Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-07-06 HPC Packet
i 1 1 \i'a tec THE IIRTMPLA CE OF MIENESOTA AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North July 6, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of June 1, 2015 regular meeting minutes IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement of 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. V. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) - All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Heritage Preservation Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a commission member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 2. Case No. 2015-28: Design Review for replacement of Hotel signage for new Grandstay Hotel. Located at 2500 Frontage Rd W. Tim Olson, Applicant. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS - The Chairperson opens the hearing and will ask city staff to provide background on the proposed item. The Chairperson will ask for comments from the applicant, after which the Chairperson will then ask if there is anyone else who wishes to comment. Members of the public who wish to speak will be given 5 minutes and will be requested to step forward to the podium and must state their name and address. At the conclusion of all public testimony the Commission will close the public hearing and will deliberate and take action on the proposed item. 3. Case No. 2015-29: Design Review for construction of a detached garage and ADU located at 912 5th St S. Eileen Gibson and Larry Wheeler, Owners. 4. Case No. 2015-30: Design Review for Construction of a new two-story home with detached tandem car garage. Located at 514 S. Croix. Ave W. Sara Imhoff, Owner. 5. Case No. 2015-31: Demolition Review for consideration of a partial demolition of additions to the Connelly Shoe Factory, a contributing building in the Commercial Historic District. Located at 123 Second St N. Judd Sather, Owner VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS 6. Case No. 2015-27: Design Review to reface front office portion of building and create front entry door. Located at 1792 Greeley St S. Randy Jennssen, Owner. IX. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION X. ADJOURNMENT i I \v ate': THE OIRTNPLACE OF MINNESOTA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING June 1, 2015 7:00 P.M. Chairman Larson called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Present: Chairman Larson, Commissioners Johnson, Krakowski, Mino, Welty, Council Representative Menikheim Absent: Commissioners Branjord and Goodman Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of May 4, 2015 meeting minutes City Planner Wittman noted that regarding Design Review Permit for Case No. 2015-21, signage at 927 Churchill Street West (Health Partners), the vote was 5-0, not 6-0. Also, regarding Case No. 2015-19 discussion, a typo of 60-0day should be corrected to 60-day. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Welty, to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2015 meeting as corrected. All in favor, 5-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA There were no Consent Agenda items. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 2015-19 Continuation of Design Review for addition of bedroom and bathroom at 520 Main Street North. Monty Brine, owner. City Planner Wittman explained that at the last meeting, the Commission tabled consideration of a design review permit for a redesign of the addition of a bedroom and bathroom. The property owner has since opted to change the roof style to a single gable. The new gable will have a similar pitch to the existing pitch. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Monty Brine reviewed the changes since the last submission. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 1, 2015 Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve the Design Review Permit for Case No. 2015-19, addition of bedroom and bathroom at 520 Main Street North, with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department on May 15, 2015. 2. All new materials, including the level of detail of the siding, trim and frieze boards, shall be similar to the existing facade materials. 3. The addition shall be painted to match the existing facade. 4. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the addition. 5. All minor modifications to the plans submitted shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. All in favor, 5-0. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2015-24 Design Review for mural to be placed on the north wall of Candyland at 212 Main Street North. Brandon Lamb, owner and Randall Raduenz, applicant. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is requesting permission to paint a mural on the north stairwell wall, a cinder block enclosure that was added to the original structure. The mural will be a black and white view of the lift bridge under construction, with the old pontoon bridge to the south. Additionally, two women and two men will be looking at the bridge. A Model T car and the words "Stillwater on the beautiful St. Croix" will be part of the mural. The building is located outside the Commercial Historic District. Staff recommends approval. Randall Raduenz explained the proposed design. Commissioner Johnson suggested including the date of the photo on which the mural is based, 1930, in the design somewhere near the artist's signature. Chairman Larson asked where the paint will begin and end on the cinder block. Mr. Raduenz responded he will feather the paint out to the lighter color of the blocks. It will start at the base of the building and go up almost to the banding at 20 feet. Chairman Larson asked about maintenance. Mr. Raduenz replied that a UV protective coating can be put over the paint. The paint should hold up well, as it will not have as much sunlight being on the north side. Commissioner Welty suggested making sure there is no space under "St. Croix River" and the telephone pole. She asked about the subjects being painted in colors rather than the black and white photo background. Mr. Raduenz explained his choice of black and white versus color on some of the images. City Planner Wittman stated that the mural will be double -dated, with the present date in color, and the date of the photograph on which the mural is based in black and white. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve the Design Review Permit for Case No. 2015-24, mural for the north wall of Candyland, 212 Main Street North, with the following conditions: 1. The date of the photo and the date of the painting shall be on the mural. 2. The date of the photo shall be indicated black or white, with the date of the painting and the artist's signature in color. 3. The background shall be feathered into the block wall. 4. The women shall be featured in 1920s-1930s attire.. All in favor, 5-0. Page 2 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 1, 2015 Case No. 2015-25 Design Review for mural to be placed on the east wall of Candyland at 212 Main Street North. Brandon Lamb, owner and Randall Raduenz, applicant. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is requesting design review of a mural to be painted on the front face of the stairwell wall. The mural will be a colored rendition of a storekeeper in a window, based on an old image of the original owner of Candyland. Nondescript items will hang behind the storekeeper. Above the window will be a red and white awning. The lower portion of the window will be painted with the words, "FlavoKorn." Staff recommends approval. Mr. Raduenz reviewed the design. Chairman Larson related that he doesn't object to one or the other, but to both murals together. The two murals don't really come together on the corner. It is visually jarring. Commissioner Johnson asked about fading out the bridge mural so it doesn't go right to the corner. Chairman Larson suggested doing the same with the storefront mural, pulling it in from the edges. The two images floating by themselves in the block, not touching each other, would look better. Mr. Raduenz said he could feather out the designs. Commissioner Welty agreed that the two murals compete with each other. Also, the perspective on the awning is odd. She would prefer not having the mural on the east wall at all, or having it be a continuation of the bridge scene from the north wall. The storefront painting is a wonderful idea but maybe it could be inside the store. Perhaps instead, there could be a plaque denoting the history of Candyland. Commissioner Mino agreed that the two murals don't seem to fit together. Mr. Raduenz said he could wrap the bridge around the corner, or place a tree at the corner. Motion by Commissioner Welty, seconded by Commissioner Larson, to deny without prejudice the Design Review Permit for Case No. 2015-25, the mural design proposed for the east wall of Candyland, 212 Main Street North. Motion passed, 4-1 with Commissioner Johnson voting against. Chairman Larson summarized that the idea of wrapping the mural design around to the east side is more appealing than having two separate images on the east and north walls. Mr. Raduenz noted that a sign providing some explanation of the mural would be one possibility. He will work on a new design. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Consideration of an amendment to Municipal Code, removing design review permit requirements for certain signs in the West Stillwater Business Park District. City Planner Wittman explained that last winter, the HPC expressed interest in removing certain areas of the West Stillwater Business Park from the requirement to have design review for signs. The Commission directed staff to modify the City Code to remove the Design Review Permit Requirement for replacement signage and/or new signage for an existing structure. However, any new signage in conjunction with a new structure or development would be required to undergo a Design Review by the HPC. She presented an edited version of the nine affected sections of the City Code for discussion. In addition, language referencing "Design Review" "Design Permit" and "Design Review Permit" is cleaned up, as the terms have Page 3 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 1, 2015 been used interchangeably. It is anticipated that the ordinance will be heard by the Planning Commission on June 10 and by the City Council on June 16, with adoption scheduled for July. Commissioner Welty asked why the HPC conducts design reviews for signage in the West Stillwater Business Park District. She feels it is a waste of time unless it involves a gateway or main corridor into the City. Chairman Larson said he feels that gateways and main areas along Highway 36 that are highly visible should undergo design review. He wouldn't like to see it disintegrate into strip malls like many towns. He acknowledged there are small pieces of commercial property where design review is not done. City Planner Wittman recognized there are uneven boundaries in the area. In addition, a lot of future development land was recently annexed. There may be forthcoming development especially when bridge construction is completed. The design guidelines for new construction in the West Stillwater Business Park are very limited. She could ask the City Council its thoughts on potentially changing some of the boundaries of the business park. Councilmember Menikheim commented that the Council is having a strategic planning workshop on Thursday where this issue could be discussed. Chairman Johnson said the review requirement for the West Stillwater Business Park area was initially sparked by westward development and the desire for uniformity and high quality. The design review committee was eventually merged with the HPC. Now the City has the same situation going on further west. Maybe there is a need to move those boundaries to the new undeveloped area and refine the review guidelines. Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to recommend that the City Council approve the amendment as presented, noting two typos/spelling errors. Motion passed 4-0 with Commissioner Welty abstaining. Bergstein Reuse Draft Study City Planner Wittman reviewed the draft study. The draft recommendation is partial rehabilitation of the structures. The first floor of the warehouse would be finished into an open space to allow for multi- functional programming: possibly a concession, bicycles, restrooms, and a National Park Service presence to do river education. The second floor was determined to not be able to handle the weight load of a public use. The 30-day comment period is underway. She will accept Commissioners' comments until June 10. The Commission will be making a recommendation to the City Council for the June 16 Council meeting. Chairman Larson pointed out that the most common limitation mentioned in the study interviews is the lack of parking on the site. City Planner Wittman noted that the Council is currently working through the possibility of using boat slips at St. Croix Boat & Packet for public docking, as a test case to gauge the demand for public slips. Commissioner Johnson asked why a new boat landing is being considered when those slips are already there. City Planner Wittman said all the organizations contacted said they would love to be part of developing programming for visitor education if the building is reused. Page 4 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting June 1, 2015 Chairman Larson commented, if a bicycling trail center of some sort is included, a lot of bikers may not ever get to it if they enter and exit the City via the Brown's Creek Trail. City Planner Wittman replied the loop trail will likely attract a lot of users, especially serious bikers. Councilmember Menikheim said there are already examples of public/private partnerships in the City to use as models. He reminded the Commission to consider sustainability and maintenance issues. Forget about the boating because it's 60 feet down to the water. Focus on the biking and walking. The lack of parking would then be a benefit. Commissioner Johnson said he finds it interesting that the organizations want to use the space if given to them. The focus on the Jewish heritage of the buildings is understandable but that population hardly existed here at all. City Planner Wittman recognized that the City took on the financial burden of the buildings without any use for them other than possibly public works storage. The National Park Service is not interested in taking over the buildings. Councilmember Menikheim said that may be negotiated. Chairman Larson said the outdoor space created by the two buildings is beautiful. They have a great view of the bridges. He favors preserving the buildings. Motion by Chairman Larson, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to recommend full exterior rehabilitation and stabilization as the first priority, partial rehabilitation as the second priority, limiting the parking and paved surfaces and discouraging use of the buildings for boat launch -related activities. All in favor, 5-0. Statewide Heritage Preservation Commission Training City Planner Wittman informed the Commission that the City was awarded a grant to work with Mankato and Eden Prairie on development of a statewide heritage preservation training program. There will be an online training curriculum, a manual for HPC Commissioners statewide, and a statewide conference. Boutwell House Commissioner Johnson noted that the Washington County Historical Society bought the Boutwell House this week. Agenda Item Addition Commissioner Mino asked if the next meeting date could be added at the bottom of the agenda. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Chairman Larson, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to adjourn. All in favor, 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 5 of 6 iliwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOIA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: September 3, 2014 CASE NO.: 2015-28 Tim Olson, DeMars Signs representing Grandstay Hotel & Suites Design Permit request for signage at 2200 West Frontage Road, located in within the West Stillwater Business Park Design Review District ZONING: BP-C: Business Park Commercial COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Commercial PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting a Design Permit for two new 40 square foot sign panels to be installed in the free-standing, pylon sign located at 2200 West Frontage Road. The sign panels are green with white lettering, fluorescent internally -lit box that will read 'Grandstay Hotel and Suites.' Additionally the property owner is seeking to remove and replace the existing wall sign (Crossings Inn & Suites) with the company's signature 'G' logo which will also be a green, internally illuminated sign. This will be on the gable facing the Frontage Road. The specifications sheet proposes a matching logo to be placed on the north facade, however this is not consistent with the municipal zoning regulations. APPLICABLE GUIDELINES, REGULATIONS AND FINDINGS Signs in the in the BP-C zoning district must conform to the sign regulations. Aside from the proposed northern logo, all signs proposed are in conformance with the sign regulations. 2200 West Frontage Road (Grandstay) Case No. 2015-28 (HPC: 7/ 6/ 15) Page 1 of 2 The signs also conform to the 1989 West Stillwater Business Park Plan (Plan). The Plan indicates a landscaped area equal to twice the sign area comprise of bushes or flowers shall be provided around the base of free standing signs. The existing hotel provides for this landscaped area. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission approve the Case No. 2015-28 as submitted with the following conditions: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to the designs submitted and dated 6/16/2015. 2. Only one green logo sign may be installed. This shall be installed on the southern facade, substantially parallel to the West Frontage Road. 3. An 80 square foot landscaped area shall be maintained at the base of the free standing sign. 4. All signs shall receive a sign permit prior to the installation of permanent signage. 5. Any additional temporary signage shall be in conformance with the City's temporary sign policy. 6. Substantial changes shall be review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS Applicant Narrative Facade photos (existing and proposed) Sign Specifications 2200 West Frontage Road (Grandstay) Case No. 2015-28 (HPC: 7/ 6/ 15) Page 2 of 2 June 16th 2015 Grandstay Hotel 2200 Frontage Rd Assessor's Parcel 3203020340011 Zoning District BPC DeMars Signs will be adding a 72" x 80" G on the Frontage road side of the building and on the pool wall buy the parking lot. We are removing the existing Crossing Inn and Suites sign that was on the wall facing Frontage Road. We are also want to take down the existing 4' x 10' ft pylon sign and replace with a 4' x 10' Grandstay pylon sign. Attached are drawings of what we propose to do. Grandstay Hotel & Suites Stillwater, MN 80" 10 SCALE -1/2" = l'-0" MANUFACTURE & INSTALL (2) INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FLUSH MOUNTED CHANNEL LETTERS (FRONT & REAR ELEVATIONS). 5" DEEP BLACK RETURNS. GREEN PLEXIGLASS FACES, 1" BLACK TRIM CAR ILLUMINATED BY GREEN LEDs. POWER SUPPLIES ARE SELF-CONTAINED. SCALE - 3/a" =1'-0" to MANUFACTURE & INSTALL (1) ONE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED D/F POLE SIGN THAT IS FABRICATED OF AN ANGLE -IRON FRAME SKINNED WITH BLACK ALUMINUM WITH 2" BLACK ALUMINUM RETAINERS. THE FACE IS A FLEXIBLE FACE WITH TRANSLUCENT 5' VINYL GRAPHICS APPLIED TO THE FIRST SURFACE. THE SIGN WILL BE ILLUMINATED BY WHITE LEDs. DESI401TYPE VINrEIR R ,.7taii,Rla1 I. INEONDISPLAYS ❑ CHANNEL LETTERS ❑NAAYLIn.(5.76 sf ❑ REV. CHANNEL LETrER:: 00116POLE SIGN ❑ SINGLE POLE SIGN hIIOTAIMENI SIGN ❑DIRECTIONAL DCkl1MENSILE READER BOOM ElE DISPLAYS PROJECT TYPE HEW CONSII11 E110N REMODELING TENANT CHANGES LANDLORD IMPROVEMENTS CORPORATE CHANGES AMENDMENTS TO EGCIGINIS AT:NA .L l This sign is Intended to be Installed in accordance with the requirements of Arlicta 60e of the rational Electric Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of the sign. NOTICE: ALL GRAPHIC REPRODUCTIONS ARE SUBJECTED BY APPROVAL OF AUTHORIZED CLIENT. AS OF APPROVAL BY THE UNDERSIGNED & DATED PRIOR TO ANY FABRICATION OF PRODUCT. TRI CITY SIGN COMPANY HOLDS ALL AGREEMENTS FINAL AND TO CLIENT APPROVAL Sake Rep Dale DRAWING NO 3346 SALES DEPT: Bill Palsies DRAWN BY: 4. Seale: As Noted. Dale: 05 27.15 INSPEciED AL: Revised: HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 6, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-29 APPLICANT: Eileen Gibson and Larry Wheeler, property owners REQUEST: Design Review of a future Accessory Dwelling Unit to be located at 912 5th Street South, a residential property located in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) ZONING: RB-Two Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR-Low/Medium Density Res. PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST AND BACKGOUND The applicant has submitted a Design Permit application for a proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) to be constructed at 912 5th Street South, a residential lot located in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD). DISCUSSION All new homes in the NCD are required to follow the NCD design guidelines. These design guidelines serve as a common reference for all those involved in the process of new construction in the district including property owners, neighbors, residents, architects, designers, builders, city staff, and the commission. The Commission should discuss the following guidelines in relationship to the potential design, providing input to the property owner regarding whether or not this home fits with the NCD guidelines. Neighborhood and Streets Massing and scale of a new building should be compatible with neighboring structures. The proposed 2-story ADU will be located on the same property as an existing 1.5 story home. Homes directly adjacent to the proposed ADU are all 1.5-2 stories in height. Respect the existing rhythm of the streetscape. Follow alignment and setbacks predominant on the street and adjacent properties. The new garage and ADU will be set back from the road further than the required setback of 30' as well as back from the prevailing front yard for houses in this neighborhood. This is consistent with the guidelines for detached garages. Design new roofs to be compatible with forms of existing roofs in the neighborhood. Building height should be considered in choosing roof forms, architectural style, and relating to context. The roof forms of the primary structure and neighboring residences are predominantly single or double gable. The proposed roof is a stepped -gable with dormers on the front and rear of the structure. The proposed height of the structure is 22' which is 2' less that of the primary structure. Building and site design should respond to natural features. Preserve significant trees. The structure is proposed to be situated on top of the hillside, set back from the road. While the land is relatively flat, there is a grade change from the front of the structure to the rear. While two trees are proposed to be removed from the site, all other trees are proposed to remain. When retaining walls are necessary, minimize their impact. Respect the site's natural slope in new building design: minimize cut, fill and retaining walls. A portion of the property will be retained by the foundation of the structure. Building Site Locate garage and driveway to respect existing street and neighborhood patterns. As indicated, the garage and ADU will be situated back from the front property line and maintain a 25' rear yard setback. Minimize garage impact on new structure massing and street front. As the garage will be set back from the street, the garages on the street will be reduced. The size and mass of the structure should be compatible with the size of The footprint of the structure is less than 800 square feet as well as smaller than the footprint of the primary structure, after alterations are made. 912 5' Street So. (Gibson/Wheeler NCD Infill) HPC: 6/6/2015 Page 2 of 4 the property. Consider front porch elements in the design of infill structures. No front porch is proposed for the garage and ADU. Accessory buildings should be compatible with the main building. The garage and ADU will be sided in like materials as the primary structure. Design and detail new construction as four-sided architecture. This guideline has been met. Architectural Detail The facade of the structure should be compatible in scale and character to the houses of the streetscape. Most of the residences within close proximity are simple in design and construction, with minimal detailing. The new garage and ADU will be consistent in style. Building elements should be proportional to the scale and style of the building, and its context. The property owner is proposing proportional window and door openings to the size of the structure. Use architectural details to create visual interest and support architectural style. The two-story mass of the structure will be broken up with a first -floor roof overhang on the garage/ ADU access. Additionally, horizontal banding elements are proposed about the garage doors. In new building design, consider appropriate materials, textures and colors, and their relationship to other buildings of the neighborhood. Materials and colors have not been identified on the plans though the applicant has indicated the materials and colors will be consistent with the primary residence. Use masonry and stone authentically. No masonry or stone is indicated as proposed. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The HPC has several alternatives related to these two requests: A. Approve. If the proposed infill design review meets the Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2015-29. Staff would recommend the following minimum condition for approval. 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department on June 16, 2015. 2. The materials and colors shall be consistent with the primary residence. 3. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the home. 912 5' Street So. (Gibson/Wheeler NCD Infill) HPC: 6/6/2015 Page 3 of 4 4. Exterior lighting shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the approved Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines, then the Commission could deny the request. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, the denial would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until your August, 2014 meeting. The 60-0day deadline for HPC action is August 17, 2015. Staff recommends the Commission approve the application the recommended conditions. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Certificate of Survey Facade Renderings (3 pages) Foundation and Floor Plans (3 pages) Cross Section 912 5' Street So. (Gibson/Wheeler NCD Infill) HPC: 6/6/2015 Page 4 of 4 X4 *� a ,. 11 water 5 31E 517 �e 613 .�4 `t:, it Mk: 4{ri q s 0.'4•* � _-- � _ • .- * ':- . t .� �2f _ Y ?'�' i f 4 f f a .. = ,r — r �, >. A. 704 710 716 - ,720 724 802 806 The Birthplace of Minnesota N E s 912 5th Street South r Subject Property Parcel Boundaries °^-- Municipal Boundary 0 130 260 520 Feet 810 T w 811 705 812 813 812 m 815 General Site Location 818 _ 817 116 ♦— 816 = ..�..,W. u + ' i .�- iti i �IA1,. 22 �0 Fi = 817 410 404 ii i — 820 U 522 514 ` J 502 z 424 416 �/) 322 314 "3 0 824 823 826 0 w _ > STREET , , WEST CHURCHILL ,, 1 �' j�tr� C �. " 4 °\ �� 1i gilt' W.7 ' 9" `. �o' s ."I AK509 505 421 41 a 509 603 �- a� -L902 04 "" 219 319 313 309 av� 615 611 ,'. � l 911 II 908 k . �. '908 911 912 0It OV Qo • J ,., .� ' g6 .. 916 0 913 •`.. ° �� \ :. -612 (r) 916 916 ++" b` =; v °, 922 919 920 921 924 7 1 r {; ' 1002 , `' o ... �r,1 100 1002 s . 1 003 1006 1 601 1004 r"..."f . / 1008 1 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: LIGHT HOUSE HOMES LEGEND 0 • X'150.0 .20) SET 1 /2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS NO. 25718 FOUND MONUMENT (AS NOTED) SOIL BORING SPOT ELEVATION CATCH BASIN SET OFFSET HUB PROPOSED ELEVATION — — _820 —PROPOSED CONTOUR ou > -0- 0 STORM SEWER POWER POLE SANITARY MANHOLE OVERHEAD UTILITY SANITARY SEWER FENCE AREAS SUMMARY (IN SQ. FT.) AREA OF PARCEL = 10,801 SQ. FT. AREA OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS: HOUSE = 706 DRIVEWAY = 727 SHED = 62 CONCRETE = 366 WALL = 35 SPORT = 364 TOTAL = 2,260 20.1% CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of MINNESOTA. EL L. THURMES GARAGE FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 17765 0.7' E & I 0.2' S OF 1/2" I IRON PIPE MARKED "STACK" AT LOT CORNER Lf �• c} z O v GO O Ian REVISED 6-1 8-1 5 PROPOSED DATE: 5-6-15 PIKE 27.5' -1- C- to. \ FOUND I/2") U021' IRON PIPE MARKED RLS 17765 0.4' E & 0.4' 5 OF LOT CORNER LEGAL DESCRIPTION 0- 21 laa -- .00 (135 PLAT) N89°53' 13 "E 1; 134.94 FENCE P01{l" 6�' 6 c I o . \� ..vrarFj_ 22.00 Lots Four (4) and Five (5), Block Eleven (11) Churchill, Nelson & Slaughter's Addition to the City of Stillwater. Subject to a driveway easement for purposes of ingress and egress over and across the South 7 feet of East 68 feet of Lot 5, Block 1 1 , Churchill, Nelson & Slaughter's Addition to the City of Stillwater, and together with an easement for driveway purposes for ingress and egress over and across the North 4 feet of East 68 feet of Lot 6, Block 11, Churchill, Nelson & Slaughter's Addition to the City of Stillwater 0 RI u 43 Dab `t{. 77) 7.00 nr 1 f, i%97//:%2. //m l 1_1 � '.a' fir, II/ EX-OU5pUSE `;�0 `iH01.D -\ ~ *°,7 3 38 12.00 J m rY,ct)I',kt--1 .'r '-0 ?-'•- QI �� ��.T L tom` v I°.�.c.'' U {Ij. 4 r4E00 ' ) 1 f 6.7TW i _J c0 lsATV 61'4,31 \'/ 6Pk 9. rz ,t EXISTING HOUSE I u / / I o- �/'2:,;// /..///"/Arco 1 /.� J — _ _ !A GM C• PROPOSED5 "r I Sy co 1 0- r. cc; I0) SET PK µ (4ti ' ? v1 i. I ') ...i , --, 15"hIRGH .1 m 6 ID LO f�. , ? MA• iCO.,I e0 c0 p 7� I i+ 1 , . 3i 4.5TW 447:T 6//40frzi% EXISTING HOUSE NORTH 20 97. , 0 f f lID�7fr 40 ti CPS© i FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE MARKED -RLS 7447 0.6' E & 0.2' 5 OF LOT CORNER. NO MONUMNET SET u U 1— s n ON 1/i o • m Li] oC F- L f1 II' WIDE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AS RECITED IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL PROPOSED ELEVATIONS AND GRADING PER RECOMENATIONS FROM THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS SHOWN WITH THE MOST CURRENT FOUNDATION PLAN PRIOR TO EXCAVATION. PROJECT LOCATION: 912I 5th Street South iSTILLWATER, MN Suite #1 6750 Stillwater Blvd. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone 651.275.8969 Fax 651.275.8976 dan@ cssurvey .net CORNERSTONE License No. 25718 PROJECT NO. LHH1 5001 LAND SURVEYING, INC. qARik-Gie FE oN-T Owitigg.•• I B.orl Dia-rg; Sciu: X0-"o GRADE. 1.-SFT VATO 51,EVA-rt 0 KAPC- ovkitv.sR &-e, : - 0..< ? 4. ScAL5: 1/4" I t•-• 0" 0 \09 NOV, 4.k.tt:Oti /141146r1.40( Oh -re t: ti.gr P&Sigiti- yvhf caLaR CALa. y4! GARA,v;' KEAR LEvn-ri oti 2. 0 x 9 _ Go n1e. r001t0‘) g$" C-O00. PI4D. Y1 f LL , S +24 FRO 61 Ft5110S r-R o t -r v it pl! to -Co D PN I-i l}1 r f{ gR{2 4-S 114 ___PE1A4RD.of Jill ... FS -EAR 0-01)-'. 9''-a*LC. SZ-fie), o' 1 °? t-f WALS 1:m ; 4-1 ,2 airS/0; t4)i+ cagR_.._ mRA E Fa UND/\fE oN C.01,1eAq4e Wf-i-L.s x6 Woot CoLi j - 9' o" If 9'(g'o•1!, pg` a tl w se xg"o•H."DR. I, 3-d 2''112114' 30 4,$ -0 -00 0-14141: qt135oNA41/5"-Ei.gt D rfE: S C.F►LC : _ +" = / 1-o0 sT Fi-ooe PL 1`tJ 0 If /L9.ii /Lir , o Gi A ' 5 5. 2 tJt) !;-,- L.() 0 pLitt b,/ I /34 0 /VW Co,— I aore /'-all fLr-i-TO? 21...ettl 19/ 191-ro4 w51 tasilL,t rAidti " Sirt. TRU $565 9.2. 0,C. 0 _At( s‘.4.,— C.-6W tit • p•kvii% 4447. - Cefeoit WALLS' LI)LPODItiei-311: _ _kLe) TPecs.16,-: (setts - 7 r/A:' Ose, .LIPS &PT, rt'wp-reR 3 6 91L cat- Rivag G)PtIRP (Re Ros INN LS:14 R TAP6D 2Lpsee_sitigA1vtiel; X 4:11D. WA-U.5 WTI 0 ri epM14 KU,/ V0.'0 rktokiklelk raft ou-T - N ALL a 14040-Ptak, th qgPrI7a fooinfkrioN Wfifoky%6015 " po)gp cord/4u. .2",?st FUR, ou-r wit 1R-ID Aftei 41' ?gRF: -re DJ, owortR1 15500 tv‘htfeLZ-12, P-r6 fr, - s"-.20/5" P_CS KW'.0.WFV5s1,C4-,R S 1/4" HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 6, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-30 APPLICANT: Jeremy and Sara Imhoff, property owners REQUEST: Design Review of a future home to be located at 514 St. Croix Avenue West, a vacant property located in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) ZONING: RB-Two Family Res. COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR-Low/Medium Density Res. PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST AND BACKGOUND The applicant has submitted a Design Permit application for consideration of design review of a proposed single family residence to be constructed at 514 St. Croix Avenue West, a vacant lot located on the North Hill. The property is in the Neighborhood Conservation Design District and as such an infill design review permit is required for the new home. DISCUSSION All infill homes in the NCD are required to follow the NCD design guidelines. These design guidelines serve as a common reference for all those involved in the process of new construction in the district including property owners, neighbors, residents, architects, designers, builders, city staff, and the commission. The Commission should discuss the following guidelines in relationship to the potential design, providing input to the property owner regarding whether or not this home fits with the NCD guidelines. Neighborhood and Streets Massing and scale of a new building should be compatible with neighboring structures. A two-story home is proposed. While the majority of this neighborhood is single -story, postwar homes, the properties immediately adjacent to the proposed structure one and a half story (to the west), a two-story walkout (to the east) as well as a full two-story (across the street) The two-story facade is broken up by a covered porch proposed to wrap from the front of the home to the West side. Respect the existing rhythm of the streetscape. Follow alignment and setbacks predominant on the street and adjacent properties. The applicants are proposing setbacks consistent with the zoning code regulations and those (newer) homes built in the neighborhood. The front porch of the house will be set back 20' from the property line and the detached garage will be set back from the property line. Design new roofs to be compatible with forms of existing roofs in the neighborhood. A single -gable, 12/14 pitch roof is proposed. This is consistent with other in the NCD and adjacent to this property. As there is a presence of lower -pitched roofed houses in the neighborhood, the applicant is proposing a low-pitched covered porch. Building height should be considered in choosing roof forms, architectural style, and relating to context. The property owner is proposing a 24' tall home in this area. With the steeper pitched roof, the house will have a taller appearance than the 1.5 story home to the west but will be no greater in height than the two-story home across the street. Building and site design should respond to natural features. Preserve significant trees. An existing cedar tree blocks the frontage of the lot. This tree would be situated at the edge of the driveway. While the owner would like to retain the tree, it is likely the removal will need to occur during construction. Four additional trees, on the East property line, are anticipated to be relocated to the rear of the property. When retaining walls are necessary, minimize their impact. Respect the site's natural slope in new building design: minimize cut, fill and retaining walls. The lot is relatively flat. No retaining walls are proposed. Building Site Locate garage and driveway 514 St. Croix (Imhoff NCD Infill) HPC: 7/6/2015 Page 2 of 4 Front facing garages in this neighborhood are common. As to respect existing street and neighborhood patterns. indicated, a 30' setback would be maintained for the garage. Minimize garage impact on new structure massing and street front. A tandem garage is proposed on this site. This helps reduce the impact of garage in this neighborhood. While the garage will be visible from the street, it will be set back and have an appearance of a single car garage, consistent with other homes along this street front. The size and mass of the structure should be compatible with the size of the property. The proposal meets all lot coverage requirements for this zoning district and will be more conforming than many of the other residences in the neighborhood and elsewhere in the NCD. Both the primary structure, as well as the accessory structure are narrow and long, a characteristic of homes during Stillwater's periods of significance. Consider front porch elements in the design of infill structures. As indicated, a wraparound porch is proposed. This will extend from the front around the West side of the home, stopping at a bump -out in the West facade which will serve as the primary entrance to the home as well as rear yard access. This rear yard access area will also have a covered porch area which will lead to a screen porch at the rear (North) side. Accessory buildings should be compatible with the main building. The garage is proposed to have the same materials and details as the primary structure. Design and detail new construction as four-sided architecture. This guideline has been met. Architectural Detail The facade of the structure should be compatible in scale and character to the houses of the streetscape. The proposal is a modest, two-story home. Very little architectural details are proposed though the home will showcase painted wood fascia and frieze boards, consistent with the architectural style. Building elements should be proportional to the scale and style of the building, and its context. As with most homes in this neighborhood, the house is simple in design and construction. Use architectural details to create visual interest and support architectural style. In new building design, consider appropriate materials, textures and colors, and their relationship to other buildings of the neighborhood. The simple design is consistent with the architectural style. The covered porches, uniform windows and different material choices help create visual interest. Use masonry and stone authentically. No masonry or stone is proposed. 514 St. Croix (Imhoff NCD Infill) HPC: 7/6/2015 Page 3 of 4 ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The HPC has several alternatives related to these two requests: A. Approve. If the proposed infill design review meets the Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2015-30. Staff would recommend the following minimum condition for approval. 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department on June 19, 2015. 2. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the home. 3. Exterior lighting shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the approved Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines, then the Commission could deny the request. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. Furthermore, the denial would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until your August, 2015 meeting. The 60-0day deadline for HPC action is August 17, 2015. Staff recommends the Commission approve the application the recommended conditions. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Design Review Application and Checklist (2 pages) Applicant Submission Title Page Aerial, Survey and Site and Floor Plans (4 pages) Elevations (3 pages) Area and Site Photographs (10 pages) 514 St. Croix (Imhoff NCD Infill) HPC: 7/6/2015 Page 4 of 4 0 The Birthplace of Minnesota 514 St. Croix Avenue West (a vacant lot of record) Subject Property Parcel Boundaries -P..- Municipal Boundary 160 320 General Site Location Design. Review Application and Checklist This Design Review Application and Checklist should be submitted with a City Planning Application Form Contact: Stillwater City Planning Office 651-430-8821 City Hall 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 www.ci.stillwater.mn.us Project Address: Applicant name, address, telephone: 1. Neighborhood Architectural Styles: X Vernacular ❑ Italianate ❑ Queen Anne ❑ Greek Revival ❑ American Foursquare ❑ u Other: ❑ Gothic ❑ Second Empire Stick 2. Prevailing neighborhood streetfront setback: (Guidelines #1, #2, #3) Prevailing setback on block (est.) Average setback on block (est.) ?O D Proposed new house setback a i '-O 3. Is the pattern of homes in your �.0 k Proposed new house 5. Prevailing Garage Location pattern in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) Front Rear Side Garage Garage Garage House on right %WIE ❑ ❑ ❑ House on left - ❑ House to rear ? ❑ Prevailing on block Prevailing opposite block Proposed new house ❑ neighborhood 1, 1-1/2, or2 stories high? (Guidelines #4, #5) Stories - . 1 1-1/2 2 House on right 4 to , X ❑ House on left u ❑ X House to rear `; ❑ ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block Prevailing opposite block U )( ❑ Proposed new house ❑ ❑ 4. Prevailing Front Porch pattern in your neighborhood: (Guideline #13) Front Porch None House on right ❑ House on left ❑ House to rear ? ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block ❑ Prevailing opposite block ❑ Proposed new house Notes: (p1of2) ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. Prevailing Garage Size in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) 1 stall 2 stall 3 stall Garage Garage Garage House on right 14. ,ISL1F ❑ ❑ ❑ House on left House to rear Prevailing on block , Prevailing opposite block 7. Is the proposed compatible in form and detail with the design character of the main house? (Guideline #14) 8. If the proposed structure/garage location, setbacks, size or general design character does not fit prevailing neighborhood patterns, how do you propose to reduce its impact on the neighborhood and streetscape? : Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines Design Review Application and Checklist 9. Does the proposed structure work with natural slopes and contours of the property? (Guidelines #6, #7, #8) ❑ Structure sited parallel to slope 14, Building deigned to reduce cut and fill (minimized retaining walls) i , Landscaping incorporated into grading changes Notes: 10. Are there significant trees on the property? Will any trees be removed or damaged by new construction? (Guideline #9) Li Types of trees Li Heights Li Trunk diam. Notes: Air . -C v'-0 � POAC Qu 7 t tt !.&-r t to t1 t) AAA X Lights are located or directed away from Loawl .t— neighboring property OLAN ! , l F t A, . ove _ Light fixtures are shielded to prevent glare Good N or Considerations at neighboring property Li Other: 1. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbor's access to sunlight in adjacent yards, patios or rooms? (Guideline #21) Q1fac N .' !�'� House t�right: ‘�j`7 '1r7 ouse to re. Notes: caom to to How will you mitigate any negative sunlight impacts on neighbors? XLocate structure on lot to minimize impact ❑ Adjust building height, or portions of building, to minimize impact Other: Wit-! fitera r toe~ F ct-k/Oit.. W a 'I'o Stillwater w rva on s To be included with this Application and Checklist: Site Plan: include location of proposed buildings) on property, lot area; indicate impervious surface, property lines, street/ sidewalk location and approximate location of adjacent structures. Indicate proposed outdoor deck/patio and . landscaping features. Building Plan; dimensions, first floor area square footage. Building Elevations: indicate building height, windows, materials, and color on all elevations. Indicate proposed exterior lighting. Photographs of site and streetscape. Regular Planning Department Development Application Form Conse ti District {�[ Design Guidelines StrtAt _e wz-Ark,-C ) NZ fog- 1 ouS 2. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbors' privacy?(Guidelines #22, #23) _.-. HouseLti�-�.� _ �n- to right: �:.=.. �_- egouse to Ieft r : L +'I et rn yya trti, House to rear:'}#t. S {r.1l1..... '` `00S, 1"1`E ) Notes: �y How will you mitigate any negative impacts on neighbors' privacy? ❑ Offset/locate windows to reduce impact Li Use obscure glass in window ❑ Locate balconies to minimize impact. "IC Use landscaping elements for screening Other: wit!-i it4 c_Ar� [ Apt Sa �� f<S 4 Pi VA'rr L' 4. �4 HvS c rf- (I Aryl(* 3. How is outdoor lighting impact minimized for neighbors?(Guideline #25) 2 of 2) STILLWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT DESIGN REVIEW IMHOFF RESIDENCE PROPERTY UNDER REVIEW - IMHOFF RESIDENCE - Tax Parcel #: 213020340157 - Address: 5XX St. Croix Ave West, Stillwater, MN 55082 CONTACT - Owner: - Address: - Email: - Telephone: Jeremy and Sara Imhoff 117 Olive Street West Stillwater, MN 55082 sara©imprintarchitecture.com 206.940.9427 -- _ 1 I 1 1 - H TABLE OF CONTENTS - Washington County Survey - Site Survey - A1.1 Site Plan - A2.1 Building Floor Plans - A3.1 Exterior Building Elevations - A3.2 Exterior Building Elevations - A3.3 Exterior Building Elevations - Streetscape Photographs - Street View Reference Site Plan - Image 1 - Image 2 - Image 3 - Image 4 - Image 5 - Image 6 - Site Photographs - Site Image 1 - Site Image 2 - Site Image 3 - Site Image 4 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SURVt (AND LAND MANAGEMENT DIVISION 14949 62nd S'Ireel North, P.O. Box 6 Stillwater, Minnusola 55082-0006 (651) 430-6875 sunreyor@co. washingr1 n.mn us www.co.washinglon.mn.uOurveyor CONTOUR LEGEND • — 10 FOOT INTERVAL CONTOUR 2 FOOT INTERVAL CONTOUR Contours are provided coudesy of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Minnesota DNR makes no representation or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the reuse of data provided herewith, regardless of its format or the means of transmission. There is no guarantee or representation to the user as to the accuracy, currency, suitability, or reliability of this data for any purpose. The user accepts the data 'as is', and assumes all risks associated with its use, The Minnesota DNR assumes no responsibility for actual or consequential damage incurred as a result of any users reliance on this data. LEGEND DNR PROTECTED WATERS DNR PROTECTED WETLAND DNR PROTECTED WATERCOURSE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARK BOUNDARY teal oZ = 43u! l :31VOS 0 —1 �8 o dvw wNIOIA NOaOJS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER FORMAT (GEOCODE) SECTION TONNVAP RANGE QUARTER SPECIFIC ROWER RUBBER RUMEN QUARTER PARCEL CO ANA Oil NA MI (GDUl) • LAST FOUR DOTS OF PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER r THIS DRAWING IS THE RESULT OF A COMPILATION AND REPRODUCTION OF LAND RECORDS AS THEY APPEAR IN VARIOUS WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICES. WASHINGTON COUNTY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY INACCURACIES, PROPERTY LINES AS SHOWN ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES AND MAY NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL LOCATIONS. MAP LAST UPDATED: March 6, 2015 NO ADDITIONAL CHANGES HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO DATE DATE OF CONTOURS: November, 2011 DATE OF PHOTOGRAPHY: May, 2013 rano° uo}6uiyseM'SL0 a N a SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS PROPOSED CORRIGAN MINOR SUBDIVISION Survey Prepared For: Joshua Corrigan 380 South Fourth Street Bayport, Minnesota 55003 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Existing Parcel Description Supplied: (copy of Doc. No. 3311818) The East Half of lot seventeen (17), all of lots eighteen (18) and nineteen (19), and the West Half of lot twenty (20) in Block Three (3) of Wilkin's Addition to Stillwater according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Washington County, Minnesota. Notes: Notes: BARRETT M. STACK STILLWATER, MINN. 55082 MINNESOTA REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR Tel. No. 439-5630 Bearing system is assumed datum. • Indicates iron found as noted. o Indicates #13774 iron pipe set. "M." Indicates measured value. "R." Indicates recorded value. Offsets shown to existing structures are measured to the outside building wall line, unless shown or noted otherwise. Any projections from said wall line, such as eaves, sills, steps, etc., will impact these offsets accordingly. Underground or overhead public or private utilities, on or adjacent the ,parcels, were not located in conjunction with this survey, unless shown otherwise. OU Indicates observed overhead utility lines inplace. See Sheet 2 of 2 Sheets for proposed Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 Descriptions. This Proposed MInor Subdivision is subject to the review and approval ol the City of Stillwater. Parcel is presently zoned RB District: Min. Lot Area = 7500 sq. ft. Mite. Lot Frontage = 30 feet. Front Setback = 30 feet. Rear !setback = 25 feet. (verify data with the City of Stillwater) Side Yard Setback = 10 feet or 10% of Lot Width. Offsets shown to existing fence lines are measured to the general centerline alignment thereof. March 30, 2015 - Revision Note: (Prepared for Sara Imhoff_) (Parcel 2 - 2004 Corrigan Survey) Added Tree Locations and Wash. Co. contour mapping to Parcel 2 as surveyed in 2004. Added BENCHMARK and spot check elevations of contour mapping based on MnDOT elev. datum. Spot check elevations indicated thus: "39.5" = 934.5 MnDOT datum. (NAVD 1988 Datum) k `ymX 24 SS FNO. 20. Se - W I —._ --4 74- — ,saz 4/./C/y R /ie ZO.S8- N /7v kr ryl ND°37'AVE Q fc‘ \ Y4Z 7 S, 5?' o � LOT /8- \\\ of iAc'N �r9,rl?Cy FI orsR 1 - Zc f ' -'' 4/./6 M l__ Bir. - -66.74 4i'e aa4 ) I. 00 Pfbiz 37 39 • N Nri A f / 3 0 93G - `.3c./‘ _ Z44 3 5" n TVMP w Ri6,e°rvey GOT /'37.3 3g.8 \ 3 9. 5 f \\ I re,,, /Pa y Jfl"ce-o, 4, ,ra ��!�,--a.i 34. J - ZO.S&' 9 - 20.58 fir ,—_ !,krer N89°/f'¢./"W CaeB a.2t y�sr v t%-iYCH,A?,4,,e,e: •/ C,N . /V/c/G /.t/ P/pY:. Si. ,40. Z 7 h4'5..f 0` , EST CO . a47r/, 7 t,-' ` ( CAFTA4AP /14 T C'zA e,e- l ST PG4 7 '%v = GO\FEET 39.5 A/ - 3f.4 /.23.¢-- _. 911 --- - - iz SB 35" Il f 38.5 fi No°37'/8"E Nogna /"-2't ' )/ • I herebycertify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me c:r under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. F/r. C 6' N Date April 2-, 2004 13774 Reg No PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED TANDEM CAR GARAGE DASHED LINE OF --- BUILDING BELOW LINE OF ROOF EAVE EXITING HOME EXITING FRONT PORCH EXISTING CONCRETE WALK W A 5--0' GARAGE SETBACK 8 K 8 rc SLOPE NEW CONCRETE PATIO SLOPE 13 -2' NEW CONCRETE DRIVEWAY o r1GAAR NEW CONCRETE WALK LANDSCAPED/ SEATING AREA NEW CONCRETE WALK GRASS SLOPE I.O-E`F SLOPE SLOPE RELOCATE ERRING TREES, FINAL LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY OWNER LINE OF EXISTING 2'•5" CONTOURS PER SURVEY — LINE OF PORCH ROOF BELOW -- LINE OF ROOF SAVE DASHED LINE OF BUILDING BELOW IOUSE TBAC j - PROPOSED TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY HOME -- LINE OF PORCH GRASS ROOF BELOW NEW TREE(S) FOR FRONT YARD, TBD PROPERTY LINE EXITING TREES TO BE REMOVED EXITING DRIVEWAY OWNER JEREMY AND SARA IMHOFF 117 OLIVE STREET WEST STILLWATER, MN 56062 CONTACT: SARA IMHOFF SARAN MPRINTARCHITECTURE.COM TEL: 206-940.9427 TAX PARCELS: 213020340157 SITE ADDRESS: 5XX ST CROIX AVE WEST STILLWATER, MN 55062 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I ALL THAT PART OF LOT 19 LYING EASTERLY OF THE WEST 5.00 FEET THEREOF, AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT 20, ALL BEING IN BLOCK 3 OF WILKIN'S ADDITIONAL TO STILLWATER, ACCORDINGI TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE OFFIC OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA LOT COVERAGE LOT SEE: 7,676 SF ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGE: 26% = 1,919 SF ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE: 25%= 1,919 SF BUILDING COVERAGE: HOUSE PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR HOUSE: 1074 SF PROPOSED HOUSE PORCH: 372 SF TOTAL HOUSE: 1,446SF GARAGE PROPOSED/ TOTAL GARAGE: 473 SF BUILDING TOTAL: 1,919 SF = 26,00% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE: HOUSE EAVES: 263 SF GARAGE EAVES: 160 SF CONCRETE DRIVEWAY: 542 SF CONCRETE WALKWAYS: 90 SF CONCRETE PATIO AND STEPS: 314 SF TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE: 1,359 SF = 17.70% GROSS LIVING SQUARE FOOTAGE BASEMENT: UNFINISHED MAIN FLOOR HOUSE: 1,074 SF UPPER FLOOR HOUSE: 661 SF TOTAL GROSS LIVING SQUARE FOOTAGE: 1,936 SF EXITING CEDAR TREE TO BE REMOVED ST CROIX AVENUE WEST NORTLI 1 SITE PLAN SCALE: IMHOFF RESIDENCE SITE PLAN U J J co L- f0 U d) M I L A1.1 ._ a N N N 0 8' 0` 16'-0" 2N-9" 9'-5" 21'-B" 24'-5 1/2' NEW GARAGE 15.-3" CONCRETE DRAY GENERAL NOTES: SEE Al, I SITE PLAN FOR CALLOUTS IN COMMON Au EST RGUOOM/ STUDY BEDROOM I DN L HALL BEDROOM 2 1 FULL ii• Ci? BATH =.• - I Ey 1I 5 MASTER BATH _..L.. _I j. MASTER SURE IN _t_ " IN 8 • 0• a -Tr 1 B'-0' B'-B' 2 UPPER FLOOR PLAN 13'-3" O B 13'-5" CONCRETE pRIVEWAY GENERAL NOTES: SEE AI.I SITE PLAN FOR CALLOUTS IN COMMON 1eV DN CONCRETE PATIO CONCRETE WALK s«TING/ PLANTING SPACE WOOD BACK PORCH WOO IT SCREEN PORCH 1r II KRCHEN UP FROMprrirr CONCRETE N WALK 4 I- L LAUNDRY ROOM ra— C7 t'�, nOrtont. Room NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME LIVING ROOM GAS FIREPLACES HEARTH WOOIDf101e Nlffictl .. 1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN 21'-B" NORTH SCALE: I- o 4'4• Er-o* IMHOFF RESIDENCE MAIN AND UPPER FLOOR PLANS J J C C Co W U W ■ — N 0 03 B, J 0 N SCREEN PORCH TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF PLATE fti TOP OF SLAB WALL SCONCE 12 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - SILVER COLOR — 2X4 PAINTED FRIEZE TRIM 23(3' FIXED CLAD WINDOW TYP OF 2 46 - STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER COLOR -- 2X 10 PAINTED FRIEZE TRIM PAINTED BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING OO i 3"-4'LAP BOARD PAINTED WOOD 1 ,`-' PROPOSED GRADE SIDING A GARAGE DOOR + EXISTING GRADE TYP HOUSE COLORS: SIDING AND ALL TRIM WHITE WINDOWS CLAD/ BLACK ROOF SILVER/ METALLIC FLOOR (DECKING) CLEAR WOOD SOFFITS CLEAR WOOD DOORS CLEAR WOOD TIP WINDOW TRIM (SIM 61? DOOR): 1-1 /2' JAMBS 2 1 /2" SILLS 2X8 W/ 1 CROWN A T HEAD EXTERIOR LIGHTING TO BE: 14 RECESSED CANS IN SOFFITS 2) LANDSCAPE LIGHTING TO BE ON PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL 3 4" LAP BOARD PAINTED WOOD SIDING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER COLOR — 2X6 PAINTED WOOD FASCIA 6X 12 PAINTED WOOD BEAMS ---- WOOD SOFFITS - CLEAR FINISH 6X6 PAINTED. WOOD POSTS CEDAR PORCH DECKING. CLEAR FINISH 1 1- B-0" WOOD DOOR, CLEAR li FINISH. TOP ALL EXTERIOR DOORS - STONE STEP WOOD DECK SKIRT 3'-4" LAP BOARD PAINTED WOOD SIDING TOP OF RIDGE oir 1W8ILTCIw.HEAA J TOP OF PLATE - To TOP OF SUBFLOOR .t WINDOW HEAD TOP OF SUBFLOOR FINISH GRADE 1 SOUTH ELEVATION 1 I I 11_t--I _I—I-1— I- 1 I I I I f 1 1 t I I STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER COLOR TOP HOUSE COLORS: SIDING AND ALL TRIM WHITE WINDOWS - CLAD/ BLACK ROOF - SILVER/ METALLIC FLOOR (DECKING) CLEAR WOOD SOFFITS CLEAR WOOD DOORS - CLEAR WOOD TOP WINDOW TRIM (SIM 4 DOOR): 1- I /2" JAMBS 2-1 /2' SILLS 2X8 W/ CROWN Al HEAD EXTERIOR LIGHTING TO BE: I.) RECESSED CANS IN SOFFITS 2.) LANDSCAPE LIGHTING TO BE ON PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL 3' 4" LAP BOARD PAINTED WOOD SIDING - STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER COLOR IF 'A110 O 8.1 2X6 PAINTED WOOD FASCIA 6X 12 PAINTED WOOD BEAMS - WOOD SOFFITS CLEAR FINISH ' 6X6 PAINTED WOOD POSTS • ---- CEDAR PORCH DECKING. CLEAR FINISH 1--- PAINTED BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING STONE STEPS Y --CONCRETE WHLIT- PR61PCSSB1.14GAWA GE FBit9H0WE4 FOR CLARITY PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE 60P 01: PEAK. 1OP OF PLATE WIf4Ofh/r HEw -_ ION OF SUBFLOOR WINDOW HEAD TOP Q - 8DB.00R FINISH GRADE -- CONCRETE WALK WR#193 DECK SKIRT 3' 4' LAP BOARD PAINTED WOOD SIDING — STONE STEP SCALE IMHOFF RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.1 U - J -J • d D e s imprintarchitecture cc ui 4-1 ■ — 0 E ■ 66666� 0 N+ 2 WEST ELEVATION 0 4.-0,. 8•-0,. DASHED LINE OF SCREEN PORCH - NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY m_r1;11 L._-_. 1i----- x;._ -_1 ., — PAINTED BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING WALL SCONCE GENERAL NOTE: REFER TO A3.I FOR CALLOUTS IN COMMON 1 GENERAL NOTE: REFER TO A3.1 FOR CALLOUTS IN COMMON SCREEN PORCH PER PLAN 1 NORTH ELEVATION 2 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 0 4'-0" 8"-0" IMHOFF RESIDENCE cn z 0 I- w J w O c w 5i I- Zm X� W I A3.2 GENERAL NOTE: REFER TO A3.I FOR CALLOUTS IN COMMON 1 GARAGE WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 IMHOFF RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS a) W di 0 0 0 Z co o �I o� ■ U J J • U a) U L E A3.3 ._ r N 0 • m 0 N .0 O. W 0 N- 0 4 -0"" ST. CROIX AVE. WEST - STREET VIEW REFERENCE SITE PLAN IMAGE 2 IMAGE 1 IMAGE 6 ST. CROIX AVE. W tit) IMAGE 1: ST. CROIX AVE W - LOOKING NORTH Proposed Site IMAGE 2 - ST. CROIX AVE W. - LOOKING NORTH Properties West of Site - 1305 William St. N (View from St. Croix Ave. W) - 518 St. Croix Ave W IMAGE 3: WILLIAM STREET N - LOOKING WEST Properties West of Site IMAGE 4: ST. CROIX AVE W - LOOKING SOUTH & WILLIAM ST N - LOOKING EAST Properties West of Site - 1219 William St. N (View from St. Croix Ave W.) - 1219 William St. N IMAGE 5: ST. CROIX AVE W - LOOKING SOUTH Properties East of Site - 415 St. Croix Ave W - 421 St. Croix Ave W - 507 St. Croix Ave W IMAGE 6: ST. CROIX AVE W - LOOKING NORTH Properties West of Site - 510 St. Croix Ave W - 504 St. Croix Ave W SITE VIEW 1 - LOOKING WEST Neighboring House - 518 St. Croix Ave. W. SITE VIEW 2 - LOOKING EAST Neighboring House - 518 St. Croix Ave. W. SITE VIEW 3 - LOOKING NORTH AND EAST From South Side of Site - View Looking North - View Looking East SITE VIEW 4 - LOOKING SOUTH From North End of Site iUwater HE OPEITHPIACE OF MINNESOTA. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 6, 2015 APPLICANT: Judd Sather, applicant CASE NO.: 2015-31 REQUEST: Demolition request for portions of a Historically Significant Structure located at 123 2nd Street South ZONING: CBD, Central Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST AND STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS The applicant is requesting approval of the selective demolition of an addition to the Connolly Shoe Factory, a Nationally Registered Historic Commercial contributing building. The addition consists of two, originally separate structures built between 1906 and 1956 which supported the shoe factory operations. The legal property boundary of the factory includes these two structures. The older of the two structures appears on the 1910 Sanborn Map, as indicated to the right. It is designated as an Oil House. This is an approximately 50' long by 20' wide tile building with an overhead garage door. It is situated perpendicular to the alley and is depicted on the existing conditions site plan as being fee -standing. A single service door is located on the north side in a concrete area which contains waste receptacles. A single z COMMERCIAL "'iw xik s 0,0W,"• Comnaur ewe Co.. i �b acaa;;;-- ..:�,D.JY.. Avsr orme 102 Zia Offnce l ...0 A y. 00 AP E. MYRTLE ....:161` AV'/1 , 2 z 5, 8:8 glass pane window is located on the west facade. Several of the exterior tiles have broken and fallen off, particularly on the corners of the building and on the north elevation. The Oil House was turned into the Leather - findings Warehouse prior to 1956 when a new, smaller structure was constructed between the original Oil House and the J primary structure, as depicted on the 1925- 1956 Sanborn map to the right. This building, which was turned into the Oil House, is currently metal on the eastern facade, containing an oversized service door. The western facade contains a single casement window. The facade is brick. This smaller structure was eventually connected to the Leather -findings shop by a single doorway. =ts E. MYRTLE A small service alley currently exists between this structure and the primary shoe factory structure. Access into the shoe factory building can be achieved in the rear at this location. A stormdrain is situated in this walkway area. At some point between 1956 and the present day, both structures were connected together and then connected to the shoe factory building. No record of this has been able to be found in modern permit archives, though a 1972 permit for a roof extension from the building at the southeast corner could have been related. APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS City Code chapter 34, Building Demolition, identifies any building or structure or portion of 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 listed historic district. For historically significant buildings (or portions thereof) proposed for demolition, the Commission determine one of the following: (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, then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit may be issued, as provided in subsection (3) below. (ii) Feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission determines that there is a feasible alternative to demolition, the permit must be denied. HPC Case 2015-31 123 2nd Street North Partial Demolition July 6, 2015 Before approving the demolition of a building, 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 require a mitigation plan as a condition of any approval for demolition of a building. 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. With the approval of the city council, the commission may stay the release of the building, wrecking or demolition permit for up to 180 days as a condition of approval for a demolition of a building that 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. STAFF ANALYSIS As the applicant indicates, these two structures were utilized as accessory to the shoe factor operations. While there is no historical or architectural assessment of the addition(s), they are a part of the property listed as contributing to the Commercial Historic District, designated locally and nationally. The lack of notation of these portions of the building often suggests they have no historical significance. However, it is common to not have detail of the historical and architectural significance of accessory structures in the National Report. The proposed demolition is due to the site constraints for proposed mixed use to occur in the building after the sale to the applicant. The applicant has conditional approval of a Special Use Permit for the construction of an events venue on the upper story, mixed office/practitioner space on the second level as well as a restaurant space on the lower level, accessed off of Commercial Street. In order to achieve the high -intensity, multi -use of the building, the applicant will need to install a new transformer on the site, new air condition units for the separate floors and lease spaces as well as have a location for enclosed waste receptacles. The proposed site plan is found on the proposed site alterations page. As the southernmost portion of the addition, the tile shop with the overhead garage door, is older and had continually been a part of the factory's operations, its significance is evident. As the structure's evolution went from being an Oil House and then the Leather -findings Warehouse, the building has been able to be adaptively reused in the past. Additionally, the exterior tile is not common in downtown Stillwater and embodies "...distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, period, form or treatment." The newer structure, which has had modifications including enlargement may be less significant. The construction materials appear to be more modern and less significant. As it was traditionally used as the Oil House and now as a workshop for the building, the significance may be less than that of the older structure. HPC Case 2015-31 123 2nd Street North Partial Demolition July 6, 2015 DEMOLITION FINDINGS Given adaptive reuse of the shoe factory building is desired, the need for supporting services for the building is necessary. The successful operations of this large structure will hinge on the ability to provide appropriate utilities to the building. As such, there is a need to gain additional space in this area to accommodate the transformer, air conditioning units and waste receptacles. However, staff finds this space could be achieved in between the factory and the tile building for the services whereas the waste receptacles could be housed within the tile structure. As such, staff finds that there is no feasible alternative to demolition of the 1924-1956 Oil House but there is feasible alternative to the demolition of the Leather -findings Warehouse. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the HPC open the public hearing to take public comment, including testimony from the applicant. Once all comments have been made, the HPC should close the public hearing and take action on the request. The Commissions may move to approve the permit, approve with conditions or deny the permit. Staff recommends the following: 1. Approval of the demolition permit for the Oil House, as depicted on the 1924-1956 Sanborn maps, and necessary attachments to the primary structure located at 123 2nd Street South with the following conditions: a. The applicant shall provide 20 amp electrical service to the City of Stillwater for the water pump located at the Sunken Gardens, a contributing historic site in the Commercial Historic District, located adjacent to the building. b. Documentation shall be provided of the exterior drain flows. In the event the drain is connected to the municipal sanitary or storm sewer system, the drain shall be disconnected and connected to the building. Documentation of the disconnection shall be provided. c. Documentation of abandonment of the wellhead shall be provided. d. Documentation of the interior and exterior dimensions and conditions, including heights, widths, and materials shall be submitted to the Stillwater HPC and kept on file as a portion of the historical and architectural inventory for the structure. e. The demolition shall be contingent upon the sale of the property to the applicant. 2. Denial of the demolition permit for the Leather -findings Warehouse, as depicted on the 1924-1956 Sanborn Map and noted as the Oil House on the 1910 Sanborn Map due to its distinguishing characteristics of form or treatment and its supporting role in operations for the Connelly Shoe Factory. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Applicant Submission Certificate of Survey Proposed Site Alterations Architectural Significance Report (2 pages) Site Photographs (4 pages) HPC Case 2015-31 123 2nd Street North Partial Demolition July 6, 2015 .' / .' ! ••......••••=momm. illwa ter. 1 117 ___ -- _ _ .4y is 4, i II pp y a ^ LIIIII �., - '� ° — + _ �_,, °`„ .............------ The Birthplace of Minnesota 123 Second Street South A o Parcel Boundaries ....,. Municipal Boundary r''/K pr r; -. ; F Area of Selective Demolition 321 tVga, - L. _ — rla , ��� �ii P e t >. 3 �'� 232 r".."'r - '�_ `,. 0 115 230 460 Feet �, � �- ^'v `- '0(/'' .,2 \" R is JJ 225 �' P A General Site Location \ � �` y t �. ' t �i� �130 � '' �.ti Milo. { . „t —' 204 to � 12 r 1'` 20 130 r s . • 11 to y216 12� - 102 � , 5 1 1 d �2 a° o _ Mane, �26\ 102 220 L ^/i� c �♦ t ,€ n t 102. , , Ins ,'sr REGEND O " p IA,B.Ir.w,,,r �«a'1[1w .0rmmn0 nvr,cr nR "V m,r°'ve r .01-11191//0 cr 0,01.11. 61) ,.a,e esroaei I .n,1NrIII><AtYR 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 'Ihe lall0hlrttJ Legal [kicripfWn is as sltAmn Oil E cA Nit. Services, as agent Lot First American Title Insurance Company Title Commitment No. 150143, dated February 9th, 2015. All that part of Block Number 18 of the Original Town (now City) of Stillwater, as surveyed and platted and now of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, in and for Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows, to wit: Commencing at the intersection of the East line of Second Street with the South line of Commercial Avenue; thence Easterly along the South line of Commercial Avenue 200 feet, more or less, to the West line of Nelson Alley; thence South along the West line of Nelson Alley to a point 100 feet North of the North line of Myrtle Street, thence Westerly parallel with the North line of Myrtle Street a distance of 50 feet to a point; thence Northerly parallel with the East line of Second Street to a point 70 feet South of the South line of Commercial Avenue; thence Westerly parallel with the North line of Myrtle Street 150 feet, more or less, to a point in the East line of Second Street; thence Northerly along the East line of Second Street 70 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning, together with the rights in that certain deed from Henry C. Farmer and Mary Eva Farmer, his wife, to Connolly Shoe Company, dated and acknowledged May 22, 1905, and recorded slay 24, 1905, in Book 60 of Deeds, page 376, with reference to the Southerly 2 feet of the Northerly 72 feet of the Westerly 150 feet thereof. (Abstract property) r 010.11r•_nw tOne., tea t --r+' ,rpeL oaes+a —..0 eB,taR0.,Y mnA,NNC 04100.1 ..— — ,rLmr6r. fpw ,f17s. cfIL GeaneD \ z `i O \ \ \ CERTIFICATION: ti e400 EMLe5 WT. eutfyny 'UTSUe.. r PARCEL LITE FALLS -013 SOUTH OF &ADOJC LPE 5E1 P.R. NAL 0.4' oW W LSi II `e- WEST & O.r SOUTH WOD - - of &A014C CORNER ti`\ "} FOIAD I/2' POUCH OF (Ti) PARCEL '"E`1 CcerER to ISA'Filln Setutces, I (I„ First Amerman Otte Insurance Company, Judd C. Sather, Lake Area Mortgage and Gartner Properties, LLC. This is to certify that this map or plat and the Survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2011 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys, jointly established andadopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 7(a), 7(b)(1), 7(c) 8, 9, 11(b), 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on February 2nd, 2015. CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC. Dated: 3-25-IS Revised: By Daniel L. hunnes Minnesota License No. 25718 The FSA Title Services, as agent for First American Title Insurance Company Title Commitment No. 150143, dated February 9th, 2015 was relied upon for matters of record. Other easements may exist that were not shown in this commitment and are not shown on this survey. rc'.w A,R5DIµ almtlagc 'SIAy'L' O e a 7 0�Y rwt. -, r>-3 a,Y ra=.,—'E'' Y ,,� ram_ \ _/ tr IUJ 1 � 0n ,-w EASEMENTS: ELF $ ,1 - 1 The following survey related easements or encumbrances are as on FSA Title Services, as agent for First American Title Insurance Company Title Commitment No. 150143, dated February 9th, 2015. I. none AREA: TOTAL AREA = 15,599 SQ. FT. SURVEY NOTES: 1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON COORDINATES SUPPLIED BY THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEYORS OFFICE. 2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER STATE ONE CALL LOCATES AND AS -GUILTS PLANS PROVIDED BY ME CITY OF STILLIVATER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. 3. THERE MA)' BE SOME UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS, ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR LOCATED.. PARCEL LINE FALLS 0.05' NORTH OF &ALONG LINE-. i / 4,0 ,4S �jy9. VnF pm R■.r..4 LIFE VAIL.. ,1 Si+.rIl, - —N C r FLOOD INFORMATION: THIS PROPERTY LIES WITHIN ZONE X OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP 2716300266E WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF FEBRUARY 3RD, 2010. EXISTING PARKING THERE ARE 0 VISIBLE PARKING STALLS DESIGNATED ON THIS PARCEL INCLUDING 0 HANDICAP STALL. ALTA NOTES: 4 ITEMS CORRELATING TO TABLE OF 2111 ALTA STANDARDS 8. Substantial features observed in the process of conducting the survey are shown graphically. 16. There is no observed evidence of current earth moving work, building construction or building additions. 17. Surveyor is unaware of any proposed changes In street right of way lines. 18. There is no observed evidence of site being used as s solid waste dump, sump or sanitary landfill. 19. No wetland areas were delineated on subject property. e11Sr eL CaR11R • ayL" V. 3e VLSI 6 0 0 SOUTH Air BIJLpNC CORNER, NO NONIYENT SET -BLLptG CORNER FALLS 0.L3' EAST OF PARCEL CORNER. NO ticnfltNr sot S� &AGINIG CORNER FALLS 0.2' WEST--, OF PARCH LIE FOUND 1/2' IRON PRE o n' SOUTH R PARCEL CORNER. NO ti.Xtrtrlr SU'0 ptAONG CORNER-• FALLS 0.2' EAST S. 0.2`SOUTH OF PARCEL CORNER ti�15SVNG UGI�G UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES: (4 111E UNDERGItiTIJNY UTH.111ES SHOWN HAVE KIN LOCATED FROM FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPROMISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THE SURVEYOR HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST. OTHER UTILITIES k1A1' EXIST ON THIS SITE THAT WERE NOT ktARKED UP. Le;GU. BEFORE You OKI °CAI Gopher State One Call r\YW Lrn' AREA: 651-154-0002 TOLL FREE: I-Wn-253-I 166 \ CONTACT: Judd Sather 214 South Main St., Stillwater, MN 55082 (651) 342-1476 COUNTY/CITY: WA5111 N GTON COUNTY CITY OF STI LLWATER VICINITY MAP VICINITY MAP %RICHri01/11 TdcWurv�mrxN 0,1 20 Nfsr, REVISIONS: DATE 3-25-15 REVISION INITIAL ISSUE NORTH 0 10 20 PROJECT LOCATION: \ 2ND STREET N. \ PID#2 80302041 0094 \` +. N Suite 01 6750 Stillwater Blvd. N. Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone 651.275.8969 Fax 651.275.8976 darnW cssurvey .net CORNERSTONE LAND SURVEYING, INC. FILE NAME PROJECT NO. SURVLC62.DIYG LC15062 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY CON MCIA, 5'���1' ri 25 Jill TELEPHONE POLE EXG, 208V POLE MOUNTED TRAN5FOPMEP5 ANI7 LOW OVE11-IEA2 5F VICE TO 5FCON2 LEVEL 57.4TCH GEAR. C INADEQUATE) open EXG, 1510PY ( post 1924 xtclthia-) visas door EXG, 15TOkY ( "Oil House" 1910) 1 1 me, fence garaoe door Hdo. to South PPOPO5F21,0V\I LOVE kit 2� N , Second 51, / Partial 2emol ition l ecLues{' 6 / 17/ 15 Mark 5,'alai Archi,ec 5, Inc, 6 51-967-2085 l up 13" 480v FT, NIGH I TAINING'J1'AL' bldg. to 5cuth rOs Mark S. Balay, RA S till w a t e r M i n n e s o ta 110 East Myrtle Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 (651) 430-3312 B A l A AARCHITECTI Y Michael E. Balay, RA I n d i a n a p o l i s I n d i a n a 8482 Weaver Woods Place Noblesville, Indiana 46060 (317) 845-9402 6/17/2015 Research and Report on the Architectural Significance of The "Oil House" Myrtle Alley, Stillwater Sources 1/ Stillwater Library St. Croix Collection materials and files 2/ Historical Sanborne Insurance Maps 3) Stillwater City Directories 4) various biographical references 5) Historical Survey of Downtown Stillwater by Noreen Roberts for National Register nomination. Architectural Analysis 1) This structure is in two parts an original detached storage structure and a connector that was built later. Both buildings have had extensive alterations through the years. Both roofs are built with modern materials so are replacements. The buildings are currently being used as work shops for building maintenance staff and storage of equipment. 2) The "Oil House" is so named only because of how it's label on the 1910 Sanborne Insurance Map. That 1910 map is the first map that the Connelly Shoe Factory also appears on. 3) This detached clay tile wood roof structure was built probably to safely store flammable and hazardous materials used by the shoe factory. It was originally a fireproof enclosure not intended for human occupancy. In an oral historical interview in March of of 1994 Mr. Tom Gerson an employee of the shoe factory from 1933-1967 said, "That tile structure? Yes, we used that to store things like cements and flammable stuff and get it out of the factory..." This is the only reference specifically to the structure that I could fmd other than the two insurance maps 1910 and 1924. 4) NO contemporary historic city directories indicate an independent building on Myrtle Alley in this block. It was not an independent occupancy. 5) Most accessory structures for industrial function were torn down when their industrial use ended but this structure was repurposed into a garage and equipment storage building. page 2 6) Its' contribution to the historical significance of the shoe factory and the historic downtown commercial district is minimal at best and it specifically does not fit the context of a functioning occupied historical building since it was only basically a storage shed for chemicals. 7) It does not exemplify any specific industrial process or unique building design or construction material usage from one of the national register contexts for this district. 8) In reviewing the work for nomination of the district it was not surveyed as an individual building and was not mentioned in the analysis of the Connelly Shoe Factory when it was recommended as a contributing structure. iUwater HE OIWTHPIACE OF MINNESOTA. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: July 6, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-27 APPLICANT: Randy Jennissen, J & J Remodelers REQUEST: Design Permit approval for exterior facade improvements to the structure located at 1792 Greeley Street South ZONING: BPI - Business Park Industrial COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Commercial PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting a Design Permit for a proposed addition and upgrade to portions of the exterior facade. The details of the facade improvement include: • Installation of a 14' X 6' portico on the front (East) facade. The portico will be constructed of cedar finish rafters and brick piers. • A stone veneer will be placed on the bottom of the existing front (East) facade and wrap around 2' on the north and along the south facade of the existing structure's addition. • New lap siding will be placed above the stone veneer. While the color has not yet been determined, the applicant has indicated the color will be muted. • A new cedar pergola and patio area will be constructed on the south end of the structure's existing addition, filling in a portion of open space at the southeast corner of the structure. • Three new tempered glass picture windows will be installed on the East and North side of the existing addition to the structure. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS The intent of the design review procedure is to secure the general purposes of the comprehensive plan, West Stillwater Business Park Plan, to maintain the character and integrity of neighborhoods and commercial districts by promoting excellence of design and development, preventing traffic hazards, providing adequate services and encouraging development in harmony with its neighborhood or planning area. The applicable standards of the design review are as follows: (1) Architectural character: i. The suitability of the building for the intended purpose. ii. The consistency of the applications design with approved design guidelines. iii. The compatibility of the character of the design with adjacent development. (2) Outdoor advertising: The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with adjacent development. (3) Historical structures, vistas, sites and the impact of development on these resources. (4) Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. Design guidelines have been developed for the West Stillwater Business District to ensure consistent quality design. The following guidelines will be used: Guideline Architectural Standard: Unadorned pre- stressed concrete panels, standard concrete block or metal siding shall not be used as exterior materials for new buildings. Architecturally enhanced block or concrete panels may be acceptable. While a significant portion of this building does not conform to the design standards, the property owner is improving portions of the structures - thereby decreasing the nonconformities. Architectural Standard: Architectural consistency on all sides of the building is required in terms of colors, materials and details. While the addition is proposed to be consistent on all three sides, the stone veneer is proposed to only extend 2' onto the North side. Site Plan: Onsite lighting shall serve functional safety and aesthetic purposes. No lighting plan has been submitted. Site Plan: Overall lighting shall be directed down and shielded from adjacent properties or roadways. All lights shall be contained on the property. No lighting plan has been submitted. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Upon a finding by the design review committee that the application, subject to any conditions imposed, will [meet] the standards of design review, secure the purpose of this chapter, the comprehensive plan and the heritage preservation ordinance, the design review committee may approve the design permit, subject to conditions as it deems necessary. If a finding is made that the permit would violate the standards of design review, it must deny the application. 1792 Greeley Street South HPC Case No. 2015-27 Page 2 The applicant is proposing an 84 square foot portico addition as well as a 140 square foot patio area to the front of the existing structure. Although the additions will be in conformance with the area dimensions and setbacks, the location is proposed to be placed in the required 20% landscaped area. As the property is not meeting the 20% minimum requirement for landscaping and the proposed addition would increase the nonconformity, the property owner will need to create this landscaping area elsewhere on the property. However, there is ample space on the property to install the required landscaping. Staff finds this application meets the purpose of the standards for design review set forth in the zoning code, comprehensive plan and the heritage preservation ordinance, staff recommends approval based on the following conditions: 1. The stone veneer shall be extended along the North facade up to that point of the existing concrete block facade and consistent with the lap siding extension. 2. The installation of new lighting shall be directed down and shielded from adjacent properties or roadways. All lights shall be contained on the property. 3. A total of 204 square feet of new landscaped area shall be created onsite. Landscaping shall be a combination of trees, shrubs, flower and ground cover. 4. In the event the Community Development Director determine substantial alterations are proposed for future phases of facade renovation, staff shall bring the proposed modifications before the HPC for design review. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Facade Improvements (2 pages) 1792 Greeley Street South HPC Case No. 2015-27 Page 3 PERGOLA8'-0"16'-0" 6'-0"4'-7"2'-1"11'-1 1/2" 23'-9 1/2" 1'-0"8'-4"3'-0" N E W Z P L Y 2 X 1 0 R I D G E B M N E W 2 X 1 0 R A F T E R S 1 6 " 0 . C . W / 1 X 6 C E D A R F I N I S H B E L O W R A F T E R S 1X10 CEDAR FASCIA N E W L A P S I D I N G N E W S T O N E V E N E E R O N T O P O F 2 X 4 F R A M E D W A L L 3'-0" N E W A S P H . S H I N G L E S N E W P I C T U R E / T E M P E R E D A W N I N G W I N D O W NEW PICTURE/TEMPEREDAWNING WINDOWNEW 3'X3'X6' BR I C K P I E R S W/ 6"X6" R/S CD R P O S T S N E W L A P S I D I N G N E W S T O N E V E N E E R O N T O P O F 2 X 4 F R A M E D W A L L R A I L I N G N O T S H O W N F O R C L A R I T Y P E R G O L A N E W A S P H . S H I N G L E S 2 ' - 0 " N E W P I C T U R E / T E M P E R E D A W N I N G W I N D O W NEW DOOR N E W 3 ' X 3 ' X 6 ' B R I C K P I E R S W / 6 " X 6 " R / S C D R P O S T S 6'-0" SCALE :EAST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"1 N O R E V I S I O N / I S S U E D A T E S C A L E : D A T E : P R O J E C T : S H E E T : D R A W I N G N A M E P R O J E C T : C O N S T R U C T I O N C L I E N T : N O T F O R J & J R E M O D E L E R S J & J R E M O D E L E R S N E W O F F I C E E L E V A T I O N S 1 5 - 0 0 0 2 6 / 1 5 / 1 5 A S N O T E D A 2 . 0 1 SCALE :PARTIAL SOUTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"2 S C A L E : P A R T I A L N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3