Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-2020 HPC PacketHASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Agenda for the Meeting of September 15, 2020 Regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. conducted solely by telephone or other electronic means as provided in Minnesota Statutes § 13D.021 and no in-person meeting will be conducted at City Hall. I. Call to Order and Quorum II. Minutes: A. September 15, 2020 III. Certificate of Approval Review A. 321 6th St E – SUP Historic apartment and parking lot B. 200 7th St W – Portable carport IV. Business and Information A. State Historic Preservation Review Board request for comment – 200 2nd Street West, Former Hudson Manufacturing Company Factory National Register listing consideration V. Adjourn The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on November 17, 2020 HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 15, 2020 Held at 7:00 p.m. and conducted solely by telephone or other electronic means as provided in Minnesota Statutes § 13D.021 and no in-person meeting was conducted at City Hall. I. Quorum: Toppin, Sovik-Siemens, Simacek, Youngren, Borchardt, and Ragan-Scully Absent: Smith Staff Present: Justin Fortney, City Planner Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. II. Minutes: August 18, 2020 Motion by Sovik-Siemens for approval, seconded by Simacek - motion approved 7-0 by rollcall. III. Certificate of Approval Review A. 314 5th St E – New Fence Fortney presented the staff report. Commissioner Simacek questioned the height of the fence in relation to the front of the building. Fortney explained the ordinances allows fences up to the front property line, but they must be under 42-inches in height. He added that the applicant is proposing a six-foot tall fence in the rear and dropping it down to 4-feet near the mid-point of the home and stopping it even with the front of the porch. Commissioner Borchardt commented that the Design Guidelines do not allow the front yards to have opaque fencing. Fortney said the Design Guidelines state that front yards should not be enclosed by opaque fencing. He added that the fence only runs along the side of the property and is along a neighboring vegetation and home. Commissioner Sovik-Siemens said the HPC has not approved vinyl fencing in the district and the appropriate material for fencing should be wood or metal. Terri Whipple said she needs a privacy fence because she can no longer bear the issues with the neighbor and the condition of his property. Whipple further explained that she cannot maintain a wood fence due to their nature to deteriorate rapidly. She added that because of the issues with the neighbor, she cannot maintain the other side of the fence, which would lead to the fence rotting. Commissioner Ragan-Scully said she understands there are some extenuating circumstances, which would not allow traditional materials such as wood to be used, as the required maintenance would not be allowed on the opposite side of the fence. Motion by Ragan-Scully for approval, seconded by Simacek; motion approved 6-0 by rollcall. Business A. Commissioner Toppin presentation on initiative ideas from the recent NAPC FORUM Conference Commissioner Toppin discussed some ideas for HPC to consider. She asked staff if they offer any assistance to historic home owners related to research or planning their projects and if this is expressed to the homeowners. Fortney said this is stated on the city website and included in yearly postcard mailings. He added that he receives the most inquiries from prospective homebuyers and he explains the Design Guidelines, HPC review, and assistance that staff and the Pioneer Room can provide. Toppin discussed publishing a regular article in the newspaper on topics of preservation. She suggested staff contact the paper and inquire about submitting a regular article. Fortney said he could contact the paper about inclusion of articles. He suggested that the next step may be to determine what commitment the HPC could make to providing articles, if on a regular basis. Toppin said she asked staff in the past how much time they spend on HPC work compared to planning work, but wanted to ask him on the record. Fortney said originally his time was to be split 25/75 respectfully. He added that the department has since lost a third of its staff. He said there are certain times in the year where he spends more and less than 25 percent on preservation. Toppin said well than maybe a quarterly article for the newspaper. Commissioner Youngren said he was recently in Lansburgh, Minn. and noticed small posters in the windows with historic information and photos. He thought it would be a great thing to do downtown that would show people some historic photos and stories. He wondered what the business owners would think of allowing the posters. Ragan-Scully said as a business owner she likes the idea and commented that the locations should be as uniform as possible to make them easy to find and read. Other commissioners commented that they liked the idea and the HPC should proceed with some posters. B. State Historic Preservation Review Board request for comment – 200 2nd Street West, Former Hudson Manufacturing Company Factory National Register listing consideration Fortney provided the staff report and the commissioners commented that they agree with staff that the HPC should review the request for listing on the National Register Nomination and consider making a recommendation as an entity without a professional historian. IV. Adjourn Motion by Simacek second by Youngren to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 pm; motion approved 6-0 by rollcall. Respectfully Submitted - Justin Fortney CERTIFICATE