Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-20-2000HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting of June 20, 2000 I. Quorum: Thorsen, Simacek, Langenfeld, Siemens, Coutu, Goderstad, Schnirring and Smith present. Chairm~n Thorsen called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. II. Minutes of May 16, 2000: Motion by Goderstad, second by Schnirring to approve; motion carried. IlL Review of building permits or design proposals. A. Guardian Angels Block. Consider townhouse designs. Loren Brueggemann, Sherman Associates presented a plan to build 12 townhouses and remodel the school for 20 apartments. The church will be remodeled for public uses, and the rectory used for a women's shelter. Sketches ora number of townhouse designs were considered. The neighbors seemed to feel the design was too plain and asked for more visual interest. Sherman would like to preserve a continuity of design between the buildings and may add some face brick compatible with the existing school. The guidelines for new construction call for compatible design. A judgement about compatibility would consider size, shape, massing, streetscape, materials and style. Style does not require duplication of period construction or copying existing structures, but does consider the window, door and front entrance treatments, roof shapes, yard and garage locations in the neighborhood. Commission comments: buildings need chimneys to look traditional, vertical board effect on comers where sided, perhaps buildings could be different colors of brick, roof colors like school, cottage style windows look good, use ivy to screen vinyl siding on back of buildings, gingerbread not important - clean looks better. Sherman will return on July 18~ with revisions for action on compatibility of designs with neighborhood. B. Patti Blatz. 119 8* Street. (Old Hastings) Design review for replacement of shingles, chimneys, gutters and vents. Motion by Goderstad, second by Coutu for approval with conditions new gutters and vents only onthe "back" (north) side ofthe roof; duplication of existing chimneys not required, but the same scale and some detailing is necessary for compatibility of the new work with the age of the building; motion carried. C. Scott Buchberger. 116 E. 2nd. (Downtown) Review proposed removal of front step and replacement with a ramp from sidewalk to door in order to provide handicapped access. The Building Department is now requiring a good fakh attempt to conform with the accessibility law when a building is substantially remodeled or occupancy changes. In general at least one entrance, preferably the main, must be accessible. Do the changes necessary for accessibility threaten or destroy the historic significance of the building or the stability oftbe building? How can the change be accomplished with the least impact on the original material and design. Motion by Langenfeld and second by Coutu to approve replacement of step with ramp as shown in drawings on the grounds that removal of the step was not a threat to the structure or the significance of the building; motion carried. D. Brad Stepan. 203 E. Second. (Downtown District) Review design of replacement awning for new store in former Sherwin Williams. Mr. Stepan was not told by the building department that he had to get design review for awnings and signs. The awning is made and paid for ($2,500). This tyle of curved and fixed awning has been approved for Nature's Pallette, the Levee Caf6 and Fancy That. The former two buildings are not National Register, and the latter has a more modem storefront. A flat awning would be more appropriate for the age of this 1868 building. Motion by Schnirring, second by Smith that the awning is not approved on the grounds that the curved style is not appropriate for the age and appearance of the building; that the owner may put it up for no more than three months if necessary; and that City Council is asked to purchase the awning so the owner can replace it with a flat slope design; motion carried. E. Bob and Heidi Langenfeld. 203 e. 2ha. (W. Second Historic District). Wrought iron fence and privacy screen. The design and location oftbe fence and privacy screen appear to be compatible with the age of building and the neighborhood. The owners already have a fence of this design - which was used in the neighborhood before the turn oftbe century. There are no adverse affects on the house materials or design. Motion by Goderstad, second by Schnirring to approve the on the grounds that there are no adverse mapacts and the design is appropriate, motion carned,~__x~. IV. Unfinished business: Staffhas met with and distributed materials to all members of the building department to remind them about the permit review procedure. V. New business Annual Historic Preservation conference. At least one commissioner should attend the annual training session in Winona. This year it is held Thursday and Friday, September 28 and 29. VII. Adjournment Motion by Smith, second by Simacek to adjourn; motion carried.