Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-09-14 HPC Packet
i 1 1 \i'a tec THE IIRTMPLA CE OF MIENESOTA AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North September 14, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of August 3, 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. 1. Case No. 2015-39: Consideration of approval of a Design Permit of a single, wall -mounted sign to be located at 402 Main Street North. Monty Brine, Owner. Thomas Anderson, Applicant. 2. Case No. 2015-41: Consideration of approval of a Design Permit of a single, wall -mounted sign to be located at 118 Chestnut Street East. Jennifer Cates -Peterson, Owner. Brian Schutte, 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. 2015-42: Design Review of a future home to be located at 911 Abbott Street, a vacant property located in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) Dale Tennison and Sandi Miller, Owners. Steve West Applicant. VII. NEW BUSINESS 4. Case No. 2015-40: Consideration of a Design Permit for the painting of the exterior facade of the structure located at 108 Main Street North. Dan Smith, Owner. Deitrick McKenzie, Applicant 5. Case No. 2015-43: Design Review for the construction of a new financial intuition to be located 2020 Washington Avenue. William Hickey, Applicant. Jeanine Swanson, Owner. VIII. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION 6. Staff Updates -Verbal IX. ADJOURNMENT i I \v ate': THE OIRTNPLACE OF MINNESOTA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING August 3, 2015 7:00 P.M. Chairman Larson called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Present: Chairman Larson, Commissioners Goodman, Johnson, Krakowski, Mino (arrived at 7:04 p.m.), Welty, Council Representative Menikheim Absent: Commissioner Branjord Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of July 6, 2015 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Welty, to approve the minutes of the July 6, 2015 meeting. All in favor, 5-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2015-32 Design Review for hanging business sign with black decorative bracket, located at 112 Main Street South. Mike Lynskey, owner and Gina Kazmersik, applicant. Case No. 2015-33 Design Review for replacement of black vinyl roof with white, located at 333 Main Street North. Mark Desch, owner. Case No. 2015-38 Design Review for addition of ground mounted transformer and new rooftop HVAC unit, located at 1950 Curve Crest Boulevard. Thomas Rieser, owner and Darrick Mack, applicant. Motion by Commissioner Welty, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor, 6-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2015-35 Design Review for 952 square foot garage and 682 square foot accessory dwelling unit, located at 1343 First Street South. Lowell Schmoeckel, owner. City Planner Wittman explained the request. The applicant proposes to construct a garage with an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on a residential lot which contains a single family home. An application has been received for a Special Use Permit and associated variances but these have not been heard by the Planning Commission. One letter was received from property owner Amy Klutz expressing concern about the height. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Property owner Lowell Schmoeckel explained the design. The floor elevation could be reduced. He has spoken to Ms. Klutz about the project. He is not planning to use the structure as an accessory dwelling unit, but as space for his hobbies. There will not be a window on the first floor north elevation. There will be two windows on the second story north elevation. There will not be grills on the windows as in the drawings. Chairman Larson opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Johnson noted that reducing the joist height should help reduce the massing of the structure. Placing a taller egress window would add value and usefulness for potential future use as an ADU. Chairman Larson suggested the height should be lowered as much as possible. Commissioner Welty commented that the footprint of the structure seems almost the same size as the footprint of the house. She wondered if it could be narrowed toward Ms. Klutz's property. City Planner Wittman responded that the Planning Commission will consider the size variance next week. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Welty, to approve the Design Permit for Case No. 2015-35, 952 square foot garage and 682 square foot accessory dwelling unit located at 1343 First Street South, with the following conditions: 1) Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department on July 17, 2015. 2) The materials and colors shall be consistent with the primary residence. 3) Exterior lighting plans shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4) The approval shall become effective upon the City's receipt of an application permit signed by the legal property owner. 5) Efforts shall be made to reduce the height of the structure, from ground grade to the top of the roof peak, to 23'6". The structure may not be greater in height than the primary residence. 6) The vertical banding element separating the siding elements, shall be lowered to a 3/5 ratio, similar to that of the primary residence. 7) The second story windows shall be a sash window with no grill element. The window size may be increased proportionally. 8) The two first -floor windows on the north elevation are permitted to be removed and two sash windows may be installed on the second story. 9) All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. 10) All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. All in favor, 6-0. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2015-34 Design Review for tenant signage, located at 216 Myrtle Street West. Van Jensen, applicant and Robert Eiselt, owner. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is seeking to install two new signs: 1) a nine square foot wall - mounted, 2" thick metal sign to be located below an existing recessed light fixture beneath the canopy/awning, to contain the business logo in teal and black lettering with the words "home • baby • kids • maternity" and 2) an approximately ten square foot awning to read "LIL' TULIPS" in 12" high brushed aluminum letters identical to those at the U.S. Post Office. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Motion by Chairman Larson, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the Design Permit for Case No. 2015-34, tenant signage located at 216 Myrtle Street West, with the following conditions: 1) Disturbance to the wood framing shall be done in a fashion as to prevent excess damage and future water intrusion. Page 2 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 2) All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the HPC. All in favor, 6-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Case No. 2015-31 Demolition Review for consideration of a partial demolition of additions to the Connolly Shoe Factory, a contributing building in the Commercial Historic District, located at 123 Second Street North. Judd Sather, owner. City Planner Wittman reviewed the request. At the last meeting, the HPC granted a permit for demolition of the portion of the structure that was identified as the Oil House on the 1925-56 Sanborn Map. The HPC continued consideration of the demolition of the Leather Findings Warehouse as identified on the 1925-56 Sanborn Map, until the applicant demonstrated that maintaining this portion of the building was not feasible and until such time as the materials, elevations, height and design of what would be located in its place were provided to the HPC. The applicant has submitted a supplemental drawing for the demolition request, indicating an 8' tall rock face concrete block wall that will be constructed above ground grade at the western and southern boundary of the service area. This would provide a non-combustible barrier along the property lines as required by Xcel Energy. Documentation of correspondence with Xcel Energy's review of the supplemental drawing has been provided, as well as further correspondence between staff and Xcel Energy regarding the proposed site design and the company's standards for development of a transformer in regard to the 16' distance between the factory building and the Leather Findings Warehouse. Staff finds there is no feasible alternative to the demolition and recommends approval with conditions. Mark Balay, Balay Architects LLC, representing the owner, addressed the issue of drainage. If redirected, the storm drain would be rerouted through the connection that goes through the floor. There is a reported low level contamination of the soil under the slabs. WR Medical, a previous owner, made a connection between the buildings which will be removed. Chairman Larson asked if there will be enough of a new slab to prevent water from accumulating. Mr. Balay replied that the oil house slab is independent. It is within 1" of the other slabs. They are considering topping the whole slab to ensure positive drainage. The existing chain link fence will remain as a security measure during construction. It will be extended to the property line and privacy strips would be inserted. Trash will be collected inside the building as opposed to outside. There will likely be other improvements in the alley to come before the Commission. Commissioner Johnson asked about the material on the face of the wall. Mr. Balay replied a buff color close to the St. Croix Stone color will be used. Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the Demolition Permit for Case No. 2015-31, partial demolition of additions to the Connolly Shoe Factory located at 123 Second Street North, with the following conditions: 1) Plans shall be in substantial conformance with the plans dated June 21, 2015 on file with the Community Development Department. 2) 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. 3) Documentation shall be provided of the exterior drain flows. In the event the drain is connected to the municipal sanitary system, the drain shall be disconnected and connected to the building. In the event the drain is connected to the stormwater drainage system, the drain shall not be disconnected. Documentation of the disconnection shall be provided. Page 3 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 4) Documentation of the interior and exterior dimensions and conditions, including heights, widths, and materials shall be submitted to the HPC and kept on file as a portion of the historical and architectural inventory for the structure. 5) A temporary security fence is permitted to be extended along the east property line. No barbed wire shall be permitted. Trash shall not be stored in the enclosure. 6) The rock face wall shall be installed in "buff' color to resemble St. Croix stone. 7) The applicant shall obtain a Design Permit for any additional exterior changes including, but not limited to, the utility service area enclosure. All in favor, 6-0. Mr. Balay noted he has a lot of historical information on the structure which will be displayed in the event center. NEW BUSINESS continued Case No. 2015-37 Design Review for remodel and expansion of an existing garage to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit, located at 119 Chestnut Street West. Roger Tomten, ARCHNET, applicant and Jeff Anderson, owner. City Planner Wittman explained that in December 2014, the HPC approved Case No. 2014-37 for the remodel and expansion of a garage. The 2014 approval was modified and resubmitted for the Commission's review (as Case No. 2015-14) in April 2015. Since that time, the owner has again modified the design. The new design is no longer consistent with either of the originally approved HPC design permits and is substantially different from the original approved variances issued by the Planning Commission. In previous designs, the application proposed expanding the structure to the east to maintain the character of the streetscape and preserve views for uphill neighbors. The new design increases the height of the structure by one full floor. Two letters of comment were received, from Spike Carlsen voicing support, and from John and Catherine Clemency opposing the project. Staff recommends denial, without prejudice, on the basis it does not conform to the Downtown Design Review District guidelines addressing height and proportion. Jeff Anderson, owner, summarized the history of the project. The 1970s garage was deteriorating and was historically incorrect. He drew plans over a year and a half ago and showed them to neighbors. The Clemencys expressed concerns about the height, causing him to rework the plans. He then came up with the idea of expanding to the east instead of going above the existing foundation. Because of the ravine, that required City approval. Those plans were approved and there was a requirement they be engineered. Soil testing revealed that 8-14 micro pilings would be required, which would have cost $12-14,000 each. So the plans were reconfigured to once again increase the height. When he presented those plans to the Clemencys, who live to the northwest of the property, they expressed concerns again about the height because it blocks their view. So architects drafted two additional options that are not quite as high, in which the roof was lowered 2' and the knee wall is 4' on the east and west sides to accommodate the Clemencys' sight view concerns. Roger Tomten, architect, explained the two new alternative designs. The first option lowers the knee wall to 4' on the east and west sides, and lowers the peak by 2'. The second option includes lowering the roof as much as possible and using the mansard architectural design for a flat roof. The mansard style is still considered Victorian in design. Commissioner Johnson commented that with the mansard style, the massing of the structure is greater on the upper portion than with the previous designs. Because the house sits lower, this structure appears more dominant. Page 4 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 Mr. Tomten responded to concerns expressed about the streetscape of Fourth Street saying it is a unique streetscape because the only structure on the east side is much lower than street level. The houses on the west sit at a much higher elevation. Chairman Larson noted that the shed roof is a large projection on both designs and looks out of character with either style. He agreed that even though the mansard style would have a lower overall height, it would appear greater overall in bulk as seen from the street. Commissioner Johnson reflected that the massing of the Queen Anne style design works with proportion to the house. Fourth Street functions more as an alley. He doesn't feel the second story is distracting from the streetscape. The level of detail matches the house. He supports the new design. Chairman Larson noted it is not a public hearing, but invited comments from the audience. John Clemency, 205 West Chestnut Street, stated that Fourth Street is not an alley, it is a City street that is used and taxed as other streets. Either design would obstruct their view of the whole South Hill, the Broadway staircase and part of the river for six months of the year. Structures were approved that cut off their view to the north, and now their view of the river is being obstructed due to trying to jam an accessory dwelling unit onto a very small space. They oppose the proposal because it diminishes their view and their property value. John Broad, 208 South Fourth Street, who lives directly behind the property on the hill, said his home sits higher than the Clemencys. He would like to keep the design historically accurate. The Andersons have worked to obtain input. The design does not negatively impact his view so he is concerned more about historical context than the height. Kat Carlsen, 220 South Fourth Street, expressed support for either of the two latter designs. The Andersons have gone above and beyond trying to please the neighbors. City Planner Wittman noted she has discussed with Mr. Tomten that the variance obtained for the number of stories above the garage may need to go back before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Johnson asked if there is anything in City Code protecting someone's view over land they do not own. City Planner Wittman responded generally in Minnesota, if you want to preserve a view, you have to pay for it. The Anderson property is just outside the Downtown Height Overlay District. Commissioner Johnson commented that the Queen Anne design dated July 30, 2015 with the lower gabled roof seems compatible with the neighborhood and the existing house. He understands the Clemencys' concern about the loss of their view but unfortunately there are no guarantees for the rights to the view. The proposed design meets the requirements, so the Commission should grant approval. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Goodman, to approve the remodel and expansion of an existing garage to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit, located at 119 Chestnut Street West, using the Queen Anne style plan with the lower roofline submitted July 30, 2015, with the following conditions: 1) Exterior lighting plans shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) 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. All in favor, 6-0. Page 5 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting August 3, 2015 OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION There were no other items of discussion. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Goodman, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to adjourn. All in favor, 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:56 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 6 of 6 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: September 14, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-39 Thomas Anderson representing the Reincarnations Home Furnishings business and Monty Brine, property owner Consideration of approval of a Design Permit of a single, wall -mounted sign to be located at 402 Main Street North ZONING: Central Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Permit to install one wall mounted sign to the Isaac Staples Mill building located at 402 Main street North. The sign will be a single 11 square foot corrugated metal sign with brown laser cut lettering on it. The sign will read 'Reincarnations' with 'home furnishings' below. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Wall mounted signs are permitted by the sign ordinance at a ratio of one square foot per one linear foot of business unit frontage unless a multi -tenant sign plan has been developed and adopted. The sign is consistent with the adoption zoning code provisions for wall signage as structure. well as the multi -tenant sign plan in place for the Municipal Code Section 31-209, Design permit states: • The Standards for Review , Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following standards: o 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. o Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. The Downtown Design Manual indicates the following (abbreviated) guidelines: ■ Only one sign that contains the business name or graphic logo ... window sign may be used in addition to other sign types. ■ Signage should be located in such a way as to not obscure any architectural features. • Use painted wood where practicable. • Choose tones with sufficient contrast to be clearly legible: dark on light or light on dark. • The storefront sign should be used to display the primarily name of the business only. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS As the application demonstrates, the appearance of the wall sign will be consistent with the Downtown Design Review Manual guidelines and in harmony with the Stillwater Commercial Historic District. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of HPC Case No. 2015-34 with the following conditions: 1. The sign shall be limited to 11 square feet. 2. The sign shall obtain a sign permit prior to the installation. 3. Disturbance to the exterior wall face shall be done in a fashion as to prevent excess damage and future water intrusion. Utilization of existing openings shall be encourage. Patching of holes shall be done in a fashion as to prevent future water intrusion. 4. All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 402 Main Street North HPC 2015--39 (9/14/2015) Page 2 of 2 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 14, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-41 APPLICANT: Brian J. Schutte, representing City Sliqours REQUEST: Consideration of approval of a Design Permit of a single, wall -mounted sign to be located at 118 Chestnut Street East ZONING: Central Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Permit to install one wall mounted sign to structure located at 118 Chestnut Street East. The sign will be a single 6 square foot plastic sign with a vinyl decal. The sign will read 'City Sliqours,' the name of the business with 'beer• wine • spirits' below. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Wall mounted signs are permitted by the sign ordinance at a ratio of one square foot per one linear foot of business unit frontage. The sign is consistent with the adoption zoning code provisions for wall signage. Municipal Code Section 31-209, Design permit states: ■ The Standards for Review , Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following standards: o 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. o Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. The Downtown Design Manual indicates the following (abbreviated) guidelines: • Only one sign that contains the business name or graphic logo ... window sign may be used in addition to other sign types. • Signage should be located in such a way as to not obscure any architectural features. • Use painted wood where practicable. • Choose tones with sufficient contrast to be clearly legible: dark on light or light on dark. • The storefront sign should be used to display the primarily name of the business only. Use only one line of lettering if possible, leaving out secondary information. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS With the exception of the secondary information, the application demonstrates the appearance of the projecting sign will be consistent with the Downtown Design Review Manual guidelines and in harmony with the Stillwater Commercial Historic District. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of HPC Case No. 2015-41 with the following conditions: 1. The sign shall be limited to 6 square feet. 2. The sign shall obtain a sign permit prior to the installation. 3. The background of the sign shall be black. 4. The secondary information, 'beer. wine • spirits' shall not be approved. 5. Disturbance to the exterior wall face shall be done in a fashion as to prevent excess damage and future water intrusion. Utilization of existing openings shall be encourage. Patching of holes shall be done in a fashion as to prevent future water intrusion. 6. All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 118 Chestnut Street East HPC 2015-41 (9/14/2015) Page 2 of 2 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 14, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-42 APPLICANT: Steve West, Landsted LLC representing Sandi Miller & Dale Tennison, property owners REQUEST: Design Review of a future home to be located at 911 Abbott Street, 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 911 Abbott Street West, a vacant lot located near Washington Square Park. The property is in the Neighborhood Conservation Design Review District and as such an infill design review permit is required for the new home. Sandi Miller and Dale Tennison purchased the property in June of this year, just after the Heritage Preservation Commission approved a Design Permit for new construction proposed by the previous owners, Ray and Carmen Loida. Prior to the purchase of the property, staff advised the future property owners of the NCD guidelines and requested contact to discuss the guidelines prior to developing new homes plans. In late July the property owner's representative contacted me indicating their client had developed a new home plan and asked for staff's review. 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 single story home with a basement is proposed. A historic 1.5 story home is to the west and a single story home, set on a hill above the vacant lot, is located to the east is single story. Respect the existing rhythm of the streetscape. Follow alignment and setbacks predominant on the street and adjacent properties. The applicant is proposing to face the home set back 30' from the front property line which is consistent with homes along this street with the exception of the historic home to the west, which is approximately 17' from the property line. Homes across the street have varied setbacks between 17' and 40' from the property line. Design new roofs to be compatible with forms of existing roofs in the neighborhood. A traditional gable roof is proposed which will have an extended, smaller single gable over the garage. This is consistent with most properties in this neighborhood. Building height should be considered in choosing roof forms, architectural style, and relating to context. The height of the building is proportionate to the architectural style. Building and site design should respond to natural features. Preserve significant trees. The lot is relatively flat. The applicant has indicated one 2' in diameter ash tree will need to be removed. As per City Code, the tree will need to be replaced with a 2" diameter tree. Replacement shall be identified on the grading plans. When retaining walls are necessary, minimize their impact. Respect the site's natural slope in new building design: minimize cut, fill and retaining walls. No retaining walls are proposed. 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 9/14/2015 Page 2 of 5 Building Site Locate garage and driveway to respect existing street and neighborhood patterns. While front facing garages in this neighborhood are common, the applicant is proposing to extend the garage wholly in front of the home. This design is not supported by the design of the neighboring properties. Minimize garage impact on new structure massing and street front. A 22' wide garage is proposed for this 30' home. With nearly 75% of the front of the home proposed to be garage, the garage's impact on the neighborhood and streetscape is significant. This is a garage -dominant design which is not encouraged. The size and mass of the structure should be compatible with the size of the property. The size and mass of the home is compatible with the property. Consider front porch elements in the design of infill structures. The applicant is proposing a 15 square foot stoop to be located at the front entryway, setback 52' from the property line. Accessory buildings should be compatible with the main building. No accessory building is proposed. Design and detail new construction as four-sided architecture. With the exception of faux stone on the base of a front stoop overhang, the house design is carried on all four sides. Architectural Detail The facade of the structure should be compatible in scale and character to the houses of the streetscape. The homes in this neighborhood are smaller and contain minimal decorative elements. The applicant is proposing a cedar shake gable trim, corner and frieze boards as well as uniform window trim, indicative of homes in the NCD. Building elements should be proportional to the scale and style of the building, and its context. With the garage extending in front of the home, the garage is not proportional to the scale of the front facade of the home. Use architectural details to create visual interest and support architectural style. The architectural details proposed are modest, which is consistent with this neighborhood. In new building design, consider appropriate materials, textures and colors, and their relationship to other buildings of the neighborhood. With the exception of the forward extending garage, a home style indicative of contemporary suburban design, the architectural style and materials is in harmony with the homes in this neighborhood. Use masonry and stone authentically. Stone is proposed at the base of a front stoop overhang. It is not proposed to be located in any other portion of the home. 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 9/14/2015 Page 3 of 5 FINDINGS While the proposed design generally conforms to the guidelines of Neighborhood and Streets and Architectural Detail, the garage -forward design is not consistent with the Building Site guidelines #10 and #11. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The HPC has several alternatives related to this requests: A. Approve. If the proposed infill design review meets the Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2015-42. Staff would recommend the following minimum conditions for approval. 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department and on file with Case No. 2015-42. 2. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the home. 3. A grading permit, with plans showing for the replacement of the significant ash tree, shall be obtained prior to the construction of the home. The replacement shall be with at least one 2" diameter deciduous tree. 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 October, 2015 meeting. Staff recommends the Commission deny the application on the basis the proposed home does not conform to the NCD guidelines in relationship to the location of the garage and its impact to the streetscape. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Design Review Application and Checklist (2 pages) Narrative Request (2 pages) 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 9/14/2015 Page 4 of 5 Site Plan Main Floor Plan Exterior Elevations (4 pages) Similar Home Design Washington County Information (2 pages) Neighborhood Information and Photos (6 pages) 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 9/14/2015 Page 5 of 5 1 8 817 A �y iwa ter .., fi': I .�i" i - ,. _ s - y .•.. '•'.'y . `�. v . �' �.• y The Birthplace 911 Abbott of Minnesota Street CAI �-.' _ -.I �rl � i ll il wIII ■.a;_ `-- _ -- _ _-- - — — (a vacant Site 911 Abbott ? Parcel Boundaries ,N.1.. Municipal Location Street Boundary parcel) Li. !III' I _ 717 928r- — 922 r 716' t� W E I 71. 7.; 1006 = 721 722 1721 ., 0 55 110 S 220 ST k STREE Feet 7 -L ABBOTT 1 1 MEP WWI Ilse n 1 ITIMi. _ . ` �^ \- 1017f 1015 f 1 806 �H' f 1 W `' \ - 819 915 905 ppp((([[[�������.J C I1MMMMWME` L'E ®®-- ®q tits .,���. �"sl�Ogl • Yr1=1 i i ni: 11' usur E ILlll 111 � I iinn \ .. *A Iliy 850 nn IIIIII�®®"III16 .=/� �/ ��* �i ; -. 9112 _ — t' = .1��.=11111111111 roll el IN IIIL 111 I 11 Ili � I _®®®®'MME 824 Ai i�:- -. _. I �, 77.■D u. = ai Jili ii: CC "NIn N�LL� '1{�s ,� a : traa ! n: nm IMF �I :mum IV 1 {'� / -- - — - M —• I par .11171 aG TA 11-11 � � ✓' 1 1 11 PIMILMaei;;i _® 906 927 �. '' _.._.._.._.._.._.._.. 1 IR. 919 911 905 i •` 821 81 ,�`' �,� • �" .HE 939 a� jI,,,, i im6illlli 1 = PI . q ffiE �'�'I K} t 4 §y�f �� Yip` - g ' 1{ - nll la RP •' == r a �4, Q " � �- : :_. .9. •.... ., ....,€ . 1 •:, t _ y �I-s� k 'S • i v / � 92"t- _ I 812 : nl•■ d i�l ;o minn n.t R...nnn. , .0 AN :. t: —[ ,� T' 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 Addr s: 91 ,41abe) ity4 51. I/• Applicant name address, telephone: 541td; MIA", L lI 1t1 r Texhh i $orl �3sG 4(t& AVe-. Apt•407,Meiurevails. MM• 5'5-4 eq. CpsL- 4,161-6Sg2 1. Neighborhood Architectural Styles: o Vernacular ❑ Italianate o Queen Anne o Gothic o Greek Revival ❑ Second Empire o American Foursquare ❑ Stick ▪ Other: /90- I4Bo gaaefies L Ie 51oveeS 2. Prevailingneighborhood streetfront setback: (Guidelines #1, #2, #3) (Z. homes) Prevailing setback on block (est.) 281 8 20' Average setback on block (est.) 14' Proposed new house setback SO' 3. Is the pattern of homes in your neighborhood 1, 1-1/2, or 2 stories high? (Guidelines #4, #5) Stories 1 1-1/2 2 House on right ❑ ❑ • House on left • ❑ ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ a Prevailing on block 2 homes P ❑ P Prevailing opposite block IN ❑ ❑ Proposed new house a ❑ ❑ 4. Prevailing Front Porch pattern in your neighborhood: (Guideline #13) Front Porch None House on right ❑ House on left ® ❑ House to rear p ❑ Prevailing on block Z-komes Prevailing opposite block o Proposed new house ® ❑ Notes: 5frflA/1 'r-o 5. Prevailing Garage Location pattern in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) Front Rear Side Garage Garage Garage House on right ® ❑ ❑ House on left House to rear Prevailing on block Prevailing opposite block Proposed new house 6. Prevailing Garage Size in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) 1 stall 2 stall 3 stall Garage Garage House on right ❑ I House on left ❑ House to rear ❑ +� Prevailing on block ❑ i Prevailing opposite block ❑ Proposed new house ❑ Garage 7. Is the proposed garage 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? : t 4,'/ J 1 t ja/►.+fd oo v6 + y eg �1. 74 ►s ,A'S'S 1.1N dt4it it Fvi ' 1- Porgy Stillwater Conservation District (p 1 of 2) Design Guidelines Design Review Application and Checklist 9. Does the proposed structure work with natural slopes and contours of the property? (Guidelines #6, #7, #8) ❑ Structure sited parallel to slope ® Building deigned to reduce cut and fill (minimized retaining walls) ▪ Landscaping incorporated into grading changes Notes: not sr t. • 10. Are there significant trees on the property? Will any trees be removed or damaged by new construction? (Guideline #9) • Types of trees .45h a Heights S0' al Trunk diam. 1$ Notes: I -free- , iv b remov-ci Good Neighbor Considerations 1. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbor's access to sunlight in adjacent yards, patios or rooms? (Guideline #21) House to right: House to left: House to rear: Mt 0 Notes: 1- 54,.y Axon 'v.' *tit 44 5kI Ye,41. hp How will you mitigate any negative sunlight impacts on neighbors? ❑ Locate structure on lot to minimize impact ❑ Adjust building height, or portions of building, to minimize impact ❑ Other: Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines 2. Will the proposed structure significantly affect your neighbors' privacy?(Guidelines #22, #23) House to right: AM; i 014 House to left: he House to rear: 11 0 Notes: How will you mitigate any negative impacts on neighbors' privacy? o Offset/locate windows to reduce impact o Use obscure glass in window ci Locate balconies to minimize impact. • Use landscaping elements for screening ▪ Other: LAIt 4f)-440r0.0 sin wi.rdowf wf #"las? I € /o.i' 3. How is outdoor lighting impact minimized for neighbors?(Guideline #25) a Lights are located or directed away from neighboring property a Light fixtures are shielded to prevent glare at neighboring property ❑ Other: To be included with this Application and Checklist: ® Site Plan: include location of proposed building(s) on property, lot area; indicate impervious surface, property lines, street/ sidewalk location and approximate location of adjacent structures. Indicate proposed outdoor deck/patio and landscaping features. O Building Plan: dimensions, first floor area square footage. ® Building Elevations: indicate building height, windows, materials, and color on all elevations. Indicate proposed exterior lighting. MI Photographs of site and streetscape. 1111 Regular Planning Department Development Application Form (p2of2) To: Stillwater Planning Commission August 21, 2015 From: Mark Erickson Landsted Re: Proposed Millar/Tennison Residence, 911 Abbott Street W. Ladies and Gentlemen: We represent Sandi Millar and Dale Tennison, owners of the above referenced property. They have hired Landsted to design and build them a home on their lot. The last home we built in Stillwater is at 1303 Broadway Street North. This is to be a retirement home. As such, the bedrooms and living area need to be on the main level. An attached two -car garage is also needed. The home we have designed for them is 1,350 square feet. This is as compact as we could get the plan, given the rooms needed. We are basically at the maximum building area based upon the size of this lot. The lot our clients have purchased is very small; only 50 feet wide. This makes locating a side load garage set back from the house impossible, as there is not enough width to get a radius sufficient to turn around after backing out of the garage. We have been in contact with Abbi Wittman, City Planner, who has expressed concern over the fact that the garage appears dominant from Abbott Street W. Every attempt has been made to mitigate this: -We have set the structure as close to the front of the lot as code allows so as closely as possible line up with the neighbors to the E and W. -There is a stone column holding up a small front porch, as well as contrasting banding detail on all four sides of the home. -We propose cedar gable brackets and shakes at the gables for detail. -There is window trim on all four sides of the structure. -Sandi and Dale are planning extensive landscaping. -Our clients are willing to consider adding a porch to the front of the garage, but we are at our building size limit, based upon the size of the lot. Apparently a variance would be needed to exceed this limit, even though the combined building area/impervious surface would be below the maximum for this lot should we be allowed to add this area to the structure. Abbi stated: "As the City has recently approved designs for new homes that are able to achieve the 25% maximum structural coverage requirement on small lots, the arguments for practical difficulty are hard to make." We disagree with the above statement. A retirement home, which needs the rooms on the main level, will need a larger building area than a two-story, where the bedrooms can go upstairs. Also, not having an attached garage in Minnesota could be considered a hardship. 1,350 square feet is not a large home. Not allowing our clients to build their retirement home on this lot infringes on their rights under Minnesota Statutes. Photos of several neighboring properties are included with this application. It should be noted that a majority of the structures in this neighborhood appear to be built between 1950 and 1980, with the exception of two on Greeley Street South, which were built in the 2000's. Classic architectural styles as described in the Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines are indeed very rare in the proximity of our clients' lot. In fact, we could only find four properties which could be considered classic architecture within 4 blocks of this lot and none of them were on the same block as 911 Abbott St. W. or visible from this property. The design we propose for this home has details from the arts and crafts era. We feel this will be as attractive as any home in the immediate neighborhood. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, 14°17L--- Mark Erickson Landsted, LLC . 900 Crestview Drive . Hudson, WI 54016 Minnesota and Wisconsin Real Estate Broker . MN Contractor # BC404801 651.248.7343 At3 s-r w, 'I I-1,,2 P-0, 'PKlv0 5410o' n° PATIO ohvsuP f fATig \16oki `j u i ,1 136T rl l-a-- i 1 0 L.A,N T D CL . 8.20, l� Ex. ( Aff ro'-o NOS • 7, sod sd. pr-. i- A • I) 87 ¢5aP17= 13I.1ILDr1.1&/6-rpv►llr�a� PPrs • I, Sod 54 FT= or +Wrz I N4MRY ►ovs i,350 50-r, * MII—ig" 4csa? [JJ . - 9cb 2,2-5 b 54 rr; PrNI34 MILLAR / T;�INISON KESID�NGE dry 01.a.-Nr76-c 7 AU& 2o►s SibINU COY az U HT 131zow41 `nam - wHns oCz wING15k - WH ITS. T ;I,1VIkT ID H T VA 1(7 ILI iz t( I D(I -I A �11111l� .11•■1■1•■l ■11M■UMUM., ■1MM1=1••r111111t 11 ._ se11 Y1■gM11UNN.li INWIli Ln Min i•Ir111•1N 11I111[11;11111111MM11r1v z_ VAT is ,wig si; ,'. Ntp �,t4Jr Washington County Page 1 of 1 Hosted by� Vanguard Appraisals, Inc Parcel Number: 33.030.20.21.0125 Property Address: STILLWATER, MAPS Class: RESIDENTIAL Legal Description: SUBDIVISIONNAME HOLCOMBE'S ADD TO STILLWATER LOT 3 BLOCK 5 SUBDIVISIONCD 09895 Prior Year Value Information Year Land Value Dwelling Value Improvement Value Total Value 2015 $85,000 $0 $0 $85,000 2014 $65,000 $0 $0 $65,000 More Years... Lot Type Lump Sum Land Information Square Feet 7,500 GIS Map Information Acres 0.172 http://washington.minnesotaassessors.com/parcel.php?parcel=3303020210125 9/3/2002 Washington County Parcel ID: 3303020210125 Parcel Address: , CITY OF STILLWATER Created on 8/17/2015 0 62.5 125 250 Feet i f i I l MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT This drawing is the result of the cornpil alio n and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. ' Washington County is not responsible for a ny maccu racies. wPsHINGToN 60 umzx �jl� Afl 57 W, (HOMO• /6\1-1 -I&HT of 91i ,$3orr 5r w) 912 C FtJJGHILL. 5T W. (HOM1 AT R VAN? o qI I A! SoTT sr; W.) II AIM$ or-r 5'r W, (MII-L / 1 N N I SoN 0T) 945- ABr OQ TT s"i th/p A Poore .5 r W) 72-2. V i ET( 61, , G, ( HoiiA - R 81,0 dPf'e_S I "M D "iI I Afi5f3! `r 517 J) ;Eu;ii�r.0 rl;tnnui ; 916 /5I30-r--r ST, W, (HoME AT 131-o&-I% Orpo6Ii or. 911 ABBOTT sr w;) 92-2 A1550-ram... r`r, W, (I-10ra AT > I�o(- orra I rrs G)I I i\vsfoTT`5T, W.) 929 ,,$BOTT 'T, W. No M E AT 15L-0e,I4 orw,61-ry ,EEoTT 5T. W) I z.I G E LS Y ST S. (HOMlr AT 5LOG K OrPoE ITe 911 APS'rr 6T Pi 717 G•RML5- Y ST, s, (I-fot.4 N aaR I N1 V-R' 1i O t-1 G R0,0.1-*-Y 5r s, g, A150,'1 T ='r. W.) 715 G iz.e 5l-ie`( Si S. C. H c*1 IN11z-S r-61 IO N 0 ColaL' ( ST, 5a 1t, Awo-r-T 6 r, HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 14, 2015 APPLICANT: REQUEST: CASE NO.: 2015-40 Deitrick McKenzie, applicant representing Dan Smith, property owner Consideration of a Design Permit for the painting of the exterior facade of the structure located at 108 Main Street North ZONING: Central Business District COMP PLAN DISTRICT: DMU - Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval to paint a portion of the Osaka Sushi and Bistro tenant space located at 1048 Main Street North. The proposed tenant space to be painted is the northernmost, single story addition. Initially the applicant's representative indicated the desired color to paint the faux brick would be Sherwin William's 'Jalapeno' orange, as seen to the right. At the time of initial discussion with staff, it was identified additional color samples may need to be identified as the submission did not appear to be a muted, Victorian color as identified in the Downtown Design Review District guidelines. SW 6629 Ja'openo Save 9W rr7i'Wtom ,wumnqProledLid - Color Family orate Color p 90 RGO Value'. R-YaJ I Ga l 45] fical.krumal Value. I811504 1:RV 15 As such, the applicant submitted the Design Permit application with a series of color options for the Commission's consideration: ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS As the brick to be painted is not historic brick, the impact of the painting is to the character of the historic district and contributing buildings directly adjacent to the single -story structure. As such, staff would recommend the utilization of one of the colors in the far left-hand column (Flower Pot, Fired Brick, Bold Brick or Fireweed) as each of these are more muted. The darker tones, the Fired Brick or the Fireweed, may be most appropriate and may compliment the two- story structure to the south. As no specific color has been identified, findings cannot be made that the painting will conform to the Downtown Design Review District's guidelines. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The Commission has several alternatives regarding this request. The Commission may approve, approve with conditions, request additional information and table the consideration or deny the request based findings cannot be made that any of the proposed colors will conform to the District's guidelines. 108 Main Street North HPC 2015-40 (8/212015) Page 2 of 3 Staff recommends the Commission discuss the proposed colors with the applicant. If the Commission finds a color sample submitted conforms to the District's guidelines, staff would recommend approval of the specific paint color with the following conditions: 1. Prior to painting any holes shall be filled as to prevent water intrusion. 2. Painting shall be uniform on all portions of the one-story faux brick. 108 Main Street North HPC 2015-40 (8/212015) Page 3 of 3 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 14, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-43 APPLICANT: William Hickey representing Jeanine Swanson, Ideal Credit Union REQUEST: Design Review for the construction of a new financial intuition to be located 2020 Washington Avenue ZONING: BPC-Business Park Commercial COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Commercial PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is proposing the construction of a new financial institution with drive through banking services, Ideal Credit Union, to be located at the 2020 Washington Avenue. In addition to a Design Review permit, the applicant has obtained a Special Use Permit for the drive -through window. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES Municipal Code Section 31-209, Design permit states: • The Standards for Review , Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following standards: o Architectural character: • The suitability of the building for the intended purpose. • The consistency of the applications design with approved design guidelines. • The compatibility of the character of the design with adjacent development. o 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. o Historical structures, vistas, sites and the impact of development on these resources. o Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. The West Stillwater Business Park Design Guidelines indicate the following: Architectural Standards • 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. • All roof or ground mounted mechanical equipment and exterior trash storage areas shall be completely enclosed with building material compatible with the principle structure. Low profile self-contained mechanical units which blend in with the building design located to the side or rear of the building may be permitted. • Architectural consistency on all sides of the building is required in terms of colors, material and details. • • • The applicant is proposing the use of architectural metal panels, precast stone and brick as the primary facade materials. Mechanical equipment will be fully enclosed in an 8' tall metal panel area which will appear to be an extension from the front facade. The design is consistent on all four sides. Landscape Standards • The applicant is proposing to • Street trees shall be required for all new development. The keep existing, mature type of tree and their location shall be approved by the vegetation along the street Director of Parks. frontage. • All area of a lot not used or improved for parking, driveways or storage areas shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs, flower and ground cover. • Sufficient landscaping is proposed with the project. • All new trees shall be balled and burlapped or moved from a growing site with a tree spade and be a 2-1/2 inch caliber for deciduous trees, 6 foot in height for evergreens and 1- 1/2 inch caliber for ornamental trees. • A minimum 20-foot wide landscaped front yard setback area shall be maintained along all public streets and 10 foot side yard landscaped area maintained on all other sides. • A minimum of 10 percent of parking and driveway areas shall be landscaped with trees and shrubs. • All utilities must be underground and utility meters screened or integrated into the building structure. Signs • The applicant is proposing the • Signs and related building graphics shall be a part of the reuse of the existing free overall building and site design. Sign size, height location standing sign on the property. and material shall relate to building scale and design. Additionally, wall signage is • Retail signage shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance.' 1 The applicable City Code Section 31-509, Sub. 8 indicates All commercial, office and industrial signs in all BP districts are subject to the following conditions:: (a) Number of signs. A property may have one freestanding sign, one wall sign per building face, and as many awning, canopy, marquee, or multitenant master signs as permitted in this Subdivision 8. (b) Wall signs. Wall signs in the BP district shall meet the following requirements: (1) Area. The gross surface area of a wall sign may not exceed one square foot for each foot of building, parallel or substantially parallel to the front lot line. (2) Location. A wall sign must be located on the outermost wall of any principal building but may not project more than 16 inches from the wall to which the sign is affixed. Height. A wall sign may not project higher than the parapet line of the wall to which the sign is affixed. (3) 2020 Washington Avenue Case No. 2015-42 (HPC: 9/ 14/ 2015) Page 2 of 4 • A landscaped area equal to twice the sign area comprised of bushes or flowers shall be provided around the base of free standing signs. proposed on the east and west elevations. However, the west elevation signage will not conform to the zoning code. Site Plan • As a condition of CPC • On -site lighting shall serve functional safety and aesthetic approval, lighting shall purposes. contain no illumes at the • Overall lighting shall be directed down and shielded from property line. adjacent properties or roadways. All lights shall be • Parking will be screened by contained on the property. • Parking shall be screened from the street by berming, the building or my mature bushes, low walls or changes in the grade of parking areas. vegetation. FINDINGS The applicant has demonstrated that with certain conditions the design conforms to the West Stillwater Business Park District guidelines. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION The HPC has several alternatives related to these request: A. Approve. If the proposed design review request is found to be consistent with the adopted design guidelines, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2015-43. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1 Roof or ground mechanical equipment not depicted on the site plan shall be completed enclosed with building material compatible with the proposed architectural metal, stone or brick. 2. The trash storage area shall be completely enclosed within the building or by materials compatible with the structure with the proposed architectural metal, stone or brick. 3. Directional signage for the drive through shall be limited to lane signage and height clearances, as identified on Sheet A402. (c) Freestanding signs. Freestanding signs in the BP district shall meet the following requirements: (1) Area. The gross surface area of a freestanding sign may not exceed 100 square feet for each exposed face nor exceed an aggregate gross surface area of 200 square feet. (2) Location. A freestanding sign must be set back 15 feet from the front or side property line. (3) Height. Along State Highway 36 freestanding signs may not project higher than 25 feet. (d) Awning, canopy or marquee signs. Awning, canopy or marquee signs in the BP district shall meet the following requirements: (1) Area. The gross surface area of an awning, canopy or marquee sign may not exceed 50 percent of the gross surface area of the awning, canopy or marquee to which the sign is affixed. (2) Location. A sign may be affixed to or located upon any awning, canopy or marquee. (3) Height. An awning, canopy or marquee sign may not project higher than the top of the awning, canopy or marquee to which the sign is affixed. 