When Michelle Peele, steward on the Wiscasset Public Library Board of Trustees, came to the Wiscasset Historic Preservation Commission in November, she thought she had made a good case for a metal roof for the building.

“We keep historic papers and priceless art on the top floor,” she had said. “And because of the ice dams caused by the shingled roof on the low pitch roof lines, we had a lot of leakage. There were days when we had buckets everywhere. It was just a matter of time before something was lost that couldn’t be replaced.”

The commission, in November, rejected her request out of hand. Albert Kontrath, alternate member of the commission, and Wendy Donovan, asked her to look at alternatives, including metal shingle roofs and flat metal roofs, such as lead or copper roofs, or slate.

When she returned at the Dec. 1 meeting of the commission, she had done her homework. She had had estimates for both a copper or slate roof and a metal shingle roof, which were between twice and three times as expensive as a standard metal seamed roof, and she reiterated strongly why asphalt shingles were not a reasonable choice for the library.

“We have low-pitched roofs,” she said. “We also added heating to the building without the right kind of ventilation many years ago, and together, that’s caused significant problems with ice dams. We can’t get grants to build a roof that will have to be replaced in ten years, instead of the 30 years a metal roof will last, and we can’t get grants to spend twice or three times as much to do the same job.” She pointed out that the original roof was wood shake, not asphalt, so the asphalt roof was not truly historical anyway. She quoted several sources, including historic preservation sources, that suggested that “the cost and ease of maintenance may dictate a wholly different solution to historic preservation when it comes to roofing.  Any historic commission should take into account problems with wind, weather, and roof pitch.”

Peele quoted the Historic Commission’s own statute that said the commission needs to take into account maintenance and hardship, although Planner Ben Averill said that such an exemption could only be invoked once an application was turned down.

“This commission voted against a metal roof for the library, 5-0,” Peele countered. ”So I say, let’s get on with it.”

Peele, who at one point used an expletive to comment on the commission’s action, wasn’t finished. “I come to you as a volunteer,” she said. “I’m the steward of the library, on the board of trustees, because I am a licensed contractor in South Carolina and I know what that building needs from an architectural standpoint. I am all about preservation — my husband and I restored a 200-year-old house to be added to the National Registry in South Carolina, and those rules are much more exacting. But the library building is more than a building. It houses contents that can’t be replaced from a historical perspective, and those items are in danger. Heaven forbid if a homeowner has to go through this just to protect their home and contents.”

While she was speaking, Chairman John Reinhardt listened in astonishment, laughing a little at times.

Peele said, “I’m as transparent as I can be, and some of you might not like that, and I don’t care. But I am telling you, when people come to you, an advisory committee, you need to listen to them and work with them. Except for two people on this commission, Mr. Kontrath and Ms. Donovan, no one was even listening to me last time, when I came prepared with 16 pages of material, explaining why the library board of trustees thought our best option was a standing seam metal roof. I’m before you now with another six pages of material that shows you in your own statutes and in other preservation statutes why you should reconsider. You may not like the idea of a metal roof, but the town can’t afford to build a new facility to house these collections, and our funding for a roof or anything else, comes from taxpayers.”

After the November meeting, Kontrath had visited the library and seen for himself the problem on the upper floor. He spoke to that problem at the December meeting. “I’m convinced that Ms. Peele has done her due diligence,” he said. “We gave her some suggestions, and she acted on them, and discovered they are out of reach of the library fiscally.”

Commission member Richard Thompson commented on Peele’s “finger-wagging” at the commission. “We are volunteers, too,” he said. “We are trying to do what our job is, to protect the historic nature of the district.”

“There is nothing historic about asphalt shingles,” Peele repeated. “The building originally had wood shake shingles, which were outlawed as fire hazards. So you can’t pretend that asphalt is more historic than metal.” Some forms of metal roofs were in use at the time the building was constructed, she said. She also pointed out that one of the eaves at the library already had a metal roof.

Reinhardt said that neighbors might object, but Susan Blagden, who is a neighbor, declined to speak against the metal roof, and later abstained from the vote. Peele pointed out that at least one of the library’s near neighbors already has a metal roof.

Reinhardt said he was offended by Peele’s comments, and by what he saw as her implication that the commission wasn’t working with people. “We have to make sure the historic district’s character is preserved,” he said.

Ultimately, the commission voted 3-1 in favor of the metal roof, with Reinhardt, Donovan and Kontrath voting in favor, Thompson voting against, and Blagden abstaining.

Then the listening audience took its turn to talk. One man said he felt that Blagden’s knitting was inconsiderate to people who were speaking to the commission, and that it looked like she wasn’t paying any attention to what people were saying.

A woman in the audience disagreed with him, saying that there is evidence that knitting helps people concentrate. Blagden put away her knitting.

Another man said that he had been the first “guinea pig” of the new commission and that, although he had to come back three times, he felt the process was fair.

Also Dec. 1, the commission approved a project at 14 Middle Street to remove siding and replace wood clapboards and wood walls on a shed attached to a residence, and heard about a project at 144 Federal Street to build two Habitat for Humanity homes. Mark Primeau of Habitat for Humanity 7 Rivers wanted assurance that the setbacks wouldn’t have to be 100 feet from the road before closing on the property. The assurance was given, and the project was tabled until Primeau was ready to return with plans for the two new residences.

Relating to a meeting with the selectmen in November, the commission started to make some recommendations about how the historic preservation ordinance might be improved. A decision was made to have a second commission meeting this month, on Dec. 13 at 5 p.m., to discuss the ordinance. Averill said he would send copies of other communities’ ordinances to see if any of them would be a good model.

Reinhardt then went on to repeat that he was offended by “one of our applicant’s” remarks, and thanked the remaining audience members for their patience. Most had left when Peele left.

After the meeting, Kontrath said he was glad they had found a way to accommodate the library. “I see our job as an advisory and educational job,” he said. “We gave them a little more information, and they acted on it, and discovered it was out of their price range. We can’t put obstacles in people’s way or what we’ll find is that they’ll stop asking for our assistance, or worse, they’ll conduct demolition by neglect, and the whole town will be the poorer for it.”