Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHPC Packet 09-21-2021 The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on October 19, 2021 at Hastings City Hall HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Agenda for the September 21, 2021 Regular business at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Volunteer Room I. Call to Order and Quorum II. Minutes: A. July 27, 2021 III. Certificate of Approval Review A.208 Sibley Street – New sign B.119 8th Street E – New fence C.209 Sibley Street – maintenance/ repair issue IV. Business and Information A.Discuss Preservation Awards B.Century Home Application Review – 615 3rd St W V. Adjourn HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting of July 27, 2021 Held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall I. Quorum: Toppin, Smith, Youngren, Simacek and Borchardt Absent: Sovik-Siemens and Ragan-Scully Staff Present: Justin Fortney, City Planner Chair Toppin called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. II. Minutes: May 18, 2021 Motion by Youngren for approval, seconded by Smith - motion approved 5-0. III. Certificate of Approval Review A. 315 Pine Street – Partial Demolition and Rehabilitation Fortney presented the staff report. Pavel Zakharov, property owner, explained his plan to rehabilitate the property including the phases and timeline. He said it would likely be two or more years before the third floor was reconstructed, but the site wouldn’t be a constant construction zone. Jarl Olson of 632 4th Street East, said he is fine with the proposal. He added that he just wants some kind of project to begin, since the structure is in poor shape and nothing has been done yet. Commissioner Smith asked how the damaged walls would be rebuilt to the original specifications. Zakharov said the existing walls that are damaged have been measured, will be drawn up to scale, and most of the ornate window units are salvageable. Motion by Smith for approval of the following, based on the following findings of fact, seconded by Borchardt- motion approved 5-0. Approved Actions 1. Demolish the third floor 2. Demolish two second story walls and rebuild them to the measurements, dimensions and appearance as the existing, as much as it is possible with required building codes. 3. Rehab the building interior and perform exterior maintenance under the supervision of the city building and planning departments. 4. Install a new EPDM membrane roof over the new third level floor trusses. 5. Conceptual approval to construct a new third floor level in the spirit of the damaged third floor, which would require design review by the HPC. Findings of Fact 6. Based on photographical evidence, along with a verbal report from City Planning staff who inspected the property, there is virtually no salvageable material left on the third floor. Due to this severe damage, destruction of the third floor is necessary to correct an unsafe and dangerous condition from the fire and water damage. 7. There is similar damage to two second story walls identified in the staff report that require partial demolition as the only reasonable way to correct the damage. 8. There are no reasonable alternatives to the partial destruction and reconstruction as described in the staff report. B. 106 & 108 2nd Street East – New Sign Fortney presented the staff report. Commissioner Simacek asked if the sign size allotment is based on the frontage of the just the one building the sign is going on, or both of them. Fortney said it would be based on the frontage of the single building where the sign would be located, which is 108 2nd Street East. Motion by Youngren for approval as proposed, seconded by Simacek- motion approved 5-0. C. 215 Sibley Street – New Storm Windows (Staff Approved) Fortney stated he approved the storm windows as they met all the appropriate Design Guidelines. He added that the Commission had previously approved replacement windows, but the owner elected to have the historic windows rebuilt, which resulted in the continued need for storm windows. IV. Business A. Discuss Preservation Awards Chair Toppin said that the Commission should consider preservation awards for the fall since we have already missed it twice due to COVID-19. Toppin said that Commissioners Sovik-Siemens, Youngren, and herself would look for potential nominations. V. Adjourn Motion by Smith to adjourn the meeting at 8:02 pm, seconded by Simacek; motion approved 5-0. Respectfully Submitted - Justin Fortney CERTIFICATE APPLICATION 9-2021 101 2nd Street E Lynn Hoeschen – New sign Ca. 1928, 208 Sibley Street Historic District- Contributing Request: The applicant is proposing to install a hanging carved and painted wooden sign. Ordinance, Guidelines 1. Sign Design Guidelines (Page 39) 5: Historic Commercial Buildings: General Guidelines 8. Signs, Awnings, and Lighting • Wherever possible, signs should be placed in traditional sign locations… • Signs should be appropriately sized… traditional materials such as wood and metal. Zoning Ordinance 155.08 • 8’ clearance, 2.5’ max projection, 6 SF max, Wood and or metal only, no lighting, 1 per business max. Staff findings: The new sign is appropriately sized and would not cover up any architectural details. The sign would be hung on a steel bracket from the wood post just left of the entrance. The bottom of the sign would also be fixed to the building so it will not blow back and forth. CERTIFICATE APPLICATION 9-2021 119 8th Street East - Patti Blatz – Fence. Ca. 1858, Old Hastings Historic District – Contributing Request: The applicant wishes to install a wrought iron style fence around the backyard pool. There is currently a wood privacy fence, which will be removed. The applicant is also proposing general landscaping as shown on the plan including patio, walkways and plantings. Ordinance, Guidelines Residential Guideline 11: Fences and Walls 1. Repair and Conservation Existing historic fences of metal or wood should be repaired and conserved wherever possible. Repairs should be compatible with the original materials and design of the fence. 2. New Fences New fences should be compatible with the architectural character, materials, and scale of the principal building and surrounding streetscape. Fences enclosing the front yard should be semi- transparent. Appropriate materials include wrought iron and painted wooden pickets. In general, complete enclosure by opaque fences is not appropriate. 3. Chain Link Fences Chain link fences should not be used to enclose front yards or the front half of side yards. Fences that allow some visual penetration of front yard space are preferable to complete enclosure. Chain link fences should not be used to enclose front yards or the front half of side yards. Staff Findings The proposed fence is a wrought iron style fence made of aluminum and painted black. This style fence is appropriate to the home and era. Plantings are generally not regulated in the Design Guidelines. The proposed patio and walkways are in the rear and not visible from the streets. Alley Proposed Fence Existing Fence Proposed Fence CERTIFICATE APPLICATION REVIEW 9-2021 209 Sibley Street. Brick Maintenance/ Repair Issue Ca. 1892, East Second Street National Register Historic District Issue: Staff received a permit application for tuck pointing of the subject building by a local contractor. The subject contractor had previously made a similar application on a separate building and did not call for any of the required inspections that staff required. Due to past issues with the contractor, staff had them explicitly explain what the exact work would entail for this project. The contractor said they were going to perform tuck pointing, which they explained involved grinding out bad mortar and bagging in new mortar along with replacing some bricks as needed, repainting, and nothing more. Planning and building staff directed the contractor to follow industry standards, use type O mortar, and use as similar bricks as possible, to which the contractor agreed. Staff stopped by the property on the day the work was to begin. Staff observed the rear wall facing the ally had caulk all over it. The calk was used to patch vertical cracks, missing mortar and even to replace damaged and spalling bricks. On the east side, they were in the middle of smearing cement over the bricks with a trowel and had patched large holes in the wall were there were bricks the day before. When confronted about the work not being inline with the permit, they stated that the original plan changed due to the condition of the brick. Staff said they understand things may change, but then so must the permit. Staff also explained that the methods they are using are not industry standards for repair and do not meet the Design Guidelines. The contractor commented that the proper way to repair the wall would be to metal lath and stucco the wall, but the owner didn’t want to pay that much. Staff responded that stuccoing over a damaged brick wall would not repair any damage. A Building inspector placed a stop work order on the building. The building owner said she hired the contractor to do tuckpointing and was fine with the work and did not want to pay more for repairs. The contractor hasn’t responded with a revised permit application or work plan and the building sits as-is. This and other buildings downtown show evidence of past masonry repairs, which were also improperly made. This does not change the fact that this work was done in violation of the building requirements, HPC Design Guidelines, and industry standards. Masonry requires specific maintenance for longevity. Damaged bricks and mortar are expected maintenance items that must be completed from time to time. They are not intended to last indefinitely. Furthermore, most buildings downtown are mass masonry construction which means the exterior walls are solid masonry and are the load bearing structure of the building, rather than just a siding material. To simply cover up missing bricks and mortar with cement, stucco, or caulk, may make the building look a little neater, but does not repair the structural damage, it hides the damage, and makes future repairs difficult to impossible. This may also compromise the structural integrity of the building. If this is done to the buildings downtown, rather than the regular required maintenance, the buildings will eventually become unsound and require extensive rebuilding or demolition. Since most of the damage was concentrated to a specific area, there is likely a water intrusion issue contributing to the damage. This is often due to a leaking roof, parapet wall caps, windowsill, or gutter. Any attempted masonry repair must include identifying and resolving the cause of damage. Completion of the work as stipulated in the Design Guidelines and in line with industry standards will now be more expensive because the improperly applied products must be removed from the damaged and adjacent undamaged materials. This will likely be near impossible without replacement of additional material. The work completed must be addressed, as it was not approved and additional work is still required. Staff cannot approve the work that was done incorrectly or future work to be competed in the same manner. There are likely additional options the HPC may consider, but the following two are most apparent. 1. Require all of the unauthorized work to be reversed and completed to industry standards and Design Guidelines, along with the uncompleted work. 2. Allow the improper cement application to remain in place, but require removal of caulk from brick and mortar joints and require those areas and unrepaired areas to be repaired as required by the industry standards and Design Guidelines. There are countless companies in the metro area that specialize in this regular maintenance procedure. They vary from large companies specializing in big projects to single proprietors specializing in chimneys and small projects. Design Guidelines Historic Commercial Buildings: General Guidelines: (Page 35) 3. Masonry Deteriorated brick, stone, mortar, and other materials should be replaced with material used in the original construction or with materials that resemble the appearance of the original as closely as possible. The advice of a skilled mason should be sought for major repair projects. Repointing Original mortar joint size and profile should be retained and/or reduplicated in repointing. Mortar mixtures should duplicate the original in lime, sand, and cement proportion and should duplicate the original mortar in color and texture. Just before the repairs 8/12/2021 After stop work order was issued Some areas were pressure washed so hard that bricks were removed and replaced with troweled cement. Cement Calk Worn mortar joints filled with caulk Missing bricks filled in with calk To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Justin Fortney, City Planner Date: September 21, 2021 Item: Business and Information HPC Action Requested: A. The Preservation Awards Committee will present the nominated properties for concideration at the meeting. B. Review the attached Century Home Application for concideration – 615 3rd St W HPC Memorandum