OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting - June 24, 2026

Boards and Commissions — Wednesday, June 24, 2026
BodyRochester, Minnesota
SessionBoards and Commissions
DateWednesday, June 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 3:27:22

Transcript — Verbatim
0:12

They are recording.

0:27

Yes.

1:04

Oh, hopefully we are recording and the all is picking us up.

1:09

So the light on.

1:13

The latest line is it's just the like giving me an indication of the captain lines.

1:31

Does anybody else want design guidelines?

1:38

Okay.

1:38

Okay.

1:39

I think I have an extent with me.

1:55

We have any person.

2:03

I think something just for clearly.

2:06

Yeah, I think we should have transcript.

2:10

Can you do the transcript on just to make sure it was exactly try?

2:19

Let me try here.

2:36

So maybe we can remove them.

2:54

So we're still like that piece.

2:58

Oh, you think that's so cool.

3:03

I think it's test.

3:21

I guess it's coming.

3:22

Well everybody, we're waiting on a technical issue just for a second here, but um, if we can please have it quiet in the room.

3:33

Okay.

3:34

Welcome everybody to the June 23rd Heritage Preservation Commission meeting.

3:38

Before we call to order, we start each meeting with a 15-minute public open comment period.

3:43

This is an opportunity for the public to comment to the commission regarding items that do not have a public hearing on today's agenda.

3:49

Each speaker has up to four minutes.

3:51

The commission will not discuss or respond to any comments made during this time.

3:56

Please be concise and mindful of your time during your remarks so that everybody wishing to speak has the opportunity to do so.

4:03

Will the first speaker please step forward to the front of the room and clearly state your name?

4:08

Uh yes, Vice Chair Poyer.

4:10

Thank you, Chair Saster.

4:11

I'd like to make a motion to extend the 15-minute comment period to cover all seven people that are signed up on our list so that we don't run out of difficult time before they all speak.

4:32

And we have a second from Commissioner Kessler.

4:34

Any further thoughts?

4:36

Okay.

4:37

Commissioners, all in favor say aye.

4:39

Any opposed, say nay.

4:41

Any abstentions?

4:42

Okay, passes unanimously.

4:44

All speakers will be accommodated for the open comment period.

4:47

With that, we'll our first speaker please state your name and go ahead.

4:50

Hi, my name is Barry Crowney, as most of you know.

5:00

Um, I carefully read how Henderson's proposed a item 5A, which would change the nature of probably the most important part of the downtown historic district by surrounding the original buildings for larger and much more modern buildings and changing the visual effect and being in an old wonderful architectural area, replacing it with a much more modern street with just some buildings from the past.

5:20

I do not support this change to the viewing experience, which also includes the ability to look at the uh May Oclumba building from Broadway.

5:30

Um the current proposal clearly violates standard number nine of the standards for rehabilitation regarding the spatial relationships that characterize the property.

5:42

Um as to the size, scale, proportion.

5:46

Um, and the uh massing of the property in the and its environment.

5:52

It's very important because the massing is definitely violated.

5:56

Um standard two is also violated in the spatial relationships that characterize property.

6:03

The HPHD can and should reject the proposal with the Olmsted Bank proposed.

6:09

We also looked at um how far away it was in the end.

6:13

Molly's point has always been if from a distance and and if you're close by, if the viewing experience substantially changed to the building, it shouldn't you reject it.

6:24

She said that over and over and over again when you're with the Olmstead bank.

6:28

And uh bank again uses a slightly better material, it's a little more compatible than what we're doing now, is putting a mud ultra modern building, which is actually modeled after a non-contributing building uh from the uh you know uh in the district.

6:46

And so they're using a non-contributing building to sort of modify that rather than having something that's a little more compatible with the the nature of of the landmarking.

6:57

So I'm just hoping that uh I mean that that you vote against it.

7:02

Molly and the staff can have their own opinions, but as commissioners you can and should you your own judgments as to the merit and nature of their recommendations, but please reject these additions as a lessening of the historical viewing of landmarks in this area should not be included.

7:20

Thank you very much.

7:22

Thank you, Mr.

7:22

Skolnik.

7:23

Will the next speaker please step forward and state your name?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████73%
Procedural█████████14%
Public Engagement███████11%
Pending Litigation█2%
Summary of Proceedings

Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting - June 24, 2026

The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) met on June 24, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Conference Room 104. The meeting included a public comment period, decisions on two Certificates of Appropriateness, and informational discussions on the Certified Local Government program and project updates. The most significant action was the denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed 7-story addition to 309-317 South Broadway.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved the minutes of the May 19, 2026, meeting by unanimous consent.
  • Item 7B (a letter addressed to the HPC) was struck from the agenda by a vote of 5-2-1 (5 ayes, 2 nays, 1 abstention).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Seven speakers addressed the commission during the open comment period, all opposing the proposed addition at 311 Broadway. Speakers included Barry Skolnick, Kevin Reynolds, Chris Allen, John Kruesel, Lucy Kruesel, Barb Hudson, and an email from Maggie Panetta read by Chair Zastrow. They argued that the project would harm the historic district, violate Secretary of Interior Standards (especially Standard 9 regarding spatial relationships), and set a dangerous precedent. Lucy Kruesel, a small business owner in the district, expressed concerns about displacement and loss of the district's character. Barb Hudson criticized the inclusion of a personal opinion letter in the agenda packet and urged the commission to uphold its mission.

