The URL can be used to link to this page

96-1076 � � � � � �� Council File # �(Y� � ��(/ Green Sheet # � �(O RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By �� /� .l�k� Referred To Committee: Date 1 2 3 4 5 WHEREAS, Robert and Cherry Grant, 415 Laurel Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota 6 55102 made application to the Heritage Preservation Commission to approve the installation 7 of a skylight pursuant to the provisions of the Saint Paul Legislative Code for the structure at 8 415 Laurel Avenue, legally described as the E 40 ft of Lot 8, Blk 11, Cochran's Subdv of an 9 Addn to Blk 11, Woodland Park Addn, said property being located in the Historic Hill 10 Heritage Preservation District; and 11 12 WHEREAS, The Heritage Preservation Commission, after having provided notice to 13 affected property owners, conducted a public hearing on the application on April 13, 1995 and 14 the commission, in its Resolution No. 2282, dated April 27, 1995, denied the application 15 based on the following findings and conclusions: 16 17 1. The deck is located at the rear, northeast corner of the structure and wraps 18 around the East side to a doorway. Most of the East side portion will be 19 covered by a porch roof yet to be constructed. The posts and valence of this 20 rear porch will match the existing front porch and the rear porch forward/deck 21 railing matches the front porch railing as well. This rear porch forward/deck 22 will have little visibility from the street and its design is compatible with the 23 structure. The deck is integrated into the design of the building and does not 24 simply project from one wall. 25 26 2. The skylight for which the applicant seeks approval provides light, ventilation, 27 and views to a fourth floor children's playroom. The space was previously 28 used for storage. The only window in this space are at the front elevation and 29 close to the floor. The flat skylight is a Velux product measuring 30 inches by 30 38 inches and projecting three to four inches about the roof plane. 31 32 3. The applicant and his clients choose not to install a skylight in a location with 33 limited or no visibility from the street. A skylight near the front of the other, 34 or West, side of the roof would probably be largely hidden by the corner tower, 35 but the view from it would not be as desirable, according to the applicant. A 36 skylight on the top, flat part of the roof was dismissed because of the potential 37 for leakage and the belief that a skylight and a roof hatch would crowd the roof 38 or ceiling too much. 39 40 4. The skylight is located on the side but near the front of the building on a very 41 prominent roof plane. It is quite visible from the street. This steeply pitched 42 (22:12) hipped roof is a dominant and important part of the design of the 43 building. The skylight interrupts the strong, smooth, unbroken sweep of roof 1� . 9� -/o�� ' 1 � and, therefore, has a significant adverse impact on the architectural and historic 2 character and integrity of the Kirk House. In addition, because the skylight is 3 above the rooftops to the East, it provides nice views but is also visible from 4 some distance down the street. The skylight is contrary to Hill District 5 guideline which calls for avoiding alteration to distinctive azchitectural features. 6 7 WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Legislative Code § 73.06, Robert and 8 Cherry Grant duly filed with the City Council an appeal from the determination made by the 9 commission and requested a hearing before the City Council for the purpose of considering 10 the actions taken by the commission. The appeal was filed beyond the time allowed for such 11 appeal filings provided by ordinance because the Grants' were subsequently cited for having 12 or not removing the skylight in question as it was installed prior to commission review and 13 allowed to remain in contradiction to the commission's order. The Grants' were issued a 14 criminal citation for this violation and the matter was heard in Ramsey County District Court 15 - Housing Division where the parties agreed to continue the criminal matter in order to allow 16 the Grants' the opportunity to appeal the decision of the commission. It now appears that the 17 Grants' contractor, a Mr. Bradley, did not inform the Grants' of their right to appeal the 18 commission's decision and that the Grants' were not otherwise directly notified of the 19 commission's decision. Therefore, it was determined that the Grants be allowed to present this 20 appeal to the City Council; and 21 22 WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Legislative Code § 73.06 and upon notice to affected 23 parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the Council of the City of Saint Paul on July 24 10, 1996 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and 25 26 WHEREAS, the Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the 27 application, the report of staff, the record minutes and the resolution of the commission, does 28 hereby 29 30 RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby reverses the 31 decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission for the following reasons: 32 33 1. Appellant was willing and paid for many of the building permits required for 34 the project. 35 36 2. Appellant pays $10,000.00 in property taxes and made a $750,000.00 37 investment in the subject property. 38 39 3. The skylight makes the property more livable. 40 41 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Robert and Cherry Grant be 42 and is hereby granted on condition that the Grants' pay any additional sums required for any 43 additional building permits including any double fees; and 44 Ir;• � �'�-io7� � 1 . . � 2 AND BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this 3 resolution to Robert and Cherry Grant, the Zoning Administrator and the Heritage 4 Preservation Commission. 5 r� �` i �` � �, ��'�� " � i ` ; f_r Yeas Navs Absent Requested by Department of: a e �ostrom arris � uerin � _ e ar _� ettman une � BY� Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date�,�, y �� T—'�� , .��0�/� Adoption Certified by Council Secretary BY. � By� Approved by Mayor for Submission to '�/_ Council Approved by Mayor: Date �� By: ��,��- ,%��/�",�,', By. . . .. f.:.... � 9�-�a�� City Council � �► N A D �REEN SHEET N° 3 fi 3 61 a e 266-8610 ❑o�w►�r►rer,raRE�� cmcourici� �rrm�uonre Councilmember Jerry Blakey �� CITYATTORNEY �CITYCLERK NUM�ER FOR S BE IL ENDJ1 (DA �p�q�p a BUDOE7 DIRECTOR �flN.A Mt�T.BERYICES DIR. OWDER �MAYOR(OR ASSISTANn � TOTAL#E OF SKiNATUR�PAOES (CUP ALL LOCA�IONS FOR 810NATURE) ' ACTION REOUE8TED: Finalizing City Council action taken on July 10 to grant the appeal of Robert and Cherry Grant for a skylight at 415 Laurel Avenue. REC�M�NDATION8'Appr°w(��°r Ry��R� PER80NAL 8HRVICE CONTRACT'S MUBT ANSWER TME FOLLOWINti QUESI'101/s: _PLANNNrO COA�M�AISSION �,...CIV�8ERVIGECd�IM188�N 1. Has tMs penonRirm eve�worked undsr e ooMraCt�r.kNs depprtmsnt7 - _��E _ YES NO 2: Hafl thfs psrson/Iirm ever been a dty employeq? —�� — YES NO _DIBTRICT COURr _ 3. Dces this ps►wn/firm poasess a skill not nonnally possesse�d t►Y�Y�u��Y�YeeZ 8t1PPORT8 WHK�H COUNCIL OBJECTrvE9 YES NO Explain ell yes answsn on�spants sh�st and at�eh to qrNn sMst MIITIATINO PROBLEMi��88UE.OPPO�RTl1NITY(Who.N�Mt.WMn.Whsn.Why): ADVANTAOES�APPROVED: AU6 2 2 �6 1ERRY BLAKEY DISADVANTAOES IFAPPROVED: � � • Aw��i� Il�� W�1'� W I�UG 21 1996 �BADYANTAOEB IF NdT APPpOVED: ° TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION = COSj/RBVENUE BUD�iETED(C11iCLE ONE) YES NO ��{�gpup� ACTIVITY NUIISER FINMICIAL iNF�iAnAl'ION:(EXPI.AIN) OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY • � Timothy E. Marx, City Attorney �� _ 'O�� CITY OF SAINT PAUL Civil Division Norm Coleman, Mayor 400 City Hall Telephone: 612 266-8710 IS West Kellogg Blvd. Facsimile: 612 298-5619 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 � August 13 , 1996 Nancy Anderson City Council Research 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 RE: Appeal of Robert and Cherry Grant of a decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission heard by Council of July 10, 1996 . Dear Nancy: Attached please find the signed original resolution finalizing the decision of the Council in the above referenced matter granting the appeal of Robert and Cherry Grant of a decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission. Sincerely, i+�/NV1"a"�► Pe er W. Warner Attachment � OFFICE OF LICENSE,INSPECTIONS AND ��,O?� ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RobertKessler,Director � { CITY OF SAINT PAUL LOWRY PROFESSIONAL Telephone:612-266-9090 Norm Coleman,Moyor BUILDING Facsrmile: 612-266-9099 Suite 300 350 St Peter Street SaintPaul,Minnesota 55102-ISIO w�r 19 June 1996 � �� JUN 1 9 1g96 Ms.Nancy Anderson City Council Research 310 City Hall Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102 Deaz Ms.Anderson: I would like to request that City Council hearings for two appeals of decisions of the Heritage Preservation Comtnission be scheduled for July 10, 1996. The two cases are as follows: �Appellants:Robert and Cherry Crrant Properiy address: 415 Laurel Avenue(Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District;Ward 1) Purpose: appeal HPC decision denying approval for skylight(HPC File#2282) 2. Appellant: Gregory Lehman Property address: 839 East Fourth Street(Dayton's Bluff Heritage Preservation District;Ward 7) Purpose: appeal HPC decision denying approval for side-yard deck(HPC File#2609) My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the June 26, 1996 City Council meeting. These public hearings do not require published notice. Please call me at 266-9087 if you have any questions. Sincerely, � �� n ; �.�, � �.��,�� , �, Aaron Rubenstein Preservation Planner cc: Robert Kessler,LIEP Robert Lunning,HPC Chair Peter Warner,CAO OFFICE OF LICENSE,INSPECTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTlON Q / _ IO�� Robert Kessler,Director r b � CITY OF SAINT PAUL LOWRYPROFESSIONALBUILDING Telephone:612-266-9090 Norm Coleman,Mayor Suite 300 Facsimtle: 6I2-266-9099 350 St.Peter Street Scint Paul,Minnesota 55102-1 SIO 2 July 1996 Ms.Nancy Anderson Secretary to the City Council 310 City Hall Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102 RE: HPC File#2282: Robert and Cherry Grant City Council Hearing: July 10, 1996 P SE: To consider an appeal of the Heritage Preservation Commission's decision to derry a building permit application for a skylight on the structwe located at 41 S Laurel Avenue in the Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ACTION: DENIAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL PORT:None. OPPOSITION: None. • Dear Ms.Anderson: Robert and Cherry Grant have appealed the decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission to deny a building permit application to Todd Bradley for a skylight on their house located at 415 Laurel Avenue. The Heritage Preservation Commission held a public hearing on this pernut application on Apri127, 1995,at which time Mr. Bradley addressed the commission. At the close of the public hearing, the commission voted 5-4-2 to deny approval of the pemut. The appellants,Mr. and Ms. Grant,were later cited for having,or not removing,the skylight,as the skylight had been installed prior to HPC review. The matter went to Housing Court,where it was laid over to allow the Grants the opportunity to appeal the decision to the City Council. (The HPC applicant for the skylight,Mr. Bradley,appazently did not inform the Grants of their right to appeal the decision and the Grants were not directly notified of the decision.) This appeal is scheduled to be heazd by the City Council on July 10, 1996. Please notify me if any Councilmember wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing. Sin rely, n � � > Aaron Rubenstein Heritage Preservation Planner Attachments • cc: City Councilmembers Robert Kessler,LIEP Director Robert Lunning,HPC Chair Peter Warner,City Attorney's Office � Gerald Frisch,appellants' attomey r.Aw or�cEs NILVA AND FRISCH, P. A. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION , • ESTABLISI�D 1935 2350 West Seventh Sveet • Saint Paul, Minnesota 55116 ---- (612) 690-1591 AI.LEN �.NfIi.VA FAX(612) 690-2613 1911-198'7 GERALD E.FRISCH � Apri130, 1996 _ �� ": k`� City of St. Paul o �-�� Office of License, Inspections and w <; �°� Environmental Protection �. �� ..,�.�. 300 Lov�*ry Professicnal Building ' '�' ' � ° _ ,_ � 350 St. Peter Street o `'" St. Paul, MN 55102-1510 Attention: Aaron Rubenstein, Staff Person to St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission Dear Mr. Rubenstein: On behalf of our clients, Robert and Cherry Grant, owners of 415 Laurel Avenue, St. . Paul, MN, please mnsider this as Appeal to the St. Paul City Council for review of the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission's decision that a skylight has a significant adverse impact on the historic and architectural character and integrity of the Kirk House, 415 Laurel Avenue, St. Paul, MN. The basis for this Appeal is that the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission acted arbitrary and caprioiousiy in making its determination on Apri127, 1995 in File No. 2'L82. This Appeal is taken from the Resolution of St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission of Apri125, 1996, within the 14day appeal period. We understand that you will be notifying us when the matter will be heard by the St. Paul City Counc�l. Very truly yours, N1LV D FRISCH, P.A. rald E. Frisch � GEF:ks � Mr. and Mrs. Robert Grant OFF7CE OF LICENSE,INSPECTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Rober(Kuskr,Direcror � ` �. ,�� • CITY OF SAINT PAUL LOWRY PROFESSIONAL Telepho»e:612-?66�9090 Norm Coleman,Mayor BUILDING Focsimile: 61?•266-9a99 Suire 300 3S0 St.Peter Smet Soin�Poul,Minnesoto 55J02-1310 29 April 1996 Robert and Cherry Grant 415 Laurel Avenue Saint Paul,MN 55102 Dear Mr. and Ms. Grant: � The Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission passed a resolution at its Apri125, 1996 meeting stating that the commission dces not wish to reconsider its decision to decry approval of the skylight on your house and that any appeal of that decision should proc�eed directly to the City Council. A copy of the resolution is enclosed. Therefore,if you wish to appeal the commission's decision,please • send me a letter stating that and the grounds for your appeal. I would need to receive such a letter by May 9, 1996. Please call me at 26b-9087 if you have any questions or conccrns. Sincerely, � � -��,'�.�'vv.. �Jv�c��c�,�v� � ` Aaron Rubenstein Preservation Planner cc: Gerald Frisch Philip Miller,City Attorney's Office Peter Warner,City Attomey's Office • CITY OF SAINT PAUL • HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION FILE NUMBER 96-� DATE 25 April 1996 WHEREAS,the Saint Paui lieritage Pr�vation Coaumssion is authorized by Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul L�gislative Cade to review building permit applications for e,�io,r alterations,new canstruction or demolition on a within designated Heritag�Preservation Sites or Heritage Preseavation Districts;and WHEREAS,Todd Bradley,a designer and contractor representing the owners of 415 Laurel Avenue,applied for a building permit to install a skylight on the structure located at 415 Laurel Avenue,which skylight had already been installed without HPC approval;and WHEREAS,dye Robert A.Kirk House at 415 Laurel Avenue is located within the Historic Hill Heritage Prese.rvation District and is categorized as pivotal to the district;and WIiEREAS,the Heritage Preservation Commission found that the skylight has a significant adverse impact on the historic and arclutectural chazacter and integrity of the Kirk House and denied approval of a building permit for the skylight by a vote of 5-4-2 on Apri127, 1995(File#2282);and WHEREAS,Mr.Bradley was natified of the HPC's decision and his right to appeal in a letter dated May 1, 1995 b�ut the property owners were not directly notified;and • WHEREAS,the commission's decision was not appealed within 14 days of the date of the letter; and WHEREAS,the property owners were issued a misdemeanor citation for code violation concerning the skylight;and WHEREAS,it is the opinion of the City Attomey's 0�"ice that the property owners should have the right to appeal the commission's decision; NOW,THEREFORE,BE 1T RESOLVED that the Heritage Preservation Commission supports its earlier decision in this matter,dces not wish to reconsider its decision,and therefore advises that any appeal should be heard by the City Council without further HPC review;and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any such appeal shall be made within 14 days of the adoption of this resolution. MOVED BY Buetow � SECONDED BY Hauser IN FAVOR 10 AGAINST 0 • ABSTAIN 0 OFFICE OF LICENSE,INSPECTIONS AND FNVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Robert Kesskr,Disector � / ` '�n / l� � �,I CITY OF SAINT PAUL BUIlDINGINSPECT70NAND Telephone:612-2669090 No�m Coleman, Mayos DESIGN Facsrmile:612-2669099 350 St Peter Str�et Sytitt 300 Saint Paul,Minncsow S5IO2-1570 � 1 May 1995 Mr. Todd Bradley 427 Laurel Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Mr. Bradley: The Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission voted at its Apri127,1995 meeting, as you know, to approve your building permit application for the rear deck/porch, but to deny approval for the skylight, at 415 Laurel Avenue. I have enclosed a copy of the commission's resolution to that effect. You have the right to appeal this decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Such appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of this letter. • Chapter 73 requires that the following paragraph be included in all letters indicating denial of a permit: Secrion 73.06 (h)Appeal to the Citv Council. The permit applicant or any parry aggrieved by the decision of the heritage preservation commission shall, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the heritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order and decision to the city council. T7te appeal shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the division of pla�uting of two (2) copies of a norice of appeal and statement setting fonh the grounds for the appeal. The division of planning shall trans»rit one copy of the notice of appeal and statement to the city council and one copy to the heritage preservation commission. The commission, in any written order den�•ing a permit applicarion, shall advise the applicant of the right to appeal to the city council and include this paragraph in all such orders. Because the Heritage Preservation Commission is no longer staffed by the Planning Division, I would request that any letter of appeal be sent to me at LIEP instead of to the Planning Division. Please call me at 266-9087 if you have any questions or concerns. Si� erely, ., ...-.. 2l. ' ' � Aaron Rubenstein Preservation Planner cc: Tate Halvorson, LIEP • Greg Johnson, LIEP CITY OF SAINT PAUL • HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTION FILE NUMBER 22s2 DATE 27 April 1995 R'HEREAS, the Sain1 Paul Heritage Preservation Commission is authorized by Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Cocle to review building pemut applications for exterior alterations, new construction or demolition on or within designated Heritage Preservation Sites or Heritage Preservation Districts; and R'HEREAS, Todd Bradley has applied for a building permit to install a skylight and construct a rear deck on the structure located at 415 Laurel Avenue within the Historic Hill Heritage Preservation Distriet; and WHEREAS, the Robert A. Kirk I�o�use at 415 Laurel Avenue is a three and one-half story, Queen Anne style structure designed by Hermann Kretz and William Thomas, constructed in 1888, and categorized as pivotal to the Historic Hill District; and WHEREAS, the Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District guidelines for design review include the following: 11. Restoration and Rehabilitation, A. General Principles: 2. The distinguishing original qualities or • character of a building, structure, or site and its environment sha[I not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. II. A.: S. Distinctive srytisric features or ear�mples of a skilled craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity. II. A.: 9. Contemporary d�cign for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alteraxions and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the properry, neighborhood, or environment. II. D. Roofs: ...The original roof type, slope, and overhangs should be preserved. New dormers may be acceptable in some cases if compatible with the original design. Modern skylights are a simple way to alter a roof to ad»uit light and air without disrz�pting its plane surface, are less naticeable than dormers, and may also be acceptable. Skylights should be flat and as close to the roof plane as possible. They should not be placed on the front roof plane. IL F. Porches and Exterior Architectural Features: Deck...additions may be acceptable in some cases, but should be kept to the rear of buildings where they will be the most inconspicuous and detract the least from the historical context. The detailing of decks...should be compatible with the period and style of the building; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission, based upon evidence presented at its • Apri127, 1995 public hearing on said permit application, made the following findings of fact: q(. - �� '7 � • Heritage Preservation Commission Resolution: File #2282 Page Two 1. The deck is located at the rear, northeast corner of the structure and wraps around the east side to a doorway. Most of the east side portion will be covered by a porch roof yet to be constructed. The posts and valence of this rear porch will match the e�sting front porch and the rear porch/deck railing matches the front porch railing as well. This rear porch/deck will have little visibility from the street and its design is compatible with the structure. The deck is integrated into the design of the building and does not simply project from one wall. 2. The skylight for which the applicant seeks approval provides light, ventilation, and views to a fourth floor children's play room. The space was previously used for storage. The only windows in this space are at the front elevation and close to the floor. The flat skylight is a Velux product measuring 30" x 38" and projecting three to four inches above the roof plane. 3. The applicant and his clients chose not to install a skylight in a location with limited or no visibility from the street. A skylight neaz the front of the other, or west, side of the roof would probably be largely hidden by the comer tower but the view from it would not be as desirable, according to the applicant. A skylight on the top, flat part of the roof was dismissed because of the potential for leakage and a belief that a skylight and a roof hatch would crowd the roof or ceiling too much. • 4. The skylight is located on the side but near the front of the building on a very prominent roof plane. It is quite visible from the street. The steeply pitched (22:12) hipped roof is a dominant and important part of the design of the building. The skylight interrupts the strong, smooth, unbroken sweep of roof and, therefore, has a significant adverse impact on the architectural and historic character and integrity of the Kirk House. In addition, because the skylight is above the rooftops to the east, it provides nice views but is also visible from some ways down the street. The skylight is contrary to the Hill District guideline which calls for avoiding alteration to distinctive architectural features. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings, the Heritage Preservation Commission grants approval of the reaz porch/deck as proposed and denies approval of the skylight. MOVED BY Baker SECONDED BY Hauser IN FAVOR 5 AGAINST 4 ABSTAIN 2 Der,isions of the Heritage Preservation Commission are final, subjed to appeal to the City Council within 14 days by anyone affeded by the decision. This resolution does not obviate the need for meexing applicable building and zoning code requirements, and does not constitute approval for ta�c credits. • 415 Lawel Avenue HPC File#2282 HPC Meetin�tes • 4.13.95: Applicant Todd Bradley did not appear;case laid over to 4.27.95. 4.27.95: Aaron Rubenstein showed slides of the site and sucnmarized the staff report. Applicant Todd Bradley:doesn't s�ee a problem with the skylight,it's small and'sasignificant and shouldn't be a problem. Commissioner Baker: asked why work done without a building permit. Bradley:was in a hurry,thought HPC"could cut some slack,"expensive project. Commissioner Albers: is the roof a significant architectural feature? Bradley:tt►ere aze numerous skylights in the area. Commissioner Frame:asked HPC staff about that. Commissioners Baker and Hauser moved and seconded the draft resolution to deny approval of the skylight and approve the rear dcck/porc�. Commissioner Albers asked Commissioner Heide about the architectural significance of the roof. Motion passed 5-4-2(Kessler and Cazey abstauung). notes prepazed by Aazon Rubenstein • • �t C� - l Q'� � • HPC FILE #2282 CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FILE NAME: Install skylight and construct rear deck DATE OF APPLICATION: 3.7.95 APPLICANT: Todd Bradley DATE OF HEARING: 4.13.95 LOCATION: 415 Laurel Avenue (north side between Western and Arundel) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: E 40 ft of Lot 8, Blk 11, Cochran's Subdv of and Addn to Blk 11, Woodland Park Addn HPC SITE/DISTRICT: Historic Hill District CATEGORY: Pivotal CLASSIFICATION: Moderate STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE: 4.7.95 BY: Aazon Rubenstein A. SITE DESCRIPTION: The Robert A. Kirk House at 415 Laurel is a three and one-half story, • Queen Anne style residence constructed in 1888 and designed by Hermann Kretz. It has a truncated, steeply hipped roof, a front corner tower, and a front gabled dormer with a horseshoe balcony. The exterior walls are clapboazd with fishscales, stick work, and carved panels. The full-width front porch wraps around one side. At the rear is a new, one-story, solarium addition. A newer garage is at the rear of the lot with alley access. B. PROPOSED CHANGES: The applicant seeks approval for a skylight and rear deck that have already been installed. C. GUIDELINE CITATIONS: The Historic Hill Heritage Preservation District guidelines for design review include the following: II. Restoration and Rehabilitation, A. General Principles: 2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. IL A.: S. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of a skilled craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity. IL A.: 9. Contemporary design for alterarions and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the properry, neighborhood, or environment. • HPC Staff Report: File #2282 • Page Two II. D. Roo,fs: ...The original roof type, slope, and overhangs should be preserved. New dormers may be acc�tcble in soxrre cases if com�atible with the original design. Modern skylights are a simple w�ay to alter a roof to admft light and air without disrupting its plane surface, are less noticeable tltan dormers, and may also be acceptabde. SkyCigh�r should be flat and as close to the roof plane as possi8l�c. They should not be placed on the front roof plane. IL F. Porches and Exterior Architectural Features: Deck...additions may be acceptable in some cases, but should be kept to the rear of buildings where they will be the most inconspicuous and detract the least from the historical context. The detailing of decks...should be compatible with the period and style of the building. D. BACKGRUUNQ: The applicant has completed an extensive interior and exterior rehabilitation of tbe Kirk House for its n�w owners. Last year HPC staff approved building permits for the following work on the strvcture: reeQnstructio� and extension of the front porch to match the originai; construction of a rear solarium; installatio� crf two air conditioning condensers; reroofing; and repair and replacement, as necessary, o�f siding and trim to match existing. During the rehabilitation project, a skylight was installed on the fourth floor of the east side elevation and a rear deck was constructed, both without building permits. E. FINDING�: � 1. The deck is located at the rear, northeast corner of the structure and wraps around the east side to a doorway. Most of the east side portion will be covered by a porch roof yet to be constructed. The posts and valence of this rear porch will match the existing front porch and the rear porch/deck railing matches the front porch railing as well. This rear porch/deck will have little visibility from the street and its design is compatible with the structure. The deck is integrated into the design of the building and does not simply project from one wall. 2. The skylight for which the applicant seeks approval provides light, ventilation, and views to a fourth floor children's play room. The space was previously used for storage. The only windows in this space are at the front elevation and close to the floor. The flat skylight is a Velux product measuring 30" x 38" and projecting three to four inches above the roof plane. 