Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHPC Packet 03-11-2025HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Agenda for Meeting of March 11, 2025 Regular business at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Volunteer Room I. Oath of Office A. Mark Simacek B. Krista Peterson C. Wendi Schilts-Johnson II. Elect Chair and Vice Chair III. Call to Order and Quorum IV. Minutes: A. November 19, 2024 V. Certificate of Approval Review A. 618 Ramsey St – Chicken coop B. 312 2nd St W – Replace and expand deck VI. OHDS – Original Hastings Design Standards Review VII. Business and Information A. Century Plaque Request – 1105 Maple St. B. Review proposed changes to the OHDS regulations C. Form Preservation Awards Committee D. Discuss HPC goals for 2025 VIII. Adjourn The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on April 15, 2025 at Hastings City Hall HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting of November 19, 2024 Held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, Volunteer Room I. Call to Order and Quorum Youngren, McCoy, Peterson, Bremer, Simacek, Toppin, and Smith. Absent: Borchardt and Alitz Edell Staff: Fortney II. Minutes: A. October 15, 2024 Approved by Chair Toppin III. Certificate of Approval Review A. 700 4th St W – New gutters Fortney presented the staff report. Commissioners commented that the gutters would cover the fascia changes that are proposed to hold the gutters. Derek Smith, owner, explained that the installer said the fascia change will only be visible from the ends of the gutter, but will be wrapped with white aluminum to match the gutters. Motion by Commissioner Peterson to approve the replacement as proposed, seconded by Commissioner Youngren. Approved 7-0 B. 218 402 6th St E – New windows, porch, steps, and doors Fortney presented the staff report. Commissioners commented that the existing rough cedar may be difficult to paint. Commissioner Bremer was concerned the porch wouldn’t be allowed as shown on the AI rendering because building code will likely require a full wall or railing due to the height from the ground. The following actions were approved as noted: 1. Open the front porch and add square columns – Approved a. If a railing is required, it must be reviewed by the commission. 2. New white double-hung window inserts - Approved a. If dividers are used to represent the existing old 1 over 1 or historic 2 over 2 glass patterns, they must be at least on the outside of the glass. 3. New exterior doors - Approved 4. Aluminum sofit and facia - Approved 5. Rebuild front and side stairs - Approved a. Simple wooden steps and railings. If different, HPC must review. Motion by Commissioner McCoy to approve the east and rear signs as proposed with the following condition, seconded by Commissioner Smith. Approved 7-0 Alitz Edell nay IV. OHDS – Original Hastings Design Standards Review V. Business and Information A. Discuss HPC goals for 2025 Chair Toppin suggested a designation study or Historic Resource Survey, since neither has been done for some time. Fortney explained the purpose and use of each, and the Commission discussed the benefits, budget, and grants available. The HPC recommended exploring the possibility of a Historic Resource Survey during 2025, which could occur in 2025 or 2026 depending on funding. Chair Toppin requested the 2025 goal discussion be extended to the next meeting, in case there are an additional ideas. VI. Adjourn Motion by Commissioner Smith to adjourn at 8:30 pm, seconded by Commissioner Youngren. Approved 7-0 Respectfully Submitted - Justin Fortney CERTIFICATE APPLICATION March 2025 618 Ramsey Street. Chicken Coop and run. Hannah and Simon Lemaire Ca. 1875, Old Hasting Historic District- Request: The applicant is proposing to place a chicken coop in the backyard. The coop is only 30 square feet and incorporated into the enclosed run footprint of 54 square feet. The six allowable chickens are proposed. The proposal has been reviewed by the Planning staff and appears to comply with the Keeping of Chicken ordinance. The materials include pressure treated lumber, Hardware cloth fencing, composite siding (The application states “Fibrex siding”, but that is a material Anderson Windows makes for its window frames), and Polycarbonate roofing. Ordinance, Guidelines Residential Guideline 10: Garages and Accessory Structures 3. Select prefabricated accessory buildings with appearance, material and scale compatible to the main structure of the site and surrounding area. - Sidebar - There are many historic sheds, carriage barns and early automobile garages remaining in Hastings. Some were designed to match the architectural style of the house, while others are simple vernacular buildings. Nearly all were sited in the rear yard and reached by an alley or narrow driveway from the street. Staff Findings The applicant said if they moved, the coop would go with them. The City’s zoning code treats all structures as though they are permanent because they are allowed in perpetuity. The HPC has not differentiated between permanent and temporary changes in the past. City chicken licenses are valid for 5-years. There is no mechanism for coop removal if a license expires or is revoked. The proposed coop is a typical design for a small backyard flock. It would not be visible from outside the property because of privacy fencing and its location behind the home. CERTIFICATE APPLICATION 312 2nd Street West – Mitchell & Wendy Mainka – Replace and expand rear deck Ca. 1890, West Second Street Historic District- contributing and NR Request: The applicant is proposing to replace the rear deck and wrap it around the full rear of the home. The proposed railing is a black aluminum. Ordinance, Guidelines Fence: Design Guidelines 7: Porches and Steps (Page 24) 6. Decks Decks should be constructed only at the rear of the building or where most inconspicuous from the public street. Railings, steps, and other deck details should be compatible with the architectural character of the building. 3. Railings The original spacing, section, and profile of railings and balusters should be maintained in replacement or repair. Unless historical evidence indicates, reconstruction should include a bottom rail and balusters should not be nailed directly to the step or deck. Metal railings should not be used to replace wooden railings. Staff findings: The deck location is in the back of the home, which is consistent with the design guidelines. The deck is only visible from the rear of the adjacent properties and ally but obscured by a fence. The deck design is simple. The railing is black aluminum. The Guidelines state that a metal railing should not replace a wooden one. This is likely relating to historic porches with existing wooden railings, but it may be considered. The guidelines relating specifically to decks state that design, including the railing should be compatible with the design of the home. Home from this period would have had railings on a porch made of wood, which are more substantial than modern aluminum railings. The porch guidelines do suggest a bottom rail rather than attaching balusters directly to the floor or skirt. Additions and alterations can affect the historical fabric of the home. The house appears to have original siding, which must be removed for the ledger board connection. This affect is loss is minimal. Any connection to the home can be a source for water infiltration, which can be minimized with proper installation and flashing. To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: March 11, 2025 Item: Century home plaque request – 1105 Maple St HPC Action Requested: Review and consider authorizing the sale of a Century Home Plaque to the applicant for the actual cost of $100. Background Information: Please see the review criteria below with staff response based on the application materials. Additional materials are included in the digital packet. 1. Original structure should have been built for residential use (no combined uses with commercial or other types of uses). Multi-family structures, bed and breakfast establishments, and other properties are eligible as long as the building has retained its architectural integrity as a residential structure. Staff: the structure was clearly built and used as a house. 2. Building shall be documented to be 100 years old or older. Staff: County records indicate a construction date of 1898. The 1935 and very clear 1945 aerial photography clearly show this house in this location with the existing additions. Census data show the address being occupied back to the 1920’s, but that doesn’t prove anything about this structure. The home is certainly very old. The applicant provided what looks similar to a Sanborn Fire Insurance Map showing a home in this location in 1896(?), but with a different configuration. I have not seen a Sanborn Map for any year covering areas this far out from downtown. The owner states the home has a limestone foundation, indicating if moved, it is at least not a modern move. Staff is fairly certain the house is over 100-years old and likely was in this location for over the same, if not from original construction. 3. House must reflect its original architectural character. Staff: The house retains its original design and character. 4. Additions and alterations to the house are acceptable; however the original architectural character should not be compromised. Houses that have been re-sided with vinyl or other siding types are not automatically disqualified from recognition. A moved building may qualify as a site if the move was made to preserve the resource from demolition and if the moved building was not altered in a manner that is inconsistent with its historical integrity. Staff: Additions and modern garage are appropriately located. The house design has not changed and retains integrity. Planning Commission Memorandum 5. House shall not exhibit signs of deferred maintenance, which threatens the economic life of the structure. House should demonstrate how to care for older homes. Staff: There are no visible signs of deferred maintenance. Staff recommends approval to issue a Century Home Plaque upon payment of the casting fee. 1945 City Council Memorandum To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: February 18, 2025 Item: Zoning Code Update – OHDS, Original Hastings Design Guideline area Commission Action Requested: Review the proposed changes to the OHDS Guidelines and provide comments. Background Information: The existing OHDS Guidelines were adopted about 20-years ago to protect the traditionally design core of the city from incompatible design and scaled residential infill development. In practice, the current guidelines have been difficult and cumbersome to use. They are overly technical, and design review has been difficult. They rely on averaging the surrounding homes scale and design to determine appropriate metrics for a project, which is difficult and awkward. Additionally, applicants typically come to the city with a plan, before understanding the design requirements. One of the consultants working on the zoning code update has a background in landscape architecture and has written design guidelines for similar cities. The proposal is to regulate the OHDS area as a new unique zoning district, where the appropriate design elements are zoning requirements. The lot sizing and setback requirements are unchanged except as listed below. There are graphics included to highlight the proposed code requirements. Definition of terms and review procedures are being released with the second half of the code revision. It has not been determined if the review will be an administrative process. It may be proposed as an administrative process for applications that fully meet the requirements and legislative for ones that do not. That procedure may be similar to the existing one, but using the new regulations. Proposed requirements: Some applicable consultant proposed language includes the following: A. Driveway location. a. Typical residential districts throughout the city may have one driveway per street frontage. b. In either R-T zone, one driveway is allowed per lot: It must be off an alley or side street, if existing. (This is a big change. Currently, areas covered by the proposed R-T2 have no restrictions.) B. Definitions and specific parameters for some of the following building design elements will be written in the second half of the zoning code (to be reviewed at a later date). C. Building design for zoning district R-T1 (Currently called OHDS area) a. New design elements (9-14) 9. A garage door (attached or detached) must be set back behind the front façade a minimum of 10-feet. 10. Ground floor Occupied Building Space on Front Façade must be at least 65% of the full facade width. 11. The main entrance must be located on the front façade. Entrance type: porch or stoop 12. Windows on the front façade must be between 30%-50% of the wall area 13. Maximum width of a building segment is 35-feet 14. Maximum height of 2.5 stories/ 30-feet See attached requirements Proposed Zoning Map section Existing OHDS boundary in current code Properties within the district limits that are not zoned R-2 are exempts from the requirement, the new R-T1 district just identifies the applicable properties by zoning, without a district boundary. The R-T2 zone has similar lot size and setback requirements but does not include most of the proposed design requirements. This area was formerly outside the OHDS area and contains a wide variety of house stock.