Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-07-07 HPC MIN Heritage Preservation Commission July 7, 1999 Present: Howard Lieberman, chairperson Chuck Dougherty, Phil Eastwood, Jeff Johnson, Robert Kimbrel, Roger Tomten Others: Planner Sue Fitzgerald Mr. Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Dougherty, moved approval of the minutes of June 7, 1999; all in favor. Case No. DR/99-16 Design review of exterior sign for the Chef’s Gallery at 324 S. Main St. Lora and Steve Bachman, applicants. The applicant said the requested sign will be the same dimensions as the existing sign. The lettering will be 9 inches high, rather than 5 as indicated in the agenda; as the copper background of the sign ages to a desired green, it will be sprayed to retain that color. The existing lighting will remain. The applicant will be repainting the trim in the existing colors and cleaning up some rust. Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Kimbrel, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. Case No. DR/99-17 Design review of exterior pylon sign for US Bancorp Piper Jaffray at 105 Chestnut St. Art-N-Sign, representing applicant. Mr. Fitzgerald said the applicant’s representative could not be present at the meeting. Ms. Fitzgerald said the applicant was informed that it was staff’s recommendation that the requested colors be reversed, with a blue background and white lettering, rather than the requested white background and blue lettering. Ms. Fitzgerald noted because the business has not changed, the sign is grandfathered in as to the ability to light the sign if desired, and it was thought a white background would be too intrusive should the sign ever be lighted. Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Dougherty, moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Lieberman asked the motion be amended to indicate the sign could not be lighted except for the fact the existing business sign is grandfathered in; Mr. Kimbrel and Mr. Dougherty accepted the amendment to their motion. Members indicated their preference the sign not be lighted. Mr. Dougherty noted that issue could be further addressed should the applicant return regarding the recommendation to change the requested colors. Amended motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/99-18 Design review of exterior building, parking and signage for the Roof Depot, 1815 S. Greeley St. Mohagen Architects, Ltd., representing the applicant. Mr. Mohagen noted that nothing has been done to the existing building, the former Ammerman building, for a long time. The applicant would like to keep the existing brick façade with EFIS material placed over the existing concrete; other plans include installing new windows, roof flashing and overhead doors, and redoing the corrugated secondary portion of the building to match the main building. There was some discussion regarding the requested lighting; currently, there is no lighting. In the discussion, it was noted that if security is an issue, the amount of lighting could be reduced by placing units closer to the entry ways and bringing the units down a bit. It was agreed to have Ms. Fitzgerald and Mr. Tomten work with Mr. Mohagen on the lighting issues. Mr. Johnson asked about the proposed new entry. Mr. Mohagen said he would like to do a small mansard with metal panel insert. Mr. Johnson said he was concerned about the mansard shape over the window and also the canopy over the second entrance, noting it would be more fitting to have a flat roof canopy at that location. The applicant agreed to come back to the HPC with details regarding canopies and the design of the new entrance. In the discussion regarding landscaping plans, Mr. Johnson noted there is a mature spruce on the south side of the boulevard which should be incorporated into the plans; Mr. Mohagen said there is some question as to whether that tree is on the applicant’s property, but said the applicant would be sure not to take out any mature trees. Mr. Johnson moved approval as conditioned, adding to condition No. 3 that the lighting details be revised and submitted for review by staff and Mr. Tomten; adding to condition No. 4 that existing trees be incorporated into the landscaping; that the trim and flashing match the color of the building (taupe); and that door/canopy details be submitted for further review. There was discussion regarding requested signage. It was noted the requested sign is within size guidelines. Mr. Johnson asked if the roof of the current metal building was going to be brought up to the same elevation of the existing building; Mr. Mohagen affirmed that was the plan. Mr. Johnson suggested centering the sign between the window and the edge of the building or placing the sign more towards the south corner. Mr. Johnson noted that only one sign was permitted on the west elevation. Mr. Johnson added to his motion approving the requested 4 x 16’ sign to be placed equidistant from the parapet and south edge of the building and that one sign only be allowed. Mr. Tomten seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP/V/DR/99-29 Design review of exterior ff Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites at 2000 Washington Ave. Darby Sheets, applicant. Present for the discussion were Darby Sheets and project planner Paula Mestelle of Westwood Professional Services. A graphic of a prototype building was provided. Ms. Fitzgerald noted the proposed building is right at the maximum of allowable height – 46 feet. Mr. Tomten talked briefly about the orientation of the building, suggesting it should be more horizontal, rather than vertical as indicated in plans. He also asked if there were options for lighting rather than the ground uplighting units as proposed. He noted the photo of the prototype indicated an overhang to the building; he suggested recessed soffit lighting to wash the building, rather than the uplighting. Mr. Tomten also asked if the allowable one sign had to be placed over the front entrance, suggesting that perhaps the applicant would prefer the allowable sign be placed on the south elevation. Mr. Lieberman suggested that if the applicant eliminated the uplighting, the Commission might be more sympathetic to the nee for an additional sign. It was noted the directional signs are OK, but no logos are allowed. The proposed parking lot lighting consists of shoebox fixtures on 20’ poles, which are acceptable. When asked about security lighting, Mr. Sheets indicated there would be down-lighted wall packs. When asked about lighting in the drop-off entrance canopy, Mr. Sheets said there would be downlighting in the canopy; he also stated he would like to do metal (blue in color) on the gables and front awning entrance, rather than shingles. Mr. Johnson agreed the building material orientation should be more horizontally oriented to reduce the visual height of the structure. He suggested increasing the overhang accents the horizontal orientation. It was noted that guidelines call for the use of the same materials/colors on all elevations of the building. Mr. Kimbrel asked about adding some architectural features to the north/south elevations. Mr. Sheets noted that canopies over the entrances at those elevations will help a great deal. Mr. Johnson noted the main issues consist of the amount of lighting on the building and providing a horizontal look to the structure. Mr. Sheets noted that he can’t do soffit lighting on the south and north elevations. Mr. Johnson suggested that on the south elevation there be lighting in the gable area only to draw more attention to the sign; more lighting may wash out the sign and defeat its purpose. The sign will be channel lit/ yellow with two orange shooting stars. Mr. Kimbrel moved approval as conditioned, eliminating condition No. 3 as there are no adjacent residential properties; numbering the condition that there be no phasing of the project as a separate item; eliminating condition No. 11; adding a condition that there be no uplighting of the building and that a new lighting plan be submitted for review and that all other lighting be downlighted; and that the building be horizontally oriented. Mr. Johnson suggested adding conditions that the overhang include a soffit to provide for downlighting; that a metal roof be provided over the front awning and two front hips; that gable canopies be provided over the two side entrances; that all four sides of the building be of the same materials; that no corporate logos be allowed on flags or informational signs. Mr. Lieberman suggested adding language that due to the hardship presented by the location; the HPC recommends two signs be permitted; Mr. Johnson suggested additional language that the signs be channel lit and of the colors submitted. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion of approval with all the added conditions. Mr. Tomten said he had an issue regarding recognizing a hardship caused by being two building pads away from the highway. Mr. Lieberman said recognizing the applicant’s concessions regarding the lighting, he would be uncomfortable opposing the second sign. Mr. Kimbrel asked to amend the motion to indicate the HPC approves the design/lighting/placement of the signs, removing any reference to hardship. Mr. Johnson agreed to the amendment. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/99-19 Design review of signage and exterior modifications at 503 N. Main St. Chris Hamilton, applicant. Mr. Hamilton informed members he had signed a four-year lease for the building. He wants to do the front of the building and two sides in log siding rather than painting the existing galvanized material as indicated in the packet. He will also have to replace two doors, and would like to install wooden posts to support the existing overhang. Mr. Johnson asked about the existing light pole; Mr. Hamilton said he planned to remove the pole. There was discussion regarding placement of the sign (wooden with recessed lettering). Mr. Johnson suggested placing the sign on the end gable on the west elevation, noting that when the doors are open for display of his product, that provides another opportunity for signage. Mr. Hamilton said he though he would prefer to have the signage on the south elevation; the sign will be the same size as the existing sign. Mr. Lieberman moved approval of the request as conditioned, with the additional condition that the building be done in stained wood, log siding with signage to be worked out with staff and one commission member. Mr. Johnson suggested specifying that one carved wooden sign with stained lettering be allowed on either the west or south elevation; that the applicant work with staff and a commission member on lighting issues; and that the applicant remove the two mast lights from the property. Mr. Kimbrel seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Johnson volunteered to work with staff and the applicant. Other items: ? Ms. Fitzgerald said the nomination forms for the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota’s annual Historic Preservation Awards are due Aug. 16. It was agreed to discuss possible nominees at the August meeting. Ms. Fitzgerald will forward a list of previous nominations/award winners to members prior to the meeting. ? Mr. Lieberman commended Mr. Johnson on his two articles relating to bridge issues which had appeared in a local paper. ? Ms. Fitzgerald noted the City Council had approved the historic lighting for the downtown area. Mr. Kimbrel said he would like to see the HPC review the design of the fixtures; he said it appeared the design is different that what was originally approved. Ms. Fitzgerald said the city is talking with one other vendor for installation/maintenance of the new fixtures. It was agreed that Mr. Johnson and Mr. Kimbrel should work with City Engineer Klayton Eckles and staff during meetings with the other potential vendor. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Mr. Tomten, made that in the form of a motion; motion passed unanimously. ? Mr. Lieberman raised the issue of berming; Ms. Fitzgerald said she would be taking with Video Update and St. Croix Bike and Skate/Kennedy Transmission regarding that issue. ? Mr. Johnson provided his written comments to Mr. Tomten’s design guideline revision. Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Dougherty, moved to adjourn at 9:30 p.m.; all in favor. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary