The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-09-09 HPC Packeti 1 lwat!I: THE B I R T H P L A C E O 6 MINNESOIA Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Wednesday, September 9, 2009 The meeting will begin at 7 p.m., Wednesday, September 9, 2009, in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF August 3, 2009 MINUTES 3. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Heritage Preservation Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Heritage Preservation Commission may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.01 Case No. DEM/09-30. A demolition request for a residence located at 223 Pine Street W in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Richard Van Horne, applicant. Continued from August 3, 2009 Meeting. 4.02 Case No. DR/09-38. Infill design review of a residence located at 706 Holcombe Street South in the NCD, Neighborhood Conservation District and the RB, Two Family Residential District. Richard Beberg, applicant. 5. DESIGN REVIEWS 5.01 Case No. DR/09-35. Design review of an awning, Compass Center for Healing, located at 116 Chestnut St East in the CBD, Central Business District. Althea Ennen, applicant. 5.02 Case No. DR/09-36. Design review of a projecting sign, This Love of Mine, located at 412 Main St So in the CBD, Central Business District, Signcrafters, Mike Lawrance, applicant. 5.03 Case No. DR/09-37. Design review for an accessory dwelling unit located at 315 Olive St W in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mark Balay Architects, representing Jeff Anderson and Greg Stokes, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.01 Stillwater South Main Street Archaeological District letter dated August 18, 2009 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURN City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 3, 2009 Present: Howard Lieberman, Chairperson, Micky Cook, Gayle Hudak, Jeff Johnson and Jerry Krakowski Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge Absent: Phil Eastwood, Roger Tomten and Scott Zahren Mr. Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Ms. Hudak moved to approve the minutes of July 6, 2009, as presented. Mr. Lieberman seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mark Hanson, Cottonwood Court, Stillwater, stated he had revised plans for the patio at Marx Wine Bar and Grill. Mr. Lieberman moved to place this as the last agenda item. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. DEM/09-30 A demolition request for a portion of a primary dwelling unit and garage at 223 Pine St. W. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Richard Van Horne, applicant. The applicant was present. He reviewed plans to demolish the existing wood -framed rear addition to the home and replace it with a new 500 square -foot master bedroom with a walkway to the back to the house. He said they would like to demolish the garage and replace that structure at some point. Mr. Van Horne briefly addressed other plans for renovation of the primary structure, including removal of several wood gables and restoration of the original verandas along the west and north sides of the house, and restoration of window openings. Mr. Lieberman noted there are nine steps required for approval of a demolition permit, and one of the things the Heritage Preservation Commission looks at is the completeness of an application. Mr. Johnson stated the applicant had done a good job with plans for the new addition and said he thought plans were appropriate to the historical character of the original structure. In discussion, it also was noted that the addition to be demolished was not a part of the original structure and not representative of the original architecture. Mr. Johnson stated he was a bit concerned that one of the nine required steps, advertising a structure for sale or give- away, had not been completed; he noted that could be excused for the addition as that could not reasonably be sold, but he questioned that omission for the garage. Mr. Van Horne suggested that given the structural integrity of the garage, it is unlikely anyone will be interested in purchasing or taking that structure. Mr. Lieberman suggested approving the request, subject to the applicant advertising the garage for sale. Mr. Lieberman opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Lieberman moved approval of the application with the condition that the applicant advertise the garage for sale as soon as possible. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion, clarifying that approval is given for the demolition of the wood frame portion of the main structure, with the request for the garage demolition continued to the next meeting, with the applicant to report back to staff if there is any interest expressed after the garage is advertised for sale or give- away. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Cook pointed out the address listed for the residence is incorrect, should be 429 Pine St. W. 1 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 3, 2009 CASE NO. DEM/09-34 A demolition request for a garage at 214 N. Owens St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Amy Best, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Johnson noted that an e-mail had been received from the applicant regarding the estimated cost of rehabbing the structure. Mr. Lieberman opened the public hearing. No comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Johnson noted that the only item not completed in the application was the cost, and that has now been received by e-mail. Mr. Johnson pointed out the applicant has no plans to replace the garage at this time. Mr. Pogge stated this property is in the process of being sold as part of an estate sale, and a pending purchase is contingent on the garage being removed. Mr. Pogge stated a new owner likely will want a new garage and will have to obtain abuilding permit and meet all codes. Mr. Johnson moved approval as submitted, with the supplemental information dated July 31, 2009. Ms. Hudak seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. DESIGN REVIEWS Case No. DR/09-32 Design review for proposed signage for Scentchips at 204 Main St. S. in the CBD, Central Business District. Dan and Deb Florh, applicants. Dan Florh represented the applicants at the table. Mr. Johnson said he thought the colors were good, but suggested that the signage be set in the sign band space rather than higher up on the building as submitted. Mr. Florh agreed that would be possible, but noted the signage might have to be longer due to the width of the sign band space. Mr. Johnson verified the sign would not be lighted. Mr. Florh stated they have changed plans for colors of the building — they would like to paint the door maroon, Rookwood Red in the provided color palette, rather than beige as originally submitted. It was verified the sign will be mounted into the masonry, not the brick. Mr. Johnson moved approval of the Case No. DR/09-32 as conditioned, with the additional condition that the sign, not to exceed 13 square feet, be placed in the sign band and below the masonry parapet and approving the colors as submitted, green as the body of the building with red door and red and beige trim. Mr. Krakowski seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/09-33 Design review for proposed signage for The Kitchen at 324 Main St. S. in the CBD, Central Business District. Corey Welke, Mathey Signs, applicant. The applicant was present. Mr. Lieberman reviewed the requested signage. Mr. Johnson asked about previous signage on a canopy on the south elevation; the applicant stated the canopy is being removed by the building owner. Mr. Johnson suggested the white space in the proposed sign on the Main Street elevation is more pronounced and may not get the desired message across; the applicant responded that they plan to bold up the text some, and the LED lighting will provide some color. Ms. Cook wondered if the proposed signage might not lead to some confusion with another tenant; the applicant responded they are aggressively marketing the space. 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 3, 2009 Ms. Hudak, seconded by Mr. Lieberman, moved approval as submitted and conditioned. Motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Mark Hanson presented some revised plans for the outdoor patio area at Marx Wine Bar and Grill. Mr. Lieberman noted for the record that the HPC had previously approved plans for the new patio area. Mr. Hanson said rather the block and stucco wall previously discussed, they would like to use a steel grid support system with metal panels; he said the metal panel will have some type of copper/patina treatment. Mr. Hanson provided some drawings of plans for the record. Mr. Hanson noted this new proposal gives more of a contemporary feeling and is consistent with building materials in the area. He said the wall will still be about 7' tall. Mr. Johnson said he thought this was a good use of materials on the alley side of the business. Mr. Lieberman said he thought this was more consistent with the interior of the business and moved to approve the design modification for the outdoor space as presented. Mr. Krakowski seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Pogge referred to the information in the agenda packet regarding the annual preservation conference. He asked members interested in attending to contact him as soon as possible. He said there may be some grant money to pay the registration fees. Mr. Pogge noted that at least one HPC member must attend in order for the City to keep its local government certification status. There was some discussion of the Heirloom Homes program in view of the decision to decline next year's grant due to the requirement for the local match. Mr. Pogge said there have been some tweaks to the web site, such as featuring a House of the Day. Mr. Pogge noted that Stillwater is the second city to have declined next year's grant. He also suggested there may be other opportunities for grants to meet the local match requirement in future years. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Ms. Cook, moved to adjourn at 7:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 3 er 6+ 6 T H P L A C F OF MINE Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commissio From: Michel Pogge, City Planner in Date: Thursday, September 03, 2009 Re: HPC Case 2009-30 Message: Attached is the classified ad that was placed by Richard Van Horne for the garage at 223 Pine St W. From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP • City Planner • City of Stillwater • 216 N. 4th Street • Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430-8822 • Fax: 651.430-8810 • email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.mn.us ILLWATERGAZETTE.COM 021 11 Ltd T 0, ca C Vcow O N ea E1 c t C1 T T 0 O a I M • 0 E OD 10 = 10 -E 0 N 1 6 , 1. ,0 F2g1 4 f s F LL m r ¢ 3 a A E E O O CO N 09, CO to N uir c,• OHO O'0' 80� M .12 NbilAVAR cu MI 0 N C dd ox o x� LC) N gN N x •� a 0 W ? co 5 • c 0) O ° C•a ® _C -o73 oW CC N m w IX • • • U11- 4 . N S11llwarer BIR,HP:ACF of M;NNfiSorA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: September 3, 2009 APPLICANT: Richard Beberg CASE NO.: 09-38 REQUEST: Infill Design Review of new construction in the Neighborhood Conservation District LOCATION: 706 Holcombe St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING: RB - Two Family HPC DATE: September 9, 2009 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planneru DISCUSSION The applicant has submitted plans for a new single-family home at 706 Holcombe St S. The proposed home is to be located on a parcel that is 70' x 200' for a total area of 14,000 square feet. The new home is replacing a home that was destroyed by fire earlier this year. The footprint of the new home is approximately 1870 square feet. The detached garage is approximately 24' x 24'. The applicant has not submitted a site plan but has verbally indicated that the garage will be setback behind the home. The property is in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) and is subject to the Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines. EVALUATION OF REQUEST All infill homes in the NCD are required to follow the NCD design guidelines. These design guidelines serve as a common reference for all those involved in the process of new construction in the district including property owners, neighbors, residents, architects, designers, builders, city staff, and the commission. The guidelines are intended to serve as a framework to guide the design process, while allowing for individuality and creativity in architectural design. Twenty-seven guidelines make up the NCD design manual. These guidelines cover three (3) general areas including Neighborhood and Streets, Building Site, and Architectural Detail. 706 Holcombe St S Page 2 The area around this home is a mix of mid 1800s homes through homes built past WWII in the 1950s. This has resulted in a number of different styles of homes which makes any new home design difficult. Staff met with the property owner and their contractor to review their plans and from that meeting a number of staff's concerns were addressed including updates to trim, frieze board, and window detail. Staff still has concerns related to the following items: Guideline #13 - Consider front porch elements in the design of infill structures and Guideline #16 - The fa ade of the structure should be compatible in scale and character to the housed of the streetscape. The first floor of the proposed new home is approximately 16 feet further forward than the second floor. With the first floor bumped out in front of the second floor creates the need for several gable ends. A situation where the gable extends above first floor bump out is a style generally not seen in Stillwater's historic core. Additionally, the gable over the first floor covers a major portion of the second floor elevation and leads to the windows on the second floor being moved to the outer edges of the home in an inappropriate placement. If the second floor was moved forward and placed flush with the first floor then the multiple gables on the front elevation could be removed. Additionally, an appropriate shed roof could be placed over the porch. Architectural Detail The width of the hardboard lap siding and window trim, is not included and should be made a condition of the approval. The windows are casement windows with grills to allow them to appear like double hung windows. Overall, the proposed home does a good job of containing consistent and highly detailed architecture on all four sides of the building. The footprint of the proposed home is comparable to that of the former home with a portion of the old foundation being used for part of the new home. Zoning Considerations The previous home was a legal non -conforming structure for failing to meet the required front yard. State Statue 462.357 Subd. le. and City Code Sec 31-216 regulate non -conforming structures and "grandfathering" rights of a structure. Under these codes, a structure is permitted to be replaced and continue the conformities of the previous structure. In this case, since the same general footprint is being used the new structure it is permitted to retain the previous setback and building coverage without a variance or other zoning approval. 706 Holcombe St S Page 3 ALTERNATIVES The HPC has several alternatives. A. Approve. If the proposed changes and plans are found acceptable to the HPC, it should be approved. Staff would recommend the following minimum condition for approval. 1. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the approved design guidelines, it could deny the requested amendment. With a denial, the basis of the action should be given. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requested could be tabled until your October 5, 2009 meeting so that additional information could be submitted. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is October 10, 2009. RECOMMENDATION Review and take action on the request. Attachments: Elevation Drawings Floor plans Area Photos Application and checklist completed by the Applicant Design Review Application and Checklist 9. Does the proposed structure work with natural slopes and contours of the property? (Guidelines #6, #7, #8) i Structure sited parallel to slope ❑ Building deigned to reduce cut and fill (minimized retaining walls) ❑ Landscaping incorporated into grading changes Notes: 10. Are there significant trees on the property? Will any trees be removed or damaged by new construction? (Guideline #9) o Types of trees ❑ Heights ❑ Trunk diam. Notes: PJ C Tr- L x- 5 c/ a •,. �� {a� dve Good Neighbor Considerations 1. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbor's access to sunlight in adjacent yards, patios or rooms? (Guideline #21) House to right: PJ p House to left: eJ x' House to rear: f19P Notes: Air+� '% e K is<h 7 �C How will you mitigate any negative sunlight impacts on neighbors? ❑ Locate structure on lot to minimize impact o Adjust building height, or portions of building, to minimize impact o Other: Stillwater Conservation District 2. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbors' privacy?(Guidelines #22, #23) House to right: House to left: House to rear: tJ n Notes: d P How will you mitigate any negative impacts on neighbors' privacy? ❑ Offset/locate windows to reduce impact o Use obscure glass in window o Locate balconies to minimize impact. ❑ Use landscaping elements for screening ❑ Other: 3. How is outdoor lighting impact minimized forneighbors?(Guideline #25) Lights are located or directed away from neighboring property o Light fixtures are shielded to prevent glare at neighboring property ❑ Other: To be included with this Application and Checklist: ❑ Site Plan: include location of proposed building(s) on property, lot area; indicate impervious surface, property lines, street/ sidewalk location and approximate location of adjacent structures. Indicate proposed outdoor deck/patio and landscaping features. ❑ Building Plan: dimensions, first floor area square footage. ❑ Building Elevations: indicate building height, windows, materials, and color on all elevations. Indicate proposed exterior lighting. ❑ Photographs of site and streetscape. ❑ Regular Planning Department Development Application Form Design Guidelines (p 2 of 2) Design Review Application and Checklist This Design Review Application and Checklist should be submitted with a City Planning Application Form Contact: Stillwater City Planning Office 651-430-8821 City Hall 216 N. 4E' St. Stillwater, MN 55082 www.ci.stillwater.mn.us Project Address:, r) B71. iLift, Go.1 !�- 54- e, A. . +- ApOcantname, ad ss, telephone: T fF TS`a& c4 4 ri ( }-lo ( St r-e,c-4-- 4,17 - ' ' t7 1. Neighborhood Architectural Styles: • Vernacular ❑ Italianate o Queen Anne o Gothic u Greek Revival ❑ Second Empire o American Foursquare ❑ Stick t( Other: MO l ,(' (� A =yS 2. Prevailing neighborhood streetfront setback: (Guidelines #1, #2, #3) Prevailing setback on block (est.) Z..'Si Average setback on block (est.) Proposed new house setback 40 3. Is the pattern of homes in your neighborhood 1, 1-1/2, or2 stories high? (Guidelines #4, #5) Stories 1 1-1/2 House on right ❑ House on left ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block ❑ �C. Prevailing opposite block o ❑ Proposed new house ❑ ❑ 2 4. Prevailing Front Porch pattern in your neighborhood: (Guideline #13) Front Porch None House on right ❑ House on left ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block t ❑ Prevailing opposite block .ram- ❑ Proposed new house .. ❑ Notes: 5. Prevailing Garage Location pattern in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) Front Rear Side Garage Garage Garage House on right ❑ �� ❑ House on left House to rear Prevailing on block ❑ ❑ Prevailing opposite block u Proposed new house ❑ 6. Prevailing Garage Size in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) 1 stall 2 stall 3 stall Garage Garage Garage House on right ❑ ❑ IC House on left ❑ q r ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block ❑ 9t ❑ Prevailing opposite block ❑ •K ❑ Proposed new house ❑19e.