OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Frederick Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 11, 2024

Historic Preservation CommissionThursday, April 11, 2024
BodyFrederick, Maryland
SessionHistoric Preservation Commission
DateThursday, April 11, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:14

Good evening.

0:15

Welcome to the April 11th 2024 session of the Frederick City Historic Preservation Commission.

0:23

This evening's hearing, excuse me, this evening's hearing will attempt to get through as quickly as possible.

0:31

Not least because it's allergy season and I don't know how long my voice is going to hold out.

0:37

So the technical qualifications of the commission and the staff are on file with the City of Frederick and are made a part of each and every case before the Commission.

0:46

The Frederick City Historic Preservation Commission uses the guidelines adopted by the mayor and board of Alderman and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation published by the U.S.

0:57

Department of the Interior National Park Service, and these guidelines are made a part of each and every case.

1:03

All cases were duly advertised in the Frederick News Post in accordance with Section 301 of the Land Management Code.

1:10

Introductions this evening.

1:13

Sitting on my left, the audience's right, is Commissioner Eva Soller.

1:19

I'm Commissioner Robert Van Rennes.

1:21

We have Commissioner Paul Fitzgerald and Commissioner Ann Hart, and then the lovely and talented manager of community planning and urban design, Brandon Mark.

1:32

Our historic preservation planner, Sarah Hoffeditz, and Assistant City Attorney Iris Annan.

1:40

Anyone who has business before us this evening or wishes to be heard any kind of testimony, please rise and be sworn in.

1:53

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given and statements made in this hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

2:03

If so, answer I do.

2:05

Thank you.

2:06

Please be seated.

2:10

It is the purpose of the Historic Preservation Commission to safeguard the historical and cultural heritage of the City of Frederick by preserving sites, structures or districts that reflect elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, archaeological, or architectural history to stabilize and improve property values of such sites, structures or districts, to foster civic beauty and to strengthen the local economy and promote the preservation and appreciation of such sites, structures, and districts for the education and welfare of the residents of the City of Frederick.

2:45

In order to be eligible to vote on an application, a commissioner must first have made the required site visit and attended any and all meetings at which such an actual application was discussed.

2:55

In the event that a commissioner is absent from any such meeting, the commissioner may satisfy the attendance requirement by reviewing the record of that meeting.

3:10

That being said, are there commissioners with are there any commissioners with statements of eligibility?

3:18

Mr.

3:18

Chairman, regarding item number four under section four HPC business.

3:24

I note that I have a conflict of interest as the owner of that property under consideration when that case comes up.

3:32

I'll will recuse myself and step down from the dais, answer any questions from the floor, and then uh leave the room for any further discussion.

3:42

All right, thank you.

3:44

Is that um acceptable procedurally?

3:48

Yes, it is.

3:48

Correct.

3:49

All right, thank you.

3:53

All right, moving on.

3:54

Um do we have any other announcements this evening?

3:58

We have no announcements.

3:59

All right.

4:01

And then um I guess that brings us to HBC business.

4:05

So, item number one, administrative approval report.

4:12

So we had 29 administrative approval reports that we reviewed and gave approval for.

4:34

I move that we accept the report.

4:39

Second.

4:41

Any further discussion?

4:45

All in favor, please raise your hand.

4:48

All right.

4:50

That passes.

4:51

Thank you.

4:54

Uh HPC 24-308 DR.

5:06

Ms.

5:06

Hoffeditz.

5:08

A request for demolition review has been submitted per section 423 of the land management code for a garage at 505 Fleming Avenue.

5:18

Planning staff have determined that the structure is in whole or in part 50 years or older.

5:24

Based on the evaluation, the historic preservation commission is in charge with determining if the property is potentially eligible for individual historic designation.

5:33

A property is eligible for designation for a historic preservation overlay if it is at least 50 years 50 years, retains historic integrity, and meets at least one of the following criteria mentioned in the memo.

5:47

The property at 505 Fleming Avenue is part of the revised plat of the Simmerman edition recorded in 1938.

5:57

The site identified as lot 61 is identified by the public street to the south, public alleys to the west and north, and a neighboring residential lot to the east.

6:08

The primary dwelling is identified as a contributing resource to the Frederick National Register Historic District F-3-39.

6:17

The dwelling in the associated garage appear to have been first used by Lewis and Bessie Moberly, who purchased the property from Alfred and Helen Ziverman in 1939.

6:28

The Commission's review is limited to the garage.

6:32

The structure retains a good degree of historical integrity, maintaining elements of its original location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, but lacks a high level of architectural or historic significance.

6:48

Research has not indicated that the garage holds significance for an event or cultural group, nor was any information found to indicate that is associated with the lives of significant persons.

6:58

Staff finds that the garage is not individually eligible for designation and recommends that the commission not pursue a designation application.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████79%
Engineering And Infrastructure██4%
Historic Preservation Commission██4%
Procedural██3%
Zoning And Land Use██3%
Community Engagement2%
Legal Matters2%
Budget Equity Analysis1%
Urban Design1%
Summary of Proceedings

Frederick Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 11, 2024

The Frederick Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) held a public hearing on April 11, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. The commission addressed several agenda items including an administrative approval report, a demolition review for a garage, certification of historic preservation tax credits, an extension request for a prior approval, and four case hearings. Key actions included determining the non-contributing status of 77 S. Market Street, approving a rehabilitation and addition with a rooftop deck at 216 E. Patrick Street, approving an entry modification at 31 W. Patrick Street, and continuing a demolition case due to applicant absence. Public testimony was heard on the 77 S. Market Street case.

HPC Business

  • Administrative Approval Report (29 items): The commission unanimously accepted the report covering 29 administrative approvals.
  • HPC24-308DR – 505 Fleming Avenue (garage demolition review): Staff found the garage not individually eligible for historic designation. The commission voted unanimously not to pursue a designation application.
  • Certification of 2023 Historic Preservation Property Tax Credits (Group I): Staff reported 14 applications with an investment amount of $303,413.15 and a credit amount of $41,817.54. The commission certified the recommendations and forwarded them to the Director of Finance.
  • HPC20-579 – Extension Request for 159 W. Patrick Street: Commissioner Fitzgerald recused himself as the property owner. The applicant (Paul Fitzgerald) stated that financing has been delayed due to COVID-19, supply chain issues, and the city’s construction of an above-ground sewage pump station on the property. Staff recommended a 12-month extension. The commission approved the extension unanimously.

Cases to Be Heard

  • HPC23-1262 – 77 S. Market Street (demolition - contributing vs. non-contributing determination): Staff recommended finding the building non-contributing due to extensive alterations and a modern facade installed after 1974. The applicant’s consultant (Kate Coranda of Chris Goodwin Associates) presented evidence of lost historic integrity. Public comment included opposition from Charles Stanton (lifelong resident), William Holtzinger (representing United Fire Company 3), Karen Thomason, and Ashley Cosie (adjacent property owner), who argued the building retains historic character and that the project would negatively impact the neighborhood. Commissioner Hart expressed disagreement, citing the building’s retained feeling and association. The commission voted 3-1 (Commissioners Van Rens, Fitzgerald, and Saller in favor; Commissioner Hart opposed) to find the building a non-contributing resource. The demolition decision was deferred pending a revised replacement plan.
  • HPC24-056 – 216 E. Patrick Street (rehabilitation and addition with rooftop deck): Staff recommended approval subject to removal of the rooftop deck, citing visibility from the street and inconsistency with guidelines. The applicant (Brian Bradfield, Ellison Benjamin Architecture) argued the roof deck is integral to the project and does not compromise historic integrity, and that the surrounding area is becoming more commercial (including a planned hotel). After discussion, the commission approved the application unanimously, with conditions: (1) a shop drawing for the custom wood door at the front entry to be reviewed by staff, (2) lighting not to exceed 3500 Kelvin. The commission did not adopt staff’s condition to remove the rooftop deck, finding that the deviation was appropriate and would not compromise the streetscape or the contributing status of the building.
  • HPC24-071 – 31 W. Patrick Street (modify entry): Staff recommended approving a deviation from guidelines to replace a modern revolving door with a new entry that matches the existing modern fenestration. The applicant (Steve Knott, CCS) preferred a champagne anodized finish for hardware to match adjacent doors. The commission approved the application unanimously.
  • HPC24-168 – 610 N. Market Street (demolition): The applicant was not present. The commission continued the case to the next hearing.

Key Outcomes

  • The garage at 505 Fleming Avenue was determined not eligible for individual historic designation (unanimous).
  • The 2023 Historic Preservation Property Tax Credits (Group I, $41,817.54) were certified and forwarded to the Director of Finance (unanimous).
  • A 12-month extension was granted for HPC20-579 at 159 W. Patrick Street (unanimous).
  • The building at 77 S. Market Street was found to be a non-contributing resource (3-1). Demolition decision deferred until a revised replacement plan is submitted.
  • The rehabilitation and addition at 216 E. Patrick Street was approved with conditions (unanimous), including retaining the rooftop deck.
  • The entry modification at 31 W. Patrick Street was approved (unanimous).
  • The demolition case at 610 N. Market Street was continued to the next hearing.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening. Welcome to the April 11th 2024 session of the Frederick City Historic Preservation Commission. This evening's hearing, excuse me, this evening's hearing will attempt to get through as quickly as possible. Not least because it's allergy season and I don't know how long my voice is going to hold out. So the technical qualifications of the commission and the staff are on file with the City of Frederick and are made a part of each and every case before the Commission. The Frederick City Historic Preservation Commission uses the guidelines adopted by the mayor and board of Alderman and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation published by the U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service, and these guidelines are made a part of each and every case. All cases were duly advertised in the Frederick News Post in accordance with Section 301 of the Land Management Code. Introductions this evening. Sitting on my left, the audience's right, is Commissioner Eva Soller. I'm Commissioner Robert Van Rennes. We have Commissioner Paul Fitzgerald and Commissioner Ann Hart, and then the lovely and talented manager of community planning and urban design, Brandon Mark. Our historic preservation planner, Sarah Hoffeditz, and Assistant City Attorney Iris Annan. Anyone who has business before us this evening or wishes to be heard any kind of testimony, please rise and be sworn in. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given and statements made in this hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? If so, answer I do. Thank you. Please be seated. It is the purpose of the Historic Preservation Commission to safeguard the historical and cultural heritage of the City of Frederick by preserving sites, structures or districts that reflect elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, archaeological, or architectural history to stabilize and improve property values of such sites, structures or districts, to foster civic beauty and to strengthen the local economy and promote the preservation and appreciation of such sites, structures, and districts for the education and welfare of the residents of the City of Frederick. In order to be eligible to vote on an application, a commissioner must first have made the required site visit and attended any and all meetings at which such an actual application was discussed. In the event that a commissioner is absent from any such meeting, the commissioner may satisfy the attendance requirement by reviewing the record of that meeting. That being said, are there commissioners with are there any commissioners with statements of eligibility? Mr. Chairman, regarding item number four under section four HPC business. I note that I have a conflict of interest as the owner of that property under consideration when that case comes up. I'll will recuse myself and step down from the dais, answer any questions from the floor, and then uh leave the room for any further discussion. All right, thank you. Is that um acceptable procedurally? Yes, it is. Correct. All right, thank you. All right, moving on. Um do we have any other announcements this evening? We have no announcements. All right. And then um I guess that brings us to HBC business. So, item number one, administrative approval report. So we had 29 administrative approval reports that we reviewed and gave approval for. I move that we accept the report. Second. Any further discussion? All in favor, please raise your hand. All right. That passes. Thank you. Uh HPC 24-308 DR. Ms. Hoffeditz. A request for demolition review has been submitted per section 423 of the land management code for a garage at 505 Fleming Avenue. Planning staff have determined that the structure is in whole or in part 50 years or older.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com