Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-09-08 HPC PacketRevised Agenda Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Thursday, September 8, 2011 The regular meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission will begin at 7 p.m., Thursday, September 8, 2011, in the Fire Department Training Room (1st Floor) at Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street, Stillwater MN 55082. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF August 1, 2011 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 /2011 -43. A demolition request for a single family residence located at 820 Sycamore Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. David Majeski, applicant. 4.02. Case No. 2011 -24. A zoning text amendment to the Building Demolition Ordinance, Chapter 34 of the Stillwater City Code. City of Stillwater, applicant. 5. DESIGN REVIEWS 5.01 Case No. DR/2011 -45. Design review of signage for "No Neck Tony's" located at 231 Myrtle Street East in the CBD, Central Business District. Anthony Misenor, applicant. 5.02 Case No. DR/2011 -46. Design review of a portion of the exterior facade at Valley Ridge located at 1570 Frontage Road in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Tanek Inc, Jessica Meidinger, applicant. 5.03 Case No. DR/2011 -47. Design review for temporary signage at the "Fun Shop" located at 1500 Frontage Road in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Mike Hammer, applicant. 5.04 Case No. DR/2011 -44. Design review of signage for "Dave's Sport Shop" located at 1650 Washington Ave in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Topline Advertising Inc., applicant. 5.05 Case No. DR/2011 -48. Design review for signage at The Edge Hockey Centers located at 1650 Washington Avenue in the BP -I, Business Park Industrial District. Robert Kaufmann, applicant. 5.06 Case No. DR/2011 -49. Design review for modifications to a parapet wall located at 132 Main Street South in the CBD, Central Business District. Greg Gartner, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURN 1' Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Thursday, September 8, 2011 The regular meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission will begin at 7 p.m., Thursday, September 8, 2011, in the Fire Department Training Room (1st Floor) at Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street, Stillwater MN 55082. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF August 1, 2011 MINUTES 3. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Heritage Preservation Commissibn 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/2011 -43. A demolition request for a single family residence located at 820 Sycamore Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. David Majeski, applicant. 4.02. Case No. 2011 -24. A zoning text amendment to the Building Demolition Ordinance, Chapter 34 of the Stillwater City Code. City of Stillwater, applicant. 5. DESIGN REVIEWS 5.01 Case No. DR/2011 -45. Design review of signage for "No Neck Tony's" located at 231 Myrtle Street East in the CBD, Central Business District. Anthony Misenor, applicant. 5.02 Case No. DR/2011 -46. Design review of a portion of the exterior fagade at Valley Ridge located at 1570 Frontage Road in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Tanek Inc, Jessica Meidinger, applicant. 5.03 Case No. DR/2011 -47. Design review for temporary signage at the "Fun Shop" located at 1500 Frontage Road in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Mike Hammer, applicant. 5.04 Case No. DR/2011 -44. Design review of signage for "Dave's Sport Shop" located at 1650 Washington Ave in the BP -C, Business Park Commercial District. Topline Advertising Inc., applicant. 5.05 Case No. DR/2011 -48. Design review for signage at The Edge Hockey Centers located at 1650 Washington Avenue in the BP -I, Business Park Industrial District. Robert Kaufmann, applicant. 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURN A ate 1NE IIRTNILACE OF MINNESOTA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 2011 7:00 PM Present: Commissioners Lieberman, Johnson, Krakowski, Goodman, Zahren, and Councilmember Cook Staff Present: Planner Pogge Absent: Commissioners Tomten and Brach Chair Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Zahren, seconded by Commissioner Goodman, moved to approve the minutes of July 6, 2011. Motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM , No one was present who wished to speak. Open forum was closed. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. DEM /2011 -40. A demolition request for a residence located at 823 Anderson Street West in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Mark Balay Architects representing Brad and Gwendolyn Glynn, Applicant. Mr. Pogge introduced the case in which Brad & Gwendolyn Glynn, property owners of 823 Anderson St W, are requesting a demolition permit for the existing single family home and all other structures on the property. The applicants intend to sell their land to the hospital for a yet to be determined use after the house is removed, and have reached a preliminary agreement with the hospital which includes removal of the house from the property. Mr. Pogge explained that a "non- historic structure or building" is defined by Chapter 34, Section 34 -2 as a structure or building less than 50 years old. This structure was built in 1900 according to the Washington County Assessor's office 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. Section 34 -5 of the City Code lists nine items that must be considered prior to approval of a demolition permit by the Commission. City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 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 application simply notes the legal description as Lot 6, Block 14 of Holcombe's Addition to Stillwater. This is not the complete legal description for the property. 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 entire home and all of the other structures on the site 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 applicants stated in their letter that "it is not economically feasible to relocate or renovate the structure in the current market." They included three proposed budgets to renovate and relocate the current home. 6. Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located; the applicant stated in their application that, The future re- use plan will be under the control of the hospital." No other information or plans for the property's reuse were submitted with the application. 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 Low /Medium Density Residential and is zoned RB, two - family residential. A single - family home conforms with the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements. A hospital use is a specially permitted use in the RB zoning district. This site is in the Neighborhood Conservation Design District. Any new structure in the future would be subject to the infill design criteria. 8. A description of alternatives to the demolition; the applicant notes alternatives that include relocating the structure to a different property. 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 noted in their letter that the property has been advertised on Craig's List, local Ebay, and in the Stillwater Gazette for removal over a period of three years. The applicant has failed to submit evidence of these attempts. Additionally, staff feels that it may be appropriate to list the home and property for sale by a local realtor as opposed to simply selling it directly to the hospital without any attempt to find a potential purchaser who would preserve the home as is. In the end the most prudent option for the current owner may be to sell it to the hospital; however, an attempt to find an alternative 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 buyer seems reasonable. The applicant has included some history on the house in their application prepared by Mark S. Balay. No historical or architectural significance was noted. Mr. Pogge noted that Section 34 -5 Subdivision 1 outlines what is required to be submitted with a demolition application. In reviewing the application material, staff finds that the applicant lacks a complete legal description for the property, a reuse plan for the property, and proof of a reasonable effort to sell or preserve the structure. HPC has several alternatives related to this request: A. Reject the application as incomplete. If the HPC finds that the application is not complete they could reject the application. With a rejection, the Commission must list the specific items that are deficient in the application. B. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the demolition rules then the Commission could deny the request. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. C. Approve. If the proposed demolition request is found acceptable to the HPC, they should be approved. Staff would recommend the following minimum condition for approval. The demolition permit shall be effective only after a reuse plan on the property has been reviewed and approved by the HPC. D. Table. If the HPC wished to give more time to consider alternatives to demolition or if the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until your September 5th meeting. The 60 -day decision deadline for the request is September 11, 2011. City Staff met with representatives from Lakeview Hospital on July 28 to discuss this request, at which time staff explored various reuse options with the hospital. The hospital is considering an option that would permit the home to remain on the site long term. Staff recommends that the application be tabled to September 5, 2011 to allow additional time to consider alternatives to demolition. Commissioner Liebermann asked if anyone was present who wished to speak on this matter. Stuart Glaser, 1103 Everett St S (2 houses down), posed the question as to how much more is the hospital is going to be allowed to buy. He went on to say that this house has been here since 1900. Recently, three houses where the parking ramp is now were destroyed or moved. He wondered if there was a plan for replacement, and if there was buffer, "because the hospital keeps eating up the houses around them." Mr. Glaser has not decided if he opposes or approves the demolition, but is concerned about the loss of homes in the area and about decreasing property values. Don Johnson, 1015 Everett St S (adjacent to the south), expressed his frustration that the letter just received is the first they heard about this. His feeling is that the project is moving too quickly. When the hospital put in the ramp, he went to half a dozen meetings with the Planning Commission, at which time the Planning Commission said no, the hospital should not get a ramp, but the council went ahead and approved it anyway. He stated that he does not like the hospital's encroachment on the neighborhood and the increase of commercial development in a residential 3 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 area. He said that he is concerned but is not totally against this sale, as he understands that real estate sales are difficult at this time. Steve Finnegan, 5526 Oakgreen Place N, Oak Park Heights, speaking on behalf of his mother, said that he is part owner of the house as well. Going back 50 years he can see what the hospital has done in this neighborhood, vacating Anderson Street and taking residential homes to add land to the hospital. Mr. Finnegan said he feels that this should stay a residential area and he would like to see the house put up for sale first before any demolition consideration. He is also looking for a guarantee that demolition would not damage houses around this one. Motion by Commissioner Liebermann, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, that since the application is incomplete, there is no plan for reuse, and not all of the nine steps have been met, to table this case until such time as HPC is presented with a complete application and plan for reuse for that property. The motion was approved unanimously. DESIGN REVIEWS Case No. DR/2011 -42. Design review of two exterior signs for "This Love of Mine" located at 201 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District. Serigraphics Sign Systems, applicant. Commissioner Lieberman explained that the applicant is requesting design review and approval for three sets of signs at 102 Main St N for This Love of Mine. Along Main St and Myrtle St identical wall signs are proposed to replace the existing Pulp Fashion wall signs and awnings. The new signs are proposed to contain the words "This Love of Mine" in black letters on a white background, with accent pieces that are green, yellow, and orange with black boarders. The signs are both 8 feet wide by 4 feet 6- inches tall for a total of 36.2 square feet in area, and will be illuminated with the existing goose neck style lights on the building. Along the rear of the building facing Union Alley the applicant is proposing to install 5 individual panels measuring 3 feet wide by 1 foot tall, totaling 15 square feet, using black lettering on a white background with a small flower accent, with the words: 1. "one -of -a -kind items" 2. "handmade jewelry" 3. "re- fashioned jewelry" 4. "hand- selected clothing" 5. "photography" When asked about mounting for the sign, Steve Reeser, owner of the store, said that there are no brackets to be reused as the existing sign was glued to the building. Temporary signs are up at present. Gartner Studios, the building's owner, tried to remove the previous sign and it came off in pieces. The plan is to have the glue removed without damaging the building. The new design should cover up any previous residue as the new sign is slightly bigger than the previous one. The applicant further stated that he does not feel that the expense of removing the old sign should be his responsibility. Commissioner Liebermann stated that HPC takes no position on 4 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 that, but they would not like to see the granite on the building damaged in any way. Mr. Liebermann suggested trying to find a product that will safely remove the glue, and also suggested that city staff contact Mr. Gartner about removing the glue, rather than making it the new owner's responsibility. Mr. Pogge stated that there is precedence for advertising in an alley. By policy, the Commission has allowed generic identification signs on awnings and such signs are not counted against the allowable sign area. In cases of buildings with a single wall sign they have allowed the addition of a single projecting sign that contains generic verbiage. Staff is concerned that the proposal with multiple sign panels could result in similar future requests and that adding multiple sign panels would necessitate the need for additional building penetrations. Staff recommends against the proposal and recommends that if generic identification signage is used that it be limited to a single sign face. Mr. Reeser responded that he is open to using one panel rather than five if that is preferable to HPC. This would require fewer holes and result in less damage to the side of the building. His design team can submit an updated sign to match what is on the front. Staff recommends approval as conditioned. 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2. No additional signage without HPC approval. 3. No exterior lighting on the sign without HPC approval. 4. That a single sign face for the generic identification sign be used facing Union Alley. Final sign design shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior . to installation of the sign. As conditioned, the proposed signs meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance and meet the intent of the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District Design Manual. Motion by Johnson, seconded by Zahren, to approve Case No. 2011 -42 with the four conditions listed, with additional clarification on item #3 to use existing wall - mount lights on the south and east, no exterior lighting on the west, adding condition #5 that the sign on the west side be one sign frame with the color to match that of the Main Street sign, and that the tenant signs be embodied within the larger sign frame. Motion was approved unanimously. Commissioner Liebermann added that although Union Alley is technically an alley, there is significant traffic enough to warrant signage and this request is not a departure from normal procedure or ordinances. Councilmember Cook asked for clarification that the one panel will now incorporate the five individual signs but will still be the same dimensions. The applicant responded that yes, that is correct, and that the size would be the same or possibly a little smaller than what was previously planned. 5 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 Case No. DR/2011 -39. Design review of the Downtown Stillwater Pedestrian Walkway located in the CBD, Central Business District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Commissioner Lieberman read a brief description of the project. Starting with Main Street, the project will include bump -out curbs on both sides of Main trimmed with the typical hexagonal paver band to match the existing sidewalks along Main Street. New colored and stamped concrete crosswalks will be installed across Main Street and Commercial Street. The walkway will begin with an entrance area which includes brick and stone columns, ornamental fencing, natural stone seating, and a kiosk/information signage panel. The walkway between Main Street and Water Street will include a pergola structure, restrooms, benches, litter receptacles, and bicycle racks. One existing drive apron along Main Street will be removed and the existing parking areas to the north and south of the walkway will be framed with concrete curb. A planting island on the south edge will screen the existing gas station. The concrete walks along Main Street will be edged with the hexagonal paver band, brick columns, ornamental fencing, and tree and shrub plantings. Mr. Pogge introduced Bill Sanders, Landscape Architect with Sanders Wacker Bergly, and Bill Hickey to present the plan. Mr. Sanders displayed the drawing and pointed out various features beginning at Main Street and Commercial Street. The plans are to improve the intersection, extending corners out, and adding a pedestrian crosswalk. The entry space allows for a street - scape edge, with parking on the north side by the book store. Landscaping, fencing and columns will be added, along with street parking spaces. He explained that as you enter the half circle area with the Kiosk, the space opens up with the pergola and sitting area. The plaza itself is mostly paved with stamped or scored concrete (but will not be slippery), and will pick up the brick color and texture. The wood pergola will have a landscaped background. The center area arches provide a traditional look. Columns will have some brick and stone and some smooth surface. Lighting in the walkway will be the same acorn lighting design that is used throughout the park. The pedestrian walkway will continue across Water Street. The lower area will become a sitting and eating area, with permanent tables, umbrellas and benches made of a material and finish that can be left out year round. Low stone walls and plants provide a background for this area. The larger plaza area that overlooks Lowell Park and the amphitheatre will become a walking zone. There are bike racks on both sides. Mr. Pogge indicated that the projected need is for as many as 200 spaces for bikes in the downtown area. Levee elevation will take into account potential flooding levels. At the trail it will ramp up to 691 feet. Councilmember Cook expressed concern that behind restroom is a service station, and that when she walks down Commercial Street the restroom will block the view of the bridge. Mr. Sanders responded that with the panoramic view and the relatively small size of the buildings, portions of the bridge will be visible. The view won't be blocked except right behind the buildings. Mr. Hickey said that under Council's direction, a "park" style building was designed, using primarily brick with cast stone accent matching those used throughout the walkway, and board and batten freeze board. The brick is a red iron spot color that fits the traditional Stillwater brick colors. The building will have a gable roof with transom windows. The main roof surface will be 6 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 a gray tile made of cement with metal over the transom windows. The front of the restroom will have a large overhang that will serve as a shelter for bus riders. The vent stacks will be disguised as a chimney. Trim colors are two greens used in combination along with white. The interior will be a clean, classic look, using a glazed block product in white with visual texture (speckles) with some black accents, going up to the 8 foot level, above which it will be painted. Floors will be polished concrete, but will not be slippery. Lighting will be discreet. The buildings will be insulated for all season use. Concern was expressed about allowing enough space for a bus stop. Mr. Hickey said that the footage needed has been taken into consideration. Staff recommends approval as conditioned. 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Mr. Pogge has been in contact with DNR and FEMA regarding flood plain zoning, and they will be applying for a variance. The buildings are designed to take into account flood issues, with fixtures coming down from above, for instance, and footings designed to "hold down" the building as well as to hold it up. Commissioner Liebermann asked about safety concerns and sufficient lighting in the area. The applicant responded that building lighting will function independently of the walkway and street lighting and that there will also be lighting in the pergola and bus stop area. The acorn lights along the river front have .a shield in them, but these will be used without the shield. The designer will ask if Xcel will consider a modification. HPC prefers down -lit lights rather than those pointing towards the sky. Building lighting is recessed fixtures at each doorway and on the walls. Mr. Pogge stated that maximum height restrictions have been met by the building's design, but a variance will be requested for minimum height restrictions. Motion by Johnson to approve and recommend to the Planning Commission and to City Council to approve plan for the pedestrian walkway as submitted. Seconded by Zahren. Motion passed unanimously. Case No. DR/2011 -41. Design review of SIGNAGE FOR "Indigo Creek" located at 317 South Main Street in the SBD, Central Business District. Cindy Mickelson, applicant. Ms. Mickelson wasn't present, but Mr. Pogge explained that she was present at the last meeting for a sign for the front of the building, but is now requesting a sign for the back of the building. The applicant is requesting design review and approval to install a projecting sign for Indigo Creek at 317 Main St S. The proposed sign face is 24- inches by 36- inches for a total of 6 square feet. The sign is proposed to contain the words "Indigo Creek" and "Gallery and Custom Framing." The lettering is proposed to be white, on a rock picture background with a tan boarder. The sign is proposed to be installed on existing bracket facing Water Street. For retail storefront 7 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 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 sign frame is not counted towards the total area. The total area of the sign face is 6 square feet, which meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Staff recommends approval as conditioned. 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2. The bottom of the projecting 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. The proposed sign meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual. Motion by Commissioner Zahren, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, moved to approve Case No. DR/2011 -41 as submitted. Motion approved unanimously. NEW BUSINESS The Star Tribune printed an article in which Roger Tomten was discussed prominently about the new bridge design. Mr. Tomten was also on KARE 11 during senate testimony. Commissioner Johnson mentioned that Todd Anderson had previously put up a garage behind a house on 6th St just south of Churchill. Mr. Anderson came before HPC for demolition years ago and was denied, but now the house is gone. Mr. Pogge stated that an emergency demolition permit was given as internally the house had collapsed. The house is now "gone by neglect." Commissioner Johnson also mentioned that there is still a "HAF" sign on the corner by the old post office. Mr. Pogge stated that he has written a letter about the sign and will go directly to the church (property owner) about it, and that the sign should have been removed weeks ago. He explained that there are steps that need to be taken per council policy, and that the first step is to educate the person as to our sign code before citing them for code violation. Commissioner Johnson said that there is another sign at Maple Island. Mr. Pogge was not aware of that one, but he will investigate. There are issues with free speech, being placed in the right of way, litter, etc., with signs that must be reviewed. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification about the home demolition (Case No. DEM /2011 -40) and Lakeview Hospital discussed earlier this evening. He wondered that since action was tabled, not actually rejected, does the applicant need to wait a year to come back. Mr. Pogge responded that he will send out a rejected application to let the applicant know what was missing. This resets the 60- day clock, and they can resubmit at the next meeting. OTHER BUSINESS 8 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 1, 2011 There being no further discussion, Commissioner Zahren, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, moved to adjourn at 8:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carol Danielson Interim Recording Secretary 9 Memo Community Development Department To: Heritage Preservation Commission From: Michel Pogge, City Planner p, Date: Thursday, September 01, 2011 Re: Case 11 -43 Demolition of 820 Sycamore St W Message: Staff visited the site at 820 Sycamore St W on August 31, 2011. Due to the condition of the property staff determined that the property represented an immediate public hazard. As such, City Staff issued an emergency demolition order on the structure. Due to this, no further City review is required. Since a public hearing notice was published, the Commission needs to open and close the hearing without further action. 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: August 26, 2011 APPLICANT: City of Stillwater CASE NO.: 11 -24 REQUEST: Revisions to City Code Chapter 34 "Building Demolition" HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE: September 8, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planne059 BACKGROUND Currently, before a structure over 50 years of age is demolished, a public hearing before the Heritage Preservation Commission is required unless the structure is an immediate life safety hazard. Applicants are required to complete what is known as the "nine steps" before the Commission will approve a permit. Once the nine steps are completed, the HPC is required to approve the demolition permit unless the structure proposed to be demolished is on the National Register of Historic Places (currently 8 residential structures and 64 commercial building in the downtown area are on the NRHP) or are locally designated (currently no structure in the City is locally designated). Due to the rather relaxed requirements of the current ordinance, important structures could be demolished and are not protected. For example, homes like the Alexander and Ida Nelson house on top of Chestnut Street stairs; the John and Anna O'Brien house, now home to Rivertown Inn; and Adolphus and Aurora Hospes House, now home to Aurora Staples Bed and Breakfast, all fall outside of any real protection that the City's demolition review ordinance provides. On the other hand, currently all structures over 50 years of age that are proposed to be demolished require a public hearing before the Commission. Even those that clearly have no historic integrity. A change should be made to allow staff to initially review demolition requests so that staff could approve the demolition of buildings that do not have historic value or integrity. For example, a 1950's block garage on a property with an 1800's home would be an instance where staff could approve the permit. Finally, the ordinance fails to clearly define, what constitutes a partial demolition. Demolition Ordinance Amendment Page 2 Staff has researched demolition ordinances from 37 HPC's around the State of Minnesota. Two ordinances worthy of consideration are from Chaska and Minneapolis. In Minneapolis, staff conducts an initial review to determine if a structure is potentially historic and if not, staff administratively approves the demolition request. This would expedite clear -cut cases and allow them to be quickly approved. Other more significant structures would continue to be reviewed by the HPC. Both Chaska and Minneapolis have a provision that allows the Commission to impose a 180 -day waiting period. This approach of requiring a waiting period is also very common throughout the nation when it comes to demolition reviews and allows the community time to search for an alternative to demolition. The Minneapolis ordinance takes it one step further and allows the Minneapolis HPC the opportunity to consider locally designating the property during the waiting period, and if approved by the HPC and City Council, the demolition of the property could be blocked. While rarely applied, it provides a relief valve of sorts, which also requires City Council approval to ensure that properties are not locally designated without just cause. The Heritage Preservation Commission has been discussing the possibility of revising the current ordinance over the past year and a half. The attached proposal represents the Commission proposal based on this work. SPECIFIC REQUEST Consider an amendment to the City's Building Demolition Ordinance. DISCUSSION The proposed Building Demolition Ordinance does four main things: 1. Allows for city staff to review and approve demolition requests without the need to complete the nine steps or go before the HPC for review when staff determines the building or structure has no historic significance even if the building is older than 50 years of age. 2. Provides an opportunity for the Commission to grant a permit to demolish a significant property with up to a 180 -day delay to allow parties interested in preserving the historic resource a reasonable opportunity to act to protect it. Ultimately an applicant could appeal a delay to the City Council. Additionally, if the structure is a hazard, City Staff can issue the demolition permit regardless of the HPC's action. 3. Provides an opportunity for a demolition permit to be denied on a structure that is determined to be significant even if it is not listed on the national register nor is locally designated. The proposed ordinance requires that a structure be locally designated within 180 days of the HPC action. Per City Code, the Council would have to approve the start of the local designation process and the actual local designation. 4. Defines what a demolition is and is not. Demolition Ordinance Amendment Page 3 50 years or older vs. a set date In the past, the Commission has discussed whether a rolling date (i.e. 50 years or older) or a set date (i.e. January 1, 1945) should be used when determining if a building or structure is potentially historically significant. The Commission has asked staff to draft the ordinance using a rolling date set at 50 years of age or older based on the current ordinance and due to the fact that 50 years is when a property is first eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. When the building demolition ordinance was first established by the City in 1995, building that were 50 years or older were 1945. Today, 26 years later, a building built in 1961 receives the same protection as those from the nineteenth- century and who represent the hallmark of Stillwater, and the goal of preserving. Additionally, none of the neighborhoods representing post World War II development in Stillwater have been studies by the HPC and without these studies is difficult to establish a rational basis for determining what constitutes a Historic Resource. For these reasons, staff recommends that the age of Building or structure of potential historic significance be changed from 50 years or older to December 31, 1945 or older. ALTERNATIVES The HPC has several alternatives related to this request: A. Recommend City Council Approval. If the Commission finds the proposed ordinance is acceptable, the Commission should recommend that the City Council approve the demolition ordinance as presented. B. Recommend City Council Approval as recommend by City Staff. If the Commission agrees with City Staff, the Commission should amended the proposed ordinance to change the definition of "building or structure of potential historic significance" to be those buildings or structures built on or before December 31, 1945 and recommend that the City Council approve the demolition ordinance. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not advisable, then the commission should recommend that the City Council deny the proposed ordinance. D. Table. If the HPC wished additional time to review the ordinance, the Commission should table action to the October 3rd meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Alternative B ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 34, ENTITLED BUILDING DEMOLITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: 1. Amending. City Code Chapter 34 replaced with the following: Chapter 34 BUILDING DEMOLITION Sec. 34 -1. Purpose of chapter. This chapter 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. Sec. 34 -2. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subdivision, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Building or structure of potential historic significance means a building or structure or portion of a building or structure 50 years of age or older. Commission means the heritage preservation commission. Community Development Director means the Stillwater Community Development Director or his or her designee. Demolition means one of the following: (1) Razing a building. (2) Removal of fifty (50) percent or more of the structure. (3) Removal of more than twenty (20) percent of the exterior front facade of a structure. (4) Removal of more than forty (40) percent of the total exterior side and rear facades of a structure. (5) Removal of any part of a roof for the purpose of expanding the living space. (6) Demolition by neglect. A demolition shall not mean any of the following: (1) A structure required to be demolished in accordance with Minn. Stats. ch. 463. (2) Destruction by fire that has been determined to be a total loss by the Community Development Director. However, a fire that is caused by arson and was proven to be started by an act of the owner or the owner's agent shall be considered a demolition. (3) Destruction by a natural disaster or other similar event and which has been determined to be a total loss by the Community Development Director. Historic Resource means any building or structure that is not currently designated as a Heritage Preservation Site but which is worthy of such designation because of its historical, cultural, architectural, archaeological or engineering significance for one of the following reasons: (1) The property is associated with significant events or with periods that exemplify broad patterns of cultural, political, economic or social history. (2) The property is associated with the lives of significant persons or groups. (3) The property contains or is associated with distinctive elements of city or neighborhood identity. (4) The property embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural or engineering type or style, or method of construction. (5) The property exemplifies a landscape design or development pattern distinguished by innovation, rarity, uniqueness or quality of design or detail. (6) The property exemplifies works of master builders, engineers, designers, artists, craftsmen or architects. (7) The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. 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 heritage preservation site or a contributing structure or building in a designated national register historic district. Nonhistoric structure or building means a structure or building less than 50 years old or a noncontributing structure in a nationally or locally designated historic district. Sec. 34 -3. Permit 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. Sec. 34 -4. Procedure. The building official must forward a copy of each demolition permit application to the community development director. Subd 1. Community Development Director Review. The community development director shall review the permit, make one of the following determinations, and take the associated action: (1) The building or structure is historically significant. If the building or structure is found to be historically significant, then the application will be sent to the commission for review according to Section 34 -4, Subd. 2. (2) The building or structure is a historic resource. If a building or structure is potentially historic due to is age of 50 years or more, and it is determined to be a historic resource, then the application will be sent to the commission for review according to Section 34 -4, Subd 2. (3) The building or structure is potentially historic but not a historic resource. If a building or structure is found to be potentially historic, but it is determined that it does not meet the definition of a historic resource, then the application for a demolition permit will be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit. (4) The building or structure is Nonhistoric. If a building or structure is nonhistoric, then the application for a demolition permit will be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit. Subd.2. Heritage Preservation Commission Review. If the community development director determines that a building or structure is historically significant or a historic resource, then the commission must review the demolition request to determine whether a demolition permit may be issued. (1). Required demolition permit application materials. An application form and 15 copies for commission review must be submitted to the city in order to place the demolition request on a commission agenda for consideration. The demolition permit application must include the following information: (a) A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighborhood properties; (b) A legal description of property and owner of record; (c) Photographs of all building elevations; (d) A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished; (e) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition; (f) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located; (g) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements; (h) A description of alternatives to the demolition; and (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. (2). Public hearing. The commission must hold a public hearing according to chapter 31- 204, subdivision 3 of this Code. The commission will conduct the public hearing, review the demolition request, and decide upon one of the following courses of action: (a) For a historically significant building or structure (i) No feasible alternative to demolition. 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. (ii) Feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission determines that there is a feasible alternative to demolition, the permit must be denied. (b) For a historic resource (j)Negative finding. If the commission finds that the property is not a historic resource, then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit shall be issued, as provided in subdivision 3 below. (ii) Positive finding with no feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission finds that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, but that there is no feasible alternative to demolition, then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit shall be issued, as provided in subdivision 3 below. (iii) Positive finding with feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission finds that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, and that there is a feasible alternative to demolition, then the commission shall deny the demolition permit and direct the community development director to prepare a designation study of the property, as provided in section 22 -7, subdivision 4. (1) Failure to designate property. If the city council does not approve the preparation of the designation study within 30 days of the commission determination, or if the completed designation study is not approved within 180 days of the commission determination, or if the city council denies implementation of the designation after completion of the designation study, then the building official shall issue the demolition permit. (3). Commission findings and conditions. While reviewing the demolition permit request, the commission shall consider the following findings and conditions: (a) Destruction of historic resource. Before approving the demolition of a property determined to be an historic resource, the commission shall make findings that the demolition is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the property, or that there are no reasonable alternatives to the demolition. In determining whether reasonable alternatives exist, the commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the significance of the property, the integrity of the property and the economic value or usefulness of the existing structure, including its current use, costs of renovation and feasible alternative uses. The commission may delay a final decision for up to one hundred eighty (180) days to allow parties interested in preserving the historic resource a reasonable opportunity to act to protect it. (b) Mitigation plan. The commission may require a mitigation plan as a condition of any approval for demolition of an historic resource. Such plan may include the documentation of the property by measured drawings, photographic recording, historical research or other means appropriate to the significance of the property. Such plan also may include the salvage and preservation of specified building materials, architectural details, ornaments, fixtures and similar items for use in restoration elsewhere. (c) Demolition delay. The commission may stay the release of the building, wrecking or demolition permit for up to one hundred eighty (180) days as a condition of approval for a demolition of an historic resource if the resource has been found to contribute to a potential historic district to allow parties interested in preserving the historic resource a reasonable opportunity to act to protect it. The release of the permit may be allowed for emergency exception as required in section 34 -7. Sec. 34 -5. 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. Sec. 34 -6. Injunction. In addition to any other relief provided by this chapter, the city attorney may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for an injunction to prohibit the continuation of any violation of this chapter. This application for relief may include seeking a temporary restraining order, temporary injunction and permanent injunction. Sec. 34 -7. Violation of chapter. Any person violating any provision of this chapter 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. 2. Savings. In all other ways City Code Chapter 31 shall remain in full force and effect. 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of , 2011. CITY OF STILLWATER Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane Ward, City Clerk Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: August 31, 2011 Anthony Misenor Design Review of proposed signage for No Neck Tony's 231 Myrtle St E CASE NO.: 11 -45 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: ZONING: HPC DATE: REVIEWERS: PREPARED BY: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use CBD - Central Business District September 8, 2011 Community Dev. Director Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for a sign and updated awning at 231 Myrtle St E for No Neck Tony's. Wall Sign The sign is proposed to contain the words "No Neck Tony's" in gold letters on a black background. The sign will have a gold border. The sign is 21 feet wide by 1 foot 10 inches tall for a total of 38.5 square feet in area. The applicant is proposing that the sign be illuminated with gooseneck lighting; however, no details were provided. The applicant should provide details on the lighting fixtures for review before installing them. 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 states building signs in the CBD '...may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face...'. The applicant's retail space is 52 feet long facing Myrtle St. The total sign area of the proposed sign is 38.5 square feet, which is smaller than allowed under the zoning ordinance. 231 Myrtle St E Page 2 Awning The applicant is also requesting to replace the existing green canvas awning with new black canvas fabric. The applicant plans to use the existing awning frames. 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. No additional signage without HPC approval. 3. Only the existing gooseneck style light fixtures shall be used to light the sign. The light bulbs in the fixtures shall not extend beyond the body of the gooseneck fixture. The light bulbs shall be limited to 100 watt incandescent light bulbs, 20 watt compact fluorescent light bulbs, or 4.8 watt LED light bulbs. Lighting fixtures and electrical conduit runs shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. FINDINGS The proposed sign and awnings meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance and meet the intent of the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District Design Manual. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing of the proposed sign Photo of existing building Location_of Sign Address City 21 Stillwater Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50,00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651 - 430 -8820 State MN Zip 55082 Applicant Narn q t r a o .►vr Ad Tess City Z c ,c/NA- Rt..9 Owner (if different from Applicant) Phone # 6�r yyZS7$O State Zip Name e r Address 32f 7 L alga.. Contractor's Name Name Address City Phone # L 55Z 7-30 3iSl State M Zip 56- Y." Phone City State Zip Attached are the following documents (Required to be submitted with application) Attach a plan showing the sign size, location and type of material used. If the sign is to be mounted on the building, show an elevation of the building and sign. Additionally, if the building is historic the sign mounting shall limit damage to the exterior of the building. Design Review application (if required). All signs in the Downtown Area and in the West Stillwater Business Park require design review byHPC I Sigh Details ' Sign Size Dimensions' , �� = Square Feat Sign Heigh (If lreestardirg) �. x t, l�'r — Setbacks. From Property Line 1 From t Bldg ' FFrom Driveway /Parkin g Lot L Colors: 1 Materials: awe +� 1 cool cQ��.�' ' woo Illumination: liirYes o No Ifr Yes. Type: Declaration hereby certify that the information best of m o+ ledge and belief. I ample e to inspec issue 0 provided in this application is true, correct and complete to the eby authorize the City of Stillwater and any agent or site dt any reasonable time before and after any permit is Applicant Signature _ RaViBt+r (Engraft,* ,* use ordy) Apptroved El Denied Date Permit # ay Date Date Conditions for approval: Contractor must be licensed 'r,ith 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.APlanning4Fonns\Applcation for';ign Permit ooc :iodated �.,plernber 23, ?tiC• 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 (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 require'. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION , I Address of Project :32-1 t&yr4 . , - (- Assessor's Parcel No. 0O ■QO (Required) Zoning District C Description of Project in details 0,c e e:: s ; n ; ev- y . '7 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. .1 further certify I will comply with the permit /fit Is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is required O Property Owner -..1 r' (J .1/, h)rip Representative AA-\-\ssi Mailing Address ._ L State Zip f: in,z >,/ 3 5' Telephone No . d 3 C) - .sic/ AW Ap0 /4 Signature I %���� �� _� r Far //r% • 4e e. H: \mcnamara\sheila \2005\design review permitwpd July 13, 2005 Mailing Address 321 MBE - fiz City State Zip & +' t1 ■o Telephone N • 1,251 - - /tp Y 7 Signature Required) i i ia.ter THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: APPLICANT: Jessica Meidinger, Tanek Architecture OWNER: Kriss Novak, South Metro Centers V, LLC REQUEST: Design Review for exterior building changes at Valley Ridge Mall LOCATION: 1570 Frontage Road COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: C - Commercial ZONING: BP -C Business Park Commercial HPC DATE: September 8, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner Mcf August 31, 2011 CASE NO.: 11 -46 BACKGROUND The owners of the Valley Ridge Mall are proposing to modify a portion of the facade in the northwest corner of the site where Anytime Fitness currently is. The project calls for removing the existing tower feature and construct a new surface that faces southwest in order to improve visibility for the two corner spaces. The existing anytime fitness sign would be placed on the new wall as shown on the plans. Additionally, a number of existing planters will be removed which block visibility to several storefronts and replace them with a new handrail system. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The property is located within the West Stillwater Business Park. Consequently, the design standards found in the West Stillwater Business Park Plan apply to the project. The project simply aims to provide visibility to retail spaces that are currently difficult to see. The plans call for the new pillars and surfaces to match the existing brick, stone, and colors that is currently on the building. 4 1570 Frontage Road Page 2 of 2 ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the Design Review Permit with the following conditions: a. All changes to the approved plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. Any major changes will also need to go to the Planning Commission and /or Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits. 2. Deny the design review permit as requested. If the Heritage Preservation Commission decides to deny the requests, findings of fact substantiating the findings must be provided. 3. Table the requests for additional information. RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval of the request with the conditions identified in above. Attachments: Location map Applicant's materials Case No: Date Fl : Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 to ;114J 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 (Le. 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 1 2"---0 Assessor's Parcel No. Z--19 30 Zoning District 6P - C Description of Project in detail Se-A- G c.P,-te cQ "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 OwnerCALLAIAMdib CCf,4CiS \Representative Mailing Address f0OOf & pak -'�ocL 1 0Mailing Address 1 �'. 2t? 91/ 4 (fr_ 3oo City State Zip Il/lt042izoik1 w, A,1KI bi 3 City State Zip V4t l'..A.0,1(S (01\1 55404- Telephone No. x61/ S'"5 0210 Telephone No. IQI R. --voU ,ti✓ 10- c , i/1,t € i4 tvlS/r,✓ S: \Planning \design re lew permltwpd April 12, 002 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission Valley Ridge Description of Project August 19, 2011 The ownership of Valley Ridge would like to modernize and "open up" this particular corner of the shopping center. This work will be done in conjunction with our existing tenant's (Anytime Fitness) Reinvention Program — a company -wide upgrade and standardization to their facility. The ownership of Valley Ridge will remove a portion of the existing tower and rebuild the related facia so it faces southwest (towards the main entrance). Three of the existing columns will be removed — opening up and bringing more light to the comer tenant's space (Anytime Fitness and the former Tuesday Morning). Additionally, the built -in planter and the brick railing immediately west of the existing storefront will be removed and replaced with a metal railing. This too will open up the sightlines into the comer and the adjacent tenant's space. Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: August 31, 2011 APPLICANT: Mike Hammer CASE NO.: 11 -47 REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for Halloween Fun Shop LOCATION: 1500 Frontage Road COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: C - Commercial ZONING: BP -C Business Park Commercial HPC DATE: September 8, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for an extended temporary sign at 1500 Frontage Road for Halloween Fun Shop. The sign is proposed to contain the words "Halloween Fun Shop" in black letters on an orange background. Various Halloween associated images will also be included on the sign. The proposed sign is a vinyl style sign. The sign is 20 feet wide by 5 feet tall for a total of 100 square feet in area. The sign will be non - illuminated. The City Code allows staff to approved temporary signs for up to 30 days at a time. The applicant would like to have the sign up from September 3rd to November 1St. Staff has approved a temporary sign permit for the first 30 day period; however, to go beyond the initial 30 days it requires the Commission's approval. Due to the limited time the business will actually be open City Staff believes the use of a temporary sign as proposed is acceptable. 1500 Frontage Road 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. No additional signage without HPC approval. 3. The sign shall be removed by November 1, 2011. In future years, the sign is permitted to be on display between September 1St through November 1St annually. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing /photo of the proposed sign DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM Case No: Date Filed: Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required. Fourteen (14) copies of aN supporting materials are required. All following information is required . PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project t500 for* (,Rc{ W Assessor's Parcel No. �'DSD �` i" "0ot 10 J (Required) Zoning District Descri • • of Project in detail._,_, 7 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 ifrtis granted and used If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature Is Ind. Property OwnerO004 1■AttroetvrtrtYs V, U (, Representative M m er Mailing Address bODD Slnt i 01(1- goad Mailing Address r r y Ste MI v nctovt . Mt4 J- City State Zip cepi ei'S ,, G J< , '/ s S Telephone . 615,9-, 8+ , • Telephone No. ,.. d - ARM Signature H:lmcnamara\sheila \2005\deslgn renew permit wpd July 13, 2005 Signatu Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651 -430 -8820 iodation of Sigh Sign Size: Dimensions: *ay 0 X t pt7 Fr'°YYI'Q[t .' RL 4 -VJ City Stillwater From Driveway/Parking Lot State State MN Zip 55082 Applicant ` Illumination: cl 'es No It Yes, Type. Name . it // - 44,7 , Phone 6) ,14 7 Address o t�Vir City ef State . i jcity Owner (if different from Applicant) Nari; r%1,1w:tro ttnterE v, t. -L., ne# ei S - i.•tt3 .4 t-3 gopi hetalotck -Rd. Atal01 A ttn a- Contractor's Name Name Phone Address City State zip Attached are the following documents (Required to be submitted with appncauon 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 Sign Details Sign Size: Dimensions: *ay 0 X = Square Feet/ ` , 0 Sign Height. (It freestanding) Setbacks: From Property Line From Bldg From Driveway/Parking Lot Colors: (jc� e J % %,f s C7 1 `tom" Materials: ii I Illumination: cl 'es No It 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 reque Owner Signature (required) Applicant Signature Review (For arfrceuse El 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 \Fomts Application for Sign Permit..doe Updated: September 23, 2006 c zZ Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: September 1, 2011 CASE NO.: 2011 -44 and 2011 -48 Request #1 (Case 2011 -44) APPLICANT: Top Line Advertising, Inc REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for Dave's Sport Shop Request #2 (Case 2011 -48) APPLICANT: Robert Kaufman REQUEST: Design Review of proposed signage for Lumber Yard Hockey and Sports Center LOCATION: 1650 Washington Ave COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: C - Commercial ZONING: BP -C Business Park Commercial HPC DATE: September 8, 2011 REVIEWED BY: Community Dev. Director PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner( i DISCUSSION The former Pro -Build site at 1650 Washington Ave is in the process of being converted into a new retail and recreation center. Dave's Sport Shop will operate the retail space and while the recreation center will be called Lumber Yard Hockey and Sports Center. Dave's Sport Shop (Case 2011 -44) The sign is proposed to contain the words "Dave's" in red letters, "Sport Shop" in white letters with a red boarder, and a blue logo. The sign is 15.8 feet wide by 5.9 feet tall for a total of 93.2 square feet in area. The sign will be internally illuminated channel letters. 1650 Washington Ave Page 2 Lumber Yard Hockey and Sports Center (Case 2011 -48) Pro -build used a 9' by 9' internally lit cabinet style, which the applicant is proposing to reface for their business. The sign is proposed to contain the words "Lumber Yard" that will simulate a wood grain pattern, "Hockey and Sports Center" in white letters on a green background. The main background of the sign is proposed to be White. The sign will contain a lumberjack and various sports emblems. The sign is 9 feet wide by 9 feet tall for a total of 81 square feet in area. For retail wall signage the West Business Park design standards provide that the signage shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance. The zoning ordinance states that for a wall sign, 'the gross surface area of a wall sign may not exceed one square foot for each foot of building, parallel to the front lot line'. The applicant's retail space has 180 feet facing Washington Ave. The total sign area of the two proposed signs is 174.2 square feet, which is smaller than allowed under the zoning ordinance. 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. No additional signage without HPC approval. FINDINGS The proposed signs meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance and meet the intent of the West Business Park Design Manual. attachments: Applicant's Form Drawing /photo of the proposed sign Case No: Date file T Receipt No.; Fee: $25.00 v , 14) DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUr,YfrY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of ail forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Photos, sketches and a letter of Intent Is required. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials is required. After Heritage Preservation approval, there Is a 10 -day appeal period. Once the 10 -day appeal period has ended, the applicant will receive a design review permit which must be signed and submitted to the City to obtain the required building permits. Ail following information is neaulned , PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project x` ��As$e r' Parce N .30003I 66 t3 Zoning District ig12— • Description of Project in detail__ _ L D @� ick- ij L -� s, on &rn't . 1 . ' 9 1 '7 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, Ifurther certify will comply with the permit Ifit Is granted and used" ]f representative is not ropert owner, then property owner's signature isogithvg. Property Ow Mailing Add! City State Zi Telephone No. RepresentatNe T+�: � -,Q e- P v i�11 MODift.i_WMailing Address f 1 1 b J -St ctn. 1C Qs rn11 City State Zip �11�. al-r) (42 571._L) I 10 Telephone No. 3 14a2 ,T0(03 SaNarningkotsignre401perriiCW; i hIJ L, (.if i (: IL'it� Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Deveioprnent Depanment 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 59082 651. 430.6820 Locatton of skin drr . �1'}I(;t✓ Mt—attar Stilwater -- - lets MN z'P 65062 A Ilcant .. 1 i -, SQuere feel 95, ' 5igh Helg il: yr freestarrd�ngl ROM Orlwwewey/PPARing Lof� Sa;ba:Au: From PTo i1y Line 1 Co,ors:rt t`t�ilhu ,l .t.t� Meter:at2: C1 L,V I p . , If Yes. Type: L, D LS l rr- "� j _. ` : �' [1� 4 Va ��tll Owner (if different front Applicant) f wN8nx! fit: - f �u -r�S r k�e� c f ri c it.e.. Phone M 7(r,�3 l I naTi 5`71. y 1 zip E . m cG t'..k. ' P. Contractor's Name None C Jr /'il G: �r�� ,`"�. `�—� (� Address Ci Slaw Tip' ached are the following docutnents (Required to ba submitted with application) Attach a plan swing the sign size, location and type of material used. If the sign is to be mounted on the budding, show an elevation of thee 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 Stiilwatel Business Perk require design review by HPC. 81gn Details — - - - -- -- -- - - . - -. - -- Sign Elie: rren 1 _,. x I j From Bldg t 1 i -, SQuere feel 95, ' 5igh Helg il: yr freestarrd�ngl ROM Orlwwewey/PPARing Lof� Sa;ba:Au: From PTo i1y Line 1 Co,ors:rt t`t�ilhu ,l .t.t� Meter:at2: C1 L,V I p . , If Yes. Type: L, D °•,ii C. i mn∎notion: Ytee a No Declaration 1 hereby certify that the Information provided in this application is true, correct and complete to the best of m knowledge and bedsit. 1 hereby authorize the City of Stillwater and any agent or employ- ' of it, to ins. the proposed site at any reasonable time before and after any permit Is Issue,' ate,_.. a request Ii` ()valor .ty' tar : (rep nl Signature , or office use onry)�t ��i o Approved o Dented °at' 1 permit It Conditions for approval: Gate g tl Cale 212-II Contractor must be t censed with the City of Stillwater. Contractors license application form is available at Stillwater City Hail. Remember to call Gopher State One call at 651.454 -0002 before you dig to Identity any underground utility locations. This is a FREE service. SPionningfonaMpollwt:on for sigh Perm l oc Updated: SoutumOer 23.20 0 ? t ADVERTISING TopLine Advertising, Inc. Sign Manufacturing, Installation and Service 11775 Justen Circle, Suite A — Maple Grove, MN 55369 Phone (763) 428 -5067 Fax (763) 428 -5072 www.toplinesign.com August 2, 2011 To Whom It May Concern: We are submitting a sign permit application package to install one (1) set of LED channel letters reading "DAVE'S SPORT SHOP" w /swoosh (93.2 squ. ft) at 1650 Washington Avenue. Regards, . Lori Vukelich Topline Advertising, Inc. rn to s;0 15.8 ft ;Mt ±r23(n) _EDET 1 E 1-1_( /8p7;c -- SPORT SHOP INDIVIDUAL L.E.D. ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS 1. ACRYLIC FACES 2. 1" PLASTIC TRIM CAP 3. 5 "ALUMINUM RETURNS 4. L.E.D. LIGHTING SYSYTEM 5. WHITE ALUMINUM LETTER BACKS 6. REMOTE POWER SUPPLY 7. BUILDING FACIA 11775 Justen Circle, Maple Grove, MN PH: 763-428-5067 FAX: 763-428-5072 Scott Fuerstenberg CLIENT Dave's Sport Shop COMPANY 1650 Washington Ave Stillwater, MN 55082 ADDRESS Kelly Gibbons DESIGNER /SALESMAN 5/25/2011 DATE y APPROVED BY THESE PLANS ARE THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF TOPLINE ADV. THEY ARE SUBMITTED TO YOUR COMPANY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER TO PURCHASE THESE PLANS OR TO PURCHASE FROM TOPLINE ADV., A SIGN MANUFACTURED ACCORDING TO THESE PLANS. DISTRIBUTION OR EXHIBITION OF THESE PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A SIGN SIMILAR TO IS EXTREMELY FORBIDDEN. IN THE EVENT THAT SUCH EXHIBITION OCCURS, TOPLINE ADV. EXPECTS TO BE REIMBURSED $1.000 IN COMPENSATION FOR THE TIME AND EFFORT ENTAILED IN CREATING THESE PLANS. 1 Letter of Intent To: Community Development Department From: Robert Kaufman (on behalf of The LumberYard) Date: August 29, 2011 Re: Sign Request Attached is a design review application and the application for sign permit. This request is to simply replace the face on an existing building sign with the logo of the new business. The facility is currently being remodeled as a sports training facility. The building includes Dave's Sport shop (retail store) as a tenant and they have made a request for a new sign to go above their entrance. The existing sign 011 the building (under this application) will be used to designate the facility name (The LumberYard). Please contact me with any questions. Thank you. Robert Kaufman, Owner The LumberYard 612 -210 -8182 Application for Sign Permit Fee: $50.00 Community Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651 -430 -8820 Location of Sign Address )6so Wu�0,,N,s . Ar ■Stillwater City State MN Zip 55082 Applicant = Square Feet 2) Sign Height: (If freestanding) Setbacks: From Property Line /Ob' Name `r%+e ct� /. ck&) �n-k�s (D BP '7l.L�.,l�r �.s+) Phone # 61Z-- 'zlo• 's$1$ Z Address f / 1 5 cs W csl..,,)7v., ih,.+, . cit. 54-;\ 1 w , }er State .Nt n/ Zip_, ?-Z Owner (if different from Applicant) Mater als: Mt--L:Yelai, - Name Po o 14 je.. .. , Phone # b1 2 -2.10-- 1 I$ 2 Address 1i. qv-Fill s4^. L "/ _ N . City , L0. >� E l State Zip � 2 Contractor's Name Name k4Ait, CO,.,-r,,c+ro.. Phone # d >! -3I- Zsd7 Address City,- State Zip Attached are the following documents (Required to be submitted with application) ❑ Attach a plan showing the sign size, location and type of material used. If the sign is to be mounted on the building, show an elevation of the building and sign. Additionally, if the building is historic the sign mounting shall limit damage to the exterior of the building. ❑ Design Review application (if required). All signs in the Downtown Area and in the West Stillwater Business Park require design review by HPC. Sign Details Sign Size: Dimensions: Q ` j X 9 i = Square Feet 2) Sign Height: (If freestanding) Setbacks: From Property Line /Ob' From Bldg jil, From Driveway /Parking Lot Z i Colors: �,� Mater als: Mt--L:Yelai, - Illumination: 14 Yes ❑ No 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 Sign ,red) g /24/// Date Applicant Signature Date Review (For office use only) ❑ Approved ❑ Denied 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 \FormslApplication for Sign Permit.doc Updated: September 23, 2006 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No: Date Filed: Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (Le. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Photos, sketches and a Letter of intent is required Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following information is required . PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 1 Sb Lu 1,ap.s ,. Avg Assessor's Parcel No. 3a• ° v. —o.. 3I..�� ld boi 3 1 (Required) �R Zoning District C-$ Description of Project in detail t„.�, ,t,a ,�. "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my know /edge 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 71,), .5L 1-/4c*, Cc..",--s Representative Mailing Address I `VI. Lill= ,s4,- Lam_ N, Mailing Address City State Zip 1"‘' M &U t f z City State Zip Telephone No. to 12 z► o -'g i .. Telephone No. H: \mcnamara \sheila \2005 \design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 Signature r 2. equired) HOCKEY AND SPORTS CENTER Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: September 7, 2011 APPLICANT: Larry Koral for Gartner Properties REQUEST: Design Review of parapet wall changes COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use ZONING: CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE: September 8, 2011 PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner CASE NO.: 11 -49 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval of changes to their exiting parapet wall on the building occupied by DQ at 132 Main St S. Over the past two years, a number of pedestrian have reported falling on ice along the south face of the building. Currently the cap on the parapet allows snow to collect and with a southern exposure when the snow melts it hits the sidewalk were it refreezes and creates a hazard. The owner is requesting to add a new permanent cap that will not allow snow to accumulate on the southern facing exposure. The new cap would create a vertically flat surface and extend the visible portion of the parapet approximately 12 to 14 inches taller then what is currently there. 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 noncontributing building to the Historic District and was built in 1869. ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options: 1. Approve the request. 2. Deny the request. 3. Continue the request for more information. The 60 day decision deadline for the request is November 3, 2011 and the next Heritage Preservation Commission meeting is scheduled for October 3, 2011. 132 Main St S Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and discuss CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1. All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2. The new parapet cap shall be painted to match the adjacent parapet surface. attachments: Applicant's Form and packet 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 Address of Project I3�' �� %ry �� Assessor's Parcel No. (Required) Zoning District Description of Projjeectt in detail �1 /Ic% "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 G s r Y , -f-A. Representative L. A/C >Z / / AA Mailing Address c e C iK`y ? Mailing Address J.?o L /'t Y474 S7 City State Zip -S-ii//1144-7--K MN 53ra:4 City State Zip .S'i / //h / `74 Telephone No. 6,5 3 5i 770o Telephone No. 6'5~/ 'Vc Z S.6' 9e Sign Signature (R- wired) (Required) H : \mcnamara \sheila \2005 \design review permit.wpd July 13, 2005 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purpose Eliminate a safety hazard with melting snow from the roof dripping on the sidewalk and freezing. During the winter of 2009 — 2010 there were five (5) pedestrians who reported falling on ice on the south facing sidewalk of the Dairy Queen Building, one resulting in litigation. During the winter of 2010 -2011 a total of four (4) pedestrians reported falling on sidewalk ice. Cause of problem The cap on top of the building wall collects snow and melts with the southern exposure, dripping on sidewalk below and freezes. Solution to problem Shoveling and salting sidewalk has not resolved problem. Tried sweeping snow off wall cap but impossible to keep up with snow accumulation. Permanent fix is to modify wall cap to eliminate snow accumulation that when melting would cause ice to form on south facing sidewalk. Proposed modification will not allow snow to accumulate on southern facing exposure. Snow can accumulate on northern slope of new cap and melt with water draining to roof and exiting via roof drains. Contacted multiple roofing contractors for various solutions. After numerous meeting and discussions we have selected the attached modification to the building wall cap believing this is the best solution to resolve this safety issue and keep within the boundaries preserving Stillwater downtown historical value. Grill Chill Respectfully submitted for kind consideration to the City of Stillwater by Gartner Properties 651 - 351 -7700 Stillwater, Minnesota September 8, 2011 Current Roof DO Building Current Roof DQ Building View from the Mara Mi building roof top - Acutal street view would be minimal. Metal extension to be verticle. Red line indicates how extension would be. Refer to drawing supplied by contractor for details. View from street level. Proposed Roof DO Building ROOF * TECH COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL ROOFING SOLUTIONS WE RF ON TOP OF YOUR BUSINESS (651) 351 -7302 Fax (651) 351 -7439 www.rooftech.com DARIY QUEEN - STILLWATER I OF I Pro N/A A DECEMAER DECEMAER 20, 2010 N/A NTS I 01,110,1017 N/A CSS