HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-01 HPC MINCity of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
February 1, 2010
Present: Howard Lieberman, Chair, Robert Goodman, Jeff Johnson, Roger Tomten,
Scott Zahren and Jerry Krakowski.
Absent: Micky Cook
Also present: City Planner Mike Pogge, Kurt Newcomb, Downtown Parking Commission
Mr. Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Approval of minutes: Motion to approve the minutes of January 1, 2010, with correction
under New Business to replace south on 2 instead of "west on myrtle Motion passed
unanimously.
OPEN FORUM
No comments were received.
PUBLIC HEARINGS. None
DESIGN REVIEWS.
Case No. DR /10 03. Design review of signage for the City Parking Ramp located at 200
2nd St No in the CBD, Central Business District. City of Stillwater, applicant.
Howard Lieberman introduced the project and gave the background on the sign. It is a
proposed projecting sign face is 3'2 -3/4" wide by 6 feet tall for a total of 19.375 square
feet. The sign is proposed to contain the circular parking lot "P" logo with the words
Public Parking in the lower part of the circle. Above the parking logo will be the Stillwater
Logo and a metal arch. The sign is proposed to be unlit.
For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the
size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance. The zoning ordinance allows
projecting signs of up to six square feet in size. The proposed sign is larger than what
the code allows.
City staff has presented various projecting sign proposals to the HPC in December 2009
and January 2010. Comments from the two HPC meetings were relayed to the Parking
Commission during the Parking Commission's January 14, 2010 meeting. At that
meeting, the Parking Commission discussed the HPC concerns. The Parking
Commission felt that where most downtown businesses have 24 to 26 foot wide store
fronts the ramp is a different scale being about 200 feet wide and 4 levels tall.
Additionally, the Parking Commission felt that projecting signs on Main Street are
1
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
February 1, 2010
intended for pedestrians where the signage on the ramp is intended to inform motorists.
The Parking Commission believes a 20 square foot sign is justified in this situation.
Finally, the Parking Commission has worked hard to establish a recognizable image in its
parking lot signage. Therefore, the Commission requested staff to forward a formal
design permit request to the HPC for consideration.
Kurt Newcomb, Chairman, was present from the Downtown Parking Commission.
There was no change from the last discussion. Concern is the size of the sign in a
residential area and it may not be the greatest need of people coming up and down Myrtle
Street.
There is a lot of additional signage that will needed to direct people to the ramp. The
Commission was hopefully that this one sign on the building isn't going to be the main
signage leading people to the ramp because it isn't in a very good location to do that.
Discussion on where other signs should be located in the City directing people to the
ramp and then discuss what signage would be appropriate with this building.
Once you get through the gauntlet of where other signage would be located within the
City on where to get to the ramp this particular sign really wouldn't have any reason to be
bigger because if the other signage is doing its job.
Kurt Newcomb was asked what was changed from the last meeting. The sign will be a
nonlit sign which will be nonintrusive and that the Downtown Parking Commission wants
to make sure that people from out of town can actually see the building. They want to
make easier for people to see the building in an unfamiliar area.
The Commission agreed that they want to make sure that the people coming into town on
the primary access points have direction to the parking because it isn't on Main Street and
it isn't on Myrtle so you have to get them directed to the parking and it isn't really apparent
until you get some direction to the building.
Kurt Newcomb said the designer did a really good job not making it look like a parking
ramp.
The Downtown Parking Commission just wants to make the ramp do its job for the City of
Stillwater.
2
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
February 1, 2010
Michel Pogge is going to the February Downtown Parking Commission meeting and will
revisit the entire downtown directional signage. There are about nine parking lots in the
downtown area and the signage has the Stillwater logo with parking and arrows which
were done in the1980s when the city switched from having a contract management firm to
in- house. The directional signage is pretty dated and is going through a process not only
for this facility but for all parking lots to add new signs. We are going to with the P logo
which is very similar to what you see in the parking lots today and just simple arrows
below it which are flexible over time. Bob Lane in 2003 did an entire master plan for
parking lot signage and that is where we are getting parts of this from. It will be going to
the Downtown Parking Commission in February and anticipating having this up in
April -May timeframe.
The green will tie back to the existing program. It will have a dark blue logo which is the
original Stillwater logo.
