MINUTES OF THE MONTCLAIR HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

JULY 21, 2005

Present:  Vice Chairman Ira Smith, Commissioners Kathleen McDonough, Denis Orloff, Edward Lippincott, Jonathan Perlstein, John Morris, Susan Brady

Absent:  Chairman Jerry Mosier

Also present:  Jonathan Mellon, Commission Secretary

Order and Announcements:  The meeting was called to order at 7:30 pm by Vice Chairman Smith.  Mr. Mellon called the roll and stated that the Commission had a quorum. The notice of compliance with the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act was read, indicating that appropriate notice was forwarded to the officially designated newspaper of Montclair and also posted in the Municipal Building.

Approval of Minutes of May 19, and June 16, 2005:  As the minutes had not been ready in order to be included in the packet sent to the Commission, the approval of the minutes was carried until the August 18 Meeting in order to allow for proper review by the Commissioners.

Approval of Resolution and Certificate of Appropriateness

Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of Commerce Bank / North, South East corner of Grove Street and Bloomfield Avenue  On motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner Lippincott, the memorializing resolution was adopted as modified.

Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of David Park, 1 Lackawanna Plaza  On motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner Perlstein, the memorializing resolution was adopted as modified.

Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of Philadelphia Sign Company, 491 Bloomfield Avenue  On motion by Commissioner Lippincott, seconded by Commissioner Orloff, the memorializing resolution was adopted as modified.

Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of Jonathan Felsman, 28-30 Church Street  On motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner Lippincott, the memorializing resolution was adopted as modified.

Adoption of Memorializing Resolution of Alliance for Integrated Healthcare, LLC., 292 Bloomfield Avenue  On motion by Commissioner McDonough, seconded by Commissioner Lippincott, the memorializing resolution was adopted as modified.

Old Business

Application 2005-12 ALPHA MTS USA, INC.

578 Bloomfield Avenue  (Block 2208, Lot 8)

At the time of the public hearing, Amir Shamma, representing the applicant, came forward and was sworn.  The documents that had been submitted by the applicant as part of the application package included; revised existing and proposed elevation and floor plan prepared by Evans Architect; and cut sheets for the proposed storefront, entrance door, and exterior lighting.

The applicant was returning to the Commission with a revised design for the proposed alterations to the storefront.  The original application was reviewed at the May 19th, and June 16th meetings, during which the Commission raised a number of concerns relating to the proposed alterations to the storefront as well as the proposed new signage.  The Commission also stated its concern over the lack of detail provided by the applicant regarding the proposed changes to the site.  The Commission asked the applicant to return at the July meeting with a new proposal for the storefront and signage that responded to the concerns that were raised at the previous meetings.

Mr. Shammaa began his presentation by discussing the proposed signage, and stated that the proposal now calls for one wall mounted sign approximately seventeen square feet in size, which is to consist of individual letters fixed directly to the building façade.  The letters are to be made of aluminum in a gold color, with the area behind the letters proposed to be covered with wooden panels between the existing vertical ribs, painted white.  In addition, the proposal now calls for the installation of six goose neck light fixtures, Sign Star Style B of B-K Lighting, in a white color.

He continued his presentation by reviewing the proposed replacement of the existing storefront with a new one that will closely match it.  The proposal calls for an identical replacement of the wooden portion of the storefront beneath the windows, using the same wooden material, design, and white color.  The glass portion of the storefront is proposed to be replaced with three new insulated double glass divisions, with a Kawneer Encore 2” aluminum framing in black color that will match the existing.  The existing door is proposed to be replaced with a new Kawneer 350 Heavy wide stile aluminum door in black with a 6” wide cross bar and 16” fully glazed side fixed light and matching cross bar, (detailed specifications for the door and hardware were provided in the application packet).  As part of the replacement of the door, the existing single glass curved panel is proposed to be replaced with a new one of insulated glass and of a similar curve.  In addition, the proposal calls for the installation of a decorative etching at the borders on the glass for the door as well as the storefront.

He completed his presentation by stating that the revised design did not call for any changes to the canopy or metal gate and fence that had been shown to the Commission at the earlier meetings.

Upon completion of the presentation by the applicant, the Commission stated that the applicant had returned with a revised design that had addressed the concerns raised at the previous meetings.  The Commission went on to state that the proposed signage was appropriate in scale and design for the building, and the lighting was of a simple design that will not overwhelm the façade.

The Commission noted that the applicant had worked with the Commission to produce a design that balances the needs of preserving the look of the distinctive storefront, while at the same time addressing the concerns of the business for the need for a more energy efficient storefront.  The Commission stated that the proposal would result in a storefront that retains the existing design, including the distinctive curved section of glass, while allowing for the installation of a new entrance.  In addition, the Commission noted that while the curve of the glass is proposed to be altered slightly, the effect on the overall appearance of the façade will be minor, and the exact replacement of other elements in the storefront will allow for the storefront to retain its overall look.

Vice Chairman Smith, hearing no further questions from members of the Commission or staff, opened the meeting to public for comments on the application.  No public comment was offered.

On a motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner Morris to approve the application with conditions, the Commission voted seven in favor, with no negative or abstaining votes.

Conditions:

A)  The goose neck light fixtures are to be centered on the wooden vertical ribs in the portion of the façade above the storefront.

New Business

Application 2005-21 – Samuel Allen.

346 Bloomfield Avenue (Block 3104, Lot 21)

At the time of the public hearing, Samuel Allen, the applicant, came forward and was sworn.  The documents that had been submitted as part of the application package included; a completed application for a certificate of appropriateness; photograph of the building with the proposed sign superimposed; and a rendering and layout plan for the proposed sign.

The applicant was proposing to install new wall mounted signage at the property referenced above.  The proposed new wall mounted signage will consist of two signs, which are proposed to be 15” high, and 59” wide, with golf colored lettering on a green background.  The proposed location of the signs is on the transoms located at the top of the storefronts, which is within the building sign location band.  The applicant was not proposing any additional changes to any other part of the storefront façade.

Mr. Allen provided the Commission with an overview of the proposal, stating that the signage was needed to properly advertise his business.

Upon completion of the presentation by the applicant, the Commission stated that the proposed wall mounted signage was appropriate in scale and design for the façade, and would not result in the loss or covering up of historic fabric.  The Commission noted that the proposed mounting height of the sign was appropriate in that it is located over the storefront windows.

Vice Chairman Smith, hearing no further questions from members of the Commission or staff, opened the meeting to public for comments on the application.  No public comment was offered.

On a motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner McDonough to approve the application, the Commission voted seven in favor, with no negative or abstaining votes.

Application 2005-22 – Lougman Khalil.

314-328 Bloomfield Avenue (Block 3104, Lot 22)

At the time of the public hearing, Yousef Sawalhi, representing Clifton Signs & Awnings, the sign contractor for the applicant, came forward and was sworn.  The documents that had been submitted as part of the application package included; a completed application for a certificate of appropriateness; rendering and layout plan for the proposed sign; and a photograph of the building.

The applicant was proposing to install a new wall mounted sign at the property referenced above.  The proposed new wall mounted signage will consist of one channel letter sign, with 8 letters plus a logo mounted on a raceway.  The sign will contain 18” high aluminum can letters, faced with plexiglas, with plastic surrounds.  The raceway is proposed to by 9’ in length, 7” high, and 8” deep.  The letters in the sign are proposed to be of a navy blue color, while the logo is proposed to be of an orange color, and the raceway is proposed to be black.  The proposed sign is to be located within the building sign location band.  The applicant was not proposing any lighting for the new sign, or any other alterations to the façade.

Mr. Sawalhi reviewed the proposed signage for the Commission, and provided a material sample for the channel letter sign.  He went on to state that the proposed raceway would be anchored to the building, and would not negatively impact the historic fabric of the building.

Upon completion of the presentation by the applicant, the Commission stated its concern over the proposed choice of sign for the façade.  The Commission went on to state that the proposed sign did not appear to be compatible with the overall design of the building, and suggested that the applicant consider other types of signage for the façade.

In response to the concerns raised by the Commission, the applicant agreed to return with a revised application at the August meeting.

Application 2005-23 – Competitive Signs and Graphics.

547 Bloomfield Avenue (Block 2211, Lot 7)

At the time of the public hearing, the representative for the applicant, came forward and was sworn.  The documents that had been submitted as part of the application package included; a completed application for a certificate of appropriateness; photograph of the awning that has since been removed; photograph of the building with the proposed awning superimposed; and a rendering and layout plan for the proposed awning.

The applicant was proposing to install a new awning with signage at the property referenced above.  The proposal calls for the installation of a new awning with support structure on the façade.  The proposed new awning is to be a black sumbrella canvas with gold lettering located on the front and sides of the lower portion of the awning.  An 8” scalloped edge is proposed to be located beneath the lettering.  The applicant was not proposing any additional changes to any other part of the storefront façade.

The representative for the applicant provided the Commission with an overview of the proposed awning with signage, and stated that the applicant would return to seek approval from the Commission for any window signage.

Upon completion of the presentation by the applicant, the Commission stated that the proposed awning was appropriate in scale and design for the façade, and would not negatively any historic fabric.  The Commission noted that the applicant would have to return with an application for the approval of the proposed window signage that was discussed at the hearing.

Vice Chairman Smith, hearing no further questions from members of the Commission or staff, opened the meeting to public for comments on the application.  No public comment was offered.

On a motion by Commissioner Orloff, seconded by Commissioner Brady to approve the application, the Commission voted seven in favor, with no negative or abstaining votes.

Application 2005-24 – Jonathan King.

156 Bloomfield Avenue (Block 3101, Lot 21)

At the time of the public hearing, Jonathan King, the applicant, came forward and was sworn.  The documents that had been submitted as part of the application package included; a completed application for a certificate of appropriateness; rendering and layout plan for the proposed sign; and a photograph of the building with the proposed sign superimposed.

The applicant was proposing to install a new wall mounted sign at the property referenced above.  The proposed new wall mounted signage will consist of one dibond material sign, which is proposed to be approximately 50” wide and 20” high, with 7” high vinyl lettering.  The sign is proposed to be of the same colors as the existing signs on the façade, with wine colored lettering on a white background.  The proposed sign is to be located within the building sign location band.  The applicant was not proposing any additional changes to any other part of the façade.

Mr. King provided the Commission with an overview of the proposed sign, and stated that the applicant was agreeable to any suggestions that the Commission mighty offer in order to have the sign improve the appearance of the building.

Upon completion of the presentation by the applicant, the Commission stated that the proposed wall mounted sign was appropriate in scale and design for the façade, and would be in keeping with the style of the existing signage on the building façade.  The Commission noted that the proposed sign would not cover any important architectural details and would comply with the size requirements of Montclair Code Section 347-109.  The Commission went on to state that although the signage on the building is not ideal, it does currently have some symmetry to it, and by matching the width of the new sign with the existing one that would be maintained.

Vice Chairman Smith, hearing no further questions from members of the Commission or staff, opened the meeting to public for comments on the application.  No public comment was offered.

On a motion by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Lippincott to approve the application with conditions, the Commission voted seven in favor, with no negative or abstaining votes.

Conditions:

A)  The proposed sign is to be of a width of 69” and a height of 20” in order to match the dimensions of the sign over the storefront window to the west.

B)  The proposed sign is to use the same typeface, as well as is to have the same border around the lettering, as found on the sign to the west.

Public Comment

There was no public comment offered during this portion of the meeting.

General Discussion Issues - Members of the Historic Preservation Commission

Proposed Pine Street Historic District:  Public Hearing on Thursday, July 28, 2005, at 7:30 p.m.

Mr. Mellon informed the Commission that a special meeting of the Commission had been scheduled for July 28, in order to have the Commission receive public comment on the proposed Pine Street Historic District.  He stated that public notice of the meeting had been provided 20 days prior to the scheduled date as required by the ordinance.  He noted that this included the publishing of the notice in the official newspaper of the township, notice by certified mail to all owners of affected property, and the placing of a copy of the nomination report in the Municipal Clerk’s office for public inspection.  He also informed the Commission that there had still not been any protests received from the owners of the affected properties.

Adjournment

There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm on a motion made by Commissioner Orloff and seconded by Commissioner McDonough.

Respectfully submitted,

Jonathan Mellon, Commission Secretary