Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-01 HPC MINHERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 1, 1996 Present: Chairman Robert Kimbrel Katherine Francis, Jeff Johnson, Howard Lieberman, Jay Michels, Brent Peterson and Roger Tomten Others: Susan Fitzgerald and Steve Russell, planning; Jerry Fontaine, Planning Commission Chairman Kimbrel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Approval of minutes Mr. Tomten asked that the wording regarding light fixtures in Case No. DR/96 -6 be changed from "dispersed to "shielded" from neighbors. Mr. Tomten, seconded by Mr. Lieberman, moved approval of the March 4, 1996, minutes as corrected; all in favor. Case No. SUP /V/DR/96 -15 Design review of 60 condominium units and nine townhouses at 301 S. Second St. Gerrard Realty, applicant. Mr. Johnson excused himself from participation in the discussion due to his association with SEH, the consulting architectural firm for the project. Lou Moran, SEH architect, went through some "modest" differences in the previously presented plans. He also presented samples of the proposed exterior building materials. As proposed the mountain red rock -faced brick would be used for both the townhouses and the condominium buildings. Mr. Moran said natural light would provide subtle color differences between the complexes. A lighter color brick banding would be utilized on the units. Andersen windows would be used. A standing seam meal roof would be utilized. Also provided was a computer generated rendering of a photo taken from the roof of the Connolly Shoe Building showing how the complex might look as viewed from that direction. Ronn Hechter, Grand Garage, expressed a concern about the impact of the project on parking. He also expressed a concern about the timeframe of the project and the impact of the construction phase on area businesses. He also suggested the possibility of problems from groundwater flow. Mr. Moran said two parking spaces per unit would be provided, as well as additional parking for guests. He also said every attempt would be made to • • minimize the impact of construction on neighbors. Additional soil borings will be done prior to construction, he said. Mr. Robert Anderson, 315 N. wens St., also raised a concern about parking. Jerry Fontaine, chairman of the city Planning Commission, asked whether HPC members had any concerns regarding the size of the project. Mr. Lieberman responded that members were initially concerned that the buildings were too massive for that site and noted the developers had attempted to address that concern through changes in building elevations and other design modifications. Mr. Lieberman said he was concerned that using the same bricking on both the townhouses and condominium buildings would create a visual effect that the project is too massive. Mr. Kimbrel said he felt the current plans are more appropriate that when the project was first proposed. Mr. Fontaine said he felt the buildings looked more interesting at the lower elevations and more "institutionalized" at the higher elevations. Mr. Moran pointed out that there is more design variability than is presented in the design sketches or the computer - generated photo. Donald Nolde, 311 S. Third St., business, asked whether the developers had purchased the lot on Olive Street behind the U.S. West Building. A purchase agreement is pending, Mr. Moran said. Mr. Lieberman reiterated his concern about the use of the same color brick throughout the project. Ms. Francis and Mr. Peterson shared that concern. Mr. Russell suggested that the developer attempt to use materials and design details to break up the mass of the project as has been done with the changes in elevations. Mr. Moran again stated that natural lighting will provide subtle differences in coloration. Mr. Tomten said he was more comfortable with the detailing shown in the sketches than the computerized photo; he suggested more detailing around the window openings. James Huntsman, 416 S. Fourth St., expressed a concern about the roof line. Mr. Moran said the building(s) would appear flat from Highway 35 in Wisconsin only, not as viewed from any place in Stillwater. Mr. Huntsman also asked about the window detailing. Mr. Michels asked for a clarification on the number of units in the project. As proposed in the latest plans, there are 74 units, Mr. Moran said. There was continued discussion regarding the brick coloring. Mr. Moran reiterated that the natural character of the environment will give the appearance of changes in coloration. However, Mr. Moran said if the brick color is an issue with the HPC, the developers would be happy to come back for further review of the issue. Mr. Johnson asked whether the HPC was being asked to give approval to the plans presented on 3/18/96 and whether the information presented at the April 1 meeting updated the earlier plans. Mr. Tomten moved approval with the condition that the developers continue to work with the HPC regarding the selection of the brick coloring; that the developer continue to work with the HPC on detailing issues; and that the developer submit lighting, signage and landscaping plans for review. Mr. Lieberman suggested adding language approving the plans of 3/18/96 as modified based on the materials presented at the April 1 meeting. Ms. Francis seconded the motion; all in favor. Case No. DR/96 -8 Design review of exterior modifications to the entrance area at 302 S. Second St. (U.S. West building). Gerrard Realty and Mark Balay, applicants. Mr. Balay and Mr. Peter Gerrard presented the request. The request is for an 8'6" x 10' sign face, an awning and seven flags, as well as a new glass panel door. Ms. Fitzgerald said no sign had been submitted for review. She said a sign plan would be required if there is to be more than one use in the building. Decorative flags, as requested, would not be allowed on the face of the building according to the city's ordinance. Mr. Balay said the request is to draw attention to the corner of the building as a sales office for the condominium /townhouse project. Mr. Russell said the requested sign (8'6" x 10') appears to be much like a billboard advertising the building behind it (the condominiums). Off -site advertising is prohibited, he said. The developers would be allowed to place a 50- square -foot sign on the project site itself. Mr. Michels noted it would be difficult for the HPC to grant approval without seeing a sign plan. Mr. Michels moved to deny the use of flags, to allow an awning as described and to invite the applicants back with a more detailed sign plan; Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. All in favor. 0 0 Case No. SUP /DR/96 -17 Design review of exterior sign at 317 S. Main St. Scott Zahren, applicant. Mr. Zahren explained the request is to repaint an existing sign. Mr. Johnson suggested using a border to make the sign look more permanent. Mr. Johnson moved approval as conditioned, with the additional condition that a border be used to accent the sign. Ms. Francis seconded the motion. Upon questioning whether a directional arrow would be included in the sign and whether the plan submitted was the final plan, Mr. Johnson added a condition that any changes /addition to the signage beyond what was presented to the HPC be reviewed by Ms. Fitzgerald. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. SUP /DR/96 -13 Design review of a temporary tent at 127 S. Water St., Lumber Baron's Hotel. John F. Berglund, applicant. Mr. Berglund and Mr. Chuck Dougherty were present for the discussion. Mr. Berglund said they would like to use a tent to be able to utilize the patio area in case of inclement weather; the tent would be taken down when not in use. Mr. Kimbrel pointed out the tent issue had come before the HPC before, specifically in an earlier request by the Freight House. Mr. Lieberman noted when the Freight House submitted its request, it was felt a tent would visually detract from the historic downtown district, especially as viewed from Lowell Park. Mr. Russell noted that B & Bs have received special event permits, allowing a limited number of events each year; he suggested that might be a way to accommodate this request. Mr. Michels said allowing B & Bs to hold special events was not the same as allowing a tent in the downtown district. He suggested that granting approval would go against a precedent set in denying the Freight House request and would likely enable the Freight House to come back to the HPC. Mr. Tomten said he could understand using the patio space for weddings or similar special occasions. Mr. Berglund said the intent is to use the tent only for special events and take it down when not in use. Mr. Johnson suggested allowing the use on a trial basis and for a limited number of special events. Mr. Johnson moved to allow the use on a temporary basis for one calendar year, allowing six events per year. Use is 0 0 limited to weekends, Friday afternoon to Monday morning. The tent can be no larger than 30' x 60' and must be of a solid color. Ms. Fitzgerald suggested adding the condition that the tent meet fire codes. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Mr. Michels asked about music from bands playing outdoors; Mr. Berglund said they would be sensitive to that issue considering they have guests who would be affected by the issue. Motion passed 6 -1 , with Mr. Michels voting no. 04 Ono 91; Review of modification to Stillwater Market Place exterior facade. George Bestrom went through some minor exterior design changes to the previously approved plans for the project across from the Target /Cub stores; the materials and colors will be the same as originally presented. The Target/SuperValu people have reviewed and approved the changes. Mr. Tomten, seconded by Mr. Peterson, moved to approve the modifications as presented; all in favor. Review of Stillwater Spine Clinic conc=L The project architect presented some concept plans for the 12,000- square -foot building which would house three or four tenants. There would be a canopied central entry way. The building would be predominantly brick, with stucco on the rear elevation. Signage would be one common sign with a listing of tenants. A below grade parking area would be provided, as well as at grade parking. Mr. Johnson noted that guidelines call for all four sides of a building to have the same kind of treatment. Both he and Mr. Tomten referred to possible drainage and other site problems in trying to accomplish the lower level parking. Mr. Tomten referred to the guidelines regarding lighting. Review of a dental clinic conce2tt James Kellison and Doctors Stenberg and Kauls appeared with the concept plan. Mr. Kellison said the doctors, in partnership with an endodontist, Mary Reed, were considering purchase of the 2.7 acres directly east of Culligan on Curve Crest Boulevard. The property has just 255 feet across the frontage. The dental group is proposing to subdivide the parcel into two lots with a shared access and common areas. The dental clinic would be built at the rear of the property. Mr. Russell noted that the configuration of the parcel calls for some creativity in providing maximum usage. He also suggested the wooded area • 0 at the rear of the property be protected under a covenant. Mr. Lieberman pointed out the most of the issues involved in the proposal will be issues handled by the Planning Commission. Mr. Johnson agreed the wooded area should be conserved; he also suggested signage could be an issue in future. Planning Commission /HPC relations. Mr. Fontaine briefly addressed the HPC. He suggested it might be good to have a Planning Commission member sit in on HPC meetings and HPC member on the Planning Commission meetings when special use permits and variance requests are involved. There was a general discussion about variances, particularly sign variances. The recording secretary left at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording secretary