Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-20 HPC MIN - signed HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING April 20, 2022 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairwoman Mino called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Present: Chairwoman Mino, Commissioners Finwall, Heimdahl, Larson, Thueson, Walls, Councilmember Junker Absent: Commissioner Holmes Staff: City Planner Wittman, Community Development Director Gladhill APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of March 16, 2022 Regular Meeting Motion by Commissioner Thueson, seconded by Commissioner Finwall, to approve the minutes of the March 16, 2022 meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2022-18: Consideration of a Design Permit for rooftop solar panels. Property located at 102 2nd St S in the Downtown Stillwater Design Review District. Ross Larson of Nordic Luv LLC, property owner and Colin Buechel of All Energy Solar, applicant. Case No. 2022-21: Consideration of a Design Permit for exterior sign lighting on storefront. Property located at 102 (106) Main St S in the Downtown Stillwater Design Review District. Grandma Vincenza Pinzadot LLC, property owner and Cecilia Loome of Black Letter Books LLC, applicant. Case No. 2022-23: Consideration of a Design Permit for window replacement. Property located at 101 Pine St W in the Downtown Stillwater Design Review District. Alex McKinney representing Washington County, property owner. Case No. 2020-32: Consideration of a Design Permit modification for the property at 220 Chestnut St E. Joel Hauck, applicant, and 200 Chestnut Partners, LLC, property owners. Commissioner Mino requested that Case No. 2022-23, Design Permit for window replacement at 101 Pine St W, be pulled from the Consent Agenda and placed under New Business. Commissioner Thueson requested that Case No. 2020-32, Design Permit modification for 220 Chestnut St E, be pulled from the Consent Agenda and placed under New Business. Motion by Commissioner Walls, seconded by Commissioner Thueson, to adopt the Consent Agenda as amended. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2022-22: Consideration of a Demolition Permit to remove the home on the property located at 1008 5th St S in the Neighborhood Conversation District. Spencer Middleton and Sofie Cohen, property owners. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 20, 2022 Page 2 of 6 City Planner Wittman explained that in April, 2021 the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a Building Demolition/Design Permit request for the partial demolition, renovation and addition of the structure at 1008 5th Street South. The applicants were proposing to remove greater than 30% of the circa 1906 constructed, single-story residence. The reason for the proposed demolition was due to improper grading which had resulted in portions of the structure sinking below grade; sill and floor joist ground contact; rotted ceiling joists; cracked girder beam; and basement flooding. The staff report noted that removing a portion of the home and rebuilding it would remedy these issues and provide for more structural stability. The property owner then obtained a building permit, removed portions of the home, and began framing a new roof for the structure. Due to a combination of factors suggesting greater foundation issues than originally anticipated, the property owners have determined that full demolition and reconstruction are necessary. In its current state, the home is a public nuisance and a hazard. Detailed renderings of the proposed new home were submitted today and staff feels the design conforms to the guidelines set forth for new construction in the Neighborhood Conservation District. Staff recommends approval of the Building Demolition Permit and the Design Permit for the new home. Commissioner Finwall asked why a bigger foundation can’t be added under existing house. Ms. Wittman replied there are concerns about cost and that moving/jacking up the structure will tweak the wooden elements further out of alignment. The house is not square. Spencer Middleton, applicant, stated they tried to make the renovation work but the contractor said due to many factors it would be very costly and time consuming to renovate the footings and foundation, and he was unwilling to do so. Chair Mino opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Mino closed the public hearing. She asked about proposed finishes and materials. Mr. Middleton stated the exterior will have horizontal lap siding in dark green with 4” exposure. The roof will be standing seam black metal, and window trim will be black. Mr. Middleton added and Ms. Wittman confirmed that the site plan is substantially the same as previously approved in 2021. She showed the new renderings and site plan. The applicant verbally indicated the materials will be identical to the materials already approved. This could be made a condition of approval if the HPC desires. Commissioner Thueson pointed out the challenge of comparing the project with the Conservation District Design Guidelines because of seeing the new renderings for the first time tonight. Ms. Wittman stated building demolition permits may not be approved until there is a new design that substantially conforms to the Neighborhood Conservation District, but the Commission may table consideration of the overall action to request final details of the plans, or may develop conditions that are similar to the previous approval if the Commission would approve of the demolition. Chair Mino recognized there are existing safety concerns and that construction costs should be a consideration as well. Commissioner Heimdahl appreciated the applicants’ substantial efforts to preserve the building and their willingness to consider sustainability measures including salvage. Commissioner Finwall recognized the applicants’ attempts to preserve the structure and the need for demolition. She said if the Commission had reviewed this as a clean slate it probably would not have approved the design. Mr. Middleton answered that they are building a single story home because the original intent was to renovate the existing single story home which would not support a second story. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 20, 2022 Page 3 of 6 Ms. Wittman pointed out there are single story structures across the street. Commissioner Larson remarked it is important that the massing and scale of the new home be compatible with others on the street, but the original intent was to save the single story historic home. He finds the proposed new home acceptable as a great improvement over the previously approved plans. However the lack of detail on drawings and a site plan is concerning. The applicant could be asked to submit a final site plan and detailed drawings, for staff approval. Commissioner Thueson agreed the lack of a site plan is challenging. He asked Ms. Wittman to elaborate on the conditions of the foundation. Mr. Middleton noted that the newer house design was based on the existing footprint of the front half of the house that would have been retained. Councilmember Junker commented the application should be tabled due to outstanding questions. Motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Chair Mino, to approve the demolition permit based on the findings regarding safety and stability of the structure, and to table consideration of the amended design permit for the design of the new home. Motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner Thueson voting nay. Former HPC Commissioner Jeff Johnson noted there is now an opportunity to look at a different design if the applicants wish, since the lines of the original home are no longer restricting the design. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2022-23: Consideration of a Design Permit for window replacement. Property located at 101 Pine St W in the Downtown Stillwater Design Review District. Alex McKinney representing Washington County, property owner. Ms. Wittman explained the case. Washington County is seeking to construct and install custom aluminum storm windows on the Washington County Historic Courthouse. With the exception of windows on the old jail that have security bars on them, all of the first and second floor windows, as well as one original window located in the basement, are proposed to have storm windows added. It is unknown whether or not the Courthouse windows were ever protected by storm windows. Vertical and horizontal mullions will be added to the exterior of all windows in a pattern to match the original window. At all points where the storm windows meet original window framing and trim, the windows will have a continuous bead of approved sealant. Protection of the historic features of the courthouse is vital to the long-term preservation of the structure. One public comment was received from former HPC Commissioner Jeff Johnson voicing concern about the addition of aluminum windows, suggesting it will change the character of the structure. The applicant stated they have submitted the plans to both the Minnesota Historical Society (MNHS) and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for review. Staff recommends approving the requested Design Permit with two conditions. Chair Mino asked the applicant about their interactions with SHPO, why the storm windows will not be wood, and why the frames will be black since the interior is brown. Alex McKinney, applicant, Washington County Parks Manager, said the windows have deteriorated and storm windows were strongly recommended to take care of mold and rot. They have consulted with MNHS, which provided $55,000 for this project, and SHPO, which will issue final approval. It is a standard brown color, not black (wrong in packet) that will closely match the existing. Anodized aluminum was chosen for durability. An exact match would have cost another $40,000. The storms are the exact windows that are on the National Register-listed Federal Building in Minneapolis. Commissioner Larson asked if the existing windows are operable. Mr. McKinney replied most are, but some of the basement windows are not. In some areas where ventilation is needed, the design allows Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 20, 2022 Page 4 of 6 the bottom half to be taken out and replaced with a screen but most will be set in place. He also confirmed that the new windows will match the existing mullion patterns. Commissioner Heimdahl stated if MNHS and SHPO approve the design, he is OK with that. Scott Peterson, contractor, stated the windows will not obscure the views and it is a high quality window that has been used in hundreds of federal buildings throughout the U.S. Jeff Johnson, former HPC Commissioner, observed that the mullions will line up, however they still will look different. Also, the storm window will mount out to the masonry creating a larger, undivided reflective surface of glass. It would be nice to reduce the amount of glass by adding a horizontal mullion to get the 4 over 4 look rather than the 1 over 1 look. Mr. Peterson stated the existing windows were poorly designed, allowing moisture to get in and necessitating rebuilding many of the window sashes. This type of window was suggested to keep water away from all the wood components. The interior dividers will be seen between the glass but not on the surface of the glass due to the cost and need to protect the components from weather. Therefore it will not completely mimic the existing window patterns. Commissioner Larson said he understands the economics involved and would defer to the historical experts at SHPO assuming they approve the project. Chair Mino agreed. Motion by Chair Mino, seconded by Commissioner Heimdahl, to approve the Design Permit for window replacement at 101 Pine St W with the two staff recommended conditions, adding Condition #3 that the applicant must obtain MNHS and SHPO approval prior to installation. All in favor. Case No. 2020-32: Consideration of a Design Permit modification for the property at 220 Chestnut St E. Joel Hauck, applicant, and 200 Chestnut Partners, LLC, property owners. Ms. Wittman reviewed the case. In 2021 the City approved a Design Permit for the construction of a new apartment building at 200 Chestnut Street East. During the review, the HPC expressed concern for a 5’8” retaining wall proposed to be located along the Union Alley sidewalk. After redesign of the wall plan to a combination of 2-4’ retaining wall with fencing and landscaping, the HPC found that the plan conformed to the Downtown Design Review District standards and added to an enhanced pedestrian experience. Since HPC approval, the property owner had to modify the design plan to accommodate the underground parking. This necessitated raising the basement elevation, which increased the height of the terrace and subsequently the wall along Union Alley. Additionally, the terrace area was repurposed to accommodate stormwater drainage on site through a green roof system. The building permit plans submitted now show a 4’6” wall with horizontal railing above. The wall will be stamped in a vertical, woodgrain pattern. Above the wall (chest height) will be a mixture of plantings specific designed specifically to accommodate rain water on the site; they will set in a 12” deep planter. Below the wall at sidewalk grade, there will be six 8” wide planters with vining plants designed to grow up the textured wall. Staff determined the wall to be substantially compliant with the intent of the HPC’s approval. Staff recommends the Commission review and find the proposed 4’6” wall substantially compliant with the original approved Design Permit. Commissioner Thueson remarked that bricked up windows of buildings across Union Alley could be opened in the future so this design needs to fit that context. Commissioner Heimdahl noted there was talk of creating an Art Alley down Union Alley so the applicant might consider public art in the future. Ms. Wittman clarified that the Art Alley would be in the next block to the north. She discussed with the applicant the potential for some sort of art along the wall. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 20, 2022 Page 5 of 6 Councilmember Junker remarked that nearly 5’ of concrete running almost the length of the alley is impersonal and cold, a big change from concept approval. He would like to see more detail i.e. brick. Commissioner Walls and Chair Mino agreed it is unappealing from a pedestrian standpoint. They would like it to look less like a parking garage wall. Bob Loken, ESG Architecture & Design, responded that the wall is to be poured with a formliner in the pattern of boards, but a brick pattern could be used instead. Councilmember Junker said the Crosby Hotel bricked the Mulberry façade of their parking garage to eliminate the parking garage look. Commissioner Larson said the wall stands out as different from the rest of the building. He suggested a different pattern may help but would not like to see fake brick next to the real brick. Mr. Loken replied they may be able to create staggered recesses in the wall or use both poured and non-poured forms. Joel Hauck, applicant, reminded the Commission the wall is bookended and balanced by the brick structures and runs along 1/3 of the block. Chair Mino commented the previous design had a more dynamic pedestrian feel which was preferable. Ms. Wittman said staff will continue to work with the applicant given the Commission’s feedback. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Forum Conference July 13-17 Ms. Wittman asked if any Commissioners want to attend. Scholarships are available. Discussion of Election of Officers Ms. Wittman shared that in May Commissioner Walls is resigning and a new Chair and Vice Chair will need to be elected. Commission Requests Chair Mino asked the status of the local designation program. Ms. Wittman replied she will discuss this with Community Development Director Gladhill and new staff. Chair Mino asked how late applicants may submit materials for meetings. Ms. Wittman replied because it is a public meeting, people may submit anytime or bring materials to a meeting. Deadlines can be discussed with Mr. Gladhill and future staff. FYI Ms. Wittman reported that she and Commissioner Thueson spoke to the Stillwater Women’s Reading Club with a Powerpoint presentation designed so any Commissioners and staff could present it. Ms. Wittman also shared that the digitization of historic public records, with the Stillwater Public Library, will continue this year with early 1920’s-30s sewer maps with hand drawn records. Commissioner Finwall and the Commission recognized City Planner Wittman for her dedicated service, this being her last meeting with the HPC before she leaves to work for the City of Forest Lake. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 20, 2022 Page 6 of 6 Chair Mino thanked Commissioner Walls for his service on the HPC. Councilmember Junker reported that three candidates were interviewed for Commissioner Walls’s seat. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Walls, seconded by Chair Mino, to adjourn. All in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 9:02 p.m. Amy Mino, Chair ATTEST: _______________ Tim Gladhill, Community Development Director