot A. The house encroaches on the setback line by a very small distance. I move we accept this plan dated November 10, 2006, which shows a setback of 25.35 tapering down to 24.40.
Action: Approved
F. Dressler 137 East 2nd Street
Improvements: Build house per plans attached
Involved parties:
Discussion: Ms. Monigle: We went to this house today and we looked again at the over sized windows on new section of the house, and that are also positioned differently than they show on the drawing.
Mr. Heckrotte: I think we have several problems:
Problem #1: The drawings that were given to us by Charles DuPont, show the street front of the building. We had directed from day one that the street front of the building was not going to change. The drawings look that way until you look at the plans of the new building. The plans show a notation for window size which is a much larger window that the building had on its front wall. The picture shown is correct, the schedule shows it is wrong and we approved according to the picture. The windows that go on the front of this house have to be what they always were which were relatively small windows for a relatively small house.
Problem #2: We have a set of plans in front of us (September 2005) which show Plum Alley elevation. It shows fairly large windows. It also shows those windows lining up with the windows on the old house and it shows the windows on 2nd floor up tight underneath the eaves. It also shows where the floor line is on the building and the floor height. If you go look at the building today, you’ll discover that the building is built with the 1st floor recessed into the ground and 2nd floor dropped with lining up with the 2nd floor of the old house. The windows have been dropped to match those floor lines. It means the windows on the 1st floor on the side of the house are nearly on grade and the 2nd floor windows are about 1 ½’ below where the eave will end up. This is unacceptable to us. It looks horrible that way.
Problem #3: Is one we didn’t discuss fully enough and we see the old house has been graced with 4 large windows on the end elevation. Those large windows would be much bigger than any of the windows on the old house on the front. They are certainly larger that what is drawn and what we approved.
Action: I think a letter should go to this owner putting him on notice that he has issues on the subject of the windows and the issues are that the front windows are clearly going to be the old size. The side windows on Plum Alley, the seven have got to come up to match what we approved on the drawing. We are going to have a discussion about the 4 windows on the front part of the house. Mr. Bergstrom: Also we will provide him with a copy of the Ordinance #439.
NEW APPLICATIONS:
G. DiSabatino 75 W. 5th St., 425 South St. & 427 South Street
Improvements: Final inspection and Build decks on back of houses
Involved Parties:
Discussion: Ms. Monigle: The houses which we have just looked at have now been inspected by this group according to the new Ordinance which authorizes us to have a review before a final Cert. Of occupancy is granted. #1: The doors are metal not wood. #2 The fan lights over the doors do not appear to be wood and have snap in muntins. #3 The house on 5th Street doesn’t have a railing at front steps.
Action: Mr. Heckrotte: On the motion to accept the decks: I move we vote on the application as submitted
Mr. Heckrotte: No: because it encroaches into rear setback previously discussed. What is acceptable is ground level brick patios.
Mr. Hentkowski: No: For the same reasons
Ms. Miller: No: for the same reasons
Ms. Hegvik: Abstained from voting
Ms. Monigle: No: for the same reasons
Disposition: Denied
N. Jodbauer 44-46 East 3rd Street
Improvements: Replace cedar shakes with cedar shingles. Re-point exterior bricks.
Involved Parties:
Discussion:
Action: Mr. Heckrotte: Roof: I move we vote on the application as submitted.
Re-point bricks: As submitted with proviso that HAC members look at sample pointing.
An addendum attached: For replacing shutters and trim in kind. As submitted with proviso that we see what is intended and cut sheets.
Disposition: Approved
F. Ritter 150 E. 4th Street
Improvements: Replace porch deck in kind and repair steps in kind.
Involved Parties:
Discussion:
Action: Mr. Heckrotte: I move we vote on the application as submitted.
Disposition: Approved
S. Watts 60 W. 3rd Street
Improvements: Demo existing house and build new house (plans for house to follow)
Involved Parties:
Discussion:
Action: Mr. Heckrotte: I move we vote on the application to demo with intent to build a house as submitted. NOTE: Condition of house after our inspection: It was deemed un-salvable.
Disposition: Approved
Minutes from October 2006 were approved.
Meeting adjourned at approximately 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by____________________________
Deborah A. Pullan
Edited by Heckrotte