❑ 7. Is the proposed garage compatible in form and detail with the design character of the main house? (Guideline #14) Lfe 8. If the proposed structure/garage location, setbacks, size or general design character does not fit prevailing neighborhood patterns, how do you propose to reduce its impact on the neighborhood and streetscape? : Stillwater Conservation District (p 1 of 2) Design Guidelines .nnrraourrr.:; : .uaunoru•nm. (uuusuuaIIuYr rr ari••rr•/rrr••u••rrr••r••r••rmrrrr••r. iiiiir.aummaiiiiiiiiriiimisms lameaa..r amilasimassii'iaiiiu...:' M M M J nuuouuuuuuuuuur._ �•ieiririY,Y��il IOC BAND BOARD HARDBOAR^ LAP SIDING WIDE CORNER TRIM iO WATER TABLE BOARD 1 y 1 1 y 1 y y 1 y 1 y 1 y 1 i 1 y-- y 1 y1� 1yt1 y1 ;1 ;att.. � i y y� y iyL J... y1 t� t i 1y 1y 1,1y 1 t1 �;1 1 yt1 1 `1y 1,sl yam--•i H" FRIEZE BOARD DECORATIVE HARDBOARD SIDING CASEMENT WINDOWS W/ CHECK RAIL HARDBOARD TRIM ALL WINDOWS SXS TURNED COLIN-M W/ TURNED SPINDLES FRONT ELEVATION :F T.6. . _ia REr. ..s use mean e sar..-a sea os▪ �ssuAnxa e-'peer.. a eewwn-»xu�JUT �• yRe�;wew. e»uTu=rew � 0 z OD uW >� Ot UI OLiE al , fll °mot HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. i C m SHc'ET NURSER ONE OF 6 SHEETS FLAN NUNS. 09029 D DAIS 7,72£ . .ED Tkm. ovr.c.,NA.:TT.NT ,44fRAGE SIDE ELEVATION NCTE, corm...wt. To vERI, ALL DI.ENSION. AND CONDINCNS IN THE FIELD AND GE 1.9PCNSMILE FOR SANE Original house plans (dated August 5, 2009) and submitted to the City prior to staff meeting with the applicant on August 17, 2009. 240* ASPHALT SHINGLES 1 01,4 - DECK RIM SCALE: VB" • I'-O z 0 }_- 1 } w w 1-- z ii SCALE: V8" . 1 O" (I)co CO6 a) 0 C:) E " o o co —a (c3 (S) ° 0 CI- h- p -NV ATRIUM ji 1 . k INIMIL I i I pr Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE ZONING: HPC DATE: REVIEWERS: PREPARED BY: September 2, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-35 Althea Ennen Design Review of proposed signage and facade change for Compass Center for Healing. 116 Chestnut St E PLAN DISTRICT: CC - Community Commercial CBD - Central Business District September 9, 2009 Community Dev. Director Michel Pogge, City Planner !NI DISCUSSION The Commission considered and approved a request on May 4th, 2009 to remove the former Stillwater Music name from the canopy at 116 Chestnut St E and place it with the new name "Compass Center for Integrative Healing" in gold letters leaving the background of the canopy black. After that approval, the applicant removed the Stillwater Music name and logo from the canopy and elected to paint the canopy a copper color. Since this is a major change to what was approved by the Commission the applicant is now requesting an amendment to their design review approval for the new colors. The applicant would like to use the canvas painted a copper color and apply the business name "Compass Center for Healing" in off-white lettering with their logo in a lavender color. No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application. For canopy signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance. The zoning ordinance states 'the gross surface of an awning or canopy sign may not exceed 50 percent of the gross surface area of the smallest face of the awning or canopy to which the sign is affixed'. The applicant's proposed sign meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 116 Chestnut St E Page 2 Building Color The request is also to change the stucco color from white to light sand color. The elevation mock up that shows the sign also shows the proposed colors. RECOMMENDATION Review and take an action MINIMUM CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2. No additional signage. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing of the proposed sign Photo of existing building is t -I 4�5i f�3/ �?� v/e ir/ i l& 'TZ/E Ex47,;�/J ifeiPl ar 2/ Pt vy r� .6'r rsi, c J _ SH/Ji.7/eil.J "Is et ,'//OST " % N4yC/ zva�iGr/ {'Y�zl LlJ /`fire 5"i / I� E✓E•t/ ✓1/drike., LE ,q4i, pST /7/i /i/4"11/ T&' 9 i ►/ At/ ,e5ri;14 /9 E i7 •v e+�'��+L /I C/ y -27ie .9rvv r/ ht; ✓ i iyr �1l rfi :nlevr0 54'Lh/ o/yG THE /1/0“/ ,'c7TC�/ fii►/1J Lc y c, : ft6 e4.<r t A,L,�' Vif�tL G✓ct t)c1E i'vid, z?7 $c t-VE oKSw J, id EXt.'77>ty jtly✓/f,95 5'4/gt-4-ea CoI 2, flpiti Tf-E .4i/:0 /v r.9 /fs' .144.)- p/2,gotocisil /¢4'fly vel y Ted s iraL6,,,rye e 4,t y ;94/0 it 74/ PRdre, c04_ i)0 / E P r rhig i/ i�/s efr 74e IaES/�// /� ✓io1�/ c�a rum/TTG �lvt'f I fi5�' T/%/ T ®G( ,e / , /1l GV� 17/M/ G/ T ,pit-L! 4/0 i'—rFf=/ C_ 'E cf,1.v9c; .' `ftE .'f-e/4//. c6I, i 5 vly /fi-/ it /%iV / 44 '7_' G62ctr..'-T-44'47 I e7.0 4 i /1/ �- t"�iLl/Lt . y�- ea rs� iG�il%SCl7 • �5 WALL ,�f 5 `iierS%v� /t-vdiifi�i? / T J c� LE, . �' .¢f'i7. s . wAiv r j v' i . 4 i/� fif lg6fLr7 L(L � L � 4E5'E./treE ;,,/ Tarc c.v,4..44cr�i fy �CES�Fci Fi,�t i yaties) Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: September 2, 2009 APPLICANT: Cheris Murphy CASE NO.: 09-36 REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for This Love of Mine LOCATION: 412 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: CC - Community Commercial ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: September 9, 2009 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a projecting sign for This Love of Mine at 412 Main St S. The proposed sign face is 24-inches by 36-inches for a total of 6 square feet. The sign will attach to the wall with brackets on the top and bottom of the sign. The sign is proposed to contain the words "this love of mine" in dark gray on a light gray background. A flower extends off the "e" in mine. The words "Handmade Jewelry" runs across the bottom of the sign in sandstone color on a light burgundy background. For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance. The zoning ordinance allows projecting signs of up to six square feet in size. Staff did not count the sign frame toward to the total area. The total sign of the sign face is 6 square feet meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 412 Main St S Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2. The bottom of the project must be a minimum of 8 feet above the sidewalk. 3. No additional signage. FINDINGS The proposed sign meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing/photo of the proposed sign Print Form Case No: Date Filed: Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following information is required . PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project412 Main Street Assessor's Parcel No. Zoning District Description of Project in detaillnstall new projecting sign "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is required. Property Owner Murphy Mailing Address412 Main Street City State ZlpStillwater, MN 55082 Telephone No. 612 229 6522 Signature i�. \\ 0 Representative Mike Lawrance/Signcrafters Mailing Address2405 Annapolis Ln N #200 City State ZipPlymouth MN 55441 Telephone No. 763 571 2995 Signature C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\DWARD\DESKTOP\DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT.WPD February 5, 2003 Print Form Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8820 Location of Sign Address412 Main Street City State MN Zip 55082 Applicant NameSigncrafters Phone #763-571-2995 Address2405 Annapolis Ln N #200 CitYPlymouth stateMN Zip55441 Owner (if different from Applicant) NameThis Love of Mine/Cheris Murphy Phone #612-229-6522 Address412 Main Street citYStillwater stateMN Zip55082 Contractor's Name NameSame As Applicant Phone # Address City State Zip ached are the following documents (Required to be submitted with application) ❑ Attach a plan showing the sign size, location and type of material used. If the sign is to be mounted on the building, show an elevation of the building and sign. Additionally, if the building is historic the sign mounting shall limit damage to the exterior of the building. ❑ Design Review application (if required). All signs in the Downtown Area and in the West Stillwater Business Park require design review by H Sign Details Sign Size: Dimensions: x = Square Feet Sign Height: (if freestanding) Setbacks: From Property Line From Bldg ¶From Driveway/Parking Lot Colors:white beige black Materals:aluminum and vinyl Illumination: ❑ Yes Ei No If Yes, Type: ectaration I hereby certify that the information provided in this application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. I hereby authorize the City of Stillwater and any agent or employee of it, to inspect the proposed site at any reasonable time before and after any permit is issued related to this request. Otrer Signature (rcqjuired) q��; Apj Sig Pure Date Date8/20/09 '-Rdview (For office use only) ❑ Approved Permit # ❑ Denied Date By Conditions for approval: Contractor must be licensed with the City of Stillwater. Contractor's license application form is available at Stillwater City Hall. Remember to call Gopher State One call at 651-454-0002 before you dig to identify any underground utility locations. This is a FREE service. S:\Planning\Forms\Application for Sign Permit.doc Updated: September 23, 2006 160" 13'-4" Rod iron bracket SIDE VIEW notes: Remove existing sign and install at new wall location.] Hang using provided rod iron brackets.I Attach to stone using anchor sleeves. This Love of Mine - Sign Detail &igncrnft,erc3 ;ttllwatei: P P t A i7 , 0 N Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: September 3, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-37 APPLICANT: Jeff Anderson and Greg Stokes REQUESTS: Design Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit LOCATION: 315 Olive St W HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE: September 9, 2009 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planne 9 BACKGROUND Jeff Anderson and Greg Stokes, property owners of 315 Olive St W, are requesting a design review for an accessory dwelling unit on their property. The building would contain just less than 676 square feet on the first floor of usable space for a garage with an additional 676 square feet of habitable space on the second floor that will be used as an accessory dwelling unit. The lot size is 10,500 sq. ft., and 10,000 sq. ft. is the minimum lot size permitted by the ordinance for an accessory dwelling unit. The existing garage contains many of the same architectural elements including roof style (hipped roof), with dormers, and similar horizontal siding. 315 Olive St W Anderson/Stokes Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Review Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUESTS The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is specifically charged to review item g of the accessory dwelling unit conditions as listed in the RB zoning district requirements. Accessory Dwelling Units are permitted special uses in the RB district subject to the following conditions: a. Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet. The subject lot is 10,500 square feet. b. The accessory dwelling unit may be located on second floor above the garage. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is located on the second floor above the garage. c. The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is proposed to have a 25 foot rear yard setback and a 10 foot side yard setback. The proposed setbacks meet the requirements of the RB district. d. The accessory dwelling unit must be located in the rear yard of the primary residence or be set back from the front of the lot beyond the midpoint of the primary residence. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is behind the main home and meets the requirements of the code. e. Off-street parking requirements for an apartment and single-family residence (four spaces) must be provided. The proposed accessory dwelling unit will provide the required four off-street parking spaces with two spaces in the garage and a minimum of three in the driveway. f. Maximum size of the accessory dwelling unit is 800 square feet. The proposed area of the living space in the accessory dwelling unit is 676 square feet. g. The application requires design review for consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials. The applicant has provided plans for the proposed accessory dwelling unit. The garage is proposed to have a gable roof with asphalt shingles. It includes a dormer on the east elevation and a saltbox style roof pitch on the with west elevation. The pitch of the proposed structure does not match the current structure. Finally, the renderings does not indicate the siding that will be used on the structure. Since these details are not clearly noted on the plans staff recommends this be made a condition of the approval. A' r 315 Olive St W Anderson/Stokes Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Review Page 3 h. The height may not exceed that of the primary residence. The existing primary residence is a two story home. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is also proposed to be two stories. The height of the accessory dwelling unit is shorter than the primary residence. i. Both the primary and accessory dwelling unit must be connected to municipal sewer and water services and be located on an improved public street. Today, the primary dwelling unit is connected to municipal sewer and water services. Since it is not clearly noted on the plans staff recommends that this be made a condition of the approval. Maximum size of garage is 800 square feet. The proposed area of the garage in the accessory dwelling unit is 676 square feet. ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the demolition permit for the garage and design review for the new accessory dwelling unit as presented with the following conditions: a. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. b. The accessory dwelling unit shall be similar style, materials and color as the primary dwelling unit. The City Planner shall review final plans for the Accessory Dwelling Unit prior to issuance of the building permit. c. The accessory dwelling unit must connect directly to a public sanitary sewer main and water service main. The services for the accessory dwelling unit must not run through the main home. 2. Deny the demolition permit for the garage and design review for the new accessory dwelling unit. If the Commission decides to deny the requests, findings of fact substantiating the denial must be provided. 3. Continue the public hearing until the October 5, 2009 Commission meeting. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is October 18, 2009. RECOMMENDATION Review and take action on the request. FINDINGS The proposal, as conditioned, meets the intent of the City's zoning ordinance. attachment: Application and supporting documents from the applicant DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No:7)7 0 -37 Date Filed: Receipt No.: t"e, Fee: $25.00 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Photos, sketches and a letter of intent Is required. Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following information is required . PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project .:3) S VI, 0 Li, Assessor's Parcel No. 2&- (-)0 2(0-4>(C5'13 (Required) Zoning District Description of Project in detail 1_11> I 1 0c- SCN) L1 j cam, "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct. I further certify I will comply with the permit ifitis granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then p operty owner's signature is required. Property Owners<C4[ S Representative I"1 Mailing Address W, C> LIV s Mailing Addre TIE- sr City State Zip City State Zip /J .: 111A 9 SaDO Z Telephone N o3 [)� j S fjj Telephone No. j 97 7-2c 3 . Signature H:\mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 Signature Mark S. Balay, RA S t i l l w a t e r fMl i n n e s o t a 110 East Myrtle Street, Suite 100 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 (651) 430-3312 8/20/09 City of Stillwater Attn: Michel Pogge 216 N. Fourth St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Pogge: A= I. A macs Michael E. Balay, RA I n d i a n a p o l i s l n d i a n a 8878 South Street Fishers, Indiana 46038 (317) 845-9402 Attached are application materials for additions to the house property at 315 W. Chestnut St. We wish to add an accessory dwelling unit to the property and are requesting Design Review by the HPC and issuance of a Conditional Use Permit by the city to allow this. Our proposed project is simple and the site, existing house and proposed A.D.U. meet all requirements of the current ordinances for the RB zoning classification. The design of the A.D.U. submitted is the same design which we submitted and was built at 711 First St. So.with minor entry modifications to entrance points. If you have any questions or need additional information please do not hesitate calling. Sincerely, Mar S. Balay Mark S. Balay Archit Enc. 3'-0" 3' — 0" y k 1 —6" / / 6X8 COLUMN JOISTS — 9X8 DOOR BEAM JOISTS 9X8 DOOR / 26'-0" FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE 1/4" O CO co N FRONT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" - 1'-0" • REAR ELEVATION/ WEST SCALE: 1/4" -rrzlriiirzn PARTW.1HT. WALL BED POSmON 7 L J SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE 1/4" - 1'—O" FIN. FL CO 7/ 0 LEFT SIDE ELEVATION SOUTH SCALE: 1/4" — 1'—O" CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: GREG STOKES NORTH 0 20 40 SCALE: 1 INCH = 20 FEET CATCH BASIN HYDRANT SIGN WATER VALVE UTILITY POLE LIGHT POLE TELE/ELEC BOX GAS VALVE OVERHEAD WIRES WELL MANHOLE CULVERT GAS METER FENCE CONCRETE • DENOTES FOUND 1 /2" IRON PIPE 0 DENOTES 1 /2" X 18" IRON PIPE SET AND MARKED BY 25718 CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the a of Minnesota. DANIEL L. RMES License. No. 25718 ate 5-18-05 s 10 • `Sa sk"E 550 FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE N 7 • ; is s s 0.3' WESTERLY AND - 0.5' SOUTHERLY OF LOT 'CORNER -) _860- -A -.a 70_A Z 5' 00 , PLC '�---= / N / N co PROJECT LOCATION: 315 OLIVE STREET STILLWATER, MINNESOTA .0AREA: TOTAL AREA OF LOT = 10,528 SQ.FT. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION (as provided by the owner) The east 70.00 feet of Lot 9, Block 2, WILSONS ADDITION TO STILLWATER, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Washington County, Minnesota. C, NOTES: UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT LOCATED OR SHOWN EASEMENTS, IF ANY, MAY EXIST. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS. BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED. THE EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO RESEARCH OR SURVEY THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES FOR GAPS AND OVERLAPS. 0ldfr2 Suite #B100 200 East Chestnut Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone 651.275.8969 Fax 651.275.8976 dlt-csls@ mcleodusa .net CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC