APRIL 23, 2003

Note: The April 23, 2003 minutes were transcribed from tapes and notes.

Chairperson Diane Rochelle called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Ms. Rochelle announced that Ms. Kathleen Morrow and Ms. Linda Fallon were excused from the meeting.

I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The following changes were made to the Minutes of March 26, 2003:

Page 2 - Reports - Historical Commission, LMMM Report, 2nd Paragraph, 2nd Sentence: Delete "with the original runner."
Page 5 - Mill Hill Buildings, Repairs: Bell Tower and Smith Street, 3rd Paragraph, Last Sentence: Change "work" to "supplies."

** MS. FALASCA MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2003 AS CORRECTED.
** MRS. BOOTH SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED.

Ms. Rochelle informed the Commissioners of Mrs. Morrow's surgery and passed around a card to be signed. Ms. Rochelle stated that she had also sent flowers to Mrs. Morrow on behalf of the Commissioners.II.

REPORTS - HISTORICAL COMMISSION

LMMM report

This report was taken out of order on the agenda for the convenience of Ms. St. Aubyn.Historical Commission
April 23, 2003

Page 1Ms. St. Aubyn informed the Commissioners that she had brought the location agreement with Paramount Pictures and stated that the agreement was now between the City of Norwalk, the LMMM and the Norwalk Historical Commission being named as the people leasing through Paramount. She stated that the agreement has been read by the City Law Dept. and that they are revising a few clauses in it. Paramount Pictures will be meeting with the City tomorrow to go over some of those clauses but that nothing substantial will be changed. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that what she needed from the Commission was for them to look the agreement over and to have a resolution appointing Ms. Rochelle to sign the agreement for the Commission, and for acceptance of the agreement in order to go forward with the project Ms. Rochelle stated that she had picked up a copy of the agreement from Ms. St. Aubyn that evening before the meeting and had made copies for all of the Commissioners which were then distributed for their reading. Ms. Rochelle stated that she had discussed the agreement at length with the Corporation Counsel's office, and other than the misspelling of Mr. Iannaccone's name, which she pointed out to the Law Dept., the Corporation Counsel assured Ms. Rochelle that the City is going to protect the building and that they are behind this one hundred percent. Ms. Rochelle stated that it was not a complete lease and that there may be an addition of an indemnification clause but not anything to do with preservation or restoration but will protect the City. Ms. St. Aubyn added that there are also additional insurance policies as well.
Ms. Falasca asked if Ms. St. Aubyn could explain the insurance policies. Ms. St. Aubyn replied that she thought the policies were for $5 million dollars per incident, both for bodily injury and for injury to the building. Mr. Bloom pointed out an error in the agreement that mentioned placing carpeting in the dining room, which should have been the drawing room, saying that the dining room was already carpeted. Ms. Rochelle said that she would see that this and any other corrections would be faxed to the Law Dept.
Ms. Gunn said that she was curious to know what kind of carpeting would be put into the drawing room. Ms. St. Aubyn said that the entire rotunda floor will be restored, that Paramount Pictures has photographed and made intricate drawings of each one of the pieces of wood, that Paramount would be repairing the pieces of wood that are too damaged in order to retain, and that on top of that, Paramount will match the red rugs that are down in the rotunda floor with the same color going up the stairs, it has a very small, similar to the original, gold diamond and cut into the side is a scroll of gold. Ms. Gunn asked if this was in the photographs. Ms. St. Aubyn stressed that it was similar to the carpeting that was originally on the stairs. Ms. Gunn asked how the carpeting would be attached to the stairs. Ms. St. Aubyn said that Paramount would hire a carpeting installer to look at that and that Fran Harrison, who was in the carpet business for a long time, has discovered how the original carpet was attached up underneath the lip of the stair, and that the new carpeting will be attached in the same manner. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that Paramount Pictures is working with Port Draper and that Port Draper will oversee any of the work that goes into it.
Ms. Gunn asked about the color of the carpeting for the drawing room. Ms. St. Aubyn replied that the carpets were a dark blue with a scroll around the outside. Ms. Gunn asked if the scrolling would be in the general depth of the ones in the photographs. Ms. St. Aubyn assented. Mr. Bloom questioned the fire retardant. Ms. St. Aubyn said that Paramount was bringing her a copy of it, and that they do not allow anything on their sets that does not have the highest level of fire retardant. Ms. Falasca asked if Paramount was going to be cleaning the skylight glass. Ms. St. Aubyn said that Paramount would be bringing in someone who was a professional in order to clean it. She stated that they would be cleaning the skylight glass, all of the woodwork and cleaning anything that was coming down from the rotunda as there was a patina of approx. two inches of dust over everything. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that nothing was going to be refinished. She stated that Paramount would be taking the rotunda floor and doing everything by hand, cleaning it, they are working with Port Draper who has talked to experts in order to find out what they should be using and that they would be overseeing it.
Ms. Falasca questioned the replacement of hardware on all of the doors on the main and second floors. Ms. St. Aubyn explained that bits and pieces of the mansion have fallen off over the years and are stored upstairs, and that these pieces would be gone through to see if they could be repaired using the original pieces as much as possible. Ms. Gunn stated that in the skylight area there were plexi panels that were to protect the skylight glass from falling through and asked if Paramount would be replacing the plexi panels. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that she didn't know but that each step would be gone over with Port Draper as to how it should be done correctly.Historical Commission

Ms. Gunn asked if there was any idea who would be doing the restoration of the rotunda floor and if the Commission could see a resume of their work. Ms. St. Aubyn replied that they have worked with the Art Dept. at Paramount Pictures, who will be handling this and with Port Draper, who has talked to various people about what should be done. Paramount's Art Dept. was willing to put in the highest grade wood necessary in order to match but as it turned out, the wood in the rotunda floor was very very cheap wood, and if Paramount had put in a fruitwood they couldn't match it exactly, so they are actually matching the color exactly to what the floor wood color is. Ms. St. Aubyn pointed out that when the carpets on the rotunda floor had been cleaned, they were cleaned wet, which damaged the rotunda floor and a lot of the pieces of the floor had come loose, and in some instances those pieces are in the shape of a "U". Ms. St. Aubyn stated that what Paramount will do is replace each piece and staining it to the colors adjacent. Ms. Gunn said that they would not be using the atlas of cedar or variety of different woods; they were just staining the replacement wood to match the color. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that if it were a piece of fruitwood that was damaged, Paramount would replace it with another piece of fruitwood and stain it to match the color. She also noted that there would be a carpenter onsite in the Mansion in order to replace all these bits and pieces of wood that need to be done. The floor is going to be hand cleaned, the pieces that can be restored will be restored, they will be lifted up and put back down again if the wood can be saved. If the wood cannot be saved, the pieces will be individually be protected for archives and new pieces of wood will be cut and put in and will be as closely stained as possible, and then the entire floor will be hand-polished.
Ms. Falasca questioned the replacement of any light fixtures. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that no light fixtures would be put into the walls of the LMMM. Mr. Bloom was concerned about a line in the agreement stating temporarily hanging a chandelier from the skylight. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that that statement was inaccurate, the chandelier will not be suspended from the skylight but there will be an arc built across it and the skylight will hang from that and won't be adjacent to the glass. Ms. Gunn asked if there will be scaffolding built to hang the chandelier. Ms. St. Aubyn said that there will be scaffolding both to paint and to suspend the chandelier. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that Paramount has spent hours at the LMMM with detailed drawings and measurements to ensure that the LMMM will be protected. Ms. Gunn mentioned her concern that the movie company will operate by its own standards and that in previous situations she has heard that the movie company involved promised to do certain things to protect the building being used, and that once they left the site it was discovered that these things were not done. Ms. Gunn was concerned that this would also be the case at the LMMM. Ms. St. Aubyn assured Ms. Gunn and the Commissioners that Paramount Pictures has bent over backwards and will be very caring about the LMMM. She said that Paramount was looking to be a "good neighbor" and that they are looking to make this a positive experience, and that she believes this will be so.
Ms. Rochelle stated that this was one of the reasons she had an extended conversation with Corporation Counsel this evening as she wanted assurances that the LMMM would be protected and that preservation would be an important attribute of this agreement, and she was fully assured that the City and the Legal Dept. was behind the Commission.
Ms. Gunn asked if the $70,000 would be going to the LMMM. Ms. St. Aubyn replied that $15,000 would be going to the City with the balance coming to the LMMM. Ms. Falasca asked if any other rooms in the LMMM would be used for storage or walk-throughs. Ms. St. Aubyn said that possibly the library would be used, but that would be all. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that there would be coverings on the floors as far as she has been told. She also said that everything would be photographed by both the LMMM and Paramount and that there was a seven-day review period after Paramount leaves. Ms. Falasca questioned the hours Paramount would be inside the LMMM while filming. Ms. St. Aubyn was not sure but thought that the filming would be done between 6 or 7 a.m. and run through 7 p.m. and that there would be someone on site throughout the filming, monitoring the situation. She also stated that there will be a roped-off area for the public to view the activity at the LMMM which will be controlled as much as possible. Ms. St. Aubyn said that the film crew will be bringing in 18 tractor-trailers which will arrive at approx. 5:00 a.m. and be totally in place before the Park opens and will not obstruct the public's access to the Park. She stated that the tractor-trailers will be located in the South Lawn and that this will be a separate agreement with Parks & Rec. for bonding and whatever needs to be done for the grass. Ms. St. Historical Commission
April 23, 2003
Page 3Aubyn stated that she has worked very hard with Paramount and that if she thought the LMMM would be put in jeopardy in any way, she would not have agreed to allow its use. Ms. Rochelle reminded the Commissioners that the actual time of filming is only eight days.
Ms. Bryant wanted to know who had the authority to say no to Paramount if something were to be proposed that they did not want to do and asked if there was something in the contract indicating that they had the right to say no or a process to handle this. She asked if the contract gave Paramount the right to override Ms. St. Aubyn or her staff on any question. Ms. St. Aubyn said that she would be on site, Ms. Elizabeth Montgomery would be on site as would Ms. Susanne LaTulipe and Port Draper, and that they would be there to say no if it was necessary to do so but that she didn't feel it was necessary to state this in the contract. Ms. St. Aubyn asked that the Commission approve the contract. Ms. Rochelle said that she would take a motion to approve the location agreement with Paramount Pictures with the four changes that the Commission has stipulated, and that she be the signatory for the Norwalk Historical Commission.

** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED THAT THE LOCATION AGREEMENT BE APPROVED WITH THE CHANGES STIPULATED, AND THAT MS. ROCHELLE BE DESIGNATED SIGNATORY FOR THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
** MRS. BOOTH SECONDED.

Ms. Rochelle asked if there was any further discussion. Ms. Falasca said that she would still like to see something added to the agreement stating that nothing would be attached to or put into the walls. Ms. Rochelle agreed to add that to the contract.

** MOTION PASSED.

Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. St. Aubyn if she had anything else to report on the LMMM. Ms. St. Aubyn stated that this coming Sunday there would be a book signing at the LMMM from 1 to 3 p.m., the book is called "Mouse Mansion" and was done in the 1960's by Judy Rodriguez, one of the original people who helped save the LMMM. On May 18th there will be a concert, which is part of the "Music at the Mansion" series, which will also benefit the Norwalk Symphony

Hoffmann Architecture contract

Ms. Rochelle told the Commissioners that the Hoffmann architectural contract has been signed by Mayor Knopp on April 4th and Hoffmann should be working on the drawings. Ms. Gunn said that there should be a preliminary meeting on the drawings. Ms. Rochelle said that once the drawings were done the search can begin for a contractor and the project can be put out to bid.

Repairs: Veranda, Conservatory and Drainage

Ms. Falasca asked about the drains and Ms. Rochelle stated that they were being worked on now.

HISTORICAL CEMETERIES REPORT

Repairs: Grave Markers and Notification Process

Ms. Rochelle said that the signs were now up at the four cemeteries, the notifications were sent to the Probate Court and the Connecticut State Historical Commission, and that things were going along according to schedule. She reported that the Commission has received a check for $500 from the Norwalk Historical Society which represents a contribution towards the Selleck plot restoration which was deposited in the Cemeteries account, and the total of the Cemeteries account is now $775. Ms. Rochelle said there is also $7,000 in the Capital account for restoration. She stated that restoration work can begin in July and that the Commission now has to obtain estimates for that work. Mrs. Booth questioned the amount in the Cemeteries account and Ms. Rochelle explained that $275 came from the Pine Island Cemetery tour from a few years ago, plus the $500 from the NHS, which totals the $775. Ms. Falasca asked if the Commission is required to put the cemetery work out to multiple bids. Ms. Rochelle explained that anything under $7,500 does not have to go before the Land Use committee, but they have to have two estimates.
Ms. Rochelle stated that the wood chip pile at Brookside Cemetery is either in the process of being removed, or has been removed by DPW.
Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if she had received the GPS survey of Pine Island from Mr. Irving Slavid. Ms. Gunn stated that she has not yet received it but that she had spoken with the Mr. Slavid, that it was in the works and she should receive it soon.
Ms. Gunn told Ms. Rochelle that in the 2004 Capital Budget, the Commission has received $10,000 for the cemeteries and she believed that this was because the Planning Commission did the condition assessment and study which shows a prescribed plan. Ms. Gunn also stated that she had received several phone calls from members of the public who had seen the signs at the four cemeteries and were interested about the work to be done.
Ms. Rochelle told Ms. Gunn that she could begin obtaining estimates on the proposed cemetery work. Ms. Gunn reminded Ms. Rochelle that at a previous meeting she had requested help with this from someone else on the Commission. Ms. Rochelle appointed Mr. Bondi to assist Ms. Gunn. Mr. Bondi did not attend the meeting so he was unable to comment.

ROGERS RITCH MERRIT HOUSE

Bid/Rebuilding Status

Ms. Rochelle stated that the bid is proceeding in a timely fashion. She stated that she had had a pre-bid conference this morning with the three qualified bidders that the Commission had approved. Ms. Rochelle stated that the bid is due back on May 7th, the contractors are reviewing the materials they took with them, and will have to come back before the Commission with any questions and addendums that they might have. Ms. Rochelle asked the Commission for a motion to allow the Bid Committee to approve the contractor and forward the contractor's name to the Land Use committee for the May 15th meeting.

** MRS. BOOTH MOVED TO ALLOW THE BID COMMITTEE TO APPROVE THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE RRM AND FORWARD THE NAME TO THE LAND USE COMMITTEE IN TIME FOR THE MAY 15TH MEETING
** MS. FALASCA SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED.

Ms. Rochelle reported that they have also received $500 from Pitney Bowes and $100 from the Evening Women's Club of Norwalk.

MILL HILL BUILDINGS

Norwalk Historical Society report

Ms. Rochelle introduced Ms. Lynn Friedman to the Commission and informed them that Ms. Friedman was now the Acting President of the NHS as the former president, Mr. Richard Booth, had resigned. Ms. Friedman gave her report verbally.
Ms. Friedman reported that Mr. Booth has resigned as president of the NHS and that she has stepped up as Acting President, and that Mr. Ed Cozzette is currently the Vice President. She stated that the NHS will be holding a board meeting in June when a new executive committee will be voted upon. Ms. Friedman stated that the Mill Hill Complex Building Committee has been reorganized, with Mr. Phil Taylor as chair, and Ms. Gail Wall and Ms. Pat Genova acting as assistants and liaisons to Ms. Gunn.

Town House Stove, Ventilation System and Hot Water Heater

Ms. Friedman reported that Ms. Wall and Ms. Genova will be contacting Ms. Gunn for the specifics on these projects. She also stated that, at Ms. Rochelle's suggestion, they are also looking into obtaining an outside light for the front of the Town House to shine on the flagpole which will enable them to leave the flag up at all times.
Regarding the squirrel damage, Ms. Friedman reported that she has two bids on the repair of curtains, which she presented to Ms. Rochelle, and that she understood that the Commission is obtaining bids on the repair of the chewed windows. She stated that no one at the NHS has touched anything in the Fitch Law Office in case someone from the City's Risk Management or the insurance company needed to see the damage in person. Ms. Friedman asked that if someone does need to view the damage, the NHS would like to have this done as soon as possible as they have scheduled school programs beginning on May 12 and though they don't expect the repairs to be completed by that time, they would like the building to be cleaned by then. Ms. Rochelle stated that Ms. Gunn would be working with the NHS on this. Ms. Gunn reported that there was a $1,000 deductible. Ms. Booth stated that at the last meeting, the Commission had asked Mr. Booth, who was then President of the NHS, to obtain estimates on repairing the windows. Mr. Booth contacted someone from the list he was given and two people would be sending an estimate to Ms. Rochelle. Ms. Rochelle stated that she had not received anything to date, but that as soon as she receives them, she will pass them on to Ms. Gunn.
Ms. Friedman reported that the NHS board has decided to table any decisions on the installation of the stove in the Town House kitchen until a new Board of Directors is elected in June. Ms. Rochelle stated that the stove has already been approved by the Commission. Ms. Friedman stated that she had checked the minutes of the NHS Board meetings and it had never been approved by the Board of Directors. Ms. Rochelle stated that that was okay because the City owns the building and the NHS is the rentor. She stated that if the Commission wanted to change their vote, that was fine, but that at this moment in time the Commission has approved the installation of a stove, it has not approved cabinetry, but has approved the stove, which can go forward for code compliance, for heating water and for limited cooking. She stated that it was better than a hot plate and was the Commission's decision from several months ago. Ms. Friedman said the Commission would have to approve the cabinetry before they can move ahead with the stove because the cabinet has to be removed before the stove can be installed. Ms. Rochelle stated that they could proceed with the purchase of the stove.
Ms. Gunn stated her concern that Purchasing had requested a letter from Ms. Rochelle stating the stove would only be used for warming purposes. She said that the concern was that in five years' time different people could be running the NHS and may not realize the stove was not to be used for cooking. She asked Ms. Rochelle if there was any type of signage that the Commission wanted to put up in the kitchen on or near the stove stating that the stove was to be used for warming purposes only. Mr. Iannaccone agreed that this was a good idea. Ms. Gunn stated that they need to protect the City from liability. Ms. Falasca stated the staff at the LMMM cannot cook any longer, that heating and warming is allowed but no cooking. She said that there is no signage regarding this but that everyone is aware of it and it is passed down as new people come in.
Ms. Falasca asked Ms. Friedman if there was a particular reason why the NHS wanted to put the stove purchase on hold as she thought the Commissioners all had the idea that this would help the NHS with their various events. Ms. Friedman said that when the idea first came up everyone thought it was a good idea, but at the end the Board was split with some people thinking a stove was a good idea, and others thinking a warming oven would serve the same purpose and eliminate the immediate necessity of removing the cabinetry to install a new stove. Others felt there was a danger of an open flame. Ms. Friedman said that especially when the NHS holds their Taste of Thanksgiving event, the kitchen is crowded with children and adults. She also stated that some people in the NHS felt they should be making more room for an office and taking up less room for the kitchen. Ms. Friedman said that the NHS really does need the capacity for warming food, but they weren't really sure that a stove was the answer and the Board wanted to discuss it further.
Mrs. Booth said that it seemed to her to be a change of mind as it was all "gung-ho" last fall, that Mr. Cozzette had drawn pictures and it was all systems go. Ms. Rochelle questioned that now that Mr. Cozzette was the new Vice President, he no longer interested in the stove. Ms. Friedman said that she believed that when Mr. Cozzette looked into it a little more, he felt the same way and in fact has done further research on the warming oven idea. Mrs. Booth said that earlier, Mr. Cozzette had said that a warming oven was just as expensive as a stove, but Mr. Iannaccone pointed out that he thought Mr. Cozzette was talking about a commercial stove as opposed to a warming oven, which was what he and Mr. Cozzette had discussed regarding the matter. Mrs. Booth said that she didn't know as she didn't have anything to do with the pricing, but she was aware that there had been a stove in the kitchen several years ago, which had been taken out and a hot plate used instead, which has been very inconvenient for people using the kitchen. Ms. Rochelle said that to her, she couldn't see that a warming oven was preferable to a stove and couldn't see the functionality of it at all. Ms. Falasca said that in the long run, she thought the NHS would be happier with a stove. Ms. Rochelle pointed out that they were now hooking up a hot water heater and might just as well hook up a stove at the same time in a single installation.
Mr. Iannaccone asked who was paying for the stove. Ms. Rochelle stated that the Commission was, that the money was there in the budget. Ms. Gunn said that before purchasing the stove, they needed to be sure the money was there. Ms. Rochelle said that the estimate for the Bell Tower was $5800 and that they have $25,000, so yes they did have the money. Ms. Bryant said that it also was a matter of aesthetics as many people enter the Town House by the back door through the kitchen. Ms. Falasca said that the kitchen part of the building was an add-on and not historical at all. Mr. Iannaccone said that when this first all came about, he thought the NHS said they were going to purchase the stove. Ms. Rochelle said that they did offer to purchase the stove, but seemingly with new officers, that purchase was out the window. Ms. Friedman said again that the stove purchase was never approved by the NHS Board of Directors, the last time the Board heard anything on the subject was the price of the commercial fan, at which time it was voted down.
Ms. Gunn said that when Ms. Friedman mentioned the Taste of Thanksgiving being crowded and the possibility of an open flame, she had such chills. Ms. Rochelle said that they cooked everything in the outer Law Office, why would she even say that, the NHS was not going to have open flames. Ms. Gunn said she disagreed with Ms. Rochelle on that, and whether or not she had a chill was her own business. Ms. Gunn asked why not consider an electric stove, which is safer in an historic building. Mr. Iannaccone stated that if the NHS was going to buy the stove and now does not want to buy it, why should the Commission buy it. Ms. Rochelle said that was a good question. Mrs. Booth said that the NHS had had an electrical stove before on a 220 line, but that a 220 line was not priced. Ms. Gunn said that when she talked to the electrician, the electrician did not see a 220 line as a problem, it was already coming into the Town House. Mr. Iannaccone said that the building was sufficient to support a 220 line and that many houses all over the city operate on a 60 watt line. Ms. Friedman said that they had not decided to do away with the purchase of a stove, but that the discussion was tabled until the election of new officers in June. Ms. Rochelle said that the Commission would need two estimates for the purchase, once the Historical Society decided what they wanted to do.
Ms. Friedman continued with her report, reminding the Commission that the Historical Society's annual meeting would be held at the Town House on May 14 at 7:30 p.m. and invited all members of the Society to attend. She thanked Mr. & Mrs. Booth for setting up visits from Norwalk Public School children, including Tracy, Fox Run, Marvin and Silvermine schools. Ms. Friedman announced that June 8th would be Children's Day at the NHS. She mentioned that the Mill Hill buildings would be open on Sundays beginning May 25 and that they would also open on Memorial Day during and after the parade.
Ms. Friedman closed her report by stating that the NHS is beginning a long-term project of developing a
professional NHS Museum and that they are working with members of the CT League of History Organizations to find out ways to obtain grants and professional museum consultants.
Ms. Friedman asked the Commission for help with the signage at Mill Hill. She said that she and Mr.Cozzette felt that the sign was not visible enough from the street and people could not see it as they drove past. She said that she and Mr. Cozzette had spent several hours at City Hall at Planning & Zoning and Public Works discussing this, and the only thing it looks like they really can do at this point is to take the same size sign and turn it perpendicular to the road, but that it would have to go through the Zoning Board of Appeals, and that if the sign stays where it is, they don't have to do anything, but if they do anything new, it must be 40 feet back from the property line, which would put it on top of the building and no one would be able to see it. Ms. Friedman said that if the NHS were to mount a sign on the building itself, it could only be a foot high and half the length of the building. Ms. Falasca said that if they changed the direction of the sign, only traffic coming one way could see it. Ms. Friedman said the sign would be painted on both sides. Ms. Rochelle said that the application for this variance was going to have to come from the Historical Commission because the City is the owner of the property and the Commission is the agent for the City. Ms. Friedman said that Mr. Cozzette is ready to work on this right away because if they start work immediately, the sooner they start work the sooner they can get the new sign up. She said the earliest they can get on the P&Z agenda was July 28 and it would be nice to have the new sign up for fall.
Ms. Rochelle asked what is the name that is going to be put on the sign. Ms. Friedman said that this could be discussed. She said that Mr. Tod Bryant suggested "The Historic Village at Mill Hill," and since the NHS would be paying for the sign and since they are currently leasing the property, they would like to have "Norwalk Historical Society" on the sign so that when people come to the buildings they know that this is where the Historical Society is. Ms. Friedman said that people also don't know that there are other buildings in the back of the property. Mr. Bloom said that one of the biggest problems with the current sign is that it is white and blends right into the background. He suggested a deeper green with gold letters, or something that really caught the eye. Ms. Friedman said that putting something new and different would also catch people's eyes. Several options were suggested and discussed by the Commission and Ms. Friedman. Ms. Rochelle asked if the NHS were going to pay for all the fees to be incurred by doing this as well as the cost of the sign, as the Commission has no more money in its budget. Ms. Friedman said the assumed they will be. Mr. Bloom asked if this would have to go before Land Use if there was a name change at Mill Hill. Ms. Rochelle said that this was something else that would have to be investigated. Ms. Friedman said that the NHS will bring a design and all of the costs to the Commission before they vote on any changes. Ms. Rochelle asked if Ms. Friedman would come back in May with some of this information to be discussed.Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn why the Commission still showed in the financial statements that there still was $4,384 left in the Special Appropriation for the Fitch Law Office. Ms. Gunn said she thought she had cleared that out but would check on it. Ms. Rochelle said that as of April 17 it was still listed.

Repairs: Bell Tower and Smith Street

Ms. Rochelle said that they were in the midst of processing a purchase order with Walter's Construction. Ms. Gunn said that in doing research on the roof leaks, she found several different pictures that she showed Ms. Friedman that showed the Bell Tower in different states over the years from the late 19th Century to the present, and it has several different bases. Ms. Gunn felt that the Commission needed to do an assessment of the buildings at Mill Hill particularly since the squirrel damage. She said that since the Commission received money for the Capital Budget for the cemeteries, she tried to figure out why the cemeteries received money while other projects didn't, she felt that it was the condition assessment report that was the determining factor. Ms. Gunn said that it was her understanding that this was not a serious leak, but that there has been evidence of leaks upstairs for many years, and it should be re-addressed.
Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if she was aware that the Commission approved a purchase order to do a repair on the leak and that Ms. Gunn was instructed to follow through with that approval. Ms. Gunn said that she is advisory to the Commission and that as she did the research and she found the different images, thought about it, talked about it and read over the old files, she thought that the Commission should step back and think this through before they go ahead and patch this since they don't have a situation like they had at the Carriage House. Ms. Rochelle said they have evidence there was a leak and that they have the money to do the repairs. Ms. Gunn reminded Ms. Rochelle that in the summer she told Ms. Gunn that she didn't think there was a leak there and they didn't need to spend the money to do that, but that in the fall her opinion suddenly changed.
Mrs. Booth said that there were parts of the Bell Tower missing. Ms. Gunn agreed, saying that was because of the vinyl siding put on the Tower. Mrs. Booth said that's what they had estimates to fix. Ms. Rochelle said that's what the Commission approved to fix. Ms. Rochelle said that Ms. Gunn was absolutely correct in saying that they should do assessments and preservation and research and things like that, but that this Commission in December approved the work. Ms. Falasca said they need to address the immediate problem and that water problems do not go away. Ms. Gunn said that the problem was that when she speaks to Walter's Construction, he just quotes $3,500 to fix it, he doesn't break it down to the different aspects of the repair, and that he does not guarantee or assure them that if they spend $3,500 they are going to fix the leak at all. Ms. Gunn said that there are so many problems because of the flashing and the vinyl siding that it seemed to her that before they spend the $3,500 to fix it they should send someone up there to assess it, to take away some of the vinyl siding on the bottom which most people believe is the source of the problem, and to see what they find. Ms. Rochelle said that was why they approved an amount of $5,000 should they find something up there once they get up there. Ms. Falasca said that Walter's was going to have to take off the vinyl siding once he gets up there. Ms. Gunn said that no, not the way the Commission has approved it, and she felt that the Commission needs to consider getting a professional conservator to assess the repair. Ms. Gunn pointed out that it was a very different business to manage a historic restoration property than it is to manage a school or fire department building or some of the functioning City properties. She felt that the Commission would be doing a better job for the building if they give it more consideration and bring in a professional.
Ms. Falasca said that sometimes you never find where the leak comes from. Ms. Rochelle said that they do know that there are missing tiles up there and asked what Walter's Construction was going to do. Ms. Gunn said they were going to put a new membrane roof on the top and going up from the gable of the Town House, he was going to pull off the vinyl siding to see what he could find and then replace it. Mr. Bloom said that the reason the vinyl was there was because at one time the Town House was downwind from a chemical corporation on Smith Street and it turned the paint yellow, which is also the reason there is not a wood roof on the building any longer. He stated that that was the third roof the building has had since 1965 and that the City got tired of replacing it so they used asphalt shingles the last time.
Ms. Gunn said that she had presented these ideas to the Commission last year, that the Tower repair be done in phases, as they did not have the money to do it all at once. She asked if the Commission wanted to keep the Tower completely covered in vinyl. She said that after listening to the Commission this evening, she is wondering whether they should consider delaying the repair until they can decide what they want to do. Ms. Rochelle said that she thought the Commission had approved just a simple vinyl repair, replace the tiles, fix up the flashing, stop the leak but not do a complete refurb because they didn't have the money for it. Ms. Gunn said that all the contractors are telling her that water is getting into the Tower in some way, that there is a "bathtub" that has occurred because of the different roofs and the flashing that went on, and this may be causing the water to get trapped in a kind of gutter. Ms. Gunn said that there is a new committee from the NHS and she would like to work with the new committee on nailing this down more because it is unclear what should be done.
Mr. Bloom said that he thought that at this point, why don't they just fix the Tower and see if it stops the leak because his fear is that by doing extensive work at this time, they may open themselves to a large expense for money they don't have and then they will be committed to a much larger project that the City may not allow. He felt that they should just get the basic repair done and see if it holds. Mr. Bloom said that when the Town House was worked on in 1965, they sandblasted the bricks, which removed the glazing as well as the five coats of paint, but that was the technology at the time. He said that mistakes do get made, but sometimes with good intentions. Mr. Bloom said he felt that they ought to go ahead with theTower repair now, and later when they can afford to, the Commission can do the more extensive repair. Ms. Rochelle directed Ms. Gunn to continue to get the quotes for the Tower repair.

NORWALK MUSEUM REPORT

Ms. Gunn gave a verbal report to the Commission. She reported that the data entry of the Museum art collections is continuing, that they have discovered a few computer glitches that they have overcome, that they have been using the digital camera to photograph the art collection and it is going well with several volunteers assisting. She said that the Museum has been open on a regular basis and that Museum staff continues to serve a lot of people doing research on both genealogy and in-house research and general layout of what Norwalk was like. Ms. Gunn said that in the last couple of weeks there have been many families visiting the Museum due to school vacations. She discussed the GAIN program meeting the Museum hosted with the Rowayton Elementary School students and their parents, and the "What Is a Museum" program with second graders in which the hatting industry was presented and the students made felt. She announced the Raggedy Ann Tea Party to be held in May and invited the Commissioners to attend.
Ms. Gunn reported the volunteer hours at the Museum have increased, and she announced the hiring of a new part-time employee, Betsy Jewell. She told the Commission she now had the modem for the Internet, the Internet account, and that Rick Hayes from the City Data Processing Dept. would be completing the hookup soon. Ms. Gunn also handed out flyers for the new Switch Tower Railroad Museum, which will be opening on May 3rd. Ms. Gunn discussed the upcoming railroad exhibit and Briggs students' photography exhibit at the Museum.
Mr. Iannaccone asked about the light for the flagpole. Ms. Rochelle said that several months ago the Commission approved the purchase of the light and asked for the status. Ms. Gunn said that she had been in contact with Rick at Plaza Realty & Management several times and that they say they are working on it, but it has not yet been installed. Ms. Hayes stated that she herself had called Plaza Realty in February and that they told her the outside light was "in the works" and that it would be installed at some point but the Museum is still waiting for the light two months later.

