Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-02-02 HPC MIN0 0 Heritage Preservation Commission Feb. 2, 1998 Present: Roger Tomten, chairperson Jeff Johnson, Frank Langer, Howard Lieberman, Jay Michels, and Brent Peterson Absent: Katherine Francis and Robert Kimbrel Others: Sue Fitzgerald, planning Chairman Tomten called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Approval of minutes Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Johnson, moved approval of the minutes of Dec. 1, 1997; all in favor. Case No. DEM /98 -1 Public hearing on request for demolition of a residence at 1817 N. Second St. Richard Edstrom, applicant. Mr. Edstrom was present for the discussion. Mr. Tomten asked if the building inspector had looked at the structure to determine whether it posed a threat to public safety. Ms. Fitzgerald said the structure has not been condemned, but she said the city's two building officials inspected the structure and advised her not to go inside. Mr. Edstrom noted the there was no sewer or water service. The building has been vacant for between 10 and 20 years and used as storage for quite some time. He said he is approached on almost a weekly basis regarding the sale of the property. He said several callers expressed an interest in possible renovation of the structure, but no one has pursued that. Don Empson (the only person present for the public hearing), who is doing the City's historical survey of Dutchtown, called the structure a non - renewable resource. He agreed the structure needs substantial work, but suggested subsidies might be available to assist in the effort. Mr. Langer noted the City has taken a couple of properties by eminent domain and required the structures to be rehabilitated; it was pointed out the City acquired those properties through tax forfeiture. Mr. Edstrom stated the structure is beyond repair. He said he has no immediate plans for the property; his primary concern is safety. He has boarded up the windows as a safety measure. Given the lack of documentation from Mr. Zepper and without members being able to go inside the structure to determine its condition, Mr. Tomten suggested that Mr. Edstrom be allowed to remove the outbuilding and the deck on the east side of the house to address the safety issue, at least temporarily. Mr. Johnson asked Mr. Empson if the structure would fall under the definition "potential historic structure." Mr. Empson said while he has not completed the survey, the house is certainly part of M the core Dutchtown community. He said he thought all of Dutchtown could qualify as an historic district. Mr. Johnson suggested considering the demolition of the most dangerous parts of the structure — the garage and porch on the east side — and securing the remainder of the structure until the conclusion of the Dutchtown survey to determine historical significance. Demolition of the remainder of the structure could be considered at a later date if Mr. Edstrom still wants to pursue that course of action. Following additional discussion, Mr. Johnson moved to deny the request for demolition of the main property, allowing the demolition of the outbuilding and east porch, with the HPC to consider demolition of the main property after completion of the Dutchtown survey, should Mr. Edstrom return with that request. Mr. Michels seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/97 -4 Continuation of design review of Maple Island renovation phase II. Tim Stefan representing Mainstream Development Partnership. Tim Stefan and Vern Stefan were present. Phase R will involve demolition of the Main Street fagade, and there is some question as to the age of the structure as to whether demolition will need to meet the requirements of the City's new ordinance. Tim Stefan noted the initial intent was to preserve the Main Street fagade; however, that was determined to be economically not feasible. He said from what he has been able to determine, that portion of the building was designed in 1941 and constructed in 1958. He said he has not been able to find any written documentation of the building's age other than construction documents. It was the consensus of members to proceed with the design review, pending determination of the age of the building. Ms. Fitzgerald noted that if it is determined that portion of the existing structure is over 50 years old, the issue will come back before the HPC. Tim Stefan went through the site plan and elevations; material and color samples also were provided. He also explained the sign plan. The exact location of the rooftop mechanicals has not been determined at this time, but they shouldn't be visible, he said. Mr. Johnson expressed one concern. He said the second story elevation looks far apart from the first story. He asked if there was any way the glass could be brought closer to the floor. Mr. Stefan agreed with that observation, but said moving the glass down interferes with office space design. Mr. Johnson suggested carrying the window frame down by using a solid panel. Mr. Langer suggested some type of sill treatment also might be helpful. Members expressed favorable comments about the plans. Mr. Peterson said he was pleased to see the integrity of an industrial building has been maintained. Mr. Michels moved approval as conditioned. Mr. Johnson asked that the motion be amended to include a condition that a spandrel panel be added to the second floor windows and consideration N given to a sill treatment of the second floor window openings. Mr. Tomten suggested including approval of the proposed sign package in the motion of approval. Mr. Michels accepted the amendments to his motion of approval. Mr. Lieberman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Mr. Johnson, moved to allow the removal of the canopy on the north elevation of the Phase I portion of the building; motion passed unanimously. Other items Update on Dutchtown architectural survey: Mr. Empson was present. Members had received copies of the draft of part I of the survey with the agenda packet and expressed favorable comments. Members gave several suggestions as to possible structures to include "in the completed document. CLG grant application: Ms. Fitzgerald said a grant had been submitted for the Holcombe survey. Mr. Tomten agreed that it makes sense to do the Holcombe neighborhood survey before redoing the South Hill survey and said he would like to get to the point. of establishing Locally Designated Historic Districts. Mr. Langer expressed his concern about losing homes to demolition to construct new homes with river views. He suggested the use of low- interest loans and/or subsidies to encourage renovation of homes. Mr. Peterson noted that if the City has Locally Designated Historic Districts, the concern would be alleviated. Mr. Tomten asked about the status of language changes to the Demolition Ordinance. Ms. Fitzgerald reported that RFPs for the Aiple property have been sent out. She asked for an HPC member to serve on the committee evaluating the RFPs; Mr. Johnson and Mr. Michels both said they would be willing to sit on that committee. Mr. Michels, seconded by Mr. Peterson, moved to adjourn at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording secretary 3