===PAGE 1===
Town of Lunenburg  
Architectural Preservation District Commission  
 
Cullen Dwyer, Chairman  
Anthony Sculimbrene, Vice Chair  
Anthony Nicastro, Member  
Richard McGrath, member  
William Lloyd, Clerk  
 
 
Meeting Minutes 
Thursday, January 5, 2023 
Ritter Building 
Call to Order: At 7:36 PM  
Present: Chairman Dwyer, McGrath, Sculimbrene, Lloyd,  
Review of Minutes: Last Meeting was irregular due to the agenda not being posted 48 prior to meeting which 
then causes the minutes  
Public Comment: Anna Lockwood (Main Street) Asked if meeting can be recorded for all meetings in the 
future.  Can not get the true story from minutes alone. Discussion agreed that we can support if the town is 
willing to support with resources.  
Correspondences: 
1. Chairman received resignation of Mbr Nicastro from the council.  Looking into proper procedure 
for formal resignation. 
New Business:  
1) December Meeting was not official as the agenda was not posted  
2) Approved Oct and Nov minutes Mbr Sculimbrene motioned, Mbr McGrath seconded, all in favor (4). 
 
Old Business: 
 
1) Select Board call to appear at Town Meeting 
a. Coordination for December appearance at Town Meeting could not be completed by the 
APDC with such short notice with two members traveling out of town. 
b. First Issue was to reconsider of the CTA for Ritter Building 
i. APDC informed Select Board that it needed to be resubmitted. 
ii. Select Board via Town Manager has asked to just reconsider original request 
iii. Current plan does not match replace vs refurbish via line item, discussion at 
Town Meeting was to replace all windows.  Requesting a full scope of work 
with drawings would give a better site picture of what can be done with the 
budget that was allotted at the original request ($120K).  Current estimate is 
($100K) just for replacement of windows without the other line items for repair 
roof, walls, ect. 
1. Brand of window cost comparison, along with comparison 
2. Dec 6 Select Board meeting, Town Manger stated a new architect  
would need to be hired to capture new current conditions and updated 
estimate. 
===PAGE 2===
3. Storm windows in place show that those windows are in far better 
condition than the windows without storm windows. 
4. Depending on the changes in scope a new CTA might be needed 
anyway. 
iv. Chair comments that the decision to reconsider existing CTA would be a no 
from him, would approve if “replacement of windows” was removed from the 
application. 
v. Mbr Lloyd: Without any changes to CTA and no changes to current condition, 
no change in vote status. 
vi. Mbr Sculimbrene :Would request if new architect is selected could we meet and 
discuss windows | What maintenance comes with new windows in an old 
frame? 
vii. Mbr McGrath: Denied CTA as the design of new windows would take away 
from the historical value of the facility. 
c. What does the APDC want to see to get to approved CTA? 
i. Administrative review with new design would be 
d. What constituted a completed application? 
i. Requirements should be clear on the application for the submitter. Checked by 
the APDC admin before it is sent to APDC meeting. Review could lead to a 
request for more information or clarification.  This could affect timeline which 
extensions can be requested if needed.   
ii. CTAs usually go smoothly until the issues with 30 School Street. 
iii. Review of building inspector requirements to match expectations with their 
submittals vs APDC submittals (Mbr S
culimbrene will approach the building 
inspector) 
e. Response to comment of preservation vs historical commission 
i. You cannot preserve something that is not historical (>75 Years) and the two go 
hand in hand in a lot of cases. 
ii. In APDC mission statement 
 
 
Other Business: 
2) Demolition by neglect article to review by Mbr. McGrath. 
Next Meeting:  Meeting Schedule:  January 31, 2023 (Backup for week of Feb 13) 
 
Adjourned: 8:46 PM