The URL can be used to link to this page

04-222CounCil File # r Z�^'� Green Sheet # 11� V RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To Whereas, the HPC conducted a public hearing on the said application on September 25, 2003, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard after having provided notice to affected property owners; and � 2 Whereas, Real Estate Development Crroup (hereinafter, the "REDG"), made application 3 to the Heritage Preservation Commission (hereinafter, the "HPC") in HPC file No. 03-398, for a 4 demolition pemut to raze a dwelling and detached gazage located at the address commonly 5 known as 358 Marshall located in the Hill Historic District; and 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Whereas, at the close of the hearing, the HPC denied the application based upon all the testimony and records before it, including the foliowing findings set forth in HPC Resolution No. 03-398, required under Legislative Code 73.06(i): 1. To approve a demolition permit at this time would not be appropriate given the lack of information regazding the viability of the structure. Detailed structural information, rehabilitation costs and a feasibility study [were] not included as part of the application. Committee: Date 2. Apartment building were late arrivals in the Summit-Hiil neighborhood and they were largely built to expand the income base as rental properties. As early as 1901, Summit Avenue had restrictions regarding the construction of apartment buildings in order to maintain the neighborhood's character of single family homes. A factor why the neighborhood was not totally lost to apartment buildings was because the early apartment boom was restricted to two periods: 1901 and the 1920's. The character of the neighborhood would be compromised if this scale of house were lost on a lot by lot bases and replaced by monolithic apartment buildings. 3. The design of this house is typical of a pattern book example from the mid- 1880's. This type of house was once very common in the neighborhood and were often the first to disappear. Whereas, on ar about September 28, 2003, REDG, pursuant to L,eg. Code 73.06(h), duly filed an appeal from the decision of the HPC and requested a public hearing for the purpose of considering the action taken by the HPC; and Whereas, on October 22, 2003, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and �� 2 Whereas, the City Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the 3 application, 4 does hereby 5 the testimony, the report of staff, and the record, minutes and resolution of the HPC; 6 Resolve, that the HPC erred in denying the demolition pernut application as the 7 application submitted met the requirements of Leg. Code 73.06(i)(2); and be it 8 9 Further Resolved that the appeal of REDG is hereby granted, subject to the condition that 10 the demolition pemut shall issue upon the issuance of a building permit for the new development 11 proposed on the site by REDG; and be it 12 13 Finally Resolved, that the clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the HPC, L.IEP and 14 the zoning administrator. ,. �,� Z � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green SheeY�� s': j�,_ a%:. � DepartrneMloffice/council: Date Initiated: � � -L��„��a,��;a,�n�;�a��t 13-FEB-04 Green Sheet NO: 3011895 Co'rtact Person & Pho`re: � Deoartment Sent To Person Initial/Date Peter Wamer 0 icense/[os eMiodEoviron Pro 266-8710 puiyn 1 icenseJfns ection/EnvironPro De artmeutDirector Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number 2 i. Attorue For Routing 3 a or's Office Ma odASSistant Order . a ouncil 5 i Clerk Ci Clerk Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip Alt Locations for Signature) Adion Requested• Council approval of a resolution memorializing City Council action which overturned a decision of the HPC regazding a demoliGon permit to raze a dwelling and detached gazage located at 358 Marshail. Rewmmendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions: Planning Commission 1. Has this personlfirm ever worked under a contrad for this department? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this personlfirm ever been a city employee? Yes No ' 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normaily passessed by any curcent city employee? - Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Jn Setember 25, 2003 HPC denied the permit to raise the structure at 358 Marshall. On October 22, 2003 apublic hearing was conducted by the City Council which over-turned the HPC's decision. This resolutian memorializes that action and grants 358 Marshall permission to destroy the dwelling and detached gazage located there. AdvantapeslfApproved: DisadvantapeslfApproved: - .. w., _ , � ° . �-,� ��'�;=�::'t T- � _ � Disadvanhages If Not Approved: ' ToWlAmountof CosNRevenue Budgeffid: Transaction: Funtlinp Source: Activity Number: Fi nancial Information: (Explain) t ` _ ._ ' . � .. _ �' � . . . ., , ` � . ;x � .. . � . . . . , . , ,r j '�us .:5 c� " . . � ••, � � �ti � _ , . � , , . ��'"a9 �" � �£ .. _ .. . . _ , . . . � . � - ' ° . . - � . ^'. ,. 7 , .� ' . . .,.<. . �� , . CITY OF SA71VT PAUL R¢ndy C. Kelly, Mayor September 29, 2003 Ms. Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: v '-�. , . - _ - � . __ � � '� � I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, October 22, 2003 for the following heritage preservarion case: Appellant(s) File Number: Real Estate Development Group HPCO3-398 Purpose: Appeal of a Heritage Preservarion Commission decision denying a demolition perxnit application to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building. Location: Staff Recommendation: Commission 358 Marshall Avenue (Hill Historic District) Approval of the demolition permit application, contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building permit for the proposed new construction. Denied on a vote of 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jerry Blakey. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and that you will publish nofice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! � Please call me at 266-9079 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ��',�� , Amy Spong Historic Preservation 5pecialist CC: Council Member Jerry Blakey AppellanUowner, Real Estate Development Group File OFF7CE OFLICENSE, INSPECTIONSAND �� _ �� ENVlRONMENTAL PROTEC770N Janeen E. Rosas, Direcior LOWAYPROFESSIONALBUILlDNG Telephone:612-266-900I 350StPeterStreet Facsimile: b11-266-9099 SuiEe 300 SaintPaul,Minnesota 55102-ISID NOTIt� OR PUSISC AF,�7�RIIHG - ;. �. -- The Sa3nt Paul Qity Couacil vsill-con- � dricEapuhlichearingon Wednesgay,"p�. tober22; 2003; at 5:3� p.m.in the,.City Cotmcil Chambers, Third Floor, �ity HaII-Courthouse, 15 West Kellogg . Bautevard, Saint Paul, MN, to con�ider the appeal of Real Estate Development Gmup to a decision of the Heiitage Aies- ervation Commission denyiag a demb$- tioa`permit application to reze t,he houae azid garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to. conytruct a six-story 68-unit 'xoudominium building. ' - Dated: October 1, 2003 � � � � Mnxx.�iucxsox, w ass�gr.suc e,ty eoun�t s�et�. � - <Octo6ar 61 . . � -54: YAUL L6GAL 7�C�R . ZZ0707U3 � . ' - - 09/29/03 MON 09:11 FAX 4045310920 ATL�'PA CONSULTING ��-aaa �oo 800 Fraaklin Avenue West �i �� Minneapoiis,l�1N 554U5 '�� Main: 612.870.850Q REAI, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT GR4UP �s.�. �,� � . � ,��: vrA �ACSNrrr.E�u:��9� aNn asn�urs September 28, 2003 �Is. Amy Spoag Saint Paul Heritage Preservazion Commission Go Office of License, Inspecrions and Environmental Protection 350 Samt Peter Street, Suite 3Q� ' Samt Paul, MN 55102-1510 Re: Appeal to vote 2o deny demolitian pemut for 358 Marshall Avenue by fiPC e Dear Ms. Spong: ' This letter is intended to put the Ciry of St. Paut on notice t6at my company will be appealing the decision by St. Paui Heritage Preservation Commission ("HPC"), to the St. Paul Ciry Council. Our grounds for appeal include, but are not liauted to the followiug (1) The HPC voted to deny tt�e demolition peimit based on the findings that were without mezit aod went aaainc the staff report, a report that is required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St. Paul Legislative Code as .it relates to this demo6iion applicafion; (2) That despite the fact that the HPC agreed with the staff report on the economic value or ; usefuiness for the huilding as it now exists, it still voted to deny the demnlition permit, attd created additionai foiiow- s� ' ivai i� wr�aui u�er��; (3) That ihe HPC finding concerning the "arcliitecturat and histnrical merit of the building" was arbihary and capricious; ' (4) The HPC made findings for the demolition permit based on irreIevant and azbivary infomxaaoq instead of focusing on the findings required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St; Paul Legislative Code. For the above reasons, and others that wilt be further discussed at the time of our appeal, Real Estate Development G%�aRpeals the denial of iu demoliuon permit by the HPC. Fstafe Development Gmup cc: Kelley LeBlanc and Bill Hickey, Collaborative Design Group ��,:v �-z� ��3 .{�c. ( U BP oy-aaa CITYOFSAINTPAUL Randy C. Kelly, M¢yor September 29, 2003 Ms. Mary Erickson Cily Council Reseazch Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: OFFICEOFLICENSE, INSPECTlONSAND EM'IRONMENTAL PROTECTTON Janeen E. Rosas. D "vector LOYi'RY PROFESSIONAL B UILIDNG 350 St Peter Street Suite 300 SaintPaul, Minnesota �5102-ISIO Telephone: 67?-266-9001 Facsimile: 612-266-9099 I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, October 22, 2003 for the following heritage preservation case: Appellant(s): File Number: Real Estate Development Group HPCO3-398 Pwpose: Appeal of a Heritage Freservation Commission decision denying a demolition permit applicarion to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building. Location: Staff Recommendation: Commission 358 Mazshall Avenue (Hill Historic District) Approval of the demolirion permit applicarion, contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building pernu2 for the proposed new construction. Denied on a vote of 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jerry Blakey. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at yow earliest convenience and that you will publish nofice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! Please call me at 266-9079 if you have any questlons. Sincerely, �%'�� `�—� Amy Spong Historic Preservation Specialist CC: Council Member Jerry Blakey AppellanUowner, Real Estate Development Group FileV �t -aaa CITY OF SAINT PAYJL Randy G Kelly, M¢yor MEMORANDUM TO: CC: FROM: RB: DATE: OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECITONS AND ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION Janeen E. Rosas, pirector L04VRYPROFESSIONAL BUILDING 350 St. Peter Street Suite 300 Saint P¢u[, Minnuot¢ 55102-1 SIO Telepfione: 651-266-9090 Facsimile:657-266-9099 City Councilmembers Peter Warner, CAO Wendy Lane, LIEP Amy Spong, HPC staff HPC appeal for 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District October 14, 2003 The following attachments highlight the events that have taken place and relate to HPC review of the permit application to raze the structure and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in the Hill Historic District: ATTACHMENT 1(pages Al-1 to A1-16) The application materials were submitted and include an HPC application form, letter from owners Real Estate Development Group, and several eachibits. ATTACHMENT 2(pages A2-17 to A2-24) The HPC resolution which was adopted on October 9, 2003 and the written order to the applicant is attached. The staff report includes the guidelines for review, the findings and recommended approval of the application. ATTACHMENT 3(pages A3-25 to A3-30) The approved minutes ofthe September 25, 2003 public hearing meeting that addresses the hearing for 358 Marshall Avenue. ATTACHMENT 4 (pages A4-31) The request for an appeal by owners and applicants Real Estate Development Group. ATTACHMENT 5(pages AS-32 to AS-48) Testimonies received in writing for the September 25, 2003 HPC meering to supplement oral tesrimony. Letter of support from Mayor Randy Kelly Charles Senkler, business owner, support Summit University Planning Council, concerned, needs more information Vernon Harms, Board of Directors ChrisYs Household of Faith, opposition Barb & Chuck Gudknecht, opposition Cynthia Holton, 464 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building — OVER — d�-aaa Page 2 358 Mazshall appeal October 14, 2003 Susan Ciarke, opposition to proposed new building Kate Bradford, 221 Mackubin, opposition to proposed new building Brita Kulach, 530 Mazshall, opposition Teresa Tierney, 473 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building Erika Perrault, 463 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building Sally Rubinstein, 442 Dayton, opposition Lara Duddingston, 443 Holly, opposition Theresa Upchurch, North Star Consultants, 447 Marshall, opposition Fran Jackson, 447 Marshall #6, opposition to proposed new building Mike Schuxnann, opposition to proposal oy-aaa Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office ofLicense, Inspections and Environmental Prctection 35D Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102 Phone: (651) 266-9078 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION DESIGN REVIEW APPLIi�ATION This application must be completed in addiGon to the appropriate ciry permit application if the affected property is an individually designated landmazk or located within an historic disttict. For applications that must be reviewed by the Heritage Pieservation Commission refer to the HPC Meeting schedule for meefing dates and deadlines. Please check the cateQory that best describes the proposed work ❑ Repair/Rehabilitation ❑ Sign/Awning ❑ New Conshuction/Addition ❑ Moving ❑ FencefRetaining W all ❑ Concept Review Only �Demolition ❑ Other Street and number: �S8 �� , Zip Code: �j �/D � Name of contact person: Company: Street and nuxnber: /�(!7� iY��'n /�, /n.�,gp.l" City: _ �+�.�¢�„ oa .Q� State: �'J'1 /j/ Zip Code: ��/O s Phone number: ,li( /cQ ) 8]Q. �cS(lU e-mail: ��.�-�,6.�,�c�3 Q u i i�n �ii.¢.. c,c».1 Name: [.t.�s la��d��.�C.� Street and number: o�Ug ��o� � /V �u, �e � City: ��, �� State: ��f _ZipCode: r S�'/�)� Phone number: �� e-mail: �c � — � t ��+�cl P, � 8 • D 3 o �-aaa 5. PxQ:�E�r a�c�r�� Contact pe Company: Street and number: �� City: }�',��„p�5 State: �/}'�.A/ ZipCode: y�j_y�/.� Phone number: (�� 37/. G�!/1 e-mail: � � ��(�It,,�,. Completely describe ALL exterior changes being proposed for the progerty. Include changes to architectural details such as windows, doors, siding, railings, steps, trim, roof, foundarion or porches. Attach speciticafions for doors, windows, lighting and other features, if applicable, including color and material samples. ��! �� i.. � Attach additiona[ sheets if necessary � u-'.a Refer to the Design Review Process & Checklist for requir�;d information or attachments. **INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL TSE RETURNED** ARE THE NECESSARY ATTACEIMENTS AND INFORMATION INCLUDED? �, YES Will any federal money be used in this project? Are you applying for the Inveshnent TaY Credats? YES _ NO � YES _ NO �_ z ��--z o� aaa I, the undersigned, unde the affected properry. I ownership must be subr unauthorized wozk will Signature Signature of owner: teview Application is limited to the aforemenrioned work to any additional exterioz woik to be done under my the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Any Dafe: l I�' �` � Date: �L�� ti t S � 70TtIVEf:._ ��<��;. L s� � u ,� . n: J'F ' �' s! t" ` � i� � , e . � . .. . :..?. 33at�reee�ad--�9:•"�•0�-. „x', Districf: tll'� 1 /Indivialua2 �it� . y ^} T�e of work: _ Requires staff review 7/�t�'�� ' ' " . �s . . , ' �-- , . _. , -tsna data: ` �'�S - P)(} : et� apphEa�ion_ YES ' L� ' (low'tng eont3itiari(s) tri�ist b� ' ` Qrder fqr ap�liqafiou, tb`ea�foira`i._ ernarionpaag�am: � , ' , ' , �. .; ; ��`, It has been determined thai tha, _.,_ �vork to be performed pnrsu�df;to � the application does not adve�sely affeM the program for preseevafiu�i and architectnral control of the heritage preservation district or site (Ch.73.06). HPC staff approval Date � Requires Commission review Subr�ififec�; ' _ � }� ;.`5�ts a�Rlaris o-� �et aE=�?larts reduc�dto 8 sda'' I � �..��%%�>,. ��., . . �. 3� .�?1�4fagrapbs. . 'n `'f.;ity Pelmit Applicat[on � ; (:ompJete; HI'C �asign Re�iew.: ` .=Ppii�ation , I��a�ing Dale,set for � �L� ��. '" R 9 '' f�l _ '3 o�-aaa i ' 8U0 Franklin Avenue West Minneapolis, MN 55405 Main: 612.870.8500 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPI'VIENT GROUP September 8, 2003 Ms. Amy Spong Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office of License, Inspecrions and Environmental Protect.on 350 Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1510 Re: Narrarive Addressing Findings For The Demolition Of 358 Marshall Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: As you are aware, we have applied for a demolition permit for 358 Marshall Avenue, which is part of the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation District. After meering with you on August 26, 2003, I would like to comment on each of the four findings thGt you will be required to make as part of the Section 73.Q6 (j)(2) of the St_ Paul Legislative Code as it relates to this demolition application. As stated in the Code, in the case of the proposed demolihon of a building, prior to approval oY said demolifion, the commission shall make written findings o:� the following: (1) The architectural and historical merit of the building; (2) The effect of the demolition on surroundmg buildmgs; (3) The effect of any proposed new construcrion on tl:e remamder of the buildmg (mc case of partial demolirion); and, (4) The econosnic value or usefulness of the building as it now exists, or if altered or modified in comparison with the value of usefulness of any proposed structures designate to replace the present building or buildings. I would like to comment on each of the four findings below as part of our application. (1) In terms of the architectural and historical merit of the liui�ding, I understand that this is a finding that you will make based on your historical data ar.d research. For your information, our research has not found any data suggesting that the builders, residents or other individuals associated with the duplex at 358 Marshall Avenue had a contributing role to the St. Paul Heritage Preservation District. ` (2) I expect that the entire shucture of the duplex and the detar,hed garage would be demolished andlor moved to another site. Since the duplex is a free standing structure, I expect the demolition of the building to have no adverse effect on the adjoining propert�es. (3) Since this is not a partial demolition, this finding does not apply. (4) We examined the value of using the building as a continued renta} versus demolition and replacing it with our proposal for a 68 unit for sale condominium project. Here is my analysis of the economic value and usefulness of the Duplex as it stands today. �i-y v�aaa Real Estate Development Cnoup, Inc. Page Z Navrative Addressin2 Findin2s For The Demolition Of 358 Marshall Avenue ' Each of the units in the duplex located at 358 Mazshall Ave, contains two bedrooms and one bathroom. The building is an Up/Down configuration wif� a common basement and common detached garage. The building has a gross potential rent on an annual basis �f $19,824.00 with zero vacancy. Expenses for the building include all of the following items: Insurance: $1,374.00 . Gas Heat: $1,896.00 . Properry TaYes: $2,550.00 . Repairs / Maintenance $3,500.00 . Trash Removal: $720.00 . Lawn/Snow: $900.00 . Supplies: $250.00 . Management Fee: $991.20 The total expenses on an annual basis are $12,181.20. The value of an income producing property is based upon the Net Operahng Income that the property is capable of producing. The Net Operating Income (NOn of 358 Marshall Ave. is $7,642.80. Investors will apply a capitalization rate of 9%-10% and apply it to the NOI and anive at a value. Using this common analysis, 358 Marshall has an economic value of $76,000 -$85,000. There are many capital improvements that are needed and much d�ffered mamtenance lefr over from the previous owner. The heating plant in the building is over SOyrs old and is in need of replacement. The roof of the building is over 15yi s old and is m need of replacement. The plumbing throughout the building is a nxixture of old galvanized pipe, ]ead, and newer copper. The water pressure throughout th'e building is poor. The previoue owner had installed a pressurization pump to help with thi; issue, Uut the puinp no longer works. The foundarion of the building has leaked in the past and is in need of tuck-pointmg. The siding on the building is stucco over siding and the stucco is cracked and crumbling in places. The lower level apartment is in need of a complete gut and remodel in order to maintain occupancy. The electrical service in the building' is not up to code All of these items are capital improvements that cost signi�, icant amounts of money (approx $85,000) but don't directly impact the income of the propetty as a rental unit. The total cost of the needed improvements is roughly equal to the econotnic value of the structure as rt stands today. With that in mind, we paid $250,000 for the duplex, three':imes the economic value of the building. The means we over paid by approximately $165;000 for the building to improve the building we would have to spend at a minimum, the entire economic value of the building, or at least $85,Q00, increasing our loss to $25Q,QQ0, ar the complete value of what we paid for the building. This financial analysis dictates that we find an alternative use for the land, which in this case involves demolition of the duplex, and combining that land to complete our 68 unit for sale condominium project, where the cost of the land can not only be recouped by the project, but earn a reasonable economic return. . ��' S o�-aaa. Real Estate Development Group, Inc. Page 3 Narrative Addressin2 Fir:direps For Tke DemoZition Of358 Marskall Avenue ' As part of this application, I am also submitting the following exhibits to assist you in completmg your written findings. E�ubits I-6 will help give you a detail�d overview of the duplex at 3�8 Marshall Avenue and the surrounding buildings. E�ibits 7-8 are a preliminary elevarion and site for the 68-unit building we will be proposing for this site and the adjoining site if our demolition application is approved. It is important to remember that Exhibits 7-8 are preliminary and will involve stlbstantially more feedback and changes as we continue through our approval processes and aoopt the comments of the Summit University Planning Council and Ramsey Hill Associarion neighborhood groups, as well as the Saint Paul Heritage Preservarion Commission, and St. Paul Zcaing and Planning Deparhnent. Attached E�ibits ➢ Exhibit 1: Aistoric Hill Heritage Preservation District Map w/ Highlighted Project Locarion ➢ Exhibit 2: Zoning Map w/ Highlighted Project Location ➢ Exhibit 3: Photographs of 358 Marshall Avenue ➢ Exhibit 4: Exisfing Conditions Site Plan ➢ Exhibit 5: Aerial Photograph (SK-8) ➢ Exhibit 6: Photographs of Surrounding Area/ Bwidmgs ➢ Exhibit 7: Westem and Marshall Proposed Prel�minary Exterior Elevations/ SiYe Photograph ➢ Exhibit 8: Weatem and Mazshal1 Proposed Prelirr,inary Floor Plans/ Site Plan/ Unit Breakdown As part of this application narrative, I would also request that after you have had a chance to complete your preliminary findings, that we have an opporiunity to meet with you again to further comment on any areas that we may have missed, or tha� may require further information or analysis on our part. I want to personally thank you for taking the rime to consider our application, and we look fon�ard to worldng with you on the successful completion of uvhat I believe will be a great project for St. Paul, its residents and the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Very fixly yours, �� Spiros Zorbalas Real Estate Development Group cc: Kelley LeBlanc and Bill Hickey, Collaborative Design Group �� " �P �1-+ • r d-� 1"1 Q � � � � 1�-1 �.J � .� � x � x .� r 0 ^ VJ r-i � H � � � W ° � v , e ,� � ��" �-� . l � � � � � �� ,, a �� .,� ��0� �I�S G a� o =� �1 � �i: v� s� — .._. �� o�� a �� :��'s�.� �� °�' o.� y � ��, — �, i �� I �So 0 6�.�5 � 96� o�� : �ol , I _� c= _ o Ri ��o ^$� >I �� [� _ $ ` a g '$..�� F o I I � � .iJi � 8 � I � � L 's _ _ —'_—'�_ _°_.—�_' ;Y � o �_ ' ��'' I 1 ;� .� � .�' 5 ��`I � �'L_J` � � �'��'�° . �� ( _ � =�1= == o � � �� J � L_� �� lJ � � � � s i ��n��.!��o.�� :��: .Q : � � �� - F� �3�i � �S �� i � � �b � � s �� a � � � I � � e � s 8 i 8 i 8 �'�8 � E " o g �' g:�B.��C�g��g{�a;:,ra�r8:��8:0 o g �,. '' �. %";:g o � e I�° � -+ r � ;; �� &�` � ey� 8 � ��' �� 8 % . _ F. �g ' � :. � I� ��` �� 'a;o� s-��a,�,��°°`.'-g.. e�a , � o ....... .o o ,;.�o e� >� = 8 8 8:e 4 l' } I �� I �� `8a 8 8 8 848 O e.s! � 8'e^ 1° i�I.L ,� V (aJ.J1° v°I \ l ei "I _ `��. g� (�� 0 f l '� ^�\\ '\1 • , I \ r Q �., ,.i !I . , � _ � .&""_ O �� 48 �� ?� 8t�� g ��s �� S 8 ps�-aaa t � �� ^� �� . x ...._ k . . ��,� ,I' ;� - �—,; _-�, �r� i. , �� . pP' _._�. i c m �}�� '�� fiJh�Fi�- .,..-:-�..,-:.— ' � f�,.:>� ,��s k ��.0 �-.«� � Syi � _. � � i j'�. � �- � 1 l �°TMa.��=$ ��{i. v� � � � �� .j � y � i . �ti., r: �� , ��: 'a,�' . b £''. ` � ��5� ; ��3�� t� �� , - ��°�� s � � , . ...��' ' �.' . . _ �.i, . I�S � ..s. f �- _._ . � i `� � _ � 1 `�'r� �fi .� �C ` a*F fr , ;p v E_ � � �� t� �9�Y<`.�` t � �.,,� . .� -�.. . � ` ��g,� * � �i� �X � � f, � y v � 4: � 358 MARSHALL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MINNES�Tq Marshali Avenue � � EAST L/NE OF — tyE'ST 1/2 LOT 2 .�J.�__ `�� /�'"� � � � � ( u r � � <I Exhibit 4 Graphic site plan and building footprint. Building and property will need to be surveyed upon tlemolition permit approval. �� COLLABORATIVE DeSip�nGrou�,�� eY '2"'-� °•S»k . ] .. � . . . ._ .,...,.�.. r. . . _.. . , •i � ' 3ilu? .. '� . � � : T. �wi 5+ � .. �a , � s k 3 a Y�J A 4 ; :�, , . . , i ` � � . .. _ ' 4 ... . ',.' ,�i. �•-, . .rrll z .. ._ _. . . _ t � _ . . _ E _ � . . . � . . . . . ..� . . ..��k � .r'.- _ . . � .. T -� ' j= �- - � "''� � � _ . t'. a . s�. � � ��.� . . � b ` ,� ti � . . .' _ -'. i` � , �. .. • �'_, .,� � si ' � �� I � . € ' �, � j _s _ ',�� ,. �� _. . . � 5 - � ,.� i . ` d.n. i (£. � � v _. � � � � � t:i � � . � i �� l� . " �� r _ YA..c ' } . . � T . u ' - � � :. i . Z , . � z�' , .._ _ � � n e , . �: �� t' 3 „ � � ' .§ � � Z a.. � .. : . . .r. _ .. m � ' : ,' ` y �p • • y— �,' � . . � .. � ._ .tl�b �.. � :t`a_ ' � �. � v ' ,.�. • � �� . . . ...:.�' . ��. . ... :'! . LS . - .� _ . . .. „ �4 � „, � � � � 0� S v � � . �a�f*'.':e 9f ..*.'� ..f �_k�. �•w �' ' i... � Y v{ .. r � 1 � � � v � ' 9 M k � . � �� Y Y�i.} ' iM1� � � . . i _ � � a e � � 5 .' , u . _ . . ' J , y � : . � . � �, i " _ - ,� . , I � , o� � � �. ' �.-�� c� r ` #I� '" - ��k ; {' � "'ah C � : . :, �.. .BS.�.� . . ,.cv�� +4x _. "9 . ,., t .:.: ' .<- .., �- . � . ' �. ; . . ..: ' %xa ' �. � � � ' ' . ;d �.�, e , . ��. . - _ . � .mF, -.. . "__ . ._ . � . . '�.L. ( � _ � ` � �M1 .. • �� ... _ ...ea? � i ai+s.� �„� . dV a � w� ' �� h : f � , w. .. 15 1 9 e � � �� *�y , z,��`� x >- S '�r � .�� . rv+�. � ;t� � t ,` '- � c _ " °�&� . ` tfi �%' .. _ � �._ N : q^ � x f � �§� � � F{ ; 8 �b S$ �• �'4 = �i, ! 1 �" ` ..• i a �i w� � ". n a� �E � �' 0 _.ry' .R. � ti � � � � � � � -� 5 � � L f �_a '� `�'`� Ss?, : � ` ��:��, i::' x � i �; � � � +�, $ ' �--� fr (`�'�'{: � � 9 , i� 3 � ,!� ,j � �,�,�, ,-�-"'� . � . � ' � [`.. �_i � g. L n . � c: � � �r� -1I ..c e w `�r .� �c ' � - :�'� � +k .. � �..�. � - . -��'��. a*�i.n �a r��' 'etdef+k.vtu €w. ;% _ �' �y" - � �a ..� �.; � r .. . .�.. `�� t _.. - � �.�, � , t . > ,r . � . �,� � -.._,.».._.. . �..s4 ... ,.�., �.:, , . ..< �'�� b .,, � n� � r . �g . : ;... 2 3 ; ` -f' k, r.17 i � ;:. �% . � � ' �:S � -i t� i.,: �. .. �� '{ ,_'w... -�x -. � � � � ��4: _-----� a . ., :=:m� �,t��.G ..#... .._�� e� : ' J�� v',i; �' '� �„w�: . a � � �p �� y � . P � � � � � W r Pa 1� l� ��b.:� �� a �� . . , � i+�l' 8 ,�:''�`.�!!? �� '� � , '' ,_ ;�- _ o �- aa�, d � G 2 T F v � I L � 6 � � J �J C N Q F L h W O � f'. O � V 'a ✓ � N Q � C Y '� .�. rTi � 4 � � � 6� R L e v C' c 0 m � � � � � � � x � � 0 '� 0 b � � �Iz d � � iC' Y y '3 � r � � � !s �� w � � � � o �l—�3 �# T� � f � � _ �.; ' � - � r-'�� I Marshall Elevation 7 ^� �_,.. 1 2 . x....-u� .. ��li. . � � ` . __�� -� �' . Western Elevation ��3: . . � Zy+� 3�� "�] � � ._-6 .. o�-aa WESTERN & MARSHALL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA MqRSHN.LqVENUE < 3 v.{ I # ��;I�T �- BfZEA�I��Q�tf��, �; ,;�1n�tG unf 68tofal �`�"�' �` � "� ��`�"r �-�- . Um�', quaf�F a Range 656 = 1 321 sf'., �' r °� >�- F�rstFloor 12 units 'x `°�_= ��5'�i�r��ftfiNFloor 12 ' Ut17#s:fl¢, - �s s : � 4 : S�xth Floor 8��nit' 3 � zr'rw". S 4 .�aan`"� s''x�nr;u-ax - . One .� sf Try1mI Flwr Plan s B n ••nec �e Vn^ B COLLABORATIVE Desi EXHIBIT$ S�t1� iloa�Plan �(� �AVtONAVENUE � Site Plan/Firet Floor Plan $ lIR1�5: �'.,�6� �'1 ,;. Upper Lqvl YaMInCPIan lc�rerL�relPaMirigPlen 0 d w � � � _ __ � 0 .� d W _ � ♦ � . .� CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COIVTD�IISSION RESOLUTION FILE NUMBER 03-398 DATE September 25, 2003 (Adopted October 9, 2003) WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission (fII'C) is authorized by Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code to review pernut applicarions for exterior alterarions, new construcfion or demolition on or wiYhin designated Heritage Preservafion Sites or ileritage Preservafion Dish and WHEREAS, The Real Estate Development Group applied for a d°molition permit to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building; and WHEREAS, the structure at 358 Marshall Avenue is a two st,�ry Victorian Era house with stucco walls and a cross gabled roof. An inventory form was not pr��sent in the file, however, the house appears to have been constructed pre-1900. Despite many alterations over the years, some remaining character defining features are decorative brackets and a two story bay with elaborate cornice and bracketing on the west side. The front and side apen porches do not appear to be part of the original design. The two bay house is asymmetrical with the main entrance offset; and WHEREAS, the following is the citation in the City's Legislative Code conceming HPC review of demolition permits: Chapter 73, Herftage Preservation Commission; Section 73.06, Review of permits; Paragraph {i), Factors to be considered; Before approving any permit application required under paragraph (d) of this section to be approved by the heritage preservation commission, the comrnission shall make fzndings based on the program for the preservation and architectural control for the heritage preservation site in regard to the following: (I) In the case of the proposed demolition ofa building, prior to approval afsaid demalition, the commission shail make writ[en fenciings on the following:. the arckitectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new construction on the remainder of the building (in case of partial demolition) and on surrounding buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the building as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the value ar usefulness of any proposed structures designated to r the present building or buildings i WHEREAS, relevant portions of the Historic Hill Dzstrict Guidelines that pertain to the proposed demolition inciude the following: 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatoble use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. Demalition YVhen reviewing proposals for demolition of structures within lhe district, the Heritage Preservation Commission refers to Section 73.06 (i)(2) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code which states the following: In the case of the proposed demolition of a building, prior to approval of said demolition, the cammission sha11 make written findings on the following: the architectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new �2 � � �' a� aaa, construction an the remainder of the buiZding (in case of partial demoZition) and an surrounding buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the buiZding as it now exists or if altered or modified iri comparison with the value or usefulness of any proposed siructures designated to replace the present building or buildings; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservarion Commission, based upon the evidence presented at its September 25, 2003 public hearing on said proposal, made the fol..owing findings of fact concerning the proposed demolition: l. The economic value or usefulness of the buiZding as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the vaZue or usefulness of any proposed str�uctures designated to replace the present building or buildings. To approve a demolition permit at this time would not be appropriate given the lack of information regarding the viability of thv structure. Detailed structural informarion, rehabilitation costs and a feasibility study w.3s not included as part of the application. 2. The effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings. Apartment buildings were late arrivals in the Summit-Hill neighborhood and they were largely bui�t to expand the income base as rental properties. As eazly as 1901, Sutnmit Avenue had restrictions regarding the construction of apartment buildings in order to maintain the neighborhood's character of single family homes. A factor of why the neighborhood was not totally lost to apartment buildings was because the early aparhnent boom was restricted to two periods: 1901 and the 1920s. The character of the neighborhood would be com �romised if this scale of house were lost on a lot by lot basis and replaced by monolithic apartment buildings. 3. The architectural and historical merit of the build[ng. The design of this house is typical of a pattern book example from the mid-1880s. This type of house was once very common in the neighborhood and were often the first to disappear. BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings, the Heritage Preservation Commission denies approval of the demolition permit to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue. MOVED BY Younkin SECONDED BY R. Meyer IN FAVOR 5 AGAINST 2 ABSTAIN 2 Decisions of the Heritage Preservation Commission are final, subject to appeal to the City Council within 14 days by anyane affected by the decision. This resolution does'.not obviate the need for meeting applicable building and zoning code requirements, and does not �onsfitute approval for tax credits. �Z- I S OFFICE OF L•.CENSE, INSPECTtONS AND ENVII20NMENTALPROTECTION Janeen E. Rosus, Director SAfNi PAUL � AAAA CITY OF SAIN I' PAUL Randy C. Kelly, Mayar LOYi'RYPROFESSIONAL BUZLDING Suite 300 350 St PeterS!reet Saint Paul, Minnesom 55702-I510 Telephone: 651-266-9090 Facsimile: 651-266-9099 September 29, 2003 Spiros Zotbalas Real Estate Aevelopment Group 800 Franklin Avenue West Minneapolis, MN 55405 Re: 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District File #FIPCO3-398, demolition permit Dear Mr. Zorbalas: As you Imow, the Heritage Preservarion Commission (HPC) considered at its September 26, 2003 meefing your application to raze the property listed above. The commission voted 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions to deny yow application. This decision was based on the discussion at the public hearing, public testimony and Fmdings made by the commission. A resolution will be adopted by the HPC at the next regularly scheduled meeting on October 9, 2003 and the resolution will be mailed to you after that date. You or any aggrieved pariy has the right to appeal the Commiss�on's decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Coc9e. Such an appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of the FIPC's order and decision. Chapter 73 states: (hJ Appeal to city counci[. The permit applicant or any party aggrieved by the decision of the herit¢ge preservation commission shall, within fourteen (14) days ofthe date of the heritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order ¢nd decisian to the city council. The appeal shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the division ofplanning [LIEP] oftwa (2) copies of a notice ofappeal and statement settingforth the graunds for the appeal. The division ofplanning [LIEP] sha11 transmit one copy of the notice ofappeal and statement to the city council and one copy to the heritage preservation commission. �he commission, in any written order denying a permit application; shall advise the applicant ofthe right to appeal to the city counci! and include this paragraph i,z all such orders. Please feel free to call me at 651.266.9079 if you have any questions. Sincerely, �'�� Amy Spong Aistoric Preservation Specialist ce: Collaborative Design Group File�' " � I � AA-ADA-EEO Bmnlover � FIPCO3-39$ Agenda Item IV. C. CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FILE NAME: 358 Marshall Avenue DATE OF APPLICATION: August 8, 2003 APPLICANT: Real Estate Development Group DATE OF HEARING: September 25, 2003 HPC SITE/DISTRICT: Hill Historic District CATEGORY: per findings, non-contributing CLASSIFICATION: demolition permit STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Amy Spong ' DATE: September 16, 2003 A. SITE DESCffiPTION: 358 Mazshall Avenue is a two story Victorian Era house with scucco walls and a cross gabled roof. An inventory foxm was not present in the file, however, the house appears to have been conshucted pre-1900. Despite many alterations over the yeazs, some remaining character defining features are decorative brackets and a two story bay with elaborate comice and bracketing on the west side. The front and side open porches may have their original roofs but the railings and columns appear to have been replaced. The two bay house is asymmetrical with the main entrance offset. B. PROPOSED CAANGES: The applicant is seeking approval to raze the two- and one-half story shucture and garage in order to construct a six story condominium building on the property and adjoining vacant lots. C. GUIDELINE CITATIONS: Historic Hil[ District Guidelines 1. Every reasonable effort sha11 be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or- site and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. Moving of Structures Proposals for moving structures out of the Historic Hill Dzstrict are reviewed using the guidelines for demolition. Propasals far moving structures onto property Zocazed within the district are reviewed using the guidelines for new constructian as well as guidelines f��r restoration and rehabilitation. Proposals for moving structures within the district are reviewed using guidelines for all of the above. Demolition When reviewing pvoposals for demolition ofstructures within the districf, the Heritage Preservation Commission refers to Section �3.06 (I)(2) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code which states the following. In the case of the proposed demolition of a building, prior to ap�rovat af said demolition, the commission shall make written findings on the following.• the architectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new construction on the remainder of the building (in case of partial demolition) and on surrounding A� � � o�-aaa HPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the buidding as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the vatue or usefutness of any proposed structures designated to replace the present buiZding or buildings. SECRETARYOF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHA BILITATION D'utrictlNeighborhood Recommended: -Identifying, retaining, and preserving buildings, and streetscape, and Zandscape features which are important in defining the overall historic character of the distri�t or neighborhood. Such features can include streets, alleys, paving, walkways, street lights, sigrts, benches, parks and gardens, and trees. -Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, and streetscape and Zandscape features such as a [own square comprised of row houses and stores surrounding a communal park or open space. -Pr and maintaining the historic masonry, wood, and architectural metals which comprise building and streetscape features, through appropriate surface treatmenas such as cleaning, rust removal, limited paint removal, and reapplication ofprotective coating systems; xnd protecting and maintaining landscape features, includingplant material. -Repairingfeatures of the buildirag, streetscape, or Zandscape by reinforcing the historic materials. Repair will also generally include the replacemen[ in kind - or with a compatible substitute material - of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of features when there are surviving pratatypes such as porch balustrades, paving materials, or street[ight standards. -Replacing in kind an entire feature of the building, streetscape, or Zandscape that is too deteriarated to repair - when the overall form and detailing are still evident - using the physical evidence to guide the new work. This could include a storefront, a walkway, or a garden. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Alterations/Additioxs far the New Use -Designing required new parking so that it is as unobtrusive as poss�ible, i.e., on side streefs or at the rear of buildings. "Shared"parking should also be planned so that several business' can utilize one parking area as oppased to introducing random, muZtiple lots. -Designing and constructing new additions to histor•ic buildings when sequired by the new use. New work should be compatible with the historic character of the district or neighborhood in terms of size, scale, desigre, material, color, and texture. -Removing nonsignificant buildings, additions, or streetscape and landscape features which detract from the historic character of the district or the neighborhood. Not Recommended: -Removing or radically changing those features of the district or neighborhood which are important in defzning the overall historic character so that, as a result, the character is diminished. -Removing or relocating historic buildings, or featur•es of the streetscape and landscape, thus destroying the historic relationship beriveen buildings, features dnd open spacE. f'�Z- 2I D�f-aaa FIPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. -Faiting to undert¢ke adequate measures to assure the preservation of building, streetscape, and landscape features. -Removing a feature of the building, streetscape, or Zandscape that is unrepairable and not replacing it; or replacing it with a new feature that daes not convey the same visual appearance. Design for Missing Historic Features -Introducing a new building, streetscape or Zandscape feature that i; out ofscale or otherwise inappropriate to the setring's historic character, e.g., replacing picket fencing with chain Zink fencing. AlterationslAdditians for the New Use -Placing parking faciZzties directZy adjacent to historic buildings wl ach cause the removal of historic plantings, relocation of paths and walkways, or blocking of alle�s. -Introducing new construction into historic distrzcts that is visually '^ncompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the district or neighborhood. -Removing a historic building, building feature, or Zandscape or str.. etscape feature that is important in defening the overall historic character of the district or the neighborhood. E. FINDINGS: 1. The building is not classified in the Hill Historic District Nomination (only a small percentage of buildings are described in the Nomination) and an inventory form was not present in the file. 2. The architectural and historical merit of the building. As the house stands currently, staff does not feel that it contributes to the historical chazacter of the district due to its altered state—mainly the stucco and porch detailing which does not appear original. The property has also lost some of the context in which it was first constructed. It is the only property remaining on this block that faces Marshall Avenu e. Permit index cards for 360 Marshall state that the property was wrecked in 1971 and 366-368 Marshall was wrecked in 1966. Accarding to the 1928 plat map of St. Paul, this block has lost approximately six properties. The loss of these buildings has compromised the Marshall and Western Avenue sides of the block and to a lesser degree, has diminished the character of Dayton Avenue. Given the massing, remaining detailing and early construction date (during the period of significance far the district), this properiy wouid conh the historic district if rehabilitated. If the property were moved to another locaticn within the district or nearby, among houses of similar massing and scale, the house coulc'I become a contributing feature for the district. Staff has not found other historical associations, such as pexsons that have contributed in some way to St. Paul's history and development or an azchitect or association with an important event, with this property. Az- zz HPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. 3. The effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings. Given the statement above regarding context, staff believes the effect of demolirion on surround:ng buildings to be minimal, although, it is always better to retain historic fabric type buildings that are associated with the development of the district than it is to demolish and create another large hole in the district. This building currently does not have similar massing or integriry as St. Joseph's Academy (individually designated site) across the street or with the 2'!Z to 3'/� story brick and sided apartment buildings on the rest of the block. 4. The economic value or usefulness of the building as it now �ists or if altered or modifed in comparison with the value ar usefulness of any proposed s, ructures designated to replace the present buitding or buildings. Per the applicanYs applicati �n (attached), the current use of the properiy as a duplex has annual expenses totaling $12,181. !0. The application also states the economic value of the income pzoducing properiy was esti*:lated at $76,000 to $85,000. Necessary capital improvements and correcting deferred maintenance was also estimated at the economic value of approximately $85,000 (this figure most likely does not include restoration of the siding and porches). The applicant also stated that they purchased the property for $250,000. Staff did not receive information from the applicant that an adaptive re-use for the existing building was explored. The applicant stated that the proposed new condo building would earn a reasonabie economic return. 5. While a formal concept review of the proposed new construction is not a part of this review, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards recommend against `7ntroducing a new building, streetscape or Zandscape feczture that is out ofscale or otherwise inappropriate to the setting's historic character, ..." and "Introducing new construction into historic districts that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the district or neighborhood. " F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings, staff recommends approval of the demo.ition permit contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building permit for the proposed new construction (staff has concerns regarding the scale and massing of the proposed building in relation to the historic district and the individually designated St. Joseph's Academy across the streeti. 4 AZ-z3 � � _ �•: : : - _ — — �:' j --, �/� � i . . , i,. ry . i i ,�; ;�� .� � � �� +� iw�� IF �i �! ' � '�• ! � � ■ �i �� ,'12 /�-_ � � � , � � - �: �� , �- . E: � ; � ., "� ` .t� � ; .� � c� � �-:� �. .. �. • . �� ._ '�i � ;,: i : ' � r ,, ;��'�q11 , ��_ "'� .- 0 ' i•• J ��;� �� . ��f . .�:` � i O� ` "�+ , �.-Y . ` f ' �� µ i 1 r � ��i;: ,_ � � i t _ r �'' . �� - �—' = I _'--`'----=.� - _i . - = "_ = 3 � - : h ,. - _-_-_ � G � _.." , {�:_-. - N a 2so '`�'`,� ��,{ � � � �� ;. :�� \ � � � ... I I :� � Q i � .:- ;:.� � � � at ._ -� r � 4 � v \ J � � � •' j. �' � � �� • � � � � •. � �i �`� � { � ��: :� ^ � __ y ♦, � � • . i _._,. � . , . �. � 3 ?� ` .. • I ! , ,r ,• � � M � ' • '9 � H'S� � I';''�� '`� � -Y_�� P4 �A AC,�1'7J�MY � ; � ---� r �.... � � r 4 �' 3��2� � �o. �5! ,. � „ �� r� �.�` � ._ , ; r��. .'_ ,. �t � � s� �� N '�` "' ° t i 4 2�, � - —� t � � , ,8 � ; ,� J�� ■ � a�-aaa CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Room 40, Lower L,evel, City HalUCourt House September 25, 2003 Present: Michael Byrd, Richard Faricy, Lee Meyer, Raymon3 Meyer, Dudley Younldn, Susan Bartlett Foote, 7ames Bellus, Gar Hargens (C,hair), Daniel Sc �tt, Paul Larson Absent: Pat Igo (excused),Shari Taylor Wilsey (excused), Ri�hard Murphy Staff Present: Wendy Lane, Amy Spong, Philip Waugh 1. CALL TO ORDER: 5:00 by G. Hazgens (Chair) 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA : Announcements moved to the end of the agenda. Agenda approved as revised. 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Faricy recused hims ;lf from agenda item N C. 4. PERMIT REVTEW/PUBLIC HEARING: A. Applicants for item A were not present so it was shifted in the agenda. B. 875 Summit Avenue, William Mitchell College of Law, Hill Historic District, by Perkins and Will Architects, for a demolition permit to raze a 1965 addition and a building permit to construct a new addition in its place. File #HPCO3-399 Waugh presented the staff report recommending approval of the demolition permit application and the building permit application. Mark Nelson and Tony Lane, from Perkins & Will, were both present to answer question;s. Hargens asked for and received confirmation that the brick will match the existing as ��lose as possible. Bellus expressed concern about the glass connection, stating the north elevation was stazk and the south elevation was not. Lane responded that they were trying to make the connection disappear. No one was present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Larson motioned to approve the proposal. Bellus asked for and was granted approval that the demolition decision and the building decision be two separate motions. Bellus stated that he would support the demolition but did nct believe that an adequate job had been done regazding the new design and would not su�port the new construction. Foote motioned to approve the demolition and Larson second the motion. Motion passed unanimously. �{3- ZS o�-aaa Larson morioned to approve the proposal for new construction and Byrd second the mation. Bellus commented that there is so much more this building could be. Hazgens stated that he has seen connectars that have been successes and advised to keep the connection as mirumal as possible. Larson stated he could have seen the design moving in a different direction but felt the architects have responded to several of the HPC concerns. Motion passes 9 to 1(Bellus). A. 283 Dayton Avenue, Hill Historic District, t.y owner, for a building permit to construct a shed dormer, replace three win lows and front door (This work was started without required approvals). File #HPCO3-397. Spong presented the staff report recommending: 1: A,.�proval of the shed dormer as constructed with the detailing proposed on the submitted drawings, including a condition to change the vinyl casement windows to wood doub. � hung windows; 2. Approval of the frieze board, dentils, front door, wide trim board and �rapping the window trim in aluminum; 3. Approval of the aluxninum soffit with tie condition that the beadboard panels be changed to a flat aluminum panel OR apprc val of retuming the soffit to wood as it existed; 4. Denial of the installed front window -�ith arch and the condition that two wood 2-over-2 double hung windows be installed in the same size and configuration that was existing (matching the neighboring house at 287 ,�ayton); 5. Denial of the proposed front porch changes with a recommendafion that the a+�plicant work with staff to resubmit a design for the front porch. Byrd asked for and received clarification that there is no precedence for the use of an arched window over two double hung windows in the Italianate style. Larson asked for the rationale of staffs recommendation of the shed dormer. Spong stated that it is a minimal impact, below the ridegline and did not disrupt the soffit Chazlie Rossley and Henry Schnitzer, owners and applicants, spoke stating that they are accepting of the staff recommendations in the report, although, they really like the rounded arch window but staff is very cleaz in the findings. L. Meyer asked for and received confumation that the function of the dormer was serving as headroom for a future third floor bedroom. Larson asked far and received clarification that the existing soffit was plywood wrapped in aluminum. Byrd asked the applicants if they reviewed the staff recommendations and had any objections. The applicants replied yes. No one else was present to speak for or against the pr<�posal and the public hearing was closed. L. Meyer motioned to approve staff recommendations 2, 3 iF soffit was wood, 4 and 5 and denial of the shed dormer stating tLat it was'not consistent with the style of the house and does not have a precedent. Younkiu seconded the motion. Foote disagreed with the removal of the shed dormer. Larsen stated support for the motion and asked for a friendly amendment that the sofTit be s�ecified as tongue and groove lx3- 4 not plywood beadboard and wanted staff to revie,w and approve final plans for the 2 A3- � o�/-a,ad arch window replacement. L. Meyer accepted the friendly amendment. Byrd asked if there was a dormer that would be acceptable or common to the Italianate style. Larson did not think a dormer works with that style of house but would accept a smaller version of that proposed. L. Meyer again stated that he does not think the Italianate style can carry a dormer. Foote stated she understood that ifthe dormer was not an obtrusive design than it would be approved. BelIus agreed with Foote stating the commission has had an inconsistent policy when dealing with dormers in general. Larson stated that his issue is with the size and scale, its not about not ha�ing a dormer at all. Byrd asked for a friendly amendment that the commission not reject th : idea of a dormer outright. L. Meyer accepted the friendly amendment. The motior� passes 9 to 1(Bellus). C. 358 Marshall Avenue, Aill Historic District, by Real Estate Development Group, for a demolition permit to raze a t� u story house and garage in order � � to construct a six story 68-unit condo building on lot and adjacent vacant lots. Rile #HPCO3-398. Spong presented the staff report recommending apprcval of the demoliton pernut contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a`�uilding permit far the proposed new construction. Foote asked a procedural question.�egazding the transition ft�n demolition permit to building permit. Bellus asked for and received clarification that a demolition permit would not be signed until the buildmg permit process was complete. Brian Pergomont, with Real Estate Development Gro.zp, spoke about the need to get contingent approval so tHey can refine the design boundaries. Pergomont stated that he and his company are invested in the neighborhood an�i they own and manage 100 apartments in the area. Bellus asked about the price points for the condos and Pergomont stated it was too early to determine, Byrd asked for a rationale for six stories in the new building. Bill Hickey, of Collaborative Design Group, stated that this was the same height as the Commodore and Blair House and would haue underground pazking. Hickey stated that the next two to four months are reserved for the review process and neighborhood meetings. Pergomont stated that the height is not defined yet and views and sunlight of neighboring structures will not be imp'acted. Bellus dissuaded the applicants from using the Blair House and the Commodore for a height comparison because they were unique and located on different types of streets and corridors. Younkin asked for a reiteration of the need for this 358 Marsha!l lot in the design. Pergomont stated that the quality of life needs for the complex necessitate the removal of the duplex. Hickey stated that the square footage and the odd ball nature of the site dictate the need to take down the duplex. � � Hargens asked for public testimony and urged those wanting to speak to stick to the topic of the demolition of 358 Marshall Avenue. (Staff handed out written public testimony that was received prior to the public hearing and stated that the handouts included 13 letters; 12 were against the demolition and/or proposel new construction and 1 was in support of the demolition and new consh A lelter of support from Mayor Randy Kelly was also passed out). 3 �3 ' �-�" o�-aaa Rick Igo the previous owner of 358 Marshall spoke and stated that the front porch was not original and that its sister house was removed many years ago. He stated that he did much of the work on the building and that it was never contributing to the district. Also stated that its economically unfeasible to rehab it. He spoke far the demolition but had reservation about the proposed new construction. Chris Yerkes, 501 Ashland, spoke against the demolition. Mary Texe, 113 Farrington, spoke against demolition. Manuel Melendez, 496 Marshall, spoke against demo'.ition. Mark Voerding, 113 Parrington, spoke against demol tion. Ruth Hylmer, 467 Marshall, spoke against demolitior,. Jim McDonough, 627 Selby, spoke against demolition. Tony Kuldch, 530 Marshall, spoke against demolitior . Chris Yerkes spoke again asking for historic contexts to be written about St Paul Hargens closed the public hearing. Younkin motioned to deny the permit application stating that there was not enough information provided on the costs and viability of � he existing structure. Ray Meyer second the motion. Bellus believed that the house hks no historic value and agrees with the staff recommendation. Bellus also stated that he �✓ould not support the proposed new construction, but there is a need to separate the demol:tion perniit and the building permit. Byrd stated that the surrounding blocks are siz�gle family homes. Bellus disagreed. Larson stated that he supports the motion : ar two reasons:l . Apartments aze late arrivals to the area and he would hate to see sma11 units supplanted by monolithic apartments, changing the scale of the neighborhood, and 2. The house is representative of a pattern book house from the 1880s. Younkin moved to adopt Larson's points as £ndings as friendly amendment. Motion to deny passes 5-2 (Bellus and Scott) �vith two abstentions (Hargens and Faricy). Bellus asked what direction does the HPC have for the applicant. Younkin stated he wants a dollar value on rehab costs. Larson believed that the rehabilitation of the house may not make sense unless its part of a larger development project. Bellus wants clarification of whats expected of the applicant. Byrd,commended the applicant for coming before the HPC at this point in the process, st<iting it was a good decision. Byrd stated that if the issue is economic hardship than demqlition may be okay, but not enough information was provided to make a decision. Foote thinks we need concrete numbers. D. 333 Irvine Avenue, Hill Aistoric District, by Mary Hennessy, for a demolition permit to raze a one-and-a-half story house in order to construct a detached three story house on lot and a detached thre e story house on adjacent vacant lot. F71e #HPCO3-400. Waugh presented the staff report recommending appresval of the demolition permit contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building pernut for the proposed new construction. Aaron Kodosh, architect far the project, stated that the owner, Mary Hennessey, would like some positive reinforoement tc go forward with the design process 0 iE3-z8 �� and asked for the demolition to be considered. Kodosh stated that they hired a mechanical engineering firm to conduct a feasibility study if the home were to be restored. Younlcin asked for and received confirmation that the square footage is about 800 square feet. Foote stated that there are nwmbers to evaluate the economic conditions and have seen the proposed single development which is consistent with the neighborhood. The public hearing was opened. Tom Stonburner, en�ineer for `I`KDA, representing the home owner of 339 Irvine stated that they would like to see some vibration limits put into place if 333 Irvine is demolished. Staff stated that there is language in the building code. Lazson asked for and received confirmarion that the C�cretary of the Interior's Standazds talk about protecting adjacent historic resources. Dean Soser, owner of 339-41 Irvine Avenue, is not opposed to the demolition and buildin ; two single family houses. Karen Alvaloz, of 331 Irvine Avene, is not opposed to the d.;molition and is asucious to have improvements along Irvine Avenue. Alvaloz stated that they would like to be brought into the process and then thanked the HPC for their t} oroughness they conducted the meeting. The pubiic hearing was closed. Bellus motioned to approve the demolition and Fa �te offered a second. Bellus stated that this building has costs that are almost equal to the value of the building and notes that for the previous case the estimated costs are $85,000 ..hat are equal to the value of the rental property. Byrd stated that there could be a lengthy conversation about how the values are calculated for rental versus ownership and stated that this owner calculated the market value based on the tas assessment. Larson stated that he supports Bellus but clarified the difference in this decision versus his prior decision. Larson stated that this house is very simple and the context in which this house stood has been lost. Motion passes 7 to 0 with 2 abstentions (Faricy, R. Meyer). E. 624 Summit Avenue, Hill Historic District, by owner, for a building permit to insta1178 triple-track aluminum storm windows. File #HPCO3-407. Spong presented the staff report and recommended denial of the building permit application. Gwynne Evans, owner and applicant, stated that the triple track is a stronger product. Larson stated that they need to see drawings s�r a sample of the product in order to vote on this matter. No one was present to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was ciosed. Younkin motioned to lay over the case until next meeting and in the mean time have the applicant bring in a sample or a drawing. Fart`cy seconded the motion. Foote stated that we constantly have to keep reevaluating palicies as new products emerge and the issue is not the number of tracks but the impact ori the window and frame. Motion passed unanimously. �F3- Z`� �� 5. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS • Spong stated that Council Member Lantry ask�d staff far a report to the HRA regarding the context of 800 E. Third Street, which is classified as a pivotal structure in the Dayton's Bluff District. • Spong stated that Island Station, off of Shepazd Road, is listed as a potential historic resource and is currently being considered for redevelopment. If interested, tours by the developers take place every second and fourth Thursday at 3pm. Just show up at the building. • Spong stated that a fust draft of the revised ox3inance has been sent from Peter Warner and that the task force should set up a meeting to go over. The meeting was scheduled for 8am on October 3 at Commissioner Meyer's house. 6. ADJOURNMENfi: 8:05 pm APPROVED AS AMENDED October 9, 2003 Submitted By: Amy Spong and Philip Waugh l{--3 -- 3 0 o�-aaa 8Q0 FrankSin Avenue Nrest Minpeapaiis, MN 55905 Main: 672.870.&SOQ REAI, ESTAT� DEVELOPMENT GROUP , �5;. ob�. <'.'�.� VGi FACSMILEd�S�66:�899) AND (7SMAILS Septembex 28, 2003 Ms. Amy Spong Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office of License, Inspecrions and Envixonmenhl Protec[ion 350 Samt Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102-I510 Re: Appeal to vote to deny demolition permit for 358 Ma�hall Avenue by FIPC Deat Ms. 5pong: This letter is intended to put the Ciry of St. PauI on notice that my company will be appealing the decisiott by St. Paul Aeritage Preservation Commission ("HPC"), to the SP Paul City Council. Our gcounds for appeal include, hut aze not limited to tfie followicg (1) The HPC voted to deny the demotition peimit based on the findiugs that were without merit and went against the staff report, a report that is reqitlired by Section 73.06 (j){2) oithe St. Paul Legislafive Code as it re]ates m this demolirion application; (2) That despite the fact that the HPC agreed wiffi the staff report on the economic value or ; usefulness for the building as it now exists, it sHll wted to deny the demoliflon permit, a�d created addirional follow=ap study that is without merit; (3) That the HPC finding conceming the "azcluteccurai and historical merit of the building" was azbihary and capricious; ; (4) The HPC made fmdings fox the demolifion permit based on itrelevant and azbiffary ' information, instead of focusing on the findings required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St, Paul Legislative Code. For the above reasons, and othecs that Fvili be further discussed at the time of our appeal, Real Estate Development Groy�akpeals the denial of its demolition permit by the HPC. Real Estate Devefopment Group cc: Keliey LeStanc aad Bill Hickey, CoIIaborative Design Group �� ,:� �-z� 'c� 3 -�n�(u�� n T , � .a�-nr;�.aa�:s;.? ..:�-,;, ;, n,�=;,,,,: :, ._ _ .................�.,......�,_ .,, . „�—_......�_' _ a �- aaa► CITY OF SAINT PAUL Randy C. Kelly, Mayor 390 Ciry Ha1[ 1 S West Ke(logg Bou[evard Saint Paul, MN 55102 Telephone: 651-266-8510 Facsimiie: 651-266-SSI3 September 24, 2003 Mr. Gar Hazgens, Chair Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission 548 Portland Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Gar: I am writing to offer my enthusiastic support for a proposed � �using project located at the Southeast corner of Marshall and Western avenues in the His,oric Hili Heritage Preservafion District. As you may know, Real Estate Development Group plans to constnxct 68 units of condominium-style housing at this site. One of my top priorities as Mayor is to develop 5,000 new housing units of all types and price ranges in Saint Paul. This proposal would provide a large nurnber of units in a high-demand neighborhood. In addition, it would attract over $18 million in private investment with no public subsidy at a time when the City needs to expand its properry tas base. I feel the pxoposal would be a quality addiUon to the Ramsey Hill neighborhood. Owner- occupied housing would replace a vacant lot that currently stands as a blight to surrounding properties. The density of housing proposed would add many new residents and strengthen the vibrant mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly chazacter of the area. I utge you to give full consideration to Rea1 Estate Development Group's proposal to construct new housing at Marshall and Western avenues. I am confident that this development will be a quality addition to the Historic Hill Preservation Aistrict and to the City of Saint Paul far decades to come. Sinc y, � dy C. Kelly ayor c: Martha Fuller, PED Amy Spong, LIEP �� i ��i� %� �� -32 � � Amy Spong - 358 Marshal Avenue �� ,�,a�Page � From: "CHARLES SENKLER" <charlessenkler@msn.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 1034AM Subject: 358 Marshal Avenue Dear Amy- Received info on the proposed demo of 358 Marshal and the condo development. I as a business owner in the neighborhood and a resident am for the project. The building at 358 is a wreck and the condos would be a positive move for the Marshal Avenue area. 1 have no knowtedge oF who is building the units, no hidden agenda but congratu{ate anyone who is willing to invest and develop our neighborhood. Who really cares if the bu iding is te� feet higher then the spec. Charles F Senkler charl essen kler@m sn.com �5-33 Summit University Planning Council Building a Better Community 627 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55104 Board of Directors Yresident Reverend DarrytSpence Treasurer Gail Graham Secretary Matthew P. Downs Vice Chair Car! Nelsan Manuel Melendez, Jr. Community Improvement And Safety David Peterson / Robert Hickman Neighborhood Development Cary Rembert Outreach Steve Wilson, Hailie Q. Brown Alice Neve Lexington Outreach Library Reverend Da�id Stewart Dayton Avenue Presbyterian Church Harry Oda University UNITED Paul Rhodes Sr. Stanley Gardner �[orgen Lindquist Mary Gardner Amy Michael Kathy Wiison Kahlid Etfendi srafj Executive Director James J. McDonough Jr., Ph.D. Community Crime Prevention Coordinatar Office Manager Jean Doyle Phane:651-228-1855 Fax:651-225-1108 district8@tcpost.com September 25, 2003 Aitn.: Amy Spong Heritage Preservation Commission Office of L'zcease, Inspection, and Environmental Protection 300 Lowry Professional Building 350 St. Peter StreeY Saint Paul, MN 55102 - 1510 RE: Demolition of 358 Mazshall Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: The Summit-University Planning Council (SUPC) — District 8 received notification of a Rezoning" request fr �m P-i, RM-2 to RM-3 of the above noted properry at 358 Marshall Avenue, the South East corner of Western Street and Marshall Avenue on Augzst 18, 2003. This item was placed on the SUPC Neighborhood Development Committee's Community Meeting agenda for September 16, 2403. On September 15, 2003, the project azchitect called our office and informed us that the rezoning request had been "temporarily tabled" to allow more time to consider the site plan. The SUPC had distributed 350+ notic�s of this Agenda item throughout the community. The September 16, 2003 Community Meeting was attended by 42+ residents and agency representatives. Since the request had been made to "table" the rezoning request, this item was deferred for discussion. However, several neighborhood residents have contacted the SUPC office and expressed concerns about the proposed "density" of the project (i.e. 68 condo units), along with other issues such as height of the proposed building, tr�c congestion, inadequate parking accommodations, safety issues - especially as related to the high number of young children in the area, etc. The SUPC Neighborhood Development Committee and Board of Directors aze committed to fully reviewing the proposed development of this site in the Summit-University community, and will continue to conduct meetings to garner input and comment from neighborhood residents. Because ai.'the confusion created by separate, but pazailel processes by PED and LIEP, SUPC —District 8 has not had sufficient information on the proposed development plan tc continue and SUPC recommendations. present a formal recommendation at this time. Further monitoring and review will will inform the Saint Paul Heritage Preservat_on Commission of any and all future Thank you for your anticipated attention to these matters. If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. ' cerely ames .. Mc . gh r., Ph.D. �-�j — 3� Executi e Director Attachment — Community Meeting — September 16, 2003 cc: SUPC Board of Directors R� v'd B M�FS • 4.2.1� • 0 3 � Amy Spong - Re: 355 Marshall Ave. (hearing) �� Page 1� From: vharms@mail.eetc.com To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 1125AM Subject: Re: 355 Marshaii Ave. (hearing) Thurs., Sept. 25, 2003 Dear Amy and or to whomever at HPC: 1 sincerely hope that you wi{I receive this before tonighYs meeting. We did receive the notification earlier but failed to respond, sorry. We just received a flyer deiivered by the Ramsey Hill Association reminding us of the meeting. ChrisYs Fiousehold of Faith had wanted to purchase the vacant lote across Marshall Avenue from our Academy front yard several months ago but the asking price was, in ourjudgment, unreasonable. We are :;orry now that we did not try harder to find a way to make that purchase. I think that you are aware that we have an abiding need to improve F�ousing for our own purposes but that in doing so our housing acquisitions iave had a positive influence on the stabilizing and upgrading of housinr in the community generally. Had we been able to acquire those vaca it lots we would have wanted to create several nice duplexes or perhaps � four unit at the most. Well, that is history! The current proposal to raze an existing home and garage in order to stretch out a six story building with 68 condos in it seems ludicrous to us! We are in agreement with the sentiment being expressed by the Ramsey Hill Association and would lend our support to their argument. Compietion of the project as proposed simpiy brings way too much density of people and automobiles, etc. to an otherwise quiet residential neighborhood and would not be welcomed by us. The immediafe neighborhood has more than su�cient multiple housing opportunities on Virginia St., Western Avenue and Dayton and Selby corners! Our hope is that sanction for this project wiil not be granted !! Sincerely, Ver�on R. Harms, Secretary Bd. of Directors, ChrisYs Household of Faith, Inc. �S � � � � Barb and Chuck Gudknecht 487 Marshafl Ave. St. Paul, MN 55102 651-298-1012 September 25, 2003 To: Amy Spong/HPC Re: HPCO3-398 We are writing to express our concerns regarding the proposed 6 story — 68 unit condo building proposed for the vacant lot on the SE corner of Western and Marshal{ and the demolition permit for the property at 358 Marshall. We have lived in the neighborhood for nearly 25 ye�rs. During that time we have invested a lot into our home and our neighborhood. We are very opposed to a 6 story complex of any type in our neighborhood — it is completely out of character in staying with a historic area. We are opposed to tearing down a historic home for this or any other purpose. Sincerely . ��.t Barb & Chuck Gudknecht f�� - �(o o�-aaa September 17, 2003 Amy Spong Go the Historic Preservation Commission City of St. Paul 15 West Kellogg St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: File # HPCO3-398 Dear Amy, I would like to convey my concems about a recent pernu� application for property at 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Real Estate L'evelopment Group, File # HPCO3-398. I am not in favor of this proposal as I do not think the proposed structure will be a proper fit in this location. The corner/street that it is located is primary single family and duplex homes. All structures in the area are no taller than ttuee stories with the exception of Blair Complex which use to be a hotel. I would like to express my concern and not recommend this proposal as a resident on Marshall Avenue. Sincerely, �;' �'� ' , �yn i . n 464 M shall,Av nu . aui, MN� 102 (651)229-0757 ��3� �Ur�9 9'� 2Z • 03 � ni i iy ��i i�y - o0o i i iai ai iau �'7'�.�..r ay° �'.„.� From: "Susan Clarke" <SusanClarkeDC@comcast.net> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 2:32PM Subject: 358 marshall Amy. Since none of the building around are so high, I would suggest that (in keeping with the historic area architecture) that the builders only go as far as maybe one storey I igher - at the most - than the surrounding buildings. Yours. Susan Clarke DC. �-38 rr�i� oNvi� - o0o rviaia�inu ,-. � ��., _ raye i� From: "Bradford, Kate" <Kate.Bradford@northstarfinancial.com> To: "'amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us'" <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 8:44AM Su6ject: 358 Marshall Dear Ms. Spong: I cannot teil you how distressed I am to Iearn of the proposed deve opment of the properly at 358 Marshali. The size and scale of what is beir� proposed is far beyond what is in keeping with our neighborhood. : fear that should this project go through, more projects will be brought forth and the integrity of our historic district wifl slowly be eroded by mass housing. There must be something that can be done to prevent th?� development. Kindly advise. Sincerely, Kate Bradford 221 Mackubin Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 �� - 39 i.,�,r._�. r '4. �'.`r d�'��,�� .. From: "Brita Kukich" <bkukich@visi.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpa�l.mn.�s> Date: 9/25/03 6:33AM Subject: proposed condos on Marshalf and Western Brita Kukich 530 Marshall Ave St. Paul, MN. 55102 651-222-3274 Amy, Many things came to mind when I heard of the application to raze t�e historic structure on Marshall to build a six story condo. In trying to stay on the topic of historicai gu�deiines, even if I thought tearing down the house was a good idea {which I don't) I could not imagine a six story structure of any kind on that corner. Even though there are sizeable historic structures in the arsa such as St. Mary's (help me out here CHOFF?) across the street the lot or green space and its hist.:rical impact create a serene presence that would never be complimented 6y a six story condominium buif�ling. Going back to the endangered duplex on Marshall, even though thc, present condition of the house only marginally supports the historic neighborhood, with some work it cculd be a great home for a family. In 1992 we bought a tiny Italianate on the 500 block, just up from the duplex in question. When we purchased the home it was a duplex with three layers of siding and aIl the wrong updates inside. At that point anyone would have said it marglnally supports the neighbonc� od. Today, it is one of many very desirabie single family homes. To say it has great historical significant would be a stretch but what this humble dwelling offers to the neighborhood for years to come is a vision which a 6 story condo could never match. There are more people in this neighborhood with similar stories than not. If the potential of every home in this neighborhood would have been viewed as insignificant then there would be no historic neighborhood teft. There are no more oId homes left in this area. We have such a desire to get ahead financially. We feel it is progress. But what is beyond? So lets take a Iook at Marshall even further down the street. Near the corner of Lexington and Marshall the city has been relocating homes on the north side of the street for the past 5? to 10? years. They did not tear them down. Just yesterday there was a large brick structure blocking the intersection of Victoria and Marshall. Although 1 can say I disagree with moving the home� at least even the city thought the structures were valuable enough to relocate. How can a historic building in a historic neighborhood, at its originat location be fess valuable no matter what its condition is? We have a designated historic district. 1 want to compare the duplex to an endangered species like the Bald Eagle. What is one less Bald Ea�le? What is one less home. When do we stop? As a resident on Marshall Ave. in the Historic District, 1 do not supp+art the demolition of the historic structure on the 300 block of Marshall. I do not agree that any condo structure would be appropriate on that corner. The twin home that is across the street, the home slated for demolition and all the smaller structures in the immediate area as well as St. Mary's (?) would suf`er from such a radical structure as the one propased. Where does the eye pause when one looks up Western betv✓een Marshall and Selby? Where does the soui of a resident go to rest? imagine that this area was your garde�. You would design positive spaces /�—� � �rr aporiy - proposea conaos on iwarsnau ano vvest�em �—��,� rage �� and negative spaces, hard scape and green space. You wouldn't put in a bunch of flowers and shrubs that were all the same size and texture. In a neighborfiood especially a city neighborhood one needs to think about that as well. Why not restore the existing dwelling back to a single family home? Why not build 2 or 3 twin homes on the vacant lots? This is a neighborhood where families live. Children play in their b�ck yards. This historic district should not continue to be a piace where small entities continue to capitaliza from the presfige of the Historic Neighborhood. We have pubiic housing for the needy. We have rursing homes for the sick. What we don't have is enough homes with grass and trees for the other horr � owners in this area to wafk down the biock and stop and pause to say hello, sit on the front porches whi : the chiidren play in the yards. What kind of historic impact would this make? Who would have ever dreamed that once again the people of St. Paul would see the value of preserving a truly historic neighborhooJ? Thank you Brita Kukich �5-�l �r�i�iya�viiy� nicxnr�.vo-oavY ,a ..,�;�� _.. . _ . ��.�;. r°`J° '.-� From: Teresa Tierney <teresa@tierneymusic.com> To: aamy.spongQci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/24/03 8:10PM Subject: RE: File #HPCO3-398 Amy, Thank you for your message today. I am unable to attend the mee :ing Thursday due to my work schedule so I will take this opportunity to state my opposition to the proposal for a 68 unit condo development at 358 '4arshali Avenue of the Hili Historic district. This is a residential area that already has much housing consisting of multiple units. Marshall Avenue already has high traffic volume and speeds and the addition of this �roperty would only increase tra�c and congestion. In addition, proposing : six story building does not appear to take into account that this is a historical district. The ultimate use of the vacant lot should mainta: i, preserve, and continue the fiistoric and neighborhood quality of thi� area. I am not opposed to to the property being used for residential purp ses, but I do not support the development for property that would raise the popu{ation density, increase traffic, and not fit with the historic atmosphere of the neighborhood. Sincerely, Teresa 7ierney 473 Marshafl Avenue /�S �4�Z � Amy Spong - 358 Marshall _ __ �-��,� a y Page 1� From: "Erika PerraulY' <erika@perrault.net> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 12:39PM Subject: 358 Marshall Hi Amy. Thanks again for taking comments and passing them along at the meeting tonight. My concerns about the proposed development at 358 Marshall are related both to the size of the building, 6 stories, as well as the number of the units, 68. The neighborhood around 358 Marshall does not include buildings �f the size and scope proposed. The Iargest close structures are the Chr�st Household of Faith building, which is Iocated on a much larger piec : of property and is historic, so is in keeping with other targer oid structures such as the Biair Arcade building. However no other bu "ding is even ciose in height to 6 stories, and I'm concerned that the 6 stories would dwart surrounding properties and causing too much of a dense mass of housing in one small area. In addition, I live at 463 Marshall, and our neighborhood is strugglii.� to carve out its niche as a safe, preserved, historic part of Ramsey hili. Simply having 68 condo units in one building on one corner substantially increases the housing density in our immediate neighborhood which is already working hard to retain good, long-te m, solid neighbors who are committed to making a livable, historic neighborhood that Saint Paul is proud of. I(and I befieve my neighbors as wefl) wefcome safe, beautiful new housing, but ask that it support the neighborhood and its historic character better by being smaller and putting fewer people in such close proximity to each other. Thanks. Have a good meeting. Erika Perrauit erika@perrault.net (w)651-338-7562 (h) 651-665-9797 �- �3 `Am� 5 ong - 358 Marshall n, _�1�_��_ Nage 1� From: "Rubinstein, Sally" <sally.rubinstein@mnhs.org> To: "'amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' <amy.spong@ci.>tpaul.mn.us> Date: 9125/03 124PM Subject: 358 Marshall Dear Amy: I am writing to oppose the planned development of the southeast c�rner of Western and Marshall and 358 Marshail in the Historic Hili District ,File #HPCO3-398). The proposed structure is too big {or the site and wi � overpower the neighboring buildings. 1 am especialiy concerned at �ut the impact such a building would have on the St. Joseph's Academy a mplex across the street. Additionally housing this dense would create terrible traf'ic problems. Even with 79 spaces for 68 units, there would be a lot or. cars parked o� the street. I also disagree with the plans for the existing house. It might not b� of great architectural value, but it does contribute to and support the architectural fabric of the district. At the very Ieast, it should be mo�. -�d rather than razed. Thank you, Sarah (Sally) Rubinstein 442 Dayton Ave. 651-224-6429 �S"�� ranyaN�ny-�ooiviaiai�mir�vaiiuC,nwnist�iicvisuwi, rue�rnr�,�o-oyo a E� � - — > D� ,�—_�j�s._. �,,,� Prom: <DANANDLARA@aol.com> To: <amy.spongQci.stpaul.mn.us> Da4e: 9/25/03 132PM Subject: 358 Marshail Avenue, Hill Historic District, File �HPCO3-398 HPC, i am a iife long resident of Ramsey Hill. i am adamantiy opposed to the proposal at 358 Marshall. This is a historic district and old building: cannot be replaced. Once you take it down it can �ever be put back. Apparently the duplex is not warranted as "historically significanf'. I beg to differ, .. is a pleasant house and IS significant because of when it was construc ed! One house may not seem like a big deal, but iYs one house here, one h�use there, this, that .... so on and so forth. Eventually over time, there will not be a historic district to protect or just a patch work of once was. Furthernore, the size of the proposed "building" is simplyjust way too large! This is iot W oodbury for crying out loud! Lara Duddingston , 443 Holly Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 (651)222-6901 �S �S � Amy Spong - 358 Marshall - Pa e 1' � � � I� �� From: "Upchurch, Tfieresa" <Theresa.Upchurch@nortY.starfinanciai.com> Ta: '"amy.spong@cistpaui.mn.us"' <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 10:57AM Subject: 358 Marshall Good Morning! I am a resident of Cathedral Hill and a member of fhe RamseyHill Association. f have fived in this neighborhood off and on for 23 years moving b�,k in 2001 because I knew were my heart belonged. Our neighborhood �s filled with such fabulous stuctures and hisfory. Allowing this monster at 358 P!arshall to rear its ugiy head would be a travesty. I moved home for a reasc � and bought property here (447 Marshall Avenue). 1 want to keep my ne:�hborhood the way i remember it as a child...the last 40 years.. and for the ne; t 100 years 10 come. Please do not allow this to happen to our beautiful neighborhood. Theresa Upchurch Sr. Field Adminisirator North Star Consultants, Inc. 2701 University Avenue SE, Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55414 direcf: 612-617-6128 fax: 612-617-6001 th eresa. upch u rch @north starfinan cia l. com <mailto:theresa. upchurch @n orthsta�n an ci al. com> CC: "'The Phoenix Newspaper"' <phoenixl@winternet.com> k5-�� Amy Spong - File #HPCO3 398 Proposed construction at 358 Marshall Ave Pa e 1" �_w. �l�_� - a�a ��.�� From: The Phoenix Newspaper <phoenix1 @wintemet.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 10:56AM Subject: File #HPCO3-398 Proposed construction at 358 tvlarshall Ave Good momi�g, Amy Spong < Re 358 Marshall, I am most concerned about the size and scoper the proposed building. There is really nofhing in the entire district that s six stories,..and certainly not six and one-half stories. Let me correct myseff. The cathedral is taller. "...new construction be harmonious with the scale and massing of existing, historic buildings in the district." Fran Jackson 447 Marshall Ave #6 Saint Paul 55102 651-291-2691 CC: T Upchurch <trublu1963@msn.com> , \5�� Amy Spong - 358 Marshali �i.�, �age 1 #� From: "Mike Schumann" <mike@traditions.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 9:57AM Subject: 358 Marshall As a resident of the Ramsey Hiil neighborhood, I would Iike to expross my extreme concern about the mass of this proposed development. The overall aesthetic appeal of this neighborhood is what makes p.�ople want to live here, and which creates the relatively high property values that the City of St. PaW c asperately needs to Tinance its many programs. The historic preservation guidelines are not only designed to protect historic structures, but also to protect the aesthetic integrity of the neighborhood. I would like to strongly encourage the HPC to reject any proposed �evelopment that creates structures that exceed the size and mass of other existing buildings in the imriediate viciniry of this project. Please feel free to call me at 651-208-3791 if you would like further input. Thanks, Mike Schumann mike@traditions.com CC: <info@ramseyhiil.org> /ES - `f � �_ � ��,�ro��,,, � ��.�:. ��_:;►,_. Ramsey Hill Associadon ��-�� o N-aaa 400 SELBY AYENUE, SUITE V, SAINT PAIIL, MN 55102-d500 TELEPHONE: 651.221.0200 October 20, 2003 To: Members of the St. Chris Coleman Jerry Blakey Pat Harris .��m Jay Benanav Paul City Council Fr: Ramsey Hill Association Boazd of Directors Rod Richter, Historic Preservation Chair At its regular monthly meeting on October 9, 2003, the members of the Ramsey Hill Association Board of Directors voted to support the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission's decision to deny the demolition permit request for 358 Marshall Avenue. The Coinmission's vote has been appealed and is on your meeting agenda (Item 54) for October 22. The Ramsey Hill Association encourages you to uphold the HPC's decision. Many years ago, when I was studying historic preservation, one of my instructors constantly drummed into our heads that nothing historic should ever be tom down unless what is proposed to replace it is much better for the community. Whether or not the new proposal is a welcome addition to the neighborhood is a question that cannot yet be answered. No defuutive proposal for a replacement structure has been produced. The members of the Ramsey Hill Association Board of Directors are of the opuuon that the replacement structure, as it has been so far described (six stories, 68 units, a multitude of zoning variances required), would r,ot be benefrcial to the Ramsey Hill neighborhood. We encourage you to uphold the HPC's denial of the demolition permit for 358 Marshall Avenue. �,. ', tICT 2 � 20Q� C7ANIEL �C�STRC�� ., FROM :UPI PROPERTY MfiNRGEMENT GR�UP FRX N0. :16125708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:55 M P ' o � 5 800 Franklin Avenue Wesf S � Minneapulis, MN 554pg Main: 612.870.8300 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMEIITT GROUP Q��ber Zo, aoos Ms, Amy Spong Saint P�I Heritage PreseEyation Commission C/o dfftce of [ Inspect7afl and �nvironmental Protection 350 Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, M7Y 55102-15(0 Re: Fina(ized Cos[ Anatysis of Budget vs. Actual $ids for 358 Marshal[ Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: Per the recommendation of the Commission on September 25'�, Zpp3, � ��ave received actua� b]ds from 4�a��fed contractprs to pin down the ac..tual cost of the contemplated repairs and renovations that this property wiil require, were it io continue [o be rented as a duplex, and returned to i£s originai 1880's period condition. This letter will compare the original budget thnt f]�ad used to determine the e�t of the cost verses the Actusll Bids that we receiv�i from licensed e�nttac[ors to restore the premise io iL original ( 8$0'S style construction. As you cao see, the acEUal bids are �7(12.016 CREATER TH,4N our original budgeted estimates, �rohich �'E� �ery conservati�e. Attaehed for your review are also the bids that have been received. 1. Heating system replaced: 2. Replaee Plumbing System: 3 2eplaoemenE of Itoof 4. Electrical 12epair/Cteplacement 5. Repair of Foundation: b• Kepair of Stucco: 7. Exterior SoffiN7'rim Replace: i3udget: $S,OOd.00 Bad�et: $IO,00Q.00 Budget: $ ) 0,000.00 Budget: $t0,000.00 BudgeY: $5,000.00 Bndget: �30,000.00 Budget; $5,000.00 Actual Bid: Actuat $id: Actual Bid: Actual Bid: Actual Bid: Actuai Bid: Actual Bid: $7,500 $ r 7,500 $16,483 $l0,IS0 $135,383 (see 5 byove) (see 5 dbove) 'CUTAT,: Budget: $85,000.00 Inere�ses Over Bud et: �10201G Actaal $ids: $I87,016 [t is my hope that this analysis will further illustrate the extent of work ehaz this property requires at this tirne to retum it to iLg origin$1 1 Bgp•s period condition. in terms of economic value, whiah we caiculated at $ based on eurrent re;nt� and aperating costs, we would create a negative economic value o£ $]02,00-$I I 1,0 ' we performed [his work. !n addition, the above $187.00O represents 75%ofour origina ase price, It is abundantEy clear £rom this anafysis, that the only feasib[e �nomic use for buildi to demoli[ion it or move ic to another site to make room for development af the und lyin� � Group FROM :UPI PROPERTY MRNAGEMENT GROUP FAX N0. :16128706500 , <. _ Oct. 22 2003 10:35RM P2 a�l-aaa RRAUSAND�R441�t� CDNS't`Ri7cTI�N COMYANi' (:O!+tTRACTORS � CONSTRUCTEO�I h1ltIVAGF.KS •...� i� Mr. Spiros Ztnebalas Rea186tflce DeVelopmnnt Grm� 800 Fra�ilcli�t Avenue West Mittneapolis> MIV 554a5 Re- 3S8 MaasGail Sti'eet IJeac 3pfras: As per yauc xequost, Kiaus-Andeison has looked at exterior �enovations ta 358 Marshatl Sueet, $c, Fanl, htinnesota. Tdit �st Eor Fhis w�& as per the attached eetiniate dated i0J21103 is ONE HUNDEtED 1�IIRTX F[V� THOUSANIS 'fHREE HUNbRED EIG�ITY THiiEE AND NO/100 DOLLARS {�135,3H3.�}. We inClnda the followiqg: Demolirion aad retwildin� uf the fron[ pwcR Demoliti0n and rebuildiAg of tHe eide porch Demolidon of smcco cxtericY ReWqrking of �after cxtcASions Re-shoring of roof rafues Instalfativa al` 4" hm'dbo�d lap siding Euterior painting VTe do not iaCl¢de: i.ead peifit [cmovai Asbestvs reaaoval g��► �f any hazaidous m��at Any � oft' or 4asrauaaon oP zoofits� rnareciats AnY modfficauon m existing fouqdari� We will n�d perxuis�ian to set scaffold on the esseerr po�tian of the neighbortns FtoPattY• � y oa bayC �u quo6ti�ts, please cooract me at youx coaveaiCfl�e. Very uuty yrnus. US-AND COlYS UL'TEOI3 COIvv1PAI3X '�j O Ra8$C3! Vice Ptesid�s I,Rltt St. Paul Divisian 200 Grand Avenue. St. P�ul. MN 55702 ..�_.....�-.nnn r�v.rr.r��OfMA}9M1 .../� AY . t�I4l��IllRlu nw�n� -r�_�� +.r��. �� ...i. b�= �aa, `FROM :UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FAX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:35RM- P3 ,� + , �ra�5�—�h� 1.�.�a.��° lv.'zr.o3� se •�. �itu FROM':UPI PROPERTY MRNRGEMENT GROUP FRX N�. :16128708500 - Acr. s_2e03 19:54aM ' SELA ROOFING.SRLE� � Res1d ��w1(� �onM6� AHluwopolH 9F. Pad � 572875�l078 651�F73964 iau fl12�exa-tOT9 � L � � ��1}!� Oct. 22 2003 10:36RM P4 .r SiNte otI^� timnes ro f40DOfY�O * e0t1d� � inewo0 149d �a/S/o-3 � ^ �. . � 66E_ �� - --- .---i� ,_..__..____._ —,�,�_. ^. Propose u�mf�ln�mendanolMor-nqa�Croti.wmeerekA+�%easatxt�9�wa: �_ ..—. W—a�$ ..�� wnag.+: D _ w•;!°�'��_.� om:e._,4roro�s4,�ryana,wew,;F�,ar4c _ 1U % MN��1�N . �Ad�Y��^. �—n..—�. .�. ��.�,,._�,�,.�"��"""°��`� � . _�..� �. m s � �— �_� :� .� �' i�eM' a�Mp¢ Kp��b�a oM ee W41 m hr [Ma➢�Ig +� pfau�n� $reccn 14n�. �'trouwRn �aoor�n uauwnMa� 7loe�xeewreoe �js�na �ee�wunaa (� rrv��c�ro� o�awsmas�almerv»ca `ur� ae „ann w weamm. FI �noM 9M (OIXhBMl�9� ONNO9�0 adM. s10CM. �nM1.v�pY Md11eMd�& W�a�e �appmary, Oet Y�7.ip6tmaea ewp�pe. ��NU NUan M qemOppCfoQEebMq�1V11eIlonY qeee OCXda e�qry WOYQ�tl w iR�Le ei{.� Da IMI� QOrwarl0t Ww IIriM�ab.Bi-. �ae/aMBLt.4x6z]liBHAIB,EaenkWa&m01i�.:ti�.�..aNGMHOeuCOilp3�qW9V�ka 6 �ppqE86MiN�Mw ..�7v..� WecreG:. ..��I� ._�.WG¢apMAq9:_� __Im1Ka11W �1 nm+bdno reaf inena wtn poo,u�ae �«hroReu w INeo frm unnene�M (W4 mamFO�PEdQ��Ml4 ��Ihe.��.Co1eY —� __ ` „ 1 Pobarowceaeepl�QawC*cwRei�o9eew¢. —� ~_ 111Mie11 (]W�F WcaWMGBE �CWeMCmnlnB Qftk QOme�—.� N�qpAl�„O,�M.C�nf ._�8b'b�.�F� „�45yq+ p30riar qaalka! Q50Yw I]tAMrcLNAne o@a�tl �nWA fldd vW i1f16� mPS i. neloo.. S MarrarM�Mtuettqclwl��aeca KK� _qepPoqrpen��..�_q�In+eqUmm� g._— �s,umw a��,sroa—._.o n.e��d� �w.,_,�,ti�—_ �..— Ie p4'aG- � E �� 3' .�Tgp�MR��60CIW„mamllAnAw�tltl_..NeNoomie�pPbPt '�. 1� n�eanwe�Ar10�fh�aary�en�d�CO y �Oraela�maiureMeWnderopmx�MO��Ra�snqt'ne mpply adwww. Wk� eere uta iweai �awmrsPp.Ar�aryn�nekvw�. wW 1��a aamruw�meNne Mm�am ar MkAwlt6 �eriwwlpOLe�aWe00wLWOrt�. �3namY �war �cA'P aM�r UaeN�e C7 �aaaw fJ acym ea(«ed pMSroM1UR�hNi'�Ne II�� ,�,e�aM m�owWa0A6o ZWNB�weIalP�oroQmNdcMlaMwbdlwiROWftoMk�mlklbrt5 �_.mwtneaoaetmp�f(n. NMOnpibpMn mC�imnly � t.TqkpoYUmmm4Wfew {""__' ._---��awranaeba�Mp�mAWnVeuw�ca. 2.N1uWnewmasolNY�P S�— erera�WaCotaMA�alanhenplm QnaaAad�t.aayhanroera�ow E�..J� d okw�y .o eqnpmrW�r.ert.oawenmiyroeadre�aanrpM��era�i�ynNa�minuneuxar. it G+�wi4� om�ascnane�wpaw� t. Nme _.c,,.9'Ounwa em1C.7s+cnaereR'Xa'! aOvamuetl Ps'%�y aawn�ansN. Qxum�am tl�ad !'1Nw.rror L�.�a+fa�NaEO.ecdOhMleldt.abixpnqrt m.napmes.�_(aee0tntliea4eprami0lmarm�Q �.N IoP�+N�1o�w We�vUMe�r m a(�9M1� u..rn.M1M.i YPsrenqrpr m��p� Finp� �insw.�.iWe�mMmn�_trar.avanetv_.xoimT_t�wna�uam^yme�eaqcimm�l� rywewn. rohYrodmvefeYi't�'oRlxara�aeheinn��u....xxi.�.. A dle�rY w[�b J n.� ._..._... •MITa�pt M Amne$MOM iotOlTllb COnnYBel. nccap+sna otCof�eqe— o-w»w...,.e.n....m �w.-`awn.a. ww�v..rNtwn,,... W sm.«,,.�... vmU fb.a.�unr.r�rws r.. �aNw1EiMM1 Mw w x a m.. w w r. � n r x MM w w,w aw � ww a�..4a w P1+.nrwnraaurwYM� WTyPhmpNea.qp�aNV�wf m � M �p� Y �WYwi�qin+mY�w�rm�il�iq4PdMMr4Y s W� � r� _ '�'IMMAMOmmM'WIM�W�w P�t�Uenpqy�pwqM�i �w�ye.iaee�pe.+..1at o �-aaa ~ FROM`:UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FRX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:37RM PS ` - __ .. .............. _ ' 101fd910� m P_ om� 8��0�� MOONEr',ANO J�/�LER P�a�anba� ar�d �eatir�g 2925 Garfie►d Ave South MinneapoPs, MN 55408 {�'�2) 827 2825 Octoper 8, 2003 F� �672} 827-�4465 Rergola WlanagemerrE 208 westem qrre North Unit � SY. Pauf MN 55102 Dear Customer, We are pleasecf to submii fhe foil�+ving proposal for the plumbirtg work a# the duplex ap MarshaH in St. Paul. We witk fumish arld 'mstaif new water Unes from the wafer �ter ta a�� fix(utes, new drain Anes from fixtures and verrt lines atl per code. We rvip ir�s3an a neu�r water heafer a�d new chimney liner as per code. We will pra�ide iwo bath tubs, two water closets,'twa iavatory sinks, tvvo kitchen sinks, lauRdry tuh, hvo outside hose sp�ots a!1 mateaiats � insta8 �ese �ixtures. Others will dc arfy patching of waI[s ancf floors. This is an estimated cast fvr the above work $17,500.00 We wili fumish and instalf a S(ant Fnn Sailer, SX-180 Ehe removal is Tsterl s�parately beloW. We vWfl set new boiler on cemeat pad, in9tafl !o existirtg piping and redi�tiart, using proper igotation and halancing valves. We will instal! a new expansion tank in basement. Cnnnecting gas, ver�ting, electricai, wi� al1 permits arrd }ests. The crosf of this shall be $5,6QO,fl0 Removai of asbestos and old boiler try Envirobate iNC $2,OOD.00 We reserve the right to not accept this bid after 30 days We apPreciate the oppornmifyy to wark with you an this projec� and are confident in our abilities fo handle this job � a prafessionai manner. Sincerery, Matthew D. Romain Projecf Engineer 9um-O-Matic Mooney and Ridler Mechanicai Contractors � Accepted ' FROM`:UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FRX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:37� P6 � tint-cc� . "`Ocb �7 09 08:i1p anthon� �� $up�esne c�:ee�'t�ic ��. �PWO E 651) 227-8849 A Elalrical work for 358 Msishatl .ave. St Paul, M1S_ 1 J we wiii clean up elechicat wieing in basernent 2.) We wilt add sufficient lighfing on ontside of buitdix� at all enay ways. 3.) We wi(l check aD w7ring in both units to �nake sute therc is no haz2rds and there rs proper pol�'ity on all circuits. 4.)'9Ve will malce sisre there is sufficicnt outlets snd lightit�g in each raom_ W¢ will add a�tlets wheie neceSSaiy t0 m2et efCCtricalcode. 5.) We wil[ add GFi outlets whe�e requ9red in kitchens and bathrooms. 6 J We wiFl make sure outleGS i1i bedrooms have ffiOfaulf proteck�or� CosE fat work listed above: $t0,150.OP � aa� WESTERN & MARSHALL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA CounCil File # r Z�^'� Green Sheet # 11� V RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To Whereas, the HPC conducted a public hearing on the said application on September 25, 2003, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard after having provided notice to affected property owners; and � 2 Whereas, Real Estate Development Crroup (hereinafter, the "REDG"), made application 3 to the Heritage Preservation Commission (hereinafter, the "HPC") in HPC file No. 03-398, for a 4 demolition pemut to raze a dwelling and detached gazage located at the address commonly 5 known as 358 Marshall located in the Hill Historic District; and 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Whereas, at the close of the hearing, the HPC denied the application based upon all the testimony and records before it, including the foliowing findings set forth in HPC Resolution No. 03-398, required under Legislative Code 73.06(i): 1. To approve a demolition permit at this time would not be appropriate given the lack of information regazding the viability of the structure. Detailed structural information, rehabilitation costs and a feasibility study [were] not included as part of the application. Committee: Date 2. Apartment building were late arrivals in the Summit-Hiil neighborhood and they were largely built to expand the income base as rental properties. As early as 1901, Summit Avenue had restrictions regarding the construction of apartment buildings in order to maintain the neighborhood's character of single family homes. A factor why the neighborhood was not totally lost to apartment buildings was because the early apartment boom was restricted to two periods: 1901 and the 1920's. The character of the neighborhood would be compromised if this scale of house were lost on a lot by lot bases and replaced by monolithic apartment buildings. 3. The design of this house is typical of a pattern book example from the mid- 1880's. This type of house was once very common in the neighborhood and were often the first to disappear. Whereas, on ar about September 28, 2003, REDG, pursuant to L,eg. Code 73.06(h), duly filed an appeal from the decision of the HPC and requested a public hearing for the purpose of considering the action taken by the HPC; and Whereas, on October 22, 2003, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and �� 2 Whereas, the City Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the 3 application, 4 does hereby 5 the testimony, the report of staff, and the record, minutes and resolution of the HPC; 6 Resolve, that the HPC erred in denying the demolition pernut application as the 7 application submitted met the requirements of Leg. Code 73.06(i)(2); and be it 8 9 Further Resolved that the appeal of REDG is hereby granted, subject to the condition that 10 the demolition pemut shall issue upon the issuance of a building permit for the new development 11 proposed on the site by REDG; and be it 12 13 Finally Resolved, that the clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the HPC, L.IEP and 14 the zoning administrator. ,. �,� Z � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green SheeY�� s': j�,_ a%:. � DepartrneMloffice/council: Date Initiated: � � -L��„��a,��;a,�n�;�a��t 13-FEB-04 Green Sheet NO: 3011895 Co'rtact Person & Pho`re: � Deoartment Sent To Person Initial/Date Peter Wamer 0 icense/[os eMiodEoviron Pro 266-8710 puiyn 1 icenseJfns ection/EnvironPro De artmeutDirector Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number 2 i. Attorue For Routing 3 a or's Office Ma odASSistant Order . a ouncil 5 i Clerk Ci Clerk Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip Alt Locations for Signature) Adion Requested• Council approval of a resolution memorializing City Council action which overturned a decision of the HPC regazding a demoliGon permit to raze a dwelling and detached gazage located at 358 Marshail. Rewmmendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions: Planning Commission 1. Has this personlfirm ever worked under a contrad for this department? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this personlfirm ever been a city employee? Yes No ' 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normaily passessed by any curcent city employee? - Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Jn Setember 25, 2003 HPC denied the permit to raise the structure at 358 Marshall. On October 22, 2003 apublic hearing was conducted by the City Council which over-turned the HPC's decision. This resolutian memorializes that action and grants 358 Marshall permission to destroy the dwelling and detached gazage located there. AdvantapeslfApproved: DisadvantapeslfApproved: - .. w., _ , � ° . �-,� ��'�;=�::'t T- � _ � Disadvanhages If Not Approved: ' ToWlAmountof CosNRevenue Budgeffid: Transaction: Funtlinp Source: Activity Number: Fi nancial Information: (Explain) t ` _ ._ ' . � .. _ �' � . . . ., , ` � . ;x � .. . � . . . . , . , ,r j '�us .:5 c� " . . � ••, � � �ti � _ , . � , , . ��'"a9 �" � �£ .. _ .. . . _ , . . . � . � - ' ° . . - � . ^'. ,. 7 , .� ' . . .,.<. . �� , . CITY OF SA71VT PAUL R¢ndy C. Kelly, Mayor September 29, 2003 Ms. Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: v '-�. , . - _ - � . __ � � '� � I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, October 22, 2003 for the following heritage preservarion case: Appellant(s) File Number: Real Estate Development Group HPCO3-398 Purpose: Appeal of a Heritage Preservarion Commission decision denying a demolition perxnit application to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building. Location: Staff Recommendation: Commission 358 Marshall Avenue (Hill Historic District) Approval of the demolition permit application, contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building permit for the proposed new construction. Denied on a vote of 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jerry Blakey. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and that you will publish nofice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! � Please call me at 266-9079 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ��',�� , Amy Spong Historic Preservation 5pecialist CC: Council Member Jerry Blakey AppellanUowner, Real Estate Development Group File OFF7CE OFLICENSE, INSPECTIONSAND �� _ �� ENVlRONMENTAL PROTEC770N Janeen E. Rosas, Direcior LOWAYPROFESSIONALBUILlDNG Telephone:612-266-900I 350StPeterStreet Facsimile: b11-266-9099 SuiEe 300 SaintPaul,Minnesota 55102-ISID NOTIt� OR PUSISC AF,�7�RIIHG - ;. �. -- The Sa3nt Paul Qity Couacil vsill-con- � dricEapuhlichearingon Wednesgay,"p�. tober22; 2003; at 5:3� p.m.in the,.City Cotmcil Chambers, Third Floor, �ity HaII-Courthouse, 15 West Kellogg . Bautevard, Saint Paul, MN, to con�ider the appeal of Real Estate Development Gmup to a decision of the Heiitage Aies- ervation Commission denyiag a demb$- tioa`permit application to reze t,he houae azid garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to. conytruct a six-story 68-unit 'xoudominium building. ' - Dated: October 1, 2003 � � � � Mnxx.�iucxsox, w ass�gr.suc e,ty eoun�t s�et�. � - <Octo6ar 61 . . � -54: YAUL L6GAL 7�C�R . ZZ0707U3 � . ' - - 09/29/03 MON 09:11 FAX 4045310920 ATL�'PA CONSULTING ��-aaa �oo 800 Fraaklin Avenue West �i �� Minneapoiis,l�1N 554U5 '�� Main: 612.870.850Q REAI, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT GR4UP �s.�. �,� � . � ,��: vrA �ACSNrrr.E�u:��9� aNn asn�urs September 28, 2003 �Is. Amy Spoag Saint Paul Heritage Preservazion Commission Go Office of License, Inspecrions and Environmental Protection 350 Samt Peter Street, Suite 3Q� ' Samt Paul, MN 55102-1510 Re: Appeal to vote 2o deny demolitian pemut for 358 Marshall Avenue by fiPC e Dear Ms. Spong: ' This letter is intended to put the Ciry of St. Paut on notice t6at my company will be appealing the decision by St. Paui Heritage Preservation Commission ("HPC"), to the St. Paul Ciry Council. Our grounds for appeal include, but are not liauted to the followiug (1) The HPC voted to deny tt�e demolition peimit based on the findings that were without mezit aod went aaainc the staff report, a report that is required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St. Paul Legislative Code as .it relates to this demo6iion applicafion; (2) That despite the fact that the HPC agreed with the staff report on the economic value or ; usefuiness for the huilding as it now exists, it still voted to deny the demnlition permit, attd created additionai foiiow- s� ' ivai i� wr�aui u�er��; (3) That ihe HPC finding concerning the "arcliitecturat and histnrical merit of the building" was arbihary and capricious; ' (4) The HPC made findings for the demolition permit based on irreIevant and azbivary infomxaaoq instead of focusing on the findings required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St; Paul Legislative Code. For the above reasons, and others that wilt be further discussed at the time of our appeal, Real Estate Development G%�aRpeals the denial of iu demoliuon permit by the HPC. Fstafe Development Gmup cc: Kelley LeBlanc and Bill Hickey, Collaborative Design Group ��,:v �-z� ��3 .{�c. ( U BP oy-aaa CITYOFSAINTPAUL Randy C. Kelly, M¢yor September 29, 2003 Ms. Mary Erickson Cily Council Reseazch Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: OFFICEOFLICENSE, INSPECTlONSAND EM'IRONMENTAL PROTECTTON Janeen E. Rosas. D "vector LOYi'RY PROFESSIONAL B UILIDNG 350 St Peter Street Suite 300 SaintPaul, Minnesota �5102-ISIO Telephone: 67?-266-9001 Facsimile: 612-266-9099 I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, October 22, 2003 for the following heritage preservation case: Appellant(s): File Number: Real Estate Development Group HPCO3-398 Pwpose: Appeal of a Heritage Freservation Commission decision denying a demolition permit applicarion to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building. Location: Staff Recommendation: Commission 358 Mazshall Avenue (Hill Historic District) Approval of the demolirion permit applicarion, contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building pernu2 for the proposed new construction. Denied on a vote of 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jerry Blakey. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at yow earliest convenience and that you will publish nofice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! Please call me at 266-9079 if you have any questlons. Sincerely, �%'�� `�—� Amy Spong Historic Preservation Specialist CC: Council Member Jerry Blakey AppellanUowner, Real Estate Development Group FileV �t -aaa CITY OF SAINT PAYJL Randy G Kelly, M¢yor MEMORANDUM TO: CC: FROM: RB: DATE: OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECITONS AND ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION Janeen E. Rosas, pirector L04VRYPROFESSIONAL BUILDING 350 St. Peter Street Suite 300 Saint P¢u[, Minnuot¢ 55102-1 SIO Telepfione: 651-266-9090 Facsimile:657-266-9099 City Councilmembers Peter Warner, CAO Wendy Lane, LIEP Amy Spong, HPC staff HPC appeal for 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District October 14, 2003 The following attachments highlight the events that have taken place and relate to HPC review of the permit application to raze the structure and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in the Hill Historic District: ATTACHMENT 1(pages Al-1 to A1-16) The application materials were submitted and include an HPC application form, letter from owners Real Estate Development Group, and several eachibits. ATTACHMENT 2(pages A2-17 to A2-24) The HPC resolution which was adopted on October 9, 2003 and the written order to the applicant is attached. The staff report includes the guidelines for review, the findings and recommended approval of the application. ATTACHMENT 3(pages A3-25 to A3-30) The approved minutes ofthe September 25, 2003 public hearing meeting that addresses the hearing for 358 Marshall Avenue. ATTACHMENT 4 (pages A4-31) The request for an appeal by owners and applicants Real Estate Development Group. ATTACHMENT 5(pages AS-32 to AS-48) Testimonies received in writing for the September 25, 2003 HPC meering to supplement oral tesrimony. Letter of support from Mayor Randy Kelly Charles Senkler, business owner, support Summit University Planning Council, concerned, needs more information Vernon Harms, Board of Directors ChrisYs Household of Faith, opposition Barb & Chuck Gudknecht, opposition Cynthia Holton, 464 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building — OVER — d�-aaa Page 2 358 Mazshall appeal October 14, 2003 Susan Ciarke, opposition to proposed new building Kate Bradford, 221 Mackubin, opposition to proposed new building Brita Kulach, 530 Mazshall, opposition Teresa Tierney, 473 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building Erika Perrault, 463 Marshall, opposition to proposed new building Sally Rubinstein, 442 Dayton, opposition Lara Duddingston, 443 Holly, opposition Theresa Upchurch, North Star Consultants, 447 Marshall, opposition Fran Jackson, 447 Marshall #6, opposition to proposed new building Mike Schuxnann, opposition to proposal oy-aaa Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office ofLicense, Inspections and Environmental Prctection 35D Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102 Phone: (651) 266-9078 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION DESIGN REVIEW APPLIi�ATION This application must be completed in addiGon to the appropriate ciry permit application if the affected property is an individually designated landmazk or located within an historic disttict. For applications that must be reviewed by the Heritage Pieservation Commission refer to the HPC Meeting schedule for meefing dates and deadlines. Please check the cateQory that best describes the proposed work ❑ Repair/Rehabilitation ❑ Sign/Awning ❑ New Conshuction/Addition ❑ Moving ❑ FencefRetaining W all ❑ Concept Review Only �Demolition ❑ Other Street and number: �S8 �� , Zip Code: �j �/D � Name of contact person: Company: Street and nuxnber: /�(!7� iY��'n /�, /n.�,gp.l" City: _ �+�.�¢�„ oa .Q� State: �'J'1 /j/ Zip Code: ��/O s Phone number: ,li( /cQ ) 8]Q. �cS(lU e-mail: ��.�-�,6.�,�c�3 Q u i i�n �ii.¢.. c,c».1 Name: [.t.�s la��d��.�C.� Street and number: o�Ug ��o� � /V �u, �e � City: ��, �� State: ��f _ZipCode: r S�'/�)� Phone number: �� e-mail: �c � — � t ��+�cl P, � 8 • D 3 o �-aaa 5. PxQ:�E�r a�c�r�� Contact pe Company: Street and number: �� City: }�',��„p�5 State: �/}'�.A/ ZipCode: y�j_y�/.� Phone number: (�� 37/. G�!/1 e-mail: � � ��(�It,,�,. Completely describe ALL exterior changes being proposed for the progerty. Include changes to architectural details such as windows, doors, siding, railings, steps, trim, roof, foundarion or porches. Attach speciticafions for doors, windows, lighting and other features, if applicable, including color and material samples. ��! �� i.. � Attach additiona[ sheets if necessary � u-'.a Refer to the Design Review Process & Checklist for requir�;d information or attachments. **INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL TSE RETURNED** ARE THE NECESSARY ATTACEIMENTS AND INFORMATION INCLUDED? �, YES Will any federal money be used in this project? Are you applying for the Inveshnent TaY Credats? YES _ NO � YES _ NO �_ z ��--z o� aaa I, the undersigned, unde the affected properry. I ownership must be subr unauthorized wozk will Signature Signature of owner: teview Application is limited to the aforemenrioned work to any additional exterioz woik to be done under my the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Any Dafe: l I�' �` � Date: �L�� ti t S � 70TtIVEf:._ ��<��;. L s� � u ,� . n: J'F ' �' s! t" ` � i� � , e . � . .. . :..?. 33at�reee�ad--�9:•"�•0�-. „x', Districf: tll'� 1 /Indivialua2 �it� . y ^} T�e of work: _ Requires staff review 7/�t�'�� ' ' " . �s . . , ' �-- , . _. , -tsna data: ` �'�S - P)(} : et� apphEa�ion_ YES ' L� ' (low'tng eont3itiari(s) tri�ist b� ' ` Qrder fqr ap�liqafiou, tb`ea�foira`i._ ernarionpaag�am: � , ' , ' , �. .; ; ��`, It has been determined thai tha, _.,_ �vork to be performed pnrsu�df;to � the application does not adve�sely affeM the program for preseevafiu�i and architectnral control of the heritage preservation district or site (Ch.73.06). HPC staff approval Date � Requires Commission review Subr�ififec�; ' _ � }� ;.`5�ts a�Rlaris o-� �et aE=�?larts reduc�dto 8 sda'' I � �..��%%�>,. ��., . . �. 3� .�?1�4fagrapbs. . 'n `'f.;ity Pelmit Applicat[on � ; (:ompJete; HI'C �asign Re�iew.: ` .=Ppii�ation , I��a�ing Dale,set for � �L� ��. '" R 9 '' f�l _ '3 o�-aaa i ' 8U0 Franklin Avenue West Minneapolis, MN 55405 Main: 612.870.8500 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPI'VIENT GROUP September 8, 2003 Ms. Amy Spong Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office of License, Inspecrions and Environmental Protect.on 350 Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102-1510 Re: Narrarive Addressing Findings For The Demolition Of 358 Marshall Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: As you are aware, we have applied for a demolition permit for 358 Marshall Avenue, which is part of the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation District. After meering with you on August 26, 2003, I would like to comment on each of the four findings thGt you will be required to make as part of the Section 73.Q6 (j)(2) of the St_ Paul Legislative Code as it relates to this demolition application. As stated in the Code, in the case of the proposed demolihon of a building, prior to approval oY said demolifion, the commission shall make written findings o:� the following: (1) The architectural and historical merit of the building; (2) The effect of the demolition on surroundmg buildmgs; (3) The effect of any proposed new construcrion on tl:e remamder of the buildmg (mc case of partial demolirion); and, (4) The econosnic value or usefulness of the building as it now exists, or if altered or modified in comparison with the value of usefulness of any proposed structures designate to replace the present building or buildings. I would like to comment on each of the four findings below as part of our application. (1) In terms of the architectural and historical merit of the liui�ding, I understand that this is a finding that you will make based on your historical data ar.d research. For your information, our research has not found any data suggesting that the builders, residents or other individuals associated with the duplex at 358 Marshall Avenue had a contributing role to the St. Paul Heritage Preservation District. ` (2) I expect that the entire shucture of the duplex and the detar,hed garage would be demolished andlor moved to another site. Since the duplex is a free standing structure, I expect the demolition of the building to have no adverse effect on the adjoining propert�es. (3) Since this is not a partial demolition, this finding does not apply. (4) We examined the value of using the building as a continued renta} versus demolition and replacing it with our proposal for a 68 unit for sale condominium project. Here is my analysis of the economic value and usefulness of the Duplex as it stands today. �i-y v�aaa Real Estate Development Cnoup, Inc. Page Z Navrative Addressin2 Findin2s For The Demolition Of 358 Marshall Avenue ' Each of the units in the duplex located at 358 Mazshall Ave, contains two bedrooms and one bathroom. The building is an Up/Down configuration wif� a common basement and common detached garage. The building has a gross potential rent on an annual basis �f $19,824.00 with zero vacancy. Expenses for the building include all of the following items: Insurance: $1,374.00 . Gas Heat: $1,896.00 . Properry TaYes: $2,550.00 . Repairs / Maintenance $3,500.00 . Trash Removal: $720.00 . Lawn/Snow: $900.00 . Supplies: $250.00 . Management Fee: $991.20 The total expenses on an annual basis are $12,181.20. The value of an income producing property is based upon the Net Operahng Income that the property is capable of producing. The Net Operating Income (NOn of 358 Marshall Ave. is $7,642.80. Investors will apply a capitalization rate of 9%-10% and apply it to the NOI and anive at a value. Using this common analysis, 358 Marshall has an economic value of $76,000 -$85,000. There are many capital improvements that are needed and much d�ffered mamtenance lefr over from the previous owner. The heating plant in the building is over SOyrs old and is in need of replacement. The roof of the building is over 15yi s old and is m need of replacement. The plumbing throughout the building is a nxixture of old galvanized pipe, ]ead, and newer copper. The water pressure throughout th'e building is poor. The previoue owner had installed a pressurization pump to help with thi; issue, Uut the puinp no longer works. The foundarion of the building has leaked in the past and is in need of tuck-pointmg. The siding on the building is stucco over siding and the stucco is cracked and crumbling in places. The lower level apartment is in need of a complete gut and remodel in order to maintain occupancy. The electrical service in the building' is not up to code All of these items are capital improvements that cost signi�, icant amounts of money (approx $85,000) but don't directly impact the income of the propetty as a rental unit. The total cost of the needed improvements is roughly equal to the econotnic value of the structure as rt stands today. With that in mind, we paid $250,000 for the duplex, three':imes the economic value of the building. The means we over paid by approximately $165;000 for the building to improve the building we would have to spend at a minimum, the entire economic value of the building, or at least $85,Q00, increasing our loss to $25Q,QQ0, ar the complete value of what we paid for the building. This financial analysis dictates that we find an alternative use for the land, which in this case involves demolition of the duplex, and combining that land to complete our 68 unit for sale condominium project, where the cost of the land can not only be recouped by the project, but earn a reasonable economic return. . ��' S o�-aaa. Real Estate Development Group, Inc. Page 3 Narrative Addressin2 Fir:direps For Tke DemoZition Of358 Marskall Avenue ' As part of this application, I am also submitting the following exhibits to assist you in completmg your written findings. E�ubits I-6 will help give you a detail�d overview of the duplex at 3�8 Marshall Avenue and the surrounding buildings. E�ibits 7-8 are a preliminary elevarion and site for the 68-unit building we will be proposing for this site and the adjoining site if our demolition application is approved. It is important to remember that Exhibits 7-8 are preliminary and will involve stlbstantially more feedback and changes as we continue through our approval processes and aoopt the comments of the Summit University Planning Council and Ramsey Hill Associarion neighborhood groups, as well as the Saint Paul Heritage Preservarion Commission, and St. Paul Zcaing and Planning Deparhnent. Attached E�ibits ➢ Exhibit 1: Aistoric Hill Heritage Preservation District Map w/ Highlighted Project Locarion ➢ Exhibit 2: Zoning Map w/ Highlighted Project Location ➢ Exhibit 3: Photographs of 358 Marshall Avenue ➢ Exhibit 4: Exisfing Conditions Site Plan ➢ Exhibit 5: Aerial Photograph (SK-8) ➢ Exhibit 6: Photographs of Surrounding Area/ Bwidmgs ➢ Exhibit 7: Westem and Marshall Proposed Prel�minary Exterior Elevations/ SiYe Photograph ➢ Exhibit 8: Weatem and Mazshal1 Proposed Prelirr,inary Floor Plans/ Site Plan/ Unit Breakdown As part of this application narrative, I would also request that after you have had a chance to complete your preliminary findings, that we have an opporiunity to meet with you again to further comment on any areas that we may have missed, or tha� may require further information or analysis on our part. I want to personally thank you for taking the rime to consider our application, and we look fon�ard to worldng with you on the successful completion of uvhat I believe will be a great project for St. Paul, its residents and the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Very fixly yours, �� Spiros Zorbalas Real Estate Development Group cc: Kelley LeBlanc and Bill Hickey, Collaborative Design Group �� " �P �1-+ • r d-� 1"1 Q � � � � 1�-1 �.J � .� � x � x .� r 0 ^ VJ r-i � H � � � W ° � v , e ,� � ��" �-� . l � � � � � �� ,, a �� .,� ��0� �I�S G a� o =� �1 � �i: v� s� — .._. �� o�� a �� :��'s�.� �� °�' o.� y � ��, — �, i �� I �So 0 6�.�5 � 96� o�� : �ol , I _� c= _ o Ri ��o ^$� >I �� [� _ $ ` a g '$..�� F o I I � � .iJi � 8 � I � � L 's _ _ —'_—'�_ _°_.—�_' ;Y � o �_ ' ��'' I 1 ;� .� � .�' 5 ��`I � �'L_J` � � �'��'�° . �� ( _ � =�1= == o � � �� J � L_� �� lJ � � � � s i ��n��.!��o.�� :��: .Q : � � �� - F� �3�i � �S �� i � � �b � � s �� a � � � I � � e � s 8 i 8 i 8 �'�8 � E " o g �' g:�B.��C�g��g{�a;:,ra�r8:��8:0 o g �,. '' �. %";:g o � e I�° � -+ r � ;; �� &�` � ey� 8 � ��' �� 8 % . _ F. �g ' � :. � I� ��` �� 'a;o� s-��a,�,��°°`.'-g.. e�a , � o ....... .o o ,;.�o e� >� = 8 8 8:e 4 l' } I �� I �� `8a 8 8 8 848 O e.s! � 8'e^ 1° i�I.L ,� V (aJ.J1° v°I \ l ei "I _ `��. g� (�� 0 f l '� ^�\\ '\1 • , I \ r Q �., ,.i !I . , � _ � .