HPC Meeting Date: February 7, 2024
To: Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission
From: Mikayla Schmidt, City Planner
Title
Certificate of Appropriateness for an Awning at 410 Division St. S - Rebstock Bakery.
Body
Action Requested:
The Heritage Preservation Commission is asked to review and approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new awning at 410 Division St. S - Rebstock Bakery.
Summary Report:
The Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) applicant, Erin O’Donnell, operates The Robins Egg out of 410 Division St. S - Rebstock Bakery, and replaced the existing green awning with a new blue awning of the same size with the same brackets. The signage on the awning is a separate sign permit application and review, and will come forward at a future date. It is not part of this COA review, which is for the awning only.
The Northfield city ordinances outline, in Chapter 34 - Land Development Code (LDC), Section 8.5.8, the Heritage Preservation Commission's Certificate of Appropriateness process and approval criteria. The HPC shall consider the following in evaluating an application for a certificate of appropriateness for a zoning certificate and/or building permit. Criterion (A) below must be met and criteria (B) through (G) shall be considered:
Criteria A, For all applications, the proposed action fully complies with all applicable requirements of this LDC;
Findings: The awning is compliant with the LDC. Further details on the applicable sections of the Northfield LDC is included below.
Criteria B, That the proposed action is in harmony with the purpose of the H-O district for sites located in the H-O district;
Findings: The proposed action is in harmony with the intent of the H-O district. Within the LDC Section 2.5.3, Historic Overlay District (H-O) purpose is defined “(a) Safeguard the heritage of the city by preserving sites and structures which reflect elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political, visual or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the city's appeal to residents, visitors and tourists and serve as a support and stimulus to business and industry; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable accomplishments of the past; and, (d) Promote the preservation and continued use of historic sites and structures for the education and general welfare of the people of the city.”
a) The applicant is proposing maintenance and investment to preserve the building.
b) The proposed changes enhance the building’s appeal to residents and visitors.
c) The proposed change promotes the continued use of the historic building.
Criteria C, That the proposed action would complement other structures within the H-O district for sites located in the H-O district
Findings: The changes will complement other structures within the H-O district. The previous green awning was in need of repair and worn. The new awning canvas will last many years to come and will enhance the visual appeal of the building and subsequently, the neighboring structures.
Criteria D, That the proposed action is consistent with the Downtown Preservation Design Guidelines for sites located in the H-O district, and consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties for sites located within or outside the H-O district;
Findings: The replacement of the existing awning is consistent with the Downtown Preservation Design Guidelines. The applicant replaced an existing awning with one that is the same size and shape. The awning is a “fixed” design which is appropriate per the Design Guidelines. The awning does extend across the length of the storefront, but not continuously across several storefronts, which would be inappropriate. The awning is made of water-repellant canvas and of a blue color (T22 Shoreline) with white trim accents and white lettering. The blue color is appropriate as it draws from the white painted brick beneath the awning and the large storefront windows with white trim. The use of the bakery also draws a need for an awning as it helps regulate the temperature within the building.
Criteria E, Consideration should be given to the amount and quality of original material and design remaining in the building or structure when applying criteria, guidelines and standards;
Findings: Not applicable.
Criteria F, For new construction, the building or addition should be compatible with: (i) scale, texture, materials, and other visual qualities of the surrounding buildings and neighborhoods; (ii) the height, width, depth, massing and setback of the surrounding buildings; and (iii) the amount of solid wall to window and door openings, and the replacement of window and door openings, should be proportional to that of the surrounding buildings and neighborhood;
Findings: Not applicable.
Criteria G, Consideration shall be given to clear cases of economic hardship or to deprivation of reasonable use of the owner's property.
Findings: Not applicable.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the awning per the attached documentation.
Attached is a resolution draft for the HPC to review. If there are any proposed changes, HPC members can contact staff in advance to make edits.
Alternative Options:
The HPC can offer edits to the COA resolution or deny the COA resolution, both of which require findings.
Financial Impacts:
N/A
Tentative Timelines:
N/A