Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-07-1990Minutes of the Special Meeting, February 7, 1990 Present: Commissioners Goderstad, Thorsen and Hoeschen Absent: Commissioners Malm and Simacek Also present: Grossman, HPC Staff The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Vice-Chair Goderstad. 1. Consideration of the proposed hotel design Mr. Grossman explained that the HPC does not have authority to review a building permit because the riverfront is not registered on a protected list although it is adjacent to a historic district. The HPC may comment upon the development's impact on the historic district and may request that the HRA or City Council adopt measures they recommend. In reviewing the proposed design, the commissioners should use the ordinance criteria pertaining to Proposed New Construction. The commissioners considered the design in view of each criteria and made the following findings. Criteria 1. New construction should be compatible with the color, texture, and materials of the surrounding buildings and neighborhood. The proposed design is not compatible because all of the surrounding buildings are brick, and the proposed material is wood. Recommendation 1. The exterior walls of a hotel shall be brick, of a color consistent with the Gardner House, Finch building, etc. Criteria 2. The shape and pitch of the roof or cornice should be compatible with that of the surrounding buildings and neighborhood. The proposed design is not compatible because the surrounding commercial buildings consistently have flat roofs and prominent, decorative cornices. The roof lines of the proposed design are a mixture of flat, off-center gabled, curved and steepled. Recommendation 2. Commercial buildings shall have flat roof and cornice lines. Alternately, a number of residential buildings in the neighborhood have gabled or mansard roofs with dormers and towers and the Old Courthouse has hipped roofs with towers. These styles might be adapted to new construction provided that cedar shingles not be used. Criteria 3. New construction should be compatible with the height, width, depth, massing and setback of the surrounding buildings. The proposed design is not compatible because the surrounding buildings are vertical: 22 and 44 feet wide and two or three stories high. The proposed design is a four story building nearly a block long without a break, and a one story building, also strongly horizontal in appearance. Recommendation 3. The horizontal lines of a building shall be varied by changes in material, setback, height or detailing at 22 or 44 foot intervals. The building mass shall be at least two and no more than four stories. criteria 4. The shape and placement of door and window openings should be compatible with the surrounding buildings. The proposed design is not compatible because of several blank walls and a variety of window openings. Recommendation 4. Above the ground floor, windows, whether singly or in pairs, shall be vertical (more tall than wide) and double- hung such as on the Gardner House, Finch or Mertz buildings. There shall be no blank, solid walls without windows, particularly facing the street and on the ground floor. Ground floor windows facing the street or parking lot shall be consistent with the commercial styles on Second Street. Criteria 5. Contemporary design should not be discouraged but should be compatible with the surrounding buildings and neighborhood. The proposed design, while contemporary and attractive, does not demonstrate that any effort was made to relate to the surroundings. This design would be more appropriate standing alone in a natural setting. Recommendation 5. New construction shall be compatible with the designs of the surrounding historic districts. This does not require "recreating" a Victorian design, but does require a regard and respect for the existing character of the neighborhood. Mr. Thorsen moved and Mr. Hoeschen seconded that the HPC request that the City Council and HRA adopt the recommendations as design standards for a riverfront hotel. A development of this size will have a significant effect on the image of the city as well as on the character of the riverfront and the historic district. Hastings will live with this large building in this highly visible location for a long time. Hastings is investing about a million dollars of tax revenue in this development and should expect the highest quality of design and materials in return. For the motion: three; opposed: none. 2. Consideration of proposed remodeling of Masonic Block Mr. Grossman described Mr. Schoen's proposals for the continued rehabilitation of the Masonic Block, 221-223 Sibley Street. The commissioners reviewed the proposals and made the following recommendations. The commission will formally review and notify Mr. Schoen and the Building Inspector whether they approve the plans or not when he presents final drawings and applies for a building permit. Proposal: second exit from the third floor to the ground. The HPC recognizes that the exterior inclosed stairway may be the only practical approach to this code requirement, however, the HPC would prefer the interior approach if possible. Locating the exterior stairway in the corner of the Old City Hall and the Riviera Theatre would make it as inconspicuous as possible. However, that involves an inclosed walkway across roofs of the adjacent two buildings and a formal right of easement in case any of the three buildings was sold to a second party. If the exterior inclosed stairway on the back of the Masonic Block is the only option, the preservation ordinance calls for any addition to a building to be compatible with the materials, colors and textures of the original. The HPC recommended that the outside material be used brick to match the color and texture of the back wall as closely as possible and that the width and color of the mortar match the original as closely as possible. A small amount of decorative pattern and windows which match the following recommendations would be allowed. Used brick: Corning Donahue is a supplier. Mortar matching: Don Kelly, Ravenna Trail, 437-7308 Proposal: third floor windows, replace existing windows in original openings. The HPC concurred with the proposal to install full frame double hung windows to replace the existing windows which do not fit the full openings. The horizontal divider in each window shall be centered. The frame may be wood or coated/anodized metal. Continue to use dark brown frames as has been done elsewhere. Proposal: third floor: new windows or patio doors and balconies. The HPC recommends windows only, double hung of the same material and design as those used above. They recognize the need for windows but they must be compatible with the character of the building: proportionate in height and width to the existing openings, tall and narrow. The HPC does not recommend patio doors and balconies. They consider that these additions would change the character of the building beyond what is necessary for the use. The HPC will consider the access door to the proposed deck on the adjacent building as an alternative to the patio doors and balconies. The design of the door should be compatible with the building, i.e. similar to existing original doors. Proposal: deck on adjacent pending viewing the plans, building provided that no visible from Sibley Street. building. The HPC had no objection, to a deck on the roof of the adjacent part, including safety railings, be Proposal: lofts inside apartments. The HPC had no objection, pending viewing the plans, to lofts inside the apartments. They recommend that the edge of a loft be recessed away from adjacent visible from loft protrude windows and painted a flat gray to make it less outside. Under no condition should the edge of a into a window opening or frame. Mr. Hoeschen moved and Mr. Thorsen seconded that the above recommendations be communicated to Mr. Schoen. For the motion: three; opposed: none. 3. &djournment Mr. Thorsen moved and Mr. Hoeschen seconded adjournment. For the motion: three; opposed: none.