The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-08-07 HPC Packetal d d I l f IA f Of I, NH (I 1 Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting August 7, 2006 The City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission will meet on Monday August 7 2006 at 7 p m in the Council Chambers of Stillwater City Hall 216 North Fourth Street AGENDA 1 CALL TO ORDER 2 APPROVAL OF JULY 5, 2006 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 01 Case No DEM/06 05 Demolition request for a shed located at 307 E Willow Street Jeanne Anderson, applicant 4 NEW BUSINESS 5 DESIGN REVIEWS 5 01 VALLEY RIDGE SHOPPING CENTER — CASE NO DR/06-26 Design review of a proposed expansion of Valley Ridge Shopping Center by approximately 9 000 square feet Property located at 1250 Frontage Road West Continued from July 5 2006 Meeting • 5 02 STONE'S RESTAURANT — CASE NO DR/06-30 Design review of proposed signage for Stone s Restaurant located at 324 South Main Street Continued from July 5 2006 Meeting 5 03 UBS — CASE NO DR/06-31 Design review of proposed signage for UBS located at 270 North Main Street Leroy Signs applicant 5 04 ULTIMA BELLEZA SALON — CASE NO DR/06-32 Design review of proposed signage for Ultima Belleza Salon at 150 3rd St So Mary Coleman applicant 5 05 WALTER WDOWYCHYN — CASE NO DR/06-33 Design review of an accessory dwelling unit located at 519 3`d St So Walter Wdowychyn applicant 5 06 GRUMPY STEVE'S — CASE NO DR/06-34 Design review of signage for Grumpy Steve s located at 410 Main St So 402 Main Street LLC applicant 5 07 ST CROIX PREPARATORY ACADEMY — CASE NO DR/06-36 Design review of signage for St Croix Preparatory Academy located at 201 N 2nd St St Croix Preparatory Academy applicant 6 OTHER BUSINESS 6 01 HEIRLOOM AND LANDMARK HOMES PROGRAM 7 ADJOURN N City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission July 5 2006 Present Jeff Johnson Vice -Chairperson Phil Eastwood Ken Harycki Larry Nelson Roger Tomten and Scott Zahren Others Community Development Director Bill Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge Absent Howard Lieberman and Brent Peterson Vice Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Tomten seconded by Mr Eastwood moved approval of the minutes of June 5 2006 Motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No DEM/06-04 Consideration of a request for demolition permit for the Maple Island Hardware building located at 225 N Main St Vern Stefan was present representing the applicant Mainstream Development LLC Mr Stefan noted they had responded with additional information regarding the three items in the demolition permit application the HPC felt were not adequately covered in the last discussion of the request Mr Eastwood asked if the expenses listed in the data supporting economic justification for the demolition were expenses that would be incurred in removing the building Mr Stefan said those expenses are over and above the cost of demolition Mr Eastwood noted that variances will still be required for a new structure and questioned whether a demolition permit should be granted based on a design plan that has not yet been approved Mr Johnson pointed out that the HPC has granted other demolition permits contingent on the applicant obtaining a building permit Mr Johnson opened the public hearing No comments were received and the hearing was closed Mr Tomten said he thought the applicant had done a good job providing the requested information regarding economic justification and options of alternatives to demolition and moved to approve the demolition permit contingent on final approval of plans for the replacement building Mr Nelson seconded the motion motion passed unanimously (6-0) NEW BUSINESS Don Empson s report on the final phase of the architectural study — Mr Empson reviewed the main points of his report to the Commission and his recommendation to create an Heirloom House and Landmark House program As proposed Heirloom Houses those representative of le century Stillwater that have a fair amount of their original design elements in tact would be listed on the City s web page along with a photo address and history of the house, homeowners would have to grant permission to participate in the program The web page also would include various educational pamphlets and other resource links to home preservation sites/materials Mr Empson provided a list of 370 homes that he considers to be Heirloom Houses Mr Empson also made recommendations regarding a program recognizing Landmark Houses and Sites the finest old house and most remarkable sites in Stillwater as well as designating three historic districts In addition to his proposals for implementing the three programs — Heirloom Houses Landmark Sites and Historic Districts — Mr Empson made 13 recommendations ranging from changing the name of Olive Street to St Paul Road to requiring that a real historian research 1 . I City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission July 5 2006 demolitions Mr Empson briefly addressed what is termed demolition by neglect and urged stricter enforcement of building codes on old houses that are being neglected and advertised as tear downs He also suggested that the HPC think about instituting remodeling guidelines in the infill district He concluded by urging the HPC to take the initiative and implement two or three new programs a year rather than responding to situations DESIGN REVIEWS Case No DR/06-26 Design review of a proposed 9 1200 square foot expansion of Valley Ridge Shopping Center located at 1250 Frontage Road W Present were Jesse Hamer of Tushie Montgomery Architects and Knss Novak Valley Ridge management Mr Johnson asked about plans for an outside dumpster whether it would be shared or separate Mr Tomten asked about plans for a public walkway or corridor connecting the addition and existing center and whether a restroom would be included The applicant said that has yet to be determined Mr Tomten referred to staff comments about the requirement for four- sided architecture Mr Hamer said EFIS would wrap around the back and piers would be added to the rear elevation However Mr Hamer said they don t particularly like the design of the existing towers and believe they can accommodate the requirement four four-sided architecture without that design element Mr Johnson said he didn t see the bell tower as a significant design element that had to be incorporated Regarding the setback requirement Mr Hamer said that issue was something of a surprise and it is still being discussed as to whether to request a variance or eliminate one bay of the addition Mr Tomten noted there are a number of unknowns and moved to table action until the August meeting so the applicant can incorporate staff comments It was suggested for the August meeting the applicant show more design details for the north elevation and include the west elevation of the existing building Mr Johnson also suggested the applicant submit a lighting plan information regarding the dumpster location and materials landscaping plan and locations/screening of mechanicals Mr Eastwood seconded the motion to table motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-27 Design review of proposed replacement sign for the Church of St Michael at 611 S Third St Present were Kris Rumpsa Knss Design Company LLC and Chris Makowske St Michael s director of administration Ms Rumpsa and Mr Makowske reviewed plans and location of the requested signage The sign would have steel framing and be lighted from the top or bottom the framing would be painted to match the church building Mr Johnson asked if the existing monument sign would remain Mr Makowske said both the monument sign and the existing school sign would remain Mr Eastwood asked if the applicant was aware of the staff recommendation that the electrical conduit be hidden from direct view Mr Makowske explained several possibilities for meeting that condition Mr Harycki asked if the signage might impact pedestrian traffic Mr Makowske said pedestrians would not be affected as the wall overhang and stairway at the location extend out an additional 2 beyond where the sign will be mounted 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission July 5 2006 Mr Eastwood seconded by Mr Tomten moved approval as conditioned with lighting for the sign to be from the top or bottom and staff to approve the location of the conduit Mr Tomten suggested the possibility of eliminating the graphic and perhaps even the church name to enable larger/more readable text denoting service times Mr Johnson also made a suggestion to improve readability Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-28 Design review of proposed signage for Stella s at 216 S Main St Chen Benson owner was present Mr Johnson pointed out that only one sign per business is allowed either the wall sign as being requested or the existing projecting sign Mr Johnson pointed out that generic verbiage or symbols would be allowed but not the business name It was confirmed the proposed signage will not be lighted Mr Tomten seconded by Mr Eastwood moved approval as conditioned with the additional condition that the business name Stella be permitted in the top sign band contingent on the removal of the business name from the projecting sign Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-29 This case was withdrawn Case No DR/06-30 Design review of proposed signage for Stone s Restaurant at 324 S Main St Present were owner Michael Stone and Dan Kaufman, Kaufman Signs Mr Kaufman reviewed the proposed signage which features 3 aluminum channel lettering with exposed neon The signage cabinet would be about 18 deep The proposed signage is basically the same square footage as the existing Grand Garage sign which would be removed if the new signage is allowed he said Members were sympathetic tp the difficulty presented by the location of the restaurant off Main Street However Mr Johnson suggested if this proposed signage was on the Second Street elevation the situation might be different and said if it difficult to allow the proposed signage in view of the design guidelines in place for Main Street Mr Zahren suggested the key to the restaurant s success is Main Street signage and said he liked the proposed design Mr Nelson also said he thought the proposed signage was within reasonable taste and spoke of the importance of calling people to a place of business Mr Tomten noted that internally illuminated signage is not recommended in the Historic Downtown District and said his first impression of the sign was that of an early 60s Holiday Inn sign Mr Tomten also suggested that the applicant provide a more accurate representation of the scale of the sign Mr Kaufman stated he thought the use of neon was vital to the Stone s location Mr Zahren asked what would happen to the signage without the neon Mr Kaufman asked if it would be possible to internally illuminate the sign Mr Johnson stated that is not allowed but halo reverse channel lettering would be allowed Mr Johnson noted that while projecting signage is limited to 6 square feet according to ordinance the existing Grand Garage sign is 40 square feet and he pointed out that the Coupe de Grille had signage in that space He suggested that the applicant work within the square footage of the existing sign and consider the use of channel lit lettering Mr Johnson also pointed out that the proposed starburst on top of the sign as proposed is three-dimensional and therefore not allowed 3 e City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission July 5 2006 Mr Eastwood pointed out the signage will require a variance and that the HPC can t grant variances that is a function of the Planning Commission/Council Mr Stone asked about the length of time involved in the variance process Mr Stone was advised that it might be mid - August before a variance could be granted it was noted that in the interim temporary signage is permitted for a period of at least 30 days Mr Johnson asked about signage on the other elevations It was noted that the signage over the main entrance has already been approved Mr Eastwood seconded by Mr Tomten moved to table the request with the applicant advised to work within the existing 40 square feet and return to the HPC with more complete drawings more accurate representation of colors and scale Motion to table passed unanimously Case No DR/06-19 Design review of revised proposal for 227 N Main St Vern Stefan was present representing Mainstream Development It was noted the revised proposal reduces the height so the building is within the height regulations and no variance is required Mr Johnson said he felt the project was headed in the right direction and spoke to the architectural elements that have been carried through Mr Tomten asked if the HVAC units would be placed on the Water Street elevation and asked if it might be possible to place the units behind the stairs Mr Stefan said that would be considered as long as the units can be serviced adequately Mr Turnblad noted the applicant had been asked to provide a view of the project from Pioneer Park and Mulberry Street Mr Stefan noted that is costly and said those will be provided if concept approval is granted Mr Johnson seconded by Mr Eastwood moved to grant concept approval of the design as conditioned eliminating condition No 7 (demolition permit as that was granted earlier in the meeting) and changing the wording of condition No 5 to state no mechanical equipment shall be allowed on the rooftop unless screened Motion passed unanimously OTHER BUSINESS Demolition applicant form — Mr Turnblad referred to the proposed demolition permit application included in the packet The packet he said is an attempt to make the process more transparent and understandable There was a brief discussion about the proposed sample letter with Mr Tomten and Mr Johnson expressing a concern that future applicants may just parrot the sample verbiage including the language regarding the economic justification for a demolition Mr Turnblad suggested the requirement for economic justification could be expanded to include the requirement that a quote be obtained from someone in the restoration business Members said they liked the inclusion of the list of historians that might be used in researching a demolition application Status report on Northern Vineyards — Mr Turnblad reviewed the report and recommendations relating to the Northern Vineyards Winery He noted that the only way Northern Vineyards can address the dumpster issue is through a building -wide effort and asked that staff be directed to work with River Market and Northern Vineyards to resolve the matter Mr Johnson seconded by Mr Eastwood moved to amend the condition of approval with Northern Vineyards to allow the two pieces of stainless steel equipment to remain outside and to require enclosure of the 4 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission July 5 2006 dumpster when the River Market dumpsters are addressed or within one year whichever is sooner Motion passed unanimously Water Street Inn — Mr Johnson asked about the status of issues with the Water Street Inn — advertising on umbrellas and the portable bar facility Mr Pogge said he had not yet talked with Mr Dougherty Mr Zahren questioned getting into the issue of umbrella logos/verbiage noting that most businesses in town utilize the vendor -provided umbrellas Mr Empson s recommendations — Mr Johnson asked about the possibility of the City designating an historic preservation officer Mr Harycki said he would like the Council to take up the issue of demolition by neglect Mr Eastwood said he thought walls should be included in the historic site program and asked about the possibility of pursuing grants to accomplish some of the recommendations Mr Johnson moved to direct staff to pursue implementing the Heirloom and Landmark House designations and getting the information on the City s web page Mr Turnblad suggested that staff develop a proposal for implementing the programs and bring that proposal back to the HPC prior to making an official presentation/request for approval to proceed to the City Council Members agreed with that plan of action Mr Eastwood seconded by Mr Zahren, moved to adjourn at 10 45 p m Respectfully submitted Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5 S II BIRTH A OF M I N N F S O 1 A DATE August 3, 2006 APPLICANT Jeanne M Anderson REQUEST Demolition Permit LOCATION 307 E Willow Street HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE August 7, 2006 PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director-, CASE NO 06-05 DEM BACKGROUND Jeanne Anderson owns the property at 307 E Willow Street In addition to the house, her property has a shed that is over 50 years old As can be seen in the attached photographs, the shed is in a rather advanced state of disrepair Therefore, the applicant would like to demolish the shed Since the building is over 50 years old, it is considered to have potential historic significance Consequently, the Heritage Preservation Commission is required to review the demolition request SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a permit to demolish the shed EVALUATION OF REQUEST Chapter 34, Section 34-4 of the City Code states that "if buildings or structures are deterrruned by the community development director to be historic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the [heritage preservation] commission for review Buildings or structures determined nonhistoric must be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit " A "nonhistoric structure or building" is defined by Chapter 34, Section 34-2 as a structure or building less than 50 years old Since the applicant acknowledges that the shed is over 50 years old, it is of potential historic significance and requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission Anderson Demolition Permit Page 2 Section 34-5 of the City Code lists rune items which must be considered prior to approval of a demolition permit by the Commission (1) A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighborhood properties, This information is included in the attached application (2) A legal description of property and owner of record, This information is included in the attached application (3) Photographs of all building elevations, This information is included in the attached application (4) A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished, This information is included in the application As mentioned, the structure is a shed The dimensions are about 10 feet by about 12 feet Though the shed is relatively small, and of relatively minor monetary value, potential historic value of the outbuilding shouldn't be minimized Much attention is given to preserving and restoring 19thh Century homes and businesses in Stillwater, as in other cities But, less effort is made to preserve the outbuildings from the same era Consequently, the outbuildings survive less often and are rarer than principle structures from the same era (5) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition, The applicant notes that the shed does not have a continuous foundation and footing Some of the wood structural members rest directly on the ground Consequently, considerable weathering and rotting has occurred near ground level Also, the partial foundation would have to be removed and replaced to support a restored shed Since the building is so small, and so much structural repair would be necessary, the applicant claims the cost is prohibitive relative to the value of the shed Intuitively this makes sense However, in an attempt to objectively determine the cost of restoration, staff recommends that a restoration contractor should be requested by the applicant to submit a cost estimate for the necessary restoration With an objective cost figure, the Heritage Preservation Commission would be better able to decide whether an attempt should be made to save the potentially historic outbuilding (6) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located, From the application materials, it appears that the location of the demolished shed would be used for open yard area (7) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements, This yard would continue to be used residentially, which is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance (8) A description of alternatives to the demolition, The applicant states simply that there is no alternative to demolition, since the cost of restoration would be so high However, the actual cost is not mentioned Anderson Demolition Permit Page 3 (9) Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible It is assumed that no one would want to move the shed and restore it However, no evidence has been submitted that the shed was offered for reuse on someone else's property ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options 1 Approve the demolition permit as requested 2 Deny the demolition permit if the level of detail submitted by the applicant is not sufficient for the Commission to make a decision 3 Table the request for more details RECOMMENDATION Staff agrees that the cost of the shed restoration compared with the cost of construction a new 10 foot by 12 foot shed is relatively high However, in an attempt to preserve the connection with the past that outbuildings offer, staff would at least recommend requiring a restoration contractor's estimate for repairs before a decision is made Therefore, staff recommends the third alternative cc Jeanne Anderson attachment Application July 21, 2006 City of Stillwater Hentage Preservation Commission 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Re 307 East Willow Street — shed Dear Commission Members Attached is a Demolition Request for a shed on the property located at 307 East Willow Street The followmg information is attached m compliance with Ordinance No 814 dated December 5, 1995 Based on the definitions m Subdivision 2, the shed for which a demolition permit is being sought is of Potential Histonc Significance smce it is more than 50 years old, as is obvious from its appearance, though the exact date is unknown It is not Histoncally Significant since it is not "any building or structure or portion of a building or structure on the National Histonc Register, a designated local landmark or a contributing structure or building m a designated national register histonc district " Since the structure is of Potential Histonc Sigmficance the procedure of Subdivision 5 applies Accordingly, the followmg information is attached 1) A map which shows the location of the shed to be demolished, 2) The legal description is attached as Exhibit A, 3) Photographs and a descnption of the poor condition of the shed is attached, 4) The structure cannot be economically restored due to the severe foundation problems as descnbed and depicted on the attached photograph and description brochure, 5) No plans have been made for reuse, 6) Given the condition of the structure and cost of renovation, there is no alternative to demolition Yours ly, cl‘k-,-""\---- ,,,-); Jea� jM Anderson 1000 ycamore Street West t ater, MN 55082 enclosures Heritage Preservation Commission Demolition Permit No Demolition Request Permit Fee $100* Address of Project 307 East willow Street Parcel No R 21 030 20 13 00110 Lot Block Subdivision SEE ATTACHED EHXIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION Applicant Jeanne M Anderson Address 1000 Sycamore St, West Telephone No 651-439-8093 Owner if different than Applicant Address Type of Structure shed Telephone No Age of Structure unknown Condition of Structure poor Intended Use of Site after Demolition none igature of Applicant / Aign • ure of Owner 7/21/06 Date 7/21/06 Date *After review and approval of the demolition permit request with the Heritage Preservation Commission a building permit must be obtained with the City of Stillwater Building Department The fee for the building permit is based on the valuation of the demolition project s Office Use Only HPC Review Date 0 Approved City Planner/Community Development Director 0 Denied Date 1 Exhibit "A" Legal Description Real property in Washington County, Minnesota, descnbed as follows Parcel 1 The Middle one-third of Lot 6, Block 42, CARLI and SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION to Still« ater, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, descnbed as follows Commencing at a point in the North line of said Lot 6, 50 feet East from the Northwest corner of said Lot thence East along the North line of said Lot 50 feet, thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot to the South line thereof, thence West on the South line thereof 50 feet, thence North to the place of beginning Parcel 2 The West 100 feet of the North Half of Lot 5, Block 42, CARLI and SCHULENBERG'S ADDITION to Stillwater Washington County, Minnesota, except the West 50 feet thereof Property Address 307 East Willow Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 Property ID# 21-030-20-13-0010 AND 21-030-20-13-0086 ENTERED IN TRANSFER RECORD W1 HIINGAON `UNNTTY,, S NNNESOTA MOLLY OURKE, AUDITOR -TREASURER BY / /,f/yyLJ 2/ e'3 X /3 oo/O, UO '1rc DEPUTY "A,Y7- W/zC 6 Ge/ i 1 1 Rouse' 3o 7 C W/aa oar bititiorvc y G / // 1 l7�n DrE 7 V /////-- Tlus structure has no foundation and is entirely rotted along the entire bottom area The roof is m very poor condition There is nothing m the mtenor worth keepmg The structure leans greatly to the north and west There is no value of any kind m the structure, and it is m such state of decay that it is not fit for use It has no redeemmg architectural features This structure should be razed as soon as approval is obtained Foundation/Sill Beam completely rotten Foundation/sill at corner Foundation by front door Buildmg leans greatly to the west & north Building leans greatly to the west & north Rubble foundation and rotten sill South foundation tilts greatly to south Leamng to north There is no coherent foundation for this structure Rubble foundation, rotten sill Intenor has no value Intenor West foundation completely rotted Tf. - • - 1:4 • A..4-:7• - SW corner and south foundation completely rotted North foundation completely rotted West side Tilt to west and north This structure has no foundation fl - Rubble foundation North & west side No foundation Rubble foundation NE corner Rotted sill on rubble foundation I E BIRTHP ACL 0 MINNESOIA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 3, 2006 APPLICANT Jesse Hamer of Tushie Montgomery PROPERTY Valley Ridge Shopping Center REQUEST Design Review for an Addition LOCATION 1250 Frontage Road West HPC REVIEW DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Interim Public Works Director, Community Development Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner// CASE NO DR/06-26 BACKGROUND The owners of the Valley Ridge Shopping Center would like to now construct a 6,900 square foot addition onto the west end of their facility Their original request presented to the comnussion on July 5, 2006 was for a 9,100 square foot addition The change was made in order to meet the required 40 foot setback from Northwestern Avenue and to provide a drive-thru between the existing building and the new building The design also provides for continuous band and roof over the drive through area in order provide a consistent look to the building and to allow for a future bay to be built within the drive-thru space if the drive-thru function would be cease in the future About half of the space will likely be used for general retail tenants and the other half for restaurant space Since the subject property lies within the West Stillwater Business Park, a Design Review Permit is required prior to issuing a building permit The Heritage Preservation Commission is charged with the responsibility of reviewing and approving or denying the Design Review Permit Valley Ridge Shopping Center August 3, 2006 Page 2 of 5 JULY 5, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Planning Commission reviewed this item at their July 5, 2006 meeting At that meeting the Comrrussion tabled the item so the applicant could show more design details for the north elevation and include the west elevation of the existing building It was also suggested the applicant submit a lighting plan, information regarding the dumpster location and materials, landscaping plan and locations/screening of mecharucals Since that meeting the applicant has revised their plans to meet the required 40 foot setback from Northwestern Avenue Additionally the applicant has provided revised elevations for the north and west elevations as requested by the Commission The applicant has yet to provide a lighting plan, information regarding the dumpster location and materials, landscaping plan and locations/screening of mecharucals EVALUATION OF REQUEST As noted above, the property is located within the West Stillwater Business Park Consequently, the design standards found in the West Stillwater Business Park Plan apply to the project The site design standards found in the City Code for properties in the BP-C, Zoning District also apply I West Business Park Plan A Architectural Standards a Page 20, Paragraph 1 specifies permitted exterior building materials i The proposed materials are permitted b Page 20, Paragraph 2 states that roof or ground mounted mechanical equipment as well as trash storage areas must be completely enclosed with building materials compatible with the principal structure Low profile self contained mechanical units which blend in with the building design can be located to the rear or side of the building i The addition is not shown to have outside garbage storage It is assumed that the tenants of the new space would use the existing dumpster area on the north side of the shopping center If this assumption is not correct, any proposed outside garbage storage would have to be enclosed The location and materials of the enclosure could be approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the HPC desires, it could be brought back for review and approval ii The applicant has not specified where the addition's mechanical units will be located or how they will be screened This information will need to be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit If it is Valley Ridge Shopping Center August 3, 2006 Page 3 of 5 acceptable to the HPC, the location and screening of the equipment could be approved by the Community Development Director Or if the commission desires, it could be brought back for review and approval c Page 20, Paragraph 3 specifies that "architectural consistency on all sides of the building is required in terms colors, materials and details " i Valley Ridge Shopping Center is an eclectic mix of building materials, colors and architectural elements There are however a few commonalities throughout, which should probably be carried through to the proposed addition as well 1 The bell -tower -like vertical articulation found across the facade of the shopping center could be included in the proposed addition The Commission discussed this at their last meeting and felt that it would not be necessary to continue this element in the addition 2 The extra parapet height is inconsistent with the rest of the building However, this may be acceptable given the eclectic feel of the building as a whole Also, it would not exceed the height of the main entrance gable The back of the parapet will be visible from Northwestern Avenue and should be a color similar to that of the back of the building ii The applicant has added detailing to the north elevation and will provide a better view on Northwestern Avenue then what was previously proposed B Landscaping Standards a This section of the business park plan relates to landscaping requirements Paragraph 1 clearly refers to "new development" Since the project is only an addition, the paragraph does not apply b It is arguable that the entire landscaping standards section is intended for "new development" and should not apply to the proposed project However, some augmentation of the property's existing landscaping is recommended There are well established trees along the north property line and a few along Northwestern Avenue There are also perennial flower beds in some of the setback areas But the landscape plan could be improved with additional plantings II BP-C Zoning District Standards A Massing and Dimensional Standards a The proposed building height is less than the maximum allowed 40 feet b The setback from both the frontage road and Northwestern Avenue is 40 feet and the revised site plan meets this requirement c Only 60% of the property is allowed to be impervious surface The current site improvements exceed 60%, though the project is grandfathered The proposed improvements will not increase the amount of impervious surface Valley Ridge Shopping Center August 3, 2006 Page 4 of 5 d Front and side yard setback areas must be landscaped Since the property is already developed, the building addition would not necessarily trigger the need to relandscape all of the yard areas However, it would be nice to augment the landscaping Detailed landscaping plans with plant types and quantities should be submitted for review B Miscellaneous a Parking - The center together with the proposed new space will need 529 parking spaces The number of spaces available, including a new 21 space indoor garage, will meet the 529 space requirement b Lighting - An exterior lighting plan for the addition has not been submitted If it is acceptable to the HPC, the location and fixture details could be approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the commission desires, it could be brought back for review and approval c Szgnage- The applicant currently is working with staff to review signage for both the existing building and the proposed addition If it is acceptable to the HPC, staff would suggest that the Commission require that a new sign plan be submitted for the entire complex, both the existing and new buildings, prior to the final inspection and occupancy for the new addition ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservahon Commission has the following options A Approve the Design Review with the following conditions 1 The project construction shall be in compliance with the plan set dated August 3, 2006, which is on file in the Community Development Department 2 All minor modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by the Commuruty Development Director All major modifications shall be approved m advance by the HPC Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor" shall rest with the City Administrator 3 Any proposed outside garbage storage shall be enclosed If it is acceptable to the HPC, the location and screening of the equipment shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the commission desires, it could be brought back for review and approval 4 Any exterior mechanical units shall meet the design standards found in the West Stillwater Business Park Plan If it is acceptable to the HPC, the location and screening of the equipment shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the comrrussion desires, it could be brought back for review and approval Valley Ridge Shopping Center August 3, 2006 Page 5 of 5 5 The back of the parapet will be visible from Northwestern Avenue shall be a color that will match the back of the building Final colors shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit 6 An exterior lighting plan for the addition shall been submitted If it is acceptable to the HPC, the location and planting materials shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the comrrussion desires, it could be brought back for review and approval 7 A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted If it is acceptable to the HPC, the location and fixture types shall be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit Or if the commission desires, it could be brought back for review and approval 8 All landscaping shall be installed prior to final project inspection 9 A new sign plan shall be submitted to the HPC for review and action prior to final inspection and occupancy of the building addition The sign plan shall cover the entire complex, including both the existing and new buildings 10 That the applicant obtain a special use permit for the drive-thru from the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit B Deny the Design Review A denial needs to be accompanied by substantive findings of fact C Table the Design Review for more details on the north elevation RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the addition with the conditions listed in Alternative A cc Kriss Novak attachments Preliminary Building Plans and Site Plan a 6, II I I 11 11 I I 11 11 I I I I II 11 I I 11 O m 1 rs I 0 I9 40 BUILDING SETBACK IXISTING BUILDING 1 _/ 1 1' I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I _I -tI 1 1 _1 -1 1• Valley Ridge Parking Calculation Summary July 20 2006 _ SF Parking per Parking Tenant Suite Sq Ft Use/Comments per 1000 1 000 s f Calculation Acapulco Restaurant 1140 8 460 Restaurant 100 10 0 85 Creative Art Supply 1150 1 340 Framing Shop '00 5 0 1/ Aerial Beauty Supply 1'160 '1 385 Beauty Supply /00 5 0 1'1 Huntington Learning Center 1'161 / 385 Assumes retail '100 5 0 I / Anytime Fitness 1/70 4 499 Fitness Center 100 10 0 45 Future Retail 1'170 4 499 Assumes retail '00 5 0 '1'1 St Croix Vision 1180 ' 141 Optical sales and service '00 5 0 I I The Golf Shoppe 1 190 1 440 Golf equipment sales and sers ice 100 5 0 7 PC Net ork Services 1300 1 440 changes to retail 200 5 0 7 x Stills ater L brary 1305 3 '100 shrinks to 3 200 Sf Retail 200 5 0 16 HBRBlock 1 10 1440 Tax return office 300 5 D amonds on Main 1316 1 440 changes to retail 200 5 0 7 The Bead Alley 13'10 1 440 Retail sales of beads and yarn '100 5 0 7 Charlottes Quilting 1 30 1 440 Quilting retailer '100 5 0 7 Euro Nails 1340 / 160 Nail salon '100 5 0 I I Spikes Shoe Repair 1350 700 Shoe and leather repair '100 5 0 4 x Ad anced Renovat ons 1360 1 357 changes to retail 200 5 0 12 H ashington Conservat on D str ct 1380 1 914 General office 300 3 3 10 x Charlottes Quilting Web 1390 1775 changes to office 300 3 3 6 Fresh Field Bakery 1400 4 716 Restaurant 110 8 3 39 Karate Club 1440 � 94, Martial arts studio 100 5 0 15 Stillwater Sports Barber 1450 490 Barber 5 3 0 15 3 stalls per chair Shorty Cleaners 1460 490 Dry cleaners drop off /00 5 0 St Croix Valley Cable 1465 3 969 General office 300 3 3 13 Asian Buffet 1490 5 774 Restaurant 100 10 0 58 A actable 1300 3 018 Retail '100 5 0 15 Washington County Licensing 1310 3 517 General office 300 3 3 1'1 Dr Spore Wellness 8 Longevity Center 1530 8'15 Chiropractor '100 5 0 4 Available 1560 '1451 General office 300 3 3 8 x Stills ater Library x Sulhsater Library Leasable Building Area 1305 6 611 con erted into garage 0 0 0 0 1305 6 61 1 converted into garage 0 0 0 0 76 658 478 83 '169 Adjustments for Required Add Additional Retail Requirement '1 580 Retail '100 5 0 13 Add Additional Restaurant Requirement 4 500 Restaurant 110 8 3 38 Total Required 83738 529 Total Provided Post Reno anon / Loss of Parking Per Alternative #5 Revised Parking Provided 83 738 541 6 46 1.51 536 Surplus/(Shortfall) Stalls to Date 7 per Tushie/Montgomery plans dated June 19 2006 sheet L1 0 plus two stalls from SEC missed (14 v 12) Alternative #5 loses 5 stalls compared to the prior site submittal on June 19th P k a C 1 labor VR 072006 XLS 7/202006 TRITE NORTH INVESTMENTS NORTH WESTERN VALLEY RIDGE RETAIL EXISTING BUILDING T Us H I E MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS STILLWATER, MN AUGUST 3 2006 FABRICS MANUFACTURED- TS BEAM: PAINT - CANOPI• STONE PIERTANDING SEAM PETAL - CANOPY OSOUTN ELEVATION SCALE i/B' - I'-O" ONORTN ELEVATION SCALE I/B' E-C' DUE NORTH RDCKFACE CMU (CM a) • -'iEn OVER..EAD =R. PANT P -HALL MOLNTED LIGI.T 1 Kr-0'AFV, TTFICAL SIGNAGE EIFS CORNICE -COLORED EIFS HANDS (EIFS .7) SIGNAGE PRECAS BRICK PIER PRECAST 'SILL -ROCKFACF PER BASE (CT1U .I ) EXISTING EFS CA.DRED EiF.S BANDS / - NEW FABRIC CANS I/ / I (E,FS 4) / /1 —ALUMINUM STOREFRONT. TYPICAL PRECAST FILL -MANUFACTURED STORE PIER WALL MDWTED LIGHT 1 IO'-O' A.F.F., TTPCAL ()NEST ELEVATION SCALE IIE . P-O' MATCH EXISTBIG SIGNAGE E ALUMNUM DOCK, TTPCAL MATCH EXISTING FABRIC CANOPY EPS - ROCKFACE CPU (MI .7) SWALE SCORE, euRNISHfD HALF P1MU GII C(CMU .3) RCCKFACE at) (CM .;) •_ EIFS ,-ROCKFACF CrEJ (CMU IQ) INVESTMENTS VALLEY RIDGE RETAIL STILLWATER, MN MANLTACTURLD STORE PIER ACT W PRECAST CAP -A'EN ALUMINIAI STOREFRONT EXISTING BU!LD �G NT EXISTING RODE TRUSS SPACE ()EAS()EAST ELEVATION — DRIVE TNRU T ve' - r-o• / FLASIIRC _.. .._.._ �EIFS CORNICE ,!..rC0.0RED EIFS BANDS J NUM 5 TYPICAL -BRICK PIER PRECAST SILL \-RCCKFACE PIER BASE (CPU. I) AUGUST 3 2006 T U S H 1 E MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS rl{l L \I IRTI I-4 I M E.,TMLNTL WESTERN z 0 z 1 0 ID ti 0 NEW ADDITION EXISTING BUILDING OSITF6 PLAN 5D I/I Valley Ridge Retail SFILF YiiY TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 8/3/06 NEW 1...IIXISTING EIFS FABRIC— MANUFACTURED— TS BEAM PAINT CANOPY STONE PIER STAKING SEAM METAL CANOPY OSOUTN ELEVATION SCALE I/8 I 0 PREFINISNED METAL CAP WALL MOUNTED LIGHT P Id-0• A F F TYPICAL PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING p/— EIFS CORNICE COLORED EIFS BANDS (EIFS >t4) ./— BRICK PIER PRECAST SILL ROOCFACE PIER BASE (CMU 1) PREFINISHED METAL 7FLASHING COLORED EIFS BANDS / (EIFS •Y) ALUMINUM STOREFRONT TYPICAL FABRIC CANOPY PRF/AST SILL MANUFACTURED STONE PIER DRIVE TIAU ONORTN ELEVATION 2 YelF I/B 0 11— r u)tm ezi4 ,1C sT1 ROCJCFACE C1U (01U 01) ONEST ELEVATION SCALE I/8 I 0 WALL MOUNTED LIGHT P 10 -O A F F TYPICAL NEW BRICK TO MATCH EXISTING NEW OVERHEAD D. PAINT EIFS ROOCFACE CM'gl (CMU a'1) SINGLE SCORE BURNISHED HALF HIGH CMU tCMU I13) ROCKFACE CMU (CV Al) EXISTING NEW ALUMINUM DOOR TYPICAL EIPS ROCKFACE 01J (01.1 51) � ..� l==11=I =MIME •••s=1=4 •M••• NEW BRICK TO MATCH EXISTING FABRIC CANOPY SINGLE SCORE BURNISHED HALF NIGH CP ?CFI- 53) ROCKFACE CMU (01U RI) Valley Ridge Retail MANUFACTURED STONE PIER IXISTING EIFS NEW FABRIC CANOPY NEW MANUFACTURED STONE PIER W/ PRECAST CAP NEW ALUMINUM STOREFRONT IX15TING BUILDING FACADE PA NT IXISTING DOORS ROOF TRUSS SPACE E5F5 ROCKFACE CM'91 (CPU I) OEAST ELEVATION — DRIVE TI—IRU SCALE I/8 1 0 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT TYPICAL NEW IXISTING PREFINISHED METAL z.......„,,,-- FLASHING EIFS CORNICE LOLORED EIFS BANDS PRFI AST CAP ERICK PIER PRF/AST SILL ROCKFACE PIER BASE (U1U 5I) MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 8/3/06 Y N E BIRTH LA k 0 M NNI 0 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 3, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-30 APPLICANT Michael Stone REQUEST Design Review of proposed signage for Stone's Restaurant and Lounge LOCATION 324 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner j�„(1/% DISCUSSION After meeting with the Commission on July 5, 2006 to discuss the one projection sign along Main Street the applicant has submitted additional material on the sign In addition to the projection sign along Main Street the applicant is now asking for a projection sign along Nelson Alley and a canopy sign along Nelson Street The applicant has also submitted information on their existing sign on the rear of the building facing Second Street that was previously approved by the Commission Wall sign facing Second Street The wall sign along the west elevation of the building contains the business name "Stone's" in gold letters with a red boarder In addition the words "Restaurant & Lounge" in black letters is located directly below the name Stone's The sign dimensions are 4'5" x 20'6" for a total sign area of 92 25 square feet The Commission required that the sign not be lit For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states building signs in the CBD ' may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face ' The applicant's building is 99 92 feet long facing Third 216 Main St S Page 2 St S The total sign area of the proposed sign is 92 25 square feet and meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance Canopy sign facing Nelson Street The proposed canopy sign is along the south elevation along Nelson Street The request is to add the business name "Stone's" in gold letters with a black boarder In addition the words "Restaurant & Lounge" in black letters will be located directly below the name Stone's No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application For canopy signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states 'the gross surface of an awning or canopy sign may not exceed 50 percent of the gross surface area of the smallest face of the awning or canopy to which the sign is affixed' The applicant's proposed sign meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance Projection sign facing Main Street The first proposed projection sign is on the east elevation along Main Street The proposed sign will replace the existing Grand Garage sign Staff has been unable to determine the exact date the existing grand garage sign was install Historically the sign has been used by a number of different tenants including the Coupe deGrille in 1997 and now is being used to advertise the Grand Garage building The sign face is 60" by 84 75" with a dimension of 62" x 92" to the outer edge of the sign The proposed new sign is 62" x 92" in size The sign will be an aluminum cabinet painted to a dark brown The backgrounds will also be painted to a dark brown The word Stone's will be non -painted copper letters Backlit channel boarders and lettering will be used White vinyl strips will be placed along the S of Stone's The channel boarder and the word "Stone's" will be backlit with red leds The words "Restaurant & Lounge" will be backlit with white leds The words cocktails, seafood, and chops will be non -lighted sintra letters painted a soft yellow Staff still has concerns with the proposed materials, shape, colors and lighting of the sign These issues should be considered by the Commission in context of the Downtown Commercial Historical District design manual guidelines prior to granting a design review permit For retail projection signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states projection signs in the CBD 'the total area of a projecting sign may not exceed six square feet The sign outer dimension of the sign is 5'2" x 8'8" for a total sign area of 39 6 square feet Since the existing sign is being removed any "grandfathering" of the sign will be lost and a variance will be required prior to the installation of the proposed sign The Commission could consider this issue in their decision to grant or deny the design review permit for this sign, however, ultimately this is an issue for the Planning Commission 216 Main St S Page 3 Additionally, City Code would not allow a sign for this business along Main Street In the past this sign and the Graystone Real Estate sign, located on the southeast corner of the building, has been used by a number of restaurant tenants of the building In the past the City has issued variances to these tenants to use the signs along Main Street Since this sign has not been used by a tenant of this space over the past year the applicant will need to secure a variance in order to have a sign along Main Street Projection sign facing Nelson Alley The second proposed projection sign is on the north elevation along Nelson Alley The proposed sign will replace the existing blank white sign The existing sign was originally approved and installed for LeBistro Cafe in 1983 The size of the sign at that time was 5 5 square feet and met the requirements of the zoning code for a projection sign At some point the sign was modified to be a circular 58 5" x 58 5" sign for a total area of 23 76 square feet Staff has been unable to determine the exact date the sign was changed or whether or not a variance was granted Staff would note that the LeBistro Cafe sign was restricted to the 5 5 square foot size as a condition of approval by the City Council and Planning Commission (note 1983 predate the existence of the HPC) The proposed projection sign on Nelson Alley is 3'11" x 5'8" in size for a total area of 2219 square feet in size The sign is proposed to be constructed out of the temporary sign face currently location on the Grand Garage sign along Main Street The sign appears to be an opaque plastic sign (Note Staff did not receive details on the sign from the applicant) The sign manufacture indicated to staff that the sign will be installed in a cabinet and will replace the existing round sign They intend to keep and reuse the existing metal supports connecting the sign to the building For retail projection signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states projection signs in the CBD 'the total area of a projecting sign may not exceed six square feet The proposed sign is 2219 square feet Since the existing sign is being removed any "grandfathering" of the sign will be lost and a variance will be required prior to the installation of the proposed sign The Commmssion could consider this issue in their decision to grant or deny the design review permit for this sign, however, ultimately this is an issue for the Planning Commission 216 Main St S Page 4 RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL Conditions for all Signs 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 All temporary signs related to Stone's are to be removed prior to the installation of any of the permanent signage 3 No additional signage Conditions for the Wall sign facing Second Street 4 No lighting on the sign Conditions for the Canopy sign facing Nelson Street 5 That the canopy shall not be lit by internal or external means Conditions for the Projection sign facing Main Street 6 The proposed sign shall be no larger than 62" x 92" in size 7 Receive approval of a variance from the Planning Commission to allow this business a projection sign along Main Street and allow the size of the projection sign exceed 6 square feet in size Conditions for the Projection sign facing Nelson Alley 8 That the sign shall not be internally ht 9 Receive approval of a variance from the Planning Commssion to allow this business a projection sign along Main Street and allow the size of the projection sign exceed 6 square feet in size FINDINGS The proposal, as conditioned, meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance attachments Applicant's Form Elevation Drawing showing sign and building 81-8" (92") 39.6 SQ. FT. 5i-2" 6" (62") Kaufman SIGN` COMPANY 2. 14'0 33rtl St. • AMINNEAPOJS, MINN:. 4541116 ►H. (612) 7Jff-682l', 'FAX (6121 7$i-6715 EMAIL KAUFSIGN/ASLC•M ■ NAME ■ ADDRESS; WHITE STRIPES (VINYL) ALUMINUM PAINTED DARK BROWN 3" DEEP PAINTED RED ALUMINUM BACKLIGHTED OUTSIDE CHANNEL BORDER EDGE LIGHTED FROM INSIDE THE BORDER WITH RED LED LIGHTS STONES 3" DEEP COPPER BACKLIGHTED "STONE" LETTERS - LIGHTED FROM INSIDE THE LETTERS WITH RED LED LIGHTS 3" DEEP PAINTED WHITE ALUMINUM BACKLIGHTED "RESTAURANT & LOUNGE° LETTERS - LIGHTED FROM INSIDE THE LETTERS WITH WHITE LED LIGHTS TRANSFORMERS FOR LIGHTING THE LED LIGHTS 1/2"THICKX3"TALL NON -LIGHTED SINTRA LETTERS PAINTED SOFT YELLOW D/FSIGN 3'� 1" 1" 11-0 31' III I!I =3" T 1'-3"5" T = 3" = 3" 9," 9" = 3" = 3" =3" 818" (92") 1/2° X 6" X 12° STEEL PLATE BOLTED TO THE EXISTING BUILDING WITH THE 1/2" BOLTS GOING INTO THE MORTER ON BUILDING 4° X 4" STEEL SQUARE TUBING SUPPORT BAR WILL BE CONTINUOUS WELDED TO THE 1/2° STEEL PLATE DATE CITY- ■ STATE ■ Stillwater MN EXISTING SIGN PROPOSED SIGN SIGN COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS.1MINI/ 66daS ru, (5!?) :u1-6021 F.:, (;r) 7a8-s13 26:AII. - K GNP513Np 7OL C1:d JOB ■ NAME ADDRESS: CITY- ■ STATE STONES DATE Stillwater MN Kaufman SIGN COMPANY 2714 E 33rd 5 MINNEAPOLIS, MINN ..1,„ PH. (5121 788-6828 FAX (612) 168-6715 EMAIL - KAUFSIGN@AOLCOM ADDRESS: STONES Stillwater, MN • SIGN COMPANY 2714 E 33rd St. MINNEAPOLIS, MINN 55406 PH (612) 788-6828 FAX (612) 788-6/16 EMAIL - KAUFSIGNCAOL COM JOB ■ NAME ■ ADDRESS CITY- ■ STATE ■ 5'-0" COCK TAILS SEAFOOD CHOPS STONES Stillwater, MN DATE: COCKTAILS SEAFOOD CHOPS a CERT/FPGA/1 yr avrTvc,. ry rt ASSET DEVELOPMEJ r SERV/CES tore,. T. [noon.•, I,1'me.n,. Orr ,.,rr.•I r...r.ytnr No. IT:1i, I..r,d.r certff le. to Croon Life 1 t;o•+pnnr, .n.1 TI11« moor....,. C..T.n.• of Ml,uoe•,N• *hot the f•ror•ls.• is • trwt end correct rrtr..ent•t free of tl.r An,n.J.rire told wars nl .I.' Iwl l•..Inr d..ecrfh,•J real e•tator That port of the folinw.nc J.-.rr 11•,-.1 trait: Ali ,hat port nt Lots A. v nod of •lesi TO of ll.o ,h'Irl..l Tn% (net tile) of 2t111wt•r •reorA1nr •,, 1hr plot of Ie.nrJ In she toiler of I l.r [tome 11 .kr, Y.al.lnfte. C..ett, Mlnne.•t• )tins wont of /L In St•rrt, •tot .of S.•eo,,.l oortl. of filetStrrel .• describe,/describe,/le "soh P •f nod •,.utl•wl tl.e loil.•ulnr J.•.crtl.ed Itne; ►.rinwl.t at • pint .. the t.•t Ilse nl .w id lot n W.Irh I. 1 . . „•••t •t•.tl• of ,he „ortl.a•t • f •old Lot !; Ihe•ee W..t •t • rtrl.t .nrlr lw tuft. Sl.or, pw. •«• 1.-:[ to Il.r ..ul 11.. .f Sot•osof Street and .014 lino there terselw.t.. u/.t,3 Ili• tw•lcr lr of w Ilwr i'••• •'O ..•r, N..trrl•- n1• s. ...wreJ et rtchi •rK1ro to see p.r.ticl With 1.r [sot I Ina of the .l..v.v .I....'•II..J t,'. L. and of ,he lutot 1.on of o.11 1.•.f t.iro. . n...1 other I.y.re.,:,I. .It•rl,-d IIM-rr..n; location •nJ nose •f •11 public .frrr,. or oils-:s in. nt.-J tin r.-'. or .•/,..rent Ihrrrt.: I.c•t let. din• srn•lo•nd teeordln% da atel •fi r.•.-'wmt• o! r.•.wd t:•. ,,-r., .• p.. III•• hr•..•,.re ....tool- •t illn•r•ot* cernitoonl far Title in•urn..,'••, Art-'l,nt 1.., l:n. .....••u; 7... w•1•w. nn.l •Itreco.l.,.. ., .11 Jost e•.,..rat• e1.161e thereon; )orwt Jon of npl.)Ir."1-1r 1.,.I1 II,, ...Anil Hove ....aloe 1 lv Incol .r•Ile•neea .•.. err.t•[IM; •nd Ine•t l.n of •11 a .• rocl.n••n,s •rota or It......•1.1 1.,o.1.. The .a..lrr.lrn..l I.rlh,•r ccrl 11 Sol llet lMsor • .e. v sods und,rhi. di rrct ..per='I'Ion an-1 ll.•I ih• Is. • hints•.,* •etl•terr. Sorer -sot. tie T �......•._.-y.� Doted: -iwl, un v 5, 14.3 •rvl.cd rrrt if lentlnn M..__,. It. ...n• !II,n...nla Ilrrf.•rr.d S,n.oe•r No. % v:1r-Lr'y oa, ./� �.�•/" Co' •„ loot t r a,• 2 `,NF Corny( of Lot 8 r99.90 _ 1Tf .- � �>" nING • 00 _ --`� n ei n.•11A1n;tcrrr • O` „rlt' .le\«tom g73 o • et tie ,«•i lino wlert , r«[rjej• ti f Tort' to �t,„• •p, '. r net^`� r .,a _ t i of 5s 111t•tr .�^ o. • elo el' r _ :_ ` J' 1 t�r.''a -et ^J I Sl `� t - 1 O s tva utt 1C� "1 • rtt IS-DA-- — � ••• r• —1 ' 1- r99. Denoree ••r.ror,- ee•.er •Merl' l enote• .owes se, JL ar oti Cory en 14. nr . D 0s,•.1.er a'errrsC secrete fe.tr.ece1 Dt0mer INrp•o.e •,roofe f.•wor, yrr.wa/f} $Wr rt/ Soso Ie/ DenettS yet seork. 1. dr Oar NSO •mot • Stillwai!i 1 F RIR 11 A 0 M NNFSOTA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 1, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-31 APPLICANT Leroy Signs, Inc /Jim Cota REQUEST Design Review of proposed signage for UBS LOCATION 270 Main St N COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner, 'p DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for wall signs at 270 Main St N in the Central Business District The request is to replace the two existing PiperJaffray signs with new signs on both the east and north elevations of the building The signs are proposed to contain the business name "UBS" in red letters with a gray background Additionally, UBS's "three key" logo will be on the sign in black The signs are 2'6" x 5'0" for a total sign area of 12 5 square feet No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states building signs in the CBD ' may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face ' The applicant's building is 62 feet long facing Main St N and 88 feet long facing Mulberry St The total sign area of the proposed sign is 12 5 square feet and meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned • a 270 Main St N Page 2 CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The sign shall not be lit 3 No additional signage FINDINGS The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance attachments Applicant's Form Elevation Drawing showing sign Photo of existing building with existing and new signs 97/12/2006 13 29 FAX 6512750617 TECHBARN COM Z 002 n �� .v JJ. "'-• NU 4b Case No: Date Filed: Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is 'responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i.e. photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following Information is =mail PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 2 70 J Assessor's Parcel No Zoning Districl.Vvis 1Sescnption of Project in detail rRe pia c e st ". , e - f 17 hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith In all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify l will comply with the permit if it is granted and use 4 If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is rearmed , Property Owner A VCCtI k've ofRepresentative Co-L C era c R .t Mailing Address2 1'-44 N Mailing Address b 32S Lde let, tub- Aye City State Zip 'T) U /M1) sq y Zip Scoot (7 & Par�C, a S'Sy25 Telephone No (Q5J 1- 2- 3 (1' Z Telephone No :74 3 v 5 3 5- OO&p Signatures �agnatur�d- C \DOCUMCN1-6 AND SET TINGsWWARDW[9KTOMAIGN REVIEW PERMIT WPD February 5 2003 PiperJaffray EXISTING PAN SIGN TO BE REMOVED - MIIIINIIMAIIMIMMININ MN - IMMUNE mum mat MMMMMMM 01011110. mol I SM NM! MINIINIM awl • ipi Jan -61111111M IBM UBS SIN 111111Ladan IIIIMINIS Una III . NMI - - NMI MN IMO eMO nal - i--s MEI !MIMEO INIMINEMINNI - --INIMIIIIIMINE - MIS NEM ▪ -• -- - n o PROPOSED NEW LAYOUT G N M 2, 6„ 1' 6" 5' 0" $UBS INSTALLATION OF ONE 2'6"x5' ALUMINUM PAN SIGNS PAN TO BE NON -LIT WITH INDIVIDUAL LETTERS & LOGO • SALESMAN: SCALE: )11f ON. J I M COTA 3/4" =1 ' MINNEAP06325 WELC11SME, MN 55429AVE, FILE: LOCATION: I76350080 UBS-STLWTR1.CDR STILLWATER, MN EXISTING PAN SIGN TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED NEW LAYOUT r s" r s" 5' 0" INSTALLATION OF ONE 2'6"x5' ALUMINUM PAN SIGNS PAN TO BE NON -LIT WITH INDIVIDUAL LETTERS & LOGO (763)535-0080 FILE:SALEMNJIM COTA LOCATION: SCALE: 325 3/4"=4MINNEA?OUS, MN 55429 WELCOME AVE. N. SIGNs UBS-STLWTR2,CDR STILLWATER, MN UBS 270 North Main Street Stillwater, MN 55082 EXISTING PAN SIGN TO BE REMOVED SIGNSt‘R° SALESMAN: SCALE: 6325 WELCOME AVE. N. J I M COTA MINNEAPOLIS,MN55429 FILE: LOCATION: (763)535-0080 UBS-STLWTR3.CDR STILLWATER, MN 1 HE B I B T H P I A r E OF MINNF 0 I A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 1, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-32 APPLICANT Ultima Belleza/Mary Coleman REQUEST Design Review of proposed signage for Ultima Belleza LOCATION 150 3rd St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner /ij1p DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for a wall sign at 150 3rd St S in the Central Business District The request is for a new sign on the east elevation of the building The sign is proposed to contain the business name "Ultima Belleza" in gold letters with a black background and gold boarder The sign is oval in shape with an outer dimension of 3'8" x 2'6" for a total sign area of 8 3 square feet No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states building signs in the CBD ' may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face ' The applicant's building is 28 feet long facing Third St S The total sign area of the proposed sign is 8 3 square feet and meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned 9 150 3rd St S Page 2 CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The sign shall not be lit 3 No additional signage FINDINGS The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance attachments Applicant's Form Elevation Drawing showing sign Photo of existing building with location of new sign DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM Case No / C(D`" Date Filed Receipt No Fee: $25.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required, Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project /56 S 1(d St' Assessor's Parcel No 2 ' oSeaw '907 0087 n (Required) Zoning District C I/ Description of Project in detail 13/d9 S/ --PoY gu sS's r3lttcr% 1 Goc-D /`iv Cc) / o "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my know/edge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is required Property Owner Mailing Address O 3v� City State Zip \VW4kQY' Telephone No 1 111YA Signature /, Yl RepresentativeA0 ( fim,a .119) Mailing Address ISO City State Zip 'fti1 u - J4 (AAA-- P-, p (057 `t3' q 0 Z �' Telephone No SignatureceeNNit /,, ( equired) H \mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit wpd February 5 2003 FASTSIGNS Proof Page 1 of 2 �n`L Grophlc Solutions Mode Slrnple FASTSIGNS® 1396 Mendota Rd E Inver Grove Heights MN 55077 Tel (651)455-4559 Fax (651)450 1747 [-Media This FASTSIGNS ® Store is E Media Fnendlyi I,1 Adobes Solutions Network Adobe Solutions Network Service Provider Z CORED' Corel Authonzed Service Bureau Proof Display Please Approve or Decline Proof Invoice/Estimate Number 13080 Approve Approve with Changes Decline (Please provide reasons for declined proof) Our Proof and Production Policy At FASTSIGNS® we take pride in precision but the final examination for accuracy is your responsibility Before giving approval please examine all proofs carefully for the accuracy of information presented as well as spelling punctuation numbers graphics colors and general layout In the event that we have miscommunicated regarding your original design we will be happy to provide a second proof free of charge if needed Thereafter any further proofs will be billed at $10 00 minimum each If further revisions are required after approval has been received additional charges will be incurred http //proofs fastsigns com/9ProoflD=2861334127182006&WebNumber=286&UID=59298 7/18/2006 * l - - t 1 r VIRTHPIA E 0 M I N N I- S 0 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 2, 2006 APPLICANT Walter Wdowychyn and Julie Pawluk REQUEST Design Review of an accessory dwelling unit LOCATION 519 3rd Street S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two Family HPC DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner /Ifp CASE NO DR\06-33 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval of an accessory dwelling unit that includes a two -car garage and an accessory unit on the second floor The lot size is 15,294 sq ft, and 10,000 sq ft is the minimum lot size permitted by the ordinance for an accessory dwelling unit The siding for the proposed accessory structure will be hard board to match the type and style on the existing primary residence The roof structure will have the same roof pitch with wood shingles like the existing primary residence The proposed accessory dwelling urut will need to be connected to municipal sewer and water services EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Heritage Preservation Comrrussion (HPC) is specifically charged to review item g of the accessory dwelling unit conditions as listed in the RB zoning district requirements Accessory Dwelling Units are permitted special uses in the RB district subject to the following conditions a Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet The subject lot is 15,294 square feet f 519 3rd Street S Page 2 b The accessory dwelling unit may be located on second floor above the garage The proposed accessory dwelling unit is located on the second floor above the garage c The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks The proposed accessory dwelling unit is proposed to have a 25 2 foot rear yard setback and a 10 foot side yard setback The proposed setbacks meet the requirements of the RB district d The accessory dwelling unit must be located in the rear yard of the primary residence or be set back from the front of the lot beyond the midpoint of the primary residence The accessory dwelling unit is proposed to be located behind the existing primary residence e Off-street parking requirements for an apartment and single-family residence (four spaces) must be provided The proposed accessory dwelling unit will provide the required four off-street parking spaces with two spaces in the garage and a minimum of two in the driveway f Maximum size of the accessory dwelling unit is 800 square feet The proposed area of the living space in the accessory dwelling unit is 624 square feet g The application requires design review for consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials The siding for the proposed accessory structure will be hard board to match the type and style on the existing primary residence The roof structure will have the same roof pitch with wood shingles like the existing primary residence The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be located in the northeast corner of the lot This area is approximately 18 feet higher than Second Street to the east and is visible from Second Street Due to this attention needs to be given to the rear of the accessory dwelling unit Staff suggests that a dormer, similar to the one on the front elevation, be added to the rear elevation to provide some visual relief Additionally, this would provide an additional view for the accessory dwelling unit Staff would also note that this property is located within the City's historic downtown commercial district 519 3rd Street S Page 3 h The height may not exceed that of the primary residence The existing primary residence is a two story home The proposed accessory dwelling urut is similar is style with the garage on the first floor with the accessory dwelling unit on the second floor i Both the primary and accessory dwelling unit must be connected to municipal sewer and water services and be located on an improved public street Today, the primary dwelling unit is connected to municipal sewer and water services Since the letter from the property owner and the plans do not clearly note if the proposed accessory dwelling unit will be connected to municipal sewer and water services staff recommends that this be made a condition of the approval l Maximum size of garage is 800 square feet The proposed area of the garage in the accessory dwelling unit is 624 square feet RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The accessory dwelling urut shall be similar style, materials and color as the primary dwelling unit 3 The accessory dwelling urut shall connect to public sanitary sewer and water service 4 Lots 7 and 8, Block 40, Original Town, now City of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota shall not be split in the future without the approval of the City of Stillwater FINDINGS The proposal, as conditioned, meets the intent of the City's zoning ordinance Attachments Applicant's Form, Elevation Drawing, Site Plan, and Photos DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ,y , p�o�-33 Case No Date Filed Receipt No (p/SZ8 Fee: $25.00 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 5(1 2 JrQ . Assessor's Parcel No �' 03O a3 yY oc3S— (Re wired) Zoning District Description of Project in detail -D�'tActieD �� cc "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative : not property owne& en property owner's signature is required Property Own Representative Mailing Address ( ?_ ., Mailing Address I i City State Zip--��X,_- + (lot S 0 ity State Zip Telephone No 6 5-1—Y39"'770 Telephone No Signature (Required) Signature (Required) H \mcnamara\sheila\2005\design review permit wpd February 5 2003 Walter Wdowychyn 519S 3'dSt Stillwater, MN 55082 July 21, 2006 Hentage Preservation Commission Stillwater City Hall 216N 4thSt Stillwater, MN 55082 Re BUILDING PERMIT REQUEST Dear Sirs/Madams Enclosed herein you will find plans for a new freestanding garage/carnage house I intend to construct behind my Victonan-era (1880) home This new garage replaces the former tuck -under garage, which has since been removed, which did not conform to the style of the home The proposed garage will be more in keeping with the ongmal style of the home It is my understanding that this is the site of the onginal garage This garage is intended to house two vehicles, plus have space for a "potting" area on the main floor The upper level will be a future "carnage house" area, including a living area, '/2 bath, and kitchenette The upper level will have a dormer with an arched window, which will "mirror" a similar window facing it in the upper level of the home There will be an inside stairway going from the main level to the upper level I intend to connect the garage to the home by an outside set of stairs leading from the upper level of the garage to a walkway, which will connect to the steps up to the deck of the home (which surrounds the recently -added conservatory) I intend to use cedar shake shingles, which again mirrors the shingles on the home The structure will have three windows on the north side (two on the lower level and one on the upper level), in addition to the upper level dormer window, mentioned above The garage doors will be two single doors, customized to fit the carnage -house style The garage will be reached by the existing dnveway alongside the house I believe that this new garage/carnage house will be a wonderful addition not only to our home, but also to the neighborhood While it will obviously be a modern structure, it will be built to as closely resemble a "penod" structure as possible, in order to retain the appropnate style for the house and our town I am anxious to begin construction of this project, and thus hope you will give your earliest attention to this matter Thank you for your consideration Sincere Walter Wdowychyn Sti11w!! I E OIRTHP A OF M I N N E S 0 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 2, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-34 APPLICANT Steve Bremer REQUEST Design Review of a second wall sign for Grumpy Steve's Coffee LOCATION 410 Main St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE August 7, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for a second wall sign at 216 Main St S in the Central Business District The proposed sign will be similar in material and colors as the existing Grumpy Steve's Coffee sign The new sign will contain the words Belgian Waffles with pictures of Belgian waffles and a coffee mug all on a tan background with a brown boarder The sign is oval in shape with a dimension of is 3'0" x 4'0" for a total sign area of 12 square feet No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states building signs in the CBD ' may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face ' The applicant's retail space is 27 feet on the south side of the building face The existing sign is 24 square feet and the proposed sign is 12 square feet bring the total sign area to 36 square feet Additionally, the zoning ordinance allows for only one sign per business per street frontage The proposal fails to meet the requirements of the zoning code 410 Main St S Page 2 FINDINGS The proposal fails to meet the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance ALTERNATIVES The Planning Commission has the following options 1 Deny the requested design review perrrut since an affirmative finding for a design permit could not be made 2 Approve the requested design review permit to allow a second 3' x 4' sign If the Commission chooses to grant the design review permit the commission needs to make an affirmative finding Additionally, staff would suggest that the following conditions for approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission b The sign shall not be lit c No additional signage d Receive approval of a variance from the Planning Commission to allow for a second wall sign on the same street frontage and to allow the total aggregate sign are to exceed the allowable square footage for a wall sign 3 Continue review on the requested design review permit until the September 4, 2006 Planning Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is September 19, 2006 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made staff recommends denial of the requested design review permit attachments Applicant's Form Applicant's Letter Elevation Drawing showing sign Photo of existing building with proposed sign Historic photos of the building DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No Date Filed Receipt No v1/5'70 Fee: $25.00 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project '1'0 Assessor's Parcel No Z`o 0 36 Z 2? 10(3 ( e uired) Zoning District C. D Description of Project in detail AI / Add , % ,-/J,7 (w. (f) "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is required Property Owner II{Z I-...r.( ILL Representative Mailing Address arc 5 , k)41 h4 -t— Mailing Address City State Zip St / a(t✓ 5-c107 City State Zip Telephone No !mac( -82(9 Telephone No Signature /'( L1 Signature ( quired) (Required) H \mcnamara\sheda\2005\design review permit wpd February 5 2003 I1AY"? Ste7, e- CIt s Coffee' 410 South Main Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 Date July 21, 2006 To City of Stillwater Histonc Preservation Committee Re Permanent Building Signage — `Belgian Waffles" We are presentmg the design for a permanent sign to be affixed on the North facing side of the Grumpy Steve's Coffee building As a retail business in downtown Stillwater, this sign and its ability to display a product for sale is extremely important The Belgian Waffles we make fresh every day are a large part of our daily sales Bemg unable to market this product would be very detnmental to our establishment Sign placement is vital as it will be at the same level of sight as our store name, thereby ensuring visibility as customers walk or dnve by Many factors would prevent the sign's effectiveness if it were to be placed at a lower level The design of this sign is attractive to the eye and fits well with the motif of our current "Grumpy Steve's Coffee" sign In no way would it degrade or overwhelm the building or storefront It would however enhance our business and blend in well with the overall look of our buildmg, as well as other buildings on Main Street in downtown Stillwater Stephen C Bremer Grumpy Steve's Coffee Grumpy Steve's Coffee - Permanent Building Signage Proposed Sign Dimensions 3'-0" 4'-O" Pictures — Minnesota Histoncal Society ifrt a,r ■ or 'AI Sliiwa ter k F 8 I R HPIA ( 0 MINNVCOIA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE APPLICANT REQUEST LOCATION COMPREHENSIVE ZONING HPC DATE REVIEWERS PREPARED BY August 1, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-36 St Croix Preparatory Academy Design Review of proposed signage for St Croix Preparatory Academy 201 Second St N PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial CBD - Central Business District August 7, 2006 Community Dev Director Michel Pogge, City Planner M 7 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for wall signs at 201 Second St N in the Central Business District The request is for new signs on the south and east elevations of the building The signs are proposed to contain the school name "St Croix Preparatory Academy" in blue letters and the words Academics, Character, and Leadership in yellow all on a white background The proposed signs will be sirrular to their existing sign at 216 Myrtle Street The dimension of the signs will be 2'6" x 7'0" for a total sign area of 17 5 square feet per sign No lighting is proposed for the sign in the application For retail storefront signs the Commercial Historic District Design Manual provides the size of signs shall be consistent with the Sign Ordinance The zoning ordinance states building signs in the CBD ' may have an aggregate area not exceeding one square foot for each foot of building face ' The applicant's building is 58 feet long facing Commercial Street and 22 feet along the south elevation The total sign area of the proposed sign is 17 5 square feet and meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned 201 Second St N Page 2 CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The sign shall not be lit 3 No additional signage FINDINGS The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance attachments Applicant's Form Elevation Drawing showing sign and building DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM Case No Dk Date Filed Receipt No Fee: $25.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc ) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project 2b l '1 Z'16 64 Assessor's Parcel No (Required) Zoning District e..,16 b Description of Project in detail Sic\nc,S-e_ CIY1 U,sF- C-) „%-jr U, S c €S DC b lClcrS "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, to be true and correct I further certify I will comply with the permit if it is granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is required Property Owner tarvr-i-e Lain Representative % Cr x p 0. rcd-n 1\c4 ittri 7 Mailing Address 20t N znot 6+ MailingAddress 2k10 w /U1 r-)-'1t S- � City State Zip 1,11 vvek,4- M P- S 3ZGty State Zip Sk-111,vu.A.kri M ki 550E5 Telephone No 651 t- lel $5 Telephone No 10S( 3141 L l to° /303 -77 CD Signature cy/X/6-%-___ (IYequired) Signature H \mcnamara\sheda\2005\design review permit wpd February 5 2003 201 North Second Street EAST ENTRANCE OF BUILDING. LIMITED VISIBILITY FROM MAIN STREET. St. Croix preparatory `ACADIMY Site drawings for St. Croix Preparatory Academy building signs. EAST ENTRANCE 22 ft 7 ft st. croix preparatory 2.5 ft 20 ft Existing sign at 216 Myrtle Street CROSS SECTION 6 ft Roof Line Top of Sign Sign will mount flush to building. Approx. 6" thick. Image is carved and painted and will match our existing sign at 216 W. Myrtle St. — Ground St. Croix Preparatory Academy 216 West Myrtle Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651.379.6160 201 North Second Street SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BUILDING. VISIBLE FROM SECOND STREET and COMMERCIAL STREET St. c roix preparatory `CAD EM� SOUTH WALL ... SOUTHWEST CORNER SECOND STREET AND COMMERCIAL STREET 201 North Second Street Stillwater Existing sign at 216 Myrtle Street Site drawings for St. Croix Preparatory Academy building signs. CROSS SECTION 2 ft Ground Roof Line Top of Sign Sign will mount flush to building. Approx. 6" thick or less. Image is carved and painted and individual letters and image pieces will be cut and mounted to red brick wall to complement the existing facade nicely. St. Croix Preparatory Academy 216 West Myrtle Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651.379.6160 1 j 1 water 1 H E BIB I N P l A f E OF MINNESOTA TO Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 3, 2006 RE Heirloom Houses Program PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director At the July 5, 2006 Heritage Preservation Comrrussion (HPC) meeting, Don Empson presented his report entitled Designating Historic Homes and Historic Distracts The report suggested a method for designating historic houses in Stillwater Specifically, two types of historic houses were discussed Heirloom Houses and Landmark Houses The HPC expressed an interest in implementmg programs for designating both house types The purpose of this memo is to outline an implementation program for the Heirloom Houses Program An implementation outline for the Landmark Houses and Sites Program will be prepared at a later date 1) City Council approval a) CDD (Community Development Director) and HPC present Heirloom Houses Program to the City Council for approval and permission to send letters to homeowners 2) Funding and Staffing a) Identify funds and staffing i) Explore grant funding for a Historic Preservation Intern (HPI) ii) Explore grant funding for program supplies postage, envelopes, letterhead, labels, overhead, etc in) Explore grant funding for Historian to do short history research for heirloom homes b) CDD would fill the role of program coordinator c) Some City staff time available for support tasks 3) Notification of Heirloom House owners a) CDD would create a letter and second notice letter These would be based upon the sample letters from the Empson 2006 report b) First notice i) City staff mails a letter and copy of news release (see below) to all 370 properties identified as heirloom houses in Empson 2006 report Letter explains program and asks for permission to photograph home from outside % Heirloom Houses Program August 3 2006 Page 2 If the homeowner wishes to grant permission, they would respond by letter to the HPI or a Volunteer Program Administrator (VPA) who serves on the HPC (1) The owners of the 370 homes would be identified and a mailing list would be generated by City staff c) Second notification i) City staff mails a second letter 3 or 4 months later, remindmg homeowners of the program (1) Waiting 3 or 4 months would hopefully be enough time for some homeowners to respond (2) When second letter is sent out, homeowners could be referred to the website to see the homes of owners who have already replied and been posted d) Annual notice i) For several years City staff sends out notice regarding the program to all potential owners who have not yet responded 4) Contracting with Historian a) In order to have accurate, professional and consistent short histories of the Heirloom Houses, CDD sends out RFPs to selected number of historians registered with the MHS to be contract histonan(s) to do research for heirloom home short stories The contract histonan(s) would also review any applications for potential Heirloom House properties that are not listed in the Empson 2006 report b) HPC recommends a histonan(s) from among the proposals Council approves selection and contract for histonan(s) c) If no grant money is available, the cost of the historical research would be mentioned in the notification letter to eligible property owners If the homeowner wishes to have the home's history included on the website and no grant money is available, then the homeowner would have to pay for the cost when the "permission to photograph" letter is returned 5) Post Heirloom Houses on website a) As owners respond i) HPI or VPA files response letters in the Community Development Department office and enters information into a database ii) HPI or VPA arranges for historian to research all respondent homes if grant money is available, or of owners who paid for the service if not (1) If no grant money is available for historic research (a) HPI or VPA informs CDD of homeowners who have paid for historian research (b) HPI or VPA forwards payment to CDD (c) City staff notifies histonan of property to be researched 4. o Heirloom Houses Program August 3 2006 Page 3 (2) If grant money is available, HPI or VPA coordinates research work with CDD, who is both the grant administrator and the admuustrator of the Historian's contract iii) HPI or VPA arranges with volunteers to photograph the home from outside (1) One shot from front (2) One shot from a side or rear (3) One shot of any other potentially historic structure on the property iv) HPI or VPA arranges with volunteers to enter the photographs, short histones and other information on the City's website HPI or VPA also logs time of volunteers unto a database if grant monies are being used for the program (1) Details for this data entry process have yet to be determined Perhaps this can be done from the library with a password and special permission to get onto a specific page on the City website (a) Data entry will need to be done with the help of City staff (either City Clerk or CDD) 6) Verify status of participating houses a) Once a year HPI or VPA arranges for volunteers to check each home listed on the website to verify whether they still qualify as an heirloom house HPI or VPA also logs time of volunteers into a database if grant monies are being used for the program b) If the volunteer believes the house no longer qualifies, the HPI or VPA and CDD arrange for review of the case by the HPC If the HPC believes the house no longer qualifies, the owner would be notified and the property would be removed from the website and moved to an archive page 7) Accept applications from potential Heirloom House owners a) Homeowners whose properties are not included in the Empson 2006 report could make application to the HPI or VPA for inclusion in the program b) The HPI or VPA and CDD arrange for the HPC to review each such application to determine if property qualifies i) Application would be reviewed by City's contract Historian (1) If no grant money is available to cover this cost, it would have to be paid for by the applicant (2) If grant money is available for the program, then the HPI or VPA coordinates research work with CDD, who is both the grant admuustrator and the administrator of the Historian's contract 8) Educational materials a) The Heirloom House Program webpage could include links to and excerpts from various sources related to home preservation and related subjects CDD would approve and have this information added to the website 1 Heirloom Houses Program August 3, 2006 Page 4 b) The 1976 River Town Restoration project to photograph the old houses in Stillwater could be indexed by the HPI or VPA or other volunteers and included so owners could see what their homes looked like then c) Empson neighborhood histories could be linked d) City's u nfill home construction guidelines could be linked 9) Publicity a) HPI or VPA would arrange for program publicity prior to mailing the first notice of eligibility i) City newsletter n) Realtors could be urged to use the website when selling one of these homes in) Tourists could be encouraged to use the website before visiting iv) News release to local newspapers explaining program City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission Demolition Permit Application Packet INTRODUCTION This packet was put together as a quick reference to help you, the apphcant properly complete and submit a demolition apphcation The examples provided m this packet are for illustration proposes only and should be used only as a reference In some cases additional information will be required while others will require less If you have any questions please contact the City of Stillwater Community Development Department at 651-430-8820 PACKET CONTENTS ➢ Demolition Request Permit ➢ Chapter 34 - City of Stillwater Building Demolition Ordinance ➢ Example Apphcation letter ➢ List of contract historians from the Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office APPLICATION CHECKLIST 15 copies of a demolition permit/plan which must mclude the following information a A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighborhood properties, b A legal description of property and owner of record, c Photographs of all building elevations, d A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demohshed, e The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where apphcable, data sufficient to estabhsh any economic justification for demolition (The information should include a bid from a residential/commercial restoration contractor), f Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demohshed is located, g Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements, h A description of alternatives to the demolition, i Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restoration or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible, and j The Heritage Preservation Commission strongly recommends that the applicant retain one of the contract historians on the attached list to complete a report on the age and cultural/historical significance of the property Updated August 2 2006 Heritage Preservation Commission Demolition Request Permit Demolition Permit No Fee $100* Address of Project Parcel No Lot Block Subdivision Applicant Address Telephone No Owner if different than Applicant Address Telephone No Type of Structure Age of Structure Condition of Structure Intended Use of Site after Demolition Signature of Applicant Date Signature of Owner Date *After review and approval of the demolition permit request with the Heritage Preservation Commission, a building permit must be obtained with the City of Stillwater Building Department The fee for the building permit is based on the valuation of the demolition project Office Use Only HPC Review Date ❑ Approved City Planner/Community Development Director ❑ Denied Date 1 Chapter 34 BUILDING DEMOLITION* Sec 34-1 Purpose of chapter Sec 34-2 Definitions Sec 34-3 Permit required Sec 34-4 Procedure Sec 34-5 Demohtion plan review Sec 34 6 Emergency demolition Sec 34-7 Injunction Sec 34-8 Violation of chapter 'Gross references —Zoning ch 31 building code ch 33 State law reference —Demolition of buildings on tax forfeited lands Minn Stet § 282 04 CD34 1 BUILDING DEMOLITION § 34 5 Sec 34-1 Purpose of chapter This chapter is adopted for the purpose of protecting the historic and aesthetic qualities of the city by preserving, rehabilitating or restonng, when reasonable, buildings or structures which constitute or reflect distinctive features of the architectural or lustoncal resources of the city, thereby promoting the public welfare and presery ing the cultural hentage of the city (Ord No 814, 12-5 95) Sec 34-2 Definitions The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subdivision, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning Buildings or structures of potential historic significance means a building or structure or portion of a building or structure 50 years of age or older Commission means the hentage preservation commission Historically stgntftcant building or structure means any building or structure or portion of a building or structure on the National Histonc Register, a designated local landmark or a con tnbuting structure or building in a designated national register historic district Nonhtstoric structure or building means a struc ture or building less than 50 years old or a noncontnbuting structure in a nationally or to cally designated histonc distnct (Ord No 814, 12-5-95) Cross reference —Definitions generally § 21 2 Sec 34-3 Permit required No building or structure may be demolished without obtaining a demolition permit An apph cation for a demolition permit must be filed with the city building official (Ord No 814, 12-5 95) Sec 34-4 Procedure The building official must forward a copy of each demolition permit application to the commu nity development director for determination of historic significance or potential significance The community development director must make the following determination Subd 1 The building or structure is histon cally significant or potentially histoncally signif- icant, or Subd 2 The building or structure is not his- toncally or potentially histonc If buildings or structures are determined by the community development director to be historic or potentially historic, the application must be sent to the commission for review according to section 34 5 Buildings or structures determined nonhistonc must be referred to the building offi cial for issuance of a demohtion permit (Ord No 814, 12-5 95) Sec 34-5 Demolition plan review Demolition plan review shall be conducted as follows Subd 1 Not less than 30 days after the com mumty development director determines that a building or structure is lustoncally significant, the applicant for the permit must submit to the commission 15 copies of a demolition plan which must include the following information (1) A map showing the location of the build ing or structure to be demolished on its property and with reference to neighbor hood properties, (2) A legal descnption of property and owner of record, (3) Photographs of all building elevations, (4) A descnption of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished, (5) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, includ ing, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition, (6) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located, CD34 3 II 34-5 STILLWATER CODE (7) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements, (8) A description of alternatives to the demo- htion, and (9) Evidence that the building or structure has been advertised for sale for restora- tion or reuse and that sale for restoration or reuse is not economically feasible Subd 2 The commission must hold a pubhc hearing according to chapter 31, subdivision 29(9) of this Code on the pending application (Ord No 814, 12-5 95) Sec 34-6 Emergency demolition If a historically significant or other significant building or structure poses an immediate threat to health or safety due to its deteriorated condi- tion, the owner of the building or structure may request issuance of an emergency demolition per mit If both the community development director and building official find that the condition of the building or structure poses a serious and immi- nent threat to pubhc health and safety and that there is no reasonable alternative to the immedi- ate demolition, the community development direc- tor and building official may issue an emergency demohtion permit (Ord No 814, 12 5 95) Sec 34-7 Injunction In addition to any other relief provided by this chapter, the city attorney may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for an injunction to pro- hibit the continuation of any violation of this chapter This application for relief may include seeking a temporary restraining order, temporary injunction and permanent injunction (Ord No 814, 12 5-95) Sec 34-8 Violation of chapter Any person violating any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and a separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day during on which a violation occurs or continues (Ord No 814, 12 5 95) CD34 4 SAMPLE LETTER OUTLINE [Date] City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission 216 Fourth Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission [Paragraph 1 First describe the location of the structure Second, provide the year the structure was built hstmg supporting information ] [Paragraph 2 Provide supporting information on the structure This could include information on the type of construction, history of the property (i e major historic events), and/or information on previous owners ] [Paragraph 3 Provide details on each of the required items listed in section 34-51 from the City of Stillwater Building Demolition Code It is important to include information on EACH ITEM The Commission also strongly recommends that the applicant retain one of the contract historians on the attached hst to complete a report on the age and cultural/historic significance of the property Providmg this report could help prevent the Commission delaying action on the request The Commission can deny incomplete applications ] Sincerely, [Name of Current Owner] Updated August 2 2006 14 MTNNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCTFTY State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historians 1/17/2006 This listing is comprised of individuals and firms who have expressed an interest in undertaking contracts for cultural resource work in the State of Minnesota It is provided for information purposes to those who may require the services of a historical consultant Inclusion on the list does not constitute an endorsement of the consultant's professional qualifications or past performance The SHPO reserves the right to reject contract reports if the principal investigator or other contract personnel do not meet certain minimal qualifications such as the Secretary of the Interior's professional qualifications standards (Federal Register 9/29/83) It is recommended that work references be checked and multiple bids be obtained before initiating a contractual agreement The SHPO will not recommend specific contractors, but may be able to comment on previous work reviewed pursuant to state and federal standards and guidelines [The SHPO has a file containing the vitae of principal investigators ] The SHPO can be contacted at the Minnesota History Center, 345 Kellogg Blvd W , St Paul, MN 55102 (651) 296 5434 4G Consulting Peggy J Boden, Ph D 267 Maria Avenue St Paul MN 55106 Phone 651/298-0926 Fax 651/330 7256 pjboden@4gconsulting net David C Anderson Ph D 169 Lundy Bridge Drive Waukon IA 52172 563/382 3079 Rolf T Anderson 212 West 36th Street Minneapolis, MN 55408 612/824 7807 ARCH', LLC Daniel Pratt 1386 Idaho Avenue West Falcon Heights, MN 55108 651/308 8749 Archaeology Department Minnesota Historical Society Fort Snelling History Center St Paul, MN 55111 612/726 1171 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historian List Louis Berger and Assoc Inc Randall M Withrow 950 50th Street Marion, IA 52302 Phone 319/373-3043 Fax 319/373 3045 Betsy H Bradley Ph D PO Box 276 Taylors Falls MN 55084 612/396 9498 bhbradley@visi com Michael J Burns Architects 824 Center Avenue Moorhead MN 56560 218/233 6620 Claybaugh Preservation Architects Robert Claybaugh AIA 361 West Government Street Taylors Falls MN 55084 651/465-7900 cayhaugh@frnntiernei net Commonwealth Cultural Resources Group Inc Don Weir 2530 Spring Arbor Road Jackson MI 49203 3602 Phone 517/788 3550, Fax 517/788 6594 Commonwealth Cultural Resources Group, Inc Kathryn Egan-Bruhy P O Box 1061 Minocqua, WI 54548 Cultural Resource Historians 1607 Dogwood Court Fort Collins, CO 80525 303/493-5270 Michelle L Dennis 2691 Jackson Street Eugene, OR 97405 503/343-6652 Donald Empson 1206 North Second Street Stillwater, MN 55082 651/351-0172 John D Feinberg The Collaborative 2080 Pearl Street Boulder, CO 80302-4430 Phone 303/442-3601 Fax 303/449 3666 Robert M Frame III, Ph D 178 Goodrich St Paul, MN 55102 651/291 7882 H Denis Gardner 5309 Vera Cruz Avenue North Crystal, MN 55429 763/533 3966 landloper@earthlink net Vance Gellert Imaging (Photographer) 4551 Aldrich Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55409 612/618 0526 Susan Granger and Scott Kelly Gemini Research 15 East 9th Street Morris, MN 56267 Phone 320/589-3846 Fax 320/589 1737 gemres@info link net Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historian List Greater Visions Commercial Photography And Literature P O Box 160 320 Washburn Belgrade, MN 56312 612/278 3200 Howard R Green Company Joseph R Trnka Project Manager/Environmental Scientist 4250 Glass Road NE, P 0 Box 9009 Cedar Rapids, IA 52409 9009 Phone 319/395-7805, Fax 319/395 9410 Louis N Hafermehl 610 North 7th Street #11 Bismarck ND 58501-3985 701/224 8321 Hardlines Mary E Crowe 4608 Indianola Avenue Columbus OH 43214 Phone 614/784-8733, Fax 614/784-9336 HDR Engineering, Inc 6190 Golden Hills Drive Minneapolis MN 55416 Phone 763/591-5423 Fax 763/591-5413 Darrell D Henning (Photographer) 1774 Whitetail Road Decorah IA 52101 563/382 5582 dhenning@oneota net Henry & Henry Preservation & Architectural Consultants 11850 Eden Trail Eagle MI48822 517/626 2412 Heritage Research Ltd John N Vogel Ph D N89 W16785 Appleton Avenue Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 Phone 414/251-7792 Fax 414/251-3776 Hess, Roise and Company Charlene K Roise, Historical and Preservation Consultants The Foster House 100 North First Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone 612/338 1987, Fax 612/338 2668 Historic Preservation Associates Timothy C Klinger P 0 Box 1064 Fayetteville, AR 72702 Phone 501/442-3779, Fax 501/582 3779 Hoisington Preservation Consultants P 0 Box 13790 Roseville MN 55113 Phone 651/415-1034, Fax 800/566 6145 Deborah Morse -Kahn, Director Regional Research Associates 4314 Linden Hills Boulevard Minneapolis MN 55410 Phone 612/925 0749, Fax 612/823 2387 dmk@regionalresearch net Kane and Johnson Architects Inc 2460 Highway 63 No Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55906 Phone 507/288 1830 Fax 507/288 1830 Todd Kapler P 0 Box 3836 Sioux City IA 51102-3836 712/239 9085 Debra Kellner 2729 South Lake Avenue Duluth, Minnesota 55802 218/727 3707 Barbara Kooiman Mississippi Valley Archaeology Center at the University of Wisconsin -LaCrosse 1725 State Street LaCrosse, WI 54601 608/785 6783 Landscape Research Inc Carole Zellie Research/Planning/Public Education 1466 Hythe St St Paul, MN 55108 651/641 1230 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historian List Neil Larson & Associates Historic Preservation and Planning Services c/o Maryanne Norton 413 Wildwood Drive Duluth, MN 55811 218/722 7460 nortonduluth@aol com Paul Larson 641 Asbury Street St Paul, MN 55104 651/644 3179 Peter Latner (Photographer) 5805 Blaisdell Avenue South Minneapolis MN 55419 612/861 8847 John Lauber 3220 Edmund Boulevard Minneapolis MN 55406 612/722 3922 Jlauber@mn it com Mathew Lundh Architect 2678 Marywood Drive Dubuque IA 52001 Phone 563/588-1792 Fax 563/690 1487 lundh_m@msn com Paul Maravelas 15155 County Road 32 Mayer MN 55360 612/657 2237 Steve C Martens Assistant Professor North Dakota State University P 0 Box 5244 Fargo ND 58105 Phone 701/237-7387 Fax 701/237 7342 Jerry Mathiason Photography 2525 East Franklin Avenue Minneapolis MN 55406 612/338 8132 Scott D McGinnis PEER Environmental & Engineer Resouces Inc 7710 Computer Avenue Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55435 612/831 3341 Mead & Hunt Chad Moffett 7900 West 78th Street Suite 370 Minneapolis, MN 55439 Phone 952/941 5619 Fax 952/941 5622 www meadhunt com Mead & Hunt 6501 Watts Road Suite 101 Madison, WI 53719 Phone 608/273 6380 Fax 608/273-6391 Tim Mitchell 32742 Fairchild Westland MI 48186 Phone 734/722 8836, Fax 734/668 1810 mitchelljtimothy@yahoo com Paula Mohr 532 29th Street Des Moines IA 50312 4024 515/288-2839 archhistorian@yahoo com Patrick Nunnally 2001 Sargent Avenue St Paul, MN 55105 651/698-2727 Oertel Architects Jeffrey Oertel 1795 St Clair Avenue St Paul MN 55105 651/696-5186 Marcia Ohlhausen 3909 Aldrich Ave So Apt #6 Minneapolis, MN 55409 612/824 6411 Parsons Engineering Science Inc J Sanderson Stevens Cultural Resources Manager 400 Woods Mill Road South Suite 330 Chesterfield MO 63017 314/576 7330 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historian List Pathfinder CRM, LLC Robert C Vogel Manager/Senior Historian 319 South Division Avenue PO Box 503 Spring Grove, MN 55974 0503 507/498 3810 800/206-8704 (toll free) pathfindercrm@springgrove coop PHR Associates Historical Research & Environmental Consultants Rebecca Conrad, Ph D 275 Crescent Park Drive - Box 717 Lake View, IA 51450 Quinn Evans Architects Brenda W Williams 1037 Sherman Avenue Madison, WI 53703 Quinn Evans Architects Steven C Jones 219 1/2 North Main Street Ann Arbor MI 48104 Phone 734/663-5888 Fax 734/663-5044 B Wayne Quist 228 South 2nd Street LeSueur, MN 56058 612/512-1749 Rivercrest Associates Inc Barbara Henning 59 Monte Alto Road Santa Fe, NM 87508 505/466 3116 bjhenning@newmexico com Norene Roberts Historical Consultant 119 Cape Street Williamsburg, MA 01096 413/268 7255 robertshistory@wmconnect com Farad J Sabongi, M Arch, ASID PO Box 21904 St Paul MN 55121 0904 651/452-8308 t Sagamore Environmental Services, Inc Ralph S Wilcox 8002 Castleway Drive, Suite 104 Indianapolis, IN 46250 Phone 317/842-0510, Fax 317/842 0547 SCI Engineering Mathew Bivens Cultural Resource Services Division 130 Point West Boulevard St Charles, MO 63301 636/757-1061 mbivens@sciengineering com SRF Consulting Group, Inc Garneth Peterson One Carlson Parkway North Suite 150 Minneapolis MN 55447-4443 763/475-0010 gpeterson@srfconsulting com Joanne Raetz Stuttgen, Ph D Folklorist 759 East Washington Street Martinsville IN 46151 765/349-1537 stuttgen@insightbb com Summit Envirosolutions Andrew Schmidt 1217 Bandana Boulevard North St Paul MN 55108 651/644-8080 The 106 Group Limited Anne Ketz The Dacotah Building 370 Selby Avenue St Paul, MN 55102 Phone 651/290 0977, Fax 651/290-0979 anneketz@106group com Thomason & Associates Preservation Planners P O Box 121225 Nashville, TN 37212 615/383 0227 Carmen Tschofen 2667 Parkview Boulevard Robbinsdale, MN 55422 763/522 5709 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Contract Historian List Two Pines Resource Group, LLC Michelle M Terrell 17711 260d' Street Shafer, MN 55074 Phone/Fax 651/257-4766 mterrell@twopmesresource com U S West Research Historical Consultants Dr Tony Godfrey 2395 E Fisher Lane Salt Lake City, UT 84109 Phone 801/485-2526, Fax 801/485 2544 Joseph Van Ryn Photographer 329 East 3 d Street Albert Lea MN 56007 507/373 3360 651/303-3058 vansvirtuals@charter net Eric J Wheeler Historic Preservation/Heritage Tourism 223 23 d Street North LaCrosse W154601 608/785-7383 ejwheelr@mwt net Mike Whye Photographer 157 Norton Council Bluffs IA 51503 712/322 6827 Thomas R Zahn & Assoc Inc Historical Design, Research & Preservation Consultants 807 Holly Avenue St Paul MN 55104 651/221 9765 tom@tzahn com • Notes "M " Ind Measured value "R " Ind Recorded value o Ind #13774 irop pipe set ® Ind monument found, as noted Bearing system is assumed datum CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Notes BARRL r1 M SLACK Underground or overhead, public S CILLWA l E.R MINN 55082 or private utilities, on or MINNESO1A REGISTERED adjacent the parcel, were not !AND SURVEYOR located in conjunction with this Tel No 439-5630 survey, unless shown otherwise SURVIY MADE FXCLUSIVELY I OR Walter Wdowychyn and Julie P9wluk, 519 So 3rd St , Stillwater, MinnEsota 55082 DISC RIPIIO N As Supplied By Client - Lots 7 and 8, Block 40, Original Town, now City of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota Note As directed by client, survey work was limited to the survey of the outside boundary of the above described parcel No other visible improvements were located, other than as shown hereon Proposed Garage location was not staked by Stack Land Surveying � AI (:2I? 4 / J a/ 2/ /29Gv i 14, ft GO �flecEc e i; o - - 4/73 ` 23 4e E N! /52 3 e - - - -. \ 7z97 - . /, 39 osS*O - \-3983 - 1 i¢a3_ zsao_.� occ ° k p4 LONG /zsr T� -r- Zf �/�, .o 14 5G%F q 8 12- °"4---L-25-z. 1 loN7.4W /F zY¢ -* F ae e'35/% t 7 e i PSEr/s ON e-i}/ Woo. fF2 <nv6 5 7,11 FNo�L / t Kai) Z 3 Moi/(/�/ T S'r - N7d'Z7 3'7 E M /T237-- Az' /S"a ,ae,vr„ t o st So 8z '1 1 hereby certify that thgs survey plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Date April 25, 2006 Reg No 13774 5 10 r r tO S T \l1 I 1 50 50 ftopo� 17 Aly)f,,;6r 60 Lo / W n ^vC Og ry1176, gd'y