HARB

Historic Architectural Review Board
Meeting Minutes
January 16, 2008

Gary Shaffer, 2007 Chairman, called the Historical Architectural Review Board to order at 7:32 p.m. on Wednesday, January 16, 2008. Those in attendance were: Board members Elwood Christ, Nancie Gudmestad, Peggy Gustafson, Bea Savage, Rich Clark and Norm Forness, along with Michael Birkner, Borough Council liaison, and Merry Bush, Borough Planner. Others attending the meeting were Bernie Yannetti for 119 Carlisle Street; Diana Thomas and Kurt Davis, The Home Front General Store, 312 Baltimore Street; Scott Coyle, Scott and Company Fine Jewelry, 17 Lincoln Square; Jane English; John and Judie Butterfield; and Ken VanHoutte, Servpro of Gettysburg, 650 York Street.

As this was the first meeting for 2008, Merry Bush acted as temporary chairman during the reorganization. Elwood Christ nominated Gary Shaffer for the position of chairman with Peggy Gustafson seconding. Ms. Gustafson then moved to close the nominations. The motion was seconded and it carried. Peggy Gustafson then moved to nominate Elwood Christ as vice chairmen. Bea Savage seconded. The motion carried with Elwood Christ abstaining.

Gary Shaffer then took over the meeting as chairman. Mr. Shaffer then introduced the members and noted that the Board serves as an advisory Board to Borough Council, which makes the final decisions concerning Certificates of Appropriateness. Mr. Shaffer noted that all applications for signs and exterior changes to buildings within the Historic District must be reviewed by HARB. There are no administrative approvals to be given at this time.

There were no changes to the agenda for the meeting. Norm Forness moved to approve the December 19, 2007 minutes as submitted. Elwood Christ seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.

Borough Council will meet on Monday, February 11, 2008. Applicants may pick up permits for those projects approved by Council after that date.

Certificates of Appropriateness

A. New Sign. Servpro of Gettysburg/Adams County, 650 York Street.

Nancie Gudmestad asked about the two versions of the proposed sign provided in the application. Ken VanHoutte said that the sign maker had provided two sizes of the sign and that they preferred the larger of the two-48-inches x 92-inches. The sign would be a maximum of 12 feet above the ground-the installer will shorten the pole and the second smaller pole would be removed.

The applicant said that the existing light box would be removed and exterior lighting installed. The applicant proposes using two clam shell lights.

Findings of Fact: The property at 650 York Street is located within the Gettysburg Historic District as determined by ordinance. The proposed sign meets the size limitations. The proposed sign does not have internal lighting.

Nancie Gudmestad moved to approve the sign as submitted. Rich Clark seconded the motion. It was then noted that the motion did not mention which sign was recommended for approval. Ms. Gudmestad amended her motion to read "recommend approval of the 48-inch x 92-inch sign. Rich Clark seconded the motion. Discussion of the size of the sign followed. The motion carried 7 to 0.

Gary Shaffer told the applicant that sign permit could not be pulled until February 12, 2008.

B. Sign. 312 Baltimore Street. Home Front General Store. Diana Thomas, applicant.

Elwood Christ noted that 312 Baltimore Street was the home of Samuel M. Bushman, a leading banker in the Borough. Bushman died between 1921 and 1922. The house is a turn of the century Victorian.

The application requested approval for three 10-inch x 10-foot single-sided signs and one 3-foot x 4-foot oval single-sided sign. The building has at least a 60-foot frontage according to the application filed by Chad Dick of Len Dick Signs. Art work submitted with the application, however, showed a total of four proposed signs.

Peggy Gustafson asked about the location of the signs. The applicant proposes to install the oval sign on the center window of the left bay in place of the round sign as shown in the application. Ms. Gustafson then asked if the applicant had considered hanging the long signs with chains from the porch instead of attaching them to the fascia board of the porch. The applicant said that they could check into that. The applicant also noted that contrary to the photo of the building they were not planning to install a sign on the pre-existing posts in the front of the building.

Michael Birkner also questioned whether the signs needed to be attached directly to the building. He asked the applicant about the Navy Arms of America sign. The applicant said that he had just purchased the company and use of the logo. Navy Arms of America is the original manufacturer of black powder and existed at the time of the Civil War.

Bea Savage asked if the applicant owned the building. The applicant said no that they were just leasing the property.

