Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-03 HPC MIN City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission April 3, 2006 Present: Howard Lieberman, chairman, Phil Eastwood, Jeff Johnson, Larry Nelson, Brent Peterson, Roger Tomten, Scott Zahren and Council Representative Ken Harycki Others: Community Development Director Bill Turnblad Mr. Lieberman called the meeting to order at 6:58 p.m. and welcomed new Community Development Director Bill Turnblad. Approval of minutes: Mr. Johnson asked about his written comments regarding Case No. DR/06-13. While not read into the record, Mr. Lieberman said the points raised by Mr. Johnson were covered in the discussion. The minutes of March 6, 2006, were approved as submitted. Design Review Case No. DR/06-15. Design review of signage change at 106 E. Chestnut St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Patricia Page, applicant. Present was Darrell Rhodes, owner of the building. Mr. Rhodes said the spelling of the building name will be corrected. The lettering will be burgundy with gold trim. The sign background will be white. Mr. Rhodes also requested that he be allowed to continue the use of a backlit sign, saying he bought the building with the sign the way it is – backlighted. Mr. Lieberman said he would strongly request that the applicant use lighting other than backlighting and also suggested that the use of backlighting is not a grandfathered use since the building ownership has changed. Mr. Rhodes asked about other backlit signs in the downtown area. Mr. Johnson agreed that with the change in building ownership, the use of backlighting is not a gramdfathered use. Mr. Johnson also suggested that the use of the building – professional office space – does not provide the rational for allowing backlighted signage. Mr. Rhodes argued that the residential appearance of the building makes it difficult to determine the use of the building; the sign contractor also pointed out that it will be costly to change the signage. Mr. Johnson moved to approve the layout of the proposed sign as submitted, with the condition that the signage not be internally lighted and that if the applicant wishes to have the sign externally lighted, a lighting plan be submitted to the HPC for approval. Mr. Zahren seconded the motion. Mr. Tomten pointed out that backlighting is not conducive to the Victorian theme of the building and surface lighting is a better approach. Mr. Lieberman also noted the downtown design guidelines were in place when Mr. Rhodes assumed ownership of the building and also pointed out that the HPC cannot grant variances. Mr. Johnson’s motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/06-12 Continued Infill Design Review in the Neighborhood Conservation District (RB, Two Family Residential District) at 1208 N. William St. Tom Mulcahy, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Johnson reiterated his written comments submitted for the March meeting: the belt line for the single unit is higher than normal and is most apparent from the side elevation; more vertical elements, such as more height to the first floor windows, should be added to the twin home; and the proposed coach lights on the front of the units should be replaced with shielded or downlit fixtures. Mr. Johnson also pointed out that the window shown in the plans for the duplex unit 1 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission April 3, 2006 does not fit with the floor plan as shown. Mr. Johnson suggested that the window not be eliminated, but replaced with a pair of windows. Mr. Harycki said during the March public hearing, many neighbors expressed concern about drainage issues and wondered whether the Infill guidelines call for drainage issues to be addressed. Mr. Turnblad pointed out drainage issues will be addressed as part of the resubdivision permit process. Two neighbors were present: Joann Loer, 1114 N. William, and Jeff Benson, 1120 N. William. Both reiterated a concern about drainage issues. Mr. Benson also reiterated a concern about the proximity of the driveway to existing utility meters. There was a question as to whether to table the case again due to the applicant’s absence. Due to the 60-day review rule, it was decided to act on the case. Mr. Johnson moved to approve plans for both structures as conditioned, with the additional conditions that: the belt line for the single unit be lowered to match the floor elevation or eave line; that the second-story window in the duplex unit that conflicts with the floor plan be replaced with two separate sash windows; that the 5x5 picture window be replaced with a double sash window; that the coach lights be replaced with shielded/recessed fixtures; that vertical elements be added to the duplex unit; and that the engineer review the drainage plan and proximity of the driveway to existing utility meters. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/06-17 Design review of parking lot and 25’ x 50’ deck at 101 Third St. S. (American Legion Post 48) in the CBD, Central Business District. David Swanson, representing American Legion Post 48. Present were Dave Swanson, Curt Newcomb and Post 48 Commander Robert Hart. Mr. Newcomb explained that rather than a deck as initially proposed, plans now call for an elevated patio with block retaining wall. Mr. Newcomb noted the Legion had purchased the parking lot behind their building which they plan to surface with pavers. Mr. Newcomb addressed some of the staff comments. He said there are plans to screen the access along Myrtle Street. Regarding the comments about color palette, he said they are looking at different tones with the paver blocks and believe the patio and paver colors can be brought together. Lighting will not be intrusive, he said. Ambient lighting is all that is proposed; the existing street light will be the primary light source, he said. The patio, he said, would provide space for a few tables with umbrellas; there will be no outside bar. Mr. Johnson asked is there would be a walkway from the patio to the front of the main structure. Mr. Newcomb said the only access to the patio would be from the inside of the main building or the parking lot. Mr. Johnson also asked about plans for the patio railing and how it would be attached. Mr. Newcomb noted that the railing will have to meet code and will likely be painted treated lumber or perhaps wrought iron. Mr. Newcomb said they plan to do some screening of the railing, such as with flower planters. The railing, Mr. Newcomb said, will be attached to the concrete slab patio. Mr. Newcomb also stated the Legion would like to complete the patio this summer in asking for concept approval of the plans. Mr. Johnson moved to approve the plans for the modular block retaining wall and concrete slab patio, with details regarding the railing, lighting, landscaping and paver/block materials to be submitted for final review. Mr. Turnblad asked that a condition be added to provide a site plan 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission April 3, 2006 for access points, which Mr. Johnson added to his motion. Mr. Eastwood seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/06-18 Design review to replace an existing entry door at 102 S. Second St. (Gazette Building) in the CBD, Central Business District. John Harvey, Harvey Woodruff, LLC, applicant. John Harvey was present. Mr. Harvey explained his request to replace the existing door with an anodized aluminum door. In addition to safety issues, he said the existing door is very heavy and does not close properly. The transom would stay, he said. He said he is requesting to use metal because of the cost involved; also, he said metal weathers better. Mr. Tomten asked Mr. Harvey if he had looked at maintaining the profile of a wood-width door. Mr. Harvey said that, too, would require a custom-made door, and he suggested the door is not that visible to passers-by. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Nelson spoke in favor of the use of wood as being more historically correct. Mr. Johnson suggested that the existing door might be rehinged to address the safety issue. Mr. Harvey reiterated that it would cost $3,000 to install a new metal door versus $10,000 for a new wooden door. Mr. Eastwood asked if Mr. Harvey would consider using a wooden door if it is determined it is economically feasible. Mr. Harvey responded that he would not consider that option. Mr. Harvey, former owner of the Bourdaghs Building, also stated he took exception to several comments made during the discussion of Case No. DR/06-15; Mr. Harvey’s position was duly noted for the record. Mr. Lieberman pointed out that the use of colored anodized aluminum is acceptable according to the downtown design guidelines. Mr. Eastwood, seconded by Mr. Peterson, moved to approve the plans to replace the building door with a bronze anodized aluminum door as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. Other items: Stillwater Mills on Main – Dave May, Four Star Land Development, was present. Mr. May acknowledged the concern regarding the roof vents, as discussed at the last meeting. He said the plumbing stacks can all be cut off 10-12” above the roof membrane when completed. He noted the rubber boot of the roof extends 9-10” to accommodate major rain events, so the plumbing vents, when cut, will extend only 2-3” above the boot. He said all the skylights, furnace vents and other roof vents were identified in the original drawings submitted to the City and said the developer is not asking for more then identified in those drawings. Mr. May also noted the developer was not given the opportunity to ventilate out the sides of the building, with the exception of the air conditioning units. And, he said the HPC’s directive was to have no mechanicals on the roof. Mr. Harycki noted that the vents are visible not just from Second Street but can be seen from areas of the South Hill as well. Mr. Harycki said Council Members have been receiving many calls of concern about this issue, and he said screening/shrubbery, as proposed in a letter from Mr. May, is not enough to mitigate the concerns. Mr. May reiterated his statement that plumbing vents will not be the issue as they can be cut off. The problem, Mr. May said, is with the exhaust vents for fireplaces, dryers and bathrooms which must be 48” above the roof deck and 36” from 3 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission April 3, 2006 fresh air returns. Mr. May said they are looking at a process of painting almost all of the vents to match the roof surface. Mr. Lieberman said he could not recall what the HPC originally approved and asked if it would make sense to hold a workshop on just this issue and at that workshop have all past records available so the Commission knows, if fact, what was approved. Mr. Harycki said the public wants to know what is going to be done about this issue. Mr. Johnson suggested that to quell some of the concern, the developer cut the plumbing vents short and paint them as soon as possible and see what comments are received – change the situation and show what might work, he suggested. Mr. Zahren asked about installing some type of screening over the entire roof. Mr. May said that creates a problem with roof point loads and ventilation issues. Mr. May said he would like to do as Mr. Johnson suggested, cut the public vents and paint, and see what input is received. Brian Larson, 2008 Hazel Court, offered comments. He said given the geography of the area, the roof should have been the design starting point, the primary design element. He suggested that either the developer knew what the roof would look like and felt it would be acceptable or had no idea of what it would look like. Mr. Larson also stated that the City should ask for more than landscaping and paint, and he noted that the more time that goes by, the more expensive any solution will be for the developer. Mr. Larson called for the developer to offer a real significant compromise and reduce the number of stacks, by consolidating the stacks or some venting through the sides of units. Mr. May pointed out that 2/3 of the building is dry walled and said he wasn’t sure if the vents can be consolidated at this point. Mr. Larson asked that the developer investigate the possibility of consolidating/reducing vents to determine if it is feasible. Mr. Harycki noted this issue will be a Council Request Item at the April 4 Council meeting to let the public know what’s going on. The public needs input, he said. Mr. Eastwood wondered if this issue had moved past the HPC and become more of a Council issue. Mr. Lieberman said the HPC has an obligation to push forward. If an impasse is reached, then the matter goes to the Council, he said. And Mr. Lieberman again said the HPC needs to see the record pertaining to the issue. Mr. Lieberman suggested holding a joint workshop with the Council and have the developer present three different concrete alternatives, with cost options, for mitigating the venting; Mr. Turnblad was asked to provide a record of the past actions for the Commission. Mr. May said he was not sure if he could get definitive costs should the workshop be scheduled within two weeks as was mentioned. It was agreed that the developer could proceed with cutting/painting/removing bags from a portion of the roof. Mr. Tomten pointed out that the Commission and others should not forget the height allowance. If the developer had been allowed to step the building up along Second Street, the structure could have been 35’ higher than the existing building. Maybe the Commission paid too much attention to the view of the structure from Main Street, he said, but he pointed out that folks still have a view of the River from Pioneer Park, which is better than no view at all. 4 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission April 3, 2006 Regarding scheduling a joint workshop, it was decided that if the Council is amenable to such a joint meeting, the HPC will be available. Mr. Lieberman moved to refer the decision regarding the workshop to the Council and await its recommendation, with the issue to be on the HPC’s May agenda for further discussion. Mr. Eastwood seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Eastwood, seconded by Mr. Johnson, moved to adjourn at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5