BENNINGTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
                  Town Office Conference Room
           Wednesday, September 24, 2003 – 3:00 p.m.
                            MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: Meg Campbell, Tordis Ilg Isselhardt, Anne Bugbee, Victor Rolando, John Dostal, Sharon Yorke, David Aldrich, Hugh Baker, Bill Colvin joined at 4 p.m.
Yorke called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
  1. Minutes
Rolando suggested that the Stone Church should be referred to as the "Former Baptist Church" instead of the Stone Church.   The group decided upon the "North Bennington Stone Church."
Isslehardt pointed out a misleading sentence on page two, section 5.  The first sentence should read:  "Colvin noted that there is a party interested in the Stone Church in North Bennington."
Isselhardt moved, Dostal seconded the minutes of September 10, 2003 be approved as amended.
  2. HPC Roles and Duties
Yorke, Campbell and Colvin met last week.  They discussed reviewing agenda items before the meetings and all are encouraged to contribute.
Yorke presented the concept of limiting the term of HPC members to a maximum of two three-year terms with a minimum of a year break after the second term.  Part of the reasoning behind this is the increasing role and duties of HPC members.  This new structure would enable new people with new ideas to come to the Commission and give current members a break from the increasing intensity. 
Aldrich expressed concern about the difficulty of finding a good professional base if members were shifting, and suggested an advisory board of professionals.  Isselhardt suggested creating a list of potential professionals – real estate agents, bankers, architects, etc. – who could possibly be on the Commission.  Rolando pointed out that anyone could come to a meeting.  Campbell suggested inviting a professional to offer feedback to tackle a particularly challenging problem.  Isselhardt remarked that there are others out there who might have dual roles – a teacher who is an architect, for example – who might have a lot to contribute to the Commission.  Yorke remarked that it takes a while to learn about the Commission, but that having new ideas is a good thing.
Yorke presented the idea of formalizing a HPC Commission member seat on the Planning Commission.  Yorke currently serves on both Commissions though there is not a formal shared role.
The Commission agreed to think about the above items and discuss them at a later date.
  3. Zoning Bylaw Review and Comment
The Commission carefully considered three areas of the new Zoning Bylaws:  
     Article 4, Section 4.2  Abandonment and Demolition of Structures
     Table 3.19 Historic Central Bennington Design Review District
     Article 5, Section 5.4 Adaptive Reuse of Historic Structures
Dostal inquired about the definition of "historic structure".  The Commission discussed the implications of including non-contributing buildings that are listed in the survey as part of the definition of a "historic structure."  Perhaps a better definition is anything that is listed on the Historic Sites and Structures Survey that is at least 50 years old.
Article 4, Section 4.2  Abandonment  and Demolition of Structures
Isslehardt inquired whether or not the abandonment and demolition of structures applies to town owned buildings and activities.  The Commission agreed that it should, and it should be clarified in this section of the new zoning bylaws (Section 4.2).
Rolando inquired as to the standard for measuring a clear and substantial benefit to the community (page 69, lines 1-2).  The Commission agreed that this should be included.
The Commission recommends that line 8 on page 70 (Section 4.2) be reworded as follows:  "Input from community organizations, preservation groups, other associations and private citizens who may wish to evaluate and comment on a submission made under the financial hardship provision."
Rolando inquired about the disruption of land areas by single dwelling on a small lot size.  What kind of archeological protection is addressed in the new bylaws?  Yorke agreed to bring it up at tonight's public meeting.
Table 3.19 Historic Central Bennington Design Review District
The Commission expressed concern at section C-1-e. regarding the use of the historical colors illustrated in the reference book on file at the Zoning Administrator's office.  The Commission agreed that the colors shouldn't necessarily be applied to all buildings, and may not be accurate for all historic buildings (i.e.  using dark Victorian colors on a Greek Revival building.)
The Commission recommended that line 2d should be reworded to "Color changes to an exterior wall or roof, when [not which] new color is included…"
The Commission felt very strongly that the role of the Historic Preservation Commission should be included in (E) Development Review Board Procedure.  
Article 5, Section 5.4 Adaptive Reuse of Historic Structures
The Commission agreed that line 12 page 89 should be amended to read:  "Historic structures, for the purposes of these regulations, shall include all structures which are at least 50 years old."  
  4. At Risk Sites & Structures
Rolando added the Van Nostrum House on Harwood Hill and the house on the left side of Harwood Hill which is boarded up and for sale, possibly the Harwood House.
Isslehardt suggested on the form the construction date should be moved over to the right, and inquired as to the definition of "Watch Status."  
  5. Other Preservation Issues
Sign proposal for Eidson Books was approved as presented.
The Commission commended Nationwide for reducing their sign.  Colvin agreed to write a letter sharing the Commission's satisfaction with Nationwide.
Because the discussion of the new Zoning bylaws took so much time, the Commission agreed to discuss the National Landmark and Historic Preservation Commission goals at the next meeting.
Upcoming Meeting: October 8, 2003
Respectfully Submitted
Meg Campbell
Historic Preservation Commission Member