Commissioner's appreciate the one of the goals of the commission is to be consistent and
fair throughout this particular zoning area.
A couple of points is that they want people to find there way to the facilities and primary
users of that would be visitors that aren't familiar with the community and because it is
one block off the main grid to get directional signs off of Main as you go up commercial
and point them up the hill. The proposed sign doesn't face Commercial and you would
only see the garage doors. The other main access is coming down Myrtle Street and
there to direct them steadily down to 2 Street but even better up at 4 Street have them
come in the upper portion before they commit to coming down the hill where there is more
distractions and those type of signs are going to get people to the facility. Here you have
one sign that is mounted on the second story which is kind of high and is not really where
you would be looking for the store front type signs you would have to come down that hill
and look past the Lowell Inn to see the sign if there wasn't and indication on myrtle street
that there was a parking facility there. We want to make sure that we get good visibility
off the primary streets.
Kurt Newcomb said the sign is proposed to be hung from the building.
Commissioners noted that it would visible only from 2 but not from Commercial Street.
The most effect access is how the directional signs are going work and that is one thing
that we didn't really see.
Some concern was where the brackets are located. The Lowell Inn has some
3
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
February 1, 2010
ornamental trees that in the front of building that will block the visibility of the sign.
The request to allowing a larger sign in an area that probably won't be that visible from the
primary access which is the Myrtle Street intersection and second concerned is that since
the projecting sign is meant for motorist that is should larger. Every business on Main
Street is trying to get signage for motorist as well. This is counter intuitive to what the
commission is trying to do with projecting signs in the downtown. A 2 foot "P" would work
just fine especially for people driving south on 2 Street.
Perhaps the thing to do would be is that there are couple of street lights in the boulevard in
front of the parking ramp and it might be possible to locate one of the "P "'s off of a light
stand if possible instead of hanging on the building so it wouldn't be hidden. It is more
visible from the south especially. As far as incorporating the logo and the arch top and
such, going back to the parking plan the arch top was introduced to add gooseneck
lighting. Perhaps look at the city logo going over the doors. The view going up
Commercial Street is pretty brutal but there are a couple of spots to introduce a city logo.
What seems to be missing is a master sign plan that has been asked for from other
building owners which would show how it relates not only this building but the directional
signs and without that it's hard to identify how effective or the purpose of this sign is other
than identifying home base. This isn't going to draw people off of Main or Myrtle
Streets. It is invisible from either location. That is the difficulty with it.
How do we most effectively and efficiently get the public where they need to be.
A sign of this size being placed that high being consistent with the intent with the design of
the building as we went through it was to keep pedestrian scale with the entry way the
kind of the store front windows of the stair wells keep in focused and set up like other
commercial buildings that have a pedestrian access and then we put a sign half way up
the building that is four times the design guide it just over scales the building. People
won't really see this sign.
Mike Pogge agreed to work with the parking commission to take another look at the sign
package.
Motion to table the design review to come up with something that is feasible and practical.
Motion to table, motion passed.
Two things; one is the design guidelines that have size limits, designs and placement
locations and sign that goes up that serves its purpose and is effective as possible and
4
City of Stillwater
Heritage Preservation Commission
February 1, 2010
best exposure and value out of the sign. Directional signs on Myrtle and Main Street
signs to point to destination.
Kurt Newcomb was thanked by the Commission for his input and for coming to the
meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Retreat Discussion. Two potential facilitators Tined up for the retreat. Have a meeting
with just the commissioners and than another with the facilitators.
Consideration of making the council representative a voting member which would fill
vacancy on commission.
Appealed from the commission to council does it pose a conflict. Ability to participate in
appeal process. Parks and Planning have voting council representatives.
Thinking of having two meetings one without a facilitator and one with a facilitator.
CLG Grant.
SHPO is supportive of this. The CLG is a federal grant and needs to be matched with
local dollars which can be state or city. The CLG is $8001 and $6999 is Legacy dollars to
fund projects in the City.
There is an annual national commissioners conference in June or July.
Motion to moved to adjourn at 8 p.m., seconded. Motion passed.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelia Wiegand
Acting Recording Secretary
5
Heritage Preservation Commission
DATE: February 26, 2010 CASE NO.: 10 -03
APPLICANT: Stillwater Parking Commission
PROPERTY OWNER: City of Stillwater
REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for the Stillwater Parking
Ramp
LOCATION: 200 211d St N
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: CC Community Commercial
ZONING: CBD Central Business District
HPC DATE: March 1, 2010
REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director
PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner
DISCUSSION
The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a projecting sign for
the Stillwater Parking Ramp at 200 2nd St N. The proposed sign face is 3'2 -3/4" wide by
6 feet tall for a total of 19.375 square feet. The sign is proposed to contain the circular
parking lot "P" logo with the words Public Parking in the lower part of the circle.
Above the parking logo will be the Stillwater Logo and a metal arch. The sign is
proposed to be unlit.
For retail storefront signs, the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides
that the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance. The zoning ordinance
allows projecting signs of up to six square feet in size. The proposed sign is larger than
what the code allows.
The Parking Commission feels that where most downtown businesses have 24 to 26 foot
wide store fronts the ramp is a different scale being about 200 feet wide and 4 levels tall.
Additionally, the Parking Commission felt that projecting signs on Main Street are
intended for pedestrians where the signage on the ramp is intended to inform
200 2nd St N
Page 2
motorists. The Parking Commission believes the size request is justified. Finally, the
Parking Commission has worked hard to establish a recognizable image in its parking
lot signage. Therefore, the Commission requested staff to forward a formal design
permit request to the HPC for consideration. A member of the Parking Commission
will be at the meeting to discuss the sign with the HPC.
FEBRUARY 1, 2010 ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
At the February 1, 2010 meeting, the HPC reviewed the design review permit. The HPC
raised concerns about the size, location, and effectiveness of the proposed sign. The
HPC suggested looking at wall signage and a simple "P" logo as a projecting sign. The
HPC also asked that the Parking Commission review their overall parking lot way
finding program as an additional option for getting people to the ramp. The HPC
tabled action on the request to allow time for the Parking Commission to review the
HPC's concerns.
FEBRUARY 16, 2010 ACTION BY THE DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION
At the February 16, 2010 meeting, staff reviewed the HPC comments with the Parking
Commission related to the proposed parking ramp sign request. The Parking
Commission discussed the comments and felt strongly about their proposed sign. The
Commission voted unanimously to continue pursuing their original proposal.
ALTERNATIVES
The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options:
1. Approve the request.
2. Deny the request.
3. Continue the request for more information.
RECOMMENDATION
Review and take an action
attachments: Drawing /photo of the proposed sign
CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL
1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage
Preservation Commission.
2. The bottom of the projecting sign must be a minimum of 8 feet above the sidewalk.
3. No additional signage without HPC approval.
4. The projection sign be reduced to be no more than six square feet or secure a
variance from the Planning Commission to allow the sign area to exceed the
allowable square footage. If the sign is reduced in size the new sign design shall be
reviewed by City Staff before installation.
Downtown Stillwater Parking Commission
Meeting Minutes
February 16, 2010
EXCERPT
Commissioners present: Curt Newcomb, chair; Jeff Johnson, vice chair; Dave Junker.
Commissioners absent: David Korte; Kevin LaCasse.
Staff present: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director; John Gannaway, Police Chief;
Dennis Pasket, Parking Enforcement, Mike Pogge, City Planner
Chair Newcomb called the meeting to order at 8:33 AM.
OLD BUSINESS
Parking ramp signaqe City Planner Mike Pogge explained the status of the parking ramp
signage. The Heritage Preservation Commission did not support the 12 square foot projecting
sign- proposed by the Parking Commission. Mr. Pogge indicated that the HPC felt that building
signage would be more effective. They prefer a 6 square foot sign that consists only of a
capitalized "P" on a circular black background as a projecting sign. The size they prefer is
consistent with the pedestrian scale associated with a historic Main Street.
Mr. Junker noted that the use of this parking ramp on Second Street is for motorists and
pedestrians. A motorist needs a larger sign than a pedestrian. Moreover, compared to a 25
foot wide storefront on Main Street, which is allowed a 6 square foot projecting sign, the 200
foot wide parking ramp's proposed 12 square foot sign is not disproportionately large.
Mr. Newcomb added that to see the projecting sign from Myrtle Street or Mulberry Street, a
motorist needs more than a 6 square foot sign.
The Parking Commission unanimously agreed to continue pursuing the 12 square foot
projecting sign.