Heritage Preservation Commission Meetings and Work Sessions

City of Excelsior Hennepin County, Minnesota Minutes Heritage Preservation Commission Tuesday, September 17, 2019 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Chair Macpherson called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Commissioners Present: Bolles, Chair Macpherson, Finch, Caron, Reece, Brabec Commissioners Absent: Salita Also Present: City Planner Becker 2. AGENDA APPROVAL Bolles moved, Finch seconded, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 6/0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) August 20, 2019 Commissioner Caron moved, Commissioner Finch seconded, to approve the minutes for the August 20, 2019 meeting as amended. Motion carried 6/0. 4. CITIZEN COMMENTS OR REPORTS None 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) 251 Water Street Window Painting SAP (HPC No. 19-28) Motion by Caron, seconded by Brabec to approve the Site Alteration Permit as presented. Motion carried 6/0. b) 37 Water Street Sign SAP (HPC No. 19-29) Chris Dennis of Lakes Area Realty clarified that the vinyl window and door signs would be removed with the erection of the permanent signs. Caron asked if the lights within the signs on the doors could be muted, as backlit signs are not permitted within the City. Finch asked how the wall signs would be affixed to the brick wall. Finch wanted to clarify what HDU meant, and the applicant was unsure. He also wanted to see that the signs be stud mounted into the mortar and that adhesives not be permitted. Motion by Finch to approve the Site Alteration Permit with amended conditions, seconded by Caron. Motion carried 6/0. c) 340 Water Street SAP (HPC No. 19-33) Mary Colleran, applicant explained that some siding would be repaired, and that unrepairable siding would be replaced with an example that was presented at the meeting. Finch wanted to clarify if the trim above the toy store awning would be replaced, as it is quite damaged. Bolles wanted to clarify if the awnings in front of the Minutes Heritage Preservation Commission 9/17/2019 Page 2 of 3 Chamber of Commerce would be removed, and Colleran clarified that they would be removed permanently per the request of the tenant. Finch believed that the awnings provided continuity and wished for the awnings to be replaced. Colleran clarified that the awnings would be straight edged as opposed to scalloped edge to match the existing black awnings. Colleran was amenable to replacing the awnings. The Commission would like to have the following conditions of approval: all nominal four-inch reveal both on the dormers and the wood level cedar siding was to be painted gray; all trim is to be wood painted white; only rotted trim to be replaced; and all awnings to be replaced with black awnings with a straight edge valance and no lettering on the awnings except for 318 and Something Safari. The amended colors were approved. Motion by Caron, seconded by Brabec, to approve the Site Alteration Permit subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the staff report in addition to conditions previously mentioned. Motion carried 6/0. d) 289 Water Street Bolles wanted to clarify if the site plan would include a light fixture and street trees. Bolles would like to see one light fixture that is similar in design to those on Water Street on Third Street with a single luminaire acorn light to go on the other side of the garage door in order to not interfere with trash removal. Brett Loftesnes, representative of the applicant. MacPherson wanted to clarify where curb cuts would exist, and Loftesnes said that they would like to see a curb cut in order to allow access to the garage door for the interior trash room. Loftesnes said that the light fixture would go around where the outdoor sidewalk café exists. MacPherson wanted to see frosted glass on the windows, and Loftesnes clarified that the windows would be translucent. Caron felt that the building was taking its visual cues from the non-contributing building next door, which is not in compliance with the Design Manual. Loftesnes stated that the design was modeled after the Burdick building was approved. Caron felt that the former design was designed for the corner and felt anchored in the corner and was troubled with the materials proposed for the back of the building. Brabec felt that the building should reflect what is happening in today’s architecture and does not like that the building is replicated. MacPherson would like to see more up-to-date elements incorporated. The Commission reviewed the design as compared to the previously approved design. Caron was concerned with the garage door on Third Street, as it could be problematic with traffic. The Commission would like to see a solid glass door instead of a garage door. MacPherson suggested putting the garage door on the rear elevation. Finch wanted to know how the design for the garage door would operate, and Loftesnes clarified that the trash would be wheeled out through the door. Finch was concerned that the trash would need to be wheeled out onto the street or sidewalk, and Loftesnes clarified that the truck would be picking up the trash from the street. He also clarified that the side garage door was to be respectful of the brewery and block the sight and odors of the trash from the patrons of the brewery. Macpherson also wanted to see the fiber cement siding accents removed and the windows to be heightened and for the doors to be moved further apart. Loftesnes clarified the slope of the site makes it difficult for the doors to be set further apart. Bolles wanted to see the horizontal bar on the windows raised. Motion by Caron to continue the item to the next meeting to give the applicant the opportunity to consider the comments provided by the Commission, seconded by Finch. Motion carried 6/0. e) 200 Lake Street SAP (HPC No. 19-30) Minutes Heritage Preservation Commission 9/17/2019 Page 3 of 3 Carrie Larson, owner of the property, stated they are in shock that anyone but the owner can nominate a property as a landmark property and that they were hoping to build their forever home in Excelsior on this site. Greg Larson, owner of the property, clarified that they were very willing to move the home. Caron wanted to review the recommendation letter from SHPO before approving or denying the Site Alteration Permit. The HPC was amenable to scheduling a special meeting in order to make a decision once comments from SHPO were received. Motion by MacPherson to continue the review until the next meeting, seconded by Caron. Motion carried 6/0. f) 218 Water Street SAP (HPC No. 19-34) Claude Galley, Acme Tuckpointing, explained that falling brick caused some damage was done to the awning, and the owner wanted the applicant to investigate what needed to be repaired. Upon inspection, it was discovered that many bricks were in need of repair. MacPherson asked if a roofer was consulted in order to determine if damage was being caused by the roof. MacPherson motioned to approve the scope of work outlined in the application and in adherence with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards as well as to form a subcommittee to approve the bricks and mortar colors, seconded by Caron. Motion carried 6/0. MacPherson and Brabec would form the subcommittee. g) Review of Draft of National Register Downtown Eligibility Study The Commission would like to schedule a special work session to review the Eligibility Study on September 30th at 10:30am or the 25th at 10:00am. The Commission moved the scheduled meeting in October from the 15th to the 22nd. 6. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Caron, seconded by Brabec to adjourn at 9:12 p.m. Motion carried 6/0. Respectfully submitted, Emily Becker City Planner