Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19930310H~STOR~C PRESERVaTiON COMMITTEE ~nutes of ~&rah ~0~ ~993 Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Les Holst, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Karen Day, Martha Madsen and Linda Smisek present. Joe Krabacher and Donnelley Erdman were excused. PUBLIC COMMENTB Carolyn McDonald, owner of the Log Cabin: We closed the restaurant last August and took off time to see what the town needed. We found that there isn't any kids sports stores from ages 8 to 18. We went to the ski show and came back and looked at the conditional uses which were probably written in the 60's. I went to the Planning Dept. to discuss applying for a conditional use and they stated that I had to go through the entire process again from housing mitigation to parking. We do not want to give up the restaurant because in six or eight years when the kids are older we want to go back to it. The only conditional uses are arts and crafts, daycare mortuary, florist, furniture bed and breakfast, boarding, church etc. and no children's stores. We can't do retail as it is not listed. Explorer bookstore has an amendment to their conditional use to gain the restaurant so they have the bookstore and the restaurant and we were hoping that P&Z would give us either or. A restaurant is the highest usage and heavy impact where a retail might be one employee and a stream of people from 9: a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Most cities have an equal usage for retail and restaurant. The conditional use codes will be redone and I was hoping the HPC could give some input as to making it more desirable for people who have historic designated buildings could apply and get a conditional use, could have equal usage or less than without going through a new process. It could be a review process. Also what is appropriate for Main Street. I feel stopping traffic coming into town and utilizing Main Street is appropriate. Bill: What would be the process of an historic structure applying for a change in conditional use. Kim Johnson: Staff and Council are setting up implementation mechanisms to work through the community plan and identify changes that need to be made and establish a time line to get those items to council. Next week is the first meeting. We understand the inconsistencies across the board. Council will direct us as to which needs are more appropriate. We will then seek input from citizens. When the office zone was created for Main Street conditional uses were created. In the public realm we are hearing that the city is loosing office space to non-office uses and that is creating an influx in the business center and beyond. We need to be careful with particular uses in zone districts and the city- wide ramifications. We will study the current needs and what changes are appropriate. Caroline: There is not retail offered in conditional uses and if we can not buy in April for next fall because that is when you get Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of March 10, 1993 all the big discounts then we can't do it at all. HPC is in the big picture and possibly that is doing something that helps historic buildings in making then more operable to people. The Floradora bldg. has had vacant office spaces for almost three years, do you really need office space? Bill: HPC would be supportive in keeping our historic buildings alive and in use. Caroline: Possibly starting a Main Street association. Kim: What Caroline is asking for and what we just cannot do by virtue of the language is say OK you have an improved conditional use for a restaurant and if you don't do the restaurant then your conditional use will remain valid and you can move off into another direction and do another use and if that doesn't work out you can come back to the original conditional use. We have not figured out a way to have concurrent conditional uses. Caroline: Katherine has a Bookstore/restaurant and what is the difference of saying restaurant/retail with limited space. Roger: Why can't it be either or and deal with this one case. We need to encourage Caroline to form a Main Street association to get the process moving. Council is here to serve the public and people like Joe Krabacher had to jump through hoops to get his antique shop and people who don't live here with big bucks come in here and hire attorneys and things happen. It just isn't right and we the citizen group have to stop being reactive and be proactive. 210 LAKE AVENUE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT Chairman Bill Poss opened the public hearing. Les stepped down. Kim: The total variances requested is one parking space and approximately three feet into the side yard setback which is required to be 19 feet. Doug: We have tried to take into account standard #4 which is that the addition not detract from the original structure. We talked about a hyphen between the spaces, change in roof form. We have changed to a more victorian roof. There is a separation from old and new. The Board encourages people to keep things in a victorian form vs the alpine form which gets into a shallow form roof. We had one large roof on the very back of the structure looking at Hallam Lake. We have changed that to get into a victorian form. We also had a change in materials to separate the old from new. We Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of March 10, 1993 will use brick on the chimney to blend in. The wood siding on the house is very narrow and on the addition we will get into six and eight inch siding. One of the things we are fighting with this are the front yard setbacks and Hallam Lake. There is one other building in town that has the cross gable roof. There have been a few window changes and the garage doors have changed to a solid panel carriage door. Roger: On the basement level egress is their another location on the property that that would fit in? Doug: I need it at the location due to the sharing of the common room and wall and I don't have the distance due to the jog in the building. It is dictated by the rise of the stairs. There will be a rail around the stair that will match. Jake: Looking at the east side, the windows on the lower level line up with the upper windows. Doug; There is a difference in height. Jake: Also between the two story wall surfaces maybe making a material differentiation between the upper and lower floor. Karen: You have preserved the streetscape by not extending the width of the new addition. The historic integrity is preserved. I also like the roof transition. I am glad to hear this defined to me the difference between a victorian roof pitch and an alpine roof pitch. Now that I see these other buildings I see that we have been putting alpine roofs on the back of victorians structures and that has hurt them. I also like the form of the carriage doors. I have no objection to the variance for the stairs. Roger: At the last meeting the Board said no on this addition and part of that was based on two factors. The two houses to the left we had nothing to do with as they were done long before we evolved into a much better board and we suggested not to use them as examples. Our most recent mistake was a house on Francis in the west end in which we allowed to be moved, expanded and added on to. We had talked about using connectors in the future as Jake has done with the Penn remodel. The question is are we going to follow what Jake has done or allow less of a monster put into a neighborhood. If that is what the Board wants to do then the architect of this project has done a great job. He has made less of a monster in an area which already has two huge mistakes. Doug: We had looked at connectors and this is going to be a duplex and use the back as full time residence and the front will be used by the two sons when they are here on vacation. We are talking Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of March 10, 1993 about a block which has large buildings and I feel this fits in with the character. We are trying to work out an agreement to use one driveway for two houses. Linda: I still see this big mass being added onto this little victorian and it is difficult for me to be comfortable with that. Martha: I like the project but do not like the size, but they are within their legal parameters. I agree with Jake that as the project progresses we need to keep a close eye on the detailing and materials. Doug: I wanted to mention that we are also dealing with the two large trees. Bill: We need to make sure everyone on the board feels comfortable that this project meets the standards and that the parking variation/side yard setback is compatible in character with the historic landmark. Bill: Karen's comment regarding the restrictive restraints to work with on this site meaning the trees, the size of the parcel etc. and how Doug has kept this narrow does allow the historic structure to read through. Utilizing one driveway is creative. Jake: I would be in support of a porch like roof over the stairway which would increase your FAR but the HPC could make a finding that it is more compatible. Doug: For the motion I would like to make sure the reduction of one parking space is included, setback, removing existing shed. The shed was modified by Nancy and it violates numerous codes. It does not show up on historic drawings anywhere. Karen: site. I would like to see the shed saved and removed from the Doug: Tom Cardomen from ACES is very interested and we will donate the shed to him. MOTION~ Jake made the motion that the HPC grant conceptual approval to 210 Lake Avenue with the following conditions: 1) the fenestration on the east side be restudied that we mentioned. 2) The treatment of the west elevation to break down the two story massing, materials, treatments. 3) We grant approval for the one space parking variation as requested. 4) Grant approval for the variation of the porch like roof over the stair. 5) Removal of the shed. 6) The development review standards have been met and the variations are more compatible in character with the designated 4 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of March 10, 1993 landmark than would be in accord with dimensional requirements; second by Martha. Question was called by the Chairman; Carried 6- 0. In favor, Jake, Martha, Karen, Linda, Roger and Bill. MOTION: Les made the motion to adjourn; second by Martha. Ail in favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Assistant City Clerk