HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-04-07 HPC MINCity of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
April 7, 2008
Present: Howard Lieberman, C hair , Phil Eastwood, Jef f Johnson, Roger Tomten, Scott
Zahren and Council Representative Robert Gag
Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge
Absent: Gayle Hudak and L arry Nelson
Mr. Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Approval of minutes : Minutes of March 2, 3008, were approved as submitted.
PUBL IC HEARINGS
Case No. DEM/08 - 08 Demolition request for a garage at 1104 Third St. S. in the RB,
Two Family Resi dential District. Adam Johnston, applicant. Continued from the March
HPC meeting.
Mr. Lieberman stated after reviewing the application, it appears the applicant met all
nine steps required for the issuance of a demolition permit and moved to approve the
p ermit. Mr. Zahren seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously.
DESIGN REVIEWS
Case No. DR/08 - 10 Design review of a paint sign band area for Enterprise Rent - a - Car at
14454 N. 60th St. in the BP - C, Business Park Commercial District. Ben Bonde, applicant.
Mr. Lieberman reviewed the request and staff findings. Mr. Lieberman moved approval
as conditioned. Mr. Eastwood seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously.
Case No. DR/08 - 11 Design review for Oh - Sus - anna at 402 N. Main St. in the CBD,
Central Busin ess District. Ann Tschida, applicant.
Mr. Lieberman reviewed the request and staff findings. It was noted that according to
ordinance, based on the size of the applicant’s retail space, the requested sign is 5.5
square feet larger than permitted. Mr. John son asked a representative of the applicant,
if there would be a problem reducing the size of the sign to meet the ordinance
requirements; the representative said they would not be opposed to doing that. Mr.
Johnson moved to approve the requested sign as s ubmitted and as conditioned, with
the additional condition that there is no lighting . Mr. Zahren seconded the motion;
motion passed unanimously.
1
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
April 7, 2008
Case No. DR/08 - 14 Design review of exterio r renovation and signage for 201 S. Main
St. in the CBD, Central Business District. Joe Heinen, applicant.
The applicant was present. Mr. Pogge noted the current signs would be removed and
replaced with the new signage; he pointed out the sign on the Ches tnut Street
elevation will be smaller th an the existing sign. Mr. Pogge stated at this time, the
building houses just one tenant. As the new owners get into their planned renovations
to house additional tenants, a sign plan will have to be developed and ap proved. Mr.
Johnson suggested adding a condition regarding submission of a sign plan; Mr. Pogge
agreed that would be good to add. Mr. Johnson suggested language that this approval
becomes null and void if an additional tenant comes in and requests signage, at which
time a sign plan must be submitted. Mr. Lieberman moved to approve Case No. DR/04 -
14 as submitted and conditioned, with the additional condition s that the signage not be
lighted and if at any point in the future, one or more additional tenants le ase a portion
or all of this building a complete new sign package must be submitted to the
Commission, which may necessitate the removal of one or more of these approved
signs to accommodate the new sign package. Mr. Eastwood seconded the motion;
motion pa ssed unanimously.
Case No. DR/08 - 15 Design review of new construction in the Neighborhood
Conservation District at 1905 Second St. N. in the RA, Single Family R esidential District.
Boyd Knudse n, applicant.
Mr. Knudsen was present. Mr. Tomten questioned t he proportion of the
transom/windows, saying it seemed a bit out of character with the simplicity of the
original house. Mr. Knudsen noted there are higher ceilings in the new structure. Mr.
Johnson asked if the applicant would be carrying some of the char acteristics, such as
the five - sided windows, of the original structure to the gables of the addition, to which
Mr. Knudsen responded in the affirmative. Mr. Knudsen said he would be using 4” lap
siding for the exterio r; he also reviewed plans for the corne r boards and trim details.
Mr. Eastwood moved to approve as conditioned; Mr. Zahren seconded the motion.
Motion passed unanimously.
Case No. DR/08 - 16 Design review of signage for 223 Chestnut St. in the CBD, Central
Business District. Cecilia Loome, appli cant.
Mr. Lieberman reviewed the request and staff recommendations. Mr. Tomten asked if
there was an existing bracket that would be utilized; Mr. Pogge said he did not believe
so. Mr. Lieberman moved approval as conditioned with the additional condition t hat the
sign not be lit. Mr. Tomten asked that there be an additional condition that if a new
2
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
April 7, 2008
bracket is installed an attempt be made to utilize the existing bracket holes. Mr.
Johnson sug gested that the sign background be an off - white, with a paint chip
submitted to staff for approval. Mr. Lieberman agreed to incorporate both Mr. Tomten’s
and Mr. Johnson’s suggested conditions in his motion for approval. Mr. Zahren
seconded the motion; mot ion passed unanimously.
Case No. DR/08 - 17 Design review of four - level parking structure at 200 N. Second St. in
the CBD, Central Business District. City of Stillwater, applicant.
Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the project. He noted the plans
include, or will include, the seven conditions the HPC stipulated when it granted concept
approval of the plans in February . He reviewed how the seven conditions have been or
will be incorporated. Mr. Turnblad reviewed comments from the Council perta ining to
the southern tow er/elevator tower and to the industrial - look of the façade. He also
reviewed comments from Rivertown Commons primarily pertaining to the park area . He
concluded by saying staff believes the design team has created a facility in kee ping with
the bulk of the downtown design guidelines and is sensitive to a lot of the public
discourse that has been received. He said approval is recommended wit h 13 conditions.
There was brief discussion of lighting and storm water runoff/treatment. The re was
discussion about keeping the park open to the public, with Mr. Johnson noting that,
according to the City Charter, there is a process that must be followed should the
Council decide not to keep the park open to public use. Mr. Tomten pointed out tha t the
park is shown as a pedestrian link and pedestrian amenity in the downtown and
Comprehensive plans and is one of the things that make Stillwater unique. Mr. Johnson
spoke of the historical significance of the site and suggested , from the HPC’s
perspec tive , it would be preferable to at least preserve the site and provide some
interpretive information on the site.
Mr. Eastwood asked if there is any way to make the nor th tower look unique. A
representative of the LSA design team replied that would be pos sible, making it look
similar to the south tower but with a little more differentiation , and he suggested
possible treatments , saying these are levels of detail that will be looked at in final
design . Mr. Johnson and Mr. Tomten also suggested possible trea tment details. Mr.
Johnson pointed out that in plans approved earlier by the HPC, the north tower was a
very different shaped building than the south end, with a different color parapet and
other differences.
On a question by Mr. Lieberman, the design tea m reviewed the treatments on the Third
Street, and north and south elevations. Mr. Eastwood asked about signage. Mr.
3
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
April 7, 2008
Turnblad noted they would come back later with a sign package. Mr. East wood asked
whether a proposed banquet room at the Lowell Inn would require significant changes
to what is being approved; the LSA spokesperson responded some changes will be
required, but they are not significant changes. Mr. Turnblad briefly reviewed two
options for the expansion, notin g a separate design review will be required for any
expansion plans.
Mr. Johnson moved approval with the 13 conditions recommended by staff and the
additional conditions that the north tower be very different and with no ch aracteristics
of the south tower, and that there be every effort made to preserve the park and an
interpretive element denoting its significance to the City’s lumbering era be included
and that the park not be used for water retention. Mr. Eastwood seconde d the motion;
motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
Request for one - year extension of design review permit for Cub Fuel Cente r – Mr.
Johnson , seconded by Mr. Lieberman, moved approval of the requested one - year
extension. Motion passed unanimously.
Re quest for extension of demolition permit, DEM/06 - 04, Maple Island – Mr. Johnson,
seconded by Mr. Eastwood, moved approval of the requested extension. Motion passed
unanimously.
Annual preservation awards – Mr. Johnson spoke of recognizing residential reno vation
efforts in view of the City’ s Heirloom and Landmark homes program. Mr. Pogge noted
this is the state’s sesquicentennial year and he suggested giving an award recognizing
the ongoing preservation efforts at the Historic Courthouse in keeping with the
sesquicentennial observation. Several members spoke in favor of recognizing the mural
at Pulp Fashion. Mr. Johnson moved to recognize the residential renovation efforts to
the homes at 502 W. Churchill Street , 411 S. Sixth Street, and 907 Willard St., Pul p
Fashion for signage, and an award recognizing the ongoing restoration efforts at the
Historic Courthouse in honor of the sesquicentennial. Mr. Lieberman said he would like
the three residential awards presented separately to emphasize the efforts the
hom eowners have put forth to meet the spirit of what is trying to be accomplished with
design guidelines.
Other I tems:
Mr. Pogge reported that 20 applications have been received for the Heirloom Homes
program. He said postcards and letters have been sent out to solicit more interest in
participating.
4
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
April 7, 2008
Mr. Pogge referred to a sign brochure in the agenda packet and stated staff has been
directed to look at signage issues in the downtown area. He spoke briefly about
sandwich boards and said any program would be intended to reduce clutter, promote
pedestrian circulation and safety. He asked for Commission feedback. Mr. Johnson
suggested perhaps the Chamber should develop proposed guidelines. There w as
discussion of the issue of enforcement of a Chamber - developed program and the need
for such signage. Mr. Lieberman suggested that clutter isn’t all bad and sometimes
promotes a feeling of vitality in a city. Mr. Lieberman said he thought this was an iss ue
that should be revisited and suggested a possible workshop with the Chamber. Mr.
Johnson questioned how much of a stance the HPC should take on this matter.
Mr. Pogge noted that Mr. Johnson had suggested that the City utilize more historically
correct c urbing type in street projects that occur in the historic sections of the City. He
said Public Works has agreed to a 12” gutter, with 6” square curb style, as opposed to a
standard 45 degree curb, in the historic section included in this year’s street proj ect
area. Mr. Johnson spoke of the possibility of using different color street signs to further
denote the historic districts.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary
5