09/29/2003 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"TOGETHER WE CAN NIAIKIF, A DIFFERENCE!" LA1oTDMARKS COMMISSION CONTINUANCE MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 IN OLD TOWN HALL 7:00 P.M. I. ROLL CALL: Vice Chairman Lord called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: B. Lord, T. Dubowski, P. Barker, G. Corell, and M. Davis ALSO PRESEleTT: Assistant Law Director B. O'Malley ABSENT: J. Lang, J. Dailey, and L. VanAuken II. REVIIEW AND CORRECTION OF 1VIINUTE5: The Landmarks Commission minutes from the September 8, 2003 meeting have been submitted for approval. Vice Chairman Lord indicated they will review the minutes from September 8, 2003 at the next regular meeting. III. RECEPTION OF VISITORS: Mr. Roman Pohlid and Mr. Tobin III. NEW BUSINESS: Roman Pohlid 27040 Butternut Ridge - Resident is seeking a permit for sidiniz Mrs. Lord said she visited Mr. Pohlid on Saturday and dropped off some reading material. She also mentioned a web site, Oldhouse.com, which is a great site for owners of older homes. She said Mr. Lang sent a letter to Building Commissioner, Dave Conway, and asked about the procedures for covering up damaged materials so the board would have that information. She said Mr. Barker has some information about that. Mr. Barker read Mr. Lang's memo for the record (see attached). Mr. Barker said, to his knowledge, they have not received a response from NIr. Conway. Mr. Pohlid said he received information from his sister on why the house would not hold paint. A previous owner had the house sandblasted, which is not recommended for an older home. He said when the house was re- coated, the wrong primer was used. He said when his sister owned the home, she had a professional company come out. That company said the wood was gouged and basically ruined. They would not guarantee the paint for more than two years. He said to repaint, as much as they would like to do it, it will not hold. There was further discussion about the primer used and the subsequent problems with the paint. Mrs. Lord said the board is concerned about the moisture problem just as Mr. Pohlid is. She said covering it with vinyl inay not correct the problem. Mr. Tobin said he is not convinced it is moisture. Mr. Corell said not knowing what it is, is a problem. W. Tobin said moisture only breaks bonds of paint if it is improperly set in the first place. He said that most paint is resistant to inoisture if the surface has been treated properly at the time of application. A company told W. Pohlid it was the treatment that removed the paint prior to all this that hurt the wood and the fact they will not guarantee the paint, tells him there is something going on. They did not say they will not guarantee it because of moisture. Mr. Corell said he would be interested in finding out what treatment was used. He said if they could apply a chemical that would prevent the wood from ever holding paint, that would be one thing. If they put a chemical on there to break paint down and failed to allow it to evaporate properly, that is another thing. He needs to have a better understanding of what was done so he can vote intelligently. Mr. Pohlid said the way it was explained, and there was no mention of chemicals, is that it was sandblasted. He said perhaps the sand is imbedded in the wood. Mr. Barker said it is not the board's charge to discuss why the wood will or will not hold paint versus sandblasting, chemical or non- chemical issues. He thinks they need to work out some agreement between Mr. Tobin, 1V1i-. Pohlid and the board so the situation can be resolved. Mr. O'Malley said that at the last meeting, the issue of the