Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-09-16 HPC PacketTHE 11ATNPLACE OF YINNEEOTA PLEASE NOTE: Heritage Preservation Commission meetings are streamed live on the city website and available to view on Channel 16. Public can participate by logging into zoom.us/join or by calling 1- 312-626-6799 and enter the meeting ID number: 503 594 024 AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING September 16, 2020 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of August 19th, 2020 regular meeting IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement of may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. V. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) - All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Heritage Preservation Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a commission member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 2. Case No. 2020-24: Consideration of a Design permit for an awning sign at 221 Main Street North in the Downtown Design Review District. River Market Coop, applicant. TREMAR LLC, property owner. VI. NEW BUSINESS 3. Case No. 2020-23: Consideration of a Design Permit for exterior facade improvements and signage 106 Main Street South in the Stillwater Commercial Historic District. Peter Hovland, applicant. RHR Investments LLC, property owner. VII. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. Design Guideline Update Project — No Packet Materials 5. MN SHPO Preserve Minnesota Conference — No Packet Materials VIII. FYI 6. NAPC Forum Discussion and Attendance Reporting — No Packet Materials IX. ADJOURNMENT 0 Zoom Meeting I� c Participants (9) illwatec THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA City of Stith Fitzie Heimdahl I•ail=lilt ill w‘11 Reggie Krakowski Dave Junker Brian Larson Matt Thueson Program Q Find a participant City of Stillwater (Host, me) 0 m ® 14 CD 0 0 City Hall (Co -host) Brian Larson Fitzie Heimdahl Dave Junker Matt Thueson Program Reggie Krakowski Shann Finwall i \ Ater THE OIRTNPLACE OF NINNESOTA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING August 19, 2020 7:00 P.M. Chairwoman Mino called the meeting to order via Zoom at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chair Mino, Commissioners Finwall, Krakowski, Larson, Thueson, Walls, Council Representative Junker Absent: Commissioner Heimdahl Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of July 15, 2020 Meeting Motion by Commissioner Krakowski, seconded by Commissioner Thueson, to approve the minutes of the July 15, 2020 meeting. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2020-20: Consideration of a Design permit for a new 17' x 17.25' generator building on the property located at 1850 Tower Drive in the West Business Park. City of Stillwater, property owner. City Water Board, applicant. Motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARING There were no public hearings. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2020-21: Consideration of a Design Permit for new Liftbridge Cowork signage to be located at 109 Myrtle Street East in the Downtown Design Review District. Jill Kaufenberg representing St. Croix Enterprises LLC, property owner and applicant. City Planner Wittman explained that Liftbridge Cowork, 109 Myrtle Street East, is requesting a Design Permit for the installation of: 1) an 8.7 square foot freestanding pole hanging sign to be made of painted wood with vinyl lettering and graphics including the business name and logo; and 2) a 4.9 square foot projecting real estate sign to be made of painted wood with vinyl lettering and graphics. Staff finds with certain conditions the proposed signage conforms to the standards set forth for design review and therefore recommends approval with six conditions. Chairwoman Mino asked, what is the Commission's standard regarding websites on signage? City Planner Wittman replied the guidelines state signs shall include business name and product offered only. Real estate signs have generally been allowed, on the assumption that once a building is fully leased the sign will be removed. Commissioner Thueson pointed out the real estate sign could be there indefinitely because of the nature of the space being co -work space. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 19, 2020 Chairwoman Mino expressed concern that allowing the website on the real estate sign could set a precedent prompting others to ask for their website to be on their signs as well. Commissioner Finwall said she finds the sign attractive and has no issue with it. Commissioner Larson said that if the Commission typically has not allowed contact information it would be hard to justify now. He agreed with Commissioner Finwall that it is an attractive sign but he does not want to open the floodgates to websites on signage. The applicant can do whatever they want in windows so they could put contact info there. He feels it is reasonable to continue to discourage websites on signs. Motion by Chairwoman Mino, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to approve Case No. 2020-21, Design Permit for new Liftbridge Cowork signage to be located at 109 Myrtle Street East, with the six staff - recommended conditions, adding Condition #7, "The business contact information shall not be utilized on either sign." All in favor. Case No. 2020-22: Consideration of a preferred Chestnut Street Plaza preliminary design alternative. City of Stillwater, applicant. Minnesota Department of Transportation, owner. Ms. Wittman stated that with the closing of the historic lift bridge to vehicular traffic, the Chestnut Street approach to the bridge is no longer needed to support vehicular traffic. In collaboration with MnDOT which will continue to own the right-of-way, the City will convert the street between Main and the lift bridge concourse to a non -motorized civic plaza. Three design concepts have been developed by the City's TKDA consulting team in harmony with community interaction from two visioning sessions and an on-line survey. It is hoped that a preferred design concept will emerge with the guidance of the community and Heritage Preservation Commission, that can be submitted to the City Council and State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in September. Future design considerations will be brought back before the Commission prior to finalizing the construction documents. Staff finds each of the concepts substantially conform to the adopted standards and guidelines and would recommend the HPC determine a preferred alternative and make recommendation to the Council for preliminary design approval. Kathleen Anglo, TKDA, reviewed Concepts 1, 2 and 3. Chairwoman Mino asked if bicyclists would need to get off their bike and walk in some of the concepts, especially Concepts 1 and 3. Councilmember Junker remarked he is not fond of Concept 2 because of the bike trail that cuts right through the pedestrian plaza. There is currently a lot of traffic going on and off the bridge. Bikes and people and strollers and kids don't mix well. Commissioner Krakowski agreed with Councilmember Junker, he would prefer Concept 1. Commissioner Thueson stated the fundamental question is whether this plaza should accommodate bike traffic or not. It's hard to consider all three designs without considering how bikes will connect with residential areas. Ms. Wittman recognized the challenge is how to balance the interests of bikes and other users. Concept 3 suggests there may be a way to get people to slow down, but it is not necessarily dedicated for bikes. Commissioner Larson commented that whatever is decided, it will need to be flexible. He likes Concept 1 because its design is simple and flexible and allows for gatherings of people. If a channel is created for bikes, that works against gatherings. He asked about the requirements for emergency vehicle access. Page 2 of 5 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 19, 2020 Ms. Wittman replied that emergency vehicles need to have access to the bridge. Down the middle is probably preferable. Ms. Anglo also said that emergency vehicles and maintenance trucks need to have access to bridge. The planning team is still trying to flesh out how many feet are needed for emergency access. Commissioner Larson stated that he doesn't like the rigidity of Concept 2. He gets the river theme of Concept 3 but it doesn't feel like as much a part of the urban fabric as Concept 1. The element he likes about Concept 3 is the big turnaround that will slow down the bikes and make everyone figure out what they will do at that point. He is open to modern furniture and also likes the idea of timber furniture in Concept 2. Commissioner Krakowski agreed with Commissioner Larson's comments. Councilmember Junker spoke about the material to be used in the plaza, whether stamped concrete or pavers. The City's existing pedestrian plaza, which is smooth concrete, is almost turning into a skateboard park, so anything that can be done to make it coarse and paver -like to discourage skateboard activity would be good. Commissioner Walls responded that would make it less of a multi -use space. Councilmember Junker said there are other areas designed for skateboards. Commissioner Walls noted if this promenade is made non -bike, bicyclists have nowhere to continue to ride their bike after crossing the bridge. They would have to dismount and walk the bike for 1-2 blocks either north, west or south. So the City has a beautiful bike trail but no way to connect to it to keep riding. Essentially that would mean reducing the multi uses to just a general purpose walking promenade. Commissioner Thueson said there is also the question of bike access in regard to the trail and to Main Street. If it doesn't go through, that changes the nature of Chestnut Street as a bike corridor. Commissioner Larson asked, is it reasonable to set aside a block of town where bicyclists are not allowed to ride their bikes? At some point, some things have to be excluded in terms of flexibility. He likes the flexible scheme as it leaves it open to how it might be used. If riders had to dismount their bike and walk 1-2 blocks, he feels that is a reasonable compromise. Ms. Wittman pointed out that the use isn't really under the Commission's purview, just the design. Commissioner Walls said the discussion is about the design, whether it limits use of bikes or not. Ms. Wittman summarized that several of the Commissioners are saying that even though it's important to be bike friendly, this very bisecting design may give too much right of way to cyclists. Chair Mino remarked she is not sure she completely agrees with that. Commissioner Finwall agreed that there should not be a designated bike path through there. She likes Concept 3 with its natural features. She wondered if all alternatives require that Water Street be closed. Ms. Wittman replied there have been discussions about the possibility of closing Water Street. Consultants are still looking at that but it would be hard for delivery trucks and emergency vehicles. Commissioner Finwall pointed out the Commission is discussing bike traffic but there would be road traffic driving right through a pedestrian corridor on Water Street and that is a bigger concern. Bikes come off the bridge really fast. She likes the roundabout that slows bike traffic down. There are opportunities for bikes to go north or south. This is the opportunity to make this a pedestrian corridor. Page 3 of 5 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 19, 2020 Commissioner Thueson opined that the design is so informed by the use requirements that use is a central question. He asked what is planned for Sam Bloomer Way. Ms. Wittman stated the hope is that Sam Bloomer Way would eventually become pedestrian only. Commissioner Larson summarized that he prefers Concept 1, keeping the furniture within tree lines, keeping the middle open for large gatherings, and it could possibly become a bicycle way through the middle. He favors a large cul de sac, open in the middle. Chair Mino said she agrees the design should be flexible and Concept 1 lends itself best. She likes the idea of more modern furniture. Commissioners Krakowski and Thueson agreed. Ms. Wittman said it comes down to how to support the uses in a safe manner. The Council will have to ultimately decide. She believes that everybody on the Commission likes the idea of a circle that slows down people down; there may be some desire to not give bikes precedence while at the same time considering how they can get to those other bike trails safely; and some sort of grid pattern that carries a sidewalk look on the edges. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS Preservation Ordinance Amendment Recommendation Ms. Wittman reviewed in summary the final version of preservation ordinance amendments for consideration. Staff is seeking a recommendation from the HPC to forward to the Planning Commission who will consider the matter in a public hearing on August 26 and then make recommendation to the City Council for their consideration on September 1 and 15. She asked Commissioners to review and submit comments to her. NAPC Forum Discussion and Attendance Reporting Ms. Wittman asked the Commissioners who were awarded scholarships and attended the NAPC Conference to submit to her the forms showing what sessions they attended. MNHS and SHPO Ordinance Amendment Grant Reporting Ms. Wittman stated she will be sending email asking Commissioners to sign a form to close out the reports for the ordinance amendments. FYI South Main Street Retaining Wall Ms. Wittman led discussion of the Main Street wall sample. Commissioner Larson showed photos of what the stone sample looks like. The color looks fairly good. He suggested asking the contractor if there is a way to make the mortar look older/darker. Meetings Ms. Wittman suggested going back to the normally scheduled third Wednesday of the month, which would make the next meeting September 16. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Walls, seconded by Commissioner Thueson, to adjourn. All in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Page 4 of 5 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 19, 2020 ATTEST: Abbi Wittman, City Planner Amy Mino, Chair Page 5 of 5 Jll!r FHE 6 I R T H P I A [. E OF MINNESOTA PLANNING REPORT TO: Heritage Preservation Commission CASE NO.: 2020-23 REPORT DATE: September 11, 2020 MEETING DATE: September 16, 2020 APPLICANT: Peter Hovland, representing Hovland Academy LANDOWNER: RHR Investments LLC REQUEST: Consideration of a Design Permit for facade alteration including painting and business signage LOCATION: 106 Main Street South DESIGNATION: Contributing DISTRICT: Stillwater Commercial Historic District Downtown Design Review District REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION Hoveland Academy intends to open at 106 Main Street south. The business proposes facade alterations including painting, and business signage. SPECIFIC REQUEST Consideration of a Design Permit for: ■ Installation of trim boards on the flat, black facade; and ■ Painting of the all existing flat, black facade and newly -applied trim in Sherwin Williams "Rainstorm"; and ■ Installation of a 4.9 s.f. wood hanging sign to be painted red with the business logo; and Street View — Google (May, 2019) ■ An (approximately) 20 s.f. projecting wood wall sign to be painted gray and read "Hovland Conservatory of Music' in white. Case No. 2020-23 Page 2 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES City Code Section Design Permit Standards for Review, Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following applicable standards: • Architectural Character: The suitability of the building for the intended purpose; the consistency of the applications design with approved design guidelines; and the compatibility of the character of the design with adjacent development. • Outdoor advertising: The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with adjacent development. • Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. ANALYSIS The property is subject to the guidelines set forth in the Commercial Historic District Design Manual, as identified in the Stillwater Downtown Plan. The following applicable guidelines can help assist the HPC in determining compliance with the guidelines as well as design consistency, detailing and materials with the existing structure and the previously approved Design Permit. DETAILING DISCUSSION ■ Where detailing has already been removed, every effort should be made to replicate them. The use of extensive historic photographic records....is highly recommended to discover Review of historic photographs provides little evidence of the structure as originally constructed. A 1920's Runk photograph, attached, shows the corner of the building, implying the building once has a traditional storefront design. In lieu of pictorial evidence, the applicant is proposing a detailing similar to the building's other tenant space, omitting the circular detailing where traditional transom windows would have been placed. missing detailing. COLOR • The color of buildings should relate to the adjacent building's color to create harmonious effect • Avoid colors which visually overpower or strongly contrast with adjacent building colors and established downtown color schemer as a whole. Sherwin William Rainstorm is not an overpowering color and will complement the darker, subdued colors in downtown Stillwater. The applicant should consider a secondary color for portions of the building to help provide greater detail and visual interest. SIGNS AND GRAPHICS GUIDELINES • Modern sign materials are acceptable provided their design is handled with an understanding of the Victorian spirit. • Only one sign that contains the business name or graphic logo is permitted per street facing side. The applicant is proposing simple, contrasting designs that conform to the zoning code and with colors consistent with the district guidelines. The use of painted wood with the business name and logo on separate signs conforms to the guidelines. Case No. 2020-23 Page 3 • Use simple, bold letting with sufficient contract between the lettering and the background. • The maximum area of the sign is regulated by the sign ordinance. • Use painted wood where practicable. • Reuse of existing mounting brackets, studs or holes is desirable. • Support brackets for projecting signs should be metal, painted black. • If a project sign is used, keep it simple in shape, small and utilitarian in design. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The HPC has several alternatives related to these this request: A. Approve. If the HPC finds the attached request conforms to the standards of design review for the Downtown Design Review District, the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, and the heritage preservation ordinance, then then Commission could move to approve 2020-23. Staff would recommend the following minimum conditions for approval: 1. The designs shall be consistent with those on file in the Community Development Department, except as modified herein. 2. The existing sign brackets shall be used and, if required, painted black. 3. Facade paint shall not be a high gloss. 4. The applicant shall consider using a two-color paint scheme. 5. 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. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the standards of design review for the Downtown Design Review District, the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, or the heritage preservation ordinance, then the Commission could deny the request with or without prejudice. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. The denial, with prejudice, would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until January meeting and direct the applicant to modify the request for greater consistency with the Downtown Design Review guidelines. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION According to City Code Section 31-209(h), upon a finding by the design review committee that the application, subject to any conditions imposed, will meet the standards of design review, secure the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan and the heritage preservation ordinance, the design review committee may approve the design permit, subject to conditions as it deems necessary. If a finding is made that the permit would violate the standards of design review, it must deny the application. Staff finds with certain conditions the proposed signage Case No. 2020-23 Page 4 conforms to the standards set forth for design review and for therefore recommend conditional approval with those conditions outlined in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Exterior Facade Design Rendering Trim Design Sample and Color Wall Sign Rendering Hanging Sign Rendering 1920s Runk Photograph cc: Peter Hovland IIS Sample of trim design Facade color will be dark blue grey We are going to do samples but are currently planing on using Sherwin Williams "Rainstorm" SW6230 544 Fla lnaterm lia-n nh.tcr i : t Wall Sign Drawing 10.6 feet (19.9 sq ft) HOVLAND CONSERVATORY OF MUSIC All wood construction and hand painted field and lettering. 1.5 x 1.5 surround trim 3/4 material in field Trim and field will be painted deep gray, lettering will be white. Sample look. Our sign will have a similar look to this sign below except the field will be not have the separated boards. 106 Main Street South, Projecting sign - Hand painted wood sign. 3/4 thick material. - Burgundy field with white logo. - The support currently exists (photo included) - About 5 sq feet in size. (less if lower corners are removed from calculation) Building Existing projecting sign support 27.5 in 9 ft 8 in from sidewalk PLANNING REPORT TO: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: APPLICANT: LANDOWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: DESIGNATION: DISTRICT: REPORT BY: Heritage Preservation Commission September 11, 2020 September 16, 2020 Sara Morrison representing River Market Coop TREMAR LLC Approval of a Design Permit for new awnings and an awning sign 221 Main Street North N/A Downtown Design Review District Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner CASE NO.: 2020-24 SPECIFIC REQUEST River Market Coop is requesting approval of a Design Permit for an awning sign to be placed at 221 Main Street North. ANALYSIS Street View, May 2019 (Google Street View) River Market Coop intends to replace all blue awnings. One awning, above the Main Street, entrance will read `River Market Coop' in white letters. The Downtown Design Review District (DTDRD) guidelines indicate: • The maximum area of the sign and minimum height above the sidewalk is regulated by the sign ordinance. Case no. 2020-24 Page 2 • Signing on awnings is permitted...on the end panel or front valance only. Use lettering size proportional to the space available. The zoning code allows for awning signs so long as the sign size does not exceed 50% of the area. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: A. Approve the requested Design Permit with the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed according to the plans on file in the Community Development Department, unless specifically modified by other conditions of approval. 2. All future signs shall obtain Design Permit approval to ensure conformance to the City Code, Downtown Design Review District Design Guidelines. 3. A sign permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of new signage. B. Deny the requested Design Permit. With a denial, findings of fact supporting the decision must be provided. C. Table the request for additional information. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that, with certain conditions, the proposed request conforms to the City Code and relevant Downtown Design Review District guidelines. Therefore, staff recommends conditional approval of the River Market Coop awning sign for the building at 221 Main Street North with those conditions outline in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Sign Details cc: Sara Morrison .... • , ......1. ,- ..4.1-*4S7- . tr ,''''.3/43 :'L'" ."- ::;" .• t 0- 4.-.4 7 . .,, .,,..,..r.1._,.>. • • . , ,,......--.'n ' 2:::: ,. :: ''' 1:. ..r. '''., ' ' -•-•-•1. 4:1 ... . •,.:- , ..7-7ff Aik:Ag. • . ..."---tr. , • " . • - - . • 1.4-'4r2,---.0",. '• ".. • . _.,......,,,..71e*. Ls.-- .' ...,"1-,,_. . ..;. ' .. -.4'.2-:'-:* .4 74:-----; - ' ....••":4"."' ....... ...,. -._ - Q ."^ •Pr.- '7•S •• Vii.f.,...1.' -7. ..' 7-...1"..7.,.,...,.r=2--.4.Z0C '• • ----,.. . " r •L' ..,,.. • --r"'"=" .50...et. ._ 4.- . . . . , . . . , • .y . .. . :',,.. . r •• . . . _ 1 ..01.-pLYer ...--, 7:e 14 •.,:d..-eiC , - ..._ .47 ,44tr- ........r.?-' ' 'R'4''' • ,....„ j. ...1....i...C'i.„,... ' . •'`.. ,, ,v.:.,,,>, ,,,.. _,.'f-P 9'. ---;1.0P, .- -. - - .5.4, . 2.' 1A-C-44$1.' d.',. . Z A•r=''t -.' . . " "T; 4,C•-• _ ;V.I.: - .4- .- ........-1:: - - . ...e, ,__ ' -'1,-; ..-1. llgetri,r... . ...E.,-,?. ;,,-;Okizr•-...,_,-...7,,,,,_:,•.,4*.S.1-tc -e..,7.,,,.,,,,,.....t, .,..- ,... , ,rt*:,.'..-...... •- el. .1:5:i:- o'-'44.i,.....grk,.• 1-.- ' 1 fi I FL:- dr- ' - ' . • c 10,e.- .._ ,........-_,,. ;•,..--4.". - "..--•-,0"4.'"tr4rtYr...."*L.*- 4.:W3E:r , 1:'1',..-f.;•"?.--'07, 1 • ...AIONOV-c, re:i41.-Pi-Fpgf-aggif