3. The applicant and his clients chose not to install a skylight in a location with limited or no visibility from the street. A skylight near the front of the other, or west, side of the roof w�ul� proimai�l}r be largely hidden by the cmrner tower but the view from it would not be as c�i7rable, ac�ord'nrg�o the app�L'cant. A skylight on the top, flat part of the roof was dism'v,sse�d becau�se vf the potential for leakage and a belief that a skylight and a roof hatch �v��d crowd the roof or ceiling too much. 4. The skylight is located on the side but neaz the front of the building on a very prominent roof plane. It is quite visible from the street. The steeply pitched (22:12) hipped roof is a dominant and important part of the design of the building. The skylight interrupts the strong, smooth, unbroken sweep of roof and, therefore, has a signif'icant adverse impact on • a (, --to `l� HPC Staff Report: File #2282 • Page Three the architectural and historic character and integrity of the Kirk House. In addition, because the skylight is above the rooftops to the east, it provides nice views but is also visible from some ways down the street. The skylight is contrary to the Hill District guideline which calls for avoiding alteratian to distinctive azchitectural features. F. STAFF RECOMIlVIENDATION: Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the HPC grant approval of the rear porch/deck as proposed but deny approval of the skylight. • • . a SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION SITES AND DISTRICTS DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION • SITE ADDRESS: �-/�� 0.it.Y'�( �U� . Name of appiicant: f Company: � ' Address (include Zip Code): � v� Phone number: � -7—.��o� Applicant's signature: Date �,2��q F' Type of application: �Repair/Rehabilitation New Construcfion O Other O Demolition � Sign O Moving O Concept Review Oniy I undersiand that it/s my responsfbility as ih�applicant stated above to contact Zoning Administraiion at 266-9008 to determine any further reviews required prior to issuance of a building permit by rhe Ciry of Saint Paul. �''Y ,'�j . (Initial) Scope of Work: (or atfach copy of written description of work) 1 c� 111 s tc:-� ( s,�ij l r�l1.-� i�v�. �1�1 is'h.�•.� a-�-E;e. s�c.r_� o v�. G✓a.�C S i� / �a� �c;J�s�. Z�� vtti4�-.r�w� �zu; �=c.k � �a.c� P xcJ�.. �— n a r�� -�t �rne�' o� I�a�c. , . . Attach additional sheets if neccessary Existing Conditions and Materials: Mate�ials included: O 3 copies of plans O Site plan (See reverse side � Building permit application O Photographs for requirements) O Other FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: • File Number: �2�G- Category: o Minor �Moderate o Major - � � 4 GENERAL 13u��u�rvu rtnnn� � DEPARTMENT � CITY OF SAINT PAUL � _ _ ` v:�1 .i �*,y T CITY OF SAINT PAUL .� � I _ ,-:. � OFf7CE OF LICEriSE,IIVSPECI70NS AND �� i � �` " l y � � ENVIRONMENfAL PROTEC'l10N. _ - , - BUII�INGlNSPECT/ONANDDESIGN ' ' � � _ . � 350 St Petcr Strett-Suite 310 ' � PK11Nt NO. Saint Paul,Minnesow 55102-I510 612-266•9001 , r��.� - P�,N`NO. � � -►�e, DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DATE 1'�� '�5 OWNER �Q�L�rr_t��- • .� . . . OWNERSADDRESS �'�� L-LLut^��C�� - • . : . . ❑OLD TYPE OF �r.3 , ' _ • ❑ NEW TYPECONST. OCCUPANCY GRADING STUCCO OR . ❑ BUILD ❑AND EXC. ❑PLASTER ❑DRYWALL ❑FENCE ❑ ADDITION ❑ALTER ❑REPAIR ❑MOVE ❑WRECK � NUMBER STREET SIOE CROSSSTREETS 1 �.- ��c.� WARD l0T BLOCK ADDITION OR TRACT . WIDTM DEPTM SIDE LOT CIEARANCE BUI�OING I�NE � , FRONT REAR ' . � LOT . - . WIDTM IENGTM MEIGHT STORIES STRUG TURE ESTIMATED VALUE BASEMENT TOTAL FLOOR AREA ❑YES ❑ NO SG. fT. �a �U INCLUDE BASEMENT �ETAILS d REMARKS: Bbo� �iJ ��5 ��.c r'�S -- C ��P��,r��r �� r . . . . : � . � � - . i�e s . . , � TEL.NO. ' ARCNIT T �' � � � CON T R ACORESS 6 21P MASONRV S�O � STATE � ,C�� D�O ►ERMIT FEE � VAIUATION ��/t./ fLAN CNECK �3 �Qg . I STATE 4 ' SURCHARGE �• DO � . � TOTAL FEE �l��j�'� Z ? � � APPLICANT CERTIFIES THAT ALL IN- i FORMATION IS CORRECT AND THAT r ALL PERTINENT STATE REGULATIONS CASHIER USE ONLV AND CITY ORDINANCES WILI BE COM- W►'�EN VALIDATEO THIS IS YOUR PERMIT � P WITH IN PERFORMING THE WORK , F HICH THIS PERMIT IS ISSUED. St.Code X��1�;�,t'/��, ADD R ESS , � � ` OF JOB AUTMOR12E0 SIGNATURE . -. ,. :_�USE TYPEWRITER OR BALL POINT PEN , _ V : � , 37q� ANO PRESS FIRMLY � ,. .. . . • i � _ ; � � _� � m m � � N y • � � ♦ � � �� 7 �N N � F f < Zc O' QY �� B • � � . �: � �.` - �� 1(0 .� _: �� z *'�� p �^i �� R L `- l, R � �P � � {f u: � ��? '- >f;. C� �Ii �x: � r�'.. ^ � � B :�� Y q^f� �� .�Y2 i 1 � v k _ va � �� `.� � � � � �; � t �� , � S 1 �_ B � T � � `�`� ��'„ :$f F 4� � i � i �, �s �� ` � � � � s i � y R p , S `` C''. C � � '.� f � �r �� j __ s '� ■ 1.•' 2 / ,�" � � � � � � x �. � \� i � v � � . �� i � � � �'-`.: � � � . . � � J i � � � � o � .., .� _ � �= � ^ o � _ . �� .� ' J•y . a� . . . t � E �`� O �; I ��. � r_ .. . �,",'.,o n.., +.. � y�E �, � t�z .• i`'ty `�� j� � ,,. y � i � � ,,,�`d-,��, ��i a � � � � •p� .c�o g � � ��g � - � �... . � ►- � . �' - � � � _ � � � � � � � ` � z � _ �gYi C# � � �� S ,s r // �� , � d < ,� ;:� i � � ? � � , � � G 4 ( °ti it °C i ' � ___—_._— __� _ __ .� � z � � _ --- i � c. : :;��- i �j .'�. � �� ' ' �. � _' �� N �'� =f �� W�E 'z� z 7• E q?S: � O U � < �m� � � �- �:�� ((, CL. ° � .. . �v' VO=� _ / . . i � � � ty � � ��C�v —p4� t N� q! � � � � � � q� � . Z �— �ls " " `J � � � s� � � � � A � - � .� � o-� � � � �, � . s � � f �-- �`—T " ' �� . s — , f � � � _ ' . 4 � f ,N '� G! � .0.. �. � , ;: �L�.. l�,';=' � � � % � � � �: �.... �� _ �? � �� \ i � N ^�: � \ a � o o:; � cc•. � . � -�.".�-- '� c�` � cL+ � � �� z ----- � O �w� : � �� r x � � � ��.� � � i- � 1�� o ; x � V _ 4�.�. � , � C,, �t' • K, o � "�' � < �,a.�� , `^ C Q�.. � , � v� 4 3j � � .0 � .•. $ , � � ; = i� a � �. 1 .'� � �^ {j.� �•• 7 � `' �`� � ; �: � � _ � �� : - �� :� ��- � r► �� P. .f�,:^�. f a.. ( I I u ' 1 L'v" 1 V Y I I v I �" 1 � - � U � v ("�'�' � � o � �' 6 6 " . v - � O ,� 0 � � �0 � � v � p O 30 � � . N O O G G �f b l�f ��1 : . , � � 9'� •lo�4� s 7 . s 28 S 6 5 6 6� � r � o :: � , O � O � � oO ,' . � -. P _ . ��:��''��: O � � ��;��► �� 60Y0 'PARK � os � � ' v v vv v v � n . A V . . �: ��: - - - - � � � �� _. >��8 y o ,��l. - ._ , v � i r --`" j��T�l ., , , . , , P t O • • • N `/ . : v 4 . , P�. -.. . O P ZD 24 O _ .. . 13 9 _ , '�"�_ .P ..� o o � � b . o 0 0'° NE/Lt APTS � Avet,c �.ov � 2 S T O 4 0 . 2 6 Z� t,P�V�L ��l. � - .__.... � o00 0 � s � o o � �oo � " '° o � 00 ! O P � o • o � u~a � c o O $ � o0 0 0 - - - o ' ° ° Q -� ° � � � �o � �o s � O Z 0 �S��.,�b ��• � ..�' � .�' � O O �l � g O p p � � . v � � .�� J A � v > 4 � o o � + � b e � �' ' • Q �U � t� ' 7 n �1 n n /1 1'� n ,�. I s� ! � _ . _ -- — --- 4l� L.�t�L �V• . APPLICANT- �dDD �\�tDLG'y LEGEND � � PURPOSE�"�5�� Sk�UCy�T � L�� hpc district boundary ILE# ZZ�Z DATE � ' �� • q� - � subjed property "`north-� � PWG. DIST MAP# � � o one tamily • � ^ commerciai ¢ two famity ♦ .... industrial SCALE 1"a 200� � �.�Q muft;P�e family V vacant ' � 2 �; �' 1, OFFICE OF LICENSE,INSPECI'IONS AND j ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC170N � Robert Kessler,Director �' . • CITY OF SAINT PAUL auirnrNCINSPECnoNArm Telephone:612-2669001 Norm Coleman, Mayor DESIGN Facsrmile:612-266-9099 ' 350 St Peter Street � Suitc 310 Surnt Poul,Mrnnesota SS702-ISIO �r ,�;' �'. �. � 23 March 1995 k'' I S' `, 4. �' Mr. Todd Bradley ' 427 Laurel Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 � Dear Todd: � I have your building permit application for the deck and skylight at 415 Laurel Avenue but did ; not receive, by March 10 as we had agreed, an elevation showing the skylight or plan and � elevations for the deck. I, therefore, was not able to put the permit on the March 23 HPC • � meeting agenda. The following HPC meeting will be on April 13, for which the application deadline is � March 29. Please complete �n HPC application form and submit it and the plans/elevations by �, Mazch 29. Enclosed are additional cc�pies of the HPC application form for your future use. , �' ! Please calt �e at �fi&-9087 if you should have any questions. � ', ; ;; Sincerely, �;� � . ��i /� � _ �t�4w �\��y�/J ' ;: / � ;� ' '� Aaron Rubenstein ,'�` k Historic Preservation Planner f cc: Greg Johnson ;� � 1 s' � ! q �. 3 '.l, �. • i , �. - ` GENERAL BUILDING PERMIT pEFnFlr,aEr�T CITY OF SAINT PAUL � ' � (� - 10 �1 � � CITY OF S�1NT PAUL � OI'I'ICE OP UCENSE.IVSPt=CTIONS A�D � G��'IR0�1�1E!�TAL PROTFCTION � y Hl'lll)l.4G lA'SPECT/U:�'A.�'U U£S1GN � � ^ 1 � n i50 S1 P��ie•r Slrrr!•Suite+/0 � PKTIt NO. � � � � �� S�in1 Puul,Afinnesom SS/0?•1 S10 6/?•:66•9(X/ / '� � - .�/..3 . f V�9T/C rV � /`��'C ' P�AN N0. � DESCRiiTiON F PROJECT DATE - OWNER �� _ OWNERSADDRESS 1 �� L ❑OLD � TYPE OF �/� � ❑ NEW TYPE CONST. OCCUPANCY /' =--- GRADING STU 0 OR ❑ BUILD D AND EXC. ❑PLA ER ❑DRYWALL ❑FENCE � : ❑ ADDITION O ALTER ❑R PAIR MOVE ❑WRECK NUMBER STREET SIDE CROSSSTREETS L t�' � WARD l0T BLOCK AOOITION OR TRACT WiD7H DEV7M S�DE lOT ClE/.RANCE BUILD�NG L�NE r . FRONT REAR LOT wiDTH ENGT�i HEIGHT STORiES STRUG • TURE ESTIMATED VALUE 8 SEMENT TOTAL FLOOR AREA � V S ❑ NO SO. FT. INCLUOEBASEMENT DETAiLS 8 REMARKS: �=/L t S _/- s%s s�� r/i� '., ' _ �i r" �� B�r ,�,�rF-c�. seS�uG<i / . - _� TEI.NO. ARCH176CTr�� -i '1 FF � � I . / ol, / yz v CONTRACTO / AODRESS d ZIV MASONRV i � � S T TE O —� . PEiiM1T FEE • a 71-1 UATION iLAN CMECK / O! • �I iS�J%l7ii`.�i � '1i' `•a• � „ , rJC�CD2�i_ .._H� __C'�P� 1 STATE /DO . �� c�i� R��iLL'i'yG '��fi.S'J SURCHARGE iQ7k "_Ai� �-�F'�ii ��:.7i 3 � 1 C� .-� �;� :,unC�iAfi�� R +��X:.3C� TOTAL FEE ;,F;SH x��'?b.�i APPUCANT CERTIFIES THAT ALL 1 � FORMATION IS CORHECT AND T CASHIER USE ONLV ALL PERTINENT STATE REGUL ONS � ANO CITV OROINANCES WILI BE COM• WHE VAIIOATEO TMIS IS VOUR PERMIT • P�IEDWITHINPERFORMINGTHEWORK FOR WHICH THIS PERMIT IS ISSUED. St.Code r ,2G ADORESS �� • �/�� OF JOB . �FIpFi1ZE SIGNATURE '