Discussion Items

  • 5.A. Certificate of Appropriateness – 311 Broadway Addition/Renovation

    • Staff presented the proposal for a 7-story addition to the rear of 309-317 South Broadway, including storefront rehabilitation of 309 Broadway. The project would add 35 new residential units (total 43 units) and preserve the Broadway facades. Staff recommended approval, citing compliance with the Secretary of Interior Standards, noting the addition’s setback and its relationship to the non-contributing building at 318 Broadway.
    • Commissioners questioned staff and applicant Hal Henderson about design, massing, and impact on the district. The applicant stated the alleyway courtyard would be open to the public and that the project aims to activate the space.
    • A motion to approve failed 3-5-1 (Commissioners Poirier, Tator, Mutchler in favor; Commissioners Shabel, Zastrow, Gandhi, Boeddeker, Koestler opposed; Connell absent).
    • A subsequent motion to deny, citing non-compliance with Standards 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10, passed 6-2-1 (Commissioners Boeddeker, Gandhi, Koestler, Mutchler, Shabel, Zastrow in favor; Commissioners Poirier, Tator opposed; Connell absent).

  • 5.B. Certificate of Appropriateness – Alteration of Signs at 501 N Broadway (formerly Struve Paints)

    • Staff explained that the property was placed on the historic inventory in May 2026, and the proposed removal of the clock and rebranding of the paint can sign required HPC approval. The new owner, Nicole Pierson, stated she would give the clock to the Struve family and rewrap the paint can with her business name.
    • The commission approved the Certificate of Appropriateness unanimously, allowing the removal of the clock and rebranding of the paint can sign.

  • 7.A. Requested Information – Certified Local Government (CLG) Program

    • Staff presented the benefits and requirements of the CLG program, noting that the city’s current practice of placing properties on the inventory without full evaluation and public hearing is inconsistent with Secretary of Interior Standards. The commission discussed the trade-off between gaining access to CLG grants and losing the protective regulations on the 70+ inventory properties. No action was taken.

  • 7.C. Updates

    • Grainger Building Site: A presentation to the City Council is scheduled for July 6, 2026. The HPC’s request for a list of artifacts from Mayo has not yet been fulfilled.
    • Indian Heights: The grant application for a cultural eligibility study was denied. Staff will explore other options, including a future grant cycle or proceeding with local designation.
    • Awards Program: A draft statement of purpose was circulated for review; final approval is expected at the July meeting.

Key Outcomes

  • Denied (6-2-1) the Certificate of Appropriateness for the 7-story addition at 309-317 South Broadway, based on non-compliance with Secretary of Interior Standards 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10.
  • Approved (unanimous) the Certificate of Appropriateness for removal of the clock and rebranding of the paint can sign at 501 N Broadway.
  • No action on the CLG program discussion; staff will continue to evaluate.
  • Next meeting scheduled for July 28, 2026, in City Council Chambers.

Meeting Transcript

They are recording. Yes. Oh, hopefully we are recording and the all is picking us up. So the light on. The latest line is it's just the like giving me an indication of the captain lines. Does anybody else want design guidelines? Okay. Okay. I think I have an extent with me. We have any person. I think something just for clearly. Yeah, I think we should have transcript. Can you do the transcript on just to make sure it was exactly try? Let me try here. So maybe we can remove them. So we're still like that piece. Oh, you think that's so cool. I think it's test. I guess it's coming. Well everybody, we're waiting on a technical issue just for a second here, but um, if we can please have it quiet in the room. Okay. Welcome everybody to the June 23rd Heritage Preservation Commission meeting. Before we call to order, we start each meeting with a 15-minute public open comment period. This is an opportunity for the public to comment to the commission regarding items that do not have a public hearing on today's agenda. Each speaker has up to four minutes. The commission will not discuss or respond to any comments made during this time. Please be concise and mindful of your time during your remarks so that everybody wishing to speak has the opportunity to do so. Will the first speaker please step forward to the front of the room and clearly state your name? Uh yes, Vice Chair Poyer. Thank you, Chair Saster. I'd like to make a motion to extend the 15-minute comment period to cover all seven people that are signed up on our list so that we don't run out of difficult time before they all speak. And we have a second from Commissioner Kessler. Any further thoughts? Okay. Commissioners, all in favor say aye. Any opposed, say nay. Any abstentions? Okay, passes unanimously. All speakers will be accommodated for the open comment period. With that, we'll our first speaker please state your name and go ahead. Hi, my name is Barry Crowney, as most of you know. Um, I carefully read how Henderson's proposed a item 5A, which would change the nature of probably the most important part of the downtown historic district by surrounding the original buildings for larger and much more modern buildings and changing the visual effect and being in an old wonderful architectural area, replacing it with a much more modern street with just some buildings from the past. I do not support this change to the viewing experience, which also includes the ability to look at the uh May Oclumba building from Broadway. Um the current proposal clearly violates standard number nine of the standards for rehabilitation regarding the spatial relationships that characterize the property. Um as to the size, scale, proportion. Um, and the uh massing of the property in the and its environment. It's very important because the massing is definitely violated. Um standard two is also violated in the spatial relationships that characterize property. The HPHD can and should reject the proposal with the Olmsted Bank proposed. We also looked at um how far away it was in the end.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com