Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-09 HPC MINCity of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 9, 2010 Present: Jeff Johnson, Vice chair, Micky Cook, Robert Goodman, Jerry Krakowski and Roger Tomten Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge Absent: John Brach, Howard Lieberman and Scott Zahren Approval of minutes: Mr. Goodman, seconded by Mr. Tomten, moved approval of the July 7, 2010 minutes. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Goodman, seconded by Mr. Krakowski, moved approval of the Aug. 2, 2010, minutes. Motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Steve Russell, candidate for City Council, spoke of some of the comments he has heard regarding the role of the Heritage Preservation Commission during his campaigning. He spoke of his interest in historic preservation and support in that area should he be elected. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. DEM/2010 -34 A demolition request for the rear portion of an existing residence at 1213 Myrtle St. W in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Bruce Earhart, applicant. Mr. Earhart described his plans. He said he would like to demolish the rear portion of the house and rebuild it, using materials that meet current code; he said the new addition would be of the same style but 6' longer than the existing. He noted that additions have been made to the original house several times, and the portion he would like to remove is one of those additions; he said it is unclear exactly when this addition was made. He described the condition of the addition in question. On a question by Mr. Johnson, the applicant said the proposal is to have the new addition look identical to what is being replaced but 6' longer; he said the roof line /pitch would be the same, but would have asphalt shingles rather than tin due to cost. He reviewed the proposed building materials. Mr. Johnson asked about plans for the original portion of the structure; the applicant stated he has put in a new front door, installed a French door on the east elevation and one new casement window on the west elevation. He explained the reason for the boxed features on the front elevation and plans to incorporate those into a new porch. Mr. Johnson opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Tomten asked if the applicant plans to reuse the porch elements. Mr. Earhart stated at some point, the porch was demolished and the bottom portion only rebuilt. He said the only thing remaining of the original porch are the pillars, which he plans to reuse. He said the original roofline will be reconstructed. Mr. Goodman asked the applicant if he had any idea of the age of the additions. Mr. Earhart said he thought the back portion is less than 50 years old due to the materials used; he talked about the condition of the addition(s) and the difficulty of raising the house that would be necessary to avoid the requested demolition. Mr. Johnson spoke of the uniqueness of the original structure — metal roof, sash windows, etc.; he said the loss of the porch and the new boxed elements have altered the appearance of the original structure. Mr. Earhart said his ultimate plans are to bring the look of the house back to the original as closely as possible, but using modern materials. Mr. Tomten agreed with Mr. Johnson's comments that if the design guidelines had been used before this point, it might have been possible to salvage even more of the original look of the house; he suggested that the applicant look at using some additional double -hung window units on either side of the bedroom in the proposed new addition. Mr. Earhart said windows can't be put on the west side of the house; Mr. Tomten noted 1 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 9, 2010 that would be possible on the east elevation and would enhance the livability of the addition. Mr. Johnson talked about the problem of using vinyl siding as proposed and suggested the use of a Hardi -Board product would enable more of the original details to be replicated. Mr. Earhart said he did plan to use wood corner boards and trim. There was discussion of the tin roof and re- grading /drainage improvements. Mr. Tomten asked about plans for the front porch; Mr. Earhart said the porch would be 6' wide, except around the boxed elements, and said the pillars would be reused. Mr. Tomten moved to approve the demolition request with the suggestion that the applicant consider the addition of a double -hung window unit on the east elevation of the bedroom addition. The applicant stated he would be amendable to doing that. Mr. Tomten pointed out the application specifies the use of wood corners, soffit, fascia and window trim which will help in providing some of the detailing of a house of the era of the original structure. Mr. Goodman seconded the motion. Mr. Johnson challenged the applicant to look at the use of a Hardi -Board material rather than the proposed vinyl product which would make it easier to replicate the original detailing; Mr. Earhart said he would look at that. Motion passed unanimously. DESIGN REVIEWS Case No. 2010 -30 Design review of Patriot's Tavern Family Restaurant and Bar at 145 New England Place in the VC- Village Commercial District. Brian Pilrain, Roman Market, applicant. Mr. Tomten asked about the screening for the coolers /ventilation system. A representative of the applicant said they are considering the fencing option to provide for better air flow. Regarding the rooftop mechanicals, it was noted there are safety issues involved with painting the units to match the roof, and it was noted the restaurant space is located on the north side of the building so the rooftop units will not be visible from the street. Ms. Cook asked if there was any discussion of this issue with the Homeowners Association; Mr. Pogge stated this was not an issue with the Association. Regarding signage, Mr. Johnson pointed out the request is within the guidelines. Mr. Tomten moved to approve as submitted and conditioned. Mr. Krakowski seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -31 Design review of signage for Chestnut Street Books at 223 Chestnut St. E. in the CBD, Central Business District. Cecilia Loome, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Johnson noted the sign meets the ordinance. Mr. Tomten asked about the grid pattern shown in the transom area