Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2010-08-02 HPC Packet
THE t4 i R T H PLACE OF M i N N E S O T A Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Monday, August 2, 2010 The regular meeting will begin at 6 p.m., Monday, August 2, 2010, in the Council Chambers at Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street, Stillwater MN 55082. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF July 7, 2010 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 Tess 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.01 Case No. DEM/DR/2010-11. Demolition request for the southern portion of a residence located at 1117 Broadway Street North in the RB, Two Family Residential District. George Middleton, applicant. Continued from the June 7, 2010 and July 7, 2010 Heritage Preservation Commission Meetings 5. DESIGN REVIEWS 5.01 Case No. 2010-24. Design review of signage for Alesci Gallery located at 116 Main Street South in the CBD, Central Business District. Scott Zahren, applicant. 5.02 Case No. 2010-25. Design review of signage for Paiement Law Office located at 221 Myrtle Street East in the DBD, Central Business District. Constance Paiement, applicant. 5.03 Case No. 2010-27. Design review of exterior window and door replacement located at 413 Nelson St E in the CBD, Central Business District. Mike McGuire, applicant. 5.04 Case No. 2010-28. Design review of a garage with a dwelling unit above located at 708 Pine St W in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Nathan and Lucy Smith, applicants. 5.05 Case No. 2010-29. Design review of signage for J.G. Hause Construction Inc, at 106 Main St So in the CBD, Central Business District. Larry Roehrkasses, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURN Following the regular meeting, Heritage Preservation Commissioners will be touring the downtown area via a boat owned by HPC member John Brach. Members will leave for the tour from City Hall at the conclusion of the regular meeting at approximately 7:30 PM. No official business will be conducted at that time. mo To: Heritage Preseyvatiorj Comsion From: Sheila Wiega Date: July 28, 2010 Subject: July HPC Mintue The July 7, 2010 HPC meeting minutes will be emailed to you on Friday, July 30, 2010. Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planner Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Re: Case 2010-11 Demolition request for a portion of the residence located at 1117 Broadway St N Message: The applicant has asked that the Commission continue their item to allow them more time to address the Commission's comments from the June 7, 2010 HPC meeting. Staff Recommendation Table the public hearing indefinitely. 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 Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: July 20, 2010 APPLICANT: Scott Zahren, Alesci Gallery REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for Alesci Gallery LOCATION: 116 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: August 2, 2010 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner CASE NO.: 2010-24 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a projecting sign for Alesci Gallery at 116 Main St S. The proposed sign face is 22-inches tall by 33-inches wide for a total of 5.1 square feet. The sign is proposed to contain the words "Alesci Gallery". The lettering is proposed to be tan, on a burgundy background. The sign will also include a tan boarder and accent feature. 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. The total sign of the sign face is 5.1 square feet, which meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 116 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 without HPC approval. 4. No exterior lighting on the sign without HPC approval. 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 Case No: Date Fled: 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. Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required. 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 is required. 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. All folbwing information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Projectny3v.14111411 $f Assessor's Parcel No K2/ o24i,s Nib I -j-..wlJ at- /!wo tP4 - Zoning District C 13 .� Description of Project in detail �z�f :t f 1 ��,�/ — 47fr be 7eee.mittlivx "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in al/ 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, t1 L. eioNp / Rpresentative. a1Z4 LAkZiJ Mailing Address //B 5' Mi-1N St' Mailing Address //gv do. MOON S,1; City State Zip1ri/f 41e Q'AN 5-542.City State Zip ,6 1h'llwA•f.Qt, Telephone No. /`i S/5 6 9--/V/ Z Telephone No. lQ S:\Planning\design review permitwpd April 12, 2002 • 46" Street level Sign face: 1 inch painted MDO, burgundy background PMS 7421 Lettering color PMS 7402 15207 N 63rd St. Stillwater, MN 55082 651.206.8025 Todd@stcroixsign.com SL Ct ?i x Estimate is good for 30 days. Project will start with 50% down, balance due on delivery or before installation. Drawings are the property of St Croix Sign until paid in full or rights for design is paid for. 15207 N 63rd St. Stillwater, MN 55082 651.206.8025 Todd@stcroixsign.com St_ CI_al_ x II I Estimate is good for 30 days. Project will start with 50% down, balance due on delivery or before installation. Drawings are the property of St Croix Sign until paid in full or rights for design is paid for. Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: July 28, 2010 CASE NO.: 10-25 APPLICANT: Joseph and Constance Paiement REQUEST: Design Review of signage and awning of Paiement Law Office LOCATION: 221 Mrytle St E COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: August 2, 2010 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner hp.4 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval of signage and awnings at 221 Myrtle St E. The project calls for a projecting sign along Myrtle, awnings along Myrtle and Union Street and a sign on one of the awnings along Union St. The building is located in the core Stillwater Commercial Historic District as listed on the National Registry of Historic Districts. The building itself is a contributing building to the Historic District and was built sometime prior to 1884. Projecting Sign along Myrtle St The proposed sign face is 3 feet wide by 2 feet tall for a total of 6 square feet. The sign is proposed to contain the words "Paiement Law Office" and their address . The lettering is proposed to be off-white on a black background with gold color accents. 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. The total sign of the sign face is 6 square feet, which meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 221 Myrtle St E Page 2 Awnings The applicant is proposing a single awning along Myrtle St over the main entrance and three awnings along Union St over the windows. All of the awnings will be black. The application fails to indicate if the awning material will be fabric or another material. The awning along Myrtle St is proposed to simply contain the address of the site. Today, the Union St side of the building contains three traditional crack style awnings. The applicant is requesting that they be permitted to replace the existing awning with three fixed awnings. Two will span over one set of windows and the third will span two sets of windows and contain their logo. The logo will cover less than 50% of the area of the awning, meeting the zoning code requirements. ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requests in whole or in part. 2. Deny the requests. 3. Continue the request for more information. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 13, 2010 and the next Heritage Preservation Commission meeting is scheduled for September 6, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and take an action 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 projection sign must be a minimum of 8 feet above the sidewalk. 3. No lighting without approval of the HPC. 4. No additional signage without design review approval by the HPC. 5. The awning coverings shall be a fabric material. attachments: Applicant's Form and packet Case No: Date Rled: 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. Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required. 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 is required. 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. All following information is required . PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 09d/ G; ,�r e 5frAssessor's Parcel No. :?M 3e0?61', 7 /G0U,3 Zoning District 1/j 4else✓ Description of Project in detail ali 3 x J 5 A/ ON ° G uAti'�'. -�- 5 e,��'Cl, ufv- c � , 6 ,fc'.?,�` /,i = S%e a / e, i } j /-- -5-• / ' o f ...5 ry 444 /5 "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/Si-elite/4 iez,:r/i' GG� Mailing Address 017l 6 6, • flrr,/e50' City State Zip J //i, 7A'/ .55aao1 Telephone No. Zidd '-JMt 1,) I/ S:\Planning\design review permitwpd Representative Gil hill Ott/ City State Zip Telephone No. Mailing Address April 12, 2002 Paiement Law Office, L.L.C. Licensed Attorneys in Minnesota & Wisconsin Constance J. Paiement Joseph M. Paiement July 10, 2010 Community Development Department - Signage City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth St Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Sign Applications for 221 East Myrtle St Dear Sir or Madam: St. Croix Business Center, Suite 155 44 St. Croix Trail South Lakeland, MN 55043 Phone 651.436.1556 Fax 651.436.6406 Please fmd enclosed the signage applications for our building at 221 East Myrtle Street, Stillwater, MN. The applications are for one hanging sign on Myrtle Street and one awning signage on Union Alley Street, in addition, a street address signage only on the Myrtle Street front door awning. Also, enclosed is the Design Review Application Form (including 14 copies of the materials) and checks for $50 and $25 for the application fees. The building currently has two non -fully functioning roll out awnings on the Union Alley building side and one stationary awning on the Myrtle Street side of the building. We understand that there is a preference for roll out awnings, however in our research of the downtown area we found only three buildings with roll out awnings (the building on Main Street that houses Life is Good store, Brines, and the new Stella store building on Chestnut). The Brines and Life is Good building awnings are badly frayed and are left rolled out continuously. The new Stella store awnings on Chestnut Street are left rolled up. The rest of the awnings downtown are stationary awnings (Leos, Main Cafe, Marx, Stillwater Gazette building, Loggers, Lowell Inn, Collaborations, Maple Island, Northern Vineyards, Chestnut Building, West Marine, River Market, Ruby Begonias, Savories, etc.). The roll out awnings do not last as long as stationary awnings and cannot be used when there is snow, as they are not designed to handle the Minnesota winter snowfall. Further, when the roll out awning on the building is rolled out the stop sign on Union Alley at the corner of Myrtle Street is blocked which creates a potential traffic hazard. The stationary awnings that we are proposing are much small and will not interfere with the traffic signage. Finally, the stationary awnings we are proposing will allow for more wwwpaiementlaw.corn City of Stillwater July 10, 2010 Page 2 of 2 of the decorative brick on the Union Alley side of the building above the windows to be exposed, which is currently being covered by the roll out awnings. We are excited about our building purchase and our move to historic downtown Stillwater and believe are design consultant has done a great job to incorporate the historic look into the signage which we will be incorporating as our firm branding. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please feel free to contact us at 651.436.1556 or connie@paiementlaw.com. • cerely, Joseph Paiement & Constance Paiement -filiwater Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8820 Location of Sign Address ) E, Mort! .. Street Applicant City Stillwater State MN Zip 55082 Name C,d? iC'.m�r Address 14- S-i-.Crecc �Tizi S. Owner (if different`. from Applicant) Name City A i<@..Ickxlck. Phone # (05i- Lt 3to- ►S54� State MN Phone # Zip S 5cq- Address City State Zip Contractor's Name Name A Address CME J J tJc, ,tU City " P ( (u �1aUvh , rufi DYl rtV P_ p l 5 Phone # Statemk a-� d a-X 3) Zip 55�p% Attached are the following documents (Required to be submitted with application) �b 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 HPC. Sign` Details4wy,��✓ ye r nsions: ,i V/3S Setffacks: From Property Line farc From Bldg • to lors: iAJ 5 ' 4(44 6b,-- - Lsuw (/ir) Illumination: ❑ Yes t.,lo Sign Height: (If freestanding) From Driveway/Parking Lot Matey als: r M'h. Lp �e,//� If Yes, Type: Declaration 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 issueO related to this r . u Own Signat a re.uired Appl - . nt Signature Review (For office use only)' D Approved- _ Permit # : , 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 with payments to be made as follows: 1/2 down and 1/2 billed upon completion Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate, All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fife, tornado and other necessary insurance upon above work. Workmen's Cotnpensation and Public Liability Insurance on and above work to be taken out by 3206 BLOONIVGTON AVE • Proposal Submitt www.acmeawning.com 6-28-10 INNEAPOLIS, MN 55407 • PHONE (612)722-2731 • FAX (612)722-2930 To Work To be PerfoAt Name Paiement Law Office Street 221 Myrtle St. E. City Stillwater 612-419-1582 State MN Street City State We hereby propose to furnish the materials end pprform the labor neeesst}ry�or tnh completion of 4 ea. omplete stationary we a ramp awnings sty a -S : North: 1 ea. West: 1 ea. 1 ea. 1 ea. 1 ea. 3'x3'x 9' 3'x3'x 9'5" 3'x3'x 19'7" 3'x3'x 9'5" 3' x3' x 5'2" (h xproj.x w) (hxprojxw) (hxprojxw) (hxprojxw) (hxprojxw) Graphics: logo (on west middle one only) "221 East Myrtle St. (on the north one 5" letters) Price includes installation Price includes soft valance (for hard valance add: $350) Fabric: black ArgeCSMIL4tS ReassiTe,{ hdaghe f rSite performed in accordance with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars($ 4080 ). $ 780 $1476 $ 780 $ 750 $450 subtotal: $4236 less discount if done soon: (- $556) subtotal: $3680 $ 400 Total: $4080 Respectfully submitted Per Acme Awning Paul Hohbein Note -This proposal may be withdrawn 30 by us if not accepted within days. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Date Signature L[,(/', 221 EAST MYRTLE STREET NORTH AWNING VOMEMENT ,i/�-LAW OFFICE". WEST AWNING awnings are 3' tall x 3' projection x 9' to 19'7" wide Frames bottoms will be 8'6" above the sidewalk Distance to the curb is 6' from the building Graphics on the north awning: 5" x 61" = 2.12 sq ft of graphics Graphics on one of the west awnings: logo 30" x 125" = 26.04 sq ft of the awnings on the west side will not have graphics on thcii1 AvOitai (5-/okye .Le(rip))/4/ froufrotAiti Sfre40-r �urKY‘)'e\&) 04641k ob Blky buidAi /1-tk0 DN lovieAl Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8820 Location of Sign driess Ha£/�iy-H Applicant; Na City Stillwater 7;_inke h 1L' O, a EGG d;;ef,ye„(/ 7%1',/ S 4Ais5 Owner (if different from Applicant) Name State MN Zip 55082 one# ZS/- 93‘ "106" State Phone # Address Contractor's Name Ai 1 Name Me(ex-ef Address City State Zip Phone # &,i� / 9J7 '? Zip Attached are the following documents (Rec(uired 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. .E9-- Design Review application (if required). All signs in the Downtown Area and in the West Stillwater Business Park require design review by HPC. Sign Details Sign Size: Dimensions: ieer-,. Fr m Bld Colors. Illumination: ❑ es NO Setbacks: From Property Line = Squa ,Feet Sign Height: (If freestanding) From Driveway/Parking Lot ify Materials: If Yes, Type: Declaration 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. Owner Signature (requi -d Applicant Signature Review (For office use only) 0 Approved 0 Denied Permit # Conditions for approval: auo Date ✓j {etifo7 Date.. /; * 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 Paiement Law Office Hanging Sign Description Details The hanging sign will be 3 feet wide by 2 feet long and 3/4 of an inch thick. The sign will be made out of wood. The sign will be painted on both sides of the board. The sign will be painted black, the lettering will be off-white, and the two decorative design pieces will be painted gold. The height of the letters for "Paiement" will be approximately 4 inches. The sign will be hung from a metal bracket affixed to the building at the corner of Myrtle and Union Alley on the Myrtle street side. The sign will be hung below the now black (former white) trim board on the building, the bottom of which is approximately 14' from the sidewalk. The bottom of the sign will hang between 9' and 10' from the sidewalk The sign will hang approximately 3" from the building. (-0/Ai< ik 70) 4665 ,OP be -Yen() aC' 1110)17�j The address should be in a warm white. C-0, M-5,Y-20, K-O.The address is outlined above. (It is difficult to see because it is on white. 3Id4 6aii ' 34,1�m���l� Crooke VaasS o�Nelaorr grezrJ awdia35 u)/ b1d3(_; eiW,55 Ayie gd) e-d0 s Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: July 28, 2010 APPLICANT: Michael McGuire CASE NO.: 10-27 REQUEST: Design Review of proposed window and door changes on the Commander Elevator LOCATION: 413 Nelson St E COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: August 2, 2010 REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planne DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval of new windows and patio door on the Commander Elevator at 413 Nelson St E. Window and Door Changes The applicant is seeking approval to remove four 2'x2' casement windows with four 3'x6' Anderson sliding windows and two 3'x7' doors on the easterly elevation on the building. The specific changed were highlighted in yellow on the plans by the applicant. The building is located in the Downtown Commercial Design Review District; however, it is outside the core Stillwater Commercial Historic District that is listed on the National Registry of Historic Districts. Future Improvements The plans also show a window on the second floor and a balcony with patio doors on an upper level that were approved in 2002 and have yet to be installed. The applicant still hopes to install these improvements in the future; however, he has no set date. 413 Nelson St E Page 2 • ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the requests in whole or in part. 2. Deny the requests. 3. Continue the request for more information. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 13, 2010 and the next Heritage Preservation Commission meeting is scheduled for September 6, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the requested window and door changes as conditioned. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. attachments: Applicant's Form and packet michael mcguire architect 409 east nelson street stillwater mn 5 5 0 8 2 July 15, 2010 Heritage Preservation Commission Stillwater, MN. Re: the Commander Elevator Building 413 East Nelson St. Stillwater, MN. Proposal to replace four 2'x2' casement windows with four 3'x6' Anderson sliding windows and two 3'x7' doors. (see drawing) The windows and frames would be white to match existing windows. The doors would be painted silver to match existing doors. If existing metal siding is damaged or removed, it would be replaces with similar material. Michael McGuire 651 439 3710 '651 • 439 • 3710 fax 651 • 439 • 9590 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No: I< -d Date Filed: )/( Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 t// 7 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 t- Address of Project (� � , N E L) + Assessor's Parcel No.2 < 03 0, X0,4(, dd j CoNt v/u p CDP (Required) Zoning Distric escription of Project in detail ►► `t" i�► 1 S ON MI v60 Sfi 5 t D L6M»t cA (\ I ALE, CuE-11-6R eNct $E1) "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 M(C_q (' M U'R Representative Mailing Address 'h' ) E1 �\66 NJ Mailing Address City State Zip 5�("It l-W/�-F lY CJ-69E).- City State Zip Telephone No. 6-5 1- if --?jai -,3 71 O Telephone No. Signa Signature (Requir d) (Required) H:\mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 , • , , A c. . V A 1. I 0 EvAroH yla t > -4- aR\\O'er\!; z a#. .1-'! V41 95 . +I 'xvv1 aON, •,,/� • rt rt Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: July 22, 2010 APPLICANT: Lucy and Nathan Smith REQUESTS: Design Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit LOCATION: 718 Pine St W HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 2, 2010 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Plann CASE NO.: 10-28 BACKGROUND Property owners Lucy and Nathan Smith are requesting design review for an accessory dwelling unit on their property at 315 Olive St W. As part of this project, they proposed to demolish an existing garage and construct a new accessory dwelling unit in its place. According to building records, the existing garage was constructed in 1974 and thus is not subject to demolition review. The building would contain just less than 556 square feet of garage space in the first floor and a total of 728 square feet of habitable space on the first and second floor that will be used as an accessory dwelling unit. The lot size is 11,250 sq. ft., and 10,000 sq. ft. is the minimum lot size permitted by the ordinance for an accessory dwelling unit. 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: 718 Pine St W Smith Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Review Page 2 a. Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet. The subject lot is 11,250 square feet. b. The accessory dwelling unit may be located on second floor above the garage. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is located mainly on the second floor above the garage with a small entry on the first floor. 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 3-foot rear yard setback and an 8.5-foot side yard setback. The proposed side yard setbacks meet the requirements of the RB district. The proposed 3-foot rear yard setback fails to meet the requirements of the RB zoning district; however, the circumstances that exist on this lot are unique. The City owns a 10-foot strip of land that runs behind this lot that runs between Martha St and William St. This was originally platted as an ally that was never developed by the City. Currently there are electrical utilities owned and maintained by Xcel Energy running through this strip. On the other side of the 10' strip of land owned by the City, the Smith's own a 128' deep by 75' wide parcel of land. Due to the existence of the utilities coupled with the fact that the City has a standing policy to retain and not vacate right-of-way the Smith's are left a required 25-foot setback along their north property line they share with the ally. Without this ally way the Smith's could construct the garage as proposed. A variance is required from the Planning Commission in order to construct the accessory dwelling unit as proposed. 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 two 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 728 square feet. 718 Pine St W Smith Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Review Page 3 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. The main roof will be a 12/12 pitch and match that of the main home. It includes a saltbox style roof on the North and South elevations in order to create more living space on the second floor of the garage while limiting the overall height of the garage. Finally, the renderings show the use of fiber -cement board siding with 3-inch reveals along with shakes on the gables. 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. The proposal calls for the development of a kitchen and bathroom in the accessory dwelling unit, which assumedly means it will be connect to municipal sewer and water services. j. Maximum size of garage is 800 square feet. The proposed area of the garage in the accessory dwelling unit is 556 square feet. ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the design review for the new accessory dwelling unit as presented with the following conditions: a. All revisions to the approved plan must be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. b. The accessory dwelling unit must be similar style, materials and color as the primary dwelling unit. If exterior lighting is used it must be soffit style lighting units. The City Planner shall review final plans for the Accessory Dwelling Unit prior to issuance of the building permit. c. The accessory dwelling unit shall connect to public sanitary sewer and water service. d. The applicant must meet the drainage requirements of the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization. e. The applicant must secure a variance from the Planning Commission to encroach into the required rear yard setback. 718 Pine St W Smith Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Review Page 4 2. Deny the 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 September 6, 2010 Commission meeting. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 13, 2010. 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 Case No: l� Date Filed: Receipt No.: 7,17,SO Fee: $25.00 //0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTME/prr CITY OF STILLWATER f 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET / STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required, Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following information is required. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 7 IS PINE- ST. W, Assessor's Parcel No. c�i ; 030.2 o '3`{. 06)- ( (Required) Zoning District Re) Description of Project in detail hI.o$t ExrsToN6 GA-ikAGt 4N0 CO/UST RuCT A ivE'w GAtRf{GE %1TK 4" AcctssoiY pw> LLiniG UN/7- ,413ovF Mek "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 L. ve Y TH Representative A AT N A V Cvl ► 771 Mailing Address 7 0$ f ,,v fir,litif Mailing Address 7/ca pink Sr, LA/. City State Zip S'rILtwATE A, AN S-s-08gity State Zip L4wATE/KA/ $�Sog 2 Telephone No. 95 2- d_s" 5- ells' Telephone No. KS- I- eig 3- 5g© S Signature ASignature (squired) (Required) H:\mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 Lucy Smith 718 Pine St. W., Stillwater, MN 55082 651-983-5805 July 15, 2010 Community Development Department City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Planning Commission, 1 am planning to construct a new garage with a dwelling unit above it in the place of my existing garage. I want the new structure to appear as is if it were a carriage house constructed in the early 1900s, but have the efficiency of a modern green built home. As a result, I have spent time working with a designer to ensure the new carriage house matches the architectural details of my 134 story bungalow. Here is a list of details on my home which I have incorporated into the new building: • 13 story frame with dormers • Same 12/12 roof pitch with asphalt shingles • 3" reveal, clapboard, fiber -cement siding • Fiber -cement shakes on the gables • Open bead -board soffits • Front porch on the garage • Similar trim size and style My home, at 718 Pine Street West consists of two parcels separated by a 10' strip of land owned by the City of Stillwater. The City doesn't use the 10' linear parcel, and it has been integrated into my yard and my neighbors' yards. We each use and maintain the portion of the City's parcel which passes through our lot. My main parcel adjacent to Pine Street is 75' wide by 150' deep. My back parcel is 75' wide by 128' deep. The City's rear lot setback for an accessory dwelling is 25'. The purpose of which is to give rear neighbors privacy and separation from accessory dwelling units - an issue which is inapplicable to my circumstance. Since I own the back lot, the neighbor to my rear will be over 140' from the accessory dwelling unit. Due to the special circumstances of my two parcels, I am applying for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback to 3'. Please review the photos and diagrams 1 have included to clearly explain the situation. Thank you for your consideration. Kind Regards, SUPPORTING PICTURES A) Existing Home B) View of rear parcel facing North - taken from the back of the front parcel. The rear property line is beyond the trees. C) View of rear parcel facing South - taken from the North property line of the rear parcel. The existing garage can be seen in the background. B A C 128' 10' 150' 718 Pine Street 2-Parcel Diagram 75' Rear Parcel City's Linear Parcel Front Parcel Pine Street West 718 Pine Street 2-Parcel Legal Descriptions FRONT PARCEL County Auditors Plat No. 9, 2nd Ward County Auditors Plat No. 9, Lot 3 REAR PARCEL Pt Lt 9 being W 75ft of E 250ft of SD Lt Exc Pt Lyg Nly of Ln description as beginning at sely cor It 12 co and plt 9 and run tbn ely alg In being desc 25ft m/1 to swly cor It 11 sd plt and sd In there term. County Auditor's Plat No. 9, Lot 9 • -11 mr 0 z 0 qZ m 9-1 118' I 11.43/4' 24•-01 9'-11tor APPROX if 11 13/4- mm r rn 9-1 1/IP I u DI I I 1143/41 1 it 11 l l l f l 11 111111111 8'-1 Ire DRAWN FOR SMITH - CARRIAGE HOUSE SCALE: ELEVATIONS CONSOLIDATED LUMBER OWNS ALL RIGHTS AND COPYRIGHTS OF THIS DRAWING. ANY DUPUCATIONS OF THIS DRAWING IS LLEGAL VERIFY HEADER AND BEAM SIZES, GRADES, ELEVATIONS, ROUGH OPENINGS, F1G. SIZES, ANDALL OTHER DIMENSIONS AND SPECS. Mc, ARROW BUILDING CENTER DWA00 otGmsNtlaEN Lumber Company 818 COUNTY RD. U HUDSON, WI S4019-1942 OFFICE: 11 388.2311 FAX 71S30 5804 WNWABCCLC.COM DRAWN BY: RHETy BORNER PRELIMINARY DATE: 07.142010 REVISION 81 DATE REVISION 83 DATE 2Pd _I oI Egg gg il; le tog [1' IOW 2d tad / p 7Yt6 SPF RAFIFRS M 74.0 C sd sd 2A'd 2I'd sd 12,0` 1 t2d • 0-11/E HIGHPLA'TFHElGHT yy e-12' CONCRETE FLOOR wxv1 Ivxe) PO' pp •7 IOW { _y N Ilif1 0 4 4 4 I § 2s � ls-3. s W-IT WO' DRAWN FOR SMITH CARRIAGE HOUSE CONSOJDATEG LULSER OWNS ALL RIGHTS ARROWBUID/NG CENTER DRAWN BY: RNETT BURNER - ANU COPYRIGHTS OF TN6 URAWWC. ANT DUPLICATIONS OF THIS DRAWING IS ILLEGAL GNYw a CanaidWN Lumber Compare, PRELMNARY PATE 6T.tA,2oW N SCILLE: UP.., � MAIN & UPPER FLOOR ELEVATORS, ROUGH ELEVALOTHROUMENSI NSiAS.FTG SIZES. AND ALL OTHER DIMENSIONS NO SPECS. Ci U sl! N. WI 6 RD. U MOSON,VR 6FAXB-TSC2 OFFICE tWWW.AAt FAX: TT6a6636U! riWWA0CCLC.CCM REVISION St 1E: REVISION 42 DAIE PROPOSED 34'X 24' I CARRIAGE HOUSE I 30.0 fOUEO0f70dY I X7�'AARAAE I NATHAN SMITH - PROPOSED CARRIAGE HOUSE 718 PINE ST W SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" DATE: 7.16.2010 STILLWATER, MN 55082 I DRAWN BY: RHETT BORNER ARROW BUILDING CENTER Division of Consolidated Lumbar Company 876 COUNTY RD. U HUDSON, WI 54016-7642 OFFICE: 715-386-2371 FAX: 715-386-5804 W W W.ABC-CLC.COM ALL COORDINATES, PROPERTY LINES, SETBACKS, AND DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR OR OWNER THROUGH LOCAL OR CITY GOVERNMENT. A C. OF- M! N N F. S O 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: July 28, 2010 APPLICANT: Kelly Meyer, J.G. Hause REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for J.G. Hause LOCATION: 106 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: August 2, 2010 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner VAR CASE NO.: 2010-29 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a three dimensional projecting sign for J.G. Hause at 106 Main St S. The proposed sign will be comprised of a doll house measuring 30 inches wide, 18 inches tall, and 12 inches deep. The house will be pained to match their company colors with a black roof, white siding, and green trim. Additionally a 36 inches wide by 12 inches tall face plate with the name J.G. Hause Constriction, Inc will hang below the house. The sign will be black and green on a white 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 a three dimensional projecting signs of up to nine cubic feet in size. Drawing a cube around the entire sign it measures 36 inches by 36 inches by 12 inches for a total of nine cubic square feet, which meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. • 106 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 sign must be a minimum of 8 feet above the sidewalk. 3. No additional signage without HPC approval. 4. No exterior lighting on the sign without HPC approval. 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 07/12/2010 13:10 6514308810 CITY OF STILLWATER PAGE 03/12 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM Case No:/Z) Date Filed: 7f Receipt No,: Fee: $ 25.00 V de s 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 (Le. 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 IOU !-A1.) SI'S Assessor's Parcel No. vMW 97,0 06201' (Required) Zoning District P Description of Project in detail ",I herebystate the foregoing statements and al/ data, information snd 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. Proper Owner S IN 'i 11.1ttTS, Representative Sl,c.tT 2.�.p 95z4-Aiti Mailing Address_j J�21 Jj3 R,pb Mailing Address City State Zip rili,h1 OPE i V t 1,,) SS42Lf City State Zip „ o, ij\/ 610 Telephone No. 5 - 32 - h Telephone No. Signature H:\mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 Signature 2- e� sir J G Hause Construction, Inc 106 Main St S Stillwater, MN 55082 Office 651-439-0189 Fax 651-439-5085 Letter of Intent The new sign for J.G. Hause Construction, Inc. is designed to creatively evoke the image of a home, with a distinctive moniker which adds character to the downtown business district. Rather than erect a larger size which may be better for visibility, we decided to blend into the downtown streetscape by hanging a scale model of a home from the existing sign bracket, with a smaller identification sign hanging below that. The model home will be painted white, with green trim and a black roof to match the signage colors. The entire sign will hang no less than eight feet (96") from the sidewalk. Thank you, JG Hause Construction, INC Page 1 of 1 MN BC #5350 WI License #7970 Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planners Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Re: Demolition Ordinance #814 Message: During a review of the City Code with the HPC at your retreat on June 30th, it was noticed that a copy of the original ordinance that Rodger Tomten had at the meeting was different then the codified version of the code. After reviewing this issue with the City Clerk, it was determined that the paragraph was in fact inadvertently left out of the codified version of the code. This will be corrected in the next version of the code. Attached are copies of the original signed ordinance and the official published version of the code from 1995. I have marked the missing section in the signed version of the code for the commission's benefit. Thanks, Mike 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 ORDINANCE NO. 814 AN ORDINANCE REGULATING BUILDING DEMOLITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: Subd. 1. Purpose. This Ordinance is adopted for the purpose of protecting the historic and aesthetic qualities of the City by preserving, rehabilitating or restoring, when reasonable, buildings or structures which constitute or reflect distinctive features of the architectural or historical resources of the City, thereby promoting the public welfare and preserving the cultural heritage of the City. Subd. 2. Definitions. a. Historically Significant Building or Structure, means: "any building or structure or portion of a building or structure on the National Historic Register, a designated local landmark or a contributing structure or building in a designated national register historic district." b. Buildings or Structures of Potential Historic Significance, means: "a building or structure or portion of a building or structure fifty (50) years of age or older." c. Non -Historic Structure or Building, means: "a structure or building less than fifty (50) years old or a noncontributing structure in a nationally or locally designated historic district." d. Commission. Heritage Preservation Commission. Subd. 3. Permits Required. No building or structure may be demolished without obtaining a demolition permit. An application for a demolition permit must be filed with the city Building Official. Subd. 4. Procedure. The Building Official must forward a copy of each demolition permit application to the Community Development Director for determination of historic significance or potential significance. The Community Development Director must make the following determination: a. building or structure is historically significant or potentially historically significant; or b. the building or structure is not historically or potentially historic. If buildings or structures are determined by the Community Development Director to be historic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the commission for review according to Subd. 5. Demolition Plan Review. Buildings or structures determined non -historic must be referred to the Building Official for issuance of a demolition permit. I 0 QJ Subd. 5. Demolition Plan Review. 0 a. Not less than thirty (30) days after the Community Development Director determines that a building or structure is historically significant, the applicant for the permit must submit f v to the Commission fifteen (15) copies of a demolition plan which must include the following information: 1. A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its I % property and with reference to neighboring properties; 2. A legal description of property and owner of record; ( 3. Photographs of all building elevations; �p 4. A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished; 3The t` 5. reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including i U where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for (\-- demolition; 6. Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or 6 structure to be demolished is located; 7. Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning C requirements; • . V • 8. A description of alternatives to the demolition; and b 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. 'b. The Commission must hold a public hearing according to Chapter 31 Subdivision 29(a) on the pending application. After the public hearing and a review of the application information and if the Commission determines that the owner has made a reasonable effort to sell or preserve the structure and after finding that there is no available feasible alternative to demolition, the commission must notify the Building Official in writing that a demolition permit may be issued. If a finding is made that the building or structure is historically significant and there is a feasible alternative to demolition, the permit must be denied. Subd. 6. Emergency Demolition. If a historically significant or other significant building or structure poses an immediate threat to health or safety due to its deteriorated condition, the owner of the building or structure may request issuance of an emergency demolition permit. If both the Community Development Director and Building Official find that the condition of the building or structure poses a serious and imminent threat to public health and safety and that there is no reasonable alternative to the immediate demolition, the Community Development Director and Building Official may issue an emergency demolition permit. Subd. 7. Injunction. In addition to any other relief provided by this Ordinance, the City Attorney may apply to a Court of competent jurisdiction for an injunction to prohibit the continuation of any violation of this Ordinance. This application for relief may include seeking a temporary restraining order, temporary injunction and permanent injunction. 2 Subd. 8. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and a separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during on which a violation occurs or continues. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 5th day of December Attest: Morli jweldon, City Clerk Publish: Stillwater Gazette December 26, 1995 • • , 1995. Stillwater Evening Gazette PO Box 58, 102 S 2nd St, Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone: 612-439-3130 Fax:612-439-4713 1111 City of Stillwater 216N4thSt Stillwater,144 55082 AFFIDAVIT of PUBLICATION State of Minnesota, ) )ss. County of Washington No. of Col. *of Days Description/Dates of Publication Documents Inches Published Business Name City of Stillwater 216N4thSt Stillwater, NCI 55082 Unit Rate 2179 12-27-95 1 of 1 Total Amount 1 16.25 1 run Evening Gazettar Rec. 26,"1905 ORDINANCE,_NO. total AN o�. REGI jl;ATING B OITY COUNCI ' GITY OF i t WATER DOES ORDAIN Stibda_Put+pose.This0rc narraeieadDpted 'lave purpose of protectki the hlstotic and aesibelso quakles of the City by Pteseefing, rehabiitating or restoring. when, reasonable, buiittlfigaristructureswiikhcOnstltutearrelgict distkicttve features of the ai haectural or hiatoricai resources of the City, thereby promong the public welfare and preserving the Cultural heritage of ire City. • Subd2.Detons. Hiaterically Storificar1 Building or Structures , means: any building or • Structure 'or portion 01 a bung. or strrtre on the National ltddC; Register, a designated local, orAta:ritilotilngslitieOlir and ed national register Meiotic 0. puilIngsor Structures ofPoterEHtgoric `s Since means: "a buhciig or above. stnteture or portion of a building or ie strut irefihy (50)yearsolageoroider' means ota structure or building :less than fifty iota (So) years old ora nonconHlbuttng structure in a nationally or locally designated historic district." d.ffommissien, Heritage Preservation Coon. Subd. 3. Permits Required. No building or strurlunta may be demolished. righted obtaining a :fdemolitien permit. An eggiloatkiri for a demolition pewit must _DO mad w* Ite ei Bldg Cadet Ordinance No. 814 12/26/95 services? 2.400 39.00 Total Amount 39.00 Jmi 4 Date Pages Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication o1 the notice: abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwx z By: Title: Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me on this c 764 day of "-' , 19 75-- Notary Public Received Payment , 19 DEBRA IC. CCL:URN noTA ,Pu L1c - i.::.. ,_, OTA ? M.y Cta;-s;icn Expires J�a..1, 2CA WNOi,4C . 0 \.) Sub .4, Pnomoduno. Tile Building Official innInward a copy of ee414 dernotitiortgemlit 1111111finen to do Corranunny Development Direatlelordeternitriallonof histOricsignificence or ,potehilal significance. The Community • • Director must matte the following • e. building.- or structure is historically .sliplifleant. or potentially historically . ti,ttie : . or stdicture isnot historically = or • If bundle* erstructuretrAre detertninedbyrnii Cornintaillybevelopment Directortobe Nilotic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the commission for review according to Subd. 5,-11111fianaDnatheitY6-Builcunclo of structures determined non -historic must be referred to the Building Ofticialfor Issuance.of a demi:Atkin peril*. . . . . Stibd. 5. Demolition Pien Review. a. Not lesslhanthirty (30) days aftertiae Community Development Director determines that a building or structure • ••,, is historically significant, the applicant -. - for the permit must 'submit: to the - . COmmiesion fifteen (15) . copies of a demolition plan which must include the following information: - . • • 1 :Amapehowing the location oithe building or Structure to be •deinolishecl on its • property and with reterence to neighboring properties; 2. A legal descAption of property and owner • . of record; 3„Photogaphs ot an building elevations; 4. A description of the bulkUng or structure or pottier% ot building or structure to be demolished; 5. The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including where applicable., data sufficient to establish any economic jusUfication for demolition; 6. Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the belkling or structure to be demolished is located; 7. Fielation ot demolition and future site use to the comprehensiVe plan and zoning requirements; 8.A descrip.tlon of alternatives, to the de"060n; and , 9.Eviderice that the budding . or .Structuie has been advertised for sale 4or . , restoration or reuse arid that sale for restorationor reuse is not economically feasible. e , b.theCeminilssionrnust hold apubilc hearing according to Chapter .31 Subdivision 29 (it) t.......1.«,ion • -S---\ . . - the Public heating and a review of aPPricati4I01onnetion and if the Commission dfitertnial that,, the owner has made a tealOnbi41/flOrttosellorpreservetheshucture andaftergraing thattherelsno aVallabiefeasibie PC-.1, th9,C01111110801 ninolly trat , the 15 '. ;'r. 'arkitil in Writing that a dMoillnioripernitt may be issued. If a linding is nude that thibulidfic or structure lehlOorlbligy. significant and there is a feasible allermemio donation, the permit must be denied. Subd. 6. Emergency Dorriolltion. N a hlicricaysigairent orother significant braiding or stnicture poses en immediate threat to health or safety due to its deteriorated condition, the owner of the building or structure may request issuance of a.n emergency demolition permit. N both the Qom:amity Development Director and Building Official rind that the condition c4 the building or structure poses a serious and imininent direct to public health and safety and that there is no reaaonable alternative to the immediate demolition, the Community Devc4opfrient Director and Building011icial may issue an emergency demolition permt, Subd. 7. injunction. in addition to any other relief provided by this OrdMance, the City Attorney may Rapti to a Court of competent Itiriscaction for an injunction to prohibit the continuation of any 'violation of this Oninance. Thie application fa MHO tillY include seeking a temporary restraining order, temporary Injunction and permanent Injunction. Subd. B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance shaft* gulityof a mtsdernermor and a separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during on which aviolation occurs or continues. Adopted by the City Council ol the City of Stillwater this 1b day of Decfirobstc, 1995 WsinliaCknkft Jay Kmble, Mayor Attestl inaka11-11" Mort Weldon, City Cleric 12/26 go Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planner /pip Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Re: Council decision on the Veteran's Memorial Plaque Message: On July 21st 2010, the City Council considered the HPC recommendation and heard from the Veteran's Memorial Committee related to their proposed plaque. The council elected to have the third paragraph changed from "This memorial is hallowed ground for all Veterans who are remembered here." to "This memorial is dedicated to all Veterans who are remembered here." With this change the Council approved the plaque. From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP • City Planner • City of Stillwater • 216 N. 4'h Street • Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430-8822 • Fax: 651.430-8810 • email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.mn.us Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planner!. , Date: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Re: Hersey & Bean Planing Mill Report Message: Attached is the draft report on the Hersey & Bean Planing Mill. Due to a major collapse that occurred this spring due to the high water on the St. Croix the report moved from a stabilization plan to a report that documents the resource and outlines the cause of the wall's failure. Please review and return any comments you have on the report by August 4, 2010. Thanks, Mike From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP • City Planner • City of Stillwater - 216 N. 4t1, Street • Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430-8822 • Fax: 651.430-8810 email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.mn.us HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL STILLWATER, MN WALL STABILIZATION REPORT July 2010 PREPARED FOR City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 COLLABORATIVE t)esignuroup,i,„ 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: 612.332.3654 Fax 612.332.3626 Contact: Craig Milkert, PE CDG Project Number 10018.00 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION SCOPE OF WORK REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS OBSERVATIONS DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX A - PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX B - SITE DRAWING APPENDIX C - ARCHIVAL PHOTOGRAPHS (`COLLABORATIVE BesignGroup,;.- 1 2 2 2 3 4 5 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The ruins of the Hersey & Bean planing mill are located at the base of the bluff that extends adjacent to the east side of current TH36 and just to the west of a dirt access trail that parallels the St. Croix River in Stillwater, MN. The ruins of the planing mill include an approximately 20 foot tall limestone wall constructed against the bluff, which has become unstable. Despite the collapse of portions of the rear retaining wall, the structural foundations of the ruins of the planing mill exhibit excellent integrity of location, materials, and association. The original construction of the stone walls for the Hersey & Bean Planing Mill used irregular shaped limestone with thin mortar joints. While much of the deterioration of the stone wall has occurred over the past 137 years, it is evident from the photo documentation that the tall west wall has significantly deteriorated within the past 4 years. The loss of stone is originating at the bottom of the wall, causing instability and collapse of the wall from the bottom towards the top of the wall. The face stones are literally falling in towards the bluff due to lack of support from the backup stone. The one factor that has been introduced to the building in recent years is the construction of the drainage ditch to the north and the culverts under the trail. This ditch drains water from the north and uses culverts under the trail to discharge water to the river. We believe that the water that is backing up at the base of the wall has softened or possibly eroded the soil from beneath the wall. Weakening of the soils beneath the wall and the corresponding progressive collapse has likely been occurring for a number of years. The wall at the south end of the site is also becoming unstable due to the erosion of soil from behind the wall. Due to safety reasons, restoration and stabilization of the tall west wall will require a large amount of deconstruction first. Reconstruction of the wall will be very expensive, impractical, and ultimately loose the historic character of the wall. Very little of the actual historic construction will remain, and the end result will be a re -constructed duplicate of the original. Our recommendation is to carefully de -construct the tall west wall down to a level approximately four feet above its base. The stones should be removed individually, starting at the top, to avoid collapse of the remainder of the wall and damage to the bottom of the wall. Although this method will result in the loss of a large portion of the historic building, it will result in a safe site for the public to experience this important piece of Minnesota history. Retaining the base of the walls will still show the footprint of the buildings. The other wall that should be considered for deconstruction is the south wall. Continued erosion of the soil and rock behind the wall are causing instability. This wall should also be deconstructed and stabilized to within approximately four feet of its base. The drainage ditch and culverts should be reconfigured to drain water away from the base of the wall and ruins. COLLABORATIVE t)c 1 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 INTRODUCTION The ruins of the Hersey & Bean planing mill are located at the base of the bluff that extends adjacent to the east side of current TH36 and just to the west of a dirt access trail that parallels the St. Croix River in Stillwater, MN. The City of Stillwater requested that Collaborative Design Group provide Structural Engineering and Historic Preservation services to investigate the collapse of the historic limestone wall of the historic Hersey & Bean planing mill on the southern end of the Aiple property adjacent to the St. Croix River and provide recommendations for its stabilization and/or repair. Following the localized flooding in the spring of 2010, a significant portion of the wall collapsed over a period of 8 weeks. After review of the situation with the City and a representative from the State Historic Preservation Office, it was decided that a modified scope of work would be pursued. SCOPE OF WORK The following is the scope of work performed: o Review existing documents for information regarding wall history and construction to determine requirements for restoration. o Perform site investigation of the limestone wall, including photo -documentation and measured drawings. o Provide Condition Assessment Report outlining the cause of the collapse and develop recommendations for both immediate stabilization and long term preservation. Review of documents The "Intensive Literature Search and Phase I/II Archeological Investigations for the St. Croix River Crossing Project" report prepared by Two Pines Resources Group, LLC dated May 2005 was reviewed and summarized as follows: The site encompasses the remains of the Hersey & Bean Lumber Company's steam -powered planing mill (1873-1906). This remains consist of the limestone ruins of the planning mill, including a wall with a window/door opening and two arched openings constructed of brick that marked a possible "water outlet" in the partially extant wall, and another that marked the opening of the flue that was excavated into the bluff. The site was recommended as a single contributing property to the NRHP-eligible Stillwater Cultural Landscape District. The planing mill was added to the Hersey & Bean Lumber Company complex in 1873. This mill, which was referred to as the "Little Mill," was constructed to the south of the main mill and was designed to cut the long pieces of lumber that were necessary for the construction of railroad bridges. In order to accommodate the length of these timbers, the cutting saw was actually constructed on a raised platform that extended out into the river. The planing mill was damaged by fire in 1887 and rebuilt on the same location. The planing mill was abandoned in 1906, when the Hersey & Bean Lumber Company ceased operation. The ruins of the planing mill consist of a 23-ft (7-m)-high limestone retaining wall constructed against the bluff, the remains of the limestone walls of the boiler room that were partially cut into the bedrock, and the underground brick -lined flue that extends 82 ft. to the west. Portions of the wall along the west side of the ruin have slumped creating large debris piles that obscure any COLLABORATIVE i)esinC roup,mr. 2 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 interior features within the ruins. Despite the collapse of portions of the rear retaining wall, the structural foundations of the ruins of the planing mill exhibit excellent integrity of location, materials, and association. Observations Visual observations of the site and wall are recorded below. The following rating system was used in assessing the building condition: • Good: The building component is new, with no apparent defects. • Average: The building component is able to perform its originally intended function in its current condition. Any defects are minor and do not affect the performance of the building component. • Poor: The building component is unable to perform its originally intended function in its current condition. The component has major defects, but is repairable. • Unacceptable: The building component is unable to perform its originally intended function in its current condition, and cannot be economically repaired. Replacement of the building component is required. OBSERVATIONS REFERENCE PHOTO RUINS WALLS • The planing mill ruins lay at the base of the bluff Photos 1 & 2 and west of the dirt access trail. The river is east of the trail • The condition of the limestone walls of the planing Photos 3 - 8 mill varies from poor to unacceptable across the site. • The center portion of the tall west wall has Photos 9 - 17 progressively collapsed from July of 2004 to April 2010 • The wing wall perpendicular to the tall wall on the Photos 18 & 19 north end is unstable and in unacceptable condition. This wall was originally constructed with two wythes of stone. Only the outer wythe is still extant. • The wall at the far southern end of the site is unstable due to erosion behind the wall, ands is in unacceptable condition. • Large stone have been placed at the top of the tall Photo 21 west wall. The instability of the wall makes support of these stones questionable. ;'COLLABORATIVE DesignCroupo, . Photos 3, 5, & 20 3 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 OBSERVATIONS REFERENCE PHOTO • The tall west wall was constructed by laying up the Photos 22 & 23 outer wythe of stone and filling the void between the outer wythe and bluff with stone • The wall appears to have collapsed due to lack of support at the bottom of the wall. • A weak and deteriorated mortar is present in many Photos 24 & 25 of the stone joints. • A drainage ditch is present extending from the Photo 26 north. • The spring flooding of the river extends over the Photo 27 trail, causing the water to back up in the culverts and the ditch. Standing water was present at the base of the wall. • The ditch ends at the base of the tall west wall, and Photos 28 — 30 drains to the river with a steel culvert and a PVC culvert under the trail. • The steel culvert appears to be clogged with debris Photo 29 DISCUSSION The original construction of the stone walls for the Hersey & Bean Planing Mill used irregular shaped limestone with thin mortar joints. The mortar throughout is in poor to unacceptable condition. The west walls of the building were constructed against the bluff. While these walls may appear to be retaining walls, they were actually relying on the bluff for support. No footings were observed beneath the walls during this investigation, but it is unlikely that any exist. Typical construction from this era would have the stone walls constructed directly on the ground surface. While much of the deterioration of the stone wall has occurred over the past 137 years, it is evident from the photo documentation that the tall west wall has significantly deteriorated within the past 4 years. In fact, the majority of the collapse occurred in March and April of this year. So, the question that needs to be answered is what has changed in recent years to create the instability of the wall? The original wall construction battered, or leaned the stone wall against the bluff. As the face stone was laid up to create the finished interior face of the building foundation wall, random and sometimes loose stones were placed as a backup between the face stone and the bluff to provide structural integrity. From our observations, it is apparent that the current instability is caused from the loss of the backup stone between the face of the wall and the bluff. The loss of stone is originating at the bottom of the wall, causing instability and collapse of the wall from the 'COLLABORATIVE DcsignGroup,{,w. 4 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 bottom towards the top of the wall. The face stones are literally falling in towards the bluff due to lack of support from the backup stone. The one factor that has been introduced to the building in recent years is the construction of the drainage ditch to the north and the culverts under the trail. This ditch drains water from the north and uses culverts under the trail to discharge water to the river. It is likely that the steel culvert was installed initially, and the PVC culvert was added when the steel culvert became clogged. The culvert location is at the base of the tall west wall. During our site visit on March 24, 2020, the river had risen to the point of covering the trail and backing water up through the culverts and into the ditch. A large pool of water had formed at the base of the wall. The water had receded before our site visit on April 5, 2010, draining the pool and exposing the culverts. We believe that the water that is backing up at the base of the wall has softened or possibly eroded the soil from beneath the wall. A compromised foundation for the wall would cause a progressive collapse as has occurred. When the stones at the base of the wall fall away, the back up stone behind the face stone will eventually fall out also. As the back up stone continue to drop, the integrity of the face stone is compromised, causing the face stone to fall into the wall. It is easy to understand that the wall will continue to collapse in on itself. This weakening of the soils beneath the wall and the corresponding progressive collapse has likely been occurring for a number of years. It is evident that many of the other stone walls have collapsed over the years. The two main areas of apparent wall instability are the small wing wall at the far north end of the tall west wall (photos 18 & 19), and the wall at the far south end of the site (photo 5). By examining the photos taken since 2007, it is evident that one half of the thickness of the wall has deteriorated and fallen from the wall since 2007. This has left the wall unstable and in danger of collapse. The wall at the south end of the site is also becoming unstable due to the erosion of soil from behind the wall. RECOMMENDATIONS Due to safety reasons, restoration and stabilization of the tall west wall will require a large amount of deconstruction first. The wall is currently too unstable and unsafe for workers to begin replacing the stone in the collapsed area of the wall. The top portion of the wall, along with the large stones placed at the top, are in danger of falling on the workers during restoration. The best method of restoring the wall is disassembly and reconstruction. Re -pointing the entire wall with an appropriate mortar would be required. COLLABORATIVE Dt.siL*nGi 5 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 Reconstruction of the wall will be very expensive, impractical, and ultimately loose the historic character of the wall. Very little of the actual historic construction will remain, and the end result will be a re -constructed duplicate of the original. Our recommendation is to carefully de- construct the tall west wall down to a level approximately four feet above its base. The stones should be removed individually, starting at the top, to avoid collapse of the remainder of the wall and damage to the bottom of the wall. Although this method will result in the loss of a large portion of the historic building, it will result in a safe site for the public to experience this important piece of Minnesota history. Retaining the base of the walls will still show the footprint of the buildings. We have included a drawing of the site and archival photographs of the wall as part of this report. The other wall that should be considered for deconstruction is the south wall. Continued erosion of the soil and rock behind the wall are causing instability. This wall should also be deconstructed and stabilized to within approximately four feet of its base. The drainage ditch and culverts should be reconfigured to drain water away from the base of the wall and ruins. Relocating the culverts farther to the north, and filling in the ditch and low areas near the base of the wall will help to stabilize the soils. Slope of the soils should promote drainage away from the ruins site. COLLABORATIVE dup,,111C.. 6 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHS C COLLABORATIVE C)csignGroup, t., HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 1 - View of site looking north along trail. Photo 3 - Planing Mill ruins looking north. COLLABORATIVE Desi nGroup, .n, Photo 2 - View of site looking north along trail. Photo 4 - Planing Mill ruins looking south. July 2010 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 5 - Wall elevation Photo 7 - Wall elevation Photo 6 - Wall elevation Photo 8 - Wall elevation July 2010 C COLLABORATIVE Design(:r©up,,,,.. HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT July 2010 Photo 9 — Tall west wall - 7/30/2004 C COLLABORATIVE L)esignGroup,,,,,. Photo 10 — Tall west wall - 3/26/2007 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 11 — Tall west wall - 4/30/07 Photo 13 — Tall west wall - 3/24/10 Photo 12 — Tall west wall -10/5/2009 Photo 14 — Tall west wall - 3/26/2010 July 2010 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 15 — Tall west wall - 4/5/2010 Photo 17 — Tall west wall - 4/20/2010 COLLABORATIVE Design[ roup,—_ Photo 16 — Tall west wall - 4/8/2010 Photo 18 — Unstable wing wall. July 2010 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 19 — Unstable wing wall. Photo 21 — Top portion of wall with large stones. Photo 20 — Unstable wall due to erosion. Photo 22— Collapsed portion of tall west wall. July 2010 C COLLABORATIVE Design Group HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 23 — Loss of back-up stone behind face stone. Photo 25 - Stones mortared in place. COLLABORATIVE DesignGroLtp,,,,,, Photo 24 — Stones mortared in place. Photo 26 — Flooded drainage ditch extending north of site. July 2010 HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT Photo 27 — Drainage ditch flooding base of wall. Photo 29 — Partially clogged steel culvert on river side of trail. Photo 28 — View of drainage ditch with steel and PVC culverts. Photo 30 — Outlet of PVC culvert on river side of trail. July 2010 COLLABORATIVE D „ ignC rc up,,,, HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 APPENDIX B SITE DRAWING COLLABORATIVE DeSI '2161-0Llp, t«. HERSEY & BEAN PLANING MILL WALL STABILIZATION REPORT JULY 2010 APPENDIX C ARCHIVAL PHOTOGRAPHS COLLABORATIVE Design(,roup,mt.