APPLICATION 200 7th Street W. Terry Fasbender – Portable carport. Ca. 1880, Old Hastings Historic District- contributing Request: The applicants are proposing to place a portable carport cover over a parking space on the south side of the detached garage. They regularly park a truck or boat in that location. They are proposing to use the structure seasonally from November through the end of March each year. The carport in 10’ by 20’ (the garage is about 26’ deep) and constructed with painted metal poles with a white tarpaulin on top. Ordinance, Guidelines Design Guidelines (Page 30) 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. Staff findings: While staff does not believe the proposed structure was one that was used historically, the location on the side of a detached building often had lean-tos for the storage of firewood, equipment, vehicles/ boats, etc. The location and size are appropriate for a structure. The materials are new proposal for HPC review. These structures are allowed by the zoning code as long as they do not include sides. 10’ x 20’ To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: October 12, 2020 Item: Special Use Permit 2020-43 – Historic Apartment \ Parking Variance –– Mike and Amy Bauer Property: 321 6th Street East, Built 1950, Old Hastings Historic District – Noncontributing HPC Action Requested: The HPC is asked to review the SUP (Special Use Permit) request to convert a large building in the Old Hastings Historic District into a nine-unit apartment. Related to the SUP, consider a request for a variance from the number of required parking spaces. There are a few exterior changes to the appearance that must also be approved. These include a parking lot, which is part of this request and basement window wells with egress windows and drainage ponds that may come at a later date. The structure was constructed in 1950 as a convent and later converted to a youth shelter in the 1990’s. The context of these changes to be considered should be how they may affect the streetscape of the district, rather than to the affect they will have to the property itself, since it is a noncontributing property to the district. Background Information: The R-2 district typically allows residential uses of one and two units. The use of apartments in large historic properties was added as an allowable SUP last year. This was in an effort to allow the reuse of these unique buildings with a residential use, to complement their residential settings and secure long-term uses. It must also be reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 12, 2020 to hold a public hearing and determine if conditions are necessary to assure it fits with the character of the neighborhood. Ordinance (J) Historic apartments – Historic Structures may be granted by SUP, a number of dwelling units above what is normally allowed within the zoning district upon adherence to the HPC Commission Memorandum following provisions: (a) That the facility shall be part of a formally designated local, state, or national historic site or district; (Old Hastings Historic District) (b) That all dwelling units shall be established within the principal structure; (As Proposed) (c) That the number of units may be dependent on the amount of off-street parking as required by the Parking and Loading Requirements of §155.09; (2/unit required) 17 proposed, this is one space less than required) (d) That the structure shall have a minimum size of 4,000 finished square feet; (10,242 SF) (e) That the lot shall have a minimum of 9,000 square feet; (18,480 SF) (f) That the SUP application be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission as required by §30.10; (October 13, 2020) (g) That necessary and approved changes are made to the structure with all applicable building permits, HPC review, and payment of applicable fees. (h) Dwelling units shall be determined as follows: 1. One residential dwelling unit per 1,000 square feet of finished structure size shall be allowed. (This would allow ten units, nine are proposed) 2. An additional 1,800 square feet of lot area shall be required for each additional unit in excess of 5 units (This would allow ten units, nine are proposed) (Ord. 2020-07, 3rd Series, passed 01-06-2020) Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abut the property: Direction Existing Use Zoning Comp Plan North Duplex/ Single-Fam R-2 Medium & Low Density Residential East Triplex R-2 Medium Density Residential West Single-Family R-2 Low Density Residential South SEAS School R-2 Institutional Special Use Permit Review There are several large historic structures in Hastings that have been grandfathered as apartment buildings and there have been little or no issues with them affecting the character of the neighborhoods or negatively affecting the historical integrity of the properties exterior. These apartments have been very consistent long-term uses of the buildings that help to keep them profitable to own and have led to their continued maintenance. Parking The zoning code requires two parking spaces for each residential unit. Applicants for some atypical apartment projects have stated this requirement produces more parking than would be necessary for their project. Some of these atypical projects have included a large number of single and studio apartments or are geared towards a specific clientele that often have only one or no cars at all. Some of these projects have received a variance to the parking requirements. Standard parking requirements will not be ideal for all situations. There is no exact formula that will produce perfectly sized parking lots for every use. Staff believes our current parking requirement of two spaces for every residential unit (single-family