Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes1 of 3 CITY OF OSHKOSH LANDMARKS COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2014 PRESENT: Vicky Redlin, Dennis Arnold, Shirley Brabender Mattox, Karen Heikel, Sharon Kipetz, Steve Cummings and Angela Merrill EXCUSED: None 1. CALL TO ORDER Ms. Redlin called the meeting to order at 3:05 pm and a quorum was declared present. 2. BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW Mr. Buck announced that there were no building permits issued on historically flagged properties except electrical and plumbing work. 3. COFFEE ROASTER VENTING – 401 NORTH MAIN STREET (NEW MOON CAFE) Mr. Buck described the roaster venting project being proposed for the Main Street façade of the New Moon Café at 401 North Main Street, which is known historically as the Beckwith House Hotel and is part of the Main Street Historic District. He went over the historic characteristics of the structure and read the property features and notes from the Wisconsin Historical Society Architecture and History Inventory. Discussion took place regarding the desire for the café to place a roaster within the structure and the limitations on locating it. Jason Baer, the petitioner, stated that the venting is being proposed out a transom type window on the northern portion of the Main Street side of the building. The alternatives of going up through the roof is unfeasible due to the upper floor uses and the potential to vent through the Algoma Boulevard side façade is not ideal as it would require internal modifications to the café operation and would also require penetrating the brick façade. The petitioner also described that there would be no permanent alteration to the building by going through the window so that the window could be replaced and building brought back to its present state if the vent were removed in the future. The Commission looked at an example of a similar venting situation from College Avenue in Appleton to get an idea of the aesthetic impact it would have and made the determination that the impact is not significant and that the reversible nature of the project made the proposed Main Street vent location the best option. A motion was made by Ms. Heikel to recommend approving the venting location through the Main Street window as proposed. Ms. Kipetz seconded the motion. Ms. Brabender Mattox inquired as to the color choice for the vent and Mr. Baer stated that the vent pipe is very modest in size and that there are many decorative options with colors that will match and blend with the building. Mr. Arnold expressed his appreciation that Mr. Baer was being sensitive to the buildings architecture and felt that the proposal was a graceful solution for alteration that is reversible. Motion carried unanimously. 4. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SINGLE AND TWO-FAMILY STRUCTURES OR HOMES AND ESTABLISHING A TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT Mr. Buck presented the history of the Design Standard Project for single and two-family structures city- wide as well as the traditional neighborhood design overlay district. He then gave a summary of the standards for both proposals and stated that the Council received a positive recommendation on the proposals from the Plan Commission and that the Landmarks Commission recommendation would be forwarded to the Council as a separate recommendation. Ms. Kipetz asked if the standards would apply to institutional, commercial or multiple family structures as the small business uses should also be accountable to rehabilitate their building appropriately as well as the single and two-family homes. Mr. Buck explained that the design standards did not address non residential uses and that they were outside the scope of the projects parameters but that the entire zoning code is being reviewed concurrently so 2 of 3 these types of buildings may have performance standards and/or design regulations within it. Ms. Kipetz recommended that the exception and appeals section be moved to the end of the ordinances as to make them less prominent and that the exceptions and appeals need to be reviewed by a separate body to determine if the codes are being enforced uniformly or if certain exceptions/appeals are given to specific projects regularly. Mr. Buck stated that all code revisions are revisited within 6-12 months of adoption to determine if there are issues or amendments that need to be made, often based on exceptions and appeals that are reoccurring. Ms. Redlin stated that she feels that the proposals are a good start to direct the changes to the older traditional homes and that the codes can be amended over time. Mr. Arnold stated that they are not as strong as he would like but less than what would be considered oppressive and motioned to recommend approval of the two design standards projects as recommended by the Plan Commission, with consideration given to relocating the exception/appeals section to the back of the codes as well as to make a statement that institutional, commercial and multiple family structures rehabilitation or in-fill projects are considered in future code revisions. Motion was seconded by Ms. Redlin. Motion carried unanimously. 5. GOALS FOR 2014 Mr. Buck went over several topics that were supplied by individual Commissioners as well as discussed what type of items the Commission may want to focus on in 2014. There was considerable discussion on multiple projects of interest and it was determined that the Commission will focus on the goals as listed below: • Website update/reconstruction • Brochure creation on historic tours of the city • Preservation Code update workshop with Common Council • Historic district designation for West Washington Avenue • Education on appropriate rehabilitation methods, tax credits, community access show/workshops, event booth/flyer/handouts/etc. It was determined that ongoing items must also be incorporated into their work plans including the annual report, Acanthus Awards, plaque/marker programs, and budget/grant pursuit. 6. PLANNING CALENDAR Mr. Buck recommended that the Commission slightly change the way their meetings take place in 2014. He recommended that rather than going over every working group, that they focus an entire meeting on one or two topics and use the entire meeting to discuss those items. He said that minutes, permit review and items that come up sporadically like specific project reviews would also continue. The Commission went over their goals, as determined and placed discussion dates on the planning calendar as follows: March State of the city display Acanthus awards Information packet/flyers April Education (rehab “how to”, tax credits, TV show, and printed materials) Event identification (farmers market, gallery walk, etc.) May Election of officers Acanthus awards Website June Annual report Preservation code revision discussion July Finalize annual report Tourism/tours Grants August Preservation code revision status September Preservation code revision workshop October West Washington Street Historic District November Open December Goals and calendar for 2015 3 of 3 7. AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING/COMMISSIONER STATEMENTS Mr. Buck mentioned that the Acanthus Awards, State of the City and discussion on informational packets for education will be the topics for the March meeting, based on the planning calendar. 8. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Heikel motioned to adjourn. Motion was seconded by Mr. Arnold. Motion approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 5:12 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, David Buck, Principal Planner