2020 Washington Avenue Case No. 2015-42 (HPC: 9/ 14/ 2015) Page 3 of 4 4. Wall signage shall be limited to the East elevation wall as it is substantially parallel to Washington Avenue. 5. The East elevation wall signage shall be limited to 60 square feet. 6. The East elevation wall signage and existing pylon signage shall obtain a sign permit prior to the installation or modification. 7. Any additional signage shall be reviewed and approved by the HPC prior to the submittal of a sign permit application. 8. Effort should be made to retain the existing trees located on the western property line. 9. All utilities shall be located underground. 10. All wall pack lighting shall be shielded. 11. All other wall and parking lot lights shall be downwardly directed. 12. A building permit shall be obtained prior to ground disturbance. 13. A grading permit shall be obtained prior to ground disturbance. 14. 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 West Stillwater Business Park guidelines, and the requirements set forth approval of Site Alterations, 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 October, 2015 meeting. Staff recommends approval of Case No. 2015-43 with the aforementioned conditions. ATTACHMENTS Applicant Submission Cover Sheet Site Plan Landscape Plan Exterior Elevations, line drawings (4 pages) Exterior Elevations, renderings (4 pages) 2020 Washington Avenue Case No. 2015-42 (HPC: 9/ 14/ 2015) Page 4 of 4 Ideal Credit Union 2020 Washington Avenue Project Location Location Map Project Team Owner : Ideal Credit Union 8499 Tamarack Rd. Woodbury, MN 55125 Contact - Jeanine Swanson Phone - 651-770.7000 Email-Jswansan@ideakv.mm Architect : Collaborative Design Group 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Contact - Elizabeth McCullough Phone - 612-371-6425 Email - emcc0llough@collaborativedesigngroup.00m Civil Engineer: West Ann Engineering 4710 West Ann Road Spring Park, MN 55384 Contact- Ian Maloney Phone - 952-471-1072 Email - ian@westarmeng.com Landscape Architect: Biko Associates 79 13th Ave. NE, Suite 107 Minneapolis, MN 55104 Contact - Harold Skjelbostad Phone - 612-623-4000 Email - hskjelbostad@bikoassociates.com Structural Engineer: Collaborative Design Group 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Contact- Craig Milkert Phone - 612-332-3654 Email - cmilkert@collaborativedesigngroup.com Mechanical Engineer: MEP Associates 2401 Pilot Knob Rd, #134 Eagan, MN 55120 Contact- Larry Nemer Phone - 651-379-9120 Email - larryn@mepassociates.com Electrical Engineer: MEP Associates 2401 Pilot Knob Rd, #134 Eagan, MN 55120 Contact- Leisbel Lam, PE Phone - 651-379-9120 ext 1307 Email - leisbell@mepassociates.com General Contractor: James Steele Construction 1410 Sylvan Street St. Paul, MN 55117 Contact- Andrew Naughton Phone - 651.488.6755 Email • anaughton@jsteeleconsboction.com Drafting Symbols AG/,C> 11 / 2p Li 1515 F , EL=tOa-0' I. I MAJOR / MINOR BUILDING ELEVATION MAJOR / MINOR BUILDING SECTION DETAIL REFERENCE DETAIL REFERENCE TO PLAN, ELEVATION, OR SECTION ENLARGEMENT GRID LINE EXISTING GRID UNE MATCH LINE PROPERTY UNE CENTER LINE FLOOR ELEVATION DIMENSION STRING CONTINUOUS DIMENSION 2 1-HOUR RATED WALL CONSTRUCTION 2-HOUR RATED WALL CONSTRUCTION 2 ORNNING NUMBER 3 INTERIOR ELEVATION SHEET NUMBER PARTITION TYPE w1 WINDOW TYPE OFFICE f ROOM NAME ROOM NUMBER DOOR NUMBER DOOR OPENING — V — EXISTING CONSTRUCTION REVOION TWANG. lCONSTRUCTION PACYAaE REVISION CLOUD Code Data BUILDING CODE SUMMARY Applicable Codes: 2015 Minnesota State Building Code 2015 Minnesota State Fire Code 2012 International Energy Conservation Code w/Amendments 2012 IECC with Amendments 2014 National Electric Code Year Constructed: Type of Construction: Building Area: 2015 B-Buisiness 2,992 SF 2012 International Building Code with Amendments 2015 International Fire Code 2012 International Mechanical Code with Amendments 2012 International Fuel & Gas Code with Amendments NFPA101 Life Safety Code 2012 Minnesota Accessibility Code Amends IBC 2012, Chapter 12 CHAPTER 3 -USE AND OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: 304 Classification B-Business Business B CHAPTER 5 - GENERAL BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AREAS 3,007 sq. R Occupant Load: 31 Table 503 Allowable Height and Building Areas Construction Type BV IBC Allowable City Ordinance Actual Area / Story No. 1148 Area / Stay 9,000 SF 3,007 SF 2 Story (40 FT) 50 FT 1 Story (25 FT) CHAPTER 6 -TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION: VB Table 601 Fire Risistant Rating for Building Elemements Type VB Construction Type Structural Frame Exterior Bearing Walls Exterior Non -Bearing Walls Interior Walls Floor Construction Roof Construction 0 Hr 0 Hr 0 Hr 0 Hr 0 Hr 0 Hr CHAPTER 7 -FIRE RATED CONSTRUCTION: Fire Safety Sprinklers Fire Alarm Panel Standpipes Fire Alarm Notification/Detection Water Supply Fire Access (# of sides) Fire Wall (area separation) Fully Not Required Not Required Fully Yes 4 Not Required BUILDING CODE -Continued CHAPTER 7 - FIRE RATED CONSTRUCTION: 704.8 Maximum Area of Exterior None required when exterior wall Wall Opening not required to be rated 713 Fire Resistance Rating at Shafts One story building 718.2.2 Concealed Wall Spaces CHAPTER 9 - FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 907.2 Group B CHAPTER 10 - MEANS OF EGRESS 1003.2 Ceiling Height Fireblocking shall be provided in concealed spaces of stud walls and partitions, including furred spaces, and parallel rows of studs or staggered studs. 1. Vertically at the ceiling and floor levels. 2. Horizontally at intervals not exceeding 10 FT In areas protected by an approved, supervised automate sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, automatic fre doctors required by Section 907.2 need not be provided. Required Provided 7'-6" min Varies, Minium Height 9'-O Table 104.1.2 Maximum Floor Area Allowable Per Occupant Business -100 Gross 3,007 SF / 100 SF = 31 Occupants Table 1005.3.2 Egress Width Per Occupant Served Business, Sprinidered Stairways N/A 1015.1 Exit and Exit Access Doorways Table 1015.1 - Spaces with One Exiti or Exit Access Door Occupancy B, Maximum Occupant Load 49 Required 1 Other Egress Components .2x31 =6.2" Required = 108" Provided Provided Table 1016.1 Exit Access Travel Distance Business, Sprinldered Required Provided 300 FT c100 FT CHAPTER 29- PLUMBING SYSTEMS Table 2902.1 Minimum Number of Required Plumbing Fbdares Business - B Required Water Closet -1 Per 25 for first 50 1 M, 1 F Lavatories -1 Per 40 for first 80 1 M, 1 F Drinking Fountatin -1 Per 100 1 Service Sink 1 Provided 1 M, 1 F, 1 Unisex 1 M, 1 F, 1 Unisex 1 1 Stillwater, MN 55082 Sheet Index 08-28-2015 ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW TITLE SHEET A000 I SHEET INDEX, CODE DATA AND LOCATION MAP ■ CIVIL C101 1 CIVIL SITE PLAN ■ • LANDSCAPING L001 I PLANTING PLAN ■ I I ARCHITECTURAL MOO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ■ A401 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION ■ A402 EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION ■ A403 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION ■ A404 WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION ■ A405 RENDERED SOUTH AND EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ■ A406 RENDERED NORTH AND WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ■ A407 EXTERIOR RENDERINGS ■ A408 EXTERIOR RENDERINGS ■ c COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup,:-- 100 Poland Avenue South, Suite 1a0 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55C01 p M..332.3054 ra12.332.362e Www.collaborativetlesIgngroup.com Y V Signature PEST ARM esz.�, 1e12 NGINEERING BIKO ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED • • 0 W 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I hereby certify that Ns plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. William D. Hickey, AIA Name 20111 License R 0515.15 Date ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 15030.09 PROJECT NUMBER FAM DRAWN BY rAM PROJECT MGR. MEB CHECKED BY WDH PROJECT ARCH. TITLE SHEET A000 ®COLLABORATIVE DESIGN GROUP, INC GENERAL INFORMATION LOT AREA: 41,099 SF (0.64 AC) SET BACKS: FRONT SIDE 40 FT 20 FT BACK 30 FT PARKING: REQUIRED PROVIDED 112005F=15 1S ADA 1160 SPACES =1 1 SPACE DIMENSIONS 18'x9' 60' C' Mj l 5 L UTIUTY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT O't 265.45' SITE UGHTING (4 TYP) 516' TO TOWER DR INTERSECTION \ � 1 10 to � 17 M1 � 12 C7 2 13 }a 14 15 s W B612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER (TYP) 4 PERKINS RESTAURANT 1 22' 20' SIDE SETBACK BITUMINOUS PARKING & DRIVES DRIVE THRU ONE WAY L 11.5' L 11.5' 5.34' 5.34' \ \ \\\ \\\\\\\\\ CONCRETEWALK X 0 4 " It PC F to M1 TWO WAY 5 0.6to 4 a t � m a F.--za', 20' SIDE SETBACK ONE WAY 1111.. 1 n 362.61' a EXISTING 24. ASH 0 20 40 SITE ENTRANCE/EXIT- EXISTING CURB CUT TO REMAIN EXISTING 16'HONEY LOCUST 37' TO FRONTAGE RD INTERSECTION \ \ I \ 9N \ ) y� W 'oti "L I 2 EXISTING PYLON\ �� %j SIGN TO REMAIN UTIUTY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT 80 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 40 ft. COLLABORATIVE De61gncroup,tnc ParlbrelhoM1m Wawa; Pinwale SAY 11m p 614f912®I 1.8112113310 wactielznIndalpmcm ✓EST ARM NGINEERING 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I homily vm7 HIM HIM OR 4dlMAMon,w wort w6aPMim.1 I/ m.wtram wind lagRYMaR and Owl l ar11. 36y 1dRtl tc 6p,R undrtll. law of Wm mm&min Slirmh1m Yn Mapprmy MASI OILtlSdS User!! Ont. ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 15030.00 PROJECT NUMBER ISM DRAWN BY CHECKED BY EAM WDH PROJECT MGR. PROJECT ARCH. SITE PLAN C101 3-A R 5-A PLANT SCHEDULE 20-E wIIMIPIPVff 1-B 6 1 -Bre — .4„oo_o_00000_0 o 11-D CODE QTY DESCRIPTION A 78 River Birch Betula nigra B 78 Spring Snow Crab Malus 'Spring Snow C 78 Winged Euonymus Euonymus °lotus D 78 Red —twig Dogwood Cornus boileyi E 22 Japanese Yew Taxus cuspidata SIZE ROOT COMMENTS 2.5° BB Tree form, single trunk, Cal. single straight leader 2° BB Uniform crown Cal. 3-4' CONT. Ht. 2'-3' CONT. Ht. 2'-3' CONT. Sp. 5-B 2-C 4-C 1t 3-A OTAIP Existin. tree t. emain gre COLIABCGAMVE Wrc La A( e Ideal Credit Union ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 PLANTING PLAN L001 T.O. ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-1 ELEV = 125'-0" T.O. OPENING III ° ELEV = 116'-0" oil T.O. BRICK ELEV = 116'-0" BUILDING ADDRESS, 9" STAINLESS STEEL NUMBERS ON STAND-OFFS ARRISCRAFT PRECAST STONE, PC-1 T.O. SLAB ELEV = 100'-0" ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 G 12'-1" 21'-5" / 7'-8Y2" .,,, i 7t-O" % 8t-4' 12'-1" 39'-10" 8'-8" / r r 1 1 0 , I 3 �r f � f I 1 1 1 / 2--C \ % cow 1 ENTRY _, 1 CANOPY I 1 SOUTH ELEVATION SIGNAGE, BACK LIGHT BOXED LETTERS, COORDINATE WITH ELCECTRIAL ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-1 BRICK LIGHTING IN SOFFIT. SEE ELECTRICAL METAL SHADING FOUNDATION, SEE STRUCTURAL PREFINISHED ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 A40:9 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" Y V COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup,... 100 Min�neep005,, d MinnesotSoutha 0W11W w n.ml retlretl®IAnan ynu, NGINEER lEST ARM ING I _�I BIKO ASSOCIATES NCOR R PORATED i 0 • • V 112 V co 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Utu�Mcwwp Signature William D. Hickey, AIA Name 201d1 LIcense # 05-15-15 Data ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 15030.00 PROJECT NUMBER EAM MEB DRAWN BY CHECKED BY EAM WDH PROJECT MGR. PROJECT ARCH. SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION ®COLLABORATIVE DESIGN GROUP, INC A401 T.O. ARCHITECTURAL jMETAL PANEL, MP-1 ELEV = 125'-0" ui\ III T.O. VESTIBULE ELEV = 118'-0" T.O. BRICK ELEV = 116'-0" 46, T.O. CANOPY ELEV = 113'-2" T.O. ENTRY CANOPY & METAL SHADING ELEV= 111'-10" METAL SHADING 46, T.O. SLAB ELEV = 100'-0" PREFINISHED ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 2'-O" 7 1 2'-11"/j 10'-10" 22'-2" 4'-6" 9'-0" 8'-5" 15'-6" 16'-10" \)1 ./ 27'-0" TECTURAL PANEL, JOINT ,, MP-1 , / METAL MP-2 SIGNAGE TYP, BY BANK SUPPLIER. VERIFY MOUNTING HEIGHTS ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS. CLEARANCE SIM. BRICK ARCHITECTURAL PANE_, LANE EQUIPMENT LOCATIONS, AND HEIGHT SIGNAGE 13'-6" SCREEN WALL ARCH METAL CAULK REV. P /1_tl I Q b ' N LL J U 1 / / 1 0 IIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIg1( I / , 12'-2" EAST ELEVATION A40.2 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" V V COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup,la. 100Portland MnneapolisVeMinnesota nue South, Sub 1W 554M1 www.collaboratrotlestrvoup.com PEST ARM NGINEERING I)�II BIKO ASSOCIATES I NCORPORATED 0 • • co 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. UIJeMuwkp Signature William D. Hickey, MA Name 20111 License # 05-15d5 Date ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPOON 15030.00 PROJECT NUMBER EAM MEB DRAWN BY CHECKED BY EAM WDH PROJECT MGR. PROJECT ARCH. EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION © COLLABORATIVE DESIGN GROUP, INC A402 T.O. ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-1 \II, ELEV = 125'-0" T.O. STONE ELEV = 118'-0" T.O. BRICK / ELEV = 116'-0" T.O. CANOPY ELEV = 113'-2" B.O. CANOPY ELEV = 110'-0" T.O. SLAB ELEV = 100'-0" CANOPY, ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 T 11 8'-4 1 11 7 -0 1 11 9 -6 1 11 18 -4 / 4'-2" 12'-1' 1 GATE FRAMED, EXTERIOR FACE WITH METAL PANEL MP-1 EQUIPMENT SCREEN ACCESS STEEL FINISHED TO MATCH i I I i l f I i i \ ....= I I , j �y j '"� i ( 1 o -- 1 I — .�-- _ \ \ 1111115� I NORTH ELEVATION KNOCK -OUT FOR FUTURE TELLER WINDOW AND DEAL DRAWER SIGNAGE, BACK LIGHT BOXED LETTERS, COORDINATE WITH ELCECTRIAL ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-1 ON SCREEN WALL BEYOND ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 LINE OF DRIVE THROUGH CANOPY. CANOPY NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY, SEE 5/A400. ARRISCRAFT PRECAST STONE, PC-1 CONTROL JOINT BRICK NIGHT DEPOSIT. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR MOUNTING HEIGHTS. A403 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" V Y COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup,ia. 100Portland MnneapolisVeMinnesota nue South, Sub 1W 554M1 wxx.mllaboatlneJ..lan9mup.mm NGINEERI JEST ARNGM I)�II BIKO ASSOCIATES i 0 4-0 V V co ai 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature William D. Hickey, MA Name 20111 License # 05-15-15 Date ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPOON 15030.00 PROJECT NUMBER EAM MEB DRAWN BY CHECKED BY EAM WDH PROJECT MGR. PROJECT ARCH. NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION © COLLABORATIVE DESIGN GROUP, INC A403 ti T.O. ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP- ELEV = 125'-0" T.O. STONE ELEV = 118'-0" T.O. VESTIBULE ELEV = 118'-0" T.O. BRICK ELEV = 116'-0" T.O. CANOPY ELEV = 113'-2' B.O. CANOPY ELEV = 110'-0" Alk T.O. SLAB ELEV = 11111111 OVER FLOW SCUPPER ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 1 WEST ELEVATION 15'-6" BRICK 14'-10" 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 8'-5" 9'-0" 22'-2" SCREEN WALL 2'-11" 10'-10" CAULK JOINT u_ Q NJ ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-1 ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 ,--2'-Ott ENTRY CANOPY ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, CLEAR nseR ANODIZED V V COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup,ia. 100Portland MnneapolisVeMinnesota nue South, Sub '� 554a1 Mxx.mllaboatlneJaalae9mup.mm PEST ARM NGINEERING I)�II BIKO ASSOCIATES N C O R P O R A T E D • co 2020 Washington Avenue Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature William D. Hickey, MA METAL SHADING ARISCRAFT PRECAST STONE, PC-1 ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANEL, MP-2 A404 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" Name 05-15-15 Date ISSUED FOR HPC REVIEW August 28, 2015 REVISION LOG NO. DATE DESCRIPOON 15030.00 PROJECT NUMBER EAM MEB DRAWN BY CHECKED BY EAM WDH PROJECT MGR. PROJECT ARCH. WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION © COLLABORATIVE DESIGN GROUP, INC A404 ICU STILLWATER HPC REVIEW - 8.28.15 South Exterior Elevation East Exterior Elevation Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Arriscraft Precast Stone, PC-1 Brick Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup, inc. Rendered South and East Exterior Elevations A405 ICU STILLWATER HPC REVIEW - 8.28.15 North Exterior Elevation West Exterior Elevation Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Brick Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Arriscraft Precast Stone, PC-1 Brick COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup, inc. Rendered North and West Exterior Elevations A406 ICU STILLWATER HPC REVIEW - 8.28.15 South West Exterior Perspective South East Exterior Perspective Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Arriscraft Precast Stone, PC-1 Brick Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Brick COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup, Exterior Renderings A407 ICU STILLWATER HPC REVIEW - 8.28.15 North East Exterior Perspective North West Exterior Perspective Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Brick Architectural Metal Panel, MP-1 Arriscraft Precast Stone, PC-1 Brick COLLABORATIVE DesignGroup, Exterior Renderings A408