Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-08-03 HPC MIN HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING August 3, 2015 7:00 P.M. Chairman Larson called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chairman Larson, Commissioners Goodman, Johnson, Krakowski, Mino (arrived at 7:04 p.m.), Welty, Council Representative Menikheim Absent: Commissioner Branjord Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of July 6, 2015 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Welty, to approve the minutes of the July 6, 2015 meeting. All in favor, 5-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2015-32 Design Review for hanging business sign with black decorative bracket, located at 112 Main Street South. Mike Lynskey, owner and Gina Kazmersik, applicant. Case No. 2015-33 Design Review for replacement of black vinyl roof with white, located at 333 Main Street North. Mark Desch, owner. Case No. 2015-38 Design Review for addition of ground mounted transformer and new rooftop HVAC unit, located at 1950 Curve Crest Boulevard. Thomas Rieser, owner and Darrick Mack, applicant. Motion by Commissioner Welty, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2015-35 Design Review for 952 square foot garage and 682 square foot accessory dwelling unit, located at 1343 First Street South. Lowell Schmoeckel, owner. City Planner Wittman explained the request. The applicant proposes to construct a garage with an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on a residential lot which contains a single family home. An application has been received for a Special Use Permit and associated variances but these have not been heard by the Planning Commission. One letter was received from property owner Amy Klutz expressing concern about the height. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Page 2 of 6 Property owner Lowell Schmoeckel explained the design. The floor elevation could be reduced. He has spoken to Ms. Klutz about the project. He is not planning to use the structure as an accessory dwelling unit, but as space for his hobbies. There will not be a window on the first floor north elevation. There will be two windows on the second story north elevation. There will not be grills on the windows as in the drawings. Chairman Larson opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Johnson noted that reducing the joist height should help reduce the massing of the structure. Placing a taller egress window would add value and usefulness for potential future use as an ADU. Chairman Larson suggested the height should be lowered as much as possible. Commissioner Welty commented that the footprint of the structure seems almost the same size as the footprint of the house. She wondered if it could be narrowed toward Ms. Klutz’s property. City Planner Wittman responded that the Planning Commission will consider the size variance next week. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Welty, to approve the Design Permit for Case No. 2015-35, 952 square foot garage and 682 square foot accessory dwelling unit located at 1343 First Street South, with the following conditions: 1) Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department on July 17, 2015. 2) The materials and colors shall be consistent with the primary residence. 3) Exterior lighting plans shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4) The approval shall become effective upon the City’s receipt of an application permit signed by the legal property owner. 5) Efforts shall be made to reduce the height of the structure, from ground grade to the top of the roof peak, to 23’6”. The structure may not be greater in height than the primary residence. 6) The vertical banding element separating the siding elements, shall be lowered to a 3/5 ratio, similar to that of the primary residence. 7) The second story windows shall be a sash window with no grill element. The window size may be increased proportionally. 8) The two first-floor windows on the north elevation are permitted to be removed and two sash windows may be installed on the second story. 9) All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. 10) All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. All in favor, 6-0. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2015-34 Design Review for tenant signage, located at 216 Myrtle Street West. Van Jensen, applicant and Robert Eiselt, owner. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is seeking to install two new signs: 1) a nine square foot wall- mounted, 2” thick metal sign to be located below an existing recessed light fixture beneath the canopy/awning, to contain the business logo in teal and black lettering with the words “home • baby • kids • maternity” and 2) an approximately ten square foot awning to read “LIL’ TULIPS” in 12” high brushed aluminum letters identical to those at the U.S. Post Office. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Motion by Chairman Larson, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the Design Permit for Case No. 2015-34, tenant signage located at 216 Myrtle Street West, with the following conditions: 1) Disturbance to the wood framing shall be done in a fashion as to prevent excess damage and future water intrusion. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Page 3 of 6 2) All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the HPC. All in favor, 6-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 2015-31 Demolition Review for consideration of a partial demolition of additions to the Connolly Shoe Factory, a contributing building in the Commercial Historic District, located at 123 Second Street North. Judd Sather, owner. City Planner Wittman reviewed the request. At the last meeting, the HPC granted a permit for demolition of the portion of the structure that was identified as the Oil House on the 1925-56 Sanborn Map. The HPC continued consideration of the demolition of the Leather Findings Warehouse as identified on the 1925-56 Sanborn Map, until the applicant demonstrated that maintaining this portion of the building was not feasible and until such time as the materials, elevations, height and design of what would be located in its place were provided to the HPC. The applicant has submitted a supplemental drawing for the demolition request, indicating an 8’ tall rock face concrete block wall that will be constructed above ground grade at the western and southern boundary of the service area. This would provide a non-combustible barrier along the property lines as required by Xcel Energy. Documentation of correspondence with Xcel Energy’s review of the supplemental drawing has been provided, as well as further correspondence between staff and Xcel Energy regarding the proposed site design and the company’s standards for development of a transformer in regard to the 16’ distance between the factory building and the Leather Findings Warehouse. Staff finds there is no feasible alternative to the demolition and recommends approval with conditions. Mark Balay, Balay Architects LLC, representing the owner, addressed the issue of drainage. If redirected, the storm drain would be rerouted through the connection that goes through the floor. There is a reported low level contamination of the soil under the slabs. WR Medical, a previous owner, made a connection between the buildings which will be removed. Chairman Larson asked if there will be enough of a new slab to prevent water from accumulating. Mr. Balay replied that the oil house slab is independent. It is within 1” of the other slabs. They are considering topping the whole slab to ensure positive drainage. The existing chain link fence will remain as a security measure during construction. It will be extended to the property line and privacy strips would be inserted. Trash will be collected inside the building as opposed to outside. There will likely be other improvements in the alley to come before the Commission. Commissioner Johnson asked about the material on the face of the wall. Mr. Balay replied a buff color close to the St. Croix Stone color will be used. Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the Demolition Permit for Case No. 2015-31, partial demolition of additions to the Connolly Shoe Factory located at 123 Second Street North, with the following conditions: 1) Plans shall be in substantial conformance with the plans dated June 21, 2015 on file with the Community Development Department. 2) The applicant shall provide 20 amp electrical service to the City of Stillwater for the water pump located at the Sunken Gardens, a contributing historic site in the Commercial Historic District, located adjacent to the building. 3) Documentation shall be provided of the exterior drain flows. In the event the drain is connected to the municipal sanitary system, the drain shall be disconnected and connected to the building. In the event the drain is connected to the stormwater drainage system, the drain shall not be disconnected. Documentation of the disconnection shall be provided. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Page 4 of 6 4) Documentation of the interior and exterior dimensions and conditions, including heights, widths, and materials shall be submitted to the HPC and kept on file as a portion of the historical and architectural inventory for the structure. 5) A temporary security fence is permitted to be extended along the east property line. No barbed wire shall be permitted. Trash shall not be stored in the enclosure. 6) The rock face wall shall be installed in “buff” color to resemble St. Croix stone. 7) The applicant shall obtain a Design Permit for any additional exterior changes including, but not limited to, the utility service area enclosure. All in favor, 6-0. Mr. Balay noted he has a lot of historical information on the structure which will be displayed in the event center. NEW BUSINESS continued Case No. 2015-37 Design Review for remodel and expansion of an existing garage to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit, located at 119 Chestnut Street West. Roger Tomten, ARCHNET, applicant and Jeff Anderson, owner. City Planner Wittman explained that in December 2014, the HPC approved Case No. 2014-37 for the remodel and expansion of a garage. The 2014 approval was modified and resubmitted for the Commission’s review (as Case No. 2015-14) in April 2015. Since that time, the owner has again modified the design. The new design is no longer consistent with either of the originally approved HPC design permits and is substantially different from the original approved variances issued by the Planning Commission. In previous designs, the application proposed expanding the structure to the east to maintain the character of the streetscape and preserve views for uphill neighbors. The new design increases the height of the structure by one full floor. Two letters of comment were received, from Spike Carlsen voicing support, and from John and Catherine Clemency opposing the project. Staff