homes to all apartment units) may not be a reasonable requirement for the variety of residential uses. Staff is planning on addressing this with the Planning Commission this fall. Access The Parking lot is proposed to be a one-way design to efficiently accommodate the number of parking spaces. One-way parking lots require less area and pavement with their reduced drive isle width. The traffic will enter from the alley and exit onto Tyler Street. The access and parking lot will require the removal of some trees and bushes, which will be replaced. Building improvements Proposed building improvements include converting the many small boarding rooms into nine apartment units including as shown below along with some common spaces. Studio apartments: 2 One-bedroom apartments: 2 Two-bedroom apartments: 4 Three-bedroom apartments: 1 Notice Notice was published and sent to property owners within 350-feet of the subject property. No comments have been received at this time. SUP Recommendation Consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding if the use of apartment is appropriate for this building. Variance Review The applicants are asking for a one space variance from the required number of spaces. They believe due to the number of studio and one-bedroom units, they certainly will not need two parking spaces for every unit. This additional space increases the area of snowplowing, while also educes the are for snow storage. The owners already have concerns for snow storage due to the adjacent alley and the snow plowing of it by the city. Variances to the Zoning Code may be considered that are not contrary to the public interest where owing to special conditions, and where a literal enforcement of the provision of the City Code would result in practical difficulties. Variances may be granted provided that a number of findings are made relating to the peculiarities exist on the property, differentiation from other posible requests, and that an owner will encounter practical difficulties if the letter of the regulation were applied. Variance Recommendation While the Planning Commission will review the variance from the legal perspective, the HPC may review it from the perspective of how it may affect the streetscape or integrity of the district. Parking lots were not very common in the era of the district until closer to its end in the 1940’s. The reduction by one space is not significant, but may reduce its size as viewed from the street by increasing the green space around it. Proposed Changes to the Exterior of the Property The parking lot is shown on the site plan, it is proposed to constructed out of asphalt with concrete curbs are required by ordinance. It is a necessary improvement and is located in the rear of the property. Screening with vegetation is being planned along with fencing along the alley. The construction of the parking lot will require the removal of the existing parking lot, basketball court, and shed. The site plan shows two retention ponds on the site to better handle site drainage as the building sits a little lower than the perimeter of the property. They will be slight sodded depressions. Some of the existing basement windows will be replaced with window wells and egress windows. The plan for which locations is being drafted. Changes Recommendation The parking lot and retention ponds are the current changes that we have been provided information for review. Additional information may be forthcoming. We do not need to review all changes prior to making a recommendation to the Council on the SUP or variance. Most of the intended changes will not occur until the spring. Attachments: · Aerial Map · Proposed plans · Photographs Site Layout Existing floorplans Lower Level Main Level Second Level Third Floor To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: October 13, 2020 Item: State Historic Preservation Review Board HPC Action Requested: Concider making a comment to the State Historic Preservation Review Board as an interested party, regarding the following concideration before the Review Board on November 10, 2020: · Reviewing an application for inclusion of the Former Hudson Manufacturing Company Factory on the National Register of Historic Places. Background Information: The property owners have petitioned to have the former Hudson building listed on the National Register as part of the current tax credit funded rehabilitation project. The deadline for comments is on November 6, 2020. Although we are a CLG and may provide an official comment, at least one of our members must meet the federal standards of a historian (A graduate degree in history or closely related field; or a bachelor's degree in history or closely related field plus some noted experience in the field of historic research) In the absence of this so qualified historian, the HPC chose to not hire a qualified historian at out September meeting. On September 25th, staff sent a copy of the nomination form to the commissioner for review. Staff read through the report and found it to be accurate as far as a nonfederal standard historian can tell, other than one misstatement in section 8, page 18: “Hudson Manufacturing is one of the few early twentieth century manufacturers that remain in Hastings today.” (unfortunately, they no longer remain in Hastings) Although the work to rehabilitate the structure has begun, this proposed listing on the National Register is paramount to receiving Historic Tax Credits, which is likely critical to the project. Aside from being necessary for the project, the building is deserved of the recognition and limited protection the listing would provide. Staff recommends the city sending a simple letter in support of the nomination. HPC Memorandum