Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-10-05 HPC Packet
i 1 1 \i'a tec THE IIRTMPLA CE OF MIMMESOTA AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North October 5, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of September 14, 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. 2015-44: Consideration of approval of a Design Permit facade change and signage to be located at 120 Main Street South. Mike Lynskey, Owner. John Daly, Applicant 2. Case No. 2015-47: Consideration of approval of a Design Permit for certain facade improvements to be located at 126 Main St N. Tim Michel, Owner. 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. 2015-45: Consideration of a Demolition permit for the demolition and reconstruction of the front facing roof for 1002 5th St S. Denise Jones, Owner VII. OLD BUSINESS 1. Case No. 2015-42: Consideration of a 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. VIII. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION 2. Review of Case No. 2015-23: Cultural Landscape Field Guide 3. Staff Updates -Verbal a. Statewide Preservation Conference Update IX. ADJOURNMENT i I \v ate': THE OIRTNPLACE OF MINNESOTA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING September 14, 2015 7:00 P.M. Chairman Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Larson, Commissioners Goodman, Johnson, Krakowski, Mino, Council Representative Menikheim Absent: Commissioners Branjord and Welty Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of August 3, 2015 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Krakowski, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve the minutes of the August 3, 2015 meeting. All in favor, 5-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Case No. 2015-39 Design review for a single, wall -mounted sign located at 402 Main Street North. Monty Brine, owner and Thomas Anderson, applicant. Case No. 2015-41 Design review for a single, wall -mounted sign located at 118 Chestnut Street East. Jennifer Cates -Peterson, owner and Brian Schutte, applicant. Commissioner Mino requested that Case No. 2015-41 be moved to New Business. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Goodman, to adopt the Consent Agenda as amended. All in favor, 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 2015-42 Design review for a future home to be located at 911 Abbott Street, a vacant property located in the Neighborhood Conservation District. Dale Tennison and Sandi Millar, owners and Steve West, applicant. City Planner Wittman explained the request. The applicants propose to construct a new single family residence at 911 Abbott Street. Because the property is in the Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD), an infill Design Permit is required. Sandi Millar and Dale Tennison purchased the property in June just after the HPC approved a Design Permit for new construction proposed by the previous owners, Ray and Carmen Loida. Staff finds that, while the proposed design generally conforms to the guidelines of the Neighborhood Conservation District, the garage -forward design is inconsistent with the Building Site Guidelines #10 and Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting September 14, 2015 #11. Staff recommends denial of the application on the basis that the proposed home does not conform to the NCD guidelines in regard to the location of the garage and its impact on the streetscape. Mark Erickson, Landsted LLC, said they have been building homes in the St. Croix Valley since 1986. They understand that development should be in harmony with the neighborhood. The Tennisons wish to build a retirement home on one level. The size of the lot, 50' x 150', makes achieving an attached garage the biggest challenge. The owners would consider moving the home toward the street which would be more in keeping with the rhythm of the other homes, but this would emphasize the garage more so they feel it would make more sense to keep the home to the back. Many of the homes in the neighborhood are of newer, non -classic architecture and are garage -dominant. He is willing to modify the architectural details to give the home a more classic look. He wants to work with the Commission and clients to come up with a compromise. Dale Tennison, owner, acknowledged the Commission's frustration with the plan proposed by the previous applicants. They hope that staying within the 30' setback and the single story design minimizes the impact of the house on the street. The structure is 448 square feet less than what was previously approved. Chairman Larson provided background on the Neighborhood Conservation District. It is the only area that the Commission reviews, and only for infill construction. If it were remodeling, the Commission would have no authority. He opened the public hearing. City Planner Wittman summarized a legal opinion provided by City Attorney Magnuson indicating that neither approval nor denial would conflict with state statute. Additionally for the record, Robert Richert, 905 Abbott Street West, indicated he opposes the application due to the garage -dominant design. David Carroll, 922 West Abbott Street, expressed concern about putting a house on such a narrow lot. Chairman Larson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnson pointed out that the lot size of 50' x 150' is the minimum buildable lot size in this district. Many older lots are of that dimension. Now, trying to accommodate an auto with a one or two car garage is a real challenge on 50' lots. Chairman Larsen said he feels 1,350 square feet is a reasonable size for the lot. The style is not a concern; as staff has noted, the garage -forward design conflicts with design guidelines. There may be other nearby houses with garage -forward design, but this one has the garage fully forward. He is not convinced there is no way to accommodate a reasonably sized house with the garage set farther back. Mr. Erickson replied they are making an effort to comply. He asked if every single guideline must be in compliance. Commissioner Johnson noted there is buildable space within the sideyard setbacks that could accommodate a driveway. City Planner Wittman clarified if detached, a garage could be as close to the property line as 3'. Chairman Larson asked if the applicants considered putting the garage to the rear. Steve West, Landsted LLC, responded that if attached, a garage would require a side load which would not provide enough room due to the setback requirements. Page 2 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting September 14, 2015 Commissioner Johnson suggested a breezeway connection between a front loading garage and the house, as another approach. The before -mentioned homes on Greeley with the garage -forward design were the driving force behind the ordinance restricting the garage -forward design, which is a style that conflicts with almost all the other architecture in town. The whole idea is the community being walkable rather than emphasizing the automobile. There are ways to make the connection without having to truly attach a garage to the house. Mr. West stated he doesn't see any architectural styles that resemble the historic homes anywhere within a couple blocks of this property. He understands the purpose of the ordinance but would like to know what type of architecture the City is trying to preserve here. Chairman Larson replied that the Commission doesn't have issues with the architectural style, but with the massing of the garage. City Planner Wittman stated the intent of the guidelines is to preserve the residential character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Johnson added the intent is to preserve the character of the existing housing, with porches in front and a pedestrian friendly, more approachable feel. When the house is back behind the garage, it doesn't have that same feel. It becomes a lot less personable. He realizes there's a variety of styles in this neighborhood but the guideline is intended to prevent new construction from detracting from the houses that are historically significant. The Commission acknowledges it's a new home, and is not looking for a "new Victorian" but a house that doesn't take away from the historic homes as far as their appearance on the street. This neighborhood was a suburb of Stillwater in its early development. Houses were infilled on many lots as rural uses disappeared. So it developed a little differently but is still bound by the historic district guidelines. The only design really comes down to using the 10 foot setback as the driveway. The garage could still be connected to the house with a breezeway. Then the 25 foot setback becomes less of an issue and they would have more backyard. Commissioner Goodman asked, is the detached garage critical to the owners? Sandi Millar, owner, expressed concern about meeting the structural coverage restrictions. City Planner Wittman replied that 25% structural coverage and 25% impervious surface coverage are allowed. Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Goodman, to table Case No. 2015-42, Design Permit for_a future home to be located at 911 Abbott Street, to the October HPC meeting to request a new design which minimizes the garage size and dominance, directing the applicants to explore alternatives that include options for replacing the garage -forward design with a detached, or attached with a breezeway, rear garage design. All in favor, 5-0. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2015-40 Design review for the painting of the exterior facade of the structure located at 108 Main Street North. Dan Smith, owner and Deitrick McKenzie, applicant. City Planner Wittman stated the applicant is seeking to paint a portion of the Osaka Sushi and Bistro tenant space. A series of color options was presented for the Commission's consideration. No specific color has been chosen by the applicant. Chairman Larson said he would not like to pick the color for the applicant, but the Commission could recommend a range of tones. The four tones recommended by staff are acceptable. Page 3 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting September 14, 2015 Commissioner Johnson agreed the Commission could provide an opinion of which colors would be most fitting. Motion by Chairman Larson, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve the range of four colors suggested by staff (flowerpot, fired brick, bold brick and fireweed), as appropriate for the painting of the northern -most single -story addition, with the recommendation that the paint be applied by roller as opposed to spray, to provide contrast with the grout, with the following conditions: 1) Prior to painting, any holes shall be filled to prevent water intrusion. 2) Painting shall be uniform on all portions of the one-story faux brick. 3) The painting shall be done in a manner to protect the historic brick and stone on either side, minimizing overspray on those surfaces. All in favor, 5-0. Case No. 2015-43 Design review for the construction of a new financial institution to be located at 2020 Washington Avenue. William Hickey, applicant and Jeanine Swanson, owner. City Planner Wittman stated that the applicant proposes a new financial institution with drive -through banking services. A Special Use Permit for the drive -through window has been granted. She reviewed the proposed architectural details, landscaping plans, sign plan and lighting plans. Staff recommends approval of the design with conditions. Bill Hickey, Collaborative Design Group, stated they are in full agreement with the recommended conditions. Bess McCollough, Collaborative Design Group, added that they have started the process for a demolition permit and have initiated conversations with Brown's Creek Watershed District about stormwater. Most of the vegetation on the back of the lot will be left as is. Mr. Hickey added that the wood frame building is worn out, having stood for 30-some years. It suffered from lack of insulation and could not be adapted without a significant cost. Its systems are deteriorated. Equipment will be recycled and salvaged. Chairman Larson and Commissioner Mino stated they like the design. City Planner Wittman mentioned a new trail easement requirement. The applicants said they are OK with this. Commissioner Johnson noted maybe the island could be altered to make it more easily navigable. Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Chairman Larson, to approve Case No. 2015-43, Design Permit for the construction of a new financial institution at 2020 Washington Avenue, with the following conditions: 1) Roof or ground mechanical equipment not depicted on the site plan shall be completely 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. 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. Page 4 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting September 14, 2015 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. All in favor, 5-0. Case No. 2015-41 Design Review for a single, wall -mounted sign to be located at 118 Chestnut Street East. Jennifer Cates -Peterson, owner and Brian Schutte, applicant. Commissioner Mino stated she requested this item be pulled from the Consent Agenda because she is uncomfortable with the staff recommendation to omit the secondary line, "beer wine and spirits." City Planner Wittman explained that the intent of the secondary information was probably to clarify what is being sold and she doesn't feel it would be completely inappropriate to include that information on the sign. Commissioner Johnson commented the sign as submitted was a good sign with the beer wine and spirits - it needs to explain the business. His concern is the location. With the larger parapet above, the sign should go on the upper portion and not be tucked underneath. City Planner Wittman said the applicants chose the proposed location for the sign because of the location of the existing sign and the light. Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Commissioner Krakowski, to approve Case No. 2015-41, design permit for a single wall -mounted sign at 118 Chestnut Street East, with the following conditions: 1) The sign shall be limited to 6 square feet. 2) The sign shall obtain a sign permit prior to installation. 3) The background of the sign shall be black. 4) Disturbance to the exterior wall face shall be done in a fashion to prevent excess damage and future water intrusion. Utilization of existing openings shall be encouraged. Patching of holes shall be done in a fashion to prevent future water intrusion. 5) All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the HPC. All in favor, 5-0. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Staff Updates City Planner Wittman stated that the City received a request for records regarding City Council action, specifically for information from private emails that could have been used in conversation regarding an application. In an unrelated situation, she has been working with a property owner considering a demolition and infill permit who would like to come before the Commission for a preliminary discussion. Because of the unrelated situation regarding the records request, she obtained an opinion from City Attorney Magnuson concerning preliminary conversations about applications in the Neighborhood Conservation District. Chairman Larson noted that the memo is clear and it relieves the burden of staff having to respond to inappropriate questions about applications. He read from City Attorney Magnuson's memo stating that all members of the HPC are obligated not to prejudge an application, not to have a closed mind, to be impartial, Page 5 of 6 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting September 14, 2015 and to base their decision only on what is on the official record. For this reason, meeting informally with an applicant to give pre -application direction is evidence of prejudgement, so the Commission can't do that. For one thing, no notice of such a meeting would be given to the neighborhood. He feels that the prohibition on meeting informally with an applicant is unfortunate because sometimes getting a flavor for what the Commission wants saves the expenditure of a great deal of money on a design that is not going to be well - accepted at the Commission level. Commissioner Johnson suggested maybe a solution would be for applicants to submit a design for conceptual approval. That way, it would be on the agenda. City Planner Wittman summarized three responses that Commissioners can use, if someone approaches them to talk informally about a project: 1) talk to staff, 2) write a letter, 3) come to a public hearing. Commissioner Johnson added that he often directs applicants to the City web site to read design guidelines. Councilmember Menikheim reflected he often hears the Commission interpreting guidelines as being absolute. Guidelines should have room for interpretation. Chairman Larson recognized that some of the guidelines are more impactful than others. Commissioner Johnson noted as long as the topic is noticed as being on the agenda, there should still be opportunity for a project to come before the Commission for conceptual approval. City Planner Wittman stated she will ask City Attorney about non-public hearing applications, however in the demolition ordinance and the conservation district ordinance, pre -applications are handled at the staff level. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Krakowski, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to adjourn. All in favor, 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink Recording Secretary Page 6 of 6 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 5, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-44 APPLICANT: John Daly, owner of Gammy & Gumpy's REQUEST: Design review of an unlit, wall mounted sign panels and to be placed on the structure at 120 (122) Main Street South as well as facade painting 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 certain facade improvements as well as a series of sign panels totaling (approximately) 21 square feet. The facade improvements will include painting the red facade antique white with a dark purple trim, similarly to that which was approved by the HPC with the approval of Case No. 2015-17. The three -panel, wooden sign system is designed to work with the existing design of the structure's facade, opposed to constructing a single panel over the storefront, as encouraged by the guidelines. Two, (approximately) 1.5 foot tall by five foot wide panel will be painted white and inset in the existing beveled raised panel on the outer, rectangular panels. The lettering will be a mix of red, yellow, green and purple and read 'Kids' and 'Oasis.' The middle panel (approximately 1.5 foot tall by 4.5 foot wide) will contain two happy children, similarly designed to the existing 'gammy and gumpy' on the adjacent unit. The sign panels will be trimmed in either purple, red or green. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES The antique white facade storefront is consistent with other storefronts in the Downtown Design Review District. Additionally, the dark purple trim has been found consistently through downtown Stillwater. Wall signs are permitted by the sign ordinance at a ratio of one square foot per one linear foot of the structure, parallel to a lot line; this sign panel system will be approximately 21 square feet and the tenant would be permitted to have a total of 24 square feet. The Downtown Design Manual indicates the following guidelines: • Signage should be located in such a way as to not obscure any architectural features of the building. • Use painted wood where practicable. It is the authentic material and will look appropriate against the weathered brick of Stillwater's commercial facades. • 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. The Manual further indicates: • Materials: Use painted wood where practicable • Lettering: Choose a bold and simple type style and use it on all appropriate signs. • Color: o Choose subdued colors and dark tones in keeping with the Victorian tradition. Properly selected combinations of dark brown and green, black, off-white and gold are all appropriate. o Choose tones with sufficient contrast to be clearly legible: dark on light or light on dark. o Support brackets of projecting signs should be black. FINDINGS Staff finds the proposed signage conforms to the Downtown Design Review District guidelines. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval Case 2015-44 with the following conditions: 1. The total square footage of the sign panel system shall not exceed 24 square feet. 2. Individual sign panels shall be mounted on the existing raised beveled area. 3. Lighting for signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to installation. 4. A revised sign plan shall be submitted to the Heritage Preservation Commission for review and approval prior to approval of any additional signage. 5. All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS Application Proposed Details (4 pages) 120 Main Street South HPC 2015-44 (10/5/2015) Page 2 of 2 Azadde:/: ZAA,00 F Vh F - : fa fi (, Q (4V'. t k‘) SYq } cti k )— u n~ i (/ 7 Sb" — 3d" -- l I` Q + sfa "-3'1 i r 3 r, 1 , €-F4 Za AtOPTA7 s' ,Aarrt " AWL .0:6 ed‘liVO eddor d.‘14-20e ;41.14" 7/41 71)24- 0144401/ 1, //0 Aftisiet) Ca 2- ic eaz asis Lz7,-6) ;4i_ eAfel-thL /f�C 1TlL.0 h e 12e_ 64071e. ) Og HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 5, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-47 APPLICANT: REQUEST: Tim Michaels, property owner Consideration of a Design Permit for facade improvements to the structure located at 126 Main Street South 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 new aluminum storefront at 126 Main Street North, a contributing building in the Commercial Historic District. The new system would include the replacement of two, approximately 6' wide storefront windows on Main Street, with four, approximately 3' wide windows. Additionally, the southern facade window would be also be replace with two windows of the same size as the Main Street facade. Above the storefront windows the property owner is proposing a series of five, three -over -three, clear sets of windows with internal muntins. They will be separated from five dark bronze tinted transom windows by an infill aluminum panel. The transom windows will also contain internal muntins. Dark Bronze 3O3 AE Below the storefront windows, the property owner is proposing to cover the faux brick with a dark bronze anodized aluminum v-grove, vertical panel. As the dark bronze panels are not a traditional storefront element, the property owner has indicated two other options would be to paint the faux brick or install painted tongue and grove wood. However, the preference is to install the aluminum. ANALYSIS As the property has been designated as a Heritage Preservation Site due to its significance within the Commercial Historic District, the commission's decisions must use the following (applicable) guidelines (as found in City Code Section 22-7: Heritage Preservation Commission) to evaluate applications for site alterations: Site Alteration Guideline Staff Analysis in conjunction with Downtown Design Review District Guidelines The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features must be avoided when possible. Any new design should respect the proportions as well as the detailing of the original design and should use materials, which are consistent with those used in the original buildings. Recessed entries should be retained in existing buildings and required in new storefront construction. This storefront has been altered in the more recent past. The installation of the flat, aluminum window storefront with faux brick are examples of the alterations. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a building, structure or site and its environment. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right and this significance shall be recognized and respected. While alterations to the structure have occurred over time, the alterations detract from the rest of this building. Encouraging alterations that pay greater respect to the remaining portions of the building is desired. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced, Painted wood doors and wood framing are preferred. Aluminum doors and doorframes, 126 Main Street North HPC 2015-47 (10/5/2015) Page 2 of 4 whenever possible. If replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture and other visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features must be based on accurate duplication of features, substantiated by historic, physical or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. Contemporary design for alterations and additions shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural material and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or environment. FINDINGS Staff finds: aluminum windows and their accessories with a clear aluminum finish are not acceptable, although colored anodized aluminum is acceptable. The replacement of the window shall be with a similar, more energy efficient product that will be wrapped in anodized aluminum in dark bronze. However, the windows are proposed to contain internal muntins which are not consistent on this historic storefront. Additionally, the storefront windows are proposed to be smaller, though they will be more proportionate with the storefront windows on the rest of the building. Additionally, the clear glass three -over -three window panels will create a new appearance on this storefront that is not consistent with the rest of the building. The kick plate, or bulkhead, functions to protect the display window by raising the glass area to a safer and more easily viewed height. Historically, materials have included wood panels, stone, brick and ceramic tile. The original kick plate materials should always be retained, maintained, or uncovered when possible. The use of materials that attempt to mimic traditional materials is unacceptable. An example would be fiberglass panels that are molded to look like real brick, or vinyl molded to look like wood horizontal lap siding The installation of aluminum over the sign band area between the storefront windows and the transom window, as well as on the kick plate, is in keeping with the rest of the storefronts on this block, though the traditional material is wood. 1. The replacement of the transom windows with a bronze tinted, anodized bronze aluminum cladding is consistent with the guidelines for Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District if no muntins are contained within the windows. 126 Main Street North HPC 2015-47 (10/5/2015) Page 3 of 4 2. The replacement of the six foot wide storefront panels with three foot wide, clear glass with anodized bronze aluminum cladding is consistent with the guidelines for the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District. 3. The painting of the faux brick is consistent with the guidelines for the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District. 4. The removal of the faux brick and replacement with wood panels is consistent with the guidelines for the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District. 5. The installation of the three -over -three clear glass with muntins above the storefront windows, the aluminum infill panel and the dark bronze anodized aluminum v-groove panel kick plate are not consistent with the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District as the use of materials that attempt to mimic traditional materials is unacceptable and the design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or environment. 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 on the fact findings cannot be made that any of the proposed improvements conform to the guidelines for Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District. Staff recommends the Commission discuss the proposed storefront redesign with the property owner. If the Commission finds the storefront redesign conforms to the guidelines, staff would recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. The facade renovations are limited to the furthest north unit only. 2. All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS Facade Rendering Window Details (2 pages) 126 Main Street North HPC 2015-47 (10/5/2015) Page 4 of 4 DARK BRONZE ANOD. INTERNAL MUN11N DARK BRONZE ANOD. ALUMINUM STOREFRONT (TYP.) 1' BRONZE TINTEO INS GLASS ALUM. INFILL PANEL 1' CLEAR INS. CLASS 1' CLEAR INS. n ASS OPTIONS' 1. DARK BRONZE ANODIZED ALUM. V-GROOVE PANEL 2. TONGUE & GROOVE WOOD PAINTED 3. PAINT EXISTING FAUX BRICK HO\T E\TEA\CE 126 MAIN ST. IN -SWING SIDE WI\DOW RETAIL SPACE AG C Flat Glass earth Amecica Look Beyond AGC Glass Calculator Performance Data Exterior Lite 1/4" (6 mm) Clear Airspace 1/2" (12.5 mm) Interior Lite 1/4" (6 mm) Clear Transmittance (LT) Reflectance - Outdoors (LR) Reflectance - Indoors Transmittance 78% 14% 14% 65% Reflectance - Outdoors (ER) 11% Transmittance 51% Damage Weighted Index -ISO 71% Winter - Air / Argon 0.47/0.45 Summer - Air / Argon 0.50/0.47 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) 0.73 Shading Coefficient 0.84 Relative Heat Gain - BTU/Hr/Sq. Ft. 175 Light to Solar Heat Gain Ratio 1.07 LR 14% LT 78% 11% SHGC ---- 0.73 *Performance values are based on representative production samples and product modeling data using LBNL Optic 5.1 and Windows 5.2. Actual values may differ due to variations in the manufacturing process. *Thermal stresses or building codes may require the use of heat -treated glass. This document is not an evaluation of the risk of glass breakage from thermal stresses. Please contact AGC's Technical Services department to ensure the correct form of glass to be supplied for the structure. Featured AFG Coating Comfort Ti LOW EMISSIVITY COATING AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., as part of Japan -based Asahi Glass Co. Ltd. the worlds largest float glass company - has built a reputation on understanding customer needs -- and responding with innovative glass solutions that are both practical and technologically advanced. AGC's Comfort Ti family of low -emissivity, sputter -coated glass products is designed to maximize energy efficiency -- as well as visible light transmittance and color neutrality. Comfort Ti glasses meet a wide range of performance and geographic needs -- delivering lower annual energy costs, year-round comfort, and a beautiful appearance. AGC offers a Comfort Ti solution for every ENERGY STAR® region in North America -- as well as products designed specifically for commercial buildings and private residences AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc. is committed to maximizing the flexibility and availability of its industry leading Comfort Ti products -- including offering Comfort Ti coatings for its Tinted and Low -Maintenance glass products. Corporate Services PO Box 929 - Kingsport, TN 37662 - 1-800-251-0441 na.agc-flatglass.com AGC Flat Glass Korth America Look Beyond AGC Glass Calculator Performance Data Exterior Lite 1/4" (6 mm) Solarshield Bronze Airspace 1/2" (12.5 mm) Interior Lite 1/4" (6 mm) Clear Transmittance (LT) Reflectance - Outdoors (LR) Reflectance - Indoors Transmittance 48% 8% 12% 39% Reflectance - Outdoors (ER) 7% Transmittance Damage Weighted Index -ISO Winter - Air / Argon Summer - Air / Argon 19% 38% 0.47/0.45 0.50/0.48 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) 0.50 Shading Coefficient 0.58 Relative Heat Gain - BTU/Hr/Sq. Ft. 124 Light to Solar Heat Gain Ratio 0.96 ER- 8% LT 48% 7% SHGC---- 0.5 *Performance values are based on representative production samples and product modeling data using LBNL Optic 5.1 and Windows 5.2. Actual values may differ due to variations in the manufacturing process. *Thermal stresses or building codes may require the use of heat -treated glass. This document is not an evaluation of the risk of glass breakage from thermal stresses. Please contact AGC's Technical Services department to ensure the correct form of glass to be supplied for the structure. Featured AFG Coating Comfort Ti LOW EMISSIVITY COATING AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., as part of Japan -based Asahi Glass Co. Ltd. the worlds largest float glass company - has built a reputation on understanding customer needs -- and responding with innovative glass solutions that are both practical and technologically advanced. AGC's Comfort Ti family of low -emissivity, sputter -coated glass products is designed to maximize energy efficiency -- as well as visible light transmittance and color neutrality. Comfort Ti glasses meet a wide range of performance and geographic needs -- delivering lower annual energy costs, year-round comfort, and a beautiful appearance. AGC offers a Comfort Ti solution for every ENERGY STAR® region in North America -- as well as products designed specifically for commercial buildings and private residences. AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc. is committed to maximizing the flexibility and availability of its industry leading Comfort Ti products -- including offering Comfort Ti coatings for its Tinted and Low -Maintenance glass products. Corporate Services PO Box 929 Kingsport, TN 37662 - 1-800-251-0441 na.agc-flatglass.com iUwater HE OIWTHPIACE OF MINNESOTA. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 5, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-45 APPLICANT: Denise Jones, property owner REQUEST: Demolition request for the front facing roof of the structure located at 1002 5th Street South PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is proposing to modify the existing 1877 constructed 1.5 story home located at 1002 2nd Street South into a full two story residence. In order to achieve this, the applicant is proposing removing the existing (approximately) 12/5 pitched roof and replacing it with a (approximately) 12/10 pitched roof. A two-story addition will be added to the rear of the home. The main level of the home will encompass a new side entry door, a stairway to the second story addition, a pantry and powder room with eat -in kitchen area. The second story addition will encompass a laundry room, master bedroom and master bath while preserving two bedrooms and a bathroom. From the front of the home, the house will have the same style and appearance. No openings or other modifications are proposed to be made to this facade. Additionally, the rear (west) facade will remain intact and the proposed southern facade will be extend to accommodate for the two-story addition. The north elevation, however, will have a long, sloping roof, extending from the gable to the west facade of the structure. This newly designed roof form aims to achieve the balance between preserving the historic character of the home from the front facade while accommodating for the increased living area and challenging snow shed opportunities on this side of the home. PROPERTY HISTORY The map to the right displays the 1924 Sanborn Insurance map of the property. As can be seen, the home is largely the same as it was 91 years ago: a 1.5 story home with a standard t-gabled roof with a front porch. The single -story addition in the rear of the property has been modified in time. Contained within the Architecture -History Inventory Form of the structure, the property is identified as have statewide historic significance due to its association with the St. Croix Triangle Lumbering era, 1843-1914, as well as local significance due to its association with the Development of Residential Neighborhoods in Stillwater, 1850s-1940s. However, the integrity of the structure was listed as fair in 2002 likely due to the facade materials on the structure, and the use of new windows and modern window openings. Aside from a reroof permit issued in 1996, no building permits have been issued for the property since 194, the condition of the building was listed as good. Pre-1946 records are not accessible at this time. Furthermore, records of the inhabitants of the property are identified in the Neighborhood report for the West One -Half of Churchill Nelson, Slaughter's Addition: The Irish-born Morris and Mary Quinlan and their son. John. were the first residents of 1002 S. Fifth Street. which they had built in 1877. Two years later. they received their Warranty Deed from Emma Marsh, Morris was listed in the city directories as a gardener: considering the location ctf their house at this time. I would auess this to mean he raised produce — probably to sell in the city. But perhaps the house was not as rural as he wished. for in 1881. he sold the land to RobertCarter. who in turn sold it to William Brigan.6 HPC Case 2015-45 1002 5th Street South HOC: 10/5/2015 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS City Code chapter 34, Building Demolition, identifies demolition as "removal of more than 20 percent of the exterior front facade of a structure including the front facing roof." Due to the age of the structure, it is a Building or structure of potential historic significance. When demolition is proposed to this type of structure, City staff must determine if the structure is a historic resource. Staff has identified this structure as a potential historic resource given the property is associated with significant event or with periods that exemplify broad patterns of cultural, political, economic or social history. As such, the consideration for demolition is forwarded to the HPC. For historic resources, the Commission has the following courses of action: 1. Negative finding. If the commission finds that the property is not a historic resource, then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit may be issued, as provided in subsection (3) below. 2. Positive finding with no feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission finds that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, but that there is no feasible alternative to demolition, then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit shall be issued, as provided in subsection (3) below. 3. Positive finding with feasible alternative to demolition. If the commission finds that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, and that there is a feasible alternative to demolition, then the commission shall deny the demolition permit and direct the community development director to prepare a designation study of the property. 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. ANALYSIS AND DEMOLITION FINDINGS The purpose of the Building Demolition ordinance is to protect the historic and aesthetic qualities of the city by preserving, rehabilitating or restoring, when reasonable, buildings or HPC Case 2015-45 1002 5th Street South HOC: 10/5/2015 structures which constitute or reflect distinctive features of the architectural or historical resources of the city, thereby promoting the public welfare and preserving the cultural heritage of the city. The property owner is proposing to preserve the general character of the home while adding a significant addition to allow for modern conveniences. Staff finds the property is a historic resource but no feasible alternative to the proposed demolition exists. The property owner's desire for a modern home plan, thereby increasing the usefulness of the structure while preserving its historic character. The proposed demolition is a reasonable modification to the structure, keeping with architectural styles of the periods of significance and not detracting from the historic character of the neighborhood. 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 which may include approval, approval with conditions, tabling requesting more information, or denial of the permit. If the Commission were to approve the demolition permit, staff would recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. Plans shall be substantially similar to those on file with Case 2015-45. 2. All major revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Staff recommends approval of the demolition permit for the demolition and reconstruction of the roof of the structure located at 1002 5th Street South with the following conditions: ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Facade Renderings (2 pages) Floor Plans (2 pages) HPC Case 2015-45 1002 5th Street South HOC: 10/5/2015 EXISTING EAST ELEVATION EXISTING WEST ELEVATION EXISTING EAST ELEVATION EXISTING WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS AND CLEARANCES, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL FLOOR AND ROOF BEARING LOCATIONS, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL BEAM AND DEADER SIZES FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. )ESIGI! SERVIC1 ****COPYIZiG.NT NOTE**** ALL IZIcliTS I2.E.5EIZVED MEYE12. 1)E510 SErzVici T1JE5g. pRA\VM45 ANv SPECFICATIo 5 SLAT 1 aEMAN TLC PROPERTY aF TLIE PE514NER Orb SLIALL NOT 6E USED FOR. 4NY ON TLt. �VITf TL1t- \VwTTEN CoN- 1D NT OF TLE.510, TP2Os-CT5 R. Tit POCUAENT.5 ARE NOT TO .STit 6E REPRODUCED. CLJAN4'ED _Sc OR COPED W ANY ForzM OR MAN1F-rz \VLIATSOEVER. NOR ARE TL1EY TO 6E AS.5D TO ANY TLYZD PARTY \VfTLJOuT FR-T O15T4INN4 TL1E \VRITTEN PER45510N AND CONSENT OF TLtE PESIQT R O\VNER.: DENISE JONES 1002 5th Street South Stillwater, MN CLIENTIZELEASE ,5I0ATU12.E.5 8 DATE / /2015 P A\VN 15Y: VICE C. Iv4Ey Q LLLVATION-5 ,51--LLT NUM5 Z: A -I J015 NUMI5EIZ: 1855 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 10'-0" J EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION EFFORT 1-IAS BEEN MADE AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS AND CLEARANCES. CONTRACTOR SMALL VERIFY ALL FLOOR AND ROOF BEARING LOCATIONS. CONTRACTOR Si-IALL VERIFY ALL BEAM AND I-IEADER SIZES FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. meter ****coPYIZIG.NT NOTE"' ALL 12414.5 IZESLIZVED MEWE12. DESIGN SEfZVICE TI t 'c PR4\VNGs Orb 3PE.CfIC4TION3 SUALL REb1AN TUE PROPERTY of Tit DE.SICGNER AND 3UALL NOT 6E USED FOR ay oN TUE PROJECTS \VITUOUT TUE \VRITTEN coN— SENT of TUE DE31G' R TUESE poet ENT. ARE NOT TO 6E REPRODUCED. CUANGED OR COPED N My Foam oR MArh-R \VUAT3oEVER. NOR ARE TUEY To 6E A5341\LP TO ANY TURD PARTY \VITUOuT nr2..5T OaTANNG TUE WRITTEN PERKS -NON AND CONSENT OF TUE DE310E2 O\VNER.: DENISE JONES 1002 5th Street South Stillwater, MN CLIENT 2ELE45E .5IcNATu2E.5 8 DATL: / /2015 PIZA\VN 13Y1 VINCE C. (VIEWER LL VATION 3 ,3.IE_E_T NumE5Dz. A-2 J015 NUMbEIZ: 1855 z l7 RESIDENTIAL DES z l7 RESIDENTIAL DES HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 5, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-42 September 14, 2015 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 (NCD) Review District and as such an infill design review permit is required for the new home. The design was reviewed by the HPC at their last regularly scheduled meeting. The Commission found the plans did not substantially conform to the NCD guidelines and tabled the application, directing the applicant to submit a new design which minimizes the garage's size, dominance and impact to the street and the garage -forward nature of the design. 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 20' 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. Building Site Locate garage and driveway to respect existing street and neighborhood patterns. The applicant has proposed the installation of a 20'X22' garage to be located in the rear of the property. Minimize garage impact on new structure massing and The applicant has revised the plans to have a detached garage to be located in the rear of the property, thus reducing the garage's 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 10/5/2015 Page 2 of 4 street front. impact to the streetscape. 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 183 square front porch to be at the front of the home, expanding the entire width of the structure. 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. The building elements are proportional to the scale and style of the building and its context. 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. 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 porch overhang. It is not proposed to be located in any other portion of the home. FINDINGS The proposed design generally conforms to the Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines. 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. 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 10/5/2015 Page 3 of 4 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department and on file with Case No. 2015-42. 2. A reduction of 18 square feet of other impervious surface area shall be removed from the plans. 3. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of the home. 4. 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. 5. Exterior lighting shall be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. 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 approve the application with the aforementioned conditions. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Design Review Application and Checklist (2 pages) Site Plan Main Floor Plan Exterior Elevations (4 pages) Garage Elevations (1 page) Neighborhood Information and Photos (6 pages) 911 Abbott Street (Miller/Tennison NCD Infill) HPC: 10/5/2015 Page 4 of 4 1 8 lwa 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 ,Na.l Municipal Location Street Boundary parcel) Li. !III' I _ 717 928r- — 922 r 716' t� W E 71. 7.; 1006 = 721 722 1721 ., 0 55 110 S 220 ST k STREE Feet 7 -L ABBOTT 1 1 MEP 1 ni111 I1I MI InlMll' _ . ` �^ l\ 1017f 1015 f 1 806 �H' f 1 W `' \ - 819 915 905 ppp((([[[�������.J C I1MMMMWME` L'E ®®-- ®q tits .,���. �"sl�Ogl la, ilumll • \ �.. - N _ -- . l� _ VI l mi m Ill lll� nll 11'Ennin im. I ®�.p U,®', • � ����I *A Iliy V 850 nn llllllp HaHl.n l■6.='� \ �/ tit �* �i N ; r _ 9112 = DAW IN =imp el ne IIIL Ill = I II lull ■e I _®®®®'MME ' - 82• W Ai rag,� ■ _ _ mil^ -. _. I �, ��:- 1` ■ u. = ai Jili ii: CC "NIn d N�LL� ):" "/ ,� a : traa ! n: nm IMF r_t 82 1 j I✓ _ .i. 1 MI - {'� / -- - — - M —• I I IIII flat .11171 aG TA 11-11 � 1 liar'11 i 1 .I ��■.a ;;0 _ \ 906 927 �. '' _.._.._.._.._.._.._.. IR. 919 911 905 i •` 821 81 =L'l�,a1 • �" .HE lti �i-imoC 939 jI,,,, i im6illlli pm I. 1 = PI . q ME �'�'I = _ t 4 §y�f4 Yip( �'�K} - ' l{ - :•!“, lumina RP •'== r 2f a �4, OP Q " fTVL? � �- I `11:_. �yj ....11llll■ •.... ., ....,€ D�.���' .O; .a,q_ nlriil: ni C. . 1 •:, t _ y �I-s� k 'S • i v / � 92"t- I 812 : mil 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. 4'" St. Stillwater, MN 55082 www.ci.sfillwater.mn.us ProjectAddre s: Project si. w• Applicant rtArne addrcss, telephone: 54,4i NIAy Floe Tcnh i 50#1 46s4 4(tk M►&. ra Apt.407, M i'k,eapaf"s I-54d4 &s1-694-6r9S 1. Neighborhood Architectural Styles: ❑ Vernacular ❑ Italianate ❑ Queen Anne ❑ Gothic ❑ Greek Revival o Second Empire ❑ American Foursquare o Stick ▪ Other:i91..7- r t n r, . si►a If 2- 2. Prevailing neighborhood streetfront setback: (Guidelines #1, #2, #3) (Z. homes) Prevailing setback on block (est.) 2812 20' Average setback on block (est.) 24' Proposed new house setback 30 ` 3. Is the pattern of homes in your neighborhood 1, 1-1/2, or2 stories high? (Guidelines #4, #5) Stories 1 1-1/2 2 House on right ❑ ❑ a House on left ■ ❑ ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ ■ Prevailing on block 1 holes �+ ❑ Prevailing opposite block ® ❑ ❑ 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 Z-ti,Mles WA Prevailing opposite block ❑ Proposed new house ® ❑ Notes: Fran+ par House on right House on left House to rear Prevailing on block Prevailing opposite block Proposed new house 5. Prevailing Garage Location pattern in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) Front Rear Side Garage Garage Garage House on right ® ❑ ❑ House on left Ne ❑ ❑ House to rear ❑ ❑ Prevailing on block ❑ ❑ Prevailing opposite block • ❑ ❑ Proposed new house a ❑ ❑ 6. Prevailing Garage Size in your neighborhood: (Guidelines #10, #11) 1 stall 2 stall 3 stall Garage Garage Garage ❑ I ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ a ❑ ❑ a ❑ ❑ M ❑ 7. Is the proposed garage compatible in form and detail with the design character of the main house? (Guideline #14) ye 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? : rh& how:6 -Caif5 tke Prtval''i Pai-i'tvy15 Ihi" r,N5i,'nA Golov , Gm 4/f- d.e-i r'l Fwh4' por-1,11 Ate of then& NV* i)I - fJ iieefilbovit.041 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 a Building deigned to reduce cut and fill (minimized retaining walls) a Landscaping incorporated into grading changes Notes: ncit 3r r . 10. Are there significant trees on the property? Will any trees be removed or damaged by new construction? (Guideline #9) • Types of trees I- A, h a Heights S4 ' o Trunk diam. 1 $'' Notes: / -e r 470 he •Ye in o Ye' d., 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: ►'�o House to left: ►to House to rear: Al 0 Notes: 1-- 54ry h©►Maaw,'ll�t.�� How will you mitigate any negative sunlight impacts on neighbors? ® Locate structure onlotto 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' privacy7(Guidelines #22, #23) House to right: H1,:i i f^I House to left: MD House to rear: h D Notes: How will you mitigate any negative impacts on neighbors' privacy? ❑ Offset/locate windows to reduce impact ❑ Use obscure glass in window CI Locate balconies to minimize impact. ▪ Use landscaping elements for screening • Other: 1I6e ' /!► i1-.4',tooAl inele ivy ►"fos 1'• lee ioor 3. How is outdoor lighting impact minimized for neighbors?(Guideline #25) et Lights are located or directed away from neighboring property at Light fixtures are shielded to prevent glare at neighboring property LI 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. Photographs of site and streetscape. RI Regular Planning Department Development Application Form (p2of2) A13s01-1- W. tX, I+ou6C fix. _ BIB. _1\10-M6: ' I-0T Pilz I, Sol 561. T— RoU d, 61.124,4- - • ' 18 3 SQ r=T = tR oN-r 0710 SGt Pr,- 0714r-re. IMmzvlov5 SL —1"A V I L 14N 11�,,00112—I ���= z0! DII 911 P.533197T' 6T� W STILL-W ! O LM sTVP 1. 9. 17. /5 pN 3 ft Zb50.1" (oOYol r1 i' rriA z w0D 301...011 2250T ' ?IIMud RM• d IN/CoV I O1A/1\11Z5131;KM 125( 14° 23 - I s OH y8.'_ II--D'\ @ 1-16,NP±iT 12 L1-L 1 d6"/C. i3PRI\Atk2 1(°X 10° CARPET- DO 3R .' T 13317 sQ.1- 964sQo' 1,AK aki �- o k L N -w L- L6. 9 • � � l5 v f1 a -ZI C.-H-r VA710�i Ye. L'-o" bs-r t2 L- L.. U 9. 17, 1s Esti rx■tnoverambi� NlflrirwwMi 11111111111■IENNIKiu. l�iEwli■!i[�kii�■��rrr. Iw■Iri/III�■w■ii#i1ilu�I�1w1�. ■■lwi��i�Ywlii■## ■�'�11ii.. I»iiili�■[���ifiGi�llii■i6�1�. ■■■r■f ■iNli�iwll�iR ■sR�r�iiRil�iR`1R�.. RMillli�IrlZ�iiiil lif■!■i��, 1iiiMIUMI �,I FE �!� 11�i■Ewli rrrrr161•MMi \ 7/ c-1" K L-At4P5T-ei7 I_L-e- 9, ►-7;15- L -r VA In %e= I' - a" 1--4-14PS- b 1-1-9 , r7, is 4,111u.•I .MFi�rill■i1 ■■.�I 11 �.� � �� ■,-� I����rt Cl-fl [LJfl 1 tf f CCU om Ian_ IDI -� n7;___ 1, VA-r off; r12-H r • .VA IO1 L� �J -r1' Er) U_ C_. q , 16, tr.- W/SHIN&-roN SQUNzE PICK 915- A 0.rr sT W, (Homo AT TZI&HT or 711 At35.OTT 5T W) 912 c-l-tinz-GHR-i, sy W. (HoI1 AT F...olbsp. Yd69f II iseeerri5f W.) cfll AN5o1r-r 6r. W. (MIt-L-Pslz- Lo-r) 9or AB TT (HOM' A-r 1. I 1 o ow AsPekri .$1 w ) 72 z- f.vriz.ETrr 61 s, (Hom /T 51,004 api7I24 rTT c2ff'1II Af6F rr s1N) 916 A5EoTT ST W, (HOME- AT 41-OGK OPr®SITE or 911 /BBoff sT 140 92_2 A550T`-r' (1-tom AT s Lv orro6i-rr © "f I l N orr w.) 920 Aezo-ri 6T, W. (Home AT 15L-06,14 •11I froT1 T W) 7z-1 G-r-OLe Y ST S. (-10m AT 151-014- OrP061r5 61 1 6-17 PV,) 717 GR L.EY ST% 5e(I- Mig NE/kg INT R,6EGTfoNI 0P &R EI. Y ST, 5, 8• A stoTT' eT. vv.) 715 Gtt.eoLK`( sT. 5. (HOME NCR &RMLZY ST, 5e$ A, o-rT STr w.) HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 5, 2015 CASE NO.: 2015-23 APPLICANT: MNDOT REQUEST: Request for comments on the final St. Croix Crossing Field Guide PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner As part of the mitigation efforts for the St. Croix Crossing, MNDOT has been charged with creating a field guide to the area. In early planning efforts it was determined the guide would be a walking tour map. In May of this year, the HPC reviewed a draft of the map and provided formal comment. MNDOT has revised the map based on the comments of the HPC and provided the final map for review. ATTACHMENTS Memo from Renee Hutter Barnes, MNDOT Historian Final Draft Cultural Landscape District Field Guide HPC Comments regarding draft Guide too, Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Environmental Services Mail Stop 620 395 John Ireland Boulevard September 22, 2015 Brian Larson, HPC Chair Heritage Preservation Commission City of Stillwater City Hall 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Office Tel: (651) 366-4291 Fax: (651) 366-3603 SEP 2. 4 201S QeDatt^,enr comffo"DB RE: St. Croix Crossing Project Mitigation Project: Field Guide Comments SP 8214-114, St. Croix River Crossing Project, SHPO MOA 2003-3438 Dear Mr. Larson, The Amended Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Minnesota and Wisconsin State Historic Preservation Officers (June 2005) for the St. Croix River Crossing Project includes a number of stipulations that Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) must meet to fulfill its FHWA-delegated responsibilities for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (36 CFR 800). Stipulation VI. B. requires the preparation of a Field Guide based on the Stillwater Cultural Landscape District (SCLD) document, which was produced pursuant to Stipulation IV.E.2. The Field Guide highlights the role of historic properties within the SCLD. While working with the consultant, The 106 Group, the premise was boiled down to exploring the "Secrets in the Landscape" and calls attention to the SCLD, the St. Croix Overlook- South and the St. Croix Boomsite, along with other properties identified in the Amended MOA. Your commission provided comments to in May of 2015. Below is a recap of those comments and how we have addressed them. A few things to note: 1. The field guide will go to the State Historic Preservation Office after we have received second round comments from your commission. 2. As in the last submission, all photos are still low resolution. When we receive all comments from stakeholders and the image selections are approved, MnDOT will acquire rights from the Minnesota Historical Society and obtain high resolution images (notably for the cover). 3. Graphic design consistency with past City of Stillwater tour brochures has not been addressed per the comments from the previous letter, because it is our hope that the additions, changes and inaccuracies have been addressed satisfactorily and the design can remain the same. In addition, while there is some content overlap from other walking tour brochures produced by the City of Stillwater, the focus of this brochure is the hidden and unknown characteristics of the city. This brochure brings to light different aspects not discussed in previous brochures. If after the HPC review, the HPC as a whole feels the design needs to be changed we are happy to discuss accommodating this request. HPC Comments • Secrets in the Landscape (center tri-fold page) - Fonts have been increased to fill out the pages and color has been added to the map circles indicating existing properties (this is also true for map on inside (centerfold page). All other suggestions have been incorporated. • For more information - all suggestions have been incorporated. • McKusick House has been switched to Isaac Staples House • Brewing and Caves -• Schmickle was better known as Aiple, this change has been made and Gerhard Knips Brewery has been added. • Local Clay- a modern photo of 112 South Main has been added showing the yftllpw brick. Also changed to "South Main" Commissioner Goodman's comments • First People - The context referenced by Commission Goodman states that the Ojibvv/ utilized the river. The paragraph has been changed to state this clearly. Entrepreneurs and Settlers - Changed to mid-1840s since many dates are .:•,.:,err :.. . referenced in varied historic contexts. • Changing Ld'h capes - Incorporated suggested changes, according to the NHL for the Boomsite it is "one of the earliest" so the sentence has been changed to that statement. • River Town - changed to donated land • Point of Land - a sentence from page 8 of The Stillwater Cultural Landscape District report has been added for clarity. • The Union Elevator - an arrow has been added to point out the elevator. Project team discussed including Battle Hollow, but was ultimately cut out from the final stops. • Lift Bridge - added clarification that the 1918 plan was not implemented • Freight House - the information included in this stop comes directly from The Stillwater Cultural Landscape report which was researched by qualified historic consultants. • Engineering - removed reference to powering mills If there are additional comments the HPC feels we did not addressed or missed, please let me know. We thank you and appreciate your input on this field guide. We have reviewed the above -referenced Field Guide and find it complies with MOA Stipulation VI. B and request your comments. Please let me know if you have any questions about the attached materials. Sincerely, Renee Hutter Barnes, Historian Cultural Resources Unit Office of Environmental Stewardship (OES) Enclosures: One (1) cc: Kevin Western, MnDOT Bridge Office (email) Todd Clarkowski, St. Croix Coordinator (email) Secrets in the Landscape ORavines Visit Mulberry St., 1/2 block west of Fourth St. More than 10,000 years ago, a thick layer of glacial ice covered this region. The receding glaciers carved the steep bluffs and deep ravines that charac- terize Stillwater today. Natural and manmade activity shaped the ravines further. During the town's early years, street collapses and landslides were common along the steep slopes of the ravines. These accidental openings in the landscape and many of the natural ravines were filled to stabilize the landscape and create streets and building sites. 0 Isaac Staples House 509 North Second St., at what is now Pioneer Park Atop the natural bluffs in the North Hill neighborhood, the Staples House was built in the 1870s. From this elevated location, Isaac Staples could look down and see his St. Croix Mill near the river. The bluffs not only provided a commanding view, but also created a barrier from the smoke and noise that the mills produced. ©Public Stairs For instance, Chestnut St. between N Third and Fourth Streets Early surveyors designed Stillwater's streets in a grid with little regard to the steep terrain. Extensive grading during the early decades of the settlement did little to improve the problem. Residents created footpaths to shortcut 9 ca. 1873 some of the city's hills until the first public stairs appeared in the 1870s. These wooden stairways linked residential areas atop the bluffs with the commercial district below. Wooden staircases were later replaced with stone and concrete. OPoint of Land The riverfront at the end of Mulberry St. Flooding and landslides reshaped Stillwater's landscape over the years. In 1852, heavy rains overwhelmed the dam at Lake McKusick, causing a landslide. The landslide flowed through the Mulberry Street ravine with enough force to move trees, bury buildings, and destroy a significant portion of the town. Debris deposited in Lake St. Croix created eight to ten acres of new riverfront in the vicinity of present-day Mulberry Point. A steamboat landing and additional riverfront land for mill construction resulted. take cKusicia Union Elevator Lowell Park, north of the Commercial St. pedestrian plaza In the late 1870s, the Union Improvement & Elevator Company constructed Stillwater's first grain elevators at the end of the Stillwater & St. Paul railroad tracks. Hovering above the St. Croix River, the grain elevator easily transferred wheat from barges to railcars for shipment north. At its peak, the elevator stored up to 300,000 bushels of wheat. The entire elevator complex burned down in 1898, just a few years before the lumber industry collapsed. Only remnants of the brick foundation and chimney stack footings remain today. 1879 OLowell Park 201 N Water St., downtown on the waterfront Lowell Park didn't always look as it does today. Years ago this was a pivotal location in Stillwater's lumber industry. Imagine a place without sidewalks, landscaping, and the pavilion. Mills and ca. 1920 factories rose around railroad tracks that divided the landscape. Following the decline of the lumber industry, the riverfront transformed. The initial development of Lowell Park in 1911 represented the city's new recreation and tourism focus. 0 Stone Levee Along the waterfront at Lowell Park The riverfront was bustling spot with steamboats bringing passengers, freight, and mail. An early levee constructed between Myrtle and Chestnut streets protected the city from flood waters. A stone wall at the river's edge reinforced the levee streets after 1875. By 1900, sixty years of accumulated sawmill waste covered the levee. Local lumbermen donated the land and, in 1913, the city began building a concrete seawall. Today, the stone levee sits approximately 3 feet east of this existing concrete wall. * Courthouse • Existing Properties • No Longer Existing 0 Lift Bridge Crossing the river from E Chestnut St. 500 ft Stillwater shifted from an industrial town to a tourism desti- nation focused on the river. The 1918 Plan of Stillwater was a blueprint for the town's new focus. The plan proposed new riverfront uses and introduced the idea of Stillwater as an automobile tourist destination. Although this specific plan was not implemented, the City's transition to a tourist destination continued. This resulted in the removal of the remaining industrial buildings, repurposing of historic buildings along Main Street, and development of the scenic landscape as an attraction. When the lift bridge opened in 1931, it became the centerpiece of the "new" riverfront and a gateway to the city. 431 Freight House Along S Water St., between Nelson St. and Chestnut St. Rough roads and steamboats were the only way to reach Stillwater until area business leaders organized the Stillwater & St. Paul Railroad in 1867. This and other railroads provided reliable transportation for industry and secured Stillwater's position as a lumber center. Built in 1883, the • Stillwater quarry. ca. 1888 Freight House bridged the two main forms of commercial transportation, connecting both with riverboats and railroads that ran alongside the river. QBrewing and Caves Southwest corner of Nelson and South Main St. Conditioning and storing beer requires consistently cool temperatures. In the era before refrigeration, caves offered this benefit for free. The Joseph Wolf Brewery, established on this site in the ca. 1912 late 1800s, used the natural caves in the bluff to its advantage. (The Aiple Brewery did the same about 1/2 mile south and the Gerhard Knips' Brewery used the caves at the north end of downtown.) At its peak, this brewery produced more than 5,000 barrels of beer per year. Slab Alley 5 Main St., below the St. Croix Boat & Packet Co. Slab Alley, a two -block row of about 20 dwellings built in the 1870s, accommodated seasonal lumber workers and their families. The name may have derived from the lumber, or "slabs," piled around a lumber mill. The neighborhood lined the bluffs across Main Street from the Hersey & Bean Lumber Company. A road widening project demolished the neighborhood in 1932. Archeological investigations from 2004 to 2005 studied Slab Alley's working class population during the height of the lumbering industry. OLocal Clay, Local Bricks 112 South Main St. The young town needed building materials to grow. Fortunately, on the south end of town, nature provided good clay for bricks. Frederick Steinacker opened the first brickyard in Stillwater in 1859. At its peak, Steinacker's brickyard manufactured about 200,000 bricks per year, mining the clay, molding, drying, and firing at Lily Lake. Because local clays turned yellow during the firing process, they stood out from imported bricks. Look for them throughout downtown, and here at 112 South Main Street. Retaining Walls Mulberry St. and N Third St. Yellow Brick Gray and buff colored limestone is a prominent feature of Stillwater. Stone quarries opened throughout the city soon after settlement. One of the most common uses for limestone was to secure edges of steep streets. Wooden pickets capped some of the limestone retaining walls. Others featured wrought- or cast-iron fences. Retaining walls respond to the landscape — some are just a few layers of stone while others reach several feet high. You can still see many of these walls today. OEngineering Formerly down Mulberry St., including at the intersection of N Third St. Few water resources could compare with Stillwater's spring -fed creeks. The city's engineering office began developing plans in the 1870s to take advantage of this natural resource. During the following years, the city channelized, straightened, and deepened the ravines and creeks. ca. 1922 Lake McKusick became the city's drinking water reservoir, while the canal down the ravine and flume (on present day Mulberry Street) was closed. Buildings covered several creeks in downtown Stillwater. The city's modern sewer system is an extension of this early water distribution system. •gDEaq 2u?ww?Ms all Jo s1ueuwal Tim ` (a) 311Ed laug'oN sE an1aS 01 lams all SS01DE Xl13 alp of palmtop puE' 01 uopaauuoo a palea1D os'E g •uoi2al all punolE wag slsun0l lg2nolq sanup Dtu DS puE Dg4EJI aligowolnE 1OJ Amara E palEala apuq 1J?l all Jo uollDnllsuoD ag1, •,Cy?D all loJ snooJ1Eu0r1Ea1Da1 E 01 leulsnput UE 11101J Uoutsutll all pa)IlEUI 1I6I uI 111Ed II3M0101u11U01J13nu atop u2isapal ag1, 'lamp 3IU10U0D3 M3U S11 SE WSun01 puE uopEatool paDElgwa 'CTTEnpE12 1a1EMII?lS •1uo1J1anu all jo aoueieaddE ag1 sE IIaM sE AW0u033 all Supooi e `pasdE" oo ,C1lsnpul iagwn' DIP uagM s006I A' -rep all u1 saSuEg2 D11EiuE1p MEs 1a1EMI1i1S Wsunol Jagwni WOJ3 •Sumnls ssallyEw ow! s2-ei poiDXDa1(a of gj g u1 paleDolal) II?IAT ,Cppogs 'zluoy\1 'uta1satag all SE `sgof uMo sit palsan ,Cnsnpui wo1J a1SEM Dill uang •oin11U1nj of moil wag 'sauiii'UD WEais 01 sMopuIM w01J 2uun1DEJnuEw puE amllnou2E ill?M'1a1uoo ssautsnq pay?S1an?p E sE patuooq loremii1IS •uMo1 01 aWED spE01'IE1 SE posro1DUt ssaDDE sell `SOL81 all X. [ •alaq apEw slonpold Ilas of puE 1SEg Dill wo1J spool 1a� 01 algtssod It Supirtu '2uiddigs puE sassauisnq palloddns 0s1e UO11E11odSUE111a1eM 01 ssaaav •xto1p 1S 314101 until pz/L4SSISSMI 341 dn sasinao 1Eoglanu uo uoueuusop anbsa -Inlaid E oureooq lore/Nips UMOJ JBA!H •S111w mayemiips Ol lanuuMop sSol Jo suo?II?w paTeog puE 'pains -Earn 'pallos `patois S133110M 313H -spare 2utjPuEq pue 32E10ys Sol 1UE11odwt 'sow puE 1Sag1Ea S,31E1S all JO Duo '(p) a11s wool xi013 IS aq1 lE do' paddols-1aleM aq1 uo po3poM oiM sla8$o'—„slapual wool„ lane Dill UM0p s8o1 Dill anolp „slid 13n11„ paJIeo s1a22oJ `11!E1 all g1?M asol Ianal lane 3111 Ua4M'2uuds 3141 III •131u1M all lano g11oU was 313M la1EMII�1S u! 2U1nl SMalD 2ui2 of `ITEJ ali UJ 1aleM l2?g 3141 uo po?la1'1anaMoq `i(llsnpul fiuilagwnl au, •sassau?snq pa8ewEp puE sasnol s1a111aS paunq legs sapgspuel puE 2utpoog of pal .(Iluanba1J sure.' ,Cneaq `skep ,(I1Ea maleMII1lS uI adeJspue-I 6UI6U211egD •Ma12 uMOI ata •i1?w fiuilElado 'sly s,uMol atll pauado S1au11Ed s1g puE Spisn)pJ\\ ugo f 's1Eai( MaJ E u?g1?M «s" fumes 10J uo?1en11s 1DajJad„ inq'uMol E 1oj 2u111as leap! uE you aJaM Sallln2 puE S31.1InE1 (q palaass?p sjlnlq daais all Yelp palou lanlasgo d(l1Ea au0 •sallwnlloddo 2uppos puE EDJE 31.11 oyu? 2utgsnd a1aM aldoad Mau'sOi,g1-p?w ag1,Cg sJal}las pue sjneuejdanru3 •sauunoq su puE adaDspue'stgl JO 32Eluunpa 2uojai suopE1aua2 jo sp.toaa.t ualuiM slloddns Douap?na'EDl2oloaegDJFj •laaw (Aluo ssa»e wog) JOA N XJOJJ •15 Dill 6uole 'a6puq ssoJ)e :wed nau1po)1 (asnopnoJ wag Alem sago L•O) IIeJl xloJJ l5 l08 wagssa»e :asnoyaieM pUe mpg Appoys 'zwow 'uialsfiiae (asnogTJno) WOJ} sallw E) lleJl xloJ) ;5 LE86 r(IalewlxoJdde :ems woof!xlcu, •Zs (asnogiJnoj woJ} llenn sap L'O) IIeJ1)IJed Jaauold SZL Wed Jeauoid (asnoglinop woi} am EL) N any Apogee,' pue IieJ1lno)Ioo1 Rau :Noopano x!oi) •4s 0 e 0 0 0 6w1six3 ia6uoi oN saRiadoid 6ui1six3 • asnotoinoD Y pet' dooi Pu1s10 adexpue1IenninD puE duia o1 aDEld 1E312 E `oJ?IPTIA1 Ut tau EWE UE SUM li •EalE 2uuag1E2 IESn1Eu E SEA% 1e11 (n SE 133311Ew ' 11Ed 1aDU0id 1E puE '`, SE dew lasui alp uo pa3prui '3 0o'lano S X1!D Dill 11101J Main Dill ui luaptna lips) utsEq azI1l-iMoq E SEM 1a1EMI1�1S PDITED Mou s! rely u011ED01 31.11 •13n!J xto1D •1S Dill paz?111n osle aldoad aMgtCO Dill 'uopippe ul •slape111nJ 4Dua1J lug all palalunoaua pue 31311 pant' aldoad Elmira alJ, lane all !q paiueD sJ;nlq daals all lsu!e2E dn 2ut2pa sauteld ,CssE12 pue S1S U0J asuap Jo xiw E punoj Ea1E sill tit aldoad 'sly al J, aldoad 1.5J!d •511EM;;pts Dggnd all wopaMatn aq Apo pinogs puE ayenud are 1no1 ;li uo sauiadoid awos legs alou asEDld •an?laalap adEaspuEl E &nog aatlaEld •lueogia1SU1 woos asiMlaglo i(EW yell s11e1ap ui sauols putt of ui2 q Him no,( —S11EM 2ulgwnla pUE `slaiin2 'souid E1 's2utpltnq— lnol sill uo salts all 2UIIISin da •1121s weld ut paunq 31E S. UO1S asogi Jo XUEw ynq '30o_3d puE a:;Eid Jo ,Celdlan g 'Ell jo uoissaldxa 1E313 A11EInopred E sop/void Alois Sc1alEMIl11S „Tan ?IV f0 Sdd.1110S'ai jo1utnu ntl7,o nu pun of nngvy¢npn ummntl fti nntsctufxd un •••„ sE adEaspuEl pa llna E saugap lals!oa2l leuo!EN a4J, •SaDeld 1uols?H Jo lays?2ou lE o?lEj.j all uo $un=il ioj algt la '1Du1` 1 1 adDspuE•l IeIn1In3 la1EMllp5 all Se 1allaiiol paugap are li swig' 'Ell adtospuE' 1E1n1Eu :>ll puE 310. DI1olsil mole/Nips saOmpuv7 Pd7JJO1S People have long used Stillwater's landscape to our advantage and shaped it to our needs. From the cool caves of the limestone bluffs to the steady river, discover the relationships between the landscape and the history of the city as you explore hidden features of Stillwater's Cultural Landscape District. ca. 1872 iJ11� 70X ?7ZOXC' f/!1�-Cl'N-wGQ:ltf1i/l. This guide was developed by Minnesota Department of Transportation, available online at www.dot.state.mn.us/. To learn more about Stillwater's past, visit the Washington County Historical Society (www.wchsmn.org) and the St. Croix River Crossing Project (www.dot.state.mn.us/stcroixcrossing). The Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission (www.ci.stillwater.mn.us/hpc) conducts community history, local preservation outreach, and public education activities. Other local HPC's can be found through the State Historic Preservation Office (www.mnhs.org/shpo/local/hpc.php). To find information about restaurants and accommodations, contact Stillwater Convention and Visitors' Bureau (www.discoverstillwater.com). The publication of this field guide fulfills requirements of the Saint Croix Crossing Project. Historic photographs are used with permission of the Minnesota Historical Society. Secrets in the Landscape ITncoverilig Stillwater's Hidden History A WALKING TOUR THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA May 7, 2015 MN Department of Transportation Attn: Renee Hutter Barnes, Historian Cultural Resources Unit, Office of Environmental Stewardship Main Stop 620, 395 John Ireland Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55155 RE: St. Croix Crossing Project Mitigation Project: Draft Field Guide Comments Hello Renee, Thank you for giving the Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) the opportunity to comment on the draft field guide. Upon review, we determined we do not desire graphic design consistency with the field guide and HPC's existing Downtown and South Hill walking tour programs. While we understand this was indicated as a desire in early planning meetings for this project, some of the content overlaps our existing walking tours brochures, and could cause confusion. Some content also appears to be inaccurate. As such, we desire to keep them graphically separate and distinct. HPC Commissioner Robert Goodman and others determined some information contained within the draft field guide is not historically correct, so we have forwarded the draft field guide to the Washington County Historical Society (WCHS) for their review and comment. Comments of WCHS have been attached to this letter. The Stillwater HPC requests your consultants discuss and work with the WCHS to modify the field guide, to represent Stillwater's history. More specific comments include: CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Secrets in the Landscape (center tri-fold) page: • This page contains a lot of blank space, leaving the page with little to no contributing value to the rest of the brochure. • Since this section presents both items that are present and no longer present, this section should note which features are no longer present within the community, to prevent confusion of users trying to find them. For more information page: • As this guide has been developed by MNDOT, this should be noted on this page. A link to more information about the St. Croix River Crossing Project may be appropriate. • Contact information for each of the organizations should be consistent: address and website or one or the other. o As the WCHS will be relocating in the future and the Visitors and Convention Bureau does not have a physical address, utilizing only websites may prevent the material from becoming outdated. • The Stillwater HPC's website is www.ci.stillwater.mn.us/hpc • The Stillwater HPC is not a point of contact for restaurants and accommodations. o Information about local HPCs can be found through the State Historic Preservation Office (http: / /www.mnhs.or sh o local h c. h ). o It would be appreciated if it was noted that the Stillwater HPC conducts community history and local preservation outreach and public education activities. Storied Landscapes page: • In general, an approximate distance and location of each of the five map features should be identified (i.e. the St. Croix Boom Site is located on Highway 95, approximately three miles north of downtown Stillwater). This will help ensure more visitors explore the areas outside the walking tour area. • The 'E' letter indicator in Kolliner Park should be included on the south of the bridge line on the map. The south area has remnants of the swimming beach which is also a secret in the landscape worth noting. Secrets in the Landscape (Centerfold) page: • In general, each of the features should have an approximately address or a street intersection point to guide users. • McKusick House Draft Field Guide Comments Page 2 of 4 CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA o While the McKusick House does exist still today, the Isaac Staples home (whose foundations are marked in the present day Pioneer Park) was actually known for being built to look down at his mill. ■ The McKusick House was not constructed in the 1850s but either 1866 or 1868. ■ If used in this field guide, it should be noted the mill was a lumber mill. ■ If used in this field guide, it should be noted it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. ■ If used in the field guide, permission from the property owner should be obtained. • Public Stairs o An additional set of stairs should be indicated on the map on Chestnut Street in between Third and Fourth Streets North. • Union Elevator o The phrase should be either 'flour mill' or 'grain elevator.' • Stone Levee o It may be worth noting the existing concrete wall toda • Brewing and Caves o Neither City staff nor HPC breweries were located in S stone levee sits approximately 3' east of the Y. members are aware the Schmickle or Buster tillwater. • Local Clay, Local Bricks o The address should be defined as Main Street North or South. o The photo is of the Lowell Inn, which is not in the location identified. o There are no yellow brick on any of the buildings on the North Main 100 block. • Engineering o Indicating "Brown's Creek closed" is confusing as the river is still in existence. ■ If it is intended to indicate the canal down the ravine and flume was closed (on present day Mulberry Street), this should be described in greater detail. This list is not intended to be a complete documentation of potential inaccuracies, only those identified by the HPC in their review. Once again, thank you for giving the HPC the opportunity to review the field guide and we appreciate your consideration of the Draft Field Guide Comments Page 3 of 4 CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA aforementioned comments for inclusion into the field guide. We look forward to seeing a modification of this document. Sincerely, Brian Larson, HPC Chair Heritage Preservation Commission City of Stillwater Cc: Mayor Kozlowksi and Stillwater City Councilors Todd Clarkowski, Coordinator Sarah Beimers, Manager, Government Programs and Compliance, MN SHPO Brent Peterson, Washington County Historical Society Draft Field Guide Comments Page 4 of 4 CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us In the Storied Landscapes section:, col. 2, First People: The Ho Chunk and Ojibwe never lived in the Stillwater area, although they may have traveled through it. The Dakota were here in historic times; before them the Archaic people and the Woodland traditions of mound builders, who are not Dakota ancestors. When the first French fur traders came into the valley the Stillwater area was occupied by Dakota who had moved in from the Mille Lacs area after conflicts with the northern Ojibwe tribes. (See R. Vogel: Stillwater Historic Contexts 1993) Entrepreneurs and Settlers: Mid-1800s? Why not say the McKusick Mill began sawing in 1844. Challenging Landscape: It says "heavy rains frequently led to flooding and landsides that buried settlers and damaged businesses." We know of no settlers that were buried — maybe settlers' homes? Also choice of words: Lumbermen from the north did not float the logs downstream. Lumbermen lived in Stillwater. Logging crews were sent north each fall to log over the winter and certain loggers, called "river pigs," drove the logs down in the spring. Also the St. Croix Boom Site shown on the map as C was not the earliest storage and handling area for logs —that was at Osceola. (See History of Washington County: Gateway to Minnesota History) River Town: last paragraph: Kolliner Park, originally known as East Side Park was a tourist camp for many years. It was deeded (not sold) to the City of Stillwater by the East Side Lumber Company in 1918. On the inside spread, Secrets in the Landscape, errors are too numerous to go into deeply: First: the map — two streets that do not exist are shown: Laurel St. between Second and Main (part dead-end, part stairs — and the stairs to Main St. were taken out years ago) and Mulberry Street between Third and Fourth (Library Stairs). If a person stands at 1 on the map, he will see only the Library stairs. The ravine referenced starts a half block west of Fourth St. Stop 2: The picture is of the Ivory McKusick House, not John McKusick's. It was built in 1868. John's house from 1853 does not exist. And almost none of the lumbermen lived where they could overlook the town. Why not use the Isaac Staples house? Stop 4: Point of Land appears to reference Mulberry Point. Give it its name. The picture shows the dam at Lake McKusick, although no reason for anyone to recognize it or connect it with downtown. "New mill construction quickly filled the new acreage" — no. Never been a mill on Mulberry Point. Mills were built north of that (Staples, Hale, Nelson, Schulenberg) and south of town (Hersey, etc.) (See Historical Reconstruction of the Riverfront: Stillwater, Minnesota). Stop 5. The Union Elevator is visible in the picture; however the picture is mainly of the State Prison (no secrets there? How about Battle Hollow?). The Union Elevator was built by the NP Railroad to ship wheat north to Duluth via tracks of the Stillwater and St. Paul (note: this is not the same as the St. Paul and Stillwater) railroad, a branch of the NP. The elevator had nothing to do with flour. The wheat transfer was from barges to rail cars for shipment north. This was entirely a rail project to ship grain to Great Lakes ports (the first barge came from Hastings in 1870). (Hint: Warner and Foote is wrong). Stop 8. The tone is wrong. The waterfront park was landscaped in 1910-20 and the remaining industrial buildings were removed then; the East Side Park on the opposite shore was opened as a tourist camp about the same time, and became Kolliner Park in 1931. The 1918 plan was not implemented. Top 9: The Stillwater & St. Paul Railroad was constructed in 1870-1. The railroad that goes by the Freight House is the St. Paul, Stillwater and Taylors Falls, chartered in 1867 but not built until 1871-2, Stillwater's reputation as a lumber center did not depend on rail. Stop 10: There were six breweries in Stillwater. The Schmickle Brewery is better known as the Aiple Brewery (c.1852) and the Buster Brewery is a mystery. Gerhard Knips had the brewery north of downtown. Aiple's output was 25,000 bbl a year. Stop 13. Why the picture of the Lowell Inn? It is being built, so should be dated 1927. This is not Stillwater brick although there are several buildings on Main Street that are soft red brick from the 1880s. The building referenced as yellow brick should be 112 South Main St. (112 North Main actually IS an 1880s Stillwater Brick. Stop 14: Stillwater has two springs but not creeks as the springs are right downtown. Brown's Creek did not power local mills. The water power for one, McKusick's, was delivered by a flume running from the dam down the ravine to the mill. The flume is long gone, but there is still a trickle visible in the ravine. Brown's Creek, however, still flows to its outlet to the St Croix north of town.