Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-09-06 HPC PacketII E 8 R T H P I A OF h NHT (1 A Heritage Preservation Commission Notice of Meeting Wednesday, September 6, 2006 The City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission will meet on Wednesday September 6, 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 AUGUST 7, 2006 MINUTES 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 01 Case No DEM/06-06 Demolition request for a garage located at 521 South 5th Street Barbara Greeder applicant 4 NEW BUSINESS 5 DESIGN REVIEWS 5 01 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 Continued from the August 7 2006 meeting 5 02 MARK WEYER INSURANCE AGENCY INC — CASE NO DR/06 37 Design review of signage located at 901 South 3`d St Mark Weyer applicant 5 03 CURVE CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING — CASE NO DR 06-38 Design review of a 234 4 x 6 6 monument sign located at 2850 Curve Crest Blvd Kike Kuehn Welsh Construction Inc applicant 5 04 EDINA REALTY — CASE NO DR/06-39 Design review of a 100 square foot monument sign located at 14430 N 60th Street Schad Tracy Signs Rick Ballantyne applicant 5 05 RESIDENCE — CASE NO DR/06-40 Design review to replace the rear porch on an existing foundation and add an 8 foot deck on a residence located at 209 N 3`d Street Tom Hunninghake applicant 5 06 CESARE'S WINE BAR — CASE NO DR/06 41 Design review of exterior siding located at 102 So 2nd Street Richard Lay applicant 6 OTHER BUSINESS 6 01 Water Street Inn patio 6 02 Heirloom Housing Program Funding 6 03 12th Annual Heritage Preservation Awards 7 ADJOURN City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 7 2006 Present Jeff Johnson Vice Chairman Phil Eastwood Ken Harycki Brent Peterson and Roger Tomten Others Community Development Director Bill Turnblad and Planner Mike Pogge Absent Howard Lieberman Larry Nelson and Scott Zahren Mr Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p m Approval of minutes Mr Tomten said the language in the last sentence of the second paragraph of the material related to Case No DR/06-27 was confusing He suggested that the wording to changed to indicate that pedestrian traffic will not be affected as the adjacent wall to the south extends out an additional 2 There also was discussion as to the type of lighting recommended for Case No DR/06-30 Rather than channel lit lettering as indicated in the minutes it was directed that the minutes reflect the Commission recommended channel lit lettering that will provide a halo effect Also it was noted the vote on Case No DEM/06-04 was unanimous but not 6-0 was indicated Mr Eastwood seconded by Mr Tomten moved approval of the minutes of July 5 2006 as corrected motion passed unanimously PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No DEM/06-05 Mr Johnson opened the hearing and announced that this case had been withdrawn The hearing was closed DESIGN REVIEWS Case No DR/06-26 Design review of a proposed expansion of Valley Ridge Shopping Center at 1250 Frontage Road West Representing the applicant were Jesse Hamer of Tushie Montgomery Architects and Knss Novak of Valley Ridge management Mr Johnson referred to the changes that had been made subsequent to the discussion at the July meeting specifically that the proposed expansion has been reduced and now meets required setback from Northwestern Avenue and the design provides for a continuous band and roof parapet over a proposed drive-thru space It was noted that the purpose of the drive-thru is tenant -driven Mr Tomten asked about the materials transition at the corners and whether the materials would wrap around the north and west elevations and the drive-thru elevation Mr Tomten also questioned the height of the parapet Mr Pogge noted that there is a condition of approval related to the parapet There was a question about the trash enclosure The applicant stated the enclosure would be a gated, structure with masonry on both sides There was a question about the location of mechanicals It was noted that the mechanical units had not been selected at the time of the meeting but the units would be placed on the roof and screened if necessary It was noted that the units would be smaller units to serve each wing/bay Mr Johnson also pointed out the mechanicals would not be visible from many viewing points Regarding the required lighting City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 7 2006 Page 2 of 5 plan the applicant provided two cut sheets and site lighting plan at the meeting Regarding the required landscape plan, Mr Johnson pointed out the applicant will be submitting that and currently is working with Washington County Soil and Water Conservation to incorporate a rain garden as part of the landscape plan Mr Tomten asked about the proposed fabric canopies and whether signage was proposed for the canopies noting that a tenant is limited to one sign Mr Hamer explained a sign package for the mall was submitted in 2003 but never formally adopted He said the signage package would be going to the Planning Commission for a requested variance and will be coming back to the Heritage Preservation Commission Mr Tomten moved approval as conditioned with conditions No 3 4 6 and 7 to be reviewed and found acceptable by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit eliminating the language that these items be brought back for review and approval by the HPC with an additional condition No 11 that the materials at the corner of the north elevation wrap around the east and west elevations Mr Eastwood seconded the motion Mr Johnson asked that the applicant s handouts submitted at the Aug 7 meeting be included as part of the official record Mr Tomten and Mr Eastwood were agreeable to Mr Johnson s suggestion Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-30 Design review of proposed signage for Stone s Restaurant at 324 S Main St The applicant was not present Mr Pogge reviewed the revised request and design of the proposed signage Mr Pogge noted that in addition to the requested sign on Main Street and the already approved signage on Second Street the applicant now is requesting a projecting sign and canopy sign on Nelson Street Mr Johnson said he was unaware that signage was permitted on multiple sides of a canopy noting the request amounts to three signs Mr Johnson also suggested that the requested projecting sign on Nelson Street would be prone to damage and could be a hazard due to the narrowness of the sidewalk Mr Johnson suggested that the request regarding canopy signage be limited to either the front or two sides of the awning not all three elevations Mr Harycki relayed Mr Nelson s thoughts regarding the proposal Mr Nelson urged the Commission to consider how the City treats businesses located off Main Street Mr Nelson indicated he thought the request was a good package and reiterated the difficulty presented by the location There was discussion about the proposed lighting of the Main Street sign It was clarified that there is no translucent lighting all lighting is halo effect lighting and LED lighting Mr Tomten asked if the LED lights would be visible it was noted that a condition of approval could be added that LED lights not be visible During discussion Mr Eastwood suggested that the applicant had done what the Commission requested regarding the use of halo lighting Mr Tomten said while not excited about the proposed shape and style of the sign he agreed that the applicant had attempted to utilize lighting that is compatible with what the City is trying to do in the downtown area Mr Johnson also noted that the applicant had eliminated the starburst portion of the sign as requested by the Commission Mr Tomten suggested that if the Main Street signage is the focus the applicant be limited to using the Stone s panel only on the 2 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 7 2006 Page 3 of 5 projecting signage on Nelson Street eliminating the Restaurant & Lounge and Cocktails Seafood Chops panels Mr Johnson moved approval as conditioned adding language to Condition No 5 (canopy sign for Nelson Street) allowing verbiage on either the south face or each end of the canopy limiting the verbiage to 6 square feet per end and adding language to Condition No 9 that if a variance is granted the projecting sign is limited to the upper panel (Stone s) only eliminating the two other panels due to concerns about overhead clearance Mr Eastwood seconded the motion motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-31 Design review of proposed signage for UBS at 270 N Main St Leroy Signs applicant The applicant was not present It was noted that the request is to replace two existing Piper Jaffray signs with new UBS signs Mr Peterson seconded by Mr Eastwood moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-32 Design review of proposed signage for Ultima Belleza Salon at 150 Third St S Mary Coleman applicant Ms Coleman was present The requested sign will be black background with gold letters The sign will not be lighted and meets the allowable square footage Mr Eastwood seconded by Mr Peterson moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-33 Design review of an accessory dwelling unit at 519 Third St S Walter Wdowychyn applicant The applicant was present He explained that his two Tots have been incorporated into one parcel The proposed structure will be located on the northeast corner of the parcel the front faces west and access is off Third Street it was noted He said he would be OK with adding an additional dormer as suggested in the staff report Mr Johnson asked around lighting Mr Wdowychyn said lighting would be limited to two carriage -style fixtures located on both sides of the doorways Mr Johnson suggested that rather than carnage -style lighting the applicant consider gooseneck fixtures and place the fixtures under the eaves so as to not spray lighting onto neighboring properties Mr Johnson asked about the style of windows The applicant said windows would likely be casement style Mr Johnson suggested that sash windows might be more fitting The applicant said he was comfortable with that suggestion Mr Eastwood moved approval as conditioned with the applicant to consider the additional dormer, sash windows and downlit fixtures rather than carriage fixtures Mr Peterson seconded the motion Mr Johnson asked that the additional dormer be a requirement of approval the applicant said he was OK with making that a requirement Mr Eastwood and Mr Peterson 3 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 7 2006 Page 4 of 5 agreed to amend the motion to require the additional dormer as a condition of approval Amended motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-34 Design review of signage for Grumpy Steve s at 410 Main St S LLC applicant Steve Bremer was present representing Grumpy Steve s He explained that the coffee shop struggles to compete with Starbucks He said since installing a banner advertising the offering of Belgian waffles gross sales have more than doubled prompting the request for the additional sign During discussion it was noted that the existing Grumpy Steve s sign is a bit shy of the allowable square footage Mr Eastwood suggested placing the verbiage advertising the Belgian waffles underneath the existing sign utilizing a different font perhaps to get close to the allowable square footage rather than uses two separate signs It also was suggested that the canopy could be utilized for a graphic that would promote the waffles Mr Johnson also noted that technically the business has two frontages so a projecting sign on the Broadway elevation would be allowable Mr Johnson noted that the Commission could approve the modification of the existing sign up to the allowable 27 square feet or approve a projecting sign of up to 6 square feet on the Broadway Street elevation or deny the second sign unless a variance is approved by the Planning Commission Mr Bremer said he would like to continue the request and revise plans Mr Eastwood, seconded by Mr Peterson moved to continue Case No CR/06-34 Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/06-36 Design review of signage for St Croix Preparatory Academy at 201 N Second St St Croix Preparatory Academy applicant Mr Pogge reviewed the request He noted the proposed signage mimics that of the existing signage at the Myrtle Street facility Mr Peterson seconded by Mr Eastwood moved approval as conditioned Motion passed unanimously OTHER BUSINESS Heirloom Houses Program — There was discussion of Mr Turnblad s proposal to implement an Heirloom Houses Program as recommended by Mr Empson in his report to the Commission Mr Eastwood expressed a concern that funding for implementing this new program not interfere with funding to finish up the neighborhood studies Mr Turnblad noted that would be up to the Commission to determine its funding priorities Mr Johnson said he thought the Heirloom Home Program should be a pnonty Mr Eastwood suggested that the Landmark Homes should automatically be added to the list of the 370 properties Mr Empson has identified as Heirloom Houses It was the consensus that Mr Turnblad s proposal was a good approach to implementing the program It was suggested that Mr Turnblad contact SHPO regarding possible grants 4 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission August 7 2006 Page 5of5 Demolition Permit — Mr Turnblad noted that the Demolition Permit application packet discussed at the last HPC meeting had been revised to include a bid from a residential/commercial restoration contractor as part of the reason and supporting data for a proposed demolition He also noted that he had retained item J — recommendation that the applicant retain one of the contract historians to complete a report on the age and cultural/historical significance of the property —as part of the application packet Mr Turnblad noted that the packet has been used and distributed to potential applicants There was a brief discussion of demolition by neglect Mr Turnblad noted that the City currently has no housing code that would provide a mechanism for dealing with such situations Mr Harycki suggested that might be something the HPC should look at • It was noted that Mr Tomten would be attending the annual HPC conference • Mr Johnson asked about the signage regarding the City s selection for the Preserve America program It was noted that signage has been installed on Main Street • Mr Johnson asked about the issues related to the Water Street Inn Mr Pogge said he is trying to set up a meeting with the Inn owner • Mr Turnblad noted that a property across from Schulenberg Park is listed as a tear down He told the Commission a letter had been sent to the listing realtor Mr Tomten seconded by Mr Eastwood moved to adjourn at 9 10 p m Motion passed unanimously Respectfully submitted Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 5 Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 30, 2006 CASE NO 06-06 DEM APPLICANT Barbara Greeder REQUEST Demolition Permit LOCATION 521 5th St S HPC PUBLIC HEARING DATE September 6, 2006 PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner r47/'P BACKGROUND Barbara Greeder owns the property at 521 5th Street S In addition to the house, her property has a garage that is over 50 years old As can be seen in the attached photographs, the garage is in a rather advanced state of disrepair Therefore, the applicant would like to demolish the garage with hopes to eventually construct a new replacement garage 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 garage EVALUATION OF REQUEST Chapter 34, Section 34-4 of the City Code states that "if buildings or structures are determined 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 1Greeder Demolition Permit Page 2 garage is over 50 years old, it is of potential historic significance and requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission Section 34-5 of the City Code lists nine 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, Thzs information is included in the attached application (3) Photographs of all building elevations, Thzs information is zncluded in the attached application (4) A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished, Donald Empson investigated the structure and completed a report on the age, condition, and history of the garage A copy of the report has been zncluded in the application The report lists the garage as being built around 1915 The dimensions are about 22 feet by about 22 feet The garage was built of concrete masonry units, which was unique for the time period Mr Empson concluded that the garage has historic significance due to the history of the builder and the construction type that it exhibits, however, due to the condition of the garage Mr Empson concluded that saving the garage can not be Justified (5) The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason, including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any econorruc justification for demolition, The applicant stated that the structure cannot be economically restored and that it was viewed by Mr Chuck Bailey an expert in masonry No report was provided by Mr Bailey Mr Empson noted in his report that he discussed the structure with Mr Bailey and that in Mr Bailey's opinion "the building was beyond repair or restoration, although I believe he did ask Ms Greeder if he might salvage some of the decorative cement blocks " In an attempt to objectively determine the cost of restoration the Commission could consider requesting 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 However, staff is of the opinion with all of the evidence and the report from the Czty's Building Official it is likely a cost estimate would show it is not economically justified to save the garage Greeder Demolition Permit Page 3 (6) Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure to be demolished is located, The applicant stated in her application that she desires to build a new garage on the current location Once the garage is demolished the applicant would need to secure a variance to place the garage in its current position due to current setback requirements The applicant has indicated verbally to staff that she will apply for a variance to the Planning Commission if the demolition permit is approved by the Commission (7) Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements, This yard zvould 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 zvould be so high Hozvever, the actual cost is not mentioned (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 garage and restore it However, no evidence has been submitted that the garage was offered for reuse on someone else's property It was noted in Mr Empson's report that Mr Bailey wanted to save some of the decorative cement block 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 garage restoration compared with the cost of construction a new garage is relatively high In light of the evidence, even without a report from a competent restoration export it is staff's opinion that the cost to restore the garage would be not be economically justified Therefore, staff recommends the first alternative attachment Application Report from Mr Donald Empson MEMORANDUM TO Michal Pogge, Planner FROM Cindy Shilts, Building Official DATE August 31, 2006 SUBJECT 521 5`h Street Street Garage Demolition As per the demolition ordinance I am required to perform a structural evaluation of any building over 50 years old that has been submitted to the Planning Department for demolition I visited the above mentioned address today and I have made the determination that the garage It is my opinion that it may be cost prohibitive for the owner to invest in repairs and should be allowed to demolish the existing garage so she may construct a new one Barbara L Greeder 521 S 56 St Stillwater, Mn 55082-4921 651-439-8695 City of Stillwater 216N4thSt Stillwater, Mn 55082 Re Demolition Request Gentlemen and Ladies Attached is a Demolition Request for the garage at 521 S 5th St The following information is attached in compliance with Ordinance No 814 dated August 17, 2006 Based on the definitions in subdivion Original City, the garage for which a demolition permit is being sought is "not" of potential Historic Significance although it is over 50 years old It is not on the National Historic Register, a designated local landmark or a contributing structure Upon request the following information is attached A map survey shows the location of the structure to be demolished on it's property and with reference to the surrounding properties excluding an ad in newspaper as the structure in not movable or in any condition to be of value It is entirely cement blocks 1 A map is included of block 38 Please note that the lot to my north I own 12 feet for that property To the east has an office building on it To the south and west is streets as it is a corner lot 2 Legal description is Still-(org Twn now city) B38-46 Block 38 South 62 FT of W 150 of 038 First Ward 3 Reason for proposed demolition is the the garage is rapidly deteriorating due to circumstance beyond my control 4 Historian Mr Donald Empson has investigated, and completed a report on the age, condition of said garage which is included in the copies submitted on August 17, 2006 5 The structure cannot be economically restored It was viewed by Mr Chuck Bailey an expert is masonry 6 Detailed plans for rebuilding new garage is in progress at this Plans will be completed to begin when all paper work and permits are completed as we would like to have garage completed for this winter Sincerely Barbara L Greeder ,,,,.,,, Heritage Preservation Commission Demolition Request Permit Demolition Permit No Fee $100* Address of Project } d, \ S Sty SA' Par Lot Block 6 3 8 Subdivision nqie 1,,,C._ ,(+ Applicanta,NINq o.Y r �, (:)Y ee �e 4 Address rJ \ m '* --‘K Telephone No /0 SI - `I 31 O 671 S Owner if different than Applicant Address Telephone No c.v F. y: e. Age of Structure 1O + Condition of Structure Ae_ c_ a �\ u yl S 0 4.n d Cehnevt* \Z\cic.ks Intended Use of Site after Demolition \(C wr'L Type of Structure a$ o3e Juy3 pab3 MIP Signature of Applicant (lob h .,_>k ill cb Date G-f`'.\— -Z\Ns---5--,--r`- G_ \.,,u_se \-1 (\ 4z, 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 0 Approved City Planner/Community Development Director 0 Denied Date 1 This drawing is the result of a compilation and reproduction of land records as they appear in various Washington County offices. The drawing should be used for reference purposes only. Washington County is not responsible for any inaccuracies, Source: Washington County Surveyors Office. Phone (651) 430-6875 Parcel data based on AS400 information current through: May 31. 2006 Map printed: July 7, 2006 Report on the History and Significance of the Garage behind 521 South Fifth Street, Stillwater by Donald Empson The garage in question has significant historic interest both in its builder and in its construction Albert Carl Erlitz (1858-1935) was a stone mason About 1900, he formed the St Croix Stone and Sidewalk Company, using the Fifth Street address as his business address indicating that although there was no house on the property, there was already a building he used in his business The 1904 Sanborn Atlas shows a one story building on the rear of the lot (See Exhibit A) Also in 1904, Erhzt built his home on the lot which remains (altered after a fire) today Because the lot was apparently a filled -in ravine, the house has a nine -foot basement Setthng into this fill has affected the house, and may well be part of the reason for the garage's deterioration (See Exhibits B & C ) By 1910, there was a different configuration of outbuildings behind the house, most likely used again for the business (See Exhibit D ) Although there is no building permit, it is most likely that the present garage was built around 1915 In an era when a Model T was a luxury, a garage of this size would only have been built to accommodate the vehicles and equipment Erlizt used in his cement and sidewalk contracting business The 1924 Sanborn Atlas indicates the present garage, as well as another outbuilding (See Exhibit E ) The design and construction of the building was unique to its period, and it is fitting that a cement contractor/mason would have built such a building for his own use The two most salient features used in the garage are the embossed surfaces of some of the blocks, and the molded stones used around the door While the embossed surfaces are often seen on house foundations of this period, the molded stones are quite unusual See Exhibits Fand G1 G5) Erlitz was a well-known businessman who among other achievements, according to his obituary, contracted to build many of the sidewalks in the city (See Exhibit H ) Given the fact Erlitz was a well-known mason and cement contractor in the city, and the fact he constructed this garage using his skills and techniques peculiar to his day, makes this a significant building However the building is very dilapidated, which may be in part due to the soil conditions I suggested Ms Greeder contact Chuck Bailey, a local cement contractor who is sympathetic to preservation I talked with Mr Bailey as well asking him to evaluate if there were any way the building could be preserved His opinion was that the building was beyond repair or restoration, although I believe he did ask Ms Greeder if he might salvage some of the decorative cement blocks Ms Greeder herself is very interested in the history of the property, and indicated to me that if the garage could be repaired she would be pleased Building a new garage means moving it back on the lot giving her a driveway that would need shoveling If you examine the building, I believe you would all agree that it can not be moved Although this report cannot justify saving the garage, given its condition, I hope it will be serve as a record of this particular building and be useful in evaluating future demolition requests for structures of this type 64Qkx Background A concrete block is primarily used as a building material in the construction of walls It is sometimes called a concrete masonry unit (CMU) A concrete block is one of several precast concrete products used in construction The term precast refers to the fact that the blocks are formed and hardened before they are brought to the job site Most concrete blocks have one or more hollow cavities, and their sides may be cast smooth or with a design In use, concrete blocks are stacked one at a time and held together with fresh concrete mortar to form the desired length and height of the wall Concrete mortar was used by the Romans as early as 200 B C to bind shaped stones together in the construction of buildings During the reign of the Roman emperor Caligula, in 37-41 A D , small blocks of precast concrete were used as a construction material in the region around present-day Naples, Italy Much of the concrete technology developed by the Romans was lost after the fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth century It was not until 1824 that the English stonemason Joseph Aspdin developed portland cement, which became one of the key components of modern concrete The first hollow concrete block was designed in 1890 by Harmon S Palmer in the United States After 10 years of experimenting, Palmer patented the design in 1900 Palmer's blocks were 8 in (20 3 cm) by 10 in (25 4 cm) by 30 in (76 2 cm), and they were so heavy they had to be lifted into place with a small crane By 1905, an estimated 1,500 companies were manufacturing concrete blocks in the United States These early blocks were usually cast by hand, and the average output was about 10 blocks per person per hour Today, concrete block manufacturing is a highly automated process that can produce up to 2,000 blocks per hour Design The shapes and sizes of most common concrete blocks have been standardized to ensure uniform building construction The most common block size in the United States is referred to as an 8-by-8-by-16 block, with the nominal measurements of 8 in (20 3 cm) high by 8 in (20 3 cm) deep by 16 in (40 6 cm) wide This nominal measurement includes room for a bead of mortar, and the block itself actually measures 7 63 in (19 4 cm) high by 7 63 in (19 4 cm) deep by 15 63 in (38 8 cm) wide Many progressive block manufacturers offer variations on the basic block to achieve unique visual effects or to provide desirable structural features for specialized applications For example, one manufacturer offers a block specifically designed to resist water leakage through exterior walls The block incorporates a water repellent admixture to reduce the concrete's absorption and permeability, a beveled upper edge to shed water away from the horizontal mortar joint, and a series of internal grooves and channels to direct the flow of any crack -induced leakage away from the interior surface Another block design, called a split -faced block, includes a rough, stone -like texture on one face of the block instead of a smooth face This gives the block the architectural appearance of a cut and dressed stone A Foursquare -style house design appearing in the Radford Architectural Company's 1908 catalog Cement Houses and How to Build Them It was one of hundreds of cancrete block house designs offered by the Radford company They estimated that this design could be built for about $2 250 00, much less than traditional stone masonry houses of the time (From the collections of Henry Ford Museum & Greenfield Village ) Concrete blocks were first used in the United States as a substitute for stone or wood in the building of homes The earliest known example of a house built in this country entirely of concrete block was in 1837 on Staten Island, New York The homes built of concrete blocks showed a creative use of common inexpensive materials made to look like the more expensive and traditional wood -framed stone masonry building This new type of construction became a popular form of house building in the early 1900s through the 1920s House styles, often referred to as "modern" at the time, ranged from Tudor to Foursquare, Colonial Revival to Bungalow While many houses used the concrete blocks as the structure as well as the outer wall surface, other houses used stucco or other coatings over the block structure Hundreds of thousands of these houses were built especially in the midwestern states, probably because the raw materials needed to make concrete blocks were in abundant supply in sand banks and gravel pits throughout this region The concrete blocks were made with face designs to simulate stone textures rock - faced, granite -faced, or rusticated At first considered an experimental material, houses built of concrete blocks were advertised m many portland cement manufacturers' catalogs as "fireproof, vermin proof, and weatherproof' and as an inexpensive replacement for the ever -scarcer supply of wood Many other types of buildings such as garages, silos, and post offices were built and continue to be built today using this construction method because of these qualities http //www madehow com/Volume-3/Concrete-Block html 3 -9 .1 1 SPi*IY:5 Sons of Heiman vir ing are his _ m idom Anna laughter Mrs iw e..5 Belk _ ago % lteto- h( opened a cabinet St 1',iu1 and did contracting until 10,1 —_ Inca foul y eats ago R1R w.Es a memUt'r ot the Masons, Al T CARL natal sei l ices m ill be held it A L' '-rimy chapel 516 NNort'i ing al t nue St Paul Fi tday of ton at 2 00 o clock under tilt Local Cement contlaCtor ces of Ludm ig Lodge No 314-1 i-����ttnrnt mill be Win__ Passes Away In 4Y1 .,ERLITtD1ES iu1aJ. celnttery, St Paul _ —St Paul i 1 RS. KOSTERj ul T t Cloy in itz gi eiedto St. Paul Thin sda 'twining December 26, 11935 About t meek ago he te11 on a street its St Paul and fractured j1+I3 skull PASSES AWAY j 'leer- Local Resident Dies. 1 Born Here 80 Years Ago r.s `ettu Koster a„ed 'se y r arc Ed am ay at Anoka Minn \\ ednes t DEpcenibei 25, 1935 le v as one Gil till f 114 MOW v ,ttll«atel haling been -bo►n in cif, in 1',51 She bii'\t to ' om rod au(1 lire het ualtil 1'is5 At time Ile 11101 t.d 1 red theie '1i1 L`ihtz was boin-rn Ilpple Bran . (-ennlut-g _ er m , y . 'nor erllbei 29 1858 He VAlbmail led thrfe \oi�emfbcr 1SS1 to Augusta Obel Into passed —amity in_4Lt1l.aa•_teJ _in 19� Thea tele- 1 ated their golden,. w edding 111111r et- ,aty hcie n 19,1 MI and \11s h.11,tr ' ctp-,cr[ the ocean and came to Lake Flnlo t t om CAI man on Noy eiubcl 6 1 S81 In 1'ts2 lie came to Still«atei and had 11� ed bee c Since He « is (,.ngage d in the cont.' at ring business here pi incipally cementwort. 'Many of the -sidewalks in_Thee• to \nc i and cite «cl( laid under his direction ( since He x%a, a utenibel c' the Sons ot mkt%mg arc four daughtrt, Vic Hf,man and the IMks ry VL ies of Pm( (sly ph Ile\ e1 of '-Iall \loc,n Lakt MI, \Maigaret Bi-hop of St I and Miss Mary ho,t(r 11%ing in concin oaf —on 11N ing 111 \o1 lh Old on' biothf' Willi im Klein �i111«arri 'f•\(n 111c(IS Inds tight unelal-(11,1(cs Al Ill bt IiId 'it ay Miler ring at 9 30 o (lock from 'nUon'r Fun(rit Henn and at o(lo(k 'tom St \t ity , church 1 ills nt u'll le In \I (:11 Ill fitly ulg aif three sons Rudolph ol St Paul \\ illiam of 1A'hite Beal 11e•anda' of Still«atei two laugh tern Mrs'.Glenn I''ergu,on of St P till and Mrs '1lbent R.anunt of Still N4 At 1 11 gi andclnikli en and to o ,s eat gi Ind(hildt ea Funel it senices m ill be held at the S‘moni t 1 ilneral Home arrangements' to L, innouuced later 11`r'ends may call at tole Simonet Funeral Home A `a(It L?rlitz was a con-c.t(utious I�CIlonan almays labeling to g[re Itisi action to his many t,u limners tlso a mu',ician and fw }eats lolph N Anderson Dies is one of the principal min in our at Horne in Rice Lake bands al«ars ready to 1pp11, when i If 1 ikf \\ is( 26 1un(rIl i, ti u if ()1161l16 16 () for Adolph 1ndf t on fib pion( f 1 m( r(luint nnv-in, -an in air formally 01" rl IT141( int'If hnti'n, al Mill nr1 L,I1'4Iei \lii►il Ills ‘‘1]( I iutil't' i 1'rl ll I I lefi(1I'1 \ str,th 111 i'' ihd hotly Ail', t rnl ( it) Nina fol n( ederl During the pall unnnf 1 h( i 1n pool ill4lt,h anti wilt ibl( to s,I11N r\ HE the v►oik of 11 `, rain Ile I\ ti, ( quiet man and ( zoorl (iUzen Edward M. McGrath of New -Richmond ig Dead nr Uinivnneon r`i vitt, iii I v. b maps 11tu,tiationS and other bouice material m ill be tied to fui nibli tetial Lot a state guide also As soon as the volunteer, rr of kern have been appointed their m of k ' Ili be outlined by the seat uLfite► and they wlii=1)-e=suppii l _ naires which greatly slinpify then 'am k in the field It is nu port 1nt also that souice books coup ty histot leb atlases. old nett spapei s maps letter s and It sort folders -d- set ibing this tern story should be bent to Dr Mabel Ulriftcl State "Director i Federal Waiting Projects, AO Milt nesota. Bldg, St Paul„_ Minn , at , once—..., `Inofdel that "Vathnugton count)! lttfay tale- accur ate and complete t ept esentation In the American Gaul( and in the Minnesota Gtlnde the co operation of all citizens is neces E. sat y„ ,aya th 1 + h Thor .iho have the ability and the time should m i ite to me _immediately and be assigned to their _dui ci u- %t-►l 'be - iterfof nning a great chic sei vice to I..ocf your locality and your state by «oil. ing on loin r oluntary committee ' I rtt. fy,otleIr QStIVAtrt r au uaa v... O. ._--a •, •••• the public speaking contest snoni=nf eel by pes the Minnesota Public Health WO' Stills matron, and the women's ausiltary from of the Minnesota State 'Medical as mad( sociatIon Ann Mai y ater high able mention C hidestei of the Still school recoa ed houof Planes to Bomb Mauna Loa to Check Flow of Lava Ilonolu'u I H Dec 26 rift I..td- n with 30 ton, of high j eplosit er bombing planes of the 1, ' ai my mill take. the ill tonc1to« to in unlnece dent( d joust milli t lit till flit ~ of Maun t 1 oa A CaI10 1`heiobjettl' e o 111 b( to l'li I the flop of 0( iy lava gia1lu lll1 I(IN Inc ing upon Uhl hi a(1« +tens of do \1 a luhu 1il li the t its ol Hilo main out ( e of H atet supply Huge Gold Imports Viewed By _ IT `S--With Concer calle one 1 His bti U( the 1Iiln Af cdmi dad ith Opel man HE Mint in tl ]11i ital H 111 teIet Ii( boil t loll. ( let 1N t o rPegister of Historic Places I Historic Properties 1 Historic Pre http //www arkansaspreservation org/historic properties/national regist ME Ej ijF I4*-07ds" cr,a Properties FINE NI W'SLET1E zogemMu Ian2aftgomi© 1T Workshop _ ,flcLATEDL 5 Commercial Historic District 1 National Register of Historic Places I Arkansas Register of Historic Places I National Historic Landmarks I Arkansas Civil War Sites I Historic Site Survey NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES CONCRETE BLOCK Another popular stucco surface achieved through deliberate trowel marlcs were used on Mediterranean Spanish Revival and Craftsman style homes Another turn -of -the century labor and money saver in Arkansas home construction was concrete block molded in the appearance of cut stone Concrete, like stucco, had an ancient precedent as a building material, but its appeal as a fashionable exterior and porch treatment did not reach its zenith in the United States until Just after the turn of the century Concrete originally consisted of natural materials like clay and lime such as that found in volcanic ash that had been exposed to intense heat An artificial form called Portland cement was invented during the Industrial Revolution in England, but the natural formula continued to be marketable until the 1890s IC EE 1 p National Register of Historic Places p How to Get a Property Listed Artificial Siding Policy p Residential Siding Materials in Arkansas p Survey & Documentation p Search Arkansas National Register Listings p National Register Nomination Form p Determination of Eligibility Forms p Frequently Asked Questions p Related Links An improved version of Portland cement was produced in Great Britain through the nineteenth century and held a large share of the imports to the United States until the 1871 construction of the first American cement company in Pennsylvania The American cement industry had organized into professional groups by 1900, one of which was the Portland Cement Association The obvious function of this group was to advance the use of Portland cement, which was accomplished through workshops, advertising, catalogues and pattern books Concrete block was highly recommended by the association in 1905 [461 Early production of concrete block in the nineteenth century was achieved by filling cast-iron or wooden box molds called 'side -face machines with a dry mix of concrete mixed with the minimum amount of water for hardening The concrete was added in layers and hand -tamped The block was removed via the hinged sides of the mold box and laid out to dry for seven to ten days in an upright position [471 Mass production of concrete block buildings did not develop until Harmon Palmer patented a cast-iron hollow block machine in 1900 With this invention, it was claimed that two men could produce between eighty to one hundred blocks in a day Blocks were cast with the design plate on the bottom in down -face" machines that rotated up 90 degrees for release of the block Hollow blocks were considered superior as they were lighter, insulated better and were more moisture resistant [481 Once the popularity of the concrete block as a building material was established, competing companies began marketing their own machines All followed Palmer4s pattern of metal frame and mold box with hand release lever for opening the sides and removing the finished product [49] In the years prior to standardization of the concrete industry the size of some early blocks was 24 or 32 long Blocks were also thicker, sometimes weighing as much as 180 pounds [501 With the organization of manufacturing associations the standard block size for most machines by 1924 was reduced to 8 X 8 X 16 , however, 1/2 or 1/4 size block attachments were accessible, as well as gable, bay window, circular and corner block attachments [511 The formula for the blocks was composed of Portland cement, water, sand and stone or gravel aggregate It was advocated that the stones for the aggregate be no larger than 1/2 inch and that the of 3 Register of Historic Places I Historic Properties I Historic Pre http //www arkansaspreservation org/historic properties/national regist concrete should be wet but not over -moist, which would cause the block to adhere to the metal or sag upon removal from the mold The most common specifications called for one part cement to two or three parts sand to four or six parts aggregate [521 When embossing a design on the face of the block, a fine mix using highly ground sand or aggregate would be placed on the design plate and then topped with a coarse -mix for strength The face design came in a variety of patterns, some providing a delicate refined look such as egg and dart, rope face, wreath face and scroll face These designs were more commonly used as trim in water tables, belt courses, copings, cornices and sills Other designs were imitative of cut stone like rock face and panel face, which were most often utilized for construction of entire houses Concrete blocks were also popular for house foundations, being cheaper than stone and stronger than brick Face designs seen most often on foundations were rock face, cobblestone, panel face and ashlar Despite initial protest by architects as to its failed attempt to imitate the beauty and strength of stone, the masses across the U S and Arkansas embraced concrete block because it was comparatively inexpensive, it needed no paint and most important it was fire resistant Many garages during the 1920s were composed of concrete, because building codes in some states called for limited frame construction within a certain distrt, che used toance maintainofthepropeand propelylinethem and werealsobehighlyause combustiblecarsandt[531fuels Banks and commercial buildings were often constructed of block because of its fire resistant characteristics while farm buildings of concrete provided protection against tornadoes Porch kits could be purchased from Sears in 1908 The customer could choose between Ionic or Gothic capital molds for columns and could produce concrete bases, balusters, rails and under porch ' lattices [541 A second search of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program archives for the earliest incidence of concrete blocks used either as foundation material or siding material for a building produced a construction date of circa 1904 The next concentration of concrete block buildings occurred between 1913 and 1915 followed by 1920 to the latest date of surveyed concrete properties, 1930 Commercial buildings with party walls and banks were a large part of the surveyed properties constructed of concrete blocks, most of them being built during the 1920s as replacement buildings after catastrophic fires destroyed frame commercial districts Concrete block was normally utilized for new construction rather than as a remodeling material As with the search for evidence of stucco use in Arkansas, the AHPP archives are a limited resource in comparison with the true numbers of structures utilizing concrete blocks in the state However, they do offer a reasonable representative sample The face designs seen most often in the State Historic Preservation Offices archives were rock face and panel face The basic machine offered by Sears, Roebuck and Company home catalogues came with the rock face pattern, which could be a factor in the frequent appearance of that design in Arkansas Sears, Roebuck catalogues also offered plans for concrete houses but did not provide the concrete block because most people would make their own To cover all the bases the company offered its version of the block machine in 1905, asserting that ease of production was such that anyone could start their own cottage industry or make blocks for their personal use [551 This could account for its occurrence in many rural areas of the state and in railroad towns that would receive regular mail shipments, making the acquisition of block machines easier It is interesting to note the rapidity with which concrete blocks made their appearance in Arkansas after the turn of -the century invention of the machines, an indication that the state had become less impenetrab'e After 1930 concrete block began to lose popularity Two factors have been cited in its demise, the rise of modernism and changes in technology Concrete as a building material did not decline, but sleek, smootn surraces had become more stylish by 1920 Also at this time, automated machines that had the capability of producing more than one block at a time were available, upstaging antiquated hand tamped units Improved block machines and the growth of the concrete industry into new areas of construction Decorative concrete blocks can be found on the foundations and porches of early twentieth century Arkansas homes Rock face and panel face were the most popular decorative concrete block patterns rn the state ;s) of-1 Register of Historic Places I Historic Properties I Historic Pre http //www arkansaspreservation org/historic properties/national regist brought an end to the use of ornamental face concrete blocks in Arkansas and nationwide 56 � O Back to QQ EFFECTS OF THE DEPRESSION Historic Properties I Preservation Services I Main Street Arkansas I Tours, Events & Worksho s Frequently Asked Questions I Archaeology & Section 106 Review t& Action I Publications Free E Newsletter I Staff Drrec ory 1 Related ed Links I Site Mal Annual Report & Action Plan --� I Si a Search 1 Home ARKANSAS HISTORIC PRESRVATION PROGRAM 1500 Tower Building 323 Center Street Little Rock Arkansas 72201 Phone (501) 324 9880 Fax (501) 324 9184 E Mail info@arkansaspreservation org Dqtabsost bFR - =Up O MOVED! Arkansas Manama *turd teattl OUP Ark Ceara liarlmas Bolan Copyright ©2004 Arkansas Historic Preservation Program Web Services by Aristotle Web Design b. £. _In KIJ5 I . 611 aS06 0/2 g SrBRP 73 CHURCH WAFT ewem J6/YTS [LEG JO/ uo� n ?..0 zz.31 Y<` /qio / t t S. 5TH 50 6/Z ST. 604z ><, 46 o 0. f Scale of Feet u0 0P cv CD 0 0 0 N 0 NI OPERT Y Uf STILLWA-rER PUBLIC LIBRARY STaL.WATER. MINN L • 2/9 L. I I II I I II II I►n II 11 III iI II II I I V r ti ,-_')CIA5iT- 'E Application for Perrin Detailed Statement of Specifications -1Ok— NEW FRAME BUILDING 4nhm,ttcd c7 g. S /70,4 I OC I TION E-A-al Al,dc es JYS*-a ebb. /� Block JO o/ `4La 9rch,tect Bu,/dcr ydi++- #I- J T he ,,,thin apphcat,on Li as granted by ssuancc of Permit No >» Tay, 3 /y,.$( Wks ••itlnrrrelay&atworr-reject—ed Street 189 T rators were appointed , 189 Yi 57 who ded to allow the u ith,n Apphca tnn sust the decision of rejection and �4 the Permit en issued as abot e K Detailed Statement of Specifications for the Erection of Frame Buildings 1 16 h et side of Street or 1 yenuc (� side of is �� ) fc�^�� Street Ai nc Between ! and '..et / •• to Street 2 Lot �f Block .7 f of a.....A'.Yrw4,d+> <v ` // ieieirtren ? Size of Lot No of feet front s0 Ao of feet rear Sd Nu of feet deep / "'t" 4 Sve of Building No of feet fro it ° Vo of feet rear Vo of feet deep > S i No of stories in heigth //!/ cell it basement roil attic \o of feet to hcksrht from curb Iciel to highest point / 6 7-h- 5 Win will building cost cxclusite of lot? $ / SO 0 Gd - b What ivill he the depth of foundation n a/1s from curb !c y c! or surface of the ground ? / lee t 11 ha t will be the thickncas of said wall? S. G inches l)eptli and size ofcellar / legit dccp 22 r 3 y( 7 1V,!l foundation be laid on earth rock timber or piles' P'yv . („ L n Will the roof be fiat lxaked or Vans ird' d�j,! Cate i 9 What will be the materials of roofing? Ci CIA t� �� / 1 1 / e. to Whzt will be the means or meccas to the ^.,ot' 11 liatenal size and of floor foists 1st tier 2 \ a 2r1 tier t t ; ?d tier s 4th tier x 5th tier s 6th tier x ceding tier 2. . V roof trey 2 r V State distance from centres 1st tier /(p inches 2d tier/6 inches 3(1 tier inches 4th tier inches 5th tier inches ceding tier /G inches roof tier /6 inches 12 If floors are to be supported by columns and girders gn a the follun mg information Size and materi il of girders under 1st floor '. under upper floors a size. and material of columns under 1st floor a under upper floors r • 17 IVhat will be the distance of tvoodn orb from all flues hot rir or steam pipes? Z efel a all y342L. i 14 No and size of chimneys 1 "' �'. Z f of what material GeAt how built /ta .d i1.0P'• t 15 Will building be veneered n ith brick covered with iron or wood? Get- ' • P 1 i 16 For what purpose will building be used? r e / tl / f , e-( t) r c ( 17 How are the stairways to be constructed and of n hat materials? . �1ye O 1;-"I 18 Hots are the interior walls partitions etc to he constructed and of what materials?/LL Rey ft 91 64 tf ° f z I. E a t) rZ ./14 _mac ,...7.(c 19 How are the floors of cellars basement and other stones to be constructed? / ! i, t. ,. ,1 , t , , s� 1 20 How are the ceihngs to be constructed? Qt� (t ar. OL ki (1' / 1 . t 21 11 t11 all niztenals and workmanship be in accordinc, with the requirements )fthe law? / l 't (Th folio ing ay.recu, nt inn t he signed) r the wner or the author' ed agent ther of ) 1 he undersigned herehi agrees to perform all n orb req tired under the proposed Improvement in accordance Iy rth the plans sp-cificatro'is and within detailed statement and in conformity with the laws and ordinances of the cal of Stillwater Owner-✓1"!/(:4' lddress Architect Address t0 rsic r 0 eN I1 I1 50 40 30 20 10 0 Scale of Feet 50 100 1509.51— H .502 r D ?/. YEN DN jj 1 I B j CC , ! 5/B D 3 ST. ZI5Z G!L' LNY E �Y�LI 'rY efliticy ,41v.S ik,45,11 a r 1- F� V?��`ti "Alta a aG � x Hai '�' c��-r� r T'J S F' ; ,,C Li �"i� Al`ta + i. ,. ta'�4.eL".,L ,a n tee- .r •. _„ < ! .. i'� (Llz.fi-i.�atr`r+eFL.a M134?- '-- -.}' 4xjI�R htQr�i C -Na.� - F M 4. r`I 3 Sccprg ,". `'dT gee&544--- 41, 04- *NC ,WfijYiYg"--r-A4* .Z, T.' y —52 W� yjM.J' r �:� SST Si fAlp -47 E`G= 31, jt f ems_ �'a r I -•.,-".`.Fi • ae�'r'►e - n In Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 31, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-34 APPLICANT Steve Bremer REQUEST Design Review of a second wall sign for Grumpy Steve's Coffee LOCATION 410 Maui St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner Nip DISCUSSION On August 7, 2006 the applicant presented a request for a second wall site that said "Belgian Waffles" with pictures of Belgian waffles and a coffee mug all on a tan background with a brown boarder that match the existing Grumpy Steve's Coffee sign The Commission expressed concerns over a second wall sign and at the request of the applicant the Commission tabled action on the sign to allow the applicant to revise their design The applicant is now requesting design review and approval for a single combined wall sign at 150 3rd St S in the Central Business District The request is for a wall sign on the south elevation of the building that will replace the existing Grumpy Steve's Coffee sign The sign is proposed to contain the business name "Grumpy Steve's Coffee sign" in red letters, "Belgian Waffles" in black letters, and pictures of a coffee mug and Belgian Waffles The sign will be of material similar to the existing sign and will keep the same colors of a tan background with a brown boarder 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 410MainStS Page 2 for each foot of building face ' The applicant's building is 27 feet long on Main Street The total sign area of the proposed sign is 24 5 square feet and meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 The new wall sign shall be constructed of material similar to that of the existing wall sign 3 The existing wall sign shall be removed prior to installation of the new wall sign 4 No additional signage FINDINGS The proposal meets the intent of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual and the Stillwater zoning ordinance attachments Drawing showing proposed sign Photo of existing building with the location of new sign 1)0(0v%voirl SteBELGIAN Coffee WAFFLES Sign Dimension = 3'-6" X 7-0" (24.5 sq. ft.) 1 i E BIRTHP A E 0 MINOFSOIA Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 29, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-37 APPLICANT Mark Weyer Insurance Agency Inc REQUEST Design Review of proposed signage for Mark Weyer Insurance Agency Inc LOCATION 901 Third Street South COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT SFSL - Single Family Small Lot ZONING RB - Two Family Residential HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Commuruty Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner #0 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval for a wall sign at 901 Third St South in the RB - Two Family Residential District The request is for a new sign on both the north and west elevation of the building The sign is proposed to contain six sign areas measuring 1' by 4' for a total sign dimension of 3' by 8' for a total area of 24 square feet The sign is proposed to be white with green letters The sign are proposed to be located where signs were previously located on the building The application does not make it clear if the existing light fixtures would remain Signs are generally not allowed in the RB district If this was a home occupation then a sign up to two square feet in size would be allowed The proposed sign exceeds the two square foot requirement Additionally, the variance for office use granted in 2003 required that signage be limited to the windows only and that no exterior signage be allowed Finally, staff is concerning with the impact the signs will have on neighboring residential uses Since the proposal is not consistent with zoning nor is it consistent with the approved variance staff recommends that the Heritage Preservation Commission deny the requested sign 901 Third Street South Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made staff recommends denial of the request FINDINGS The proposal fails to meet the requirements of the Stillwater Zoning Ordinance and Planning Case V/04-74 approved on August 9, 2004 ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options 1 Deny the request to allow wall sign at 901 Third Street South since an affirmative finding for the request could not be made by staff 2 Approve the request to allow two wall signs at 901 Third Street South If the Comrrussion chooses to grant the requested design 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 signs shall not be lit c The applicants shall make application for a variance to amend their existing variance which prohibits exterior signage at this site d No additional signage 3 Continue this item until the October 2, 2006 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is October 7, 2006 attachments Applicant's Form Photo of existing building with location of new sign DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No. _ Dat Filed _ IZec?ipt No • Fee: $25.00 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Photos, sketches and a iekter ofintent is required. Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials are required. All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project I 0 S 3 51 Assessor's Parcel No „vi 10109 (Required) Zoning District Description of Project in detail & t A-;0 a4 5,ort S "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 s required Property Owner (Aat- K e t Representative MailingAddress O 5 3yr� s� � �Mailing Address City State Zip J'��-\\�I�Y-/ , M� S .x�0 2Gty State Zip Telephone No 113 1 ` b I S Telephone No Signature ed) Signature H \mcnamara\sheda\2005\design review permiLwpd February 5, 2003 Required) Sign Permit No Date Fee $50 00 Receipt No Sign Permit Review Form City of Stillwater mmunity Development Department 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater MN 55082 Section 31.01, Zoning, Subd. 27, Sign Regulations Applicants's Name (Y1a.r K to ty e Address 610 t ' . 3C- SA Owner's Name Owner's Address Contractor's Name* Sa,M e_ Telephone No /3 R - 8 go? S Contractor's Address Address of Sign Location rha.._-- Telephone No Telephone No Sign Plans Attach plans showing the sign size, location and type of material used. If the sign is to be mounted on a building, show an elevation of the building and sign. Conditions of Pennat Approval OFFICE USE ONLY Approved Denied Community Develoi ent Director/City Planner Date of Approval *Contractor must be liensed with the City of Stillwater Contractors license application form is available at Stillwater City Hall S \Planning\sign permit rev ew form wpd May 8, 2003 MAI k Jl WEYER INSURANCE AGENCY INC. FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP 901 S 3`I St Suite 202 STILLWATER, MN 55082 Tel (651)439-8825 Fax (651)439-8823 E-mail mweyer@farmersagent coin 1 08/04/06 I 1 City of Stillwater We would hke t 1 re -add a sign to the Churchill as well as the 3`I St sides of our buildmg Prior to our o ' , the buildmg the previous owner had signs at these spots which remain an off all +r as'Ia result Our original plan for the division of the space m this building mcluded three suites which each mcluded a main window facmg 3rd St At the request of a Heritage member we amended the plan to include a center hallway thus eliminating a main wmdow for the Southern offices 1For this reason as well as the obvious esthetic improvement we would request approve_ for the small and non -obtrusive signage The signs consist of 6@lx4 white signs with green lettering (matching the existing exterior colors) uped together Total sign dimension is 3 x 8 (roughly the same size as previous) Thank you for your consideration, please do not hesitate to contact me with questions or concerns Mark Weyer Example of North Side Example of West Side Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 28, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-38 APPLICANT Mike Kuehn - Welsh Construction LLC REQUEST Design Review of signage for Curve Crest Professional Buildmg LOCATION 2850 Curve Crest Blvd COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT RDP - Research & Development ZONING CRD - Campus Research & Development HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner NO DISCUSSION The apphcant is requesting design review and approval of a proposed 6 foot 6 inch tall by 13 foot 4 inch wide monument style freestanding sign The material for the monument sign will match the exiting building The applicant has verbally indicated to staff that the sign will not be ht The West Business Park design standards and the zoning ordinance allow for one a free standmg sign up to 100 square feet is size The total sign area of the proposed sign is 8016 square feet, which is smaller than the square footage allowed by the ordinance The current sign ordinance allows for one sign per business per site There are several tenants currently in the building, however, Keller Williams Realty is the only tenant with signage which is m the form a wall sign Staff would recommend as a condition of the design review permit that individual tenants be limited to either a wall sign or listing on the monument sign but not both without a variance to the sign code RECOMMENDATION Approval as conditioned 2850 Curve Crest Blvd Page 2 CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission 2 Signage for tenants shall be limited to either a wall sign or hstmg on the monument sign but not both without a variance 3 The sign shall not be lit 4 No additional signage FINDINGS The proposal meets the intent of the West Business Park Design Guidehnes The proposal meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance Attachments Applicant's Form, Elevation Drawing/Photo t r Case No' OP -- Date Filed Receipt No Fee: $25.d0 ll 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 required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project2850 Curve Crest BivdAssessor's Parcel No 3103020430015 Zoning District BP-C Description of Project in detailNew 13'-4" long x 6'-6" high monument sign Materials to match building "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 OwnerCurve Crest Professional Representative Mike Kuehn - We-iSL Czn5 ujtov) LLC Building, LLC Mailing Address35o St Peter St . Ste 200Mailing Address7807 Creekridge Circle City State Zip st Paul. MN 55101 City State Zip Minneapolis, MN 55439 Telephone No (651) 287-8894 Telephone No (952) 897-7844 Signature si Signature W`kic_ \L� C \DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\DWARD\DESKTOP \DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT WPO rebruary 5 2003 Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 31, 2006 APPLICANT Rick Ballantyre - Schad Tracy Signs REQUEST Design Review of signage for Edina Realty LOCATION 14430 N 60th St COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT BPC - Business Park Commercial ZONING BP-C Business Park Commercial HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner CASE NO DR/06-39 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting design review and approval of a proposed 25 foot tall pylon sign The sign head is proposed to be 8 feet 4 inches tall by 12 feet wide for a total of 100 square feet The background of the sign will be red with the text "Edma Realty" m white The pole supportmg the sign is 3 feet wide and colored black The West Business Park design standards and the zoning ordinance allow for one sign per business per site Today Edma Realty has a buildmg sign, therefore, they are not ehgible for a second sign without variance for the additional sign Staff would note that in 2003 Edma Realty made apphcation for a variance to allow for a second sign and in planning case V/03-44 the Planning Commission denied the request Additionally, the West Stillwater Business Park plan states that "Sign size, height, location and material shall relate to the building scale and design " The proposed sign fails to contain any elements of the building The mass of the sign is also larger then other pylon signs for single tenant businesses, kke Lake Elmo Bank and Famous Dave's These signs were hmited by the Commission to 80 square feet is size and 20 feet in height FINDINGS The proposal fails to meet the requirements of the Stillwater Zoning Ordinance and the West Stillwater Business Park Plan Planning CADCONCRETE CAP - TOP VIEW ire 10 13 4" 2 Co 01 II tr 0 CV y , Southill Dental Great Lakes Oral Surgery Keller Williams New Tenant Valley Orthodontics GSA Web Financial New Tenant 2850 CURVE CREST r_L 1 L 13 4 PRECAST CONCRETE CAP S' CMU WITH 4' FACE BRICK EACH SIDE MATCH EXISTING BUILDING COLOR ROLLOCK ACCENT BRICK TYP CUT BRICK AND SLUSH SOLID AS REQUIRED 12" CMU WITH 4' TECHTURE STONE EACH SIDE MATCH BUILDING COLOR �_____---- FIELD VERIFY GRADE AT HEIGHTS AT SIGN LOCATION CI MONUMENT SIGN ELEVATION A I 1r2 I 0 I 12 4 5' CMU FOUNDATION WALL AND CONCRETE FOOTING TYP 2" Co M 1 S" t\14 • 2 • / 0 N / r / / / / / / A / / PRECAST CONCRETE CAP S" CMU WITH 4' FACE BRICK EACH SIDE MATCH EXISTING BUILDING COLOR ROLLOCK ACCENT BRICK TYP CUT BRICK AND SLUSH SOLID AS REQUIRED 12 CMU WITH 4" TECHTURE STONE EACH SIDE MATCH BUILDING COLOR 1\___/ FIELD VERIFY GRADE AT HEIGHTS AT SIGN LOCATION 12 4 S CMU FOUNDATION WALL AND CONCRETE FOOTING TYP (?MONUMENT SIGN SECTION AI iR '0 7807 Creekrzdge Circle Minneapolis MN 55439 A WELSH COMPANY 952 897 7874 Fax 952 897 7740 MONUMENT SIGN CURVE CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING STILLWATER MN SCALE JOB REVISION REV l REV 2 AS NOTED 2006 120 0 DATE m5-16-06 ea-m-1 -06 DRAWN BY DWS DATE 08 01 06 A-1 9 •=••• sm••• IMM•- 0319 ie. / ---7.61 \�2 OUTLOT A W 08'55 E 49146 TDjA�,eL �"OTT A� BLD�aO asv*+^ „6 PREP R slag' pOriD PIM BQ 0IT OT3EF's 1‘ / / / / 1AtS StA/ STATE NIGNWAY SITE DATA. TOTAL AREAL 135b46 5F GREEN AREA X 30% 40b94 SF RECO ADb45 5P PROvIDED 36D SAGAS DATA. OLDG A 75TORY BLDG 8 15TORT RUSE M2E6 SF / FLOOR 76517 SF GROSS 1100 SF GROSS SITE TOTAL 36772 SF GROSS ZeNDS REalERSIENT6. 320000 36712 SF OD CAM PANTOS REWORD 367 0 5F / INS CARS OR 10011009 TOTAL FIRST PRASE BLDG A 3D517 5F / 66 CATS OR 40611600 SITE PLAN r w DESCRIPTION LOT I BLOCK 1 BRADSHAW ADDITION, WasYungton Canty, Minnesota NO 36 GENESIS A WELSH COMPANY 7807 Creekridge C cle M7nneapol s MN 55439 952 897 7874 Fax 952 897 7740 PROJECT CURVE CREST PROFESSIONAL BUILDING CURVE CREST BLVD STILLWATER, MN SWEET ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN I IEIEBT CERTFT TWAT T405 PLAN SPECFICATIDN CR REPORT WAS PREPARED BT rE OR 1►DER PIE OR LACER NTT DIRECT SUPERVISION AND TWAT I AM A OILY LICENSED ARCWTECT UNDER TIE LAII5 OF TIE STATE OF MIIIESOTA LYTl1 D SLOAT ALA DATE 03002 REG. NO NIS) 1951E / REVISION DATE ISSUE FOR PER'IN 011007 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION MAC REVISION / \ 05AO JO& 70070540 DRAM BT NCB CIEDCED BY LDS Al 14430 N 60th St Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made staff recommends denial of the request ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options 1 Deny the request to allow a pylon sign at 14430 N 60th St since an affirmative finding for the request could not be made by staff 2 Approve the design review request for the pylon sign at 14430 N 60th St If the Comnussion chooses to grant the requested design permit the commission needs to make an affirmative finding Additionally, staff would suggest the following conditions for approval a All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission b The applicants shall make application for a variance for a second sign c No additional signage 3 Continue this item until the October 2, 2006 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is October 17, 2006 Attachments Applicant's Form Elevation Drawing THE COLORS SHOWN IN THIS DRAWING ARE FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY AND MAY NOT I3E A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF ACTUAL COLORS 8'-4" 12'-0" Edina 100 TOTAL SQUARE FEET 15' SET BACK FROM PROPERTY LINE 25'-O" CUSTOMER EDINA REALTY CITY STILLWATER STATE MN THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF schadrtracy _signs IkSig d ,�� 325 M BOX 350TA AVE. N. P.O. 357 1610 E. CLIFF RD. ORONOCO, MN 55960 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337 PHONE / 507-367 -2631 PHONE / 952-894-2421 FAX / 507-367-2633 FAX / 952-894-2748 FILE NAME 0309407-17-06 WITH APPROVAL OF THIS DRAWING I HEREBY GIVE SCHAD TRACY SIGNS PERMISSION SALES REP RICK B. T TO BEGIN PRODUCTION OF THE SIGNAGE ILLUSTRATED IN THIS DOCUMENT I AGREE THATALL THE SPECIFICAllONS, SPELUNG, COLORS AND ELEVATIONS USTED IN THIS DRAWING SCALE 1/4" = 1'-O" A ARE CORRECT AND APPROVED. ANY CHANGE510 THIS DRAWING AFTER PRODUCTION HAS STARTED WILL RESULT IN ADDITIONAL CHARGES. DRAWN BY CHAD B. CUSTOMER APPROVAL DATE _ I REVISION 0 II ORIG. DATE 07/17/06 REV. DATE 00/00/00 FONTS USED: PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW FORM CASE NO V/03-44 Planning Commission Date May 12 2003 Project Location 14430 North 60`h Street Comprehensive Plan District Business Park Commercial Zoning District BP-C Applicants Name Richard J Olson, representing Edina Realty Type of Application Vanance Project Description A Vanance for a second sign for Edina Realty Discussion The applicant is requesting a Vanance for a second sign for Edina Realty The Hentage Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the building plans and a wall sign at the January 6, 2003 At this time the applicant is going to the Planning Commission meeting to request a variance for a second sign for Edina Realty The second sign proposed is a 25 foot high internally lit pylon sign The face of the sign would be 8 feet by 12 feet, 96 square feet The size is permitted within the sign ordinance for this zoning district, 100 square feet is the maximum permitted It would have a red background with white copy, similar to their logo The sign cabinet would be painted black In the attached letter, Lisa Meyer, Branch Manager, states that the building sits back from Highway 36 and a pylon sign would make them more visible to the traffic on 36 She also comments on the many businesses that have a wall sign and a pylon sign along the comdor Recommendation Denial Conditions of Approval Should the Commission approve the request, staff suggests the following conditions of approval 1 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director 2 No additional signage 3 Landscaping bed around the base of the sign Findings The proposed 2"d sign is inconsistent with the zoning ordinance sign regulations — number of signs 01/JUL 12 2006 4 19RM51430EDINA REALTY STAIR -''Y ur 711'�W`" "` NO 880 P 4 la 'II DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM Case No; 10 Date Filed: Receipt No.: Fee: $25.00 o‘o - r 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. A11 supporting material (i.e, photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater. Photos, sketches and a fetter of intent is required. Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting matenals are required. All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION �/ Address of Project 14136 `13d N *_ _ Assessor's Parcel No 33.3e7�a cle°4) (Required) Zoning District _ Descnption of Project in detail .i .'Sl-4NI C -0C /00 0f fOVyA4I %t) pag A4 "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 rfNis granted and used" If representative is not property owner, then property owner's signature is urredl RioIc +3 4, I ' Property Owner / 0 1/ / 6a*,5 j1/ue, Representative SO4.13 ?gay sI t i.'S Mailing Address 5/b11 J/0 /VAA Mailing Address /4 /0 eh Fr ReM9 City State Zip 5It//Wd1SSyP2 City State Zip 8u Zug/ Ilg it -/A) S.5337 Telephone No Telephone No S,2" 29 If -2'L2/ (201 Signature Signature 1441 /`�� 1IF (Required) H \mcnamara\sheda\Z005\design review permit wpd July 13, 2005 (Required) naiHrrc t4 LUU31 1 L(S'"IYpdntse1J1,r1HU IKRUY J11,IV1 1:11Y Ur 511LLWUItK NU 5690 ''f 1/41- PLANNING ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION FORM Date Fled CILSO No Fee Paid Receipt No ------- ACTION REQUESTED FEES COMMUNI4Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER Special/Conditional Use Pernik $ 210 NORTH FOURTH STREET $T Variance STILLWATER, MN 35082 Resubdlvision $1 �.+.Subdivision' $100+50J1ot .. _CompreheraNe Plan Amendment' E500 mooning Amendment' 5300 _,Planning Unit Development • $500 —Certificate of Compliance S 70 'An escrow fee is also required to offset the costs of attorney end engineering foes The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting submitted in connection with any application All supportin hes material submitted with application becomes the roe 8 material` (1 e., photos, sketches, etc) 16) copies of supporting material is required if application Is submitted to the of CityCouncillwater l twteenelve (4 copies of supporting material is required j p A site plan is required with eppllcatlans Any incomplete application or supporting material will de application process lay G PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project ‘3 Q — b Zoning DIs��C Assessor's Parcel No 1 Description of Proje (GEO Code) � 'l hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence submitted herewith in respects, to the best of my know/edge and belief, to be true and correct 1 further al the permit If it /s granted and used, certify I will comply wit Property Owner Maillng Address an Pu aiLp00 CRY - State - Zip City- State - Zip Telephone No G5� 9�,R-50 ( ( Tele Signature (Signature le requtnd) _ SJ Representallve Mailing Address Lot Sits (dimensions) _ _ x Land Arum_ Height of Buildings Stories Principal AOCessoy Feat IftricelantaraWeihiPIANAPP.M14 41? 2032 SITE AND PROJECT DE TotalEx _ .... _�� •quasre feet square feet Proposed ware feet Paved impervious Area No of off-street parking spaces f� ?y6o A) S Fenth VK-_ /03_0, v/D3_,{y EY-O" 26-O" 24" SHROUD 12'-O" RED FLEX FACE WHITE COPY CABINET, RETAINER & SHROUD PAINTED BLACK 3" RETAINER 96 SO Ft PRtOJ CF Mom, EDINA REALTY CitY STATE 11aY TEK MW _ DIVEWING (REVISION } in ORIG. DATE 10I04101 REV DATE 0100100 SAL SREP RICK SCALE V4"=1-Cr DRAWN BY RYAN FILE NAME R13-001188 CDR CUSTOMER APPROVAL DATE THIS DR4W1NG15-mg PROPEkrroF 325 MINNESOTAAVE. N ORONOpO-MN35960 PHONE/SC 6? 26-31 FAX! 0/4 ZD FONTS USED. IMPORTED IMAGE _ 1610 CUFF BURNSVI1LEE, MN 5 PRONE 1957.b94- FAX 195Z f WORK ORDER # CITY OF STILLWATER HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JANUARY 6, 2003 Chairperson Lieberman called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m Present Commissioners Diem Eastwood Hark Johnson Kraske Peterson and Tomten Others Steve Russell Community Development Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion made by Commissioner Johnson seconded by Commissioner Peterson to approve the December 2 2002 commission minutes with changes Motion passed unanimously Case No DR/03-01 Design review for a one story, single tenant office building located at 14430 North 60th Street in the BP-C District Blumentals/Architecture Inc , representing Edina Realty Inc , applicant The proposed is to construct a 8 250 square foot office building on a 57,770 square foot lot located in the Business Park Commercial District The plans show a 70-car parking lot (over the double required 27 spaces) Two signs are proposed, a pylon and front facing wall sign The landscape plan looks appropriate for the site with a variety of trees bushes and ground cover A trash enclosure is shown to the back of the parking lot The trash enclosure should have heavy sturdy doors and be made of materials similar to the building The accessory building should be removed not meeting the setback requirements The applicant was disappointed that the existing accessory building would need to be removed Motion made by Commissioner, seconded by Commissioner to approve the design for a one story single tenant office building located at 14430 north 60th Street in the BP-C Distnct with the following conditions 1 The existing storage building shall be removed 2 The parking lot shall be reduced to accommodate 60 vehicles Ci33 A vanance shall be required for two signs 4 All mechanical equipment shall be screened 5 The landscaping shall be installed before building occupancy 6 The drainage plan shall be reviewed by Engineenng If the site plan is changed significantly, it shall be returned to HPC for modification approval it______ 7 The pylon sign shall be setback 15 feet from the property line 8 Additional landscaping shall be provided around base of pylon sign OTHER ITEMS - Discussion of possible neighborhood conservation options ADJOURNMENT Motion made by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner passed unanimously Respectfully submitted Bobbi Mortvedt Recording Secretary 1 to adjourn the meeting at p m Motion CITY OF STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 12, 2003 1 The parking lot shall be resurface and parking spaces marked by August 1 2003 Motion passed unanimously Case No V/03-44 A variance to the sign regulations for the placement of two signs, a wall and a pylon sign at 14430 North 60th Street in the BP-C, Business Park Commercial District Lisa Meyer representing Edina Realty, Inc , applicant The applicant requested a variance for a second sign for Edina Realty The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the building plans and a wall sign at the January 6, 2003 meeting The second sign proposed is a 25 foot high internally lit pylon sign The face of the sign would be 8 feet by 12 feet The size is permitted within the sign ordinance for this zoning district It would have a red background with white copy, similar to their logo The sign cabinet would be painted black The applicant stated that the building sits back from Highway 36 and a pylon sign would make them more visible to the traffic on 36 Shall also commented on the many business that have a wall sign and a pylon sign along the corridor She did not feel it would be fair to deny Edina Realty a pylon sign when there are several in that area already Motion made by Commissioner Teske, seconded by Commissioner Ranum to deny the variance to the sign regulations for the placement of two signs, a wall and a pylon sign at 14430 North 60th Street Motion passed 5 fore, 3 against ase No V/03-45 A variance to the side and rear yard setbacks (5 feet required, 0 feet requested) for the construction of a detached garage located at 111 West Cherry Street in the RB, Two Family Residential District Mike and Venee Russ, applicants Mr and Mrs Russ requested no setback for the construction of a two stall garage Mr and Mrs Russ would like to build a two stall garage on the rear and side property lines The residence currently has a one stall tuck under garage With no setback drainage fire protection and air and light to adjoining properties becomes and issue Commissioner Middleton informed the applicants that they would not have access to the back and side of the garage because it is not their property He is against zero lot lines and recommends denial 8 llwateiz HE BIR HP ACE OF MINNE 0 A DATE TO Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) REQUEST Design Review Permit for home addition APPLICANT Tom Huninghake LAND OWNER Tom Humnghake LOCATION 209 North 3rd Street HPC MEETING DATE September 6, 2006 PREPARED BY Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director• J August 29, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-40 BACKGROUND Tom Huninghake purchased the residence on 209 North 3rd Street and has begun restoring it During the early stages of the restoration it became apparent that the addition on the rear of the home had considerable rot in the structural members Therefore, it was removed except for the foundation Mr Humnghake would like to build a new addition over the existing foundation Exterior details of the home would be copied on the addition Also, as can be seen in Exhibit B, there is a proposed deck that would attach to the new addition EVALUATION OF REQUEST A design review permit is required for construction of the addition because the Humnghake property lies within the downtown plan district This can be seen in Exhibit A Specifically, the City Codel states that a design review permit is required for types of projects in the downtown district that include ' any exterior remodeling that could Zoning Ordinance Chapter 31 1 Subd 30 (3) C 2 x Huninghake Design Review August 29 2006 Page 2 clearly alter the architectural integrity of [a] structure, residential or commercial" The proposed addition could have the potential to alter the architectural integrity of the home So, staff referred the project to the HPC for review Review standards to be used for this specific project are somewhat ambiguous First, even though the project is to be reviewed against the downtown design manual, the manual was developed with commercial buildings in mind Consequently, there is little or no guidance there for the proposed residential addition Second, the home is not located within the Neighborhood Conservation District, so the infill guidelines that might be helpful in reviewing the request do not even apply None the less, the Zoning Ordinance offers some guidance The character of the architecture is to be kept in mind when reviewing proposed exterior changes2 Judging by restoration efforts of the house, it is apparent that Mr Huninghake is sensitive to the architectural character of his residential structure Attached are pictures that show the structure at various stages of exterior restoration In keeping with the work already completed, it is the owner's intention to construct the addition with materials that match as closely as possible the restored materials on the existing house It should be noted that during the review of the application it was noticed that the existing home only has a 16 foot setback from the front lot line The minimum required front setback is 30 feet Consequently, the house is considered a non- conforming structure As such, the Zoning Ordinance prohibits an expansion of the structure 3 The proposed addition would be slightly larger than the previous addition This would be considered an expansion (See Exhibit B) Since this would not allowed, Mr Hurunghake has two alternatives The first would be to keep the footprint of the proposed addition the same as the previous addition The second would be to make application to the Planning Comrrussion for a variance from the required 30 foot front lot line setback If the variance is granted, then the footprint of the house can be expanded RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Heritage Preservation Commission discuss the architectural details of the proposed improvements and decide upon one of the three alternatives 2 Zoning Ordnance Chapter 31-1 Subd 30 (3) f 2 in 3 Zoning Ordinance Chapter 31-1 Subd 9 Huninghake Design Review August 29 2006 Page 3 below The conditions attached to the approval alternatives can be modified or expanded upon by the commission if desired ALTERNATIVES A Approval If the Heritage Preservation Commission finds the proposed addition and deck to be satisfactory, it could recommend approval with the following conditions 1 Unless the Planning Commission grants a front yard setback variance for the house, the footprint of the proposed addition must be revised to be no larger than that of the previous addition 2 All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the Community Development Director All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC Determination of the distinction between "major" and "rrunor" shall rest with the City Administrator B Table If the Heritage Preservation Commission believes that more information is necessary to approve the design review permit, it could continue the review until the next meeting C Denial If the Heritage Preservation Commission finds the proposed addition and deck to be inconsistent with the architectural character of the residential structure, it could recommend denial With a denial, the basis of the action should be given attachments Exhibit A Apphcant's Letter Building elevations Plot Plan Pictures of existing building elevations cc Tom Hurunghake Huninghake Design Review August 29, 2006 Page 4 Huninghake Design Review August 29, 2006 Page 5 Su,JezeT P..irry STILLWATER DOWNTOWN PLAN RCM RI RB IA ® Central 8ushess Detect 1=I Pubb Adminletralbn Office Transpatatbn Wiles, P&drg Parka Recreatbn, Open Space Re LOW Density Rest Jenne! Medium Density Residential I•Egh Density Reeklentlal rwc Marina, Reaeatbn LLD PRO PRO ■ 11111 1111 u11NIN11ill111 I1"7/ i PI _RB_ RB PA EAftt e rr A RB RB R f Huninghake Design Review Site Map Hentage Preservation Commission City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Sirs, Please review our proposed plans to replace the porch on our home at 209 N 3`d Street in Stillwater The existing porch was in dire need of repair and did not do the house justice, quite ugly if you will, therefore, has been taken down to the first floor level Our proposed plan is to replace it with something that will blend seamlessly with the existing home We will be going to great lengths, both time and expense to replicate the siding and windows as close as possible The siding is descnbed as 6" Hardy Plank, npped in half to obtain the 2 '/ reveal as on the rest of the home The windows will be Andersen double hung which will be the same sizes and styles as the homes existing windows All extenor details will be replicated, tnm, soffits, etc The roof shingles will match the new Architectural Carnage House shingles in which we recently put on the entire home The color scheme will match the rest of the home, as seen in the pictures provided The whole porch will be built on the existing foundation that is in good condition and has been in place for 50 years The only real addition will be the 8' deck on the rear of the porch extending to the east It will be 75' plus from the rear property line It will not extend north or south beyond the width of the home The deck railing will be turned spindles and match the railing on the upper balcony Great attention will be paid to every detail in this project to make to make it a beautiful addition to an already beautiful home as the pictures bare We realize our plan does not show every detail, and hopefully this letter better descnbes our intentions We will replicate closely as humanly possible with the materials made available in this modern age We thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter Regar s, /0Yn l Tom Humnghake L \ i I i IQ J c s J y CI '.l J 1 L 4 9 0 cb sti II v 00 VI 0 al.56 1 6 , Jt — a 0, 9 Y4 r T / n d r 7 ,CS s .OS1 3<l> M anl 1 a 1 4 N E R I R 11 A 0 M N 0 f S 0 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 31, 2006 CASE NO DR/06-41 APPLICANT Richard Lay REQUEST Design Review of exterior building facade replacement and the addition of an outdoor trellis for Cesare's Wine Bar LOCATION 102 2nd St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner thoP BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting design review approval for exterior building facade replacement and the addition of an outdoor trellis at 102 2nd St S in the Central Business District for Cesare's Wine Bar The applicant stated m his letter that he would like to replace the existing exterior wood siding, which is badly water damage and blistering, with corrugated metal siding - a look consistent with several other building around town The applicant also stated his desire to add a trellis over their existing patio area to allow some shade covering without the use of umbrellas Since the subject property lies within the Downtown Commercial Historic District, 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 102 2nd St S Page 2 EVALUATION OF REQUEST As noted above, the property is located within the Downtown Commercial Historic District Consequently, the design standards found in the Downtown Commercial Historic District apply to the project I Downtown Commercial Historic District Plan A Architectural Standards - Siding a Page 20, Materials states ' Compatibility with similar exterior construction materials in the immediate area is recommended in order to maintain the distinct character and harmony of the area " i This structure is connected to the old Gazette building which is a brick building The new condominium office building to the south contains wood siding, both horizontal and shaker style, and brick Across Myrtle Street to the north both the Lowell Inn and the Old Post Office are brick buildings The Chestnut Office Building on the east side of Second Street is a rock faced building The proposed corrugated metal siding does not appear to fit in this neighborhood ii The only buildings in the downtown area that incorporate corrugated metal siding are the Isaac Staples, the Commander Elevator, and the Stillwater Marina These building, while historic, do not keep with the Victorian nature of the downtown area The proposed corrugated metal siding is not compatible with buildings in the downtown area b Page 21, Colors states "The color of brick or other natural building materials should dictate the floor family choice Painting new infill building is prohibited " i Corrugated metal siding as a silver color fails to meet the color requirements of the downtown district Additionally, painting the material is unacceptable B Architectural Standards - Trellis a Trellises as a design feature are not addressed in the Downtown Commercial Historic District Plan, however, the Comrrussion has approved a few of trellises in the downtown area including for the Public Library and Northern Vineyard Winery b Page 21, Colors states "The color of brick or other natural building materials should dictate the floor farnily choice Painting new infill building is prohibited " i The trellis should remain unpainted in its natural color 102 2nd St S Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Since an affirmative finding could not be made for the review criteria, staff recommends denial of the requested design review permit FINDINGS The proposal fails to meet the guidelines of the Commercial Historic District Design Manual ALTERNATIVES The Heritage Preservation Commission has the following options 1 Deny the request to allow building facade replacement and the addition of an outdoor trellis for Cesare's Wine Bar at 102 2nd Street South since an affirmative finding for the request could not be made by staff 2 Approve the request to allow facade replacement and the addition of an outdoor trellis for Cesare's Wine Bar at 102 2nd Street South If the Commission chooses to grant the requested design 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 Comnussion b The trellis shall remain uncovered by fabric or other materials c Lighting shall not be hung from the trellis d The trellis shall remain unpainted in a natural wood color e All outside garbage storage shall be enclosed 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 3 Continue this item until the October 2, 2006 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting The 60 day decision deadline for the request is October 22, 2006 attachments Applicant's Form Applicant's Letter Elevation showing siding and trellis Picture of existing building DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Case No 1)k- Date Filed eipt No Fee: $(:10 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 172 S 2.64 'iT Assessor's Parcel Noolla T ) % (Required) Zoning District CZP Description of Project in detail 1 tit- Lief q.) VINht&C,Wvr.7' (A.700P 4IPlact el 1.11;b4 5.41e►s'( . 1NS-rhtA, 445-w Gcf qwt v1? M rib& si Di 6.1 (air-. 6h-L. 'IlhlDt 11 f 1M '1 4,90 -iligt A eVt "I hereby state the foregoing statements and all data, information and evidence atsctL 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 Property Owner Mailing Address City State Zip Telephone No Signature is not property owner,n l r 7, 1 i , !'y property owner's signature is required Representative 1, l -C2 1 Ah= ID'1,Mailing Address CQ Lb M b4O ''[' C&sJfi1` Icy 5b«tdM ") j grGty State Zip S-riw w (Z, tAAJ &7r-)--r°S•SSSS Telephone No Signature Lfi (Required) H \mcnamara\sheda\2005\design review permit wpd February 5 2003 is August 23, 2006 Heritage Preservation Committee Dear Committee members, We are seeking your consideration and review of the attached documents at the September meeting of the Heritage Preservation Committee It is our hope to complete some of the repair work to our building's exterior before the onset of winter weather We are proposing to replace the existing extenor wood siding, which is badly water damaged and blistering, with corrugated metal siding —a look that is consistent with several other buildings around town We also propose the addition of a trellis to cover the deck, allowing some shade covering without the use of umbrellas Thank you for your consideration, la4040 0 e V Richard Lay, Owner Cesare's Wine Bar cX15rING XTII' O 5fONr, cXH1INC CANOPY Eit atm. -YI �NrA Ir\ \i5of ,;) r ,c rAL c-9N(i NcVV 1:24TI OF UvC,'C,C, C c'LLI »N XI5T1fJ6 `\'OOii >CK AK) cJ./ r it V,✓ 121 �LLI� NOfr brAWING Or PICK PAI! ' L-r FOF VIHHJAL ' L '`?'IC \ri JAI U '. VAT ON NSW �Xrf?IOr: W002 COLUMN XJn OV H IAT) el-LP5 x151-ING WOO )/ A T OACK MI- 1, :1JAS 1 \IOW corm (AA it) ''°L--AL Ali iI\II, .:xisnrIG, �x11 I'It ;',I ,ririNr I J J I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 i I 1 1 I I 1 i 1 i I II 1 I lbII I III 1 I I 11 Il Ij! I 1 I 1 1 1 i I 1 i I 1 II I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 J II I I III II II III 11 I, I II I1 I II I 111,I1 11I I i I XIS-rING \NOOr 2 Ck x15rING X1-C1- CI' -.fro \E H VAT ON i I f s.. ti y L 3 J( 1fi - - .- _' J S 4l 5 a-- .m p A as �e sawn.- r a t � I 4 x d � � d -R+ SPELLECRlN(` \ a I F 8 1 X H P 0 M NNF 0 1 A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE August 30, 2006 DISCUSSION ITEM Water Street Inn Patio LOCATION 101 Water St S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT CC - Community Commercial ZONING CBD - Central Business District HPC DATE September 6, 2006 REVIEWERS Community Dev Director PREPARED BY Michel Pogge, City Planner ,i,j7 DISCUSSION Prior to August of 2004 an outdoor patio bar was constructed on the Water Street Inn site on the north of the budding In August of 2004 Chuck Dougherty made application for design review of a covered deck with dormers on the east side of the building and for the existing outdoor patio bar On September 8, 2004 the Commission reviewed the requests and tabled action on both requests This item was never brought back to the Commission for consideration Recently a member of the HPC asked staff to contact Mr Dougherty concerning the patio and request that he submit for design review on the patio After a two year delay by the City, staff would like the issue reviewed informally by the entire HPC prior to staff contacting Mr Dougherty RECOMMENDATION Review and discuss the patio and provide the Commission's desired outcome related to this issue Attachments Case No DR/04-49 application related to the patio September 8, 2004 HPC minutes s HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEW FORM CASE NO DR/04-49 Heritage Preservation Date September 8, 2004 Project Location 101 South Water Street Comprehensive Han District Central Business Distnct Zoning District CBD Applicant's Name Chuck Dougherty I. Jup`l Type of Application Design Review Project Description Design review of a covered deck with dormers and an outside bar on the north patio Discussion The applicant is requesting design review of the east outside deck It would have a new roof that would have six open dormers on it The dormers and the walls would have movable glass doors installed These doors would be removed in the summer The second request is for design approval of an outside bar at the north side of the building This bar has been constructed It is staff's suggestion that the roof be changed in some matter, or the Commission should work with the applicant to design some agreeable solution to make it work in the histonc distnct A previous condition of approval needs to be completed before this project can occur The trash receptacles shall be enclosed with an opaque matenal such as bnck or wood This condition was requested when the addition was built Recommendation Approval as conditioned Conditions of Approval 1 The trash receptacles on the north side shall be enclosed with an opaque matenal such as bnck or wood 2 A new roof shall be constructed on the outside bar following the lines of the gazebo to the northeast of the plaza 3 All revisions to the approved plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Hentage Preservation Commission Findings The proposal meets the intent of the Downtown Design Guidelines Attachments Application Form/Elevation Photos C )$S O�,11. F}p V riu"t., tc\trt o -rb Oct 4. Case No Date Filed Receipt No Fee: $25.00 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FORM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application Photos, sketches and a letter of intent is required All supporting material (i e photos, sketches, etc) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater Fourteen (14) copies of all supporting materials is required All following information is required PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION 1 Address of Project/0 (.5��'� �a�s'-ssessor's Parcel No 2 o3a. 22 ci(/ of/$ Zoning DistrictC Y Description of Project in detail ��'e .?uc 4r. 5 ,-P, "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 5TCbsc eci...-041.1-104representativeCiaGk iO Lrit( ei-iy Mailing Address /D/ S' r6 GAi h.- Sf- Mailing Address Ad l 4 a t74, Gear' Sr City State Zip S 7 l44,4 TGr/ Willi 5:caFZ City State Zip $7//ius r .-, Mt 15jort Telephone No e:4/l4/3" 4‘O°) Telephone No ‘T( /q,3 qt "G° ° `) H \mcnamara\sheda\2002\design review permit wpd Apnl 12, 2002 WATER STREET INN Description of Project Design Review 1 The plan is to dormer the roof line on the covered deck on the East side of the hotel There would be moveable glass doors installed so that the deck area can be opened in the summer and closed in the winter 2 Design review of the exterior bar on the North patio Slr Aireefek.../.2 -+Ar r 1•0111,1t.s,,„..... ( J { Wtrr .7p� \ 6a»- ,: rX \'71,1 x e i w {®`�-y\�2 .f" . 7¥ ^� 114 � «t.• TTmfl i 1 s y City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 8 2004 finished with Hardiboard The number of residential units — 98 — has not changed asked if members could submit written comments, Ms Pfannenstezn said those uld be welcome There also was a bnef discussion about the use of awnings at the retail spaces w that use would work with the residential units It was suggested that it might be better to utilize a and how sign band Mr Johnson moved to give concept approval to the revisions, with material s ampprovided for the next discussion Mr Eastwood seconded the motion, motionstounanimously passed Suki Thomsen, North Broadway, asked about the height of the structure Ms Pfanns the structure is just under 50 feet to the top of the roof, with a parapet above The Main Street elevation will have a walkway, retail spaces, and three levels of housing From the realVl le at on, only three stories of housing will be visible, she stated elevation, Dave May, representing the project developer, was present with a request to place banner sales trailer The request was for a 3x3 banner on the west side and 6x6 on the north site on thee of the p trailer Mr May said in future, when demolition occurs and construction begins the roject developer may be requesting an additional sign to let people know that other businesses Main Street are still open for business Mr Johnson suggested that staff be empowered to N ork with the developer on such signage if the need anses Ms Fitzgerald noted that if business work being negatively impacted, the city will take some type of emergency action es are The request for banners on the sales trailer was related to Case No DR/04-56, design sales trailer in the parking lot at 227 N Main St Vern Stefan also was present for the discussionreview a The discussion centered on the U-Haul rental vehicles currently parked at the site Johnson noted if the sales trailer is located in the parking lot, there will be a loss of spaces and more demand for parking Mr Johnson asked if Mr Stefan could relocate the U-Haul more les, perhaps keeping some off site Mr Stefan said he could move the U-Hauls to the east side of business, and he said locating the sales trailer at his business would not compromise of the of the lot to serve parking needs for the hardware store Mr May noted the intent istto capacity sales trailer use terminated by next springhave the Mr Lieberman moved to authonze placement of the sales trailer in the Maple Island parking lot from Oct 1, 2004-June 1, 2005, approving the requested banners, with the con that there be no lighting, and that the applicant come back withHardware condition of the use Mr Johnson seconded the motion, motion passed unanimouslyrequest to extend the length Case No DR/04-49 Design review of covered deck and review of an extenor bar on the north side of the building at Water Street Inn, 101 S Water St Chuck Dougherty, a licant PP 2 fr City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission September 8, 2004 Chuck and Judy Dougherty were present Mr Dougherty bnefly reviewed the proposed design of the deck area Mr Johnson pointed out that the intent m the onginal plan approved by the City and SHPO was to maintain the histonc warehouse/industnal look of the deck, which was the original loading dock area Mr Dougherty explained that the current roof forces folks to look out on the railroad tracks and parking area rather than the nver Mr Johnson and Mr Tomten suggested there are alternatives such as skylights and lighted panels to achieve the desired effect, rather than changing the roofline Mr Johnson suggested that Mr Dougherty look at older warehouse districts in the metro area for ideas on how to achieve his goal Mr Dougherty agreed to do that Mr Tomten asked if SHPO approval would be needed for any revisions Mr Johnson noted that since federal tax credits are involved, SHPO approval would be needed In the discussion regarding the bar, Mr Lieberman noted the north end of the building was never completed according to the plans approved by the City He asked about the status of plans to complete the north end Mr Dougherty said that is still in future plans Mr Johnson noted there was a timeline for enclosing the extenor fire escape Mr Lieberman asked staff to go through the originally approved plans for the building and provide copies to both Mr Dougherty and the HPC There also was discussion of the requirement to enclose the trash receptacle Mr Dougherty said he would do that when the City clarifies its plan for the walkway to the river, which currently shows a portion of his property being taken Mr Johnson and Mr Lieberman noted that enclosing the trash receptacle was a condition of approval eight years ago Mr Eastwood noted the proposed bar at the north end of the building is already in place Mr Lieberman suggested tabling the requests, with the understanding that the applicant not be required to tear down the structure that is already in place Mr Eastwood made that in the form of a motion Mr Tomten seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously Case No DR/04-50 Design review of a freestanding sign for River Valley Dental Care and Stenberg Orthodontics at 1395 Curve Crest Blvd Kirk X Van Blaircom, Pyramid Sign, representing the applicant Mr Blaircom and Dr Duerst were present Mr Blaircom explained the request for the internally illuminated sign, which is 6'5" high and 10" wide Only the letters will be illuminated Mr Tomten moved approval as conditioned, Mr Eastwood seconded the motion Mr Johnson noted that according to the ordinance, signage in the Business Park is limited to 6' in height Mr Blaircom stated the applicant wanted to include the address on the sign If the sign is any lower, the bottom will be hidden by brush He also noted the adjacent business sign is 6' high but is placed on a 1' berm The sign will be 15' back from the property line, in according with the ordinance Mr Johnson noted that there is no regulation regarding the address, so technically the City of Stillwater 4 FIE BIR HP A F OF M I N N F S O I A Heritage Preservation Commission DATE REQUEST HPC DATE PREPARED BY August 30, 2006 12th Annual Heritage Preservation Awards September 6, 2006 Michel Pogge, City Planner Nip DISCUSSION Annually since 1994 the Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission has selected individuals and business to receive one of their annual Heritage Preservation Awards Normally these awards are given out in May as part of National Preservation Month, however, due to staffing these awards were delayed until now As a reference point, below is a listing of previous recipients 1994 Pure Renovation Facade New Development New Design 1995 Renovation/ Reuse Restoration - Signage New Development 1996 Renovation Reuse Facade Signage 1997 Reuse of an Existing Building New Development Facade of a Building Signage St Croix Designs Architectural Antiques Glassory Block Wrap and Ship Commander Elevator J P Laskin The Depot The Lumber Baron's Hotel Cub Foods Cameo Costumes Traditions The Grand Banquet Hall A B S Company Building Loggers Sebastian Joe's I 2006-12th Annual Heritage Preservation Awards Page 2 1998 Re -Use of an Existing Bldg New Development Facade of a Building Signage 1999 Reuse of an Existing Bldg Renovation of a Bldh Facade of a Building Signage Special Achievement 2000 Renovation of a Building Signage Heritage Design 2001 Reuse of an Existing Building Signage Use of Outdoor Space Design 2002 Special Achievement Award Design Award Facade of a Building Signage Architectural Contributions to Stillwater 2003 Facade of a Building Transition of a Building Signage Heritage Award Maple Island Hardware Wash County Historical Society Carriage House Sammies Womens Casual Attire Tasteful Thymes & Grandma's House in Stillwater Images of the Past John Karst Building BP Amoco BP Amoco Randall J Raduenz Mark S Balay Architects LaBelle Vie Freight House The Stillwater Territorial Prison Hotel Design River Market Community Coop and The Valley Bookseller Dreamcoat Cafe Camrose Hill Flower Studio Ascension Episcopal Church James Melton Joseph Wolf Building Jarchow and York Building Let there be light Antique Lighting Michael McGuire Darla's Grill & Malt Shop Marx Wine Bar and Grille Brunswick Inn The Brick Ally 2006-12th Annual Heritage Preservation Awards Page 3 2004 Signage Preservation Effort Historical Contribution Building Reuse Collaboration in Reuse of a Property 2005 Signage Facade of a Building Renovation of a Building Heritage Award The Central Hub The Peace House Donald Empson Kathleen Vadnais Gartner Studios Terra Springs Toy Lounge Whitey's The Arcola Building Warden's House Museum In addition a copy of the 2005 HPC cases have been attached that can been used as a reference list by the Commission RECOMMENDATION Please bring any thoughts about possible awards and bring a list of your nominations to the September 6, 2006 meeting 2005 HPC Cases Case Number Applicant Business Owner Address Request HPC Action DR/05 01 Bnnt ButchartlTeary 0 Hara James Mulvey House Jill/Trent Lawson 622 W Chuchill St Operate a B & B Tabled DR/05 02 Troy Lewis USA Karate KFPWR Prop Dev 122 New England Place Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 03 Steve Bremer 401 Building Steve Bremer 239 East Nelson Bldg Modifications +5 0 approval DR/05 04 Richard Lay Cesare s Wine & Marketplace Terntonal Spnngs LLC 610 N Main St Signage +5 0 approval DR/05 05 Amy Olmsted/Bill Zarbok 209-211 213 Buildings Amy Olmsted 209 211 213 S Main St Bldg Modifications +5 0 approval DR/05 06 Alex Young Lake Elmo Bank Greeley Sq LLC 1903 S Greeley St Design Review of Bldg +5 0 approval DR/05-07 Spectrum Sign Systems Orthopedic Sports West Tower Parnership 1700 Tower Dr Signage +5 0 approval DR/05-08 James Bell Stillwater Medical Group Lakeview Hospital 1500 Curve Crest Blvd Design Review of Bldg +5 0 approval DR/05-09 Knss Novak The Bead Alley South Metro Centers 1250 Frontage Rd West Signage +5 0 approval DR/05-10 Knss Novak Mongolian Barbque South Metro Centers 1250 Frontage Rd West Signage +5 0 approval DR/05 11 Gary Sukopp Muraskaki Japanese Restaurant Corner House Stillwater LLC 1491 Stillwater Blvd Signage +5 0 approval DR/05 12 Jeanne Anderson Attorney Marine Leasing LLC 226 E Myrtle St Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 13 Gunnar Balstad The Stillwater Inn Same 1750 Frontage Rd Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 14 Tom Beer Eagle Valley Bank Eagle Valley Bank 1946 Washington Ave Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 15 Thad Rich ReMax R & B Real Estate Invest 1835 Northwestem Ave Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 16 Mead Stone River Market Coop Mainstream Development 221 North Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 17 Salvatore/Mary Rosa Liberty House Cafe and Creamery Jim Hagstrom 145 Liberty Place Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 18 David Cagel WineStyles Jim/Joyce Melton 124 North Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 19 Hi Tech Signs Wrap n Ship Mainstream Development 1658 Market Dr Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 20 DeMars Signs 1Liberty Village Wines & Spirits Jim Hagstrom 105 New England PI Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 21 Mohagen/Hansen Arch St Croix Orthopaedics Same 1701 Curve Crest Blvd Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 22 Nuja Rose Nuja Rose Nuja Rose 312 S Main St Signage +5 0 approval DR/05 23 Todd Nelson Nacho Mamas Nuja Rose 312 S Main St Signage & Patio +5 0 approval DR/05 24 Bill Hickey Stillwater Library City of Stillwater 1305 Frontage Rd Temp Signage +5 0 approval DR/05-25 Randy Herrman TNT Firewords TNT Fireworks 1801 Market Dr Signage +5 0 approval DR/05 26 Todd Huntly 821 Third St S Todd Huntly 821 Third St S Accessory Structure +5 0 approval DR/05 27 Rita Graybill Elephant Walk B & B Rita Graybill 801 W Pine St Accessory Structure +5 0 approval DR/05 28 David Ulrich The Spectacle Shoppe David Ulrich 111 South Main St Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 29 Kathy Ristow Marathon/Oasis Market Oasis Market 2289 Croixwood Blvd Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 30 Kathy Ristow Marathon/Oasis Market Oasis Market 1750 Greeley St S Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 31 Robert Mendex Mai Thai Cafe Corner Stone 1501 Stillwater Blvd Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 32 Harold/Heidi Sommers Accessory Dwelling Unit Same 621 West Churchill St Accessory Structure +6 0 approval DR/05 33 Heidi Rosebud Bed and Breakfast Same 125 South Owens St Design Review of Bldg +6 0 approval DR/03 52 Bill Hickey Stillwater Library City of Stillwater 223 N Fourth St Update Discussion only 8/1/05 DR/05 34 Greg Skoog Diamonds on Main Knss Novack 1314 Frontage Rd W Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 35 Chen Benson Stella MJ Murphy 216 South Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 36 Mike Black Office Buildings Royal Oaks 1949 Greeley St S Design Review of Bldg +4 0 approval DR/05-37 Greg Pavlick 221 220 Chestnut St Bldgs Greg Pavlick 221 229 Chestnut St Extenor Modifications +4 0 approval DR/05 38 Paola McElberon Accents Paola Knss Novack 1500 West Frontage Rd Signage +4 0 approval DR/05 39 Chad DeCosse The Old Sawmill Chase Company 1820 Market Drive Signage +4 0 approval DR/05-40 'dent Graphics Marathon/Oasis Market Oasis Market 103 North Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05-41 Larry Nelson Karst Building Root Properties 125 South Main St Bldg Modifications +6 0 approval DR/05-42 Lon Olson Big Nose Kates Lynch Properties 102 South Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05-43 Bnan Lehmer/Brandon Dickenson Autumn s Brian Lehmer/Brandon Dickenson 114 Chestnut Street W Signage +4 0 approval DR/05-44 James Bell Stillwater Clinic Lakeview Hospital 1500 Curve Crest Blvd Storage Shed +6 0 approval DR/05-45 Sheila Procaccini Aprille s Showers Tea Room KB Francis 120 North Main St Signage +4 0 approval DR/05-46 John Harvey Gazette Building John Harvey 102 South Second St Bldg Modifications +4 0 approval DR/05-47 Duane Downey Days Inn Percy Pooniwala 1750 West Frontage Rd Signage +6 0 approval 2005 HPC Cases DR/05-48 Dave May Stillwater Mills Four Star Land Development 350 North Main St Sales Trailer +6 0 approval DR/05-49 Amy/William Zarbok 209 213 South Main St Buildings Amy/William Zarbok 209 213 South Main St Bldg Modifications +6 0 approval DR/05 50 Tim Doyle BT Doyle s Rib Joint Mike McGuire 423 South Main St Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 51 Craig Nevissen Cub Foods SuperValu Holdings Inc 1801 Market Dr Signage +6 0 approval DR/05-52 Sandra Shun The Dog and Pony Show Sandra Shun 105 New England PI Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 53 Mark Balay Rivertown Inn Jeff and Julie Anderson 306 West Olive St Bldg Addition +6 0 approval DR/05 54 Universal Signs Inc West Marine Dick Johnson 422 E Mulberry St Signage +6 0 approval DR/05 55 Dennis Doerr Hoffman Heating and Cooling Dennis Doerr 1709 S Greeley St Signage +7 0 approval DR/05-56 Steven Hirtz Liberty Village Jay Felder 105 New England PI Sign Package +7 0 approval