&""_ O �� 48 �� ?� 8t�� g ��s �� S 8 ps�-aaa t � �� ^� �� . x ...._ k . . ��,� ,I' ;� - �—,; _-�, �r� i. , �� . pP' _._�. i c m �}�� '�� fiJh�Fi�- .,..-:-�..,-:.— ' � f�,.:>� ,��s k ��.0 �-.«� � Syi � _. � � i j'�. � �- � 1 l �°TMa.��=$ ��{i. v� � � � �� .j � y � i . �ti., r: �� , ��: 'a,�' . b £''. ` � ��5� ; ��3�� t� �� , - ��°�� s � � , . ...��' ' �.' . . _ �.i, . I�S � ..s. f �- _._ . � i `� � _ � 1 `�'r� �fi .� �C ` a*F fr , ;p v E_ � � �� t� �9�Y<`.�` t � �.,,� . .� -�.. . � ` ��g,� * � �i� �X � � f, � y v � 4: � 358 MARSHALL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MINNES�Tq Marshali Avenue � � EAST L/NE OF — tyE'ST 1/2 LOT 2 .�J.�__ `�� /�'"� � � � � ( u r � � <I Exhibit 4 Graphic site plan and building footprint. Building and property will need to be surveyed upon tlemolition permit approval. �� COLLABORATIVE DeSip�nGrou�,�� eY '2"'-� °•S»k . ] .. � . . . ._ .,...,.�.. r. . . _.. . , •i � ' 3ilu? .. '� . � � : T. �wi 5+ � .. �a , � s k 3 a Y�J A 4 ; :�, , . . , i ` � � . .. _ ' 4 ... . ',.' ,�i. �•-, . .rrll z .. ._ _. . . _ t � _ . . _ E _ � . . . � . . . . . ..� . . ..��k � .r'.- _ . . � .. T -� ' j= �- - � "''� � � _ . t'. a . s�. � � ��.� . . � b ` ,� ti � . . .' _ -'. i` � , �. .. • �'_, .,� � si ' � �� I � . € ' �, � j _s _ ',�� ,. �� _. . . � 5 - � ,.� i . ` d.n. i (£. � � v _. � � � � � t:i � � . � i �� l� . " �� r _ YA..c ' } . . � T . u ' - � � :. i . Z , . � z�' , .._ _ � � n e , . �: �� t' 3 „ � � ' .§ � � Z a.. � .. : . . .r. _ .. m � ' : ,' ` y �p • • y— �,' � . . � .. � ._ .tl�b �.. � :t`a_ ' � �. � v ' ,.�. • � �� . . . ...:.�' . ��. . ... :'! . LS . - .� _ . . .. „ �4 � „, � � � � 0� S v � � . �a�f*'.':e 9f ..*.'� ..f �_k�. �•w �' ' i... � Y v{ .. r � 1 � � � v � ' 9 M k � . � �� Y Y�i.} ' iM1� � � . . i _ � � a e � � 5 .' , u . _ . . ' J , y � : . � . � �, i " _ - ,� . , I � , o� � � �. ' �.-�� c� r ` #I� '" - ��k ; {' � "'ah C � : . :, �.. .BS.�.� . . ,.cv�� +4x _. "9 . ,., t .:.: ' .<- .., �- . � . ' �. ; . . ..: ' %xa ' �. � � � ' ' . ;d �.�, e , . ��. . - _ . � .mF, -.. . "__ . ._ . � . . '�.L. ( � _ � ` � �M1 .. • �� ... _ ...ea? � i ai+s.� �„� . dV a � w� ' �� h : f � , w. .. 15 1 9 e � � �� *�y , z,��`� x >- S '�r � .�� . rv+�. � ;t� � t ,` '- � c _ " °�&� . ` tfi �%' .. _ � �._ N : q^ � x f � �§� � � F{ ; 8 �b S$ �• �'4 = �i, ! 1 �" ` ..• i a �i w� � ". n a� �E � �' 0 _.ry' .R. � ti � � � � � � � -� 5 � � L f �_a '� `�'`� Ss?, : � ` ��:��, i::' x � i �; � � � +�, $ ' �--� fr (`�'�'{: � � 9 , i� 3 � ,!� ,j � �,�,�, ,-�-"'� . � . � ' � [`.. �_i � g. L n . � c: � � �r� -1I ..c e w `�r .� �c ' � - :�'� � +k .. � �..�. � - . -��'��. a*�i.n �a r��' 'etdef+k.vtu €w. ;% _ �' �y" - � �a ..� �.; � r .. . .�.. `�� t _.. - � �.�, � , t . > ,r . � . �,� � -.._,.».._.. . �..s4 ... ,.�., �.:, , . ..< �'�� b .,, � n� � r . �g . : ;... 2 3 ; ` -f' k, r.17 i � ;:. �% . � � ' �:S � -i t� i.,: �. .. �� '{ ,_'w... -�x -. � � � � ��4: _-----� a . ., :=:m� �,t��.G ..#... .._�� e� : ' J�� v',i; �' '� �„w�: . a � � �p �� y � . P � � � � � W r Pa 1� l� ��b.:� �� a �� . . , � i+�l' 8 ,�:''�`.�!!? �� '� � , '' ,_ ;�- _ o �- aa�, d � G 2 T F v � I L � 6 � � J �J C N Q F L h W O � f'. O � V 'a ✓ � N Q � C Y '� .�. rTi � 4 � � � 6� R L e v C' c 0 m � � � � � � � x � � 0 '� 0 b � � �Iz d � � iC' Y y '3 � r � � � !s �� w � � � � o �l—�3 �# T� � f � � _ �.; ' � - � r-'�� I Marshall Elevation 7 ^� �_,.. 1 2 . x....-u� .. ��li. . � � ` . __�� -� �' . Western Elevation ��3: . . � Zy+� 3�� "�] � � ._-6 .. o�-aa WESTERN & MARSHALL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA MqRSHN.LqVENUE < 3 v.{ I # ��;I�T �- BfZEA�I��Q�tf��, �; ,;�1n�tG unf 68tofal �`�"�' �` � "� ��`�"r �-�- . Um�', quaf�F a Range 656 = 1 321 sf'., �' r °� >�- F�rstFloor 12 units 'x `°�_= ��5'�i�r��ftfiNFloor 12 ' Ut17#s:fl¢, - �s s : � 4 : S�xth Floor 8��nit' 3 � zr'rw". S 4 .�aan`"� s''x�nr;u-ax - . One .� sf Try1mI Flwr Plan s B n ••nec �e Vn^ B COLLABORATIVE Desi EXHIBIT$ S�t1� iloa�Plan �(� �AVtONAVENUE � Site Plan/Firet Floor Plan $ lIR1�5: �'.,�6� �'1 ,;. Upper Lqvl YaMInCPIan lc�rerL�relPaMirigPlen 0 d w � � � _ __ � 0 .� d W _ � ♦ � . .� CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COIVTD�IISSION RESOLUTION FILE NUMBER 03-398 DATE September 25, 2003 (Adopted October 9, 2003) WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission (fII'C) is authorized by Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code to review pernut applicarions for exterior alterarions, new construcfion or demolition on or wiYhin designated Heritage Preservafion Sites or ileritage Preservafion Dish and WHEREAS, The Real Estate Development Group applied for a d°molition permit to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue in order to construct a six story 68-unit condominium building; and WHEREAS, the structure at 358 Marshall Avenue is a two st,�ry Victorian Era house with stucco walls and a cross gabled roof. An inventory form was not pr��sent in the file, however, the house appears to have been constructed pre-1900. Despite many alterations over the years, some remaining character defining features are decorative brackets and a two story bay with elaborate cornice and bracketing on the west side. The front and side apen porches do not appear to be part of the original design. The two bay house is asymmetrical with the main entrance offset; and WHEREAS, the following is the citation in the City's Legislative Code conceming HPC review of demolition permits: Chapter 73, Herftage Preservation Commission; Section 73.06, Review of permits; Paragraph {i), Factors to be considered; Before approving any permit application required under paragraph (d) of this section to be approved by the heritage preservation commission, the comrnission shall make fzndings based on the program for the preservation and architectural control for the heritage preservation site in regard to the following: (I) In the case of the proposed demolition ofa building, prior to approval afsaid demalition, the commission shail make writ[en fenciings on the following:. the arckitectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new construction on the remainder of the building (in case of partial demolition) and on surrounding buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the building as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the value ar usefulness of any proposed structures designated to r the present building or buildings i WHEREAS, relevant portions of the Historic Hill Dzstrict Guidelines that pertain to the proposed demolition inciude the following: 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatoble use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. Demalition YVhen reviewing proposals for demolition of structures within lhe district, the Heritage Preservation Commission refers to Section 73.06 (i)(2) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code which states the following: In the case of the proposed demolition of a building, prior to approval of said demolition, the cammission sha11 make written findings on the following: the architectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new �2 � � �' a� aaa, construction an the remainder of the buiZding (in case of partial demoZition) and an surrounding buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the buiZding as it now exists or if altered or modified iri comparison with the value or usefulness of any proposed siructures designated to replace the present building or buildings; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Heritage Preservarion Commission, based upon the evidence presented at its September 25, 2003 public hearing on said proposal, made the fol..owing findings of fact concerning the proposed demolition: l. The economic value or usefulness of the buiZding as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the vaZue or usefulness of any proposed str�uctures designated to replace the present building or buildings. To approve a demolition permit at this time would not be appropriate given the lack of information regarding the viability of thv structure. Detailed structural informarion, rehabilitation costs and a feasibility study w.3s not included as part of the application. 2. The effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings. Apartment buildings were late arrivals in the Summit-Hill neighborhood and they were largely bui�t to expand the income base as rental properties. As eazly as 1901, Sutnmit Avenue had restrictions regarding the construction of apartment buildings in order to maintain the neighborhood's character of single family homes. A factor of why the neighborhood was not totally lost to apartment buildings was because the early aparhnent boom was restricted to two periods: 1901 and the 1920s. The character of the neighborhood would be com �romised if this scale of house were lost on a lot by lot basis and replaced by monolithic apartment buildings. 3. The architectural and historical merit of the build[ng. The design of this house is typical of a pattern book example from the mid-1880s. This type of house was once very common in the neighborhood and were often the first to disappear. BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the above findings, the Heritage Preservation Commission denies approval of the demolition permit to raze the house and garage at 358 Marshall Avenue. MOVED BY Younkin SECONDED BY R. Meyer IN FAVOR 5 AGAINST 2 ABSTAIN 2 Decisions of the Heritage Preservation Commission are final, subject to appeal to the City Council within 14 days by anyane affected by the decision. This resolution does'.not obviate the need for meeting applicable building and zoning code requirements, and does not �onsfitute approval for tax credits. �Z- I S OFFICE OF L•.CENSE, INSPECTtONS AND ENVII20NMENTALPROTECTION Janeen E. Rosus, Director SAfNi PAUL � AAAA CITY OF SAIN I' PAUL Randy C. Kelly, Mayar LOYi'RYPROFESSIONAL BUZLDING Suite 300 350 St PeterS!reet Saint Paul, Minnesom 55702-I510 Telephone: 651-266-9090 Facsimile: 651-266-9099 September 29, 2003 Spiros Zotbalas Real Estate Aevelopment Group 800 Franklin Avenue West Minneapolis, MN 55405 Re: 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District File #FIPCO3-398, demolition permit Dear Mr. Zorbalas: As you Imow, the Heritage Preservarion Commission (HPC) considered at its September 26, 2003 meefing your application to raze the property listed above. The commission voted 5 to 2 with 2 abstentions to deny yow application. This decision was based on the discussion at the public hearing, public testimony and Fmdings made by the commission. A resolution will be adopted by the HPC at the next regularly scheduled meeting on October 9, 2003 and the resolution will be mailed to you after that date. You or any aggrieved pariy has the right to appeal the Commiss�on's decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Coc9e. Such an appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of the FIPC's order and decision. Chapter 73 states: (hJ Appeal to city counci[. The permit applicant or any party aggrieved by the decision of the herit¢ge preservation commission shall, within fourteen (14) days ofthe date of the heritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order ¢nd decisian to the city council. The appeal shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the division ofplanning [LIEP] oftwa (2) copies of a notice ofappeal and statement settingforth the graunds for the appeal. The division ofplanning [LIEP] sha11 transmit one copy of the notice ofappeal and statement to the city council and one copy to the heritage preservation commission. �he commission, in any written order denying a permit application; shall advise the applicant ofthe right to appeal to the city counci! and include this paragraph i,z all such orders. Please feel free to call me at 651.266.9079 if you have any questions. Sincerely, �'�� Amy Spong Aistoric Preservation Specialist ce: Collaborative Design Group File�' " � I � AA-ADA-EEO Bmnlover � FIPCO3-39$ Agenda Item IV. C. CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FILE NAME: 358 Marshall Avenue DATE OF APPLICATION: August 8, 2003 APPLICANT: Real Estate Development Group DATE OF HEARING: September 25, 2003 HPC SITE/DISTRICT: Hill Historic District CATEGORY: per findings, non-contributing CLASSIFICATION: demolition permit STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Amy Spong ' DATE: September 16, 2003 A. SITE DESCffiPTION: 358 Mazshall Avenue is a two story Victorian Era house with scucco walls and a cross gabled roof. An inventory foxm was not present in the file, however, the house appears to have been conshucted pre-1900. Despite many alterations over the yeazs, some remaining character defining features are decorative brackets and a two story bay with elaborate comice and bracketing on the west side. The front and side open porches may have their original roofs but the railings and columns appear to have been replaced. The two bay house is asymmetrical with the main entrance offset. B. PROPOSED CAANGES: The applicant is seeking approval to raze the two- and one-half story shucture and garage in order to construct a six story condominium building on the property and adjoining vacant lots. C. GUIDELINE CITATIONS: Historic Hil[ District Guidelines 1. Every reasonable effort sha11 be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or- site and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. Moving of Structures Proposals for moving structures out of the Historic Hill Dzstrict are reviewed using the guidelines for demolition. Propasals far moving structures onto property Zocazed within the district are reviewed using the guidelines for new constructian as well as guidelines f��r restoration and rehabilitation. Proposals for moving structures within the district are reviewed using guidelines for all of the above. Demolition When reviewing pvoposals for demolition ofstructures within the districf, the Heritage Preservation Commission refers to Section �3.06 (I)(2) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code which states the following. In the case of the proposed demolition of a building, prior to ap�rovat af said demolition, the commission shall make written findings on the following.• the architectural and historical merit of the building, the effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings, the effect of any proposed new construction on the remainder of the building (in case of partial demolition) and on surrounding A� � � o�-aaa HPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. buildings, and the economic value or usefulness of the buidding as it now exists or if altered or modified in comparison with the vatue or usefutness of any proposed structures designated to replace the present buiZding or buildings. SECRETARYOF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHA BILITATION D'utrictlNeighborhood Recommended: -Identifying, retaining, and preserving buildings, and streetscape, and Zandscape features which are important in defining the overall historic character of the distri�t or neighborhood. Such features can include streets, alleys, paving, walkways, street lights, sigrts, benches, parks and gardens, and trees. -Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, and streetscape and Zandscape features such as a [own square comprised of row houses and stores surrounding a communal park or open space. -Pr and maintaining the historic masonry, wood, and architectural metals which comprise building and streetscape features, through appropriate surface treatmenas such as cleaning, rust removal, limited paint removal, and reapplication ofprotective coating systems; xnd protecting and maintaining landscape features, includingplant material. -Repairingfeatures of the buildirag, streetscape, or Zandscape by reinforcing the historic materials. Repair will also generally include the replacemen[ in kind - or with a compatible substitute material - of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of features when there are surviving pratatypes such as porch balustrades, paving materials, or street[ight standards. -Replacing in kind an entire feature of the building, streetscape, or Zandscape that is too deteriarated to repair - when the overall form and detailing are still evident - using the physical evidence to guide the new work. This could include a storefront, a walkway, or a garden. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Alterations/Additioxs far the New Use -Designing required new parking so that it is as unobtrusive as poss�ible, i.e., on side streefs or at the rear of buildings. "Shared"parking should also be planned so that several business' can utilize one parking area as oppased to introducing random, muZtiple lots. -Designing and constructing new additions to histor•ic buildings when sequired by the new use. New work should be compatible with the historic character of the district or neighborhood in terms of size, scale, desigre, material, color, and texture. -Removing nonsignificant buildings, additions, or streetscape and landscape features which detract from the historic character of the district or the neighborhood. Not Recommended: -Removing or radically changing those features of the district or neighborhood which are important in defzning the overall historic character so that, as a result, the character is diminished. -Removing or relocating historic buildings, or featur•es of the streetscape and landscape, thus destroying the historic relationship beriveen buildings, features dnd open spacE. f'�Z- 2I D�f-aaa FIPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. -Faiting to undert¢ke adequate measures to assure the preservation of building, streetscape, and landscape features. -Removing a feature of the building, streetscape, or Zandscape that is unrepairable and not replacing it; or replacing it with a new feature that daes not convey the same visual appearance. Design for Missing Historic Features -Introducing a new building, streetscape or Zandscape feature that i; out ofscale or otherwise inappropriate to the setring's historic character, e.g., replacing picket fencing with chain Zink fencing. AlterationslAdditians for the New Use -Placing parking faciZzties directZy adjacent to historic buildings wl ach cause the removal of historic plantings, relocation of paths and walkways, or blocking of alle�s. -Introducing new construction into historic distrzcts that is visually '^ncompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the district or neighborhood. -Removing a historic building, building feature, or Zandscape or str.. etscape feature that is important in defening the overall historic character of the district or the neighborhood. E. FINDINGS: 1. The building is not classified in the Hill Historic District Nomination (only a small percentage of buildings are described in the Nomination) and an inventory form was not present in the file. 2. The architectural and historical merit of the building. As the house stands currently, staff does not feel that it contributes to the historical chazacter of the district due to its altered state—mainly the stucco and porch detailing which does not appear original. The property has also lost some of the context in which it was first constructed. It is the only property remaining on this block that faces Marshall Avenu e. Permit index cards for 360 Marshall state that the property was wrecked in 1971 and 366-368 Marshall was wrecked in 1966. Accarding to the 1928 plat map of St. Paul, this block has lost approximately six properties. The loss of these buildings has compromised the Marshall and Western Avenue sides of the block and to a lesser degree, has diminished the character of Dayton Avenue. Given the massing, remaining detailing and early construction date (during the period of significance far the district), this properiy wouid conh the historic district if rehabilitated. If the property were moved to another locaticn within the district or nearby, among houses of similar massing and scale, the house coulc'I become a contributing feature for the district. Staff has not found other historical associations, such as pexsons that have contributed in some way to St. Paul's history and development or an azchitect or association with an important event, with this property. Az- zz HPCO3-397 Agenda Item IV. C. 3. The effect of the demolition on surrounding buildings. Given the statement above regarding context, staff believes the effect of demolirion on surround:ng buildings to be minimal, although, it is always better to retain historic fabric type buildings that are associated with the development of the district than it is to demolish and create another large hole in the district. This building currently does not have similar massing or integriry as St. Joseph's Academy (individually designated site) across the street or with the 2'!Z to 3'/� story brick and sided apartment buildings on the rest of the block. 4. The economic value or usefulness of the building as it now �ists or if altered or modifed in comparison with the value ar usefulness of any proposed s, ructures designated to replace the present buitding or buildings. Per the applicanYs applicati �n (attached), the current use of the properiy as a duplex has annual expenses totaling $12,181. !0. The application also states the economic value of the income pzoducing properiy was esti*:lated at $76,000 to $85,000. Necessary capital improvements and correcting deferred maintenance was also estimated at the economic value of approximately $85,000 (this figure most likely does not include restoration of the siding and porches). The applicant also stated that they purchased the property for $250,000. Staff did not receive information from the applicant that an adaptive re-use for the existing building was explored. The applicant stated that the proposed new condo building would earn a reasonabie economic return. 5. While a formal concept review of the proposed new construction is not a part of this review, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards recommend against `7ntroducing a new building, streetscape or Zandscape feczture that is out ofscale or otherwise inappropriate to the setting's historic character, ..." and "Introducing new construction into historic districts that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the district or neighborhood. " F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings, staff recommends approval of the demo.ition permit contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building permit for the proposed new construction (staff has concerns regarding the scale and massing of the proposed building in relation to the historic district and the individually designated St. Joseph's Academy across the streeti. 4 AZ-z3 � � _ �•: : : - _ — — �:' j --, �/� � i . . , i,. ry . i i ,�; ;�� .� � � �� +� iw�� IF �i �! ' � '�• ! � � ■ �i �� ,'12 /�-_ � � � , � � - �: �� , �- . E: � ; � ., "� ` .t� � ; .� � c� � �-:� �. .. �. • . �� ._ '�i � ;,: i : ' � r ,, ;��'�q11 , ��_ "'� .- 0 ' i•• J ��;� �� . ��f . .�:` � i O� ` "�+ , �.-Y . ` f ' �� µ i 1 r � ��i;: ,_ � � i t _ r �'' . �� - �—' = I _'--`'----=.� - _i . - = "_ = 3 � - : h ,. - _-_-_ � G � _.." , {�:_-. - N a 2so '`�'`,� ��,{ � � � �� ;. :�� \ � � � ... I I :� � Q i � .:- ;:.� � � � at ._ -� r � 4 � v \ J � � � •' j. �' � � �� • � � � � •. � �i �`� � { � ��: :� ^ � __ y ♦, � � • . i _._,. � . , . �. � 3 ?� ` .. • I ! , ,r ,• � � M � ' • '9 � H'S� � I';''�� '`� � -Y_�� P4 �A AC,�1'7J�MY � ; � ---� r �.... � � r 4 �' 3��2� � �o. �5! ,. � „ �� r� �.�` � ._ , ; r��. .'_ ,. �t � � s� �� N '�` "' ° t i 4 2�, � - —� t � � , ,8 � ; ,� J�� ■ � a�-aaa CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Room 40, Lower L,evel, City HalUCourt House September 25, 2003 Present: Michael Byrd, Richard Faricy, Lee Meyer, Raymon3 Meyer, Dudley Younldn, Susan Bartlett Foote, 7ames Bellus, Gar Hargens (C,hair), Daniel Sc �tt, Paul Larson Absent: Pat Igo (excused),Shari Taylor Wilsey (excused), Ri�hard Murphy Staff Present: Wendy Lane, Amy Spong, Philip Waugh 1. CALL TO ORDER: 5:00 by G. Hazgens (Chair) 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA : Announcements moved to the end of the agenda. Agenda approved as revised. 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Faricy recused hims ;lf from agenda item N C. 4. PERMIT REVTEW/PUBLIC HEARING: A. Applicants for item A were not present so it was shifted in the agenda. B. 875 Summit Avenue, William Mitchell College of Law, Hill Historic District, by Perkins and Will Architects, for a demolition permit to raze a 1965 addition and a building permit to construct a new addition in its place. File #HPCO3-399 Waugh presented the staff report recommending approval of the demolition permit application and the building permit application. Mark Nelson and Tony Lane, from Perkins & Will, were both present to answer question;s. Hargens asked for and received confirmation that the brick will match the existing as ��lose as possible. Bellus expressed concern about the glass connection, stating the north elevation was stazk and the south elevation was not. Lane responded that they were trying to make the connection disappear. No one was present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Larson motioned to approve the proposal. Bellus asked for and was granted approval that the demolition decision and the building decision be two separate motions. Bellus stated that he would support the demolition but did nct believe that an adequate job had been done regazding the new design and would not su�port the new construction. Foote motioned to approve the demolition and Larson second the motion. Motion passed unanimously. �{3- ZS o�-aaa Larson morioned to approve the proposal for new construction and Byrd second the mation. Bellus commented that there is so much more this building could be. Hazgens stated that he has seen connectars that have been successes and advised to keep the connection as mirumal as possible. Larson stated he could have seen the design moving in a different direction but felt the architects have responded to several of the HPC concerns. Motion passes 9 to 1(Bellus). A. 283 Dayton Avenue, Hill Historic District, t.y owner, for a building permit to construct a shed dormer, replace three win lows and front door (This work was started without required approvals). File #HPCO3-397. Spong presented the staff report recommending: 1: A,.�proval of the shed dormer as constructed with the detailing proposed on the submitted drawings, including a condition to change the vinyl casement windows to wood doub. � hung windows; 2. Approval of the frieze board, dentils, front door, wide trim board and �rapping the window trim in aluminum; 3. Approval of the aluxninum soffit with tie condition that the beadboard panels be changed to a flat aluminum panel OR apprc val of retuming the soffit to wood as it existed; 4. Denial of the installed front window -�ith arch and the condition that two wood 2-over-2 double hung windows be installed in the same size and configuration that was existing (matching the neighboring house at 287 ,�ayton); 5. Denial of the proposed front porch changes with a recommendafion that the a+�plicant work with staff to resubmit a design for the front porch. Byrd asked for and received clarification that there is no precedence for the use of an arched window over two double hung windows in the Italianate style. Larson asked for the rationale of staffs recommendation of the shed dormer. Spong stated that it is a minimal impact, below the ridegline and did not disrupt the soffit Chazlie Rossley and Henry Schnitzer, owners and applicants, spoke stating that they are accepting of the staff recommendations in the report, although, they really like the rounded arch window but staff is very cleaz in the findings. L. Meyer asked for and received confumation that the function of the dormer was serving as headroom for a future third floor bedroom. Larson asked far and received clarification that the existing soffit was plywood wrapped in aluminum. Byrd asked the applicants if they reviewed the staff recommendations and had any objections. The applicants replied yes. No one else was present to speak for or against the pr<�posal and the public hearing was closed. L. Meyer motioned to approve staff recommendations 2, 3 iF soffit was wood, 4 and 5 and denial of the shed dormer stating tLat it was'not consistent with the style of the house and does not have a precedent. Younkiu seconded the motion. Foote disagreed with the removal of the shed dormer. Larsen stated support for the motion and asked for a friendly amendment that the sofTit be s�ecified as tongue and groove lx3- 4 not plywood beadboard and wanted staff to revie,w and approve final plans for the 2 A3- � o�/-a,ad arch window replacement. L. Meyer accepted the friendly amendment. Byrd asked if there was a dormer that would be acceptable or common to the Italianate style. Larson did not think a dormer works with that style of house but would accept a smaller version of that proposed. L. Meyer again stated that he does not think the Italianate style can carry a dormer. Foote stated she understood that ifthe dormer was not an obtrusive design than it would be approved. BelIus agreed with Foote stating the commission has had an inconsistent policy when dealing with dormers in general. Larson stated that his issue is with the size and scale, its not about not ha�ing a dormer at all. Byrd asked for a friendly amendment that the commission not reject th : idea of a dormer outright. L. Meyer accepted the friendly amendment. The motior� passes 9 to 1(Bellus). C. 358 Marshall Avenue, Aill Historic District, by Real Estate Development Group, for a demolition permit to raze a t� u story house and garage in order � � to construct a six story 68-unit condo building on lot and adjacent vacant lots. Rile #HPCO3-398. Spong presented the staff report recommending apprcval of the demoliton pernut contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a`�uilding permit far the proposed new construction. Foote asked a procedural question.�egazding the transition ft�n demolition permit to building permit. Bellus asked for and received clarification that a demolition permit would not be signed until the buildmg permit process was complete. Brian Pergomont, with Real Estate Development Gro.zp, spoke about the need to get contingent approval so tHey can refine the design boundaries. Pergomont stated that he and his company are invested in the neighborhood an�i they own and manage 100 apartments in the area. Bellus asked about the price points for the condos and Pergomont stated it was too early to determine, Byrd asked for a rationale for six stories in the new building. Bill Hickey, of Collaborative Design Group, stated that this was the same height as the Commodore and Blair House and would haue underground pazking. Hickey stated that the next two to four months are reserved for the review process and neighborhood meetings. Pergomont stated that the height is not defined yet and views and sunlight of neighboring structures will not be imp'acted. Bellus dissuaded the applicants from using the Blair House and the Commodore for a height comparison because they were unique and located on different types of streets and corridors. Younkin asked for a reiteration of the need for this 358 Marsha!l lot in the design. Pergomont stated that the quality of life needs for the complex necessitate the removal of the duplex. Hickey stated that the square footage and the odd ball nature of the site dictate the need to take down the duplex. � � Hargens asked for public testimony and urged those wanting to speak to stick to the topic of the demolition of 358 Marshall Avenue. (Staff handed out written public testimony that was received prior to the public hearing and stated that the handouts included 13 letters; 12 were against the demolition and/or proposel new construction and 1 was in support of the demolition and new consh A lelter of support from Mayor Randy Kelly was also passed out). 3 �3 ' �-�" o�-aaa Rick Igo the previous owner of 358 Marshall spoke and stated that the front porch was not original and that its sister house was removed many years ago. He stated that he did much of the work on the building and that it was never contributing to the district. Also stated that its economically unfeasible to rehab it. He spoke far the demolition but had reservation about the proposed new construction. Chris Yerkes, 501 Ashland, spoke against the demolition. Mary Texe, 113 Farrington, spoke against demolition. Manuel Melendez, 496 Marshall, spoke against demo'.ition. Mark Voerding, 113 Parrington, spoke against demol tion. Ruth Hylmer, 467 Marshall, spoke against demolitior,. Jim McDonough, 627 Selby, spoke against demolition. Tony Kuldch, 530 Marshall, spoke against demolitior . Chris Yerkes spoke again asking for historic contexts to be written about St Paul Hargens closed the public hearing. Younkin motioned to deny the permit application stating that there was not enough information provided on the costs and viability of � he existing structure. Ray Meyer second the motion. Bellus believed that the house hks no historic value and agrees with the staff recommendation. Bellus also stated that he �✓ould not support the proposed new construction, but there is a need to separate the demol:tion perniit and the building permit. Byrd stated that the surrounding blocks are siz�gle family homes. Bellus disagreed. Larson stated that he supports the motion : ar two reasons:l . Apartments aze late arrivals to the area and he would hate to see sma11 units supplanted by monolithic apartments, changing the scale of the neighborhood, and 2. The house is representative of a pattern book house from the 1880s. Younkin moved to adopt Larson's points as £ndings as friendly amendment. Motion to deny passes 5-2 (Bellus and Scott) �vith two abstentions (Hargens and Faricy). Bellus asked what direction does the HPC have for the applicant. Younkin stated he wants a dollar value on rehab costs. Larson believed that the rehabilitation of the house may not make sense unless its part of a larger development project. Bellus wants clarification of whats expected of the applicant. Byrd,commended the applicant for coming before the HPC at this point in the process, st<iting it was a good decision. Byrd stated that if the issue is economic hardship than demqlition may be okay, but not enough information was provided to make a decision. Foote thinks we need concrete numbers. D. 333 Irvine Avenue, Hill Aistoric District, by Mary Hennessy, for a demolition permit to raze a one-and-a-half story house in order to construct a detached three story house on lot and a detached thre e story house on adjacent vacant lot. F71e #HPCO3-400. Waugh presented the staff report recommending appresval of the demolition permit contingent on approval by the HPC and issuance of a building pernut for the proposed new construction. Aaron Kodosh, architect far the project, stated that the owner, Mary Hennessey, would like some positive reinforoement tc go forward with the design process 0 iE3-z8 �� and asked for the demolition to be considered. Kodosh stated that they hired a mechanical engineering firm to conduct a feasibility study if the home were to be restored. Younlcin asked for and received confirmation that the square footage is about 800 square feet. Foote stated that there are nwmbers to evaluate the economic conditions and have seen the proposed single development which is consistent with the neighborhood. The public hearing was opened. Tom Stonburner, en�ineer for `I`KDA, representing the home owner of 339 Irvine stated that they would like to see some vibration limits put into place if 333 Irvine is demolished. Staff stated that there is language in the building code. Lazson asked for and received confirmarion that the C�cretary of the Interior's Standazds talk about protecting adjacent historic resources. Dean Soser, owner of 339-41 Irvine Avenue, is not opposed to the demolition and buildin ; two single family houses. Karen Alvaloz, of 331 Irvine Avene, is not opposed to the d.;molition and is asucious to have improvements along Irvine Avenue. Alvaloz stated that they would like to be brought into the process and then thanked the HPC for their t} oroughness they conducted the meeting. The pubiic hearing was closed. Bellus motioned to approve the demolition and Fa �te offered a second. Bellus stated that this building has costs that are almost equal to the value of the building and notes that for the previous case the estimated costs are $85,000 ..hat are equal to the value of the rental property. Byrd stated that there could be a lengthy conversation about how the values are calculated for rental versus ownership and stated that this owner calculated the market value based on the tas assessment. Larson stated that he supports Bellus but clarified the difference in this decision versus his prior decision. Larson stated that this house is very simple and the context in which this house stood has been lost. Motion passes 7 to 0 with 2 abstentions (Faricy, R. Meyer). E. 624 Summit Avenue, Hill Historic District, by owner, for a building permit to insta1178 triple-track aluminum storm windows. File #HPCO3-407. Spong presented the staff report and recommended denial of the building permit application. Gwynne Evans, owner and applicant, stated that the triple track is a stronger product. Larson stated that they need to see drawings s�r a sample of the product in order to vote on this matter. No one was present to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was ciosed. Younkin motioned to lay over the case until next meeting and in the mean time have the applicant bring in a sample or a drawing. Fart`cy seconded the motion. Foote stated that we constantly have to keep reevaluating palicies as new products emerge and the issue is not the number of tracks but the impact ori the window and frame. Motion passed unanimously. �F3- Z`� �� 5. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS • Spong stated that Council Member Lantry ask�d staff far a report to the HRA regarding the context of 800 E. Third Street, which is classified as a pivotal structure in the Dayton's Bluff District. • Spong stated that Island Station, off of Shepazd Road, is listed as a potential historic resource and is currently being considered for redevelopment. If interested, tours by the developers take place every second and fourth Thursday at 3pm. Just show up at the building. • Spong stated that a fust draft of the revised ox3inance has been sent from Peter Warner and that the task force should set up a meeting to go over. The meeting was scheduled for 8am on October 3 at Commissioner Meyer's house. 6. ADJOURNMENfi: 8:05 pm APPROVED AS AMENDED October 9, 2003 Submitted By: Amy Spong and Philip Waugh l{--3 -- 3 0 o�-aaa 8Q0 FrankSin Avenue Nrest Minpeapaiis, MN 55905 Main: 672.870.&SOQ REAI, ESTAT� DEVELOPMENT GROUP , �5;. ob�. <'.'�.� VGi FACSMILEd�S�66:�899) AND (7SMAILS Septembex 28, 2003 Ms. Amy Spong Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission C/o Office of License, Inspecrions and Envixonmenhl Protec[ion 350 Samt Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55102-I510 Re: Appeal to vote to deny demolition permit for 358 Ma�hall Avenue by FIPC Deat Ms. 5pong: This letter is intended to put the Ciry of St. PauI on notice that my company will be appealing the decisiott by St. Paul Aeritage Preservation Commission ("HPC"), to the SP Paul City Council. Our gcounds for appeal include, hut aze not limited to tfie followicg (1) The HPC voted to deny the demotition peimit based on the findiugs that were without merit and went against the staff report, a report that is reqitlired by Section 73.06 (j){2) oithe St. Paul Legislafive Code as it re]ates m this demolirion application; (2) That despite the fact that the HPC agreed wiffi the staff report on the economic value or ; usefulness for the building as it now exists, it sHll wted to deny the demoliflon permit, a�d created addirional follow=ap study that is without merit; (3) That the HPC finding conceming the "azcluteccurai and historical merit of the building" was azbihary and capricious; ; (4) The HPC made fmdings fox the demolifion permit based on itrelevant and azbiffary ' information, instead of focusing on the findings required by Section 73.06 (j)(2) of the St, Paul Legislative Code. For the above reasons, and othecs that Fvili be further discussed at the time of our appeal, Real Estate Development Groy�akpeals the denial of its demolition permit by the HPC. Real Estate Devefopment Group cc: Keliey LeStanc aad Bill Hickey, CoIIaborative Design Group �� ,:� �-z� 'c� 3 -�n�(u�� n T , � .a�-nr;�.aa�:s;.? ..:�-,;, ;, n,�=;,,,,: :, ._ _ .................�.,......�,_ .,, . „�—_......�_' _ a �- aaa► CITY OF SAINT PAUL Randy C. Kelly, Mayor 390 Ciry Ha1[ 1 S West Ke(logg Bou[evard Saint Paul, MN 55102 Telephone: 651-266-8510 Facsimiie: 651-266-SSI3 September 24, 2003 Mr. Gar Hazgens, Chair Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission 548 Portland Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Gar: I am writing to offer my enthusiastic support for a proposed � �using project located at the Southeast corner of Marshall and Western avenues in the His,oric Hili Heritage Preservafion District. As you may know, Real Estate Development Group plans to constnxct 68 units of condominium-style housing at this site. One of my top priorities as Mayor is to develop 5,000 new housing units of all types and price ranges in Saint Paul. This proposal would provide a large nurnber of units in a high-demand neighborhood. In addition, it would attract over $18 million in private investment with no public subsidy at a time when the City needs to expand its properry tas base. I feel the pxoposal would be a quality addiUon to the Ramsey Hill neighborhood. Owner- occupied housing would replace a vacant lot that currently stands as a blight to surrounding properties. The density of housing proposed would add many new residents and strengthen the vibrant mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly chazacter of the area. I utge you to give full consideration to Rea1 Estate Development Group's proposal to construct new housing at Marshall and Western avenues. I am confident that this development will be a quality addition to the Historic Hill Preservation Aistrict and to the City of Saint Paul far decades to come. Sinc y, � dy C. Kelly ayor c: Martha Fuller, PED Amy Spong, LIEP �� i ��i� %� �� -32 � � Amy Spong - 358 Marshal Avenue �� ,�,a�Page � From: "CHARLES SENKLER" <charlessenkler@msn.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 1034AM Subject: 358 Marshal Avenue Dear Amy- Received info on the proposed demo of 358 Marshal and the condo development. I as a business owner in the neighborhood and a resident am for the project. The building at 358 is a wreck and the condos would be a positive move for the Marshal Avenue area. 1 have no knowtedge oF who is building the units, no hidden agenda but congratu{ate anyone who is willing to invest and develop our neighborhood. Who really cares if the bu iding is te� feet higher then the spec. Charles F Senkler charl essen kler@m sn.com �5-33 Summit University Planning Council Building a Better Community 627 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55104 Board of Directors Yresident Reverend DarrytSpence Treasurer Gail Graham Secretary Matthew P. Downs Vice Chair Car! Nelsan Manuel Melendez, Jr. Community Improvement And Safety David Peterson / Robert Hickman Neighborhood Development Cary Rembert Outreach Steve Wilson, Hailie Q. Brown Alice Neve Lexington Outreach Library Reverend Da�id Stewart Dayton Avenue Presbyterian Church Harry Oda University UNITED Paul Rhodes Sr. Stanley Gardner �[orgen Lindquist Mary Gardner Amy Michael Kathy Wiison Kahlid Etfendi srafj Executive Director James J. McDonough Jr., Ph.D. Community Crime Prevention Coordinatar Office Manager Jean Doyle Phane:651-228-1855 Fax:651-225-1108 district8@tcpost.com September 25, 2003 Aitn.: Amy Spong Heritage Preservation Commission Office of L'zcease, Inspection, and Environmental Protection 300 Lowry Professional Building 350 St. Peter StreeY Saint Paul, MN 55102 - 1510 RE: Demolition of 358 Mazshall Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: The Summit-University Planning Council (SUPC) — District 8 received notification of a Rezoning" request fr �m P-i, RM-2 to RM-3 of the above noted properry at 358 Marshall Avenue, the South East corner of Western Street and Marshall Avenue on Augzst 18, 2003. This item was placed on the SUPC Neighborhood Development Committee's Community Meeting agenda for September 16, 2403. On September 15, 2003, the project azchitect called our office and informed us that the rezoning request had been "temporarily tabled" to allow more time to consider the site plan. The SUPC had distributed 350+ notic�s of this Agenda item throughout the community. The September 16, 2003 Community Meeting was attended by 42+ residents and agency representatives. Since the request had been made to "table" the rezoning request, this item was deferred for discussion. However, several neighborhood residents have contacted the SUPC office and expressed concerns about the proposed "density" of the project (i.e. 68 condo units), along with other issues such as height of the proposed building, tr�c congestion, inadequate parking accommodations, safety issues - especially as related to the high number of young children in the area, etc. The SUPC Neighborhood Development Committee and Board of Directors aze committed to fully reviewing the proposed development of this site in the Summit-University community, and will continue to conduct meetings to garner input and comment from neighborhood residents. Because ai.'the confusion created by separate, but pazailel processes by PED and LIEP, SUPC —District 8 has not had sufficient information on the proposed development plan tc continue and SUPC recommendations. present a formal recommendation at this time. Further monitoring and review will will inform the Saint Paul Heritage Preservat_on Commission of any and all future Thank you for your anticipated attention to these matters. If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. ' cerely ames .. Mc . gh r., Ph.D. �-�j — 3� Executi e Director Attachment — Community Meeting — September 16, 2003 cc: SUPC Board of Directors R� v'd B M�FS • 4.2.1� • 0 3 � Amy Spong - Re: 355 Marshall Ave. (hearing) �� Page 1� From: vharms@mail.eetc.com To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 1125AM Subject: Re: 355 Marshaii Ave. (hearing) Thurs., Sept. 25, 2003 Dear Amy and or to whomever at HPC: 1 sincerely hope that you wi{I receive this before tonighYs meeting. We did receive the notification earlier but failed to respond, sorry. We just received a flyer deiivered by the Ramsey Hill Association reminding us of the meeting. ChrisYs Fiousehold of Faith had wanted to purchase the vacant lote across Marshall Avenue from our Academy front yard several months ago but the asking price was, in ourjudgment, unreasonable. We are :;orry now that we did not try harder to find a way to make that purchase. I think that you are aware that we have an abiding need to improve F�ousing for our own purposes but that in doing so our housing acquisitions iave had a positive influence on the stabilizing and upgrading of housinr in the community generally. Had we been able to acquire those vaca it lots we would have wanted to create several nice duplexes or perhaps � four unit at the most. Well, that is history! The current proposal to raze an existing home and garage in order to stretch out a six story building with 68 condos in it seems ludicrous to us! We are in agreement with the sentiment being expressed by the Ramsey Hill Association and would lend our support to their argument. Compietion of the project as proposed simpiy brings way too much density of people and automobiles, etc. to an otherwise quiet residential neighborhood and would not be welcomed by us. The immediafe neighborhood has more than su�cient multiple housing opportunities on Virginia St., Western Avenue and Dayton and Selby corners! Our hope is that sanction for this project wiil not be granted !! Sincerely, Ver�on R. Harms, Secretary Bd. of Directors, ChrisYs Household of Faith, Inc. �S � � � � Barb and Chuck Gudknecht 487 Marshafl Ave. St. Paul, MN 55102 651-298-1012 September 25, 2003 To: Amy Spong/HPC Re: HPCO3-398 We are writing to express our concerns regarding the proposed 6 story — 68 unit condo building proposed for the vacant lot on the SE corner of Western and Marshal{ and the demolition permit for the property at 358 Marshall. We have lived in the neighborhood for nearly 25 ye�rs. During that time we have invested a lot into our home and our neighborhood. We are very opposed to a 6 story complex of any type in our neighborhood — it is completely out of character in staying with a historic area. We are opposed to tearing down a historic home for this or any other purpose. Sincerely . ��.t Barb & Chuck Gudknecht f�� - �(o o�-aaa September 17, 2003 Amy Spong Go the Historic Preservation Commission City of St. Paul 15 West Kellogg St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: File # HPCO3-398 Dear Amy, I would like to convey my concems about a recent pernu� application for property at 358 Marshall Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Real Estate L'evelopment Group, File # HPCO3-398. I am not in favor of this proposal as I do not think the proposed structure will be a proper fit in this location. The corner/street that it is located is primary single family and duplex homes. All structures in the area are no taller than ttuee stories with the exception of Blair Complex which use to be a hotel. I would like to express my concern and not recommend this proposal as a resident on Marshall Avenue. Sincerely, �;' �'� ' , �yn i . n 464 M shall,Av nu . aui, MN� 102 (651)229-0757 ��3� �Ur�9 9'� 2Z • 03 � ni i iy ��i i�y - o0o i i iai ai iau �'7'�.�..r ay° �'.„.� From: "Susan Clarke" <SusanClarkeDC@comcast.net> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 2:32PM Subject: 358 marshall Amy. Since none of the building around are so high, I would suggest that (in keeping with the historic area architecture) that the builders only go as far as maybe one storey I igher - at the most - than the surrounding buildings. Yours. Susan Clarke DC. �-38 rr�i� oNvi� - o0o rviaia�inu ,-. � ��., _ raye i� From: "Bradford, Kate" <Kate.Bradford@northstarfinancial.com> To: "'amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us'" <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 8:44AM Su6ject: 358 Marshall Dear Ms. Spong: I cannot teil you how distressed I am to Iearn of the proposed deve opment of the properly at 358 Marshali. The size and scale of what is beir� proposed is far beyond what is in keeping with our neighborhood. : fear that should this project go through, more projects will be brought forth and the integrity of our historic district wifl slowly be eroded by mass housing. There must be something that can be done to prevent th?� development. Kindly advise. Sincerely, Kate Bradford 221 Mackubin Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 �� - 39 i.,�,r._�. r '4. �'.`r d�'��,�� .. From: "Brita Kukich" <bkukich@visi.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpa�l.mn.�s> Date: 9/25/03 6:33AM Subject: proposed condos on Marshalf and Western Brita Kukich 530 Marshall Ave St. Paul, MN. 55102 651-222-3274 Amy, Many things came to mind when I heard of the application to raze t�e historic structure on Marshall to build a six story condo. In trying to stay on the topic of historicai gu�deiines, even if I thought tearing down the house was a good idea {which I don't) I could not imagine a six story structure of any kind on that corner. Even though there are sizeable historic structures in the arsa such as St. Mary's (help me out here CHOFF?) across the street the lot or green space and its hist.:rical impact create a serene presence that would never be complimented 6y a six story condominium buif�ling. Going back to the endangered duplex on Marshall, even though thc, present condition of the house only marginally supports the historic neighborhood, with some work it cculd be a great home for a family. In 1992 we bought a tiny Italianate on the 500 block, just up from the duplex in question. When we purchased the home it was a duplex with three layers of siding and aIl the wrong updates inside. At that point anyone would have said it marglnally supports the neighbonc� od. Today, it is one of many very desirabie single family homes. To say it has great historical significant would be a stretch but what this humble dwelling offers to the neighborhood for years to come is a vision which a 6 story condo could never match. There are more people in this neighborhood with similar stories than not. If the potential of every home in this neighborhood would have been viewed as insignificant then there would be no historic neighborhood teft. There are no more oId homes left in this area. We have such a desire to get ahead financially. We feel it is progress. But what is beyond? So lets take a Iook at Marshall even further down the street. Near the corner of Lexington and Marshall the city has been relocating homes on the north side of the street for the past 5? to 10? years. They did not tear them down. Just yesterday there was a large brick structure blocking the intersection of Victoria and Marshall. Although 1 can say I disagree with moving the home� at least even the city thought the structures were valuable enough to relocate. How can a historic building in a historic neighborhood, at its originat location be fess valuable no matter what its condition is? We have a designated historic district. 1 want to compare the duplex to an endangered species like the Bald Eagle. What is one less Bald Ea�le? What is one less home. When do we stop? As a resident on Marshall Ave. in the Historic District, 1 do not supp+art the demolition of the historic structure on the 300 block of Marshall. I do not agree that any condo structure would be appropriate on that corner. The twin home that is across the street, the home slated for demolition and all the smaller structures in the immediate area as well as St. Mary's (?) would suf`er from such a radical structure as the one propased. Where does the eye pause when one looks up Western betv✓een Marshall and Selby? Where does the soui of a resident go to rest? imagine that this area was your garde�. You would design positive spaces /�—� � �rr aporiy - proposea conaos on iwarsnau ano vvest�em �—��,� rage �� and negative spaces, hard scape and green space. You wouldn't put in a bunch of flowers and shrubs that were all the same size and texture. In a neighborfiood especially a city neighborhood one needs to think about that as well. Why not restore the existing dwelling back to a single family home? Why not build 2 or 3 twin homes on the vacant lots? This is a neighborhood where families live. Children play in their b�ck yards. This historic district should not continue to be a piace where small entities continue to capitaliza from the presfige of the Historic Neighborhood. We have pubiic housing for the needy. We have rursing homes for the sick. What we don't have is enough homes with grass and trees for the other horr � owners in this area to wafk down the biock and stop and pause to say hello, sit on the front porches whi : the chiidren play in the yards. What kind of historic impact would this make? Who would have ever dreamed that once again the people of St. Paul would see the value of preserving a truly historic neighborhooJ? Thank you Brita Kukich �5-�l �r�i�iya�viiy� nicxnr�.vo-oavY ,a ..,�;�� _.. . _ . ��.�;. r°`J° '.-� From: Teresa Tierney <teresa@tierneymusic.com> To: aamy.spongQci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/24/03 8:10PM Subject: RE: File #HPCO3-398 Amy, Thank you for your message today. I am unable to attend the mee :ing Thursday due to my work schedule so I will take this opportunity to state my opposition to the proposal for a 68 unit condo development at 358 '4arshali Avenue of the Hili Historic district. This is a residential area that already has much housing consisting of multiple units. Marshall Avenue already has high traffic volume and speeds and the addition of this �roperty would only increase tra�c and congestion. In addition, proposing : six story building does not appear to take into account that this is a historical district. The ultimate use of the vacant lot should mainta: i, preserve, and continue the fiistoric and neighborhood quality of thi� area. I am not opposed to to the property being used for residential purp ses, but I do not support the development for property that would raise the popu{ation density, increase traffic, and not fit with the historic atmosphere of the neighborhood. Sincerely, Teresa 7ierney 473 Marshafl Avenue /�S �4�Z � Amy Spong - 358 Marshall _ __ �-��,� a y Page 1� From: "Erika PerraulY' <erika@perrault.net> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 12:39PM Subject: 358 Marshall Hi Amy. Thanks again for taking comments and passing them along at the meeting tonight. My concerns about the proposed development at 358 Marshall are related both to the size of the building, 6 stories, as well as the number of the units, 68. The neighborhood around 358 Marshall does not include buildings �f the size and scope proposed. The Iargest close structures are the Chr�st Household of Faith building, which is Iocated on a much larger piec : of property and is historic, so is in keeping with other targer oid structures such as the Biair Arcade building. However no other bu "ding is even ciose in height to 6 stories, and I'm concerned that the 6 stories would dwart surrounding properties and causing too much of a dense mass of housing in one small area. In addition, I live at 463 Marshall, and our neighborhood is strugglii.� to carve out its niche as a safe, preserved, historic part of Ramsey hili. Simply having 68 condo units in one building on one corner substantially increases the housing density in our immediate neighborhood which is already working hard to retain good, long-te m, solid neighbors who are committed to making a livable, historic neighborhood that Saint Paul is proud of. I(and I befieve my neighbors as wefl) wefcome safe, beautiful new housing, but ask that it support the neighborhood and its historic character better by being smaller and putting fewer people in such close proximity to each other. Thanks. Have a good meeting. Erika Perrauit erika@perrault.net (w)651-338-7562 (h) 651-665-9797 �- �3 `Am� 5 ong - 358 Marshall n, _�1�_��_ Nage 1� From: "Rubinstein, Sally" <sally.rubinstein@mnhs.org> To: "'amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' <amy.spong@ci.>tpaul.mn.us> Date: 9125/03 124PM Subject: 358 Marshall Dear Amy: I am writing to oppose the planned development of the southeast c�rner of Western and Marshall and 358 Marshail in the Historic Hili District ,File #HPCO3-398). The proposed structure is too big {or the site and wi � overpower the neighboring buildings. 1 am especialiy concerned at �ut the impact such a building would have on the St. Joseph's Academy a mplex across the street. Additionally housing this dense would create terrible traf'ic problems. Even with 79 spaces for 68 units, there would be a lot or. cars parked o� the street. I also disagree with the plans for the existing house. It might not b� of great architectural value, but it does contribute to and support the architectural fabric of the district. At the very Ieast, it should be mo�. -�d rather than razed. Thank you, Sarah (Sally) Rubinstein 442 Dayton Ave. 651-224-6429 �S"�� ranyaN�ny-�ooiviaiai�mir�vaiiuC,nwnist�iicvisuwi, rue�rnr�,�o-oyo a E� � - — > D� ,�—_�j�s._. �,,,� Prom: <DANANDLARA@aol.com> To: <amy.spongQci.stpaul.mn.us> Da4e: 9/25/03 132PM Subject: 358 Marshail Avenue, Hill Historic District, File �HPCO3-398 HPC, i am a iife long resident of Ramsey Hill. i am adamantiy opposed to the proposal at 358 Marshall. This is a historic district and old building: cannot be replaced. Once you take it down it can �ever be put back. Apparently the duplex is not warranted as "historically significanf'. I beg to differ, .. is a pleasant house and IS significant because of when it was construc ed! One house may not seem like a big deal, but iYs one house here, one h�use there, this, that .... so on and so forth. Eventually over time, there will not be a historic district to protect or just a patch work of once was. Furthernore, the size of the proposed "building" is simplyjust way too large! This is iot W oodbury for crying out loud! Lara Duddingston , 443 Holly Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55102 (651)222-6901 �S �S � Amy Spong - 358 Marshall - Pa e 1' � � � I� �� From: "Upchurch, Tfieresa" <Theresa.Upchurch@nortY.starfinanciai.com> Ta: '"amy.spong@cistpaui.mn.us"' <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 10:57AM Subject: 358 Marshall Good Morning! I am a resident of Cathedral Hill and a member of fhe RamseyHill Association. f have fived in this neighborhood off and on for 23 years moving b�,k in 2001 because I knew were my heart belonged. Our neighborhood �s filled with such fabulous stuctures and hisfory. Allowing this monster at 358 P!arshall to rear its ugiy head would be a travesty. I moved home for a reasc � and bought property here (447 Marshall Avenue). 1 want to keep my ne:�hborhood the way i remember it as a child...the last 40 years.. and for the ne; t 100 years 10 come. Please do not allow this to happen to our beautiful neighborhood. Theresa Upchurch Sr. Field Adminisirator North Star Consultants, Inc. 2701 University Avenue SE, Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55414 direcf: 612-617-6128 fax: 612-617-6001 th eresa. upch u rch @north starfinan cia l. com <mailto:theresa. upchurch @n orthsta�n an ci al. com> CC: "'The Phoenix Newspaper"' <phoenixl@winternet.com> k5-�� Amy Spong - File #HPCO3 398 Proposed construction at 358 Marshall Ave Pa e 1" �_w. �l�_� - a�a ��.�� From: The Phoenix Newspaper <phoenix1 @wintemet.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 10:56AM Subject: File #HPCO3-398 Proposed construction at 358 tvlarshall Ave Good momi�g, Amy Spong < Re 358 Marshall, I am most concerned about the size and scoper the proposed building. There is really nofhing in the entire district that s six stories,..and certainly not six and one-half stories. Let me correct myseff. The cathedral is taller. "...new construction be harmonious with the scale and massing of existing, historic buildings in the district." Fran Jackson 447 Marshall Ave #6 Saint Paul 55102 651-291-2691 CC: T Upchurch <trublu1963@msn.com> , \5�� Amy Spong - 358 Marshali �i.�, �age 1 #� From: "Mike Schumann" <mike@traditions.com> To: <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/03 9:57AM Subject: 358 Marshall As a resident of the Ramsey Hiil neighborhood, I would Iike to expross my extreme concern about the mass of this proposed development. The overall aesthetic appeal of this neighborhood is what makes p.�ople want to live here, and which creates the relatively high property values that the City of St. PaW c asperately needs to Tinance its many programs. The historic preservation guidelines are not only designed to protect historic structures, but also to protect the aesthetic integrity of the neighborhood. I would like to strongly encourage the HPC to reject any proposed �evelopment that creates structures that exceed the size and mass of other existing buildings in the imriediate viciniry of this project. Please feel free to call me at 651-208-3791 if you would like further input. Thanks, Mike Schumann mike@traditions.com CC: <info@ramseyhiil.org> /ES - `f � �_ � ��,�ro��,,, � ��.�:. ��_:;►,_. Ramsey Hill Associadon ��-�� o N-aaa 400 SELBY AYENUE, SUITE V, SAINT PAIIL, MN 55102-d500 TELEPHONE: 651.221.0200 October 20, 2003 To: Members of the St. Chris Coleman Jerry Blakey Pat Harris .��m Jay Benanav Paul City Council Fr: Ramsey Hill Association Boazd of Directors Rod Richter, Historic Preservation Chair At its regular monthly meeting on October 9, 2003, the members of the Ramsey Hill Association Board of Directors voted to support the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission's decision to deny the demolition permit request for 358 Marshall Avenue. The Coinmission's vote has been appealed and is on your meeting agenda (Item 54) for October 22. The Ramsey Hill Association encourages you to uphold the HPC's decision. Many years ago, when I was studying historic preservation, one of my instructors constantly drummed into our heads that nothing historic should ever be tom down unless what is proposed to replace it is much better for the community. Whether or not the new proposal is a welcome addition to the neighborhood is a question that cannot yet be answered. No defuutive proposal for a replacement structure has been produced. The members of the Ramsey Hill Association Board of Directors are of the opuuon that the replacement structure, as it has been so far described (six stories, 68 units, a multitude of zoning variances required), would r,ot be benefrcial to the Ramsey Hill neighborhood. We encourage you to uphold the HPC's denial of the demolition permit for 358 Marshall Avenue. �,. ', tICT 2 � 20Q� C7ANIEL �C�STRC�� ., FROM :UPI PROPERTY MfiNRGEMENT GR�UP FRX N0. :16125708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:55 M P ' o � 5 800 Franklin Avenue Wesf S � Minneapulis, MN 554pg Main: 612.870.8300 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMEIITT GROUP Q��ber Zo, aoos Ms, Amy Spong Saint P�I Heritage PreseEyation Commission C/o dfftce of [ Inspect7afl and �nvironmental Protection 350 Saint Peter Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, M7Y 55102-15(0 Re: Fina(ized Cos[ Anatysis of Budget vs. Actual $ids for 358 Marshal[ Avenue Dear Ms. Spong: Per the recommendation of the Commission on September 25'�, Zpp3, � ��ave received actua� b]ds from 4�a��fed contractprs to pin down the ac..tual cost of the contemplated repairs and renovations that this property wiil require, were it io continue [o be rented as a duplex, and returned to i£s originai 1880's period condition. This letter will compare the original budget thnt f]�ad used to determine the e�t of the cost verses the Actusll Bids that we receiv�i from licensed e�nttac[ors to restore the premise io iL original ( 8$0'S style construction. As you cao see, the acEUal bids are �7(12.016 CREATER TH,4N our original budgeted estimates, �rohich �'E� �ery conservati�e. Attaehed for your review are also the bids that have been received. 1. Heating system replaced: 2. Replaee Plumbing System: 3 2eplaoemenE of Itoof 4. Electrical 12epair/Cteplacement 5. Repair of Foundation: b• Kepair of Stucco: 7. Exterior SoffiN7'rim Replace: i3udget: $S,OOd.00 Bad�et: $IO,00Q.00 Budget: $ ) 0,000.00 Budget: $t0,000.00 BudgeY: $5,000.00 Bndget: �30,000.00 Budget; $5,000.00 Actual Bid: Actuat $id: Actual Bid: Actual Bid: Actual Bid: Actuai Bid: Actual Bid: $7,500 $ r 7,500 $16,483 $l0,IS0 $135,383 (see 5 byove) (see 5 dbove) 'CUTAT,: Budget: $85,000.00 Inere�ses Over Bud et: �10201G Actaal $ids: $I87,016 [t is my hope that this analysis will further illustrate the extent of work ehaz this property requires at this tirne to retum it to iLg origin$1 1 Bgp•s period condition. in terms of economic value, whiah we caiculated at $ based on eurrent re;nt� and aperating costs, we would create a negative economic value o£ $]02,00-$I I 1,0 ' we performed [his work. !n addition, the above $187.00O represents 75%ofour origina ase price, It is abundantEy clear £rom this anafysis, that the only feasib[e �nomic use for buildi to demoli[ion it or move ic to another site to make room for development af the und lyin� � Group FROM :UPI PROPERTY MRNAGEMENT GROUP FAX N0. :16128706500 , <. _ Oct. 22 2003 10:35RM P2 a�l-aaa RRAUSAND�R441�t� CDNS't`Ri7cTI�N COMYANi' (:O!+tTRACTORS � CONSTRUCTEO�I h1ltIVAGF.KS •...� i� Mr. Spiros Ztnebalas Rea186tflce DeVelopmnnt Grm� 800 Fra�ilcli�t Avenue West Mittneapolis> MIV 554a5 Re- 3S8 MaasGail Sti'eet IJeac 3pfras: As per yauc xequost, Kiaus-Andeison has looked at exterior �enovations ta 358 Marshatl Sueet, $c, Fanl, htinnesota. Tdit �st Eor Fhis w�& as per the attached eetiniate dated i0J21103 is ONE HUNDEtED 1�IIRTX F[V� THOUSANIS 'fHREE HUNbRED EIG�ITY THiiEE AND NO/100 DOLLARS {�135,3H3.�}. We inClnda the followiqg: Demolirion aad retwildin� uf the fron[ pwcR Demoliti0n and rebuildiAg of tHe eide porch Demolidon of smcco cxtericY ReWqrking of �after cxtcASions Re-shoring of roof rafues Instalfativa al` 4" hm'dbo�d lap siding Euterior painting VTe do not iaCl¢de: i.ead peifit [cmovai Asbestvs reaaoval g��► �f any hazaidous m��at Any � oft' or 4asrauaaon oP zoofits� rnareciats AnY modfficauon m existing fouqdari� We will n�d perxuis�ian to set scaffold on the esseerr po�tian of the neighbortns FtoPattY• � y oa bayC �u quo6ti�ts, please cooract me at youx coaveaiCfl�e. Very uuty yrnus. US-AND COlYS UL'TEOI3 COIvv1PAI3X '�j O Ra8$C3! Vice Ptesid�s I,Rltt St. Paul Divisian 200 Grand Avenue. St. P�ul. MN 55702 ..�_.....�-.nnn r�v.rr.r��OfMA}9M1 .../� AY . t�I4l��IllRlu nw�n� -r�_�� +.r��. �� ...i. b�= �aa, `FROM :UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FAX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:35RM- P3 ,� + , �ra�5�—�h� 1.�.�a.��° lv.'zr.o3� se •�. �itu FROM':UPI PROPERTY MRNRGEMENT GROUP FRX N�. :16128708500 - Acr. s_2e03 19:54aM ' SELA ROOFING.SRLE� � Res1d ��w1(� �onM6� AHluwopolH 9F. Pad � 572875�l078 651�F73964 iau fl12�exa-tOT9 � L � � ��1}!� Oct. 22 2003 10:36RM P4 .r SiNte otI^� timnes ro f40DOfY�O * e0t1d� � inewo0 149d �a/S/o-3 � ^ �. . � 66E_ �� - --- .---i� ,_..__..____._ —,�,�_. ^. Propose u�mf�ln�mendanolMor-nqa�Croti.wmeerekA+�%easatxt�9�wa: �_ ..—. W—a�$ ..�� wnag.+: D _ w•;!°�'��_.� om:e._,4roro�s4,�ryana,wew,;F�,ar4c _ 1U % MN��1�N . �Ad�Y��^. �—n..—�. .�. ��.�,,._�,�,.�"��"""°��`� � . _�..� �. m s � �— �_� :� .� �' i�eM' a�Mp¢ Kp��b�a oM ee W41 m hr [Ma➢�Ig +� pfau�n� $reccn 14n�. �'trouwRn �aoor�n uauwnMa� 7loe�xeewreoe �js�na �ee�wunaa (� rrv��c�ro� o�awsmas�almerv»ca `ur� ae „ann w weamm. FI �noM 9M (OIXhBMl�9� ONNO9�0 adM. s10CM. �nM1.v�pY Md11eMd�& W�a�e �appmary, Oet Y�7.ip6tmaea ewp�pe. ��NU NUan M qemOppCfoQEebMq�1V11eIlonY qeee OCXda e�qry WOYQ�tl w iR�Le ei{.� Da IMI� QOrwarl0t Ww IIriM�ab.Bi-. �ae/aMBLt.4x6z]liBHAIB,EaenkWa&m01i�.:ti�.�..aNGMHOeuCOilp3�qW9V�ka 6 �ppqE86MiN�Mw ..�7v..� WecreG:. ..��I� ._�.WG¢apMAq9:_� __Im1Ka11W �1 nm+bdno reaf inena wtn poo,u�ae �«hroReu w INeo frm unnene�M (W4 mamFO�PEdQ��Ml4 ��Ihe.��.Co1eY —� __ ` „ 1 Pobarowceaeepl�QawC*cwRei�o9eew¢. —� ~_ 111Mie11 (]W�F WcaWMGBE �CWeMCmnlnB Qftk QOme�—.� N�qpAl�„O,�M.C�nf ._�8b'b�.�F� „�45yq+ p30riar qaalka! Q50Yw I]tAMrcLNAne o@a�tl �nWA fldd vW i1f16� mPS i. neloo.. S MarrarM�Mtuettqclwl��aeca KK� _qepPoqrpen��..�_q�In+eqUmm� g._— �s,umw a��,sroa—._.o n.e��d� �w.,_,�,ti�—_ �..— Ie p4'aG- � E �� 3' .�Tgp�MR��60CIW„mamllAnAw�tltl_..NeNoomie�pPbPt '�. 1� n�eanwe�Ar10�fh�aary�en�d�CO y �Oraela�maiureMeWnderopmx�MO��Ra�snqt'ne mpply adwww. Wk� eere uta iweai �awmrsPp.Ar�aryn�nekvw�. wW 1��a aamruw�meNne Mm�am ar MkAwlt6 �eriwwlpOLe�aWe00wLWOrt�. �3namY �war �cA'P aM�r UaeN�e C7 �aaaw fJ acym ea(«ed pMSroM1UR�hNi'�Ne II�� ,�,e�aM m�owWa0A6o ZWNB�weIalP�oroQmNdcMlaMwbdlwiROWftoMk�mlklbrt5 �_.mwtneaoaetmp�f(n. NMOnpibpMn mC�imnly � t.TqkpoYUmmm4Wfew {""__' ._---��awranaeba�Mp�mAWnVeuw�ca. 2.N1uWnewmasolNY�P S�— erera�WaCotaMA�alanhenplm QnaaAad�t.aayhanroera�ow E�..J� d okw�y .o eqnpmrW�r.ert.oawenmiyroeadre�aanrpM��era�i�ynNa�minuneuxar. it G+�wi4� om�ascnane�wpaw� t. Nme _.c,,.9'Ounwa em1C.7s+cnaereR'Xa'! aOvamuetl Ps'%�y aawn�ansN. Qxum�am tl�ad !'1Nw.rror L�.�a+fa�NaEO.ecdOhMleldt.abixpnqrt m.napmes.�_(aee0tntliea4eprami0lmarm�Q �.N IoP�+N�1o�w We�vUMe�r m a(�9M1� u..rn.M1M.i YPsrenqrpr m��p� Finp� �insw.�.iWe�mMmn�_trar.avanetv_.xoimT_t�wna�uam^yme�eaqcimm�l� rywewn. rohYrodmvefeYi't�'oRlxara�aeheinn��u....xxi.�.. A dle�rY w[�b J n.� ._..._... •MITa�pt M Amne$MOM iotOlTllb COnnYBel. nccap+sna otCof�eqe— o-w»w...,.e.n....m �w.-`awn.a. ww�v..rNtwn,,... W sm.«,,.�... vmU fb.a.�unr.r�rws r.. �aNw1EiMM1 Mw w x a m.. w w r. � n r x MM w w,w aw � ww a�..4a w P1+.nrwnraaurwYM� WTyPhmpNea.qp�aNV�wf m � M �p� Y �WYwi�qin+mY�w�rm�il�iq4PdMMr4Y s W� � r� _ '�'IMMAMOmmM'WIM�W�w P�t�Uenpqy�pwqM�i �w�ye.iaee�pe.+..1at o �-aaa ~ FROM`:UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FRX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:37RM PS ` - __ .. .............. _ ' 101fd910� m P_ om� 8��0�� MOONEr',ANO J�/�LER P�a�anba� ar�d �eatir�g 2925 Garfie►d Ave South MinneapoPs, MN 55408 {�'�2) 827 2825 Octoper 8, 2003 F� �672} 827-�4465 Rergola WlanagemerrE 208 westem qrre North Unit � SY. Pauf MN 55102 Dear Customer, We are pleasecf to submii fhe foil�+ving proposal for the plumbirtg work a# the duplex ap MarshaH in St. Paul. We witk fumish arld 'mstaif new water Unes from the wafer �ter ta a�� fix(utes, new drain Anes from fixtures and verrt lines atl per code. We rvip ir�s3an a neu�r water heafer a�d new chimney liner as per code. We will pra�ide iwo bath tubs, two water closets,'twa iavatory sinks, tvvo kitchen sinks, lauRdry tuh, hvo outside hose sp�ots a!1 mateaiats � insta8 �ese �ixtures. Others will dc arfy patching of waI[s ancf floors. This is an estimated cast fvr the above work $17,500.00 We wili fumish and instalf a S(ant Fnn Sailer, SX-180 Ehe removal is Tsterl s�parately beloW. We vWfl set new boiler on cemeat pad, in9tafl !o existirtg piping and redi�tiart, using proper igotation and halancing valves. We will instal! a new expansion tank in basement. Cnnnecting gas, ver�ting, electricai, wi� al1 permits arrd }ests. The crosf of this shall be $5,6QO,fl0 Removai of asbestos and old boiler try Envirobate iNC $2,OOD.00 We reserve the right to not accept this bid after 30 days We apPreciate the oppornmifyy to wark with you an this projec� and are confident in our abilities fo handle this job � a prafessionai manner. Sincerery, Matthew D. Romain Projecf Engineer 9um-O-Matic Mooney and Ridler Mechanicai Contractors � Accepted ' FROM`:UPI PROPERTY MANRGEMENT GROUP FRX N0. :16128708500 Oct. 22 2003 10:37� P6 � tint-cc� . "`Ocb �7 09 08:i1p anthon� �� $up�esne c�:ee�'t�ic ��. �PWO E 651) 227-8849 A Elalrical work for 358 Msishatl .ave. St Paul, M1S_ 1 J we wiii clean up elechicat wieing in basernent 2.) We wilt add sufficient lighfing on ontside of buitdix� at all enay ways. 3.) We wi(l check aD w7ring in both units to �nake sute therc is no haz2rds and there rs proper pol�'ity on all circuits. 4.)'9Ve will malce sisre there is sufficicnt outlets snd lightit�g in each raom_ W¢ will add a�tlets wheie neceSSaiy t0 m2et efCCtricalcode. 5.) We wil[ add GFi outlets whe�e requ9red in kitchens and bathrooms. 6 J We wiFl make sure outleGS i1i bedrooms have ffiOfaulf proteck�or� CosE fat work listed above: $t0,150.OP � aa� WESTERN & MARSHALL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA