The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020-05-20 HPC Packet PLEASE NOTE: Heritage Preservation Commission meetings are streamed live on the city website and available to view on Channel 16. Public can participate by logging into zoom.us/join or by calling 1-312-626-6799 and enter the meeting ID number: 503 594 024 AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING May 20th, 2020 CONFERENCE PLANNING WORKSHOP - CANCELLED 6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of April 15th, 2020 regular meeting V. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement of may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. VI. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) - All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Heritage Preservation Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a commission member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 2. Case No. 2020-15: Consideration of a Design Permit for business signage at 223 Main St N, property located in the Downtown Design Review District. Chris Siedow, property owner and Christie Wanderer, applicant. VII. OLD BUSINESS 3. Case No. 2020-13: Consideration of a Design Permit for façade changes and new signage at the property located at 103 Main St N in the Downtown Design Review District. PAC Holdings LLC, property owner and Hamilton LLC, applicant. VIII. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. Chestnut Street Plaza Project 5. Interpretation Planning – No Packet Materials 6. 2020 Preservation Awards – No Packet Materials IX. FYI – VERBAL UPDATE ONLY 7. Misc. Development Projects 8. HPC Ordinance 9. 2020 Preserve MN Conference X. ADJOURNMENT HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING April 15, 2020 7:00 P.M. Chairwoman Mino called the meeting to order via Zoom at 7:06 p.m. Present: Chairwoman Mino, Commissioners Finwall, Larson, Steinwall, Thueson, Walls, Council Representative Junker Absent: Commissioner Krakowski Staff: City Planner Wittman, City Clerk Wolf APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of minutes of March 18, 2020 Meeting Motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to approve the minutes of the March 18, 2020 meeting. Motion passed, 5-0-1 with Commissioner Finwall abstaining. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA There were no items on the Consent Agenda. PUBLIC HEARING There were no public hearings. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2020-12: Consideration of a Design Permit for rooftop improvements for the property located at 125 Main St S in the Downtown Design Review District. Ross Larson, representing Nordic LUV LLC, property owner. Commissioner Steinwall recused herself from the discussion and the vote. Ms. Wittman explained that in 2003, the former owner of 125 Main Street South received approval for “deckage” however, the City has no approval documentation from the Heritage Preservation Commission nor the City’s Building Inspection division. An approximately 24’ wide by 40’ long deck is located on the rooftop. The deck is screened from Water Street with a 6’ wood privacy fence rising approximately 4’-5 above the patio decking. Ross Larson of Nordic LUV LLC is requesting a Design Permit for a new rooftop patio to include: replacing the existing deck with a 25’ long by 22.5’ wide Ipe (Brazilian walnut) wood deck, with two raised planter boxes and a stepped hot tub surround with bench seating; installing new fall protection and screening on top of the framed patio deck, to include a 3’6” tall black metal and Ipe wood railing with vertical black rails located on the north and south sides of the new deck; and an 8’9” tall hardwood privacy screen on the eastern side of the building; installing new lighting to include exterior undermount LED strips under built-in seating and on stair treads and down-lit lights on the interior of the privacy screen. The rooftop improvement is intended to be used as outdoor living area. While the deck and railing are typical rooftop improvements visible from the street, the City has generally determined these to be conforming to the standards and guidelines in place because, if removed in the future, the alteration would not substantially alter the Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 15, 2020 Page 2 of 6 original structure. However, the installation of the hot tub and its associated screening raise alarms as to whether or not the “design is compatible with the size, scale...character of the property.” The hot tub should be screened from view of the public (including those directly across Water Street, at the Water Street Inn). However, the 8’9” tall screen does not keep with the size, scale nor the character of the building nor its surroundings. Staff finds reducing the screen to a maximum of 6’ from the roof deck (not patio deck) would be more in conformance to the standards in place. Therefore, staff would recommend conditional approval with five conditions. Jennifer Noden, applicant, said to correct the staff report, the fence sits back three feet from the line of the building (the eastern property line). She does not think they would have a problem dropping the fence to 6’. The pre-made 5’10” wood screen panels could be attached to the roof rather than the deck itself which would bring them under 6’. They would keep the same footprint as currently there. Councilmember Junker congratulated Mr. Larson on the purchase of the building. Noel Molloy, general contractor, said the hot tub would be set back from the south ledge so it would be mostly hidden from Water Street south of Chestnut. Ross Larson, applicant, added that the existing handrail would be replaced but the visuals would not change. Commissioner Finwall asked about the materials for the 6’ high fence. Ms. Noden said the product is made from recycled compressed hardwoods. It looks the same on both sides. Commissioner Larson asked if lighting will remain attached to the vertical supports of the screen wall. One of his concerns with the original design was glare source. Lighting could be a problem because what people see is the light source more than any screening. The lower the light sources, the better. He suggested bringing the light down to more or less the 42” rail height to reduce its visibility. Ms. Noden replied that would not be a problem at all. Motion by Commissioner Finwall, seconded by Commissioner Walls, to approve Case No. 2020-12, Design Permit for rooftop improvements for the property located at 125 Main St S, with the five staff- recommended conditions, changing Condition #2 to add: Lights shall not be placed higher than 42” off the deck, and changing Condition #3 to read: The height of the privacy screen shall not exceed the height of the existing screen. Motion passed, 5-0-1 with Commissioner Steinwall abstaining. Case No. 2020-13: Consideration of a Design Permit for façade changes and new signage at the property located at 103 Main St N in the Downtown Design Review District. PAC Holdings LLC, property owner and Hamilton LLC, applicant. Ms. Wittman explained the case. In the 1980s the City approved construction of a gas station at 103 Main Street North with a free-standing sign. Since the time of Use Permit approvals, the sign has become nonconforming in height and sign size. In 1998 the HPC granted a Design Permit for exterior alterations which included changing the freestanding sign to permit a 20’, 50 square foot sign to be erected onsite. In 2005 and again in 2010 the HPC approved Design Permits for exterior alterations and signage for the existing Lucky’s gas station. Noteworthy conditions of those approvals included: cut off lighting shield to be installed at pylon lighting; only one logo shall be applied to the building along Water Street and Main Street; and any pylon sign shall be submitted for review and approved by the HPC prior to installation. The City does not have any record of HPC review/approval nor City issuance of an approved sign permit for the free-standing sign that exists today. The new owner would like to make changes to the building’s façade and signage. The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Permit to: paint all existing brick on the building and on the canopy columns white; paint the building’s black sign band area to white, adding a red decal stripe at the bottom; change the Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 15, 2020 Page 3 of 6 existing “Lucky’s Station” wall signs to new, 52” interior-lit signs to read “to go” in white lettering on red; change the gas pump canopies to either white or red with an orange stripe, white and blue with black channel letters to read “AMOCO” where the “Gulf” logo currently is; and change the existing, free-standing “Lucky’s Station” sign to an approximately 64 square foot unlit sign to read “AMOCO.” Since the staff report was done, two issues have been brought up by adjacent property owners: the absence of a trash enclosure, and cracking of the parking lot. Staff finds that with certain conditions the proposed project substantially conforms to the standards and guidelines and would recommend conditional approval with eight conditions. Commissioner Finwall asked if the canopy lights are drop down lights. Ms. Wittman answered no. They are all recessed up in the canopy. Councilmember Junker said he strongly recommends not painting the brick white as it would be out of character with the historic downtown. Also he noticed the Lucky’s pole sign has a light shining on each side. City Planner Wittman said those lights were permitted by the City long ago. Staff maintains if there is lighting on the pylon sign, it should be external and shielded, not internal. Commissioner Larson agreed that white brick is not seen much downtown. He highly encourages the applicant to stick with a black canopy with contrasting signage to not overpower adjacent buildings. Chairwoman Mino agreed with Commissioner Larson. The building will stand out regardless of color. Councilmember Junker said prior to 1999, the building was attractively retrofitted to a 1950s look. He would like to see it look more like it did in 1998. Commissioner Thueson commented that the signage from 1998 is more in keeping with downtown design review standards and guidelines rather than white or blue and red designs. Ms. Wittman said the Commission could recommend approval with modifications that are more consistent with the 1998 design. Jim Hamilton, applicant, said he would prefer not to paint the brick but he will have to get Amoco approval for a darker canopy and building. He asked if the brand colors could be used for the pylon sign. Ms. Wittman said she doesn’t see any reason the pylon sign cannot use the brand colors as proposed. Commissioner Steinwall asked if Mr. Hamilton needs to get Amoco approval for the installation of a trash enclosure as mentioned earlier. Mr. Hamilton said he would have to talk to Amoco about a trash enclosure. Commissioner Walls remarked that the client would probably see a reduction in trash hauling costs because a lot of people toss trash in the existing bin that is not enclosed. Ms. Wittman added that the screening of trash enclosures is in the guidelines for new projects but zoning code does not require it. City Clerk Wolf added that Washington County offers grants to businesses for trash enclosures. Commissioner Finwall said with this being the only gas station in downtown Stillwater, it’s a great opportunity to create a retro-look gas station. Designing it to reflect the history of Stillwater rather than today’s flashy colors would lend well to a business plan. Ms. Wittman stated Mr. Hamilton is the sign consultant but she can help convey that message to the owner. Mr. Hamilton said he will bring that up but there are some constraints with the branding. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 15, 2020 Page 4 of 6 Commissioner Thueson said he would be willing to approve the application now if they would go back to the 1998 design. This is a key location downtown and it needs to be done right. Mr. Hamilton said he will go back to Amoco and see if it can be brought back to the previous look. He thinks he can make that happen. Motion by Chairwoman Mino, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to approve Case No. 2020-13, Design Permit for façade changes and new signage at the property located at 103 Main St N, with the eight conditions recommended by staff, changing Condition #3 to read: the pump canopies and the building band shall be similar in design to 1998 approvals. Commissioner Steinwall asked if a trash enclosure should be required as Condition #9. Ms. Wittman said a trash enclosure is tied to use. Staff can probably help get the enclosure constructed without tying it to this design permit. Commissioner Finwall said she would like to see the application brought back before the Commission with the suggested changes but she is willing to vote in favor. Motion passed, 6-0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS HPC Ordinance Update & Guideline/Standards Discussion Ms. Wittman led discussion of a portion of an evaluation report of the City’s preservation ordinances, submitted by the City’s consulting firm HKGi and Landscape Research. The intent of this evaluation report section is to provide a description of the high-level ordinance improvement recommendations. The second section of the report, which will be used to guide new ordinance development, focuses on a detailed evaluation of all applicable current HPC/design review ordinances. A “should” is a guideline. A “shall” is codified, those are the rules that apply to every projects. She will start preparing comments to share with the consultant. She has heard feedback from some of the Commissioners and encourages additional feedback. Commissioner Larson commented that the Commission often deals with a building trying to be compatible in a historic sense. The standards should not eliminate the possibility of a well designed contemporary building that reflects its own time period, and should not encourage the creation of fake historic architecture. Chairwoman Mino agreed. Building designs that are compatible with their neighborhoods should be encouraged. Commissioner Finwall remarked that in her position as a planner for another city, they have ordinances and then they have standards which may be changed by staff, without council approval, to meet certain technical requirements. She is unclear about the language regarding guidelines versus standards. Ms. Wittman replied that is understandable. The intent of this update is to determine how to shape all the information into something that is reasonable and manageable. In the ordinance/code, there are some laws that apply to every project. There are also guidelines that help guide how to meet those standards. She appreciates all feedback so far. In the fall/winter the HPC will start looking at guidelines in detail. Commissioner Thueson asked if the end result will be a set of city-wide standards that are part of the ordinance, as well as particular standards for districts where they are needed. Ms. Wittman said the current process is looking at the “law” - “how we do things” - the criteria - the standards for design review. In the fall, the HPC will look at guidelines, and may get into specific guidelines for downtown. The idea is to clean up all the ordinances and laws because they are currently just too scattered. She invited Commissioners to continue to comment. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 15, 2020 Page 5 of 6 2020 Preservation Awards Ms. Wittman stated that traditionally the HPC chair presents preservation awards at a May City Council meeting because May is National Historic Preservation Month. Due to the extended Stay At Home Order, presentation of the awards may be scheduled for a later Council meeting. She reviewed a list of projects approved in the last two years to consider for awards. Commissioner Thueson asked if there are other opportunities to recognize people who are doing a good job caring for a historic property over a number of years as opposed to awards that are more project based. Ms. Wittman said the HPC has given lifetime achievement awards for people in the preservation field but she is not aware of any that have been given for preservation efforts of property owners over a number of years. A few years ago, the City started a postcard program to thank property owners for maintaining their structures. This has been difficult to administer in the past couple of years. Commissioner Finwall suggested making the preservation awards during the Preservation Conference. Commissioner Larson noted part of the reason for making the presentations at a Council meeting is that in addition to the awards, a summary is given to the Council of the work of the HPC over the past year. It reminds the Council of what the HPC is doing. Commissioner Steinwall asked if the restoration of the Lift Bridge and the trail should be recognized somehow. Ms. Wittman replied that project could receive an honorable mention award. She also thought about giving an award to the Council for enacting the demolition ordinance. Councilmember Junker stated the City Council loves to hear the summary of the HPC’s work every May. To do it by Zoom would be less desirable. The before and after pictures are very much appreciated. Consensus of the Commission was to table the preservation awards until they can be given in person at a City Council meeting. Ms. Wittman invited the Commissioners to contact her further regarding candidates. FYI South Main Street Retaining Wall Ms. Wittman informed the Commission that the City’s public works/engineering department filed an appeal but then withdrew the appeal. Staff is working with them to explore multiple design options. Something will come back before the Commission. It will most likely not be a flat-faced, concrete wall. 2020 Preserve MN Conference Ms. Wittman updated the Commission on the Conference. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) staff is trying to decide whether to shift gears toward some sort of electronic conference, or postpone the conference to 2021. The State intends to decide by July 1. She has let them know that July 1 seems late for planning efforts to resume. She asked for feedback. Commissioner Steinwall remarked there is too much uncertainty and inability to plan. After stay at home orders expire there will still be a lot of nervousness among people to attend big events. She recommends postponing it for a year so it can still be held in downtown Stillwater. Chairwoman Mino, Commissioners Larson and Walls agreed. Chairwoman Mino suggested Ms. Wittman ask SHPO to move the decision deadline to June 1. Ms. Wittman added that the City has made commitments for some reservations. Some of those funds may be remitted by the State or Federal government. JX Event Center has been reserved for four hours on Thursday. Maybe a showing of the Runk documentary film could be done there, for instance, to at least use the space. ADJOURNMENT Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting April 15, 2020 Page 6 of 6 Motion by Commissioner Walls, seconded by Commissioner Steinwall, to adjourn. Motion passed, 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Amy Mino, Chairwoman ATTEST: Abbi Wittman, City Planner PLANNING REPORT TO: Heritage Preservation Commission CASE NO.: 2020-15 REPORT DATE: May 14, 2020 MEETING DATE: May 20, 2020 APPLICANT: Andrew Mosiman and Christie Wanderer representing Forge and Foundry Distillery LANDOWNER: Chris Siedow REQUEST: Consideration of a Design Permit for business signage LOCATION: 223 Main Street North DESIGNATION: N/A DISTRICT: Downtown Design Review District REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION Andrew Mosiman and Christie Wanderer are planning to open a new distillery, to be known as the Forge and Foundry, at 223 Main Street North. Exterior alterations of the structure have been previously approved by the HPC; the business owners are seeking approval of the design of their proposed business signage. Given its location in the Downtown Design Review District, the signage design must be reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission prior to the issuance of a sign permit. SPECIFIC REQUEST Consideration of a Design Permit for the installation of: Street View – Google (May, 2019) Case No. 2020-15 Page 2  A 13’ long by 8” wall sign proposed to be located in the existing sign band. The laser cut, pinmounted, hand-painted gray/silver letters will read Forge & Foundry; the letters will have a copper accent in vinyl; and  A 26” round projecting sign to be located to the north of the entrance. The acrylic sign will have a gloss black background in a steel black frame. It will contain raised gloss letters with vinyl copper accents. APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES City Code Section Design Permit Standards for Review, Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following applicable standards:  Outdoor advertising: The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with adjacent development.  Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. ANALYSIS The property is subject to the guidelines set forth in the Commercial Historic District Design Manual, as identified in the Stillwater Downtown Plan. The following applicable guidelines can help assist the HPC in determining compliance with the guidelines as well as design consistency, detailing and materials with the existing structure and the previously approved Design Permit. SIGNS AND GRAPHICS  The storefront sign should be used to display the primary name of the business only.  Only one sign that contains the business name or graphic logo is permitted per street facing side.  Use simple, bold letting with sufficient contract between the lettering and the background.  The maximum area of the sign is regulated by the sign ordinance.  Use painted wood where practicable.  Design the sign shape to fit and fill the available space. Consider using long narrow signs spanning the full width of the façade.  Reuse of existing mounting brackets, studs or holes is desirable. The applicants are proposing simple designs that conform to the zoning code and with colors consistent with the district guidelines as well as adjacent properties. There are possible conflicts with the guidelines: • The use of the business name on both signs is discouraged. While the business name is used on both signs, they face in opposite directions, attracting street and sidewalk users. Additionally, the building is set back behind the building to the south. The limited visibility of the business in this location is unique. Thus, staff asserts this substantially conforms to the intent of the guideline. • The use of vinyl is not encouraged. However, the applicant’s use of vinyl as an accent will not detract from the painted letters. • The use of gloss materials and paint can sometimes produce undesirable effects, such as Case No. 2020-15 Page 3 glare. Since the applicant is proposing to use gloss on darker colors, glare should not occur. POSSIBLE ACTIONS The HPC has several alternatives related to these this request: A. Approve. If the HPC finds the attached request conforms to the standards of design review for the Downtown Design Review District, the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, the heritage preservation ordinance, then then Commission could move to approve 2020-15. Staff would recommend the following minimum conditions for approval: 1. The designs shall be consistent with those on file in the Community Development Department, except as modified herein. 2. Disturbance to the exterior wall face shall be done in a fashion as to prevent damage and water intrusion. Any existing drill holes not utilized will be patched. 3. Prior to the release of a sign permit, the applicant and/or property owner shall provide proof of conformance to the approved Design Permit. 4. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between “major” and “minor” is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the standards of design review for the Downtown Design Review District, the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan, and the heritage preservation ordinance, then the Commission could deny the request with or without prejudice. With a denial, the basis of the action is required to be given. The denial, with prejudice, would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a substantially similar application within one year. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the requests could be tabled until January meeting and direct the applicant to modify the request for greater consistency with the Downtown Design Review guidelines. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION According to City Code Section 31-209(h), upon a finding by the design review committee that the application, subject to any conditions imposed, will meet the standards of design review, secure the purpose of the Zoning Code, the comprehensive plan and the heritage preservation ordinance, the design review committee may approve the design permit, subject to conditions as it deems necessary. If a finding is made that the permit would violate the standards of design review, it must deny the application. Staff finds with certain conditions the proposed improvements conforms to the standards set forth for design review and for therefore recommend conditional approval with those conditions outlined in Alternative A, above. Attachments: Applicant Narrative Signage Details (2 pages) Exterior Photos (2 pages) cc: Andrew Mosiman & Christie Wanderer Chris Siedow Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission, The Forge and Foundry Distillery files this application for sign review of the building located on 223 Main Street N., Stillwater Minnesota 55082. Forge and Foundry Distillery will be a craft small batch distillery run by husband and wife team Andrew Mosiman and Christie Wanderer. We would like to update the sign with our current logo. We will include Forge and Foundry to be placed in the same location as the previous sign. It will be hand-painted with a vinyl accent to create the copper found in our logo. In addition, we would like to in clude a round standoff sign that will be located on the front of the building. The sign will be perpendicular to Main Street to help people locate us while driving or walking. This round sign does not extend beyond the current property lines. Thank you for your consideration. Christie Wanderer and Andrew Mosiman Forge and Foundry Distillery Andrew Mosiman Christie Wanderer Forge and Foundry Distillery 13630 Paragon Ave N. Stillwater, MN 55082 651.343.1428 Christie.wanderer@yahoo.com May 7, 2020 Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission 216 4th Street N. Stillwater, MN 55082 PROJECT FORGE & FOUNDRY SHARP DESIGN CO. hello@kelsisharp.com www.sharpdesignco.com PAINTED EXTERIOR SIGNAGE 13’ 15” PAINTED LETTERS ARE APPROX. 8” H PAINTED ADDRESS NUMBERALS ARE 11” H PROJECT FORGE & FOUNDRY SHARP DESIGN CO. hello@kelsisharp.com www.sharpdesignco.com BLADE SIGN 26” 1 GLOSS BLACK ACRYLIC W/ STEEL FRAME RAISED GLOSS LETTERS W/ COPPER VINYL 8” PLANNING REPORT TO: Heritage Preservation Commission CASE NO.: 2020-13 REPORT DATE: May 11, 2020 MEETING DATE: May 20, 2020 APPLICANT: James Hamilton, Hamilton Signs LANDOWNER: PAC Holdings LLC REQUEST: Consideration of a Design Permit for façade changes and new signage LOCATION: 103 Main Street North DESIGNATION: N/A DISTRICT: Downtown Design Review District REPORT BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner INTRODUCTION In the 1980s the City approved the construction of a gas station at 103 Main Street North with a free-standing sign. In 1998 the HPC granted a Design Permit for exterior alterations which included changing the freestanding sign. At the time, the HPC permitted a 20’, 50 square foot sign to be erected onsite. At the HPC’s last regularly-scheduled meeting the HPC discussed the 1998 approval for Amoco. This prior approval granted the (then) owner to paint the building facade band and pump canopies black. As such, the HPC approved the design with the condition the design conform to the 1990s approved design. This condition of approval has not been accepted by the owner and affiliates, citing Amoco no longer uses black as part of its branding scheme. Additionally, it is argued this condition of approval considerably altered the proposed design, changing the design as proposed. Thus, the owner is requesting a reconsideration of the original request. Street View – May, 2019 (Courtesy Google, 2020) 103 Main Street North HPC 2020-13 Page 2 of 5 SPECIFIC REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Permit for the property located at 103 Main Street North to: 1. Paint the building’s black sign band area to white; 2. Change the existing “Lucky’s Station” wall signs with new, 52” unlit signs to read “to go” in white lettering on red; 3. Change the gas pump canopies to white with red and orange and contrasting blue stripes with black channel letters to read ‘AMOCO’ where the “Gulf” logo currently is; 4. Change the existing, free-standing “Lucky’s Station” sign to an (approximately) 64 square foot unlit sign to read “AMOCO”; and 5. Change all existing fluorescent lights to 3000-3500K LED lights. There are a few changes from the last request. The applicant is no longer interested in painting any brick nor will install interior-lit signage but will replace all fluorescent canopy and building lights with LED. ANALYSIS City Code Section 31-509, Design Permit Standards for Review, Sec. 31-509(f) indicates the HPC shall utilize the following applicable standards: o Architectural character:  The suitability of the building for the intended purpose.  The consistency of the applications design with approved design guidelines.  The compatibility of the character of the design with adjacent development. o Outdoor advertising: The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures in relation to the creation of traffic hazards and the appearance and harmony with adjacent development. o Historical structures, vistas, sites and the impact of development on these resources. o Special design guidelines for areas or districts of the city officially adopted by the city council. The Downtown Design Review District Guidelines indicate the following: COLOR  The color of buildings should relate to the adjacent building’s colors to create a harmonious effect.  Avoid colors while visually overpower or strongly contrast with adjacent building colors and established downtown color schemes as a whole.  The color of brick of other natural The use of blue, orange and red on the pump canopies is not inconsistent with the district guidelines. When comparing the proposed color scheme to the existing, the white building sign band and white pump canopy backgrounds will help provide for a more uniform design at the site. Additionally, retaining the brick will continue to help tie the building into the downtown area. As white 103 Main Street North HPC 2020-13 Page 3 of 5 building materials should dictate the color family color.  Painting new infill buildings is prohibited. has been used for traditional wooden storefronts, the white sign band and canopy, is not completely out of character for non-brick elements of a structure. Light colors exist on the Commercial Street restroom building detailing as well as storefronts across the street. SIGNS: QUANTITIES, LOCATION AND SIZE  Only one sign that contains the business name or graphic logo is permitted per street facing side. While the applicant is proposing to use “AMOCO” on the canopies and on the free-standing sign, these signs will face opposite streets. This has been traditionally considered acceptable in this location. The HPC has previously approved a 20’ tall and 50 square foot wide sign to be on this site in the past. SIGNS: STOREFRONTS, MATERIALS, SHAPE, COLOR, LETTING & LIGHTING  The storefront sign should be used to display the primary name of the business only. Use only one line of lettering if possible, leaving out secondary information.  Trademark or logo signs may not be acceptable if the color and character of the sign is not in keeping with the historic character of the area.  Use painted wood where practicable.  Backlit and internally lit signs are not appropriate.  Design the sign shape to fit and fill the space available. Consider using long narrow signs spanning the full width of the façade.  Choose subdued colors and dark tones in keeping with the Victorian tradition.  Choose tones with sufficient contrasts to be clearly legible.  Choose a bold and simple type style and use it on all appropriate signs. The storefront sign is proposed to be changed from the long, linear sign band to a sign that is (somewhat) oval with flat ends, located directly above the entrance doors. This is not the most consistent with the guidelines however, the sign size is being dramatically reduced from what is permissible on this site. Additionally, these signs are set back behind the pumps in an area with lower visibility from the street. The existing structure does not contain painted wooden signs. A combination of plastic and vinyl has been determined to be acceptable by the HPC on this modern building. The use of red signs with white lettering as well as black lettering on either multi-colored or white backgrounds provides sufficient contrast. Lighting has also been discussed with the owner’s representative. Replacement of all existing 8’ fluorescent lights with 4’ LED lights is likely to have an impact on the overall lighting of the site. The applicant has indicated they are willing to replace the pump canopy lights with 3000K LEDs and the building lighting (located behind the sign band fascia) with 3500 K lights. This conforms to the policies set forth by the HPC. Is it likely this change will have an impact on the lighting character of the downtown. However, the HPC has no design standards or guidelines for lighting. As such, the HPC may want to make recommendations for changes to the lighting 103 Main Street North HPC 2020-13 Page 4 of 5 replacement plan though, unless the HPC can cite how the design is in non-conformance to the standards in place, they will not be binding by the Design Permit. ALTERNATIVES The HPC has alternatives related to this request: A. Approve. If the proposed application meets the Design Permit standards and the downtown design review district guidelines, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2020-13. Staff recommends the following conditions for approval: 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department and on file with HPC Case No. 2020-13. 2. Neither the building nor pump canopy columns shall be painted. 3. No signs may be internally illuminated. 4. If the pylon is externally lit, a cut off lighting shield shall be installed. 5. The pylon sign shall not exceed 20’ in height. 6. The pylon sign shall not exceed 50 square feet in area. 7. Any external illumination shall be capped at 3500K. 8. All modifications shall be reviewed and approved prior to be implemented. Major modifications shall be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission; minor modifications shall be reviewed by staff. B. Approve in part. C. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the Design Permit standards or the design review district guidelines, then the Commission may deny the request. With a denial, the basis of action is required to be given. Furthermore, a denial with prejudice would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a similar application for one year. D. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the request may be tabled to the following hearing. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION The modern gas station design does not blend well into the community’s historic core. This design is in conflict with the HPC’s current design guidelines, first adopted in 1989, as well as the Zoning Code’s Architectural Character standards 1 for design review. Simply put, the architectural character of the building makes design review of façade, sign, and pump canopy alterations challenging. As a result, the HPC has sought to promote design alterations that have a better fit. However, the HPC’s preferred design of the site is not desirable for the property owner and affiliates. However, the HPC must determine if the alterations proposed are in conformance to the standards set forth in City Code. Staff asserts the proposed signage would not create a traffic hazard and is in harmony with adjacent development. Staff recommends conditioned approval of all proposed signage. 103 Main Street North HPC 2020-13 Page 5 of 5 However, over the years the building has obtained its existing mis-matched design. Although the white background of the pump canopy and the white façade element is less-desirable in the downtown district, the overall design helps give the site a more unified look. While the commission would prefer the use of black, a subdued color that is more Victorian in nature, white and the accessory colors is not uncommon and is present as an accent on nearby structures. Staff is recommending the Commission determine if changing the pump canopy and building fascia to white will be in conformance with the following Architectural Character standards set forth in City Code: • The consistency of the applications design with approved design guidelines; and • The compatibility of the character of the design with adjacent development. If the Commission finds the proposed changes are in conformance, the Commission should move to approve the application with conditions outlined in alternative A, above. ATTACHMENTS Building Modifications Multi-colored Canopy Sign (3 pages) Freestanding Sign Color Palette BUILDINGJobber: Dooley Petro Inc Address: 103 Main Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 Date: 02.26.20 Site Level: CSVB: 1992247 Designer: Connor Daniels REVISION: JR2 This is an original concept drawing created by Big Red Rooster Flow, LLC. It is submitted for use in connection with the project being planned for you by BRRFlow. All or any part of this design (except registered trademarks) remains the property of BRRFlow. This drawing is not to scale. For all questions regarding the scope of the project, please contact Jolene Clarke 847.549.2223 or The Brand Image Adviser, Ronda Campbell 630.251.3520.BIG RED ROOSTER FLOW 2 Northfield Plaza, Ste 211 Northfield, IL 60093 Back Elevation Right Elevion Left Elevation Front Elevation See Site Notes page for specific paint codes and contact info. *REMOVE ALL UNAPPROVED SIGNAGE FROM DISPENSERS* YES, this location is receiving a Amoco “Togo” *image (Qty. 2 ). Install: 52" Illuminated Togo Sign 77" Illuminated Togo Sign 112" Illuminated Togo Sign *Note: ToGo sign to be centered over entry door and centered on the fascia above the gradient stripe. YES, this location is receiving a Amoco “Service” image. (Qty. 0 ). Install: 5' Service Decal 5' Service on ACM 5' Illuminated Service Sign 8' Service Decal 8' Service on ACM 8' Illuminated Service Sign 12' Illuminated Service Sign Exterior Building Walls to be painted Amoco Retail White (c.01) to be kept natural Building Fascia to be Amoco Retail White (C.01). See Note Below Paint Fascia Install new ACM Install Vinyl Is this location is receiving a Red Stripe? Yes, Install RED Awning Decal No Fascia Detail Notes A B C D E 30' 48" aa dd ee cc 8"52"48"30' cc 75' aa ddee 75'20 5/8" No Image Available This is an original concept drawing created by Big Red Rooster Flow, LLC. It is submitted for use in connection with the project being planned for you by BRRFlow. All or any part of this design (except registered trademarks) remains the property of BRRFlow. This drawing is not to scale. For all questions regarding the scope of the project, please contact Jolene Clarke 847.549.2223 or The Brand Image Adviser, Ronda Campbell 630.251.3520.BIG RED ROOSTER FLOW 2 Northfield Plaza, Ste 211 Northfield, IL 60093 AERIAL Back Elevation CANOPY 1 OF 2 MAP Notes Approved By Date - Any Additional Fascia Should Be Removed. ACM Is Meant To Fit Over First Layer Of Fascia Only. - If Fascia Height Is Less Than 30” It Will Need To Be Built Up To At Least 30” Inches Right Elevion Left Elevation Front Elevation Jobber: Dooley Petro Inc Address: 103 Main Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 Date: 02.26.20 Site Level: CSVB: 1992247 Install bull nose fascia with light bar Install bull nose fascia with no light bar Install flat ACM with 3D decal applied Light bar No light bar Install BGB Flat ACM (Jobber supplied ACM), decal only through Amoco Parts. Must have approval from Amoco Jobber Engineer. Light bar No light bar Paint existing flat ACM white and install bullnose decal. Must have approval from Amoco Jobber Engineer. Install Amoco T&0 (Qty. 0 ) 60" 36" 34" (approval needed) 30" (approval needed) Install Amoco channel letters (Qty. 1 ) 22" 15" (approval needed) Paint canopy columns Amoco White & Amoco Dk. Blue(Amoco Dk Bue to be painted 10' from the ground and above, per visual) Apply Amoco Light Blue stripe decal 10' from ground Install flag signs 10'6" from the ground Canopy deck to be White A B C D E F G H J K Designer: Connor Daniels I K 48” 50' Canopy clearance sign, approximate location (should not be installed under the canopy helios) Place valance and skirt graphics so that they form a circle 22” AMOCO letter logo signG 48' 10'-6”sign 10'-0”stripeIJ 1’-3” 13’-3” 1’-3” C 50'H611 512 611 512 48'611512611512C C C Revision: R1 No Image Available This is an original concept drawing created by Big Red Rooster Flow, LLC. It is submitted for use in connection with the project being planned for you by BRRFlow. All or any part of this design (except registered trademarks) remains the property of BRRFlow. This drawing is not to scale. For all questions regarding the scope of the project, please contact Jolene Clarke 847.549.2223 or The Brand Image Adviser, Ronda Campbell 630.251.3520.BIG RED ROOSTER FLOW 2 Northfield Plaza, Ste 211 Northfield, IL 60093 AERIAL Back Elevation CANOPY 2 OF 2 MAP Notes Approved By Date - Any Additional Fascia Should Be Removed. ACM Is Meant To Fit Over First Layer Of Fascia Only. - If Fascia Height Is Less Than 30” It Will Need To Be Built Up To At Least 30” Inches Right Elevion Left Elevation Front Elevation Install bull nose fascia with light bar Install bull nose fascia with no light bar Install flat ACM with 3D decal applied Light bar No light bar Install BGB Flat ACM (Jobber supplied ACM), decal only through Amoco Parts. Must have approval from Amoco Jobber Engineer. Light bar No light bar Paint existing flat ACM white and install bullnose decal. Must have approval from Amoco Jobber Engineer. Install Amoco T&0 (Qty. 0 ) 60" 36" 34" (approval needed) 30" (approval needed) Install Amoco channel letters (Qty. 1 ) 22" 15" (approval needed) Paint canopy columns Amoco White & Amoco Dk. Blue(Amoco Dk Bue to be painted 10' from the ground and above, per visual) Apply Amoco Light Blue stripe decal 10' from ground Install flag signs 10'6" from the ground Canopy deck to be White A B C D E F G H J K I K 48” 50' Canopy clearance sign, approximate location (should not be installed under the canopy helios) Place valance and skirt graphics so that they form a circle 22” AMOCO letter logo signG 48' 10'-6”sign 10'-0”stripeIJ 1’-3” 13’-3” 1’-3” C 50'H611 512 611 512 48'611512611512C C Jobber: Dooley Petro Inc Address: 103 Main Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 Date: 02.26.20 Site Level: CSVB: 1992247 Designer: Connor Daniels Revision: Original C This is an original concept drawing created by Big Red Rooster Flow, LLC. It is submitted for use in connection with the project being planned for you by BRRFlow. All or any part of this design (except registered trademarks) remains the property of BRRFlow. This drawing is not to scale. For all questions regarding the scope of the project, please contact Jolene Clarke 847.549.2223 or The Brand Image Adviser, Ronda Campbell 630.251.3520.BIG RED ROOSTER FLOW 2 Northfield Plaza, Ste 211 Northfield, IL 60093 CANOPY DETAIL Approved By Date G clearance16'-0"1'3" radius 5/8" 1/4" 6" 2 5/8" 1 3/8" 1" 2'-0" 26"bnose 5" 5" 48"fascia 13’- 3" 22” equal equal 15"15" Amoco OrangeLens Amoco Lt BlueLens FORECOURT NOTES 2 OF 2 This is an original concept drawing created by Big Red Rooster Flow, LLC. It is submitted for use in connection with the project being planned for you by BRRFlow. All or any part of this design (except registered trademarks) remains the property of BRRFlow. This drawing is not to scale. For all questions regarding the scope of the project, please contact Jolene Clarke 847.549.2223 or The Brand Image Adviser, Ronda Campbell 630.251.3520.BIG RED ROOSTER FLOW 2 Northfield Plaza, Ste 211 Northfield, IL 60093EXTERIOR PAINT SPECIFICATIONSAmoco Red - Sherwin Williams, SW6869, "Stop" - Glidden Professional, PPG Amoco Red (Custom Mix) C 2 BP Warm Gray - Pump Islands - Sherwin Williams, SW7053, "Adaptive Shade" - Glidden Professional, Order #A1860, Spec #40YY 25/074, "Gray Mountain" - Benjamin Moore, 2137-40, "Desert Twilight" - P28 DTM (Gallon) - Anchor Paint, BP Warm Gray - CC3068 (Acrylic), CC3115 (Oil) C 3 Amoco Gray - Store Wainscot - Sherwin Williams, SW7065, "Argos" - Glidden Professional, PPG1009-4 Gray Stone C 4 Amoco Light Blue Pantone Process BlueC (C100 M13 Y0 K0) C 5 Amoco Dark Blue - Sherwin Williams - SW6965, "Hyper Blue" - Glidden Professional, PPG Amoco Blue (Custom Mix) C 6 Amoco Silver Match PMS 877C C 7 10 ADA BLUEADA/Handicap Blue~ - Glidden Professional, "Handicap Blue", 25524 trac paint - Sherwin W illiams, TM2133, "Setfast Blue", Setfast marking latex - Benjamin Moore, P58-30, "Handicap Blue", Safety/Zone marking latex - Anchor Paint, BP ADA Blue - CC3074 ~Handicap Bl u e pai nt is us ed for pavement s tri ping and marking on s ite (as r equired).INTERIOR PAINTP1 WALL PAINT - Eggshell ﬁnish - Glidden Professional, Order #A0090, Spec #40YY 79/168, "Candle W ax" - Sherwin Williams, SW6379, "Jersey Cream" - Benjamin Moore, OC-112, "Goldtone" - P28 DTM (Gallon) - Anchor Paint, Candlewax Interior - CC3072 (Eggshell Latex) P4 PAINT FOR COFFEE BACKWALL - Eggshell ﬁnish - Sherwin Williams, SW6866, "Heartthrob" P5 PAINT FOR METAL CABINETRY - Eggshell ﬁnish - Glidden Professional, Order #A0731, "Dakota Land" P2 PAINT FOR DROP CEILING & DOORS - Eggshell ﬁnish - Glidden Professional, Order #A1807, Spec #30YY 62/127, "W ater Chestnut" - Sherwin Williams, SW6141, "Softer Tan" - Benjamin Moore, OC-11, "Clay Beige" - P28 DTM (Gallon) - Anchor Paint, W ater Chestnut Interior - CC3073 (Eggshell Latex) P3 PAINT FOR to go BACKWALL - Eggshell ﬁnish - Glidden Professional, Order #A0717, Spec #20YY 65/285, "Indian Corn" - Sherwin Williams, SW6380, "Humble Gold" - Benjamin Moore, 2160-50, "Oklahoma Wheat" - P28 DTM (Gallon) - Anchor Paint, Dark Pearl Interior - CC3070 (Eggshell Latex) White (Canopy Deck, Canopy Columns, Store Exterior) - Glidden Professional, Order #A 0128 , Spec #50GY 83/010, "White Wing" - Sherwin Williams, SW7006, "Extra White" - Benjamin Moore, OC-67, "Ice Mist" - P28 DTM (Gallon) - Anchor Paint, BP White - 4900 (Acrylic), 900 (Oil) C 1 •Community Engagement •Landscape Architecture •Engineering •Construction Administration •Community Engagement •Historic Resources Scope of Work: •Redesign Chestnut Street between Main Street and Lift Bridge concourse as a pedestrian only Civic Plaza •Allow for emergency vehicle access to bridge •Design St. Croix Crossing Loop Trail intersection with Downtown Promenade •Pedestrian enhancements at Chestnut and Main St. •Additional pedestrian safety enhancements at the following intersections with Main Street •Mulberry •Myrtle •Olive •Nelson Budget: •$2M Design, Engineering, and Construction Schedule: •Community Engagement/Design: May-November 2020 •Bidding: Early 2021 •Construction: Spring/Summer 2021 Downtown Value Statements: •Riverfront destination •Outdoor recreation gateway •Lively arts and cultural center •Historic and hip •It’s all right here •Where everyone knows your name •Pedestrians first •Appearances matter •Easy access and orientation •Stillwater for the next generation • • • • • • • Gaslamp Quarter Promenade, San Diego Rockwell, Tx Albemarle Plaza, CharlottesvillePhoenix Plaza • •