[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6635387,"mediaKeyId","2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed","parentId",2640326,"title","Residents and commissioners challenge city's proposed illuminated \"Bangor\" letters in historic district","audioSeconds",2322,"startMs",1220000,"endMs",3542000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed&start=1220&end=3542","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed/thumbnail_1220000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6635387/Bangor-City/Penobscot-County/Maine/Residents-and-commissioners-challenge-citys-proposed-illuminated-Bangor-letters-in-historic-district","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635387-ede06f38ed245d52b687ee073aeba92e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448562&Signature=nFfUQ1oXCIrZFOEFXTYyeYf5L8sdn9MXCaueCWxFc8hjZWzgvR9bzT9zFone~I3zg675TBVBAOrxNtMw6X5WNfpkMaV0~-lz8JHI4XqcTxeUJTQh~MUuZOetzgvMwp196s8G-RT8M5-ZfCo0BCBIByYZNMN37KgGIRLBiwSlHxixoBEhmCT9ej8fmVAsJ-pqOYhNplSl2r-Kiokpkvh2ZYzXOadMZCmhQgSOdRL0-i9fNTlwiONg9ZDE2b8rCttbz2zY7kMyStX0TX6~FCBKrxxoJW6LMasSen6qlhaqR76EGqS8b~xd9wHb4sf24DcQm5vaEM8zQu0kkp5LEWJFGg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Bangor Maine","date","2025-03-14T20:40:43.397Z","article","City staff presented a proposal March 13 to install large, illuminated letters spelling \"Bangor\" on the landscaped island at the intersection of State and Harlow streets. The project prompted sustained questioning from Historic Preservation Commission members and more than a dozen public comments, nearly all opposed.

Ian Krieg, director of community and economic development, said the idea originated in earlier staff work and with a community donor (High Tide Capital); the Culture Commission recommended the installation as public art. \"We had shelved the project because, COVID hit and, our priorities at a staff level, shifted, dramatically, and so we shelved it,\" Krieg said, describing why staff recently revived the proposal.

Commissioners and residents concentrated on two central issues: jurisdiction (whether the proposal is \"public art\" and thus outside the commission's formal review, or whether it is a sign or structure that must come before the Historic Preservation Commission) and the project's practical effects on sight lines, pedestrian safety and the downtown historic streetscape.

Anya (staff) read the municipal code definition supplied in the packet: \"Public art. Art that is installed to be visible from a public space in which does not contain characteristics of advertising or identifying or draw attention to a particular business product or service.\" That definition was a focal point of the debate, because if the installation is classified as public art it would not require the commission's certificate of appropriateness under the code as presented to the commission.

Commissioners pressed staff on process and precedent. Peter Kibler and other commissioners asked who decides when a permanent structure is considered art rather than a sign, and whether the Cultural Commission's recommendation is sufficient to remove the project from the Historic Preservation Commission's review. Commissioners repeatedly asked whether the city's legal department had weighed in; staff said legal review would be appropriate but did not present a formal legal opinion during the meeting.

Practical concerns were raised about safety and maintenance. Commissioners and members of the public said the proposed island location is in a busy, confusing intersection with limited pedestrian space and visibility; multiple speakers urged the city to consider alternative, higher-foot-traffic locations such as the amphitheater area. Staff said engineering reviewed glare and recommended the island location partly because of convenience to existing power, and that two design options were under consideration (a backlit option with lower lumen output and a marquee-style option that is brighter).

More than a dozen members of the public addressed the commission; speakers opposing the project included residents who said the letters would be out of character in the Great Fire of 1911 historic district and would create hazards for pedestrians and drivers. Anna Maria Vayesa told the commission, \"Bangor is a gem of a small city...This sign...has nothing to do with the culture or the history of Bangor, and would create a distraction for drivers in this very confusing and busy corner of downtown.\" Several commenters suggested alternative uses for city resources such as infrastructure repair, building preservation grants or a pollinator garden to complement nearby mural art.

Commissioners noted more than 100 letters were received by city council on the subject and staff said the correspondence forwarded to the commission included both pro and con submissions; staff indicated most council-submitted letters were opposed. No vote or formal certificate-of-appropriateness was taken by the commission at the March 13 meeting because staff presented the item for comment only; commission members sought clarity about process and jurisdiction and asked that their written comments be forwarded to the city council and to other city decision-makers.

Chair Edmond Suresky and other commissioners volunteered to draft a formal statement for a future meeting if commission members wished to register a collective position; staff said it could prepare a draft statement for a future meeting and that the commission could vote on it at a later date. Staff also indicated the Business and Economic Development Committee and City Engineering had been involved in prior review and that the Culture Commission had recommended the concept.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Historic Preservation Commission 03.13.25","oneSentenceSummary","At its March 13, 2025 meeting, the Bangor Historic Preservation Commission heard city staff's presentation on a proposal to install large illuminated letters spelling \"Bangor\" at State and Harlow streets; commissioners and more than a dozen public commenters raised concerns about whether the piece qualifies as \"public art,\" its effects on the Great Fire of 1911 historic district and traffic and pedestrian safety.","taxTitle","Bangor City, Penobscot County, Maine","taxId",2586,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6635392,"Historic Preservation Commission approves design review for 16 Union Plaza to add windows and fire-escape platforms",1801,2997000,1196000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed&start=2997&end=1196","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed/thumbnail_2997000.jpg","/articles/6635392/Bangor-City/Penobscot-County/Maine/Historic-Preservation-Commission-approves-design-review-for-16-Union-Plaza-to-add-windows-and-fire-escape-platforms","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635392-8e2f9a3a38c5c8df1bb0d8c2ce217c6d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448562&Signature=EJIHt48bG0vFFhagfn1oDj2EKIz4~CTrZIsPKEh-RUYRLFXrbldA-72sIVWEpQZJ2ApRWZtVC84QO1wflJ8eX4KkhSlUvWgiCRwBUlURKLLbQv18XW1n-N3m~gdVv8om0eEPst0NNYdQ1gA6I-6OWAVFr1MOI2BFAouaPvEJB05HFT0kqSeNZ6VHZmbrFrwNrCYo08o5Ydc8r3Xd5H9rW8AAOAkdEggDg5U7kmOuOu50sDmMoJrf4E87qW6rwuzfcuUHVXHhbiqrd2h9jNiJm8ygFHVYMm~g~MG2zcwjaLRraPRQ~b-nKnrMpV7r08aLw2mR0LuF2yNYN7oJXmgnkg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Bangor Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously March 13 to approve a design review and certificate of appropriateness for 16 Union Plaza (Map Lot 042-266) in the Bangor Center Revitalization Area, allowing the owner to replace existing windows, add two new windows and install exterior fire-escape platforms to meet egress requirements.

The decision matters because the work affects a building inside the Bangor Center Revitalization Area and therefore must meet the design standards in city ordinance 71-11 as applied by the commission. The applicant said the changes are intended to bring the third-floor unit into compliance with fire code and to allow future interior changes tied to a phased sprinkling project.

Mark Wheaton, identified in the meeting as the applicant and owner, described the scope of work from the podium: \"It's the Third Floor, and I'm replacing the full the windows that are there... I need to add 2, to bring it up to code... and I need to put fire escape platforms on, 2 on either end of the building.\" Wheaton and staff clarified that the proposal replaces four windows on the front, four in the rear and adds one new window on each side, with four new platform landings (two on either end) to provide egress onto exterior platforms.

Commissioners considered the submission against the criteria in section 71-11 (Bangor Center Revitalization Area) and voted separately on each required standard, citing exhibits 2–4 and 12 in the project packet. After the series of motions, the commission voted to approve the overall design review. Chair Edmond Suresky announced, \"Motion passes successfully,\" after the final roll call.

Key technical clarifications recorded in the hearing: the window schedule submitted by the applicant listed nine units (eight at 42 by 58 inches and one at 78 by 60 inches); the applicant said the new windows will be double-hung and will match the historic appearance while replacing older, less efficient windows. The proposed fire-escape platforms will be attached to the existing brick façade using suspension chains and a 2-by-10 ledger embedded into the wall; the applicant said the granite sills will not be removed. Commissioners also heard that the second-floor window replacements are planned in a later phase after the building is sprinkled to meet code for additional dwelling units.

The commission and staff reminded the applicant of procedural limits and timelines: work must begin within six months and be completed within one year unless an extension is granted through the city's minor revision or extension processes. Staff also noted that the applicant may withdraw and reapply or request a minor revision if changes are needed before construction.

What happened (formal action): the commission recorded roll-call votes on the applicable 71-11 standards and on the final motion to issue a design review approval for 16 Union Plaza; all recorded votes were affirmative.

Next steps: the owner may apply for building permits consistent with the approved design; if the owner needs additional time or minor changes, the applicant was told to pursue the city's minor revision process.

","The Bangor Historic Preservation Commission voted March 13, 2025, to approve a design review and certificate of appropriateness for 16 Union Plaza (Map Lot 042-266), allowing the replacement and addition of windows and the installation of exterior fire-escape platforms to meet egress requirements.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6635382,"City staff testifies in support of state bills to expand historic rehabilitation tax credits",521,5669000,6190000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed&start=5669&end=6190","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2640326-526a196dcf8f51acb3ecab0b0b4d39ed/thumbnail_5669000.jpg","/articles/6635382/Bangor-City/Penobscot-County/Maine/City-staff-testifies-in-support-of-state-bills-to-expand-historic-rehabilitation-tax-credits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635382-4a9516d6c6e8e3b3f477f38253570e8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448562&Signature=hR63poIfmrfVoVCoBTNmvMsrxIGPR0HWZjDUSUvSIkzK85PJWVcbW8XFrt4vT1Z2dWXG8oZ3dZdSVnDSckAFim4~6X3PMajDWzoiPabteNfcDDEgq3vJhK63sCuatvgPQugTZEvvPfviXBi~DnDSs2Hx158oqBH5YCfmp3Cu29xtSujgUGc2~AubMjMGi8NujML8wTSyujR2uuWc~tsH24oQb8WEEmX9wBymyC0dkn113Rg7~TkMPfa0LmI-RW46yBAhd8QsVYNGmYeTWTb4ama35LuONAeBNNIcen8zGWTpy7l3AiGLWYDjWfGejlXkW48PERYmp76aiTWFdx21rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff told the Historic Preservation Commission on March 13 that they provided testimony in favor of two pending state bills that would alter the Maine historic rehabilitation tax credit program.

Staff described LD 146 as a bill that would change the maximum credit allowed for certified historic-structure rehabilitation projects in the first two years in which a credit may be claimed. Under the bill the ceiling would move from $5 million in each of the first two years to $10 million total across the first two years combined; the change would apply to tax years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2025.

Separately, staff described LD 435 as a measure that would modernize the program's small-project provisions: it would raise the eligible percentage from 25% to 30% and increase the per-project expenditure cap from $250,000 to $1 million. Staff said the bill also increases the percentage of credit available for projects that create affordable housing (to 35% for significant projects and 45% for small projects) and clarified that certain provisions would apply to owner-occupied residential properties in historic districts as well as income-producing properties.

City staff told commissioners they had provided positive testimony to the Legislature in support of both bills, describing them as steps to help owners of historic buildings cover rising construction costs and to encourage rehabilitation and affordable housing creation. \"Some of these projects'...go over $5,000,000 and we all have seen construction costs go up... This gives them that flexibility,\" a staff member said in support during the meeting.

Status: staff reported the measures were in legislative work sessions at the time of the meeting; LD 435 had been scheduled for work session and LD 146 had been acted on by committee with the change described in staff remarks.

","At the March 13 meeting city staff reported providing testimony in favor of two Maine legislative measures — one to allow greater front-loading of credits for large certified historic rehabilitation projects (LD 146) and another (LD 435) to modernize small-project provisions and extend benefits to residential historic properties.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents and commissioners challenge city's proposed illuminated "Bangor" letters in historic district

Historic Preservation Commission approves design review for 16 Union Plaza to add windows and fire-escape platforms

City staff testifies in support of state bills to expand historic rehabilitation tax credits