and suggested that is a visual distraction; he said the proposed location of the sign magnifies that. Mr. Tomten suggested that the black background of the proposed sign be extended to the full width of the grid section so it goes the full length of the window; it was noted the sign would still be in conformance with the ordinance if that is done. There was discussion of the grid pattern, when it was done, who did it, etc. Mr. Tomten moved to approve, extending the width of the sign to match the width of the display window below. Mr. Goodman seconded the motion. It was agreed to have Mr. Pogge talk to the applicant/building owner to get more information about the grid pattern. Mr. Johnson referred to the conditions of approval in the staff report. The motion for approval passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -32 Design review of signage for $5 Pizza at 1980 Market Drive in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Karen Harshman, Signs by RSG, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Johnson noted the proposal is over the allowable size; Mr. Pogge stated the applicant is aware of that and is amenable to reducing the size to meet the ordinance. Mr. Pogge spoke of the difficulty due to the changing sizes of the business spaces and storefronts. Mr. Johnson wondered if the guidelines are based on front footage or if there 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 9, 2010 are other guidelines for the Market Place area. It was noted signage is allowed on the rear elevation of these building, and the applicant is not requesting that. Mr. Johnson suggested that cutting the proposed signage in half might affect the proportions of the sign; there was discussion as possible ways to meet the size. Mr. Tomten moved to approve as submitted and conditioned. Mr. Krakowski seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -35 Design review of signage for Art N Soul at 202 Main St. S. in the CBD, Central Business District. Tia Gleason, applicant. A representative of the applicant was present. Mr. Tomten asked about the location of the proposed signs; the representative said the sign on the Chestnut Street elevation would be located between the windows where a previous sign was located. On Main Street, the sign also would be located between the windows. It was noted the sign brackets would be going into wood framing, not the masonry. Mr. Tomten moved to approve as submitted and conditioned. Mr. Johnson clarified the location of the signs are between the windows. Mr. Goodman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -36 Design review of signage for The Fun Sisters at 216 Main St. S. in the CBD, Central Business District. Patsy Skeba, applicant. A representative of the applicant was present. In discussion, it was noted that one of the conditions is that the sign not be lighted. Mr. Tomten asked about the finish on the face of the sign; the applicant stated he preferred the look of a more glossy finish. Mr. Tomten pointed out the preference is for the use of more traditional materials in the historic district. Mr. Krakowski moved to approve as conditioned. Mr. Goodman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. 2010 -37 Design review of signage for Revolution Dance at 105 New England Place in the VC, Village Commercial District. Chauncy Peterson, Demars Signs, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Tomten suggested the proposed sign would look better if there is some type of frame around it; Mr. Johnson agreed that just a narrow black border would help define the sign. There was discussion of the location of the sign; Mr. Tomten said that has been a problem with this building since the beginning due to the lighting on the building; he suggested the building owner could perhaps relocate the lights and center them appropriate to the signage. Ms. Cook asked if there are guidelines for the VC District and whether this meets the guidelines. Mr. Pogge said there are design guidelines with suggested font types but guidelines are suggestions and typically applicants have been granted some leeway in expression. Ms. Cook asked if there is any review process; Mr. Pogge said the business owner did sign off on this proposal. Mr. Johnson pointed out that signage is somewhat changeable and dynamic with changes in tenants, while wood and mortar changes are more permanent and of greater concern. Mr. Johnson moved to approve as conditioned, with an additional condition that there be a 1" black border around the outer edge of the sign and with the option that the existing lighting can be moved to center over the sign. Mr. Krakowski seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Johnson asked about the status of the RFP for further evaluation /research of Landmark Homes. Mr. Pogge said he had talked with a number of people, including Don Empson, and the potential for having a graduate student(s) from the University assist with the project. There was discussion of the creation of a designated residential district that would have a design review element. Ms. Cook asked about any follow -up from the Commission's retreat session. Mr. 3 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 9, 2010 Pogge said he is working on that, and said there will be an interpretation of the City's existing demolition ordinance that he will bring to the October meeting. There was discussion of what constitutes "partial demolition." Ms. Cook asked if any contact had been made with a person who is interested in volunteering to assist the City on historic preservation issues; Mr. Pogge said he would contact that person within the next two weeks. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Krakowski volunteersedto serve on a sub - committee to evaluate the RFPs. Mr. Pogge talked about a recent Supreme Court ruling that greatly limits cities' ability to issue variances; he said that likely will require the City to modify its ordinance. Mr. Johnson asked about Water Street Inn trash enclosures; Mr. Pogge said there is discussion about purchasing a parcel of property from that owner and depending on the outcome of that discussion, the Inn will be required to either store trash inside or build an appropriate enclosure. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. on a motion by Mr. Tomten, second by Mr. Krakowski.. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 4