recommends denial, without prejudice, on the basis it does not conform to the Downtown Design Review District guidelines addressing height and proportion. Jeff Anderson, owner, summarized the history of the project. The 1970s garage was deteriorating and was historically incorrect. He drew plans over a year and a half ago and showed them to neighbors. The Clemencys expressed concerns about the height, causing him to rework the plans. He then came up with the idea of expanding to the east instead of going above the existing foundation. Because of the ravine, that required City approval. Those plans were approved and there was a requirement they be engineered. Soil testing revealed that 8-14 micro pilings would be required, which would have cost $12-14,000 each. So the plans were reconfigured to once again increase the height. When he presented those plans to the Clemencys, who live to the northwest of the property, they expressed concerns again about the height because it blocks their view. So architects drafted two additional options that are not quite as high, in which the roof was lowered 2’ and the knee wall is 4’ on the east and west sides to accommodate the Clemencys’ sight view concerns. Roger Tomten, architect, explained the two new alternative designs. The first option lowers the knee wall to 4’ on the east and west sides, and lowers the peak by 2’. The second option includes lowering the roof as much as possible and using the mansard architectural design for a flat roof. The mansard style is still considered Victorian in design. Commissioner Johnson commented that with the mansard style, the massing of the structure is greater on the upper portion than with the previous designs. Because the house sits lower, this structure appears more dominant. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Tomten responded to concerns expressed about the streetscape of Fourth Street saying it is a unique streetscape because the only structure on the east side is much lower than street level. The houses on the west sit at a much higher elevation. Chairman Larson noted that the shed roof is a large projection on both designs and looks out of character with either style. He agreed that even though the mansard style would have a lower overall height, it would appear greater overall in bulk as seen from the street. Commissioner Johnson reflected that the massing of the Queen Anne style design works with proportion to the house. Fourth Street functions more as an alley. He doesn’t feel the second story is distracting from the streetscape. The level of detail matches the house. He supports the new design. Chairman Larson noted it is not a public hearing, but invited comments from the audience. John Clemency, 205 West Chestnut Street, stated that Fourth Street is not an alley, it is a City street that is used and taxed as other streets. Either design would obstruct their view of the whole South Hill, the Broadway staircase and part of the river for six months of the year. Structures were approved that cut off their view to the north, and now their view of the river is being obstructed due to trying to jam an accessory dwelling unit onto a very small space. They oppose the proposal because it diminishes their view and their property value. John Broad, 208 South Fourth Street, who lives directly behind the property on the hill, said his home sits higher than the Clemencys. He would like to keep the design historically accurate. The Andersons have worked to obtain input. The design does not negatively impact his view so he is concerned more about historical context than the height. Kat Carlsen, 220 South Fourth Street, expressed support for either of the two latter designs. The Andersons have gone above and beyond trying to please the neighbors. City Planner Wittman noted she has discussed with Mr. Tomten that the variance obtained for the number of stories above the garage may need to go back before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Johnson asked if there is anything in City Code protecting someone’s view over land they do not own. City Planner Wittman responded generally in Minnesota, if you want to preserve a view, you have to pay for it. The Anderson property is just outside the Downtown Height Overlay District. Commissioner Johnson commented that the Queen Anne design dated July 30, 2015 with the lower gabled roof seems compatible with the neighborhood and the existing house. He understands the Clemencys’ concern about the loss of their view but unfortunately there are no guarantees for the rights to the view. The proposed design meets the requirements, so the Commission should grant approval. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Goodman, to approve the remodel and expansion of an existing garage to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit, located at 119 Chestnut Street West, using the Queen Anne style plan with the lower roofline submitted July 30, 2015, with the following conditions: 1) Exterior lighting plans shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. All in favor, 6-0. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Page 6 of 6 OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION There were no other items of discussion. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Goodman, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to adjourn. All in favor, 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:56 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary