Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-16 HPC MIN. hater 14E FIR iN F LR CE 9F MINN EFO I HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING June 16, 2021 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Chairwoman Mino called the meeting to order via Zoom at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chair Mino, Commissioners Finwall, Heimdahl, Holmes, Larson, Thueson, Councilmember Dunker Absent: Commissioner Walls Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of May 19 2021 Regular Meeting Chairwoman Mino requested a change on page 5, the addition of the word "that." Motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Thueson, to approve the minutes of the May 19, 2021 meeting as amended. All in favor. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Resolution HPC 2021-01, Resolution Adopting Written Statement of Reasons for Denial Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 15.99, Subd. 2, for a Building Demolition Permit Application for the Property at 304 Hazel Street East, HPC Case No. 2021-10 Resolution HPC 2021-02, Resolution Adopting Written Statement of Reasons for Denial Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 15.99, Subd. 2, for a Design Permit Request for a New Sign in the Downtown Design Review Overlay District, HPC Case No. 2021-21 Motion by Commissioner Holmes, seconded by Commissioner Finwall, to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2021-23: Consideration of the consolidated Heritage Preservation Design Guidelines updates. City of Stillwater, applicant City Planner Wittman stated that the HPC's consolidated design guidelines are almost completed. Existing guidelines for signs and awnings were reviewed to determine which guidelines should be codified into the City Code. She reviewed a list of the proposed standards and design guidelines. Chair Mino opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Holmes suggested placing the guidelines either earlier in the document or all at the end. Councilmember Dunker asked if staff is comfortable with the approach to multi -tenant signs downtown. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Ms. Wittman said she would take a look at multi -tenant sign guidelines. She asked that Commissioner comments be submitted to her by June 30. The document will be back in July for final consideration. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 2021-20: Consideration of a Design Permit for a 2nd and 3rd story residential addition. Property located at 225 2nd St N in the Downtown Design Review District. Nat Shea-Tanek. Inc., applicant and Archangel Assets 4 LLC, property owner. -Tabled from the May meeting. Ms. Wittman stated that Michael Russ, Archangel Assets 4 LLC, proposes to add two stories to this commercial structure to accommodate two living units. The overall height of the structure as measured from the 2nd Street right-of-way conforms to the Central Business District's height overlay maximum of three stories and 37'. In May, the Commission noted the proposal does not fit with its surroundings, and the design, materials and color represent a jarring contrast within the 2nd Street North streetscape. Commissioners directed the applicant to explore design alternatives that better conform to the design guidelines. On June 10 the property owner submitted an updated design. The new design breaks up the two-story addition with approximately 40% of the building (on the west) containing large, uniform window bays on the north and west elevations. This `front' portion of the building contains a large cornice and the back (easterly) portion maintains the originally -proposed flat wall and roof. Though the height of the building does not appear to be changed, the front portion of the building appears slightly taller than the back portion. An open-air stairwell access is shown in black with a metal facade. The new design maintains painting the existing concrete masonry building in black and utilizing white horizontal fiber cement boards and black corrugated metal panels on the two story addition. The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Permit for the 2nd and 3rd story residential addition. While the additions are broken up into units of scale, this does not inherently help the mass and bulk of the structure. The combination of white and black, in areas where there is a high prevalence of brick, increases the likelihood this building will unnecessarily stand out, making it incompatible with the general area. Overall, the height, scale, mass and proportion of the proposed alterations, including materials, color and detailing are not compatible with the site and its surroundings. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the request. Councilmember Junker referred to discussion at the May meeting about the north and south sides lacking windows due to fire codes. Ms. Wittman responded that building code requirements limit the openings within certain distance to property lines. This was discussed with the applicant. There is also an option to install fire -rated glass. Chair Mino asked if the north and west windows will have fire -rated glass. Michael Russ, applicant, said he intends to use fire -rated glass and may add some small transom windows. He would prefer to address the overall design. He is trying to create a unique building that increases density, per the City's Comprehensive Plan, yet he is hearing his building is not appropriate because of other buildings. Chairwoman Mino said she understands the applicant's frustration. The Design Guidelines are part of the challenge. She stated that the guidelines are specific that all infill buildings and facades should be composed of materials similar to the adjacent facades. Mr. Russ said he believes he made the changes in the materials as requested by the Commission. Chair Mino responded that in the last meeting concrete masonry was discussed as a possibility but brick was also discussed. Mr. Russ said he feels the City in theory wants him to turn this cinder block building into another red brick building. It will not look right to make a 60s modern building look like an 1800s brick building. Page 2 of 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Commissioner Larson asked if windows have been added on the south. Mr. Russ replied after speaking with Ms. Wittman about fire -rated glass, he would like to add one window to the east of the elevator shaft. Ms. Wittman said the building inspector should be consulted about what size opening is allowed. Mr. Russ said the windows will comply with whatever is allowed by building code. Chairwoman Mino asked if the project will come back to the HPC if substantial changes need to be made due to building code. Ms. Wittman answered that a standard condition of approval is that major modifications would require approval by the HPC. Commissioner Larson referred to the requirement that new infill buildings should fit into the streetscape fabric, and should not present a jarring contrast. He struggles with the fact that this mass is one story at the front and jumps up to three stories at the back If there were a two-story building built right to the front, it would fit from a massing standpoint. If it were three stories tall built right to the front, he is not sure if that would fit. Not only does it not seem to relate well to the rest of the context but it doesn't seem to relate well to itself. It looks like two buildings. He is not sure the massing can be fixed by changing the details or materials. Mr. Russ asked what would happen when other nearby buildings want to add two stories. Somebody at some point is going to have to build something. Commissioner Larson replied if surrounding buildings go up two stories in the future, they probably won't be one story in front and three stories in back Commissioner Holmes commented there are things beyond the control of the applicant that make this a challenge, specifically the carrying capacity of the front part of the building not being capable of supporting an addition, therefore pushing the additions back, making it a jarring change. The two parts don't feel unified. At the last meeting the Commission said the design should be simplified. Mr. Russ responded the original design was simpler and much more conforming to the current structure. Nat Shea, architect, said the new design was an attempt to break up the blank walls. They cannot change the massing from the front, and are still limited to no windows on the north side due to code. Councilmember Junker said there are only two predominantly metal buildings downtown, plus a couple of cinder block buildings with brick on two sides. They conform more to the guidelines and character of other buildings. Yes, there will be other requests but so far the requests coming in are predominantly brick with accents of metal or stone. There have to be ways to incorporate brick to tie into the existing character of the downtown. Commissioner Larson noted he is sympathetic to the applicant's dilemma given the site constraints. The structure can only be so tall. If the building is not constructed right up to the property line, windows would be allowed. With a setback of up to 10', there could be up to 25% openings. Commissioner Finwall said the new design is an improvement, but she agreed with concerns about massing. The building looks odd along Second Street. She asked why the applicant does not demolish the front portion and build on the whole site. Mr. Russ replied the requirements for parking don't allow for that scenario. From an economic standpoint, rebuilding all the office space doesn't make sense. The offices have seven great tenants and he does not want to disrupt them. Page 3 of 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Ms. Wittman summarized that many of the Commissioners struggle with the massing of the building, despite its conformance to the height requirements. This seems to be a bigger issue than materials. Motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Finwall, to deny Case No. 2021-20, Design Permit for a 2nd and 3rd story residential addition located at 225 2nd St N. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2021-25: Consideration of a Design Permit for a new residential apartment complex at 107 3rd St N in the Downtown Design Review District Nathan Landucci applicant and Jon Whitcomb property owner and Mark and Cathy Balay.property. owners Ms. Wittman reviewed the application. Landucci Homes is proposing to construct a 42-unit apartment that will span the property line with 110 Myrtle Street East where the new structure will extend behind the historic house located there. The total enclosed gross square footage of the building is 57,258 square feet. A Design Permit is required prior to the City Council's consideration of the Conditional Use Permit. Facing Third Street North, the building will be three stories clad in a light brick veneer. A recessed fourth story, clad in gray vertical metal panels is proposed. Uniform windows and patios, as well as the building's parapet, will be clad in a flat black metal. Wrapping around to Myrtle Street East, a garage exit will be located at the street level. A garage entrance, accessed from the existing 110 Myrtle Street East driveway will serve as a vehicle entrance. With this walk -out design, from Myrtle Street East the building will have a five -story appearance; in this area, dark, vertical metal panel is proposed on the four upper -most stories. Uniform window shapes and black metal balconies are carried around on all sides with the exception of the south elevation where the right-of-way and existing 1-1/2 story residence exist. The proposed development aims to meet the City's standards and guidelines within the Downtown Design Review District The applicant is requesting variances for height which will be considered by the Planning Commission. The building's height - though a stepped design - is not compatible. The mass dominates and jeopardizes the integrity of historic buildings within the vicinity, including the Lowell Inn. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the proposed request. Councilmember Junker asked if the proposed building overtakes portions of the parking lot to the north. Ms. Wittman noted the parking lot is owned by Jon Whitcomb. There are seven parking spaces and there was an agreement those would be used for public access to the parking ramp. There is a portion of land that is public property that includes a retaining wall. The applicant has requested that the City Council consider a lot line adjustment so that the lot line is clearly defined. Nathan Landucci, Landucci Development, applicant, told the Commission he has a purchase agreement with both Jon Whitcomb and the Balays. The previous proposal for this site featured four stories on the front and five stories on the back The current proposed heights are consistent with the previous proposal. He is able to meet the parking requirements. The proposal features a lot of brick and vertical metal echoing the design of the previous proposal. Commissioner Finwall asked what will be done with the existing Balay house. Mr. Landucci replied that the house will be owned by the development and will be one of the units for rent. The renters will have access to the amenities in the larger building. The house is in good condition and he believes it will fit with the landscaping. Ms. Wittman noted the house is the second oldest wood frame structure in the downtown area. Page 4 of 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Councilmember Junker stated that he has no issue with the use of brick and metal but the building size is like trying to put a northern pike into a guppy fishbowl. The building overtakes the entire corner from every angle. Mr. Landucci pointed out the proposed width is the same as the Legion building and is only 12-15 feet wider than what was previously approved for the site. The benefit of owning the Balay property is the use of the Balay driveway as the entrance to the parking, allowing right -in, right -out. He is alright with not incorporating the Balay property but he feels owning it is a good way to retain the house. Councilmember Junker pointed out this proposal has 42 units as opposed to 9 previously approved, making for much more traffic. Mr. Landucci countered that the right turn in and right turn out, not crossing traffic on Myrtle, is a benefit. From a density standpoint, his project is similar to the Chestnut building that was approved. Ms. Wittman said a traffic study will be completed and it will be discussed by the Planning Commission. Chair Mino pointed out that the HPC denied a fourth story on the Chestnut Building and it was appealed. Ms. Wittman stated the building is proposed to be 48 feet high, and the applicant is asking for an 11 1/2 foot height variance (variance from 37' and 3 stories) which will be addressed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will have to wrestle with the number of stories. The HPC looks at the mass and bulk. Commissioner Larson asked about the design on the side that faces the Lowell Inn. Mr. Landucci replied the retaining wall will be removed and the building itself will be the structural foundation. Commissioner Larson said he likes the use of the driveway to reduce traffic impacts. The massing looms the most on the east. If that side were stepped back it would have less impact. Mr. Landucci said with the parking garage and an empty lot next door, the building does not really impact a lot of buildings. The most impacted is the house and that is why it makes sense to acquire it. Commissioner Thueson remarked the design has a lot of positive aspects but his greatest concern is from the "bowl" looking up, and the building overwhelms the house. It might help if there were some sort of local designation for the house to ensure it would be well maintained. Mr. Landucci said he does not think the roofline of this building will be visible from Second Street over the Lowell Inn. Commissioner Larson stated the idea of reinforcing the corner with a building is a good idea, and three stories is reasonable, but he has an issue with the fourth story. Stepping the building back would lessen the massing but in this location it would stand out too much. He asked what makes this building fit Stillwater. Mr. Landucci answered the extensive use of brick and metal. It is a modern contemporary design, not historic. It echoes the Reuter Walton building and also has a railing cornice feature. Councilmember Junker commented this building sticks out on the corner, particularly with the fourth floor. It will make the Balay house look like a little dog house. Mr. Landucci argued that none of the important views from the house will be lost. The viewshed of the house is not affected by this building. Page 5 of 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Ms. Wittman added that the height overlay district is concerned not only with the views to the river, but also the view from the river. Commissioner Heimdahl said he feels the layout of this project encompasses the site a lot better than the previously approved project Massing is not as much of a problem as it does not seem to stand out as much, possibly because it is going down the hill. Commissioner Finwall said she does not think the design integrates the house very well into the site. The structure is too massive. She does not support the height. The building should be stepped back on the east elevation to integrate the house better. There is a lot of metal on the structure which has not been discussed. If it is tabled the HPC should require some stepping back and reduced height. Mr. Landucci responded there is no way to build on the site without dwarfing the house. Commissioner Holmes noted the house is impacted negatively but this is an important site that will be developed and the house will be impacted by whatever is built there. The plan makes the house a well preserved curiosity which is not ideal but better than having it torn down. He struggles with the fourth floor and with the amount of metal. Mr. Landucci said he is open to using more brick. Chairwoman Mino said it is worth looking again at stepping back the east side to give the house more of a presence. She has a hard time with the building wrapping around the house, overwhelming it. Ms. Wittman summarized the direction for the applicant: remove the fourth floor and possibly the third floor; explore breaking up the metal on east with some brick; step back the building on the east side; explore more landscaping in between the two buildings; explore changing the window and balcony placement toward the Balay property so they don't overlook the house. Motion by Commissioner Holmes, seconded by Commissioner Heimdahl, to table Case No. 2021-25, Design Permit for a new residential apartment complex at 107 3rd St N, asking the applicant to bring back design changes based on Commission input: 1) remove the uppermost story; 2) step back the east side of the building toward the 110 Myrtle Street property (Balay); 3) remove the easternmost third and fourth stories behind the Balay property; 4) break up the metal with brick, and consider a brick color more in line with other brick in the area; 5) landscape between the two buildings to create more privacy and separation; and 6) explore different window and balcony placement facing the Balay property. All in favor. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Use Variance Zoning Text Amendment Ms. Wittman said the City received an application for a zoning text amendment to allow for heritage preservation use variances. State law doesn't allow the City to grant a use variance but it states that Heritage Preservation Commissions may do so. An interested property owner and potential purchaser of property would like to amend the City Code. The proposed amendment will be heard by the Planning Commission and then the City Council. The formal request is to convert the William Sauntry Mansion into a real estate sales office. The Planning Commission's recommendation will come back to the HPC's next meeting after the Planning Commission holds the public hearing on whether to grant a heritage preservation use variance. She explained the draft proposal and the proposed amendment The intent is to ensure the use will fit within the neighborhood. She said tonight's discussion is not about the William Sauntry Mansion, but rather, if the HPC has any recommendations on the proposed zoning text amendment. She added that Commissioner Thueson would like the HPC to discuss the requirement that when a heritage preservation use variance is granted, the City require that property be subject to design permitting review by the HPC to ensure preservation of the property. Page 6 of 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 16, 2021 Commissioner Larson voiced support for the idea that a house that is not being sold or used, is given a chance to remain with a different use, rather than falling into disrepair. Commissioner Finwall asked if this amendment were not in place, could an applicant instead request a rezoning of the property? Ms. Wittman replied they could, but the state also prohibits spot zoning. Most of these mansions are in the middle of residential districts. Stillwater Public Library MDL Scanning Project - Volunteers Requested Ms. Wittman asked if anyone is interested in volunteering to help add metadata to scanned photos from the 1980s and 1990s under a grant received by the Stillwater Public Library. Commissioner Thueson agreed to help. He suggested posting the request on one of the Stillwater Facebook pages. State Historic Preservation Conference Ms. Wittman reported that the Conference will be held and Stillwater will participate. She has been working with Commissioner Heimdahl to develop a Rethos and Northern Bedrock window restoration class to be aired at the Conference. Commissioner Requests Commissioner Larson asked if the cornice lights that were on the buildings for Christmas are still up. Commissioner Junker replied they are in place but are to be turned off. Commissioner Larson said he noticed a new structure on top of Portside. Ms. Wittman stated it was illegally constructed and is not to code. She also reported that the applicant was given 30 days notice to remove the CBD House sign that was denied by the HPC. Heritage Preservation Awards are not scheduled. She suggested waiting till fall, maybe during the Conference. Commissioner Thueson said maybe the awards could be presented in October for the City's birthday. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Thueson, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to adjourn. All in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m. y M' o, hair ATTEST: Abbi Wittman, City Planner Resolution HPC 2021-01, Resolution Adopting Written Statement of Reasons for Denial Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 15.99, Subd. 2, for a Building Demolition Permit Application for the Property at 304 Hazel Street East, HPC Case No. 2021-10 Resolution HPC 2021-02, Resolution Adopting Written Statement of Reasons for Denial Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 15.99, Subd. 2, for a Design Permit Request for a New Sign in the Downtown Design Review Overlay District, HPC Case No. 2021-21 Page 7 of 7