The URL can be used to link to this page

09-916Council File #� Green Sheet #� p rj � lf ( RESOLUTION NT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented by � 1 WHEREAS, Joel Jensen (hereinafter, the "AppellanP'), on May 7, 2009, made application to the Heritage Z Preservation Commission (hereinafter the "HPC"), in HPC File Number 09-015 for a building permit to 3 complete construction of a new single-family home which is located in the Heritage Hill Historic 4 Preservation District on property commonly known as 1079 Portland Avenue; and 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2'7 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4i WHEREAS, the subject property first came to the attention of the HPC in Apri12006 when the HPC considered the application of John Barbour, d/b/a Barbour Ladouceur Design Group, in HPC File No. 06- 227, to construct a new single-family house with an attached garage on the said property which itself was a newly created lot resulting from the subdivision of property commonly known as 1075 Portland Avenue on January 5, 2006. At that time, an HPC staff report dated Apri120, 2006, which is attached and incorporated herein by reference, recommended approval of the proposed single-family home plans subject to certain conditions. On Apri127, 2006 the HPC moved to conditionally approve those plans subject to conditions. The approval and the conditions were delivered to the applicant in an HPC Letter of Approval dated May 1, 2006, which is also attached and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the HPC records indicate that following HPC approval, construction of the said home commenced but never finished. The records also show that the exterior details of the home that were constructed did not comply with the plans approved by the HPC on Apri127, 2006. Accordingly, the records show that the department of safety and inspections issued a"stop work" for non-compliance with the HPC approved plans and work on the said home ceased. Thereafter, the unfinished and vacant home went through a series of owners. Eventually, the Appellant, as noted above, submitted the building permit application under consideration here, to complete the said home. However, the AppellanYs application proposed to change the exterior plans approved by the HPC in Apri12006 as follows: 1. To install a two-tired retaining wall of rockface concrete block. 2. To apply a cementations coating over the exposed foundation. 3. To complete the porch with Tudor elements and detailing. 4. To install a small window on the second floor main elevation. 5. To change the front gable windows, siding, eaves and soffits. The siding will be smooth panels and 1 x 4 battens. 6. Soffits will be changed all around with vented Hardiplank. 7. To install a sma11 shed dormer on the west roof plane. 8. To switch the front and back doors. 9. To paint the structure. WHEREAS, on May 28, 2009, the HPC, after having provided notice to affected property owners, conducted a public hearing on the said application where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and, at the close of the hearing, the HPC, based upon all the testimony and records, approved the application subject to certain conditions as set forth in the HPC's Letter of Approval dated June 29, 2009, based upon the following findings set forth in the May 21, 2009 HPC staff report: �� 42 1. 43 44 45 46 47 4$ 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 2. 66 67 68 69 70 3. 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 4. 78 79 80 5. 81 82 The property does not meet the guidelines for new construction in the Hili Historic District, given its current and unfinished state. The following is a partial list of items that did not get built or finished in accordance with the approved plans (exterior only): The foundation was to have a rockface concrete veneer installed. The porch was to have turned columns and skirting with stone capped stair walls. The west elevation was to have a decorative "bump-out" in the dinning room. The roof was to have two large gabled dormers. The windows on the front first floor where to be a"Chicago style" with a large pane and transom and two side double-hungs. The second floor window in the center is missing. The end-gable attic window was to be a Palladian with divided lights. The porch roof is missing dentil molding. The main eves and soffit are missing decorative molding and dentils and the eve was to continue across the front elevation. The roof was to have flared eves. The rear garage doors were to be a carriage style with wood veneer. The siding was to be wood, with a narrow lap end mitered corners and a fiber-cement board was installed with wide lap, a false wood-grained texture and boxed corners. The trim detailing was to be wood and most of it is a fiber-cement, while the soffits and eves aze vented aluminum. The front door was to be wood with a full-light view. The building's massing in scale does not comply with the guidelines and does not relate to the surrounding historic districYs properties. It is a large box shape with two very laxge and unbroken roof planes. The neighboring houses also have a large massing but they do not appear boxy because of the variety in details like dormers, porches, bays, chimneys, etc. The applicant is proposing a small shed dormer and changes to the fascia and end-gable which add detailing to break up the large roof plane and to manipulate the scale of the fa�ade to have more traditional proportions. Staff believes the boxy massing of the property will still haue a negative impact with the surrounding properties and the original proposed bay on the west elevation was one small way in which its boxy nature was broken up. This elevation is quite visible from Lexington given the position of the neighboring house. Not repeating the gable design on the rear elevation is not traditional and does not speak to the quality of design that is recommended by the general principles in the guidelines. The addition of a small window on the front elevation, second floor, complies with the guidelines and improves the more traditional relationship of solid to void. 83 6. The cementitious coating over the exposed concrete foundation is not appropriate for new 84 construction. The guidelines state that there is a continuity of materials within a historic 85 district and that it is "threatened by the introduction of new industrial materials and the 86 aggressive exposure of earlier materials such as concrete block, metal framing, and glass." �y-�� 87 88 89 90 7. 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 8. 101 102 103 104 105 106 9. 107 108 109 110 10. 111 112 113 114 11. 115 116 117 118 12. 119 120 121 122 Staff believes the proposed foundation will not have a negative unpact as it will be minimally visible. The guidelines allow for Hardiplank in certain cases but state, "imitative materials such as asphalt siding, wood-textured metal or vinyl siding, artificial stone, and artificial brick veneer should not be used. Smooth 4-inch lap vinyl, metal or hardboard siding, when well installed and carefully detailed may be acceptable in some cases. Materials, including their colors, will be reviewed to determine their appropriate use in relation to the overall design of the structure as well as to surrounding structures." The current Hardiplank siding is a 6- inch exposure with a wood-grained texture and does not comply with the guidelines. Having dark, earth-toned colors will improve the massing of the building and make it more compatible with its historic neighbors, which are all masonry buildings. The windows installed are a synthetic material and are a Marvin Integrity brand. While they are missing some traditional detailing such as taller bottom rails and beveled profiles, staff believes they will not have a negative impact provided other changes are made to bring the property closex to compliance with the overall guidelines. The ownex wants to use the same windows where new ones are proposed. The current soffits do not comply with the guidelines or traditional detailing and vented Hardipanel is proposed but a detail was not submitted. A flat ar beadboard pattem running parallel to the wall would be acceptable. Parking still complies with the guidelines as it will not be visible from the street and access to parking will be from the alley. The double, metal garage doors were not approved but face the alley and are acceptable. The guidelines state, "Electric, telephone and cable TV lines should be placed underground or along alleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous." This should be followed for new consmxction. A two-tiered retaining wall is not consistent with traditional patterns and brick and limestone are a mare appropriate material given the properties context. The neighboring property has a stately brick retaining wall around three sides and matches the brick on the house. A sample of the proposed block was not submitted. 123 WHEREAS, based upon the said findings, the HPC, moved to generally approve the AppellanYs buiiding 124 permit application on June 2, 2009, but imposed the following specific conditions on the approval: 125 126 1. The proposed treahnent on the front elevation will be repeated on the rear elevation but the window 127 and opening does not need to be changed. 128 129 2. The applicant shall come back to HPC and/or staff with an alternate design that results in breaking 130 up the boxy massing of both the east and west elevations of the residence. This could be 131 accomplished by constructing a"bump-ouP', as originally proposed, or by adding small shed roofs 132 over windows. �9-9/fo 133 134 3. 135 136 137 4. 138 139 140 5. 141 142 143 6. 144 145 146 147 7. 148 149 8. 150 151 The retaining wall shall be one wall that lines up with the neighboring wall and is of a height similar to the neighboring wall. The siding shall be placed on all four sides to be a smooth, 4 inch lap hardiplank. The boxed corners can remain. The porch slart must have a pattern and more open design (not solid) and the final design shall be reviewed and approved by staff. All final material colors and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. The two colors proposed for the house must be a medium to dark shade and be of earth tones. There shall not be a large contrast between the two colors. A final detail on the soffit be submitted and reviewed and approved by staff. Any changes or revisions to the approved plans be submitted to HPC and/or staff for review and approval. 152 9. The HPC stamped approved construction level plans remain on site for the duration of the project. 153 154 WHEREAS, on or about June 16, 2009, the Appellant, pursuant to Legislative Code §73.06(h), duly filed 155 and appeal from the decision of the HPC and requested a public hearing far the purpose of considering the 156 action and conditions imposed by the HPC and, more specifically, Special Conditions No. 1 and No. 2; 157 and 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 WHEREAS, on August 5, 2009, a public hearing was duly conducted before the City Council where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, and at the close of the said public hearing, the City Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the application, the testimony, the report of the staff and the record, minutes and determination of the HPC; now, therefore BE IT RESOLVED, with respect to Appellant's allegation of error on the part of the HPC regarding Special Condition No. 1, which required the Appellant to repeat the front elevation styling on the rear elevation of the building, the Council hereby denies the appeal. Given the bulk and height of the structure, the rear elevation of the structure is highly visible within the historic district. The Council finds that the HPC did not err when it conditioned approval of the AppellanYs new building permit on repeating the front elevation styling on the rear elevation as it will serve to mitigate the overall impact of this new shucture on the surrounding historic district and properties; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council finds that the Appellant has likewise failed to demonstrate any error in the facts, findings, or procedures of the HPC sufficient to overturn Special Condition No. 4 requiring replacement of the improperly sized Hardiplank siding. The Council therefore denies AppellanYs appeal with respect to this item. However, after a review of all the records in this matter, it is the CounciPs determination to modify Special Condition No. 4, as set forth in the HPC's Letter of Approval dated June 2, 2009, and allow the Applicant to maintain the 6-inch lap Hardiplank siding as �9-9 � � 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 originally installed on the house. The Council fmds that the HPC decision should be modified because the application presents a set of facts that are unique to this struchxre only. First, it must be noted that the Appellant did not install the noncompliant 6-inch lap siding on the subject structure. The improper siding was installed by the previous owner. Second, when notified of the noncompliant siding the owner, rather than correct the problem, abandoned construction and walked away from the m�finished home. As a result, this home remained vacant for nearly 2 yeazs. The Council notes that vacant buildings, no matter the neighborhood, create problems for the City. Third, allowing buildings to remain vacant is not in the best interests of the neighborhood or the City. Fourth, allowing Appellant to keep the siding that was on the home when he purchased it will allow Appellant to make the required changes to the building's rear elevation. On balance, the Council finds that this is a reasonable outcome for a situation that the appellant did not create; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Joel Jensen is hereby denied in all things except to the extent modified herein; and be it F'INALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the Appellant, the Heritage Preservation Commission, the Deparhnent of Safety and Inspections, the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Administrator. Yeas Nays Absent Reque p ent of: C� � Bostrom Carter Hazris ,/ Stazk Thune Approved by the Office of Fmancial Services By: Approved bY City Attorney By: /i��ww�— �• �7-o Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Counc 1 Secretary B � Approved yor Date l✓� � B Approved by Mayor for SubmissiQn to Council ^ BY �,n /��c 0 � ��v7 � � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � )epartrnentlOffice/COUncil: Date Initiated: ��'�� CA _CityAttomey , 18-AUG-09 , Green Sheet NO: 3076456 — I � Contact Person & Phone: i Peter Wamer � 266-871� � Must Be on Council /�qenda by (Da( I 2 6-A U G-0 9 C n c,,.,� I I Doa Type; RESOLUTION E•Document Required: Y Document Contact: Julie Kreus Conhad Phone: 2668776 � � 0 CiN Attornev � g � - ,,� i 1 iCity Atturnev � Deparan Dt �cen�' ut �ro �" '�"�� Assign 2 'tyAttornev .I Number 3 yor'sOtSce I MayodAssistant For Routing 4 ounc� I � -� Order 5 " Cierk Citv Clerk Totai # of Signature Pages ^ (Clip All Locations for Signature) Attion Requested: Memorializing City Council's August 5, 2009 motion to deny the appeal of Jcel Jensen in a1l things except to tlae extent modified herein with regard to a building pernvt requested in order to complete construction of a new singl�family home which is located in the Heritage Hill Historic Preservarion District on the properiy commonly la�own as 1079 PorHand Avenue. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Foilowing Questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does ihis person/firm possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any curtent city employee? Yes No Exp4ain aN yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet. CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): The Council is required pursuant to Ciry Charter to have its actions reduced to wriring either in the form of a resolution or an ordinance dependent upon the nature of the matter before i[. The decision of the council in this matter required a written resolution in order to comply with the Charter. Advantages If Approved: Approving the attached resolution fulfills the Council's duty under the Char[er. Disadvantages If Approved: Failure to approve the resolution violates the CiTy's Charter requirement. DisadvanWges If NotApproved: ToW I Amount of Transaction: Funding Source: Financial Infortnation: (Explain) August 'I8, 2009 937 AM CostlRevenue BudgMed: Activity Number: Page 1 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 CITY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMI5SION STAFF REPORT FILE NAME: l Oxx Portland Avenue DATE OF APPLICATION: April 8, 2006 APPLICANT: John Bazbour, Bazbow Ladouceur Design Group OVJNER: Vihn Le, Wisdom Development Group DATE OF HEARTNG: Apri127, 2006 HPC SITEIDISTRIC"I': Summit West Historic District CATSGORY: New Conshuction CLASSIFICATION: Building Permit STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Amy SponglChristine Barr DATE: Apri120, 2006 A. SITE DESCRIPTION: This vacant 1ot was divided from 1075 Portland Avenue on January 5, 2o�6. The HPC did not review or comment on this lot sp1iY. The property to the east at 1075 Portland Avenue is a brick trvo- story, Cape Cod style cottage constructed in 1948 and categorized as non-contributing to the Hill Historic District. The property to the west at 1089 Portland Avenue ig a rivo-and-one-half story, brick, classical foursGuaze residence designed by E.J. Donahue, constructed in 1906 and categorized as pivotal to the Hill Historic District. B. PROPOSED CHANGES: The applicant is proposing to construct a new singie-family house with an attached garage on a]ot measuring 40' wide by 150' deep with a section cut out of the northwest corner (see lot split survey), The proposed house is to be setback 41' from the sidewalk and wili have an open front porch that is 6'-6" deep that spans the first floor elevation. The footprint for the house measures 31'-8" wide by 49'-4" deep. The house is two-and-one-half stories tall with an intersecting gable roof. C. GUIDELINE CITATIONS: The Secretarv of the Interior's Standarrls for Rehabilitation: I. A praperty will be used as rt was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal changes to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character ofa property will be retained and preserved. The removal ofdistinctive materials or alteration offeatures, spaces, and spattal relationships that characterize a property wil! be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical recorZ� of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense ofhistorical deveiopment, such as adding conjectural feazures ar eiements from other historic properties, will nat be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right wil[ be retained and preserved. S. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and canstruction technigues or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity ofdeterioration requires replacement ofa distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement ofmissing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical ar physica[ treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken usirtg the gentlest means possib[e. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources wilt be protected and preserved in place. Ifsuch resaurces must be disturbed, 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or retated new construction will not destroy hisroric materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize a property. The rrew warkshall be d�erentiatedfrom the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and propordon, and massing ro protect the integrity of ths praperry and its environment. 10. New additiorrs and adjacent or re[ated new constructian witl be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity ofthe historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Hill Historic District Guideliaes: New constraction General Principles The basic principle for new construction in the Historic Hil[ District is to maintain the district's scale and quatiry ofdesign. The Historic Hill District is architecturatly diverse within an overatt pattern ofharmorry and continuity. These guidelines for new construck'on focus on general rather than specific design eZements in order to encourage architectural innovation and quality design whi[e mairrtarning !he harmony arrd continuity of the district. New construction should be compatible with the size, scate, massing, height, rhythm, setback, color, material, buildrng etements, site design, and character of surroundingstructures and the area. Massint and Heieht New construction should conform to the massing, volume, height arzd scale ofexisting adjacentstructures. Typical residendal structures in the Historic Hill District are 25 to 40 feet high. The height of new constructian shoutd be no tawer than the average height of att buitdings on both btockfaces; measurements should be made from street level to the highest point of the roofs. (This guideline does not supersede the City=s Zoning Code height limitations.) Rhvthm and Directional Emphasis The existence of uniform narrow lots in Che Histaric Hill naturally sets up a strong rhythm ofbuildings to open space. Historically any structure built an more than one [ot used vertical facade elemertts to maintain and vary the overall rhythm of the street rather than interrupting the rhythm with a long monotonous facade. The directiona[ expression ofnew construction should relate to that ofexisting adjacent structures. Maferials and Details Yariety in the use ofarchitectural materia[s and details adds to the inrimacy and visua! delight of the district. But there is also an overall thread ofcontinuity provided by the range ofmaterials commonly used by turn-of-the-century builders and by the way these materials were used. This thread of continuity is threatened by the iniroduction o,fnew industria[ materiais and the aggressive exposure of earlier materials such as concrete black metal framing, and glass. The purpose of thrs section is to encourage the proper use of appropriate materials and details. The materials and details ofnew construction should relate to the materials and details ofexisting nearby buildings. Preferred roofmateriats are cedar shingles, slate and tile; asphalt shingles ivhich match the approximate color and texture of the preferred materials are acceptab[e substitutes. Imitative materials such as asphalt siding, wood-textured metat or vinyl siding, artif:cial stone, and artificial brick veneer should not be used. Smooth four-inch lap vinyl, metal, or hardboard siding, when well installed and carefully detailed, may be acceptable in some cases. Materials, including their colors, will be reviewed to determine their apprapriate use in relation to the overall design of the structure as well as to surrounding siructures. Color is a signifrcant design element, and paint colors should relate to surrounding structures and the area as wel[ as to the style ofthe new structure. Building permits are not required for painting and, atthough the Heritage Preservation Commission may review and comment an paint color, paint cotor is not subject to Heritage Preservation Commission approval. 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 Buildine Elements Individual elements of a building shauld be integrated rnto its composition for a balanced and complete design. These elements far new construction shouTd comptiment exuring adjacent siructurss as weli. Roofs There is a great variety ofrooftreatment in the Historic Hill District, but gabte and hip roofs are most common. The skyline ar profile ofnew construction should relate to the predominant roofshape of existing adjacent buildings. Most houses in the Historic Hill District have a roofpitch of behveen 9:12 and 12:12 (rise-to-run ratio). Highly visible secondary structure roofs should match tke roofpitch of the maitt struciure, and generally should have a rise-to-run ratio of at least 9: I2. A roofpitch ofat least 8:72 should be used if it is somewhat visible from the street, and a 6:12 pitch may be acceptable in some cases for structures which are not visible from the street. Roof hardware such as skylights, vents, and metal pipe chimneys should not be placed on the front roof plane. Windows and Doors The proportion, size, rhythm and detailing ofwindows and doors in new construction should be compatible with that ofexisting adjacent buildings. Most windows on the Hill have a vertica! orientation, with a proportion of betweett 2.' 1 and 3:1 (height to width) comman. Individual windaws can sometimes be sguare or horizontal ifthe rest ofthe building conveys the appropriate directional emphasis. Facade openings afthe same general size as those in adjacent buildings are encouraged. Woaden double-hung windows are traditiona! in the Historic Hill District and should be the ftrst choice when selecting new windows. Paired casement windows, although not historically common, will often prove acceptable because of their vertical orientation. Sliding windows, awning windows, and horizontally oriented muntins are not common in the district and are generally unacceptable. Yertica! muntins and muntin grids may be acceptabte when compatibte with the period and styte of the buiiding. Slidingglass doors should not be used where they would be visible from the slreet. Although not usually improving the appearance of a but(ding, the use ofinetal windows or doors need not necessarily ruin it. The important thing is that they should look like part of the buitding and not like raw metat app[iances. Appropriately colored or bronze-toned aluminum is acceptable. Mil! finish (sliver) aluminum should be avoided. Porchesand Decks In general, houses in the Historic Hill District have roofed front porches, while in most modern construction the front porch has disappeared. Front porches provide a transitional zone behveen open and closed space which unites a building and its site, semiprivate spaces which help to define the spadal hierarchy of the district. They are a consistent visual element in the district and often introduce rhythmic variation, clarify scale or pravide vertical facade elements. The porch Zreatment ofnew structures should relate to the porch [reatment of ecisting adjacent structures. Ifa porch is not built, the transition from private to public space should be articulated with some other suitabte design element. Open porches are preferable, but screened or glassed-in porches may be acceptable ifwell detailed. Most, but not a[I, porches on the Hil[ are one story high. Along some streets where a strong continuity ofporch size or porch roof Iine exists, rt may be preferable to duplicate these formal elements in new construction. The vertical elements supporting the porch roof are importanK They should carry the visual as well as the actual weight ofthe porch roof. The spacing ofnew badustrades shou[d reflect the solid-ta-void relafionships of adjaceni railings and porches. Generally, a solid-to-void proportion between 1:2 and 1:3 is common in the Histaric Hi11. Decks should be kept to the rear ofbuildings, should be visually reftned, and should be integrated into overall building design. A raised deck protruding from a single wall usually appears disjointed from the total design and is generally unacceptable. 09-916 Agenda Ifem III.I. HPC File #66-227 Sife 3etback New buildings should be sited at a distance not more than 5% aut-of-Irne from the setback of ezisting adjacent buildings. Setbacks greater tharz those ofadjacent buildings may be allowed in some cases. Reduced setbacks may be accepfable at corners, This happens guite often in the Historic Hill area and can lend delightful variation to the street. Landscanine Typically, open space in the Historic Hill District is divided into public, semipublic, semiprivate and private space. The public space of the street and sidewalk is often distinguished from the semipublic space of the front yard by a change in grade, a[ow hedge or a visually open fence. The buildings, landscaping elements in front yards, and boulevard trees together provide a"wa11 of enclosure"for the street "room ". Generally, landscaping which respects the street as a public room is encouraged. Enclosures which al[ow visual penetration ofsemipublic spaces, such as wrought-iron fenres, painted picketfences, !ow hedges or timestone retaini»gwaUs, are characterisiic ofmost ofthe Historic Hill area. This approach to landscaping and fences is encouraged in contrast to complete. enclosure ofsemipublic space by an opaque fence, a tall "weathered wood"fence or tatl hedge rows. Cyclone fence should not be used in front yards or in the front half ofside yards. Landscape timber should not be used for retaining walls in front yards. For the inrimate space of a shallow setback, groxnd covers and low shrxbs wi11 provide more visual interest and require less maintenance than grass. When Zots are le,ft vacant, as green space or parkrng area, a visual hole in the street "wall" may result. Landscape treatment can eliminate this potential problem by providing a walt of enclosure from the street. Boulevard trees mark a separation between the automobile corridor and the rest ofthe streetscape, and should be marntained. Garages and Parkine lfan alley is adjacent to the dwelling, any new garage should be located o,ff the alley. Where alleys do not exist, garages facing the street or driveway curb cuts may be acceptable. Garage doors shauld nat face the street. Ifthis is found necessary, single garage doors should be used to avaid the harizonta{ orientah'on of two-car garage doors. Yarking spaces shou[d not be located in front yards. Residential parking spaces shou[d be located in rear yards. Parking lots for commercial uses should be to the side or rear of commercial structures and have a minimum number ofcurb cuts. A[I parking spaces shauld be adequately screened from the street and sidewalk by landscaping. The scale ofparking lots should be minimized pnd t$e visual sweep ofpavement should be broken up by use ofplanted areas. The sca(e, level oflight output, and design ofparking lot lighting should be campatible with the charcrcter of the distrrct. Public Infrastructure The traditional pattern ofpublic streets, curbs, baulevards, and sidewalks in Ihe area should be maintained. Distinctive features ofpublic spaces in the area, such as brick alleys, stone slab sidewalks, granite curbs, and the early riventieth century lantern style street lights, should be preserved. The same style shauld be used when new street lights are installed. New street furniture such as benches, bus shelters, telephone booths, keosks, sign standards, trash containers, planters a»d fences should be compatib[e with the character of the district. Brick alleys and stone slab sidewa[ks generally should be maintained and repair¢d as necessary with original materials; asphalt and concrete patches shauld not be used. When concrete tile public sidewalks need to be replaced, new paured concrete sidewalks should be the same width as the exitingsidewalks and should be scored in a 2 foot square or t 8 inch square pattern to resemble the old tiles; expansion joinrs should match the scoring. Handicap ramps should be instatled on the inside ofcurbs as part of the poured concrete sidewalk,� where [here is granite curbing, a section should be lowered for the ramp. Electric, telephone and cable TY lines should be placed underground or along alleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous. 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 D. FTNDINGS: I. The property is currently vacant and was split from 1075 Portland Avenue. 2. The two-and-one-half-story building has a proposed height of 39'-Y' tall and complies with the guidelines for massing and height. 3. The directional expression of the proposed new constmction telates to that of existing adjacent shuctures and complies with the guidelines. 4. Asphalt "heavy-shake" style shingles for the roofing is considered an acceptable substitute to wood shingles, tile and slate. Narrow wood lap-siding with mitered comers, trim and detail relates to the materials and details of nearby structures. 5. The gabled roof appears to be of a pitch that is consistent with the guidelines and neighboring buildings. The proportion, size, rhythm and detailing of the proposed wood-frame, double- hung windows complies with the guidelines. Staff also believes the open froni porch complies with the guidelines. 6. The front setback complies wifh the guidelines and is average for the historic homes on the block. 7. A landscaping plan was not submitted, 8. Parking complies with the guidelines as it will not be visible from the street and access to parking will be from the alley. 9. The guidelines state, "Elecrric, telephone and cable TV lines should be placed underground or along aZleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous." This should be followed for new construcrion. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings above, staff recommends approval of the building permit applicarion provided the following conditions be met: 1. All final material colars and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. 2. Window and door detail be submitted to be reviewed and appxoved by staff. 3. No mature boulevard trees may be harmed during the construction. 4. Any changes or revisions to the approved plans be submitted to HPC and/or staff for review and approval. 5. The HPC stamped approved construction level plans remain on site for the duration of the project. 1 � � i OFF[CE OF LICENSE, MSPECTIONS AND ENV4RONMENTAS. PROTECT40N Bob Kessler, Direc(or CITY QF 5'�,�T PAUI, COMNlERCEBUfLDING TelepSane: 651-266-909Q Chrrstopher B. Co(eman, Mayor 8 Faurlh Slreet Easb Sui(e 200 Facsimile: 651-166-9124 S�Paul,Minnesaia55101-1024 Web: w�nefiep.us May l, 2006 John Barbour Barbour Ladouceur Design Group 129 N. Second Street #103 M3nneapolis, MN 55402 Re: l Oxx Portland Avenue, Hill Historic Distriet Apri127, 2006 HPC Permit Review HPC File #06-227 Dear Mr. Barbour: As you know, the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) considered at its April 27, 2006 meeting your application to construet a new single-family house at the property listed above. The HPC voted 10 — 0 to conditionally approve your application. This decision was based on the discussion at the public hearing, public testimony and findings by the HPC staff. The application will be approved provided the following condition{s) be met: 1. All final material colors and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. 2. Window and door detail be submitted to be reviewed and approved by staff. 3. No mature boulevard trees may be hazmed during the construction. 4. Any changes or ravisions to the approved plans be submitted to HPC and/or staff for review and approval. 5. The HPC stamped approved construction level plans remain on site for the duration of the project. You or any aggrieved party has the right to appeal the Heritage Preservation Commission's decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Such an appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of the HPC=s order and decision. Chapter 73 states: (h) Appeal to city council. The permlt appticant or any parfy aggrieved by the decision of the heritage preservation commission shall, within fourteen (14) days of the date af the heritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order and decision to the city cauncil. The appea! shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the division of planning [LIEP] of two (2J copies of a notice of appeal and statement setting forth the graunds for the appeal. The division ofplanning [LIEP] sha11 transmit ane copy of tke notice of appeal and statement to the city cauncil and one copy to the heritage preservation commission. The commrssion, in any written order denying a permit application, sha11 advise the applicant of the right to appeal to the city council and include this paragraph in att such orders. AA-ADA•EEO Employer J' ' � Please note, an F3PC approval or conditional approval�does not obviate the need for meeting applicable building and zoning code requirements, nor is it a permit to alloiv for «-ork to commence. If revisions to the approved plans aze made, be aware that additionat HPC andlor staff review will be required. Please feel free to call me at 651.266.9079 if you have any questions. Our records indicate that a permit application has not been submitted. This proposal will be on hold until the building permit application is submitted. Sincerely, i Amy Spong Historic Preservation Specialist cc: Vihn Le — Wisdom Development Group Uno Development File v� DEPARTMENT OFSAFETY AND[NSPECI'IONS 09-916 Bob Kessler, D�rector CITY OF SAINT PALSL ChrtstopherB Coleman, Mayor June 18, 2009 Ms. Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City HaII Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson; StPaul,Mrnnesota»102 Telephone� 651-1b6-9090 Facsim�fe: 651-266-4099 I wouLd like to confirm that a public hearing before the City CQUncil is scheduled for Wednesday, August 5, 2009 for the following heritage preservation case: Appellant(s): File Number: Jae( Jensen, owner 09-015 Purpose: Appeal of a Heritage Preservation Commission decision conditionally approving completion of a newly canstructed housa within the Hi11 Historic District Location: Staff Recominendation: Commission: 1�79 Portland Avenue, Hill Historic District Conditional Approval Condirional Approval revised from the staff recommendation �5 to 2) I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Melvin Carter. A July public hearing date was not possible due to scheduling conflicts. 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 notice of the hearing in tbe Saint Paul Legal Ledger. ; �ank;! Please call me at 266-4079 if you have any quesfions. Sincerely, Am pong Historic Preservation Specialist CC: Counci] Member Melvin Carter CAO, Peter Wamer Appellant, Joel3ensen File AA-ADA-EEO Employer NOTICE OF POSI.IC HLARING The.Saint Pa+il City Counc3i wi}1 con- duct a public on Wedriesday, Au- st � 5, 2009 a r 5 30' p.m. in the City �ouncil Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall/Cwnthouse. 15 West Kellogg Boula vard. St. Paul. M1�t, to consider ffie ap of Jcel3ensen, owner, to a decision o'the Heritage Preseivatton Comm3ssion condi- tionally approving completlon of a newly consh�ucted house at 1079 Portland Ave- nue. Hill Historic Distzict. �[File No. 09-015] Mazy Erickson . �A�ssistant City Covacil Seccetary . Dated: Jane 23, 2009 (June 29) - 81: PADL IEGAL L61)GER �_-�. —v= 28208489 09-916 DEPART[v7ENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Bob KusZer, Direclor � i CITY OF SAINT PAUL Chr"ulophesB Colemmq Mayor FROM: Amy Spong, HPC staf��f � RE: HPC appeal for 1079 Portland Avenue, Hill Historic District DATE: July 23, 2009 COMIv�.RCE BUII,DING Tdephone: 651-266-9090 8 Fovrth Street E., Suite 290 Facsimik: 651-2659124 Saint Pau1, MinnesoEa 55101d024 Web: www.cistpaul.mn.us7liep Donna Drummond, PED MEMORANDUM T0: City Council Members CC: Peter Wamer, CAO The following attachments highlight the main events that have taken place and relate to the HPC review of the permit application to bring a non-compliant new construction house into compliance with historic district guidel+nes at 1079 Portland Avenue: Page 1 Notice to City Council to schedule appeal. Pages 2 to 13 Grounds for an appeal by appellant Joel Jensen. Pages 14 to 20 The staff report recommending conditionaf approval. Pages 21 to 27 The application with attachments. Pages 28 to 30 Summary minutes from the May 28 pubiic hearing. Pages 31 to 32 The final decision letter with conditions and an e-mai! from a neighbor who aiso testified. Pages 33 to 60 The staff report, application, plans, minutes and decision leiter from ihe first public hearing that approved a design that was not carried out by the developer. The city issued a stop work order and then the property was foreciosed. Pages 61 to 65 Photos documenting what was built that did not comply with the approved plans. HPG staff received compfaints, verified complaints by taking photos and asked the building inspector to issue a stop work order. DEPAR'L'A�NT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS 09A16 Bob Kessler, Director � 375Jackson Slreet. Suite 22D CITY OF SAINT PAUL StPaul, Mimxesom55102 Telephone: 651-266-9090 Christopher B, Coleman, Mayor Facsim:le: 651-266-9099 June 18, 2009 Ms, Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City IIatl Saint Paul, MN 55102 Deaz Ms. Erickson: I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, Augnst 5, 200�for the following heritage preservation case: g Appellant(s): File Number: Joel Jensen, owner 09-015 r � L Purpose: Appeal oF a Heritage Preseroation Commission decision conditionally approving completion of a newly constructed house within the Hil1 Historic District Locarion: 1079 Portland Avenue, Hiil Historic District • Staff Recommendation: Commission: Conditional Approval Conditional Approval revised from the stafl recommendation (5 to 2) I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Melvin Carter. A 7uly public hearing date was not possible due to scheduling conflicts. My understanding is that this public heazing request will appeaz on the agenda of the Ciry Council at your earliest convenience and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! Please call me at 266-9079 if you have any questions. Sincerefy, Amy Spong Historic Preservation Specialist CC: Councit Member Melvin Carfer CAO, Peter Warner Appellant, Joel Jensen File AA Employer � �I R�CTaYV&� �I D.S.Y. JUN 16 2��9 �.� �� p JoelJensen 1253 Ashland Ave #2, Saint Paul, MN, 55104 (651)649-1687 Heritage Preservation Commission Department of Safety and Inspecrions 325 Iackson St, Suite 220 Saint Paul, NIN, 55101-1806 June 10, 2009 Subject: Appeal to city council of May 28 decision regarding 1079 Porfland Ave. To whom it may concem: We are appealing the May 28�' HPC decision regarding 1079 Portland Ave. We feel that our design created by Bob Roscoe and presented to the commission, met both the requirements and historic spirit of the district. We are grateful for the commissions accommodations thus far, however disagree with the extent of requested changes. We realize the HPC is merely commenting on a building, but given the amount of money • they are requSring we spend, we feel the HPC is holding our family responsible for mistakes made two owners ago. We haue tried to work with the HPC. We and the HPC have made many concessions thus faz. We are trying to live with the reality of the house already built and make it into our home. Below are the May 28�' findings of what the HPC mandates we change on our newly purchased home. The application will be approved provided the following condition(s) are met: 1. The proposed treatment on the front elevation will be repeated on the rear elevation but the window and opening does not need to be changed. 2. The applicant shall come back to HPC andlor staff with an alternate desagn that results in breaking up the boxy massing of both the east and west elevations of the residence. This could be accosnplished by constructing a"bump-out", as originally proposed, or by adding small shed roofs over windows 3. The retaining wa11 shall be one wall that lines up with the neighboring wall and is of a height similar to the neighboring wall. 4. The siding shall be replaced on all four sides to be a smooth, 4 inch lap hardiplank. The boxed corners can remain. 5. The porch skirt must have a pattem and more open design (not solid) and the final design shall be reviewed and approved by staff. 6. All final materiai colors and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. The two . colors proposed for the house must be a medium to dark shade and be of earth tones. There shall not be a large contrast between the two colors. 7. A final detail on the soffit be submitted and reviewed and approved by staff. G.� 09-916 8. Any changes or revisions to the approved ptans be submitted to HPC and/or staff for • review and approval. 9. Tke HPC stamped approved consriuction level plans remain on site for the duration of the proj ect. Appeal: We request the current siding remain intact and the following fmdings are stricken: Finding 4. The siding shall be replaced on all four sides to be a smooth, 4 inch lap hardiplank. Tke boxed comers can remain. This finding will cost $33,924 Finding 1. The proposed treatment on the front elevarion will be repeated on the rear elevation but the window and opening does not need to be changed. This finding wi11 cost �6,540 We request instead to leave the e�sting materials in place. This would mean: i) 6 inch lap texture siding 2) Reaz gable 1ap siding Grounds for the appeal; • The cost of this decision financially endangers my family, We were required to purchase the home before the HPC would rule on what exactiy needed changing. We could get a Non-Binding review, but no ruling. In order Yo purchase the properry we had bndgeted for the most eacpensive outcome based on fhe findings of Ms. Spong, the HPC preservation specialist. We hoped it wouldn't come to that. We purchased our home for $180,000 and budgeted to spend another $100,000 or so fixing it up. The 2 findings we aze contesting, add $40,464 or 22% additional To the cost of the house. Our original proposed e�erior changes, we felt wou7d have allowed our home to stytistically fit in, totaled around $14,000. We agreed to an additional$20,000 worth of changes for required shed dormer, soffit repiacement and windows. In the hope this would allow compromise. The final changes requested by the HPC add $69,000 beyond finishing the porch, to the cost of the house. This is more than 1/3 ( 38%) of what we paid for the house. � In order to comply with the current ruling, we must use a significant portion of ♦ 3 09-916 • our "rainy day" savings. Given the current economy, this puts our family in a dangerous position. We feaz the cost puts us in a position where economic hardship is much closer than it need be. The HPC guidelines in city municipal code 5ec 7435 states: Division 2. Guidelines For Design Review, Sec 74.35 "(c) These guidelines are nof hard and fast regulations. They are flexible criteria. Their purpose is to provide assurance to property owners that permit review will be based on clear standards rather than the taste of individual commission members. The guidelines will be interpreted with flexibility depending on the particudar merit of the building or area under review. Consideration will be given to the unavailability or expense of hisforical materials. When applying the guidelines the commission will also be considerate of clearly defined cases of economic hardship or deprivation of the owner of reasonable use of the property. " • Fairness We are this houses third owners. We feel the house is no longer new construction. It isn't finished, but it isn't new. As such our proposed changes should be viewed as remodeling. We should not be liable for the mistakes made by a previous • owner. Background on house The home was constructed in 2006. The developer obtained design approval for the house, then did not build what was approved. Many exterior elements are missing from what was actually built. The house has the same footprint, Is roughly the same shape, bui lacks the details and high end materials on it's exterior. The builder and developer had their licenses revoked in Saint Paul. The builder was even jailed over a dispute. The original owner went into foreclosure before the house was complete. The house was then seized by the bank. It has been vacant for 3 years, and has had complaints filed over the state of the yard. The ipterior of the house is about $0% finished. It should take about 1 month to complete. What was bualt, is a good house. The builder made a very energy efficient, green building. It's constructed using Energy Star rated Structural Insulated Panels. SIP panels offer a structure which is substantially stronger than standard construction. They offer a much more airtight buiiding, and generate very little waste during construcrion. Average heating and cooling costs should be about $50 a month. The exterior is clad in fiber cement siding, a durable, handsome building material. As it sits, in any other . neighborhood, The house needs the front porch finished to have its exterior complete. The HPC seeks to have us change our existing new house, tearing off and replacing all y 09-916 the siding, soffeting. As well as adding elements to the exterior of the house. A retroactive • enforcement of a violation committed by someone else. We were the 3 peopte to sign a purchase agreement on the house. Previous people backed out when they leamed details of what was required. We are a family of 4 who has rented in the neighborhood for 12 years. We participate in the local garden club, and own local businesses. We proposed a beautiful Tudor Revival style house. It has a handsome porch with a unique 3 pillar comer design and beautiful arch elements. The gable will be redone in board baton style. This design is the best choice given what was left by the orignai builder. The steep roof in the deviating design, is actually a feature of the Tudor Revival style. Our plans Bear Gabie Our plan for the rear gable is to leave it as is. The originat approved design plan had a simple Iap design. We would like to keep tlus element as is. We feel due to the very limited visibility from the street, the reaz gable should not be changed, We propose to keep the 6 inch lap siding. If the HPC feels a non- complying garage door can be allowed because it faces the alley, we feel that the gable need not be changed either. • Lap si@ing Our plan for the �isting siding is to Ieave it as is. The 4 inch smaller lap would look out of scale to the size of our house. Six inch ]ap fits the pmportion of our house. Our house is up a substantial hill and appears further from the street than it truly is. This impacts the scale and perception of the detail. A small4 inch lap would lose the visual impact of the Iap itself. If the 6 inch lap is maintained, the visual impact is not lost in a buzz of pin stripe design. The e�sting siding is a maintenance free cement board, with a warranty and should not deteriorate over time. The siding has a cedas mill te�ture, but is not a low quality material. It may Iook Iike rough cedar, but isn't. The relief is minimal and not visible unless you are very close. In addition the texture will be reduced oaer time with each additional coat of paint. Six inch lap siding appears to be allowed in the HPC guidelines, Attached is a copy of page 28 of the Saint Paul HPC guidelines for design review. In the written section, it � speaks of 4" lap for imitative materials, however in the images on the page, it states that 3" - 6" horizontal lap is acceptable. S 09-916 � How we have cooperated We are trying to cooperate with the HPC and have changed many elements of our initial design. 1. $5000 — Tudor porches. 2. $2000 — Mr. Roscoe's design time for the numerous changes requested. 3. $65Q0 — Front gabte, tudor design 4. $1500 — Shelf roofs over windows west and east (2 windows) 5. Foundation coating finish. Requested by the HPC specialist. 6. $1000 — Second floor window addition. Requested by the HI'C specialist. 7. $9500 — Soffit remodel, vented Hardie panel. Requested by the HPC specialist. 8. $b200 Shed dormer west roof (faux, non usable dormer). Requested by the HPC specialist. 9. $1000 windows for faux shed dormer. 10. Switch out front door 1 l. Paint the structure. 12. $1500 — 4 window gable addition 13, Porch skirt open design. Requested by the HPC. 14. FiPC approval of shade of colors low contrast requirement 15. Te;cture requirement on all remodeling materials. We have given the HPC conuol of almost every aspect of this remodel as listed above. • We have been extremely accommodaung of HPC preferences even beyond the standard printed guidelines, specifically with regards to paint color choice. Changes we grudging/y agreed to Our original plan was to redo the front gable and finish the porch in a Tudor style to better blend with the neighborhood. After zneeting with the HPC historic preservation specialist our designer, Bob Roscoe explained that the HPC really does not like aluminum soffits and that the The HPC historic preservation specialist said it would be necessary to replace the soffit material for our plan to be approved by the HPC. We did not want to do this because of cost and huge environmental waste but in the spirit of cooperation , we agreed. Replacement of the soffit material to a smooth panel fits HPC guidelines and is a considerable concession. It's design element in itself which provides authentic period detail. We later surveyed the block and found 8 of 16 of our nearest district neighbors have aluminum soffits. This area is a recent addition to the Historic District and they were most likely grandfathered in. The Hardie sofFit material has a 15 year warranty, after that it will need painting. � Aluminum does not require painting. � 09-916 Cost $I2,246 2. The HPC lustoric preservation specialist requested a dormer on tke Westem face of the roof to break up the large roof plane visible in winter from Le�rington Pazkway. The HPC historic preservation specialist said we would be unlikely to get approval without a dormer. The SII' panel construction of our house makes punchirzg a hole in the roof very difficult after the fact. The fact that it's a super insulated roof makes punching a hole in it wastefial. A fake dormer was our only option. The S1P panel manufacturer's suuctural engineer originally felt the weight of a fauY dormer may be an issue, agreeing to this was a huge risk for us. In addi6on, Dormers collect snow and ice and offer shelter to vermin. Cost $6,620 The soflit replacement and faax dormer addition cost $18,886. This seems to be a waste. The changes will cause future maintenance issues and will not increase tke value of the home. We agreed to these changes in the hope of a compromise. This has not been the case. � Closing Remarks • A home Iike this is an asset to the city. It's a shining example of a very green building. We are a regulaz working famiiy rescuing an othercvise vacant, uninhabitable eyesore. Finally it can be a beautiful home, a well made addition to the neighborhood. We did not make the house what it is today, but aze trying to keep the best parts of it and make it better. We are family wko have lived in Saint Paul for 12 years and want to rnake this house our home. The HPC has given up many design elements present in the origittaI plans, which the original builder didn't follow. However, we do not feel it's fair to eacpect �s to meet those plans. Our design is different, we like it more, and want to avoid the expectarions of the original builders plan. To be fair, we were informed from tlie start that we may have to replace all the siding. My family and Mr. Roscoe hoped we wonldn't need to replace it all, just enough architectura� detail to fit into the neighborhood. We feel, forcing us to remove 33 squares of siding over a 2 inches of lap and I mm te;�ture seems very, very, wasteful. If this was a design element being requested before the siding was put up we would gladly have gone with smooth tea-ture and a 4" lap. r __ L — � r� � � p ` Noted Washington D.C. Architect and preservarionist Carl Elefante said, "The greenest - building is the one already built" This home is Green, energy efficient, weil built. We chose a design we think fits into this great neighborhood. It is stylish, yet doesn't stand out too much. It's made of materiais which are durable and good looking. We have cooperated with the city as much as we can. We hope you wi11 view tlus proj ect from our perspective, as a remodei of an exisring structure and allow us to keep,the siding. We see this a house needing�finishing touches and artistic flair added to match the spirit of the neighborhood. It will be a great place for our family to grow. Please let us live in ouz house. Thank you, 3oel, Marijo, Lila, and Anya 7ensen � . � � � �-- � a � Z Q Q � Q � � , . � , ,- � .- � o g Z�z � z� �� SS5�0� ��V+� Q (`�ZZ�' � T z u` C� ll_l �9__.I� «� � z 3zo O Q in "'�ac`'�. a �z�� z � � � ��QQ� Z�-.i ZI— Y 4� � v z� � ?�� Q z �h z �o� � R d b � R m � R N � � A ' r ' �. t -_ /' � ^ - r - ,-. -- " = � o R --- g � � o 3 ° y 4l ,� � R5 CJ . V y � 3 �'v'-h � -t� a m O � y U G 3 � � V V L V .G O 0. 2 vi � O � N i a y Q� V V V R .r ❑ m � L O � A �L Cp � CD � � � � G R V � � '6 � � R � ^ N 7 3 � �E 'O O �n c O� � O � N �- h � gb 3 �c N t0 G .iy O � N � � R R C � � � � v -- ��a R O � R '�' R � v c c, c m � c v O = F w a 09-916 � _ o °- = m.".3v> n. - a � = = �' o c�'.a ° �_ R y��, L Q' i C= C G� O r. 't� £. � .-. �'��°R� � �a �+ � " o ° c °' c m,.�'. v � 1 C � 7 'U R y '� u '1 pp O s �' N C�3 .� � `. `� i v � i � C L +� m C y V '6 p R Cy GD'> � ol ^ � bf7 � i m � U ti 3 G r "C . �' 1� � i � 'II R � O O <y ' � O C.) � � y p � O= O m y �L v, s� G� n" s. O O , B 7 � � O '�' m U V� e�4 v� 5.1. U U� C a $ .p ma � ; N R OJ � t4 � Q �! ^� c � - � m° �' � R.as � V � � V h m a' � C.�'. `� C � i L G CI � r R G+ �� R b R U , N �Q y L G A � R�L £ R m � � m [ j R .� � � p�j � Cl X G� 60t y._. _.. L C „" � a. � C u{3. N °= 's c `n. m m > > = c ca _ " �- r y c�i =- i O U 0� p c¢ U m .0 V � _O = +� O �9. �V � � � d i4 � CJ R ` ° °-'' y - -. �` ' v � . '. ° x � y � -� � 'R � ti '� eo � C� C � G� v C�� C. f6 S1 G R.� �. N V� �vi �a°o � � ��ypm �'LSF � �Rt �N m N S ��'O C L'C F u'6 A r� V L� � m 7�� 7 aJ .'�. �� pp m m E">�cvs�HR, 5 �,°' �°m`�oc �� C � d � C d R R U v ��Rs��R Y A m S 0 �� v 4 C y �� ..Y. R L� R R ` a� � � � �n y d `` G �L G �.. � � O � O S1 � L ,'�,�, '�O 'O .0 7 [ `. � � D � � r�� R L 3 � x r "' � . a,a 3oG �' �'�O ��' �' �.+ p N A O ai - R �• � o a�v� v_ �• m� � �, �.�.c o o � y.a �o Q� �� 09-916 1:8�1l�I S�, Wl�s i C�aSU96Uo� (DivisionafILeMooxeCaipornrian License#20053fi36) 9673 Wyns[one Diive Woadbury, MN 55125 OfflCE [&5D678-9YU5 FA�: [65fl57B-9Y18 FJWL• - - - dors�COmssst�t S3��ilCa & '��'��I3C�%� ��'�'��r��'� DATE: 5-28-09 PHONE: (� (6(2) 978-8636 CUSTOMER Soel Jensen 1079 PortlandAvcaue EMAIL:joeir;ioejenson.mm St Pazil, MN 55104 SCOPE OF WORK 1) PROFESSIONAI, INSTALLATION OF NEW SIDING ON HOUSE AS OPTIONS BELOW: $ Lompiete removai & disposal of existing siding. Lnspecfioa of bere wall sLwfhmg priar to Tyrek instatlation -Inciudes instaliation ofaew T'YVGK brand Louse wrap wi[h ali seams taped prior -Indudes alt chwuciing, flas6ing, cauikmg, tighko¢Nehfaucet 6locks & venls as needed. NOTE: Special flashmg on lawer rnrne[s ofwiodows m preven[ wahr behiad siding. $pecialkickoutflasLingwereshingleraoftinesmeetsidiug. - -Includes iastallatinn ofnew ]igLts &!or Louse numbers ifpurchased by Lomeowaer. dnclodes new ws[nm bent drip caps above windows & doars as need to prevea[ Water mfiltration. -Includes disposal, daily clean up witL tLorougL Snal clean up' *Includes 5 yeaz labor wurrantee fram Capifal and the manufactures wartantce on fhe siding itself YOUR CONTACTOR GRADE SIDING OPTIONS/CHOICES Qnternet sifel (Prfcei A) 4° SMOOT$ (painted on site) James Hazdi Plank cemeut fiberboard siding $ 33,924. -Inclndes all siding EXCEPT FRONT UPPER GASLE -Inciudes 4" Lorizontal smooth teztnre $azdi siding. -Includes replacement of 1Z" & 4" window & frim boazds -Includes 25 yeaz Sherwin Williams - Great paint (2 colon) -0pen seams witL alnminwn hacking where bntt joiuts meef as per Hazdi guidelines. B) Board & Batten SMOOTH Hardi sheet siding & trim (painted on site) (as in drawing� $ 5,540. G� New James Hardi or Wood Soffif & Fascia and porch ceilipgs (painfed on site) $ 9,476. -Yet to decide on porch ceiling applicatioa styla *Smoofh hardi soffit only up to 16" wida May need you cnt sLeet siding. -Does NOT includes tLe window cost itself. Includes labor onty [a install new windows. -New dormer to be budd on top of existing roof Iiae. (cosmetic doTmer) -Thit estimate does NOT include cut in to ceiling/waQ cavity. -inciudes material, raoftie in, shmgle, sid'mg, saflit & tascia & painF. NOTE: - Dormer es[ima[e is based on access witL crane haist pte-built dormer 4om �ound to roaf iwe � INSTALLATION OF NEW SEAMLESS ALUMINtJM GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS fSame Locafion)� 2.770 5� Buildingpermit from the City_,of Saint Paul. MN. ACTTTAL ADDED OPTIONS FOR SOB TOTAL: � (I_ESS) 5°,�, 9.��I�6 LIST �'�SCQL'tvT Y:P Tt1 St,ft'��-U. �FF: (-± s _ JOB TOTAL (p7us building permit): COMMENTS: -You can depend on us for the level of service & quality installation you expect. -Call or email with quesfions. I believe I covered most everytLing. Jeff Moore - Owner $_ ( �f�,� � 5�► 33� I I . � � ��_ �"�t�'�� . . u r, r. �. � i a� � �' t ;ip � �,+� � �� ..��_ _ __ �"'�C.yar� � � t 1r - .�� k _ r �. � _�:—_f . ..�.�wv.e.�i�..... d.._ .F _ . - . l,. �..,� , G...�._-` . � . . �.. ... �._ : " + �� 1 .� x . . - ,'i . � ..._. �_ � . - , . ��..� . � ..:.. . . . :.:..: _. ._y�{ '�. ,,.. „_ ..._...... `< . � . , .,,, .: ._ _ . .�� . .: . . . . ,. _ .. . �. - ,. � - . . .. _ . . L F _ -- E �µ C� �� h �� . . _ ,1�u.:.4"3e.r�... . .. � �:_ . ... ... �� y2 `�''� ��1s'�t�'s_ltcl`\�4\\.\;,. y � ��. � �'� �. .: � v L`a . -^� �� y �, $°°�„', � ` d '� S:< � � y��` a��.,, a - �., , V` ' y �a��, N. k hT. Y � 9'� ��,_ . ��P � � '� _ 4 ', Y _ � ' r i � „ a�� x.^�� _ . *�'�a��''� ._.,.._. ��ulY^^T'w."�S`�� a „:- : � � � ; �� ;. ;-x�.:;� ",_Y ' ' - �i".� �� i ' •F � �'d . ~ '-.� �}�.• �� i �� - �� : _ ,_�� . _ _ ,�'-�„_. _ � .,...., - ■ _ ' 09-916 Agenda Item V.A. HPC File #09-Q 15 -� CTTY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FILE NAME: 1079 Portland Avenue (MI,S uses 107'� DATE OF APPLICAITON: May 7, 2004 APPLICANT: Joel Jensen OWNER: Joel 3ensen DATE OF HEARING: May 28, 2009 HPC SITEfDISTRICT: Hill Historic District CATEGORY: New Construction CLASSIFICATION: Building Permit STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Amy Spong DATE: May 21, 2009 A. SITE DESCRIPTIONBACKGROUND: This vacant lot was divided from 1675 Portland Avenue on 3anuary 5, 2006. The HPC did not review or comment on this lot split. The property to the east at 1075 Portland Avenue is a brick two- story, Capa Cod style cottage constructed in 1948 and categorized as non-contributing to the Hill Historic District. The property to the west at 1089 Portland Avenue is a two-and-one-half story, brick, classical foursquare residence designed by E.J. Donahue, constructed in 1906 and categorized as pivotai to the Hil1 Historic District. � A singie-family home was designed by Bazbour Ladouceut Design Group and in Apri120Q6, the HPC reviewed and condifionally approved that design during a public hearing. Construction began and the house was not finished nor was it built according to the approved plans. Once HPC staff learned of the non-compliance the building inspector issued a stop-work order. The house then transferred to a new owner who listed it on the mazket. In February of this year, the house went into foreclosure. New owner, Joel Jensen, plans to finish the house and live there. Staff has explained to the owner that the house will not receive a Certificate of Occupancy until the exterior is brought into compliance with the historic district guidelines. The plans originally approved by the HPC and the decision letter are included with this staff report, as well as the first staff report. B. PROPOSED CHANGES: The applicant is proposing the foilowing changes to the exterior of the properry: 1. To install a two-tiered retaining wall of rockface concrete block. 2. 4. 5. � 6. 7. 8. 9. To apply a cementations coating over the exposed foundation. To complete the porch with Tudor elements and detailing. To install a small window on the second floor main elevation. To change the front gable windows, siding, eaves and soffits. The siding wili be smooth panels and 1 x 4 battens Soffits will be changed all around with vented Hazdiplank. To instali a small shed dormer on the west roof plane. To switch the front and back doors. To paint the structure. �� 09-916 Agenda Item V.A. HPC File #09-015 C. GUIDELINE CTTATