Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 10f - 223 N Main PLAN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JULY 3,2018 ITEM III: CENTRAL MIXED-USE DESIGN ALTERATION REVIEW AND DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE FOR PROPOSED FACADE WORK AT 223 N. MAIN STREET GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Kris Wilz Owner: Kris Wilz and Jason VanMatre Action(s) Requested: The applicant is proposing faqade work on a Downtown Central Mixed-Use (CMU)building which requires a Central Mixed-Use Design Alteration Review and Design Standards Variance. Applicable Ordinance Provision the Variance is being requested: Code Reference RegLilatio Section 30-245(A)(3)(h) Design Alteration Review (change only in the exterior appearance of a nonresidential or multi-family property such as painting, roofing, siding, architectural component substitution, fencing, paving, or signage) Section 30-245(A)(6)(b) In General. Buildings shall be restored relying on physical evidence (such as photographs, original drawings, and existing architectural details) as much as possible, in keeping with the design theme described in Subsection (4) above, as determined by Plan Commission. Section 30-245(A)(6)(c) Materials and features identical to the original exterior materials and surface features shall be used. If replacement with identical materials and features is not possible, other features and materials may be used, provided they are compatible with the design and style of the building, as determined by Plan Commission. Section 30-245(A)(6)(c)(ii) Significant architectural features,including cornices,moldings and coursings shall be preserved or replaced with identical features and materials wherever possible. Section 30-245(A)(6)(d)(i) Original window and door openings shall not be blocked. Where now blocked,blocked window and door openings shall be restored where possible. Section 30-245(A)(6)(e)(i) Display windows shall be restored to their original appearance. ITEM 111-223 N Main Street-Design Standards Variance Property Location and Background: The subject property isumixed-use building located at223N. Main Street and the lot iy approximately 3,I34square feet inarea. The property contains commercial uses mothe ground floor and multi-family residential onthe upper floor. The surrounding area consists nfa commercial bank on the west, Opera House Square to the north and commercial uses to the east and south. The building at 223N. Main Street abuts the neighboring building Loits imu-nediate south. ��nnz�berofcoroz�ecciuloaeaure�ocatedonthe d8 f8�eboddbo Ih ground floor �� e building is divided into two halves. The applicant's proposed work addresses the west half of the faqade facing Opera House Square and a portion of the faqade facing Commerce Street. The applicant would like toconduct fuqadealteration work mnthe building. She explored a number of alternatives during the process and conferred with city staff on multiple occasions. Staff briefly visited the site and also asked the applicant if she would consider attending a Landmarks Commission meeting to discuss her proposed work with the Commission. The applicant attended the June 13,2018 Landmarks meeting and shared her ideas with the Commission. Sheaskedtbe(�ouzcuiosioobnr � ntanduftectbeCoonnisoiomengagedbz uz� dialogue with her, they recommended that the building owners and mason maintain the ceramic tile located onthe base of the[aqade, the trsu000z glass between the ground and second floor and install period replica glazing. Landmarks asked the applicant towork with her designer to create some renderings of the facades incorporating Landmarks recommendations. Itisimportant tonotctbatthouppDconteappeuruoceattbeTone13[.andozarkaznoetbzgvvasa courtesy. Sxction30-245/A\(3)(d) of the Central Mixed-Use Design Standards prescribes when unappearance before the City's Landmarks Commission iarequired. The section requires consultation and urecommendation from Landmarks for projects prnposedonpropezdea designated as historic, contributing to an historic district or considered by a study or survey to beeligible for listing onalocal, state ocnational register. The building at223N. Main was listed in the l98OIntensive Historic Resource Survey asineligible for listing on the State and National Registers by IINTB. The building is not a contributing structure or local Landmark, so the CMU Design Standards do not afford the Landmarks Commission any formal jurisdiction over the review and approval process for work proposed tothe property. Staff would like to note however, that in staff's opinion, the Landmarks recommendations concur with the CMU Design Standards. The Plan Coouo-tiosbooianot under any obligation prescribed byordinance to incorporate Landmarks input,but staff thought itwould behelpful Lomention the Landmarks recommendation aot ft�ebackground. �ar o Any work conducted on a CMU structure is subject to the restrictions explained in the CMU Design Standards. These standards are among the most prescriptive deeigostaodurdaiotbe zoning ordinance, with far more restrictions than base residential or commercial design standards. Many of the buildings in the CMU district are located Downtown in highly visible locations and are part ntu uniquefubricofvaryi yet complementary older d[not formally historic buildings. The CMU Design Standards seek to preserve the architectural and historical character ofthe CMU district. The standards regulate the type ofwork permitted for CMU ITEM/o-2z3mMain Street Design Standards Variance 2 structures, the manner in which proposed work may receive approval, and the methods for carrying out such work. The CMU Design Standards require proposed work to remain consistent with the CMU Design Theme for the district(see below). Section 30-245(A)(4): Design Theme: The design theme for the Central Mixed Use District is based on its historical,pedestrian-oriented development pattern that incorporates retail, residential, and institutional uses. Building orientation and character includes minimum setbacks at the edge of the sidewalk, multi-story structures, use of alleys for access, and on-street or other off-site parking. The design theme is characterized by a variety of architectural styles popular at the time, including Italianate, Romanesque, and Neoclassical, in a 2- or 3-story format with office, storage, or residential located over commercial. The facades of these buildings have a traditional main street storefront appearance, are relatively small in scale, have street yard and side yard setbacks of zero feet, have prominent horizontal and vertical patterns formed by regularly spaced window and door openings, detailed cornice designs, rich detailing in masonry coursing, window detailing and ornamentation, and are predominantly brick, stone, or wood. Exterior building materials are of high quality. Exterior appurtenances are minimal. Exterior colors harmonious, simple, and muted. Exterior signage blends, rather than contrasts, with buildings in terms of coloring(complementary to building), location (on- building), size (small), and number (few). The applicant's fagade work involves changes in the exterior appearance of two building facades. The ceramic tile at the base would be covered or removed, the leaded glass transom window covered or removed and new brick veneer installed over the regions currently sheathed by dark plastic panels. This work would maintain all window and door openings at their current locations,but would eliminate some arguably significant architectural features of the building and not restore it back to a period appearance. Work involving new siding or fagade alterations such as this is classified as a Design Alteration by the CMU Design Standards and requires a Design Alteration Review. Staff has the discretion to refer such work to the Plan Commission for review and consideration. The CMU Design standards in general require restoration and maintenance of period features and original window and door openings. The standards do however, afford the Plan Commission the discretion to determine whether: • Work proposed for a CMU structure is in accordance with Subsection(4) listed above • Proposed materials and features are compatible with the design and style of the building • Preservation of any and all elements is or is not possible Staff is of the opinion that the proposed work explained above requires Plan Commission review since it would involve modifications inconsistent with several of the CMU Design Standards. Subject Site Existing Land Use Zoning Mixed Use(Commercial and Multi-family Residential) CMU ITEM III-223 N Main Street-Design Standards Variance 3 Adjacent Land Use and Zoning Existing Uses Zonin North Opera House Square Institutional South Mixed-Use CMU East Mixed Use CMU West Commercial CMU Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use 10 Year Land Use Recommendation Commercial 20 Year Land Use Recommendation Commercial VARIANCE CRITERIA The City's Zoning Ordinance establishes design standards for the CMU district with the overall purpose/intent to: "Implement the urban design recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan, by preserving and enhancing the historical quality of the downtown, and by attaining a consistent visually pleasing image for the downtown area, as defined by the mapped boundaries of the Central Mixed Use District". The standards apply to all "new development and changes to the exterior of any building within the mapped boundaries of the Central Mixed Use District." The Plan Commission is authorized to grant variances from the strict application of the standards when it is determined that one or more of the following apply: 1. The intent of the standards have been incorrectly interpreted; 2. Standards do not apply to the particular project;and/or 3. Enforcement of the standards causes unnecessary hardship. When taking action,the Plan Commission shall make findings per the following,as described in Section 30-411(F)(1): 1. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest. 2. Substantial justice will be done by granting the variance. 3. The variance is needed so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed. 4. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship. 5. The variance will not allow an alteration of a historic structure, including its use,which would preclude its continued designation as a historic structure. ANALYSIS The applicant would like to perform work on the Waugoo Avenue and Commerce Street facades of the building. She would like to concentrate her facade work on the western half of the building and focus on the ground floor. The applicant would remove or cover the green ceramic tile currently located at the base of the facade and the leaded glass transoms located ITEM III-223 N Main Street-Design Standards Variance 4 between the ground and second floors. She would remove or cover the dark grey thin plastic paneling that is currently between the window openings on the ground floor. New brick veneer would be located in place of the grey paneling. Additionally, the applicant would install red arches above each of the window openings. Staff evaluated the completed work previously described and the impact on the architectural integrity of the building in regard to the CMU Design Standards. The standards relate to preserving the CMU district's architectural integrity and the potential impact on adjacent properties, the neighborhood character and "curb appeal" of the district. In working with the applicant, staff considered: ® Potential impact of not restoring the facade of the building back to a period or original appearance ® Potential impact of removing or covering significant architectural features,namely the green ceramic tile and leaded glass transom ® Potential impact of introducing new architectural elements not historically present on the half of the face to be rehabbed (red arches over the windows) ® Potential impact of conducting the proposed fagade work as opposed to leaving the fagade in its current state ® Architectural character of neighboring properties ® Impact of requiring the owner to restore the building to its historical appearance. The ground floor facade section appears to have greatly changed from its original appearance. Early images and photographs from the 1920s and before display extensive use of storefront glass on the west half of the building. None of the storefront glass remains on the building. Instead, the windows consist largely of punched openings. The fagade of the building appears recessed in the historic photographs. Over time, the fagade was modified and much of the ground floor wall of the western half of the fagade was pulled forward toward the sidewalk. It is difficult to discern from the historic photographs what period the ceramic tile was installed. It is also difficult to discern in the historic images whether the transom glass was present on the building when the images were taken. The leaded transom glass appears largely intact and the ceramic tile is a unique feature on this building,with the added benefit of maintaining remarkable resilience against salt and moisture when compared with porous brick/masonry. The applicant states that her proposed work will restore this western half of the building and allow it to better match the eastern half of the building facade. The eastern half of the building contains four large arched recesses with window openings. The applicant's proposed arches for all of the punched openings seek to tie into the existing openings on the eastern half of the north fagade. The applicant wants to treat the north fagade as a cohesive single unit rather than the two distinct halves it is currently. The applicant is proposing brick veneer so that the cladding material can work with the thickness of the existing materials on the fagade and appear similar to the existing brick on other portions of the north facade. The applicant feels that the proposed work will vastly improve on the existing western half of the north fagade with its plastic grey ITEM III-223 N Main Street-Design Standards Variance 5 panels. The applicant believes that the proposed work will simplify the current facade and beautify this fagade. The applicant has stated that she and her designer created multiple schemes for this facade and that the previously-described scheme is her favorite. However, she stated that she is open to discussing other possibilities and changing direction if required. As mentioned earlier, the applicant came into a Landmarks meeting and engaged in dialogue with the Commission. Staff appreciates the applicant's willingness to meet on site and explain the current cladding materials along with her proposed modifications. Staff also appreciates the applicant's willingness to appear at a Landmarks meeting despite no formal ordinance requirement that the owners do so. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed work will in a number of ways improve upon the current conditions of the west half of the north fagade. Staff does however believe that the work would require variances for several ordinance sections. The drawback of the proposed fagade work is that currently, there is little articulation (banding or corbeling, etc.) to add dimensionality or depth to the ground floor fagade. Instead, the proposed brick veneer is shown as a flat surface. Staff would like the applicant to explore options to add some articulation to the currently unadorned surface and bring it more in line visually with the articulation on the better preserved second floor fagade. Staff reviewed the CMU Design Standards described previously with the understanding that the ground floor fagade in question has greatly changed, the occupants and use of the building have changed and materials on the ground floor fagade have changed. Staff realizes that restoration of the ground floor facades back to their original conditions will require modifications to the building's interior spaces and changes in how the interior spaces are used. RECOMMENDATION Staff currently recommends the Plan Commission approves the variance request with the following conditions and finding: Conditions: 1. The variance shall apply only for work discussed as part of this variance request(area of focus being the ground floor of the western half of the north facade and the ground floor of the east fagade) 2. All existing window and door openings shall remain at their current sizes and locations. 3. Brick veneer proposed shall be consistent in appearance with existing brick on the second floor of the north fagade. 4. All materials chosen including brick veneer, etc. shall be reviewed for approval by the Department of Community Development 5. Any future facade work to be undertaken shall be filed as a separate request(s) and be reviewed by staff and the Plan Commission. ITEM111-223N Main Street-Design Standards Variance (� 6. Applicant shall add more articulation such as banding, corbeling, etc.particularly at the base of the faqade and the location of the current transom to ensure a higher degree of visual consistency with the articulation on the second floor. The Department of Community Development shall review the modifications before work is undertaken. Finding: 1. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship. ITEM 111-223 N Main Street-Design Standards Variance 7