Findings of Fact: Gary Shaffer said that the building located at 312 Baltimore Street is a sensitive building and is a contributing structure to the Gettysburg Historic District, as well as the Gettysburg Battlefield National Register Historic District. Elwood Christ added that it was the home of a prominent Gettysburg banker.

Nancy Gudmestad asked if the existing posts would be removed. The applicant said that it would be up to the owner.

Norm Forness moved to recommend approval of the application as revised. Peggy Gustafson seconded. The oval sign would hang would hang on the left front bay window. The antiques and Masonic gifts sign would hang at the far right of the building. The Navy Arms sign would hang on the small window to the right of the front door.

Bea Savage said that she was unhappy that the proposed signs would be attached to the fascia. Merry Bush agreed. Elwood Christ also did not want to see the signs attached directly to the fascia instead suggesting that they be hung below the porch fascia.

The motion carried 5 to 2, with Bea Savage and Elwood Christ dissenting as noted above. [Several days after the meeting the applicant reported to Merry Bush that they would be able hang the signs from chains rather than attaching them directly to the building.]

C. Sign. 17 Lincoln Square. Scott & Company, Fine Jewelers, applicant.

Scott Coyle will be opening a branch of Scott & Company, Fine Jewelers in 17 Lincoln Square, which also houses an antique shop. Elwood Christ asked where the sign would be located. Mr. Coyle replied that the sign would hang to the left of the front door between the two windows. The store will be located to the right when one enters the building.

Norm Forness asked if the sign would be installed against the building. The applicant replied yes. Peggy Gustafson asked that installers place the screws in the mortar joints rather than the brick.

Findings of Fact: Gary Shaffer said that the building at 17 Lincoln Square was located within both the Gettysburg Historic District and the Gettysburg Battlefield National Register Historic District and is a sensitive structure.

Nancy Gudmestad moved to recommend that Borough Council approve the application as submitted. Elwood Christ seconded and the motion carried, 7 to 0.

D. New Construction. Landscaping and stone retaining wall. 119 Carlisle Street. Monahan Realty Company, owner.

Bernie Yannetti, representing Monahan Realty, submitted an application for landscaping and a stone retaining wall at 119 Carlisle Street. Concerned about conflicts of interest Gary Shaffer reported that he had no current conflict of interest in this project as he does not have a current fiduciary relationship with the owners.

Merry Bush gave a brief background of previous applications submitted for this building. In November 1991 the applicant requested permission to demolish the building for additional parking. The application was denied. In June 1998 an application was submitted for the renovation of the building. The application was approved but the applicant did not follow through on the project.

The owners again returned in December 2006 with another application to demolish the building at 119 Carlisle Street. The applicant had allowed the property to sit without maintenance since the initial application in 1991. Reluctant to approve demolition before seeing a design for a replacement building, the applicant was asked to return with a design for the building.

In January 2007 the applicant returned with drawings of a proposed building for the site. The application was approved as long as the building was replaced with a new one in a similar design. The applicant is now proposing to install landscaping and a stone wall similar to one on the adjoining property, 125 Carlisle Street.

Bernie Yannetti said that the owners still plan to construct a building on the site but the REDDI project has been delayed further. The selected developer, Holland Construction is back peddling. Mr. Yannetti said that the owner, Monahan Realty Company, is not in a position to build right now. The owners are concerned with safety issues especially juveniles using the site for skateboarding and biking. The potential exists according to Mr. Yannetti for the skateboarders, etc. to come off the sloped site and hit pedestrians.

The applicant proposes to build a stone wall and add landscaping in the interim.

Gary Shaffer asked if the wall would be built with concrete footing. Mr. Yannetti said that the wall would be installed with footers but said that not a lot of money would be spent on the site.

While the application did not indicate that the site would be used for additional parking Mr. Yannetti was heard to say so. Mr. Yannetti said that there would be landscaping materials installed and provided a list of plants with the application. He said that the area not designated would be covered with grass.

Norm Forness asked if part of the delay is the uncertainty of the REDDI project-"why should that make a difference?" Bernie Yannetti said that the use of the building would be tied to the REDDI project, to the REDDI parcels.

Bea Savage asked if the applicant proposed to install grass along with the landscaping. Mr. Yannetti said that was the intention.

Michael Birkner asked what happens if the REDDI project is delayed for ten years; the Borough has no power to force the construction of the building. Mr. Birkner also commented on how beautiful the existing garden is. Merry Bush said that there is no definition in our ordinance for "demolition by neglect."

Nancie Gudmestad asked if the owners planned to have the stone wall match the wall on the adjacent property. Mr. Yannetti said that the wall would be about two and a half to three feet high. Mr. Yannetti also said that beyond the grass is the existing asphalt.

Peggy Gustafson said that the Monahans always do good job, however she was concerned about the permanent nature of the materials proposed. She said that a six-foot diameter tree was about 10 feet tall. Mr. Yannetti said that it was not their intention to install full height trees.

Ms. Gustafson also asked about the significance of the risk. Was additional insurance coverage required? Were there increased insurance costs? Mr. Yannetti said that there was sufficient insurance in place; the owners were concerned about people getting hurt. Ms. Gustafson said that she would be more in favor of a fence installed along the asphalt. She said that the size of the plants indicated the age of the plantings. Mr. Yannetti said that the landscaping would extend about three to three-and-a-half feet back. The plan, however, indicates shows the landscaping extending back approximately 10 feet. The applicant proposes to use the remaining part as a parking lot.

Findings of Fact: Gary Shaffer said that the property at 119 Carlisle Street was located within the Gettysburg Borough Historic District as determined by ordinance, which brings it under the review of the Historic Architectural Review Board. While the application does not involve a building the proposed changes will impact the historic character of the community and fences and walls impact the building line of the street. Since the building has been removed it is a non-sensitive site and is therefore a non-contributing site to the Historic District.

In previous discussions of the property it was the intent of the owners to build a replacement structure. However there is no timeframe mentioned in any documents.

Nancie Gudmestad said that she wished "we were approving a new building" but made a motion to recommend that the application be approved with the stone to match as much as possible the existing stone wall to the north and be the same height. Gary Shaffer seconded the motion for discussion purposes.

Peggy Gustafson asked the reason why the application was submitted for landscaping. When an application was denied for demolition so that a new parking lot could be built, the owners promised the Borough a new building. She asked where else is there a safety issue, "No one else in the Borough has come before this Board requesting such a project because of safety issues. Is this project lovely?- yes, but is this really an issue of safety?"

Ms. Gustafson provided locations of other properties in the Borough where owners could identify safety issues with slopes, but none have: Trinity United Church of Christ, S. Stratton Street; Methodist Church, W. High Street; PNC Bank, West Street; north entrance to Valentine Hall facing Seminary Chapel on Seminary Campus; Executive Offices of Gettysburg Tours and the Insurance Group on York Street; Robert Boehner's, York Street; Albaugh House, 339 Carlisle Street; parking lot at the side of the College Science Center, Gettysburg College campus; college dorm west of Agway; 400 block of Carlisle Street and East Broadway from Carlisle to Harrisburg Street. Ms. Gustafson went on to say that the sizes and types of plants indicate that this is not a short term project. She said that planting an Ivory Silk Lilac Tree or a Steeds Holly says permanent-she is very skeptical of the Monahan's words.

Elwood Christ said that in 1991 the younger Bob Monahan not only wanted to demolish 119 Carlisle Street, but also the adjacent Wieble building, 113 Carlisle Street-renters were urinating on their property. After the application was denied the Monahans cleaned up the Wieble building but put no money into saving 119 Carlisle Street, continued Mr. Christ. "And now we're supposed to think about this proposal because of the use of a new building? In 1991 the plan to expand the parking was not for the short term and it isn't now," said Mr. Christ. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me," Mr. Christ continued.

Norm Forness said that the Board does not review use of a building. The Board was concerned with the view of junk behind the building if it was demolished, as well as the potential gapped-tooth effect. HARB intended that a structure be placed there after only a short time; the site will now be compromised for an extensive period of time. Mr. Forness continued saying that he was against the motion-"it is distasteful to vote yes for something we have been opposed to for 17 years."

Bea Savage said that the proposed wall would be a very permanent structure.

Gary Shaffer said if you vote in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness it would only be for the stone wall. "The Board can't vote on landscaping; it's outside our purview. The applicant needs no approval to install landscaping." The motion failed, 1 to 6.

Elwood Christ moved to recommend that Borough Council deny the application. Norm Forness seconded. The motion carried 6 to 1; Nancie Gudmestad, the dissenting vote, said that she would hate to say that they won but the street should look nice.

Bernie Yannetti said that his client was not trying to pull anything over the Board or the Borough. Mr. Yannetti said that he respected the Board's opinion.

After a brief comment about the need for further discussions on the proliferation of satellite television disks, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Merry V. Bush
Borough Planner and Recorder