NORWALK HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY (NHRI) AND DEMOLITIONS

36 Nursery Street

This item was taken out of order on the agenda for the convenience of guests. Ms. Rochelle introduced Mr. Somma to the Commission. Mr. Somma is the owner of 36 Nursery Street and is the very first demolition on the new 90-day demolition delay ordinance which the Commission would be discussing this evening. Ms. Gunn thanked Mr. Somma for the picture and other information that he delivered to the Commission. Ms. Gunn stated that since the Commission has not gone through this procedure before, she wanted to point out that once the notice has been printed in the newspaper and she received a copy of the notice and photographs and other pieces that are part of the process, then Code Enforcement issues the "Deemed Filed" date, which in this case was April 10th and that this is when the 21 day countdown begins if no one objects, or the 90 days countdown begins if there are any objections. Ms. Gunn asked if the Commission wanted to open a discussion on this demolition.
Ms. Rochelle asked if any of the Commissioners had been by to view the house. Mr. Iannaccone said that he had seen it and that it doesn't seem to have any historical significance. Ms. Rochelle stated that the Commission had heard no objections to the demolition so far. Mr. Iannaccone said that it was hard to believe that the house was over 50 years old. Mr. Somma pointed out that the house had originally been built as a garage in 1947 and was built on a slab with cement blocks. Ms. Falasca said that she had also gone by to view the house but had not been inside it, and she didn't think there was any historical significance either.
Ms. Rochelle stated that she had gone over some of the procedure with Mr. Ed Schmidt since he had written the ordinance, and since the Commission had not been given any guidelines on what to do. She felt that the sooner the Commission can find out about a property the better as it allows research to be done. Ms. Rochelle stated that the property can be discussed in a preliminary review and the owner of the property can be invited so he is aware that the Commission will be discussing the property, but they are not required to invite the owner although everyone felt that inviting the owner was the better thing to do. She said that the next step in the procedure would
be to go through the 21-day period and wait to see if anyone objects. Ms. Rochelle stated that if the Commission reviews the property and finds no objection, when the 21st day comes, Ms. Gunn can inform Code Enforcement that there are no objections and the demolition can precede. If there are any objections in between the Commission meetings, that between Ms. Gunn and the Commission, they can field the objection to see if any new information is being brought forth, is it a frivolous objection or is there a reason for a second review of the structure, and this way the Commission will not be encumbered by a second or third meeting on the same property and can try to do everything within the regular monthly meeting. Ms. Rochelle said that if this is the procedure that the Commission would like to follow, then this will be the Commission's consensus and after the 21 days, Ms. Gunn will notify Code Enforcement and the demolition will proceed.
Ms. Gunn questioned whether Ms. Rochelle wanted her to inform Code Enforcement immediately that the Commission has found no objection on the property, or did Ms. Rochelle want her to wait until the 21st day. Ms. Falasca wanted to know, if there was any response from the community, who is notified, and both Ms. Gunn and Ms. Rochelle said that Code Enforcement would be, and then the Commission is notified afterwards. Ms. Falasca said she thought that as she understood it from the March meeting, once Ms Gunn is notified by Code Enforcement, she was to then notify someone on the Commission. Ms. Gunn pointed out that the Commission was aware of the Nursery Street demolition before she had been informed and that it was Ms. Rochelle who informed her. Ms. Gunn stated that there were a lot of things that needed to be ironed out in order to have a smoother process and that it would be a matter of time and several demolitions before the bugs were worked out. Ms. Gunn said that, for example, she was under the impression that after Mr. Ireland spoke to the Commission in March, she was to receive photographs of the properties at the same time she received copies of the application. Ms. Rochelle said that yes, she would receive photographs, but only after the deemed filed date was added and that the ordinance was very specific on that point. Ms. Rochelle said that everyone would have to work together in the future in order to be as efficient in this process as possible. Ms. Gunn said that Mr. Ireland has agreed to send her a copy of the notice once it is deemed filed because if the applicant sends it to an incorrect address then the Commission will not know about it. Ms. Falasca asked if Code Enforcement could fax the notice, and Ms. Gunn said that they would be faxing the notices in the future. Ms. Rochelle said that basically the Commission would have to do the research on the property between the time that the notice appears in the newspaper and the time it is deemed filed with Code Enforcement. Ms. Rochelle asked for a preliminary review motion on the 36 Nursery Street demolition application.

** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION FOUND NO OBJECTION TO THE DEMOLITION OF 36 NURSERY STREET AFTER THE PRELIMINARY REVIEW.
** MS. BRYANT SECONDED.

Ms. Rochelle wanted to point out that this is only a preliminary decision, that if someone from the public comes forward with any objection, the Commission is required to hold a public hearing on the demolition application. Ms. Gunn asked if some information was discovered after the Commission has made its preliminary determination, did the Commission have the ability to change its mind. Ms. Rochelle said that it did as this is only a preliminary review and not a final review and that is why there is a 21 day waiting period in case of any mitigating circumstances.

** MOTION PASSED.

Mr. Iannaccone asked if there were a penalty and how much it would be if a property owner were to demolish a building without getting a demolition permit. Ms. Rochelle stated that she believed there was a fine in the amount of one hundred dollars.

295 Newtown Avenue

Ms. Rochelle said that the owner of the property, Mr. Kirschner, has given her an apology, as he was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Iannaccone stated that he had driven past the property and stopped in front to view it. He stated that other than the building's tin roof, he felt that there was no historical significance worth saving the building for. Ms. Falasca said that the building is listed as an 1880's Victorian which she felt was a bit of a stretch. Mr. Bloom said there were hundreds of similar houses throughout the city. Mr. Iannaccone said that he understood that the property owners were going to create a long driveway and put two or three houses on a cul-de-sac. Ms. Rochelle asked if there were any discussion on the property or did the Commission want to move ahead with a motion.
Ms. Gunn wanted to point out that the Commission was viewing the house only as a house, and that sometimes it was important to view a building in the context of the streetscape and how the streetscape showed the changes in the neighborhood, for example as farms are turned into lots, and the lots are subdivided as people marry and hand down land to their children who then build on them. Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn if she had looked at the streetscape and what her assessment was of it. Ms. Gunn said that she liked what it said about the evolution of the street, but that she was not sure that the Commission has not really decided how they were going to value all of these properties and the kinds of criteria they would use as guidelines to determine whether a building should be saved or let go. She felt it would take the first couple of demolition applications for the Commission to understand where its new perimeters are and how to judge what to fight for and what not to. Mr. Iannaccone said that if he looks at the street he sees houses that were built in the 1940s, houses that were built in the 1950s, some which were built in the 1960s and 1970s. Ms. Gunn said that that was what she found wonderful about the streetscape because someone can see how the land was divided and changed. Ms. Rochelle asked if there was reason for photographic documentation as one of the goals of the Commission was not only to try to save and to salvage, but to get documentation for their architectural library.
Ms. Falasca asked if the Commission had the right to ask to go inside a property to view the interior of a building. Ms. Rochelle said that the owners could be asked, but as it is private property, the owners do not have to allow anyone inside. Ms. Gunn said the Commission needs to work on defining what is really the most important in determining whether a building should be saved, and that most important doesn't always mean the biggest house, or the most expensive house. Ms. Gunn stated that, based on the state statutes for an historic district, the Commission was not supposed to look at the cosmetics of a house, structure yes, but if the house doesn't have a coat of paint or is an ugly color, the Commission needs to look through that. Ms. Falasca said that that's what she meant, that if this house had the only tin roof in Norwalk then they had better be fighting for it, but that it doesn't happen to be, so that criteria needs to be determined. Ms. Rochelle said that maybe at the next meeting, Ms. Gunn could pull together a few ideas that the Commission could kick around to determine how to make a judgment. Ms. Gunn said that she would try, but that she also felt that the Commissioners should also think about this and encouraged them to come to the next meeting with some ideas as well, since they are the ones who have to make the determinations. Ms. Rochelle said that that was why having a staff person to the Commission was so invaluable, and that Ms. Gunn had expertise in this area. Ms. Gunn agreed but said that she was currently swamped with work and needed the Commission to do their part as well. Ms. Rochelle called for a motion on the preliminary review for 295 Newtown Avenue.

** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION HAS FOUND NO OBJECTION TO THE DEMOLITION OF 295 NEWTOWN AVENUE AFTER A PRELIMINARY REVIEW.
** MR. BLOOM SECONDED.** MOTION PASSED.

Ms. Bryant recommended that the Commission add to the agenda for the May meeting a discussion of the criteria necessary to determine whether a building should be saved, and suggested that all the Commissioners come with some ideas and/or suggestions. Ms. Rochelle agreed. Mr. Iannaccone wanted to let the Commission know that a house on Elizabeth Street, which had been taken down, disassembled and was being reassembled in Vermont. Ms. Rochelle asked how that house slipped by the Commission. Ms. Gunn said that the street number of this house was not on the list when she checked, but that others on the street were. Ms. Rochelle asked if the contractor was fined for demolishing it before coming before the Commission. Ms. Gunn stated that this demolition had been done before the new ordinance was in place.

5 Elmcrest Terrace

Ms. Rochelle mentioned that the public hearing for 5 Elmcrest Terrace could be delayed from May 14 to May 28 as the hospital had a conflict with the original hearing date. Ms. Bryant was concerned that the 90 day period would end two days before the proposed public hearing. Ms. Rochelle said that this was true and that if the hospital demolished the house, then it demolished the house, but that the Commission could not cancel a public hearing once it has been noticed in the newspapers. She said that the hospital did not ask them to cancel the hearing, only to postpone it. Ms. Rochelle asked for a motion regarding the public hearing for 5 Elmcrest Terrace.

** MS. BRYANT MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION RESCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR 5 ELMCREST TERRACE TO MAY 14 AT 7:30 P.M.
** MR. IANNACCONE SECONDED.

Ms. Gunn questioned whether the Commission wanted to hold the public hearing at the Norwalk Museum or at City Hall. Ms. Rochelle wanted to hold the public hearing at the Museum. Mr. Iannaccone pointed out that the hearing might be widely attended and questioned whether the Museum had the capacity for such a large crowd. Ms. Rochelle asked the Commission what it would like to do. She directed Ms. Gunn to find out if City Hall would be available to the Commission for the hearing and Ms. Gunn agreed to do so. The Commission decided to hold the hearing at City Hall if Ms. Gunn was able to locate a room for them to use. Ms. Rochelle asked Ms. Gunn to notify the Norwalk Hospital as soon as she determined where the public hearing would be held.

** MOTION PASSED.

III. REPORTS - COMMITTEES

LMMM Restoration Committee

There was no Committee report at this time.

Mathews Park Committee

There was no Committee report at this time.

IV. OLD BUSINESS

Mathews Park Committee

Ms. Falasca reported that the signs were going up at the Park, but that the big sign has again been delayed. She noted that plans for Devon's Place, the handicapped access playground, are moving ahead, and that the new Mathews Park brochure has been completed.

V. NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business for discussions at this time.

VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION

There was no other business to be discussed.

The meeting was called closed at 11:00 p.m.

** MR. IANNACCONE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
** MS. MATHIES SECONDED.
** MOTION PASSED.

Respectfully submitted,
Linda J. Hayes
Assistant to the Curator
Norwalk MuseumHistorical Commission

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page

Business & Ecomomy

City Departments

City Services

Government

Living in Norwalk

City Calendars

How Do I ?

Job Openings

Tourism & History

Other Sites

Feedback

Site Outline