{Draft}

SPRINGFIELD HISTORICAL COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES

Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 6:30 PM in City Hall Room 310
Present: Commissioners Murphy, Nardi, Rowe, S. Walsh, Shultis

I. ROLL CALL & PROCEDURES

II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES

1) Meeting Minutes: November 16, 2017
BOARD VOTE
Voting for: Murphy, Nardi, Rowe, S. Walsh, Shultis
Voting against: None
Abstaining: None

III. TABLED ITEMS

1) 122 Chestnut Street: Several exterior renovations
PROPONENTS
No one was present to speak in favor of this petition.

OPPONENTS
No one was present to speak in opposition of this petition.

BOARD DISCUSSION
No discussion occurred.

BOARD VOTE
As no petitioner was present, no vote was taken and the matter was continued for the next
available meeting date.

IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS

1) 147 Magnolia Terrace: Remediation of previous window replacements
PROPONENTS
Enrique Santos, of 147 Magnolia Terrace, Springfield, addressed the Commission. Mr.
Santos reminded the Commission that he was previously before them for windows that he
had replaced from wood to vinyl; however, the windows that were installed were incorrect,
which was an error by the window company. Therefore, he explained that he is before the
Commission to replace the windows with more historically appropriate ones.

Mr. (name inaudible), representative of Window World, Inc., addressed the Commission.
1
 {Draft}

The Window World representative questioned Mr. Santos of how he knew the installed
windows were the incorrect windows, which Commissioner Murphy responded that the
windows were installed illegally without a building permit or Historic Commission
approval. Commissioner Murphy went on to state that the Commission has been working
on remediating the matter with Mr. Santos. Commissioner Murphy then

The Window World representative stated that to his knowledge, in order for the windows to
be replaced, the homeowner would have to have approval first and he is not sure if that
happened or not, so all they can go off of is if the homeowner told them they had an
approval or not and he was told they had an approval. Commissioner Murphy responded
that regardless of that aspect, his company went ahead and installed windows without a
permit.

Mr. Santos explained that the Window World representatives’ purpose at the meeting was to
explain the specifications of the newly proposed windows to replace the inappropriate ones
that exist, which Commissioner Murphy replied that the Window World representative
should have a sample window or brochure to show to the Commission.

The Window World representative explained that the house currently has aluminum siding
and capping around the windows so he is not sure what is historic about the house, which
Commissioner Murphy explained that they are only dealing with the windows; however, the
features referred to were done prior to the creation of the district and any exterior changes
done subsequent to the creation of the district need to be approved.

The Window World representative questioned what needed to be done at this point, which
Commissioner Murphy responded that the windows needed to be dark in exterior color and
the grid pattern needed to match the pre-existing windows. Commissioner Murphy then
stated that it was his belief that the windows were one-over-one patterned windows, which
the Window World representative stated that he did not believe so because every window on
the house has different patterns.

The Window World representative stated that it would be difficult to replicate the previous
grid pattern since there is no record of what the previous grid pattern was.

Mr. Santos explained that all of the windows had grids except a particular section of the
home that juts out. He also stated that all the windows were original with the exception of
what Window World replaced from wood to vinyl.

2
 {Draft}

Commissioner Murphy questioned the homeowner what grid patterns were present prior to
replacement of the windows, which Mr. Santos responded that the grid patterns mimicked
the other windows with grids. The Window World representative refuted and stated that
the previous windows did not have grid patterns and then further stated that he told the
homeowner that they should go with what was originally there but they did not want to do
that; therefore, his company was under the assumption that the homeowner already had
Commission approval.

Commissioner Shultis stated that the Window World representative had previously
explained that he thought the windows were one-over-one, then questioned the Window
World representative for clarification, which The Window World representative then
questioned what one-over-one meant, which Commissioner Shultis explained that it meant
windows without grid patterns. The Window World representative then explained that a lot
of the windows his company replaced had no grids, if not all of them.

Commissioner S. Walsh questioned if some of the windows on the side had grid patterns,
which the Window World representative confirmed that some do.

Mr. Santos explained that the whole situation has been resolved through lawyers and the
Window World representative is just here to explain the specifications of the newly
proposed windows and he is not sure why the representative is going back and forth with the
Commission over what was previously done.

Commissioner Shultis questioned the other Commissioners if the current windows were to
be changed from a lite color to a dark color would the only other issue be the style of how
the window sits on the sill, which Commissioner Murphy stated that generally, vinyl
windows do not sit directly on the sill, as they typically sit in a channel. The Window
World representative stated that his windows sit directly on the sill, which Commissioner
Murphy then questioned if the Window World representative had any visuals the
Commission could look at, which the representative displayed a color chart.

The Window World representative what color would be appropriate, which Commissioner
Murphy replied that any dark color would suffice.

Commissioner Murphy questioned how many windows were previously replaced, which
The Window World representative responded that he believed it was ten windows, which
Mr. Santos refuted and stated that the total number of replaced windows was twelve.

3
 {Draft}

Commissioner Murphy questioned if the replaced windows were on all sides of the home,
which Mr. Santos stated that only the bedroom windows were replaced, which he described
as two in the front, two on the side, two on the rear corner, and four on the side facing the
neighbor.

Commissioner Nardi explained that on the upper floor, the windows have a prairie style
upper sash, which Window World representative responded that it doesn’t mean the
windows that were removed had the same grid pattern.

Commissioner Murphy stated that it is not really clear that the windows that were replaced
were actually the original windows, which the Window World representative again stated
that the replaced windows did not have any grids and the Commission cannot make them
replicate a grid pattern that no one can prove was there.

OPPONENTS
No one was present to speak in opposition of this petition.

BOARD DISCUSSION
Commissioner S. Walsh made a motion, under the category of appropriateness, to approve
the replacement of unapproved windows with windows that conform to the historical
guidelines; seconded by Commissioner Rowe.

Commissioner Shultis explained that the application on the table states, “replace windows
that conform to the historical guidelines”; however, that is the opposite of what they want to
do as they don’t want to change windows that do conform but they want to replace the
windows that don’t conform to the historical guidelines, which Commissioner Nardi stated
that they have to vote on what is on the table, which then commissioner Murphy chimed in
that they can certainly discuss that.

Commissioner Murphy stated that the one thing the Commission can agree upon is that the
windows need to be a dark color, which other Commissioners concurred.

Commissioner Shultis stated that because the Commission does not know what grid patterns
previously existed, they should request the windows be replaced with new windows of the
same existing pattern but of a dark color.

Mr. Santos was able to show visual evidence that at least some of the windows previously
had a prairie style grid pattern; therefore, the Commission deliberated as to how to resolve
4
 {Draft}

requiring grid patterns and in what locations.

Mr. Santos questioned what exterior color the Commission felt was more appropriate, which
Commissioner Murphy stated that they could pick their own dark color, which Mr. Santos
ultimately chose bronze.

Commissioner Murphy called for an amendment to the original motion on the table. He
further stated that it seems that the Commission and homeowner are in agreement with new
windows of a bronze color with a prairie style sash. Commissioner S. Walsh questioned if
this agreement applied to all windows that Window World is replacing, which Mr. Santos
then chimed in that Window World was supposed to replace an additional two windows on
the front of the house. Commissioner Murphy asked for clarification on Mr. Santos’
request and further questioned if two windows were not previously replaced, which Mr.
Santos confirmed that Window World only replaced ten of the twelve windows per their
original order.

Commissioner Nardi then suggested that the motion be changed to any window that will be
replaced or corrected and replaced.

Commissioner S. Walsh amended her original motion under the category of appropriateness,
to approve the replacement of previously unapproved windows with 4000 series vinyl
replacement windows, bronze in exterior color, with prairie style grid patterns; seconded by
Commissioner Rowe.

BOARD VOTE
Moved and seconded to allow a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of
unapproved windows with 4000 series vinyl replacement windows, bronze in exterior color,
with prairie style grid patterns.
Voting for: Murphy, Nardi, Rowe, S. Walsh, Shultis
Voting against: None
Abstaining: None

2) 16 Churchill Street: Replacement windows

PROPONENTS
No one was present to speak in favor of this petition.

OPPONENTS
No one was present to speak in opposition of this petition.
5
 {Draft}

BOARD DISCUSSION
No discussion occurred.

BOARD VOTE
As no petitioner was present, no vote was taken and the matter was continued for the next
available meeting date.

V. PRESERVATION OF HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS

1) 120 Flagler Street: Demolition of residential structure
PROPONENTS
Stoughton L. Smead, of 120 Flagler Street, Springfield, addressed the Commission. Mr.
Smead explained that in 1979, he and his wife purchased a commercial/industrial building in
the Pine Point section of the City. Mr. Smead described the location of his property and
described that his property sits on an unimproved dirt road. He explained that upon
acquiring the property, they fixed the place up by putting on a new roof and painting the
exterior. He also explained that they had used the property as an investment property
renting out to several tenants through the years, some good and some bad. He stated that
currently, the structure is deteriorating due to compromised mortar and bricks are coming
loose below the grade level. He then stated that architecturally the building has never been
beautiful and never will be beautiful.

Commissioner Murphy questioned if there were any other properties listed on the street,
which Mr. Smead replied there is only one other structure.

Mr. Smead described the home as being 735 square feet in floor area with a seven by sixteen
foot front porch. He then stated that there is a railroad service road that runs along the rear
of the property, which folks use for their ATV’s and dirt bikes, creating a nuisance. The
nuisance has created a situation where folks are wary of renting his property. Additionally,
he stated that the mortar between the bricks has become like cottage cheese texture and he
can’t stop the issue without digging up the whole foundation. He stated that the cost to
repair the issue is so exorbitant, that he figured to just take the structure down.

Commissioner Nardi commented that because of the serious structural problems endured in
the foundation, the home most likely could not be moved. He then stated that there seems
to be an additional problem of mold, which would be hazardous to one’s health to even enter
the structure. Therefore, he agreed with the petitioner that renovating the structure would
be cost prohibitive.
6
 {Draft}

Commissioner Murphy determined that the structure is not architecturally significant and he
doubts the structure is associated with any famous figure or historical event, and in addition,
he determined the house does not contribute significantly to the general area as there is only
one other house on the street; therefore, there is little justification to uphold the nine month
demolition delay period. Other Commissioners concurred.

Commissioner S. Walsh questioned the petitioner, if this structure were to be demolished,

what plans would he have for the vacant land, which Mr. Smead replied that he would
groom the land and make it park like.

OPPONENTS
No one was present to speak in opposition of this petition.

BOARD DISCUSSION
Commissioner Shultis made a motion to approve the waiver of the 9-month demolition delay
period; seconded by Commissioner Rowe.

BOARD VOTE
Moved and seconded to allow a waiver of the 9-month demolition delay period.
Voting for: Murphy, Nardi, Rowe, S. Walsh, Shultis
Voting against: None
Abstaining: None

VI. OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY BEFORE THE COMMISSION

1) Ridgewood LHD: Commissioner S. Walsh discussed recreating the original final report
for the Ridgewood Local Historic District as the original has gone missing. The
Commission deliberated on the topic and agreed to recreate the missing document.
2) Certified Local Government: No discussion occurred.
3) Community Outreach: Commissioner Murphy stated that he has been in contact with
an MGM representative regarding interpretive signage.
4) Outdoor Mechanical Equipment Guidelines: Commissioner S. Walsh briefed the
Commission that she has reviewed the drafted guidelines that Commissioner Murphy
previously submitted and she gave suggestions for the document, requiring petitioners to
include scaled drawings of their proposed equipment and placement. Commissioner
Murphy suggested sending out public notice to approve the guidelines.
5) Creation of District Guidelines: Commissioner Murphy stated that he would try to
draft new guidelines in the near future.
7
 {Draft}

6) MGM Springfield: Commissioner Shultis requested the Commission send a letter to

MGM regarding the transformation of their head house no longer being the centerpiece
of their development as previously proposed.
7) Noncompliance: Commissioner Murphy gave an update on the status of all the
properties that have been non-compliant with pre-existing stop work orders.
8) Public Speak Out: With residents of the Forest Park area in attendance, the
Commission discussed the design of a proposed school at 133 Longhill Street.

Meeting was adjourned.

x_______________________________________ __________________________
Vincent Walsh, Chairman Date