Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-01-04 HPC PacketTHE. BiATHPLAi;E @F MiNNEStDTA Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Monday, January 4, 2010 The meeting will begin at 7 p.m., Monday, January 4, 2010, in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF December 7, 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/10-01. A demolition request for a detached single car garage located at 510 Olive Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Douglas and Kelly Marthaler, applicants. 4.02 Case No. DEM/DR/10-02. A demolition request for a 1-1/2 story residence and a single car garage and to consider a request for review of a new residence in compliance with the Neighborhood Conservation District (RB, Two Family Residential District) requirements located at 1220 4th Avenue South. Terry O'Brien, applicant. 5. DESIGN REVIEWS 5.01 Case No. DR/09-42. Design review of signage for building located at 228 Chestnut St E (Dairy Queen) in the CBD, Central Business District. Wally Schoumaker, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURN City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission December 7, 2009 Present: Howard Lieberman, Chair, Micky Cook, Bob Goodman, Jeff Johnson, Jerry Krakowski, Roger Tomten and Scott Zahren Absent: Gayle Hudak Staff present: Planner Mike Pogge Approval of minutes: Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Tomten, moved approval of the Nov. 2, 2009 minutes. Motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. DESIGN REVIEWS Case No. DR/09-43 Design review of signage for "Family Cuts" at 1421 Stillwater Blvd. in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District. Bob Sherlock, Signart, applicant. Mr. Lieberman reviewed the request and staff report, which noted that the requested sign is larger than permitted by ordinance. The applicant was not present. Mr. Pogge stated the applicant has agreed to reduce the size to meet the ordinance. Mr. Johnson moved to approve with the condition that the sign be no larger than 20 square feet and the other three conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Lieberman seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/09-44 Design review of signage for "324 Reve' Inc." at 324 Main St. S. in the CBD, Central Business District. Jeff Redman, applicant. The applicant was not present. Mr. Lieberman reviewed the request. There was discussion of the intent to utilize the existing archway sign formally used by Starbucks. The archway sign is nonconforming, as noted in the staff report, but continued use would be allowed as it has grandfathering rights and is considered a legal nonconforming sign. Mr. Pogge noted that by state statute, the grandfathering status would be lost if the use of the structure is discontinued for more than a calendar year. Mr. Tomten said he thought this was a good sign for downtown and asked for a discussion of its nonconforming status at the end of the regular agenda; he moved for approval as conditioned. Mr. Goodman seconded the motion. Mr. Johnson clarified that the request is for one sign only; Mr. Lieberman suggested clarifying in the motion that any requests for additional signage must come before the HPC. Mr. Tomten accepted that as a friendly amendment to this motion; amended motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Discussion of CASE No. DEM/07-50. A demolition request for a single-family residence at 1509 Pine St. W., Robert Stanislaw, applicant. Mr. Stanislaw was present. Mr. Lieberman reviewed the history of the request, noting that the applicant has met all nine steps for the demolition permit and this discussion is due to the change in house plans. Mr. Stanislaw provided a new drawing of the plans for a one-story rambler with porch, rather than the initially planned two-story home. He said the change in plans were due to monetary and market reasons. Mr. Johnson noted that while this property is not subject to the infill guidelines, one of the concerns is how a design will fit in with the scale and style of neighboring houses; he said while there is a mix of styles in the neighborhood, the majority are 1950s ramblers. Mr. Johnson said he thought the revised plan is probably more 1 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission December 7, 2009 fitting to the neighborhood than the two-story design. Mr. Johnson moved to accept the alternate plan and make it part of the original demolition approval made in November 2007. Mr. Zahren seconded the motion; motion passed unanimously. Discussion of the nonconforming sign — Mr. Tomten said he thought the archway style sign is a good formulation of space around a public plaza and does a good job of defining the business. He said it appears the only reason the sign was approved is because it is an existing sign, and in the future that kind of signage would not be promoted because it is not defined in the City's zoning code. Mr. Pogge pointed out the City will have to do a complete zoning code rewrite after the Metropolitan Council approves the updated comprehensive plan; he suggested that perhaps language can be put in the revised zoning code that would serve as a catchall for designs that meet the intent of the downtown design guidelines. Mr. Johnson expressed a concern that such Language might put sandwich boards or high pylon signs in the permissive area. Mr. Lieberman spoke of the difficult economic times and the need to create a viable business environment; Mr. Johnson pointed out that economic times change, and a design that might otherwise not be approved could become grandfathered. Mr. Zahren agreed with the need to keep the downtown area economically viable and pointed out that historically sandwich boards and other such items were highly visible downtown. Ms. Cook suggested this gets to the previous discussions regarding the overall appearance of downtown and enforcement issues related to temporary signs, etc. Mr. Zahren raised the issue of dumpsters and said Water Street should be treated as a commercial street, not an alley. Ms. Cook said she thought Council would continue looking at the whole enforcement issue. Ms. Cook expressed a concern about setting precedent in permissive language; Mr. Johnson noted that by definition the arch signage in question is a pylon sign — mounted separate from the wall, more than 6' in height — and trying to define such a sign might translate into a full-blown pylon sign. Mr. Tomten spoke of the difficulty of applying a 1950s zoning code to an historic downtown. Mr. Pogge noted the move is away from such prescriptive codes. Parking ramp sign — Mr. Pogge said staff is preparing to send out RFPs for the parking ramp signage. He said staff believes a larger than allowed sign is needed to be visible from Myrtle Street. He spoke to the general design envisioned. Mr. Johnson suggested that signage is needed on Main Street directing people up Myrtle Street but suggested that a large sign isn't needed on the structure itself as it will be very obvious; he also noted directional signage will be needed for folks coming down Myrtle Street, but once that is accomplished, again the structure will be very obvious. Mr. Tomten also questioned the need for the City logo on the building signage; Mr. Pogge responded that all City lots have the logo displayed on signage. Mr. Tomten asked whether the lights over the pedestrian entrances were the fixtures selected during the HPC's design review; he said the Tens projects below the bottom of the fixture and spews extra light. Mr. Johnson said he noticed that the blue emergency call lights appear very bright on the third and second levels even when viewed from Main Street; he suggested perhaps the lights could be shielded in some way so the light goes into the parking garage, rather than 360 degrees. Post Office Update — Mr. Tomten asked for an update on the Post Office project and asked about "sun harvesting." Mr. Pogge stated the rain wall is for sun harvesting. Mr. Johnson asked about reports of a green roof for the full third floor. Mr. Pogge said there would not be a full third 2 t City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission December 7, 2009 story unless the applicant comes back before the HPC, and he said he believes the applicant is intending to come back to the HPC, possibly in January. There was discussion about the changes to the roof that would occur with the full third story. There was discussion of a sign on the property, which Mr. Johnson suggested amounted to a billboard sign since the applicant does not own the property that is being advertised. Mr. Pogge said since there is an active application, the sign is not considered a billboard and is allowable. Ms. Cook asked about the empty sign space at the gas station on Main Street. Other items — Mr. Tomten asked about opportunities to publish articles about the HPC, whether on the City web site or newsletter. Mr. Johnson asked about the enforcement issues, whether the Council might take action. Mr. Pogge said staff did a survey of what other cities are doing. Ms. Cook said she had suggested utilizing an intern to do an inventory of violations throughout the City and then rank those violations for taking action. Mr. Pogge explained the City's current enforcement by complaint. There was discussion of various issues related to enforcement and the role of the HPC. Ms. Cook said she would like to see a preservation plan for the whole City and would like the HPC to take a more active role. There was discussion of past difficulties with enforcement. Mr. Lieberman suggested having a retreat session to discuss priorities and the role of the HPC. Mr. Pogge suggested that members think about possible topics and discuss plans for a retreat session further at the January meeting. Meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. on a motion by Mr. Johnson, second by Mr. Lieberman. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 3 Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: December 24, 2009 APPLICANT: Douglas and Kelly Marthaler REQUEST: Demolition Permit for a garage LOCATION: 510 Olive St W HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 4,, 220010 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner` CASE NO.: 10-01 BACKGROUND Douglas and Kelly Marthaler, property owners of 510 Olive St W, are requesting a demolition permit for an existing garage on their property. The exact age of the garage could not be determined and a building permit for the structure was not on file at the City office; however, the property owners believe that the garage is older than 50 years of age. After reviewing the style and condition of the structure, it leads staff to conclude that the garage is more than 50 years old. Since the garage appears to be over 50 years old, it is by definition considered to have potential historic significance. Consequently, the Heritage Preservation Commission is required to review the demolition request. This site is in the Conservation Design District; however, since the main structure is not being removed a new garage would not be subject to the infill design criteria. SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a permit to demolish the existing garage. 510 Olive St W Marthaler Garage Demolition Pei lit Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST Chapter 34, Section 34-4 of the City Code states that "if buildings or structures are determined by the community development director to be historic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the [heritage preservation] commission for review... Buildings or structures determined nonhistoric must be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit." A "nonhistoric structure or building" is defined by Chapter 34, Section 34-2 as a structure or building less than 50 years old... Since the age of the structure could not be determined it is assumed that the garage is over 50 years old; therefore, it is of potential historic significance and requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Section 34-5 of the City Code lists nine items which must be considered prior to approval of a demolition permit by the Commission. (1) A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighborhood properties; This information is included in the attached application. (2) A legal description of property and owner of record; The legal description of the property was included in the application. (3) Photographs of all building elevations; Photos from various angles are included in the packet. (4) A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished; The existing garage is an approximately 12' by 17' garage. The applicant has indicated in the cover letter that the entire garage structure is proposed to be demolished. (5) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition; A letter from Mark Balay notes a number of decencies and that it would cost $50,000 to stabilize, rehabilitate and to expand the existing garage to allow it continued use. (6) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located; The applicant has indicated that they wish to build a 26' by 30' garage to replace the existing garage. Preliminary plans were for the new garage were submitted and are included in the packet. 510 Olive St W Marthaler Garage Demolition Permit Page 3 (7) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements; The current comprehensive plan land use designation for the property is Single Family Small Lot and is zoned RB, two-family residential. Once the current garage is demolished the proposed garage would be required to meet all of the current requirements of the zoning code. The plans as submitted would meet all zoning requirements. This site is in the Conservation Design District; however, since the main structure is not being removed a new garage would not be subject to the infill design criteria. (8) A description of alternatives to the demolition; The applicant indicates that and alternative would be to leave the garage as is. (9) Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible. The applicant has indicated that they have advertised the garage in the St. Croix Valley Press on December 29. A copy of the ad proof has been included in your packet. ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the demolition permit as presented. 2. Deny the demolition permit if the applicant has not proved the necessity for demolishing the garage or if the Commission believes there are alternates to demolishing the garage. 3. Continue the public hearing until the February 1, 2010 Commission meeting. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is February 11, 2010. RECOMMENDATION Review and take action on the request. attachment: Application and supporting documents from the applicant 4 .build online ad .dates 6 .payment Order Summary Place Another Order Your order has been successfully submitted. All ad orders are subject to approval before being published. Please print this page for your reference. Your ad order ID is 248. Please reference this ID in all future communications regarding this order. If you have any further questions or comments about your order, you may contact: White Bear Press Classifieds 651-407-1250 classified@presspubs.com Please note that classified ads run in all 6 papers Tuesday: ednesday and Thursday. Your contact information: Doug Marthaier 510 Olive St. W Stillwater, MN 55082 612-597-2467 (day) doug.marthaler@vw.com Place Another Order Logned in as d<:r c.rriaril?aier 4 orn Your Ad Order .., Price: $30.00 1w,17 single car garage for removal in sprig, 2010. best offer 65'1- 2-16 4 line(s), 12 word(s), 64 letter(s) Category MERCHANDISE Building Supplies Package: Classified Line Rates Start Date: Dec 29, 2009 Run Length; 1 weeks Show full ad run Please note that all classified ads run in ail 6 papers Tuesday, 'Wednesday and Thursday. Heritage Prese Demolition Request Permit ation Commission Demolition Permit No. Fee $150* Receipt No. Address of Project: 90 ()LI II sT Go. Parcel No.: Lot 3/41 Block / Subdivision 1A/685J R'S ADO/T/O.A/ Applicant: DOU LAS V AA/b K ELLY L_ / 44 RTIJ A LEN Address: 5 /0 d L-1 Li/- SSE T U✓- Telephone No.: 6S /— 3'/-/63 ' Owner if different than Applicant: Address: Telephone No. Type of Structure: DET G itlEO 5./14,4LE CA IC 6ARA 6C Age of Structure: yRS Condition of Structure: g C5'i 66 !JJ( ROD BRa vk) RA Fi k s /r TEA1 s iL PL 7-,es . 3'Ol.M G) Intended Use of Site after D molition: R PL/ VI`i t*1 r CA- 6f TZA 6 I , / /3 -)00 Signature of Applic t Date /0-43600? Sig ture •f 0 ner Date *After Heritage Preservatioi ended, the applicant will rec obtain the required building Department The fee for the i approval, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the ive a design review permit which must be signed an permits. A building permit must be obtained with th Office Use Only HPC Review Date: 0 Approved 0 Denied City Planner/Community Development Director e Date December 17, 2009 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission: The attached documents and application checklist information (below) have been submitted per Chapter 34 - City of Stillwater Building Demolition Ordinance for the demolition of a single car garage located on the property of 510 Olive Street West. a. A map showing location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to the neighborhood properties; • Refer to Certificate of Survey (Barret M. Stack — Land Surveyor), see "Old Gar." b. A legal description of property and owner of record; • Refer to Certificate of Survey (Barret M. Stack — Land Surveyor), see "Description" • Property owners: Douglas V. and Kelly L. Marthaler c. Photographs of all building elevations; • See attached photos d. A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished; • 12'X17' detached single car garage, wood frame construction, built in 1950, dirt floor, poor condition (sagging roof, broken rafter boards, rotten sill plates and siding) • Refer to Washington County Assessor — Residential Building Detail (Garage 1 of 1) e. The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition (The information should include a bid from a residential/commercial restoration contractor); • The small size of the garage prohibits reasonable use for even a single modern full-sized vehicle and yard equipment, or a multi -vehicle family. • The poor condition and small size of the garage makes restoration neither functional nor fiscally sensible (refer to attached letter from architect Mark S. Balay) • The garage has no significant architectural features and its design does not match the period style or architecture of the home. f. Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located; • Refer to Certificate of Survey (Barret M. Stack — Land Surveyor), see "New Gar." • Refer to preliminary concept drawings of proposed replacement garage which complements the period style and architecture of the home. • Construction is scheduled to begin in summer of 2010. g• Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements; • Proposed garage meets all position, size, setback, and hardcover requirements of garage construction per Sec. 31-308 - RB two-family district regulations (Refer to Certificate of Survey and preliminary concept drawings). h. A description of alternatives to the demolition; • As previously stated, the small size and poor condition of the garage prohibits reasonable use for even a single modern sized vehicle and yard equipment or a multi - vehicle family, and makes restoration neither functional nor fiscally sensible. • The small lot size and relative hard cover restrictions would not allow for relocation of the structure to a different location on the property. i. Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible; • Refer to attached craigslist ad. Douglas V. and Kelly L. Marthaler 510 Olive Street W 651-342-1636 Mark S. Balay, RA S t i I I w a t e r M I n n e s o t a 110 East Myrtle Street, Suite 100 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 (651) 430-3312 12/7/09 Doug and Kelly Marthaler 510 W. Olive St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Doug and Kelly: n d i s n a p We have examined your existing garage to determine potential historical based upon the established historical context of the city of Stillwater. Y structure was likely built specifically to store and protect automobiles, b. materials used to construct it and the dimensions which exist. It was' also constructed contemporary to the house. It has no significant architectural materials which would be of special note. While it does have a place in the community history as a functional item, part of the late 19th and early 20th century historical architectural and cul Stillwater which is the target of preservation efforts by the City of Stillw Heritage Preservation Commission. We have examined the physical condition of the structure and would esti construction for stabilization, rehabilitation and expansion to fit some o requirements to be approximately $50,000.00 which would include an e foundation and additional square footage of approximately 250 sf, biit no requested car lift equipment. We estimate the cost of the conceptually de structure to be about $70,000.00. It is our conclusion that rehabilitation of the existing garage is neither fiscally sensible. Don't hesitate calling, if you have any questions or require additional Sincerely, Mark S. Balay 0 Michael E. Balay, RA I i s I n d l a n a 8878 South Street Fishers, Indiana 46038 (317) 845-9402 significance ur particular ed upon the robably not features or it is really not a al context of ter and the ate the cost of your program tirely new allow for the igned new ctionally or ormation. Washington County Assessor - Residential Building Detail Page 1 of Washing on County Asse Residential Building Detail for parcel 28.030.20.34.0083 home I parcel search I sales search Building Occupancy Code 101 (Single -Family / Owner Occupied) Year Built Style Area TLA Length Width Condition Basement Bsmt Floor Adj Heating AC Attic Attic Sq. Ft. 46 1910 1 1/2 Story Frame 906 1,936 0 0 Normal Full 0 FA Gas No Observed Rooms Above Ground Rooms Below Ground Bedroom Above Bedroom Below Room Coutjt 0 0 3 0 Bldg Descript Foundation Exterior Walls Roof Interior Walls Flooring Architectural Design Single Siding ons C BIk Wgod Asphalt/Gable/Hip PlOs Carpet/Wood 1-3/4 Expansion Nol Washington County Assessor - Residential Building Detail Garage 1 of 1 Year Built Style WxL Area Condition Basement SF Qtrs Over Style Qtrs Over SF 0 Qtrs Over AC (SF) 0 Door openers 0 1950 Det Frame 12x17 204 Normal 0 None Page 2 of home I parcel search I sales search minneapol s craigslist > washngton/WI. > for sale / wanted > email this posting to a friend materials Avoid scams and fraud by dealing locally! Beware any deal involving Western Union, Moneygram, wire transfer, cashier check, money order, shipping, escrow, or any promise of transaction protection/certification/guarantee. More info Single car garage for removal (Stillwater) Date: 2009-12-13, 6:05PM CST Reply to: sale-dctg3-150$..6...92767@craigslist.org [Errors when revving toad?] please flag with care: in i scategorized prohibited spam/overpost best of craivlist 12X17 single car garage to be removed / salvaged in spring of 2010, poor condition (see photos), email for details or to schedule inspection Location: Stillwater it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests PostinglD: 1508692767 Copyright © 2009 craigslist, inc. terms of use privacy policy. feedback forum o Ind. #13774 iron set. • Ind. iron found as noted. Bearing system is assumed datum. Offsets shown to existing structures are meas. to the found. wall line, unless shown or noted otherwise hereon. See foundation footprint and Hardscape area summaries below and right. "CM" Ind. prorated lot line dimensions based on data shown on City 1/2 Sec. Map No. 11, City of records. Notes: Notes: CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY "M." Ind. measured value. BARRETT M. STACK STILLWATER, MINN. 55082 "R." Ind. recorded value. "PP" Ind. Perfected Plat value. (Rec. Plat) "JFS" Ind. values shown on a 1966 survey of MINNESOTA REGISTERED the below described parcel. LAND SURVEYOR Underground or overhead, public or private Tet. No. 439-5630 utilities, on or adjacent the parcel, were not located in this survey, unless shown otherwise. "WRW" Ind, Wood. Retaining Walls inplace. resurvey Stillwater SURVEY MADE EXCLUSIVELY FOR: Douglas. and Kelly Marthaler, 510 West Olive St., Stillwater, MN 55082 DESCRIPTION: As Supplied By Client: (copy of un-recorded Warranty Deed dated 7-31-08) All of Lot Three (3), excepting the East Three (3) feet thereof and the East One-half (E 1/2) of Lot Four (4), All in Block One (1) of Webster's Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. Note: Webster's Addition to Stillwater is recorded as Doc. No. 416049, Washington County records, a.k.a. Myron Shepard's Perfected Plat of the City of Stillwater. The above described parcel, as surveyed by me, contains 9401 square feet, more or less. \1 FNv. "zit? // LT. ZS.02 / 3.10 IA /eAsI,Str jr,eEE'7 (&- DP�ivEl J ✓7 5 72,0 ter, Tz. 3� — zs, /7 , so. /7 So M (1% `i) IAA$06/G.1 24,1 kks Lg �% Ca,V . 25:/7 W LaosE ,Qa.0 mars MArze_ z¢a r Loc. a0. /� 19PLE HI no S lorimz 2-Sroe Afn- / ,osE ' 1'/ S�fPt // / nt N 5 /G. 7 k h /5"/A f/ /' / %' D,8'E, EXISTING SITE HARDCOVER: Exist. House Fnd. 1562 square feet Exist. Old Gar. 223 square feet c 1785 square feet or 18.99% of overall parcel. Exist. Hardscape: (Includes all walks, driveway, steps, N6� /6 ¢zE patio and retaining" walls on the -above described parcel: N. LiNE oF) B2,ce, ONE /Nf371° 74 '/¢"6 ,e-SD /,./oMu/ — - M. 72.36 — — TFs 7Z, D3 WEST LivE Coe. F.44.s ON /i✓..q e_, /Yo T sir, CO,¢, fhs NOT SET. 7wD Total exist. Hardscape = 2333 square feet or 24.81% of the overall parcel. PROPOSED SITE HARDCOVER SUMMARY: Exist House Fnd. 1562 square feet Prop. New Garage 780 square feet 2342 square feet or 24.91% of the overall parcel. Proposed Final Hardscape:Summary: (includes all walks, old and new driveway, steps, patio and retaining walls on.the above described parcel. Total Final Hardscape = 2278 square feet or 24.23% of the overall parcel. Ataenele Zo' I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date April 27, 2009 Reg.No 13774 /415 OICO2/. (7 A ,02/D/t/, uaa.InSi 0134001 SI.M3 "M .0� ...ma au ue mnwie "" DIAZ p u.11 w w+ 1....1103 1 w V1OS3NNIIN 831VM1111S • I S / \ I O I S M O ��NI OIS�� ���d Nl�dW 3OV VJ M3N o v o p u s i o t o a o 9 i ) suaa- o 990 Na+ aiss-oso (KW :Ph 28095 NR 'e}v+FfiS 513711M'kR i00�iS +tY6R 3 0[! �'tel�.S x1gR d, b e viva A38 NON1180S3a 'LINI 31v0 „MaR MOOS al...0 alr OS MVa0 viva 0 7 o s a u u i yy i a 1 0 0, 1 3 g m3 La3ro414 -3101 311m "JMC i Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: APPLICANT: REQUESTS: LOCATION: December 30, 2009 Terry and Catherine O'Brien CASE NO.: 10-02 1. Demolition Permit for a single family home and garage 2. Infill Design Review of new construction in the Neighborhood Conservation District 1220 4th Ave S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING: HPC DATE: PREPARED BY: RB - Two Family January 4, 2010 Michel Pogge, City Planner jti1 BACKGROUND Terry and Catherine O'Brien, property owners of 1220 4th Ave S, are requesting a demolition permit for an existing home and garage on their property. Additionally, they are requesting infill design review for the new home and garage they propose to construct on the property. 1220 4th Ave S Page 2 SPECIFIC REQUESTS The applicants are requesting consideration of the following items: 1. A demolition permit for the existing single-family home and garage. 2. Infill design review for a new single-family home and garage. This report will review the two requests starting first with the demolition request then the infill design review request. DEMOLITION REQUEST BACKGROUND According to a report completed by Donald Empson for the property owners, the home at 1220 4th Ave S was constructed around 1861. The original house is typical of Stillwater's early laborer's homes from the 1850's and 1860's. The home experienced a number of additions and alterations over the years however, it remains a very modest home. Since the home is over 50 years old, it is considered to have potential historic significance. Consequently, the Heritage Preservation Commission is required to review the demolition request. The exact age of the garage could not be determined and a building permit for the structure was not on file at the City office. After reviewing the style and condition of the structure, it leads staff to conclude that the garage is more than 50 years old. Since the garage appears to be over 50 years old, it is by definition considered to have potential historic significance. Consequently, the Heritage Preservation Commission is required to review the demolition request. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Chapter 34, Section 34-4 of the City Code states that "if buildings or structures are determined by the community development director to be historic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the [heritage preservation] commission for review... Buildings or structures determined nonhistoric must be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit." A "nonhistoric structure or building" is defined by Chapter 34, Section 34-2 as a structure or building less than 50 years old... The home was built around 1861 making it more than 50 years old which makes it potentially historically significant and requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission before it can be demolished. Since the age of the garage could not be determined it is assumed that the garage is over 50 years old; therefore, it is of potential historic significance and requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 1220 4th Ave S Page 3 Section 34-5 of the City Code lists nine items which must be considered prior to approval of a demolition permit by the Commission. (1) A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighborhood properties; This information is included in the attached application. (2) A legal description of property and owner of record; The property is Lot 4 and 5, Block 8 of Hersey, Staples and Co's Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. (3) Photographs of all building elevations; This information is included in the attached application. (4) A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished; The single family home along with a detached single car garage are proposed to be demolished. (5) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition; The applicant went into great length justifying the demolition (see pages 8-14 of their application). Paul Martin Woodworking Company completed an estimated cost to renovate the house and garage. The estimate was $126,100 to renovate the house and $13,000 to renovate the garage. This home fails to meet modern building code requirements and standards in a number of areas; however, simply because a home fails to meet these requirements and standards should not be the sole reason to authorize a demolition as this is true for many of Stillzvater's older homes. It is evident the home has experienced advanced deterioration and continues to rapidly deteriorate in its current unprotected condition. Protective measures should have been taken years ago if this home were to be saved. At this point it would take a special individual willing to make an investment in the home that likely would not yield a positive long-term payback. (6) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located; Since this property is in the NCD an infill design review permit is required once the exiting structures are demolished. The applicant has made application for an infill design review permit for a new single family home and garage. The plans call for a two story single-family home and a two stall detached garage. 1220 4th Ave S Page 4 (7) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements; The current comprehensive plan land use designation for the property is Single Family Small Lot and is zoned RB, two-family residential. The site is in the Conservation Design District and is thus subject to the infill design criteria. The nezo home and garage will meet all requirements of the zoning code. (8) A description of alternatives to the demolition; The applicant has listed a number of alternatives to demolishing the single-family home and garage (see page 18). All of these are viable and possible alternatives to demolition; however, it is staff's opinion that none of these options furthers the goals of the HPC or the City. (9) Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible. The property has been for sale for the past two years by a previous property owner. Staff has received a number of inquires on this property with none of the potential buyers interested in preserving the structures. The applicant has placed two classified ads in the Stillwater Gazette in an attempt to have the structures moved elsewhere in the community. No one has committed to take and salvage these structures for use in the community. The applicant also had Mr. Donald Empson review the home and complete a report on it. A copy of Mr. Empsori s letter is attached and can be found on page 21 of the applicant's packet. INFILL DESIGN REVIEW REQUEST BACKGROUND The applicant has submitted plans for a new single-family home at 1220 4th Ave S The proposed home is centered on Lots 4 and 5, Block 8 of Hersey, Staples & Company Addition. The property is approximate 100 feet wide by 130 feet deep for a total area of 13,000 square feet. The footprint of the new home is approximately 1,387 with a 9' x 21' porch. The total heated living space on the first and second floor is 2,067 square feet. The detached garage is approximately 24' x 24' with a 14' x 6' storage area. 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. 1220 4th Ave S Page 5 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 to review their initial plans. Staff raised a number of concerns including trim, frieze board, window detail, garage placement, and massing. The applicant took the initial comments and substantially revised their plans to address staff's initial comments. Overall staff believes the design of the home meets the goals of the guidelines and is compatible with the homes that surround it. ALTERNATIVES The HPC has several alternatives related to these two requests: A. Approve. If the proposed demolition and infill design review requests are found acceptable to the HPC, they 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 demolition rules and the approved design guidelines, then the Commission could deny the requests. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until your February 1, 2010 meeting so that additional information could be submitted. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is February 9, 2010. RECOMMENDATION Review and take action on the request. Attachments: Elevation Drawings Floor plans Area Photos Applications (Demolition and Infill) with completed checklist Heritage Preservation Commission Demolition Permit No. Demolition Request Permit Fee $150* Receipt No. ?'-f-, D30,2 .Z3.CX� Address of Project: (2"L0 ' - 4i1 Parcel No.: 3 4• . d 3ca • 20.23 - co 351- Lot h 5 Block S Subdivision .S Y ftwt ;ab 7 / dA) Applicant: -11%i2 4` ', e4 1-(eg, it- Address: 49, 6 i' Telephone No.: Owner if different than Applicant: 303.530-3icH Address: Telephone No. Type of Structure: / 1/7. 3 tDRY �Q �i� �T/r4z� / /,�(� 6>ile �A,c A'cs - /'f 6 y,Ps Age of Structure: 60,2 - ? Condition of Structure: I/,e y froenO,z Intended Use of Site after Demolition: 5iNhC-vviic:y nee RS, *After Heritage Preservation approval, there is a 10-day appeal period. Once the 10-day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a design review permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. A building permit must be obtained with the City of Stillwater Building Department. The fee for the building permit Is based on the valuation of the demolition project. Office Use Only HPC Review Date: D Approved City Planner/Community Development Director 0 Denied Date Terry & Cathie O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 303-530-3199 December 11, 2009 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission: Application is hereby submitted for a demolition permit for a residential and garage structure located at 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater. The original portion of the residential structure, per Don Empson, local Stillwater Historian, was built approximately 1861 and was an example of a small symmetrical Greek Revival style residence architecture. The garage structure was moved to the current location at an unknown time and has no connection to the original house. The original part of the residential structure was built by Michael Collopy, age 25 and his wife, Anna, age 26, and consisted of two rooms and one-half floor second level. A portion of the original house had a limestone foundation and was wood frame construction. Three additions were subsequently added at unknown times including an expansion of the original structure with an enlarged basement accessed by an outside ground level door, a sunroom and a screen/glass porch that provided weather protection for the basement access. The original house was typical of the laborer's houses built in Stillwater at the time. The most recent residents of the home were the Joseph and Iva Junker family. It is hard to believe that two adults and nine children were raised in the home. The Junker family has had numerous members playing prominent roles in the city. The house has been empty for over two years. It's last occupant, Iva Junker died January 5, 2008, two years and a day from the scheduled Jan 4th HPC meeting. In Don Empson's history of the Hersey, Staples & Co Addition written in 2000, he wrote a short description of Old Houses as Antiques, "Just like any other antique, the value of an old house depends upon how original in appearance it is." Terry & Cathie O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 303-530-3199 Unfortunately, the subject house has been changed so much from its original appearance that it's value as an "antique" has been virtually destroyed. Additionally, it has been so poorly maintained, it has lost its value as a residential structure providing comfortable shelter to its occupants. You will find the various requirements of Section 34-5.1 of the City of Stillwater Building Demolition Code included with this submission. Sincerely, as diteA-v Terry & Cathie O'Brien Owners, Lots 4 & 5, Block 8 Hersey, Staples & Co Addition City of Stillwater Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN CONTENTS Demolition Request Permit Cover Letter to Historical Preservation Commission 1 Demolition plan review — Section 34 — 5, Subd.l . 1. Map showing the location of the structures to be demolished 3 2. Legal description of property and owner of record 4 3. Photographs of all building elevations 5 4. Description of the building or structure to be demolished 7 5. Reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, estimate of renovation costs 8 6. Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property (see separate Design Review Application documents under separate cover) 15 7. Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements 16 8. Description of alternatives to the demolition 17 9. Evidence the structure has been advertised for sale 18 10. Letter from Don Empson, historian 21 Washington County, MN 12/11/2009 Washington County, MN 1101 1022 1024 1023 1105 1113 1032 1036 1030 506 518 0 128 feet Property Information Property ID Location 503 1209 504 510 1204 1212 516 1019 1014 I 608 618 1 rl $ BUREIIIGTON i 1303 1302 1308 1312 INT -GUIS Washington County 603 1205 1209 1215 1221 1213 1225 1204 1214 1224 1230 1234 MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT This drawing is a result of the compilation and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies. 1305 615 1308 1029 1035 1203 1213 1221 1229 r 1301 HI a -GREW 1310 3 Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 2) — legal description of Property: Parcel 1 — Lot four (4) in Block Eight (8) of Hersey, Staples and Co's Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota AND Parcel 2 — Lot five (5) in Block Eight (8) of Hersey, Staples and Co's Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota Item 2) — owners of record: Terry H. & Catherine J. O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 4) — description of building or structure to be demolished: There are two structures included in this demo request: 1) a residential structure and 2) a single car garage. The residential structure consists of approximately 910 heated square feet and a 200 square foot seasonal porch covering the side entrance to the house and the grade level entrance to the basement. The original house of around 374 square feet was built around 1861. Some time later, additions of approximately 396 square feet, a sunroom of approximately 140 square feet, and seasonal porch were added. There is a one-half story second floor above the original house portion; the rest of the house is one level. There is a basement of around 700 square feet that is under all of the second addition and a portion of the westerly part of the original structure. The sunroom portion has a foundation with crawlspace and the seasonal porch is built on a concrete slab that surrounds the grade level basement entrance. The construction materials were wood frame and stucco, normal for the time period the construction occurred. The house is in very poor condition and has even been noted as such by the Washington County Assessors office public records. Substantial and costly work would need to be done to make the house reasonably habitable and up to building code requirements. The garage is a one vehicle structure approximately 308 square feet and is located very near the northern property line of Lot 4. The construction is wood framing with a corrugated metal roof. The structure was moved to its current location at some unknown time and is resting on concrete blocks on an asphalt pad. The Washington County Assessors office does not note any structure on Lot 4. The garage also needs substantial repair work. The garage might be of interest to someone able to move it to another location. Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 5 (a) — reasons for the proposed demolition of residential structure: 1) The house is sited on the South -East corner of Lot 5. Remaining in its current location will not allow the full and esthetic use of the site for the owner's proposed construction of a single family residence utilizing both lots 4 & 5. 2) Retaining the house and building a new structure with new garage would violate the accessory building use restrictions i), iii), and iv) of the RB district. 3) The structure is in very poor condition. Costs to rehab the building to normal standards of today's general public would be prohibitive and would effectively discourage rational buyers. See attached estimate of costs by a licensed contractor to bring house up to code and normal expectations of today's buyers. The size of the investment would demand a return far in excess of what today's buyers would pay for a house of this size. 4) The house has no architectural relevance, character or other redeeming attributes. While the original structure was representative of "working class" homes when originally built, it has had three additions to the original structure that have rendered it almost unrecognizable to it's humble origins. Item 5 (b) — reasons for the proposed demolition of garage structure: 1) The garage is sited very close to the Northern boundary of Lot 4. Remaining in its current location without being moved would obstruct the owner's proposed driveway and access to the proposed new double garage. 2) Moving the structure would be costly and there is no location on the current two lots that would be of interest to the owners to justify moving the garage. 3) The garage needs significant repairs to make it acceptable or movable. The costs to repair, rehab and move exceed its economic value. 4) The garage has no historical or architectural value that encourages the costs of restoration. Item 5 (c) — Economic justification for demolition: House — the estimated costs to bring the subject house up to code and modest economic amenity status would approximate $126,100 or $138 per square foot. The estimated costs do not factor in any changes that a potential homeowner might wish to implement to make the renovated home more desirable space from its present configuration. The renovated house would not be close to any normal amenity standard of a new house that was built with a budget of $138 per square foot. The estimated cost does not provide for any huge renovation surprises and does not factor moving the house to another location on the lot, an option which might make it more appealing to a potential owner. Moving the house could be an expensive option due to the condition of the structural foundation condition. Garage — while not in as poor condition as the house, the garage also needs substantial renovation work make it functional, including structural and foundation repairs, siding repairs, enlargement of the vehicle opening and relocation of the entrance door. The condition of the roof is unknown at this time. In addition, the garage would need to be moved from its current location as the new siteplan proposed driveway is best located where the garage is currently resting. The cost of renovation and moving the garage is estimated at $13,000, most likely more than one-half of a new double stall garage located where it is most useful. An estimated cost worksheet is attached that was submitted by Paul Martin, a licensed Contractor. See his letter of explanation included with this material. Item 5 (d) — Economic justification for demolition: Comments regarding the condition of the house: The foundation structure of the house is in very poor condition. The top of the foundation is at or below grade on much of the house resulting in water infiltration and rotting sill plates. There are several large cracks and shifting in the concrete block foundation. Foundation timbers and floor joists have numerous rotten or weak spots and are not properly supporting the structure. There are undersized floor joists for some spans and one significant main beam is in bad shape. The hodge-podge support system has caused uneven flooring due to floor lifting and sagging. Subsequent additions to the original house appear to have been made with lesser skilled craftsmen using construction techniques that might not be appropriate relative to today's standards. The concrete slab floor under the porch is cracked and appears to have shifted somewhat. To properly repair the foundation structural components, the house needs to be raised up off its foundation. Existing foundation walls will be substantially impacted by the necessary holes required to provide adequate supporting beams for the house lifting 9 process. Structural components may need to be completely rebuilt. From an economic perspective, it would probably be less costly to completely remove the existing foundation and install new footings and foundation walls to support the footprint of the house. The cost to adequately renovate the foundation components to proper structural integrity is a large part of additional costs of renovation that do not add any functional use for the substantial expenditure involved. The interior of the house virtually needs to be removed and rebuilt due to old age and deterioration. Raising and adjusting the foundation and structural components will impact walls, floors, etc. Flooring, walls and ceilings will need to be removed and replaced. The stairway to the second floor is totally inadequate and would need to be completely replaced to meet code requirements. An already small interior will become smaller to accommodate this change. The second floor ceiling height in the original house area is less than seven feet. Ceilings, walls and floor boards on the second level are also in very poor condition and will need to be removed and replaced. The house needs complete new insulation in all applicable areas including attic and ceilings, exterior walls, etc. with appropriate vapor barrier installed. Old single pane windows and doors need to be replaced with new energy efficient choices. The exterior siding has extensive cracking and breakage and should be completely removed and replaced. The existing roof needs to be completely replaced with some rafter reframing (roof sag) and new plywood sheathing installed along with soffits and fascia. The oil burning furnace should be replaced. Plumbing and electrical lines are in poor condition and will need to be replaced. While the bathroom and kitchen areas are small, they are still expensive to replace even with modest fixtures and appliances. Comments regarding the condition of the garage: The garage was moved to its current location at some undetermined date and has no connection with the original house. While suffering from lack of maintenance and repair, and not requiring a comfort level for human occupation, the garage could perform its intended job under certain circumstances. The foundation structure needs to be replaced or repaired along with some siding, windows and doors. The roof structure integrity is unknown at this time. One big obstacle for someone to utilize the garage is the cost of moving it to a different location in addition to the repair costs. The cost of moving, repairs and size (one vehicle) make the garage somewhat economically obsolete. Interestingly, the Washington County Assessor's office does not list any building structure on Lot 4. Paul Martin Woodworking Company Quality Renovations Since 1982 713 Packer Drive Hudson, WI 54016 651-430-4928 715-386-2445 December 4, 2009 Terry O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 RE: Renovation Estimated Costs 1220 4h Ave So, Stillwater, MN Dear Terry: This letter is in response to your request to prepare a cost estimate for renovating the residential and garage structures at 1220,41 Ave So, Stillwater, MN to comply with the City of Stillwater Historic Preservation Commission demolition permit requirements. I have personally examined the house and garage at the above address and believe the house is in very poor condition. To bring the house back to reasonable condition would practically require that it be taken apart and then put back together again. As compared to a new structure, the costs can be more than double, due to the substantial extra labor involved. The garage, which would need to be moved for you to utilize the placement of a new house, also needs structural and foundation work plus replacement and repair of siding, windows and doors in addition to painting. The commission members should understand that reputable contractors would be very reluctant provide a "bid" for this type of renovation without a very high contingency amount. I have prepared an approximate estimate to renovate the house at $126,100 with a contingency amount of only $5,000. It is my opinion that this house is beyond reasonable repair. The cost of repair, remodeling and upgrading would be substantially more than razing it and building a new structure of comparable size. Member National Kitchen and Bath Association • MN Contractor # 20093659 1/ Paul Martin Woodworking Company Quality Renovations Since 1982 713 Packer Drive Hudson, WI 54016 651-430-4928 715-386-2445 The estimated cost to renovate and move the garage to another location on the property is approximately $13,000. A decision to renovate and move the garage is questionable, but might be of interest to someone who could move it to a new location. I have included a worksheet with estimated costs for each category. The bathroom and kitchen estimates are for modest level fixtures, cabinets, appliances, etc. If I can be of further assistance, please give me a call. Regards, Paul Martin Licensed Contractor Enclosure Member National Kitchen and Bath Association • MN Contractor # 20093659 Renovation Cost Estimates 12/4/2009 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater HOUSE Estimate Subtotal Foundation $ 27,000 Dig and backfill $ 3,500 Raise/lower house off foundation 10,000 Pour new footings, floor, new walls 13,500 Structural 12,000 Basement - framing 4,500 Main floor - framing (incl stairs) 3,500 Second floor - framing 2,500 Roof - framing 1,500 Interior 17,500 Floors -tearoff, replace 6,200 Walls - tearoff, sheetrock 2,500 Ceiling - tearoff, sheetrock 2,500 Insulation, vapor barrier 4,500 Paint 1,800 Doors & Windows 8,200 Windows (14) 7,000 Doors, ext (2) 800 Doors, int (2) 400 Roof 4,500 Tearoff, repair decking, asphalt shingles Exterior 9,800 Tearoff, replace siding 6,800 Prep, paint 3,000 Bathroom Replace, update 12,000 Kitchen Replace, update 17,000 Mechanical/Electrical 8,000 Water/Sewer re -connection 500 Plumbing 3,500 Electrical - rewiring 4,000 Equipment 3,300 Furnace, related ducting 2,700 Water heater 600 Other 6,800 Dumpsters 1,400 Permits, etc 400 Contingency 5,000 Total for House $ 126,100 Raise, move garage New foundation/slab $ 3,500 Repair structural members, siding Enlarge opening, new door, move side door Prep, paint 3,000 1,500 2,000 Contingency Condition of roof unknown 1,500 1,500 Total for Garage $ 13,000 IPaul Martin /3 wasnington (—minty Assessor - xesmenuai ivaing veal) rittri./washinguon.mthrtesoraas S sors.com oasio-res.pup gic— .a..• ,••„, Residential Building Detail for parcel 34.030.20.23.0034 Building ye, Occupancy Code 101 (Single -Family / Owner Occupied) Year Buitt 1876 Style Area TLA Length Width 1 Story Frame 374 1,004 0 0 Condition Very Poor Basement Fufl Bsrrt Floor Adj 0 Heating AC Attic Attic Sq. Ft. Oil F.A. No Observed 94 -4-PoreP home parcel search I sales search Room Count Rooms Above Ground 0 Rooms Below Ground 0 Bedroom Above 2 Bedroom Below 0 Bldg Descriptions Foundation Exterior Wails Roof Interior Walls Flooring Architectural Design Single Siding Plumbing Style Count Full 1 Stn Wood Asphalt/Gable/Hip Plas CarpetNinyl 1-1/4 Expansion No Addition Year Built Style Area Condition Basement SF No Floor Adj (SF) Heat AC Attic SF .1 of 2 Addition 2 of 2 166 Year Built 1876 1 Story Frame Style 396 Area Very Poor 1.Condition 396 Basement SF 0 0 No Floor Adj (SF) 0 OH F.A. Heat Oil F.A. No AC No 0 Attic SF 0 1 Story Frame 140 doff Very Poor slow home I parcel search I sales search 1 of 12/2/2009 4:40 PM Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 6) — Proposed plans and schedule of reuse of the property: See separate Design Review Application submitted with this Demolition Application package including: 1. Design Review Checklist 2. Elevations 3. Site plan 4. Schedule Demolition Permit Application - HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 7) — Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements: The subject property is located in the RB two family zoning district. The combined two lots total 13,728 square feet, well exceeding the minimum of 7,500 square feet necessary for a single family residential structure. The building coverage of the lot including house and garage will approximate 15%, well below the 25% maximum allowed. Impervious surfaces should be less than 15% and also below the 25% maximum allowed. Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 8 a) — description of alternatives to the demolition - house: 1. Do nothing, leaving it unoccupied. The house has not been occupied for over two years. This is not a good option for the neighborhood or community. The structure will continue to deteriorate and could become a safety hazard for the neighborhood. 2. Make the absolute minimum investment required to make a reasonable return to upgrade the property and attract a tenant who could pay the required rent. A rental unit would not enhance the overall property compared to an owner -occupied single family residence. Without out an upgrade in appearance, the structure would continue to be a less -than positive image builder for the neighborhood. 3. Move the structure to another location. Due to the condition of the structure, the cost of moving would have to be added to the cost of renovation, making the total cost prohibitive. Item 8 b) — description of alternatives to the demolition - garage: 1. The existing garage is currently in the middle of the proposed driveway on the site plan of the new home and garage. The garage would need to be jacked up, existing structural members, siding, and doors repaired and then moved to a new location with a new foundation on the current lot. The total cost of repair and moving is not proportional to the cost of one stall of a new two car garage. The existing garage would have not architectural similarity to the proposed new residence. If another single garage was built so two vehicles could be garaged, the two garages on the site would violate the accessory use restriction iii) in the RB zoning district. 2. Leave the garage in its current location and move the proposed house to another location. This would eliminate the cost of moving the garage, but would not eliminate the cost of repair. This alternative would require the house to be moved to a more southerly spot than its current proposed location and in the owner's opinion, makes the lot less esthetically pleasing. 3. The existing garage could be moved off -site to another location. If someone felt it was worth the expense of moving, they would be welcome to take it away. Demolition Permit Application — HPC meeting Jan 4, 2010 1220 4th Ave So, Stillwater, MN Item 9 a) — Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse: 1. Proof of Publication — Stillwater Gazette, see attached 2. Proof of Publication — St Croix Valley Press, see attached Item 9 b) — Evidence that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible 1. Lack of response to ad for sale or moving either house or garage for $1.00. 2. See estimate of restoration cost from Paul Martin, item 5) of this submission. 1050 Lost & Found 2000 Business Services 2110 Chimney & FP Cleaning SWEEP • INSP. • REPAIR Full Time • Professional Ser. Certified/ Registered / Insured 28 Yrs Exp. Don 651-469-1369 3000 Merchandise 13050 `R`outiyies/Craf Shows & Gifts Stwr Craft Boutique Sale 6 Crafters, 622 W Olive St, Nov 27'h 9art1-8pm Nov 2e-9am6pm, Nov.291h 9am-3pm 3150 Fireplace & Firewood DRY OAK FIREWOOD Delivered in the Valley area. 715-755-2346 FrgSTcy Bpxspring- Very clean;You haul 651-439-1815 -, House& Garage, $1 each. House To Be Moved. 1- 2BR, IBA, 1000+SF, Garage To Be Moved, 22X14, 320SF. Move to your loc. 1220 4th Ave S, Stwr.303-530-3199 5000 Rentals 5200 Townhouse For Revd 2BR; IBA dower level ownhome avail now in Stwtr. W/D; D/W, at - ached garage. $850/mo +utilities- Call Kingwood Mgmt today to schedule a showing 651.439.7812 EHO STWR - 3BR townhome, 1 car att gar, all apples, $1095 651-430-3105 5300 Bu Duplexes/Dal alows For Rent Stwr- Dplx upper 1 BR w/ gar. $600, heat pd. Avl now N /S, N/P, 612-801-0379 5400 , Houses For Rent x.. Bit 3 'BA Hank Pilteelo sure! Only $14,500! Mus See, for listings 1-800-619- 3853 ext1924 Charming older home, re- cently renovated in heart of village of Marine on St. Croix. 3BR/2BA, separate D.R. plus. office/den.. New gas frplc in L.R., 2'car gar. Walk to church, country store, school, -St. Croix River ,& Ski into' O'Brien State Park: $1300/month +utils. Call Christ Luther- an Church at 651-433-3222 6400 Apartments & Condos For Rent ,,1BR; 1BA condo for ren Within walking distance 0 d ° StIwtr: Modern, quiet, , . ing; onsite W/D and lit atio with BBQ area. $7 .dA-•+elec. Call toil • to schedule a . owing:. ; ingwood Mgint. LAKE 651- 7812'EHO ` pletely 6400 Apartments Condos For Rent 3BR Upper unit of tri-plea in country setting. This one has character! Lots of storage & deck- $875+elec. Avail now-° Call .today' to, schedule a showing, King woodMgnit` 651=430812 EHO 62 and/or disabled Sect. 8 1BR; -availimmed. 651-439-0858 AFTON Spacious apt for 2 wrap around deck, pool; $1200 incls ntils; Avl 12/1, 651-690-2739 Ask about our $100 Gift Card Roomy; bright and clean. 2BR $786 Recently updated Brick Pond Apts. 651=430:2975 Bayport;'2 i' tiitetreet parking, laundry on -site pet friendly. Avail Now; $750 + electric. Kingwood Management 651.439.7812 ext. 417 for showings. EHO: COTTAGES' OF, STILLWATER .2BR-$775 .Priv"Entry; gar avl, Washer/Dryer hook, up. No dogs 651-439-96 Newly remodeled" IBR,i1 as' 4-plex ,on South Hill m `; Stwtr, quiet "`bldg, walking distance dwntn;.D/W cow -op W/D `' onsite. '$700+elect Avail; Nov 10th.-Call Kingwood;,' MLitt 651,439.7812 EHQF,.'--', NOW RENTING 1&2BR'S.:-' Oak Park Height'A *Rent 'Specfals*:" Pool/garage includ 651-439-5540 or: 651=206-2474Y o'akparkheights-apt.e Oak Park Heights- :12/1,,2BR W/D,; , parkiing, SOMERSET-riewly. dated 2BR $575+; 3 BA T.11`;$775.43othc.'th gar & laun: Sin Path approval. 651-430-3156'';' Stillwater` Newly Remodeled 2, condo, t $bird ;;toe N/P, N/S 651;439.36 9400 "Segal, BR `3 I3 A Batik `For'eclo rep 9nly $14;500! • Miis ',• Qr: tmgs.1=800.619- td924 STWR Luxury 1-2-3BR apt STWR Spacious 21 starting`$800, avl now, `'" to DT :'$800 $815 651'430.3105 paid, NS /NP 65i-49 STWRw4-close t0, $6/15, 4 N/P,; <motiths,rent 651=4914 Advertise your,.business the' Choose ePro ef�ssiol published weekly in the Stillwater Gazette on` Mondays andinthe Valley 14e newspapers To place your ad, utallultfl' l'aicttt' STWR[ Fox.Ho1101W4h new )2BR 2i3A` condo; undrgind prk, l3pic;, utg 2 balaconoes;, elec, 1 'yr lease ;;:Jo 651-238-0361�' ELMO '1B12„ corn: remodel, -new ap= 6)3R 3 BA Bank Foredo-. pcs; off sir prk; lawn, sure! $14,500! Must ht pd,,612 670.4243 tings Mi00-619- 924 SERVING THE it CROIX VALLEY SINC,E;1871)' azette Ass le� 1931 Curve`Crest Blvd. "Stillwater; MN 55O82; gazcli&capers con "Beat"pti ronnfttLik.tiq ''elevator,garage'upon availability. EHO call 763-717-0810 or 218-628-0311 for an appointment SENIOR LIVING LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION Downtown White Bear Lake LAKE SQUARE. 1BR from $917 2BR from $1135 Heat included undgrnd parking avl Daily tours including weekends at your convenience 651-426-2876 REACH OVER 62,000 HOUSEHOLDS • ,'When you-ptace an ad With ohodtitioo Publications' .com. Ya o,rno _ N N' csi Y 'a-.) 0@ c'nc o c E m > nL. gtp. i C n3 7- 0m= C �" of N y £ c "O L al "7,C; 7Ema)m aic.Ocs, = 0 u, r� °� oivt.to 7 7 l0 O N.. y N �.j ,J mnspn:i .. J " tN O LC) •r•'a 1 206 NORTH SECOND STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 (651) 351-0172 FAx: (65 1 ) 430-2051 EMPSON@USFAMILY.NET Donald Lmpson November 20, 2009 Terry O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 At the request of Mr. O'Brien, I made a thorough inspection of the Stillwater home at 1220 Fourth Avenue South on November 19, 2009. Based on my inspection and previous research on the house, I would like to offer the following observations: The original part of the house was built about 1861 by Michael Collopy, age 25, and his wife, Anna, age 26, both Irish born. The original house (today the one - and -one-half story portion) consisted of two rooms downstairs and one or two rooms upstairs. The chimney was in the center wall between the two rooms. Most likely, at some time early in its history, a kitchen was added on the west side. In the early days of Stillwater, the 1850's and `60's, small residences like this were a typical laborer's house, and hundreds of them were built in the young city. Today only a very few of these early houses remain, and whenever possible this very significant form of Stillwater architecture should be preserved. However, unfortunately, there is almost nothing remaining of the original house at 1220 Fourth Avenue South. There is nothing to preserve, and restoration of what was once there is not feasible. In the old part of the house, the original windows are gone, and the placement and size of the windows has been altered. There are no original doors remaining, and almost all the original tr'm is missing. Downstairs, the original floor and wall plaster have been removed An outside chimney has replaced the original interior chimney. Upstairs the floor plan has been changed. Over the years, several additions have been added to the old house, all of them with materials and design antithetical to the original small symmetrical Greek Revival style house. Outside newer siding has been added although it appears the old lap siding (on the original house) may remain under it. The garage has neither historical nor architectural value, and obviously was not part of the original homestead. Although most of the original house is no longer apparent, I would hope the new owner would salvage whatever is possible from this old Stillwater house. 7( DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No: Date Filed: Receipt No.: 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 34:1330.23. Z3, an33 Address of Project 12. Z 0 N 4' aw6 , Assessor's Parcel No. 3 4. & 3o z-3 . (X5 3 L (Required) Zoning District E 13 Description of Project in detail (_Cr6 /am& regg "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in allrespects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct. I further certify l will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is require.. Property Owner` IC�QR'I ` CA1tet''R,r) Representative Mailing Address 414 tEAi)62 IOW? Mailing Address City State Zip .I5944'602- . �'p gV 3 D9 City State Zip Telephone No. -, 5 30- 3i al I Telephone No. Signature JtAAA- Signature (Requd) (Required) H:\mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 Terry & Cathie O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 303-530-3199 December 11, 2009 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission: We are the current owners of Lots 4 & 5, Block 8, Hersey, Staples & Co, Addition. We currently live in Boulder, Colorado and purchased the two lots on September 15, 2008 for the purpose of building a single family owner occupied residence. The enclosed design review application is being submitted with and should be considered together with a demolition permit request for a residential and garage structure at 1220 4th Ave. So., Stillwater. Part of the motivation in moving to Stillwater is to return to our Minnesota roots, to be closer to several adult children and potentially build a new house that would be comfortable with a floor plan that meet our needs in the next 10-15 years. After living in western suburbs of Minneapolis and Boulder Colorado foothills, we want to find a low-key urban setting where neighbors and neighborhood are important. While the location on 4th Ave So is not the most impressive in Stillwater, upgrading the current use of the property will go a long way to upgrading that block of 4th Ave So. And, after meeting five different neighbors in October, 2008, it appears that the neighbors have similar feelings. We felt very welcomed by the neighbors and look forward to many rewarding friendships in the future. We looked at many different house plans that we could build efficiently and with cost considerations as part of the equation. We actually had two previous plans that were subsequently discarded as being "too roofy" or "too suburbanish" after discussions with our daughter, a Stillwater resident and several neighbors. We feel the current plan will fit in Stillwater as a new infill with relative ease. The immediate neighborhood block is a very eclectic collection of homes with five out of eleven having been built in the early '50's and the rest in the late 1800's. Setbacks vary on the immediate block. Four of the five '50's houses are on the West facing side of 4th Ave. So. Terry & Cathie O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 303-530-3199 The house to the immediate North is a one-story small rental house on a single lot. The garage is on the South side of the house, set back somewhat from the front of the house, but very close to the lot line. The immediate house to the South is an "heirloom" house that was moved to the current location in 1994 and is setback quite deep in the lot. It is a large two-story and has a detached double car garage in the North-West comer of the lot. The rest of the block is anchored by two 1880's two story homes on double lots with the Southern house facing Saint Louis St. The house to the rear, facing 5th Ave. So., is also a two story, has a large carriage house-office/garage. It has a new addition of unknown size being built on the rear Eastern side. The house plans in this application were designed by a southern US architectural firm and there will be a few modifications for MN conditions and site plan considerations. Anticipated changes include 2X6 exterior walls, a full basement, removal of the South-West rear porch, bringing the front entry door out flush to the front exterior wall to create an enclosed foyer, higher pitch roofs on the porch and side bump -out areas, a gas fireplace without the chimney, lower profile to grade (no lattice work), and atrium doors off the South side dining room area. The double door, two car garage will have a matching gable roof similar to the East elevation of the house. The site plan has the house stretching East — West with a detached garage in the rear North-West corner. Our original wish list called for an attached garage to deal with MN winters, but was reluctantly let -go to give the site plan a little more breathing room and less concentrated mass. The living area of the house is oriented to the South side with the garage, driveway and utilitarian functions on the North side. With the few modifications, the heated area footprint of the house will be less than 1,500 square feet. The upper level will add another 680 square feet for a total of approximately 2,180 (+/-). The height of the house will be less than 30 feet. The two Tots have seven large silver maples, primarily around the perimeter. We are big tree lovers and would like to keep as many as possible. It appears that we will need to remove two; one in the rear North-West corner for the garage placement and one in the mid -central area that would be close to the house and would most likely incur root damage from foundation footings. Fortunately, the one in the rear has a companion tree on the westerly neighbor's lot and would not leave a gaping hole in the canopy. The garage will also provide some screening after removal. Terry & Cathie O'Brien 44 Beaver Way Boulder, CO 80304 303-530-3199 There is one tree in the front yard that we would like to keep. The tree would be close to the front porch and also provides some screening from the street. While close to the porch, it probably would not suffer much root damage from the porch footings as compared to foundation footings. Two trees on the North-East corner will require some careful tuming into the driveway, but also add some screening. We are also garden lovers and anticipate that there will be more garden and Tess grass in the open areas. Due to the considerable shade, there will probably be many hostas and other shade loving plants and shrubs. We anticipate developing a garden patio off the South side dining room that should flow into garden pockets to the West, South and East. Most likely we will add a limited length of privacy fencing for screening out the more utilitarian aspects of the neighbor's garages and parking areas. We anticipate using hardiplank siding on the exterior and at this time, are leaning towards the "heathered moss" medium green color with off white/creamy trim. Windows will be appropriate for the house design. We would like to trim or accent the exterior foundation with native limestone, depending on cost considerations. At the current time, we would not anticipate commencing construction any sooner than spring/summer of 2010. We have a house to sell in Boulder, CO and given current economic and real estate conditions, would not consider any construction activities until our current house is sold and closed. Construction cost considerations will also have some bearing on timing, but preliminary investigations allow us to believe that we can build the house and stay within our budget. We look forward to this new chapter in our lives. Sincerely, Qutit/te(,6„,,_` Coi Terry & Cathie O'Brien Owners, Lots 4 & 5, Block 8 Hersey, Staples & Co Addition City of Stillwater r 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. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 www.ci.stxllwateLmn.us Project Address: o AaV 51 Applicant name, address, telephone: 31"3 - 4- `ORR4' 4 titt 4t Ryv p R,tzld nptt G a c ie , g-„p 3cm 1. Neighborhood Architectural Styles: oX Vernacular ❑ Italianate ❑ Queen Anne ❑ Gothic ❑ Greek Revival u Second Empire ❑ American Foursquare ❑ Stick ❑ Other: 2. Prevailing neighborhood streetfront setback: (Guidelines #1, #2, #3) Prevailing setback on block (est.) Average setback on block (est.) Proposed new house setback 3. Is the pattern of homes in your neighborhood 1,1-1/2, or2 stories high? (Guidelines #4, #5) Stories House on right House on left House to rear 1 1-1/2 2 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �C ❑ ❑ X Prevailing on block ❑ ❑ Prevailing opposite block ❑ 4-* * Proposed new house ❑ ❑ X 4. Prevailing Front Porch pattern in your neighborhood: (Guideline #13) Front Porch House on right House on left House to rear Prevailing on block ❑ Prevailing opposite block X Proposed new house Notes: None S. 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 ❑ Proposed new house o 6. Prevailing Garage Size in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) 1 stall 2 stall 3 stall Garage Garage Garage House on right /11; ❑ ❑ House on left 0 House to rear Prevailing on block Prevailing opposite block ❑ Proposed new house ❑ J�C ❑ ❑ 7. Is the proposed garage compatible in form and detail with the design character of the main house? (Guideline #14) �C�-- 56-E SK(1''# 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? : 374Cucb Fir pY 9,isr F%Ne Stillwater Conservation District (p 1 of 2) Design Guidelines Design Review Application and Checklist 9. Does the proposed structure work with natural slopes and contours of the property? (Guidelines #6, #7, #8) o Structure sited parallel to slope o Building deigned to reduce cut and fill (minimized retaining walls) o Landscaping incorporated into grading changes Notes: /UMA - i L rr 10. Are there significant trees on the property? Will any trees be removed or damaged by new construction? (Guideline #9) ❑ Types of trees 5.11-i ri a. o Heights -1 Atil ❑ Trunkdiam. t/A io+ts l3'%2/" Notes: P g i rya -r'rQ2 1 R4 /✓d kit Pi17C444D✓0n ®Z, ,I Men-ft> SE RErnv✓eo !OK tieviSe @ot/61: Good Neighbor Considerations 1. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbor's access to sunlight in adjacent yards, patios or rooms? (Guideline #21) 114il C S 1 S P House to right: NP, 4,1312446 ®An) Si, 57 Z House to left: Aft, /44-41bc` /'ae LaT House to rear: A/®, r ✓ ✓ Notes: Ream iio" r 6' of z- L' RIM 'baba- 1i'SE/pAcia How willyoumitigate anynegative sunlight impacts on neighbors? /t//,4 ❑ Locate structure on lotto minimize impact o Adjust building height, or portions of building, to minimize impact o Other: Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines 2. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbors' privacy?(Guidelines #22, #23) House to right: PP) i1ie/t 6 ev./Seim oGRSA House to left: jUD f �oa3RSCacoi ore,'Def�e��r �c House to rear: AID � GAA'bE CRR60;t6' 4gR 95 tfiSTi Notes: Nertta:IPtA) 51.444',0GT- f-ri6 How will you mitigate anynegative impacts on neighbors' privacy? ❑ Offset/locate windows to reduce impact ❑ Use obscure glass in window o Locate balconies to minimize impact. Use landscaping elements for screening ❑ Other: PD55) t. foe>✓/ B3' 1th196r 3. How is outdoor lighting impact minimized for neighbors?(Guideline #25) ❑ Lights are located or directed away from neighboring property XLight fixtures are shielded to prevent glare at neighboring property o Other: f L Gib41-ls %[. az Likti.-604 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. J( Photographs of site and streetscape. Regular Planning Department Development Application Form (p 2 of 2) z SITE PLAN FOR 1220 4th Ave. So. CITY OF STILLWATER, STATE OF MINNESOTA DECEMBER 8, 2009 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1"=20'-0' 8.5" x 11" Sheet NORTH 3 m mEgrA VeCKNo 43.19,03.40, PONIRLACE TUE 1411ARTW /WV COMAND 16@t, PX4 MITA 19.11ATIM Tort PIN MOO* 4`.4. toSh ,i4-?1,-L, PafF-4, TRENITED TA* DIEMSM OKFT "Mao WM .2242, 345' AREA DATA, ! 1,3E1 I4TV. tarl. fs ao 141D 5Cir. 276:1 TOTAL 14EAT6 Sar7, FIRST FL_OCR FLAN 2 V .4'-` -Cr 6 LEVATION aLL Q 1 e /0 Second house on North Second house on South 11 13 'l 1242 5th Ave $ $Photo- ,.. 2009Google' West elevation, property to rear of subject - 1213 5th Ave So Eye ell 872 ft 14- /S PJ L a JJamesHardie 1,4 Rte 27 Medfield, MA 02052 BUILDER INFORMATION 503 Main St. Medfield , MA 02052 (508) 359-8550 www.uniquenewhomes.com DESCRIPTION A beautiful subdivision of 24 single family &#x22;front porch&#x22; style homes that surround a &#x22;neighborhood&#x22; green. 7111LiWkEE SAMPLE PFUNT DETAILS Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: APPLICANT: December 29, 2009 Walter Schoumaker PROPERTY OWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: Greg Gartner CASE NO.: 09-42 Design Review of building signage for second floor tenants 132 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: ZONING: HPC DATE: REVIEWERS: PREPARED BY: CC - Community Commercial CBD - Central Business District January 4, 2010 Community Dev. Director Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a wall sign for tenants on the second floor along Chestnut Street at 132 Main St S. The proposed sign face is 42" tall by 36" wide for a total of 10.5 square feet. Today a projecting sign for DQ exist on the Chestnut Street and is proposed to remain in place. For signage in the Central Business District, Stillwater City Code Section 31-509 Subd 7 (a)(1) states Number. One wall, monument, awning and canopy or three dimensional sign is allowed per business. When a building or business abuts two or more public streets, an additional sign located on each street building face is allowed. Using this section the applicant is requesting the right to install the proposed wall sign and keep the existing projecting sign for DQ since these are different "businesses". 214MainStN Page 2 In the past, the HPC has used building sign plans to coordinate the style of signage on a building, such as requiring all wall signs or a single freestanding sign, on multiple tenant buildings. Additionally, page 32 of the downtown design manual (see attached) described the desire to coordinate signage on buildings to avoid a piecemeal approach to signage on the buildings. If approved, this request could set a precedent for signage on multiple tenant buildings in the downtown area. RECOMMENDATION Review and take an action on the request. 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 is permitted without approval by the HPC. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing/ photo of the proposed sign -410 t1/rC�1l� EL • • •.. _A\ A RS PA • ABC Accounting, LL( • O. -4111 • • • O. xyz mcwiaq& JlVzaf2/ • •elo- c4LC24191 36" Sign mounted above door to upstairs tenants .5" MDO Sign Board, painted background with vinyl graphics applied. Sign panels can be easily changed if tenants change. 42" Sign mounted above door to upstairs tenants .5" MDO Sign Board, painted background with vinyl graphics applied. Sign panels can be easily changed if tenants change. Sign mounted above door to upstairs tenants .5" MDO Sign Board, painted background with vinyl graphics applied. Sign panels can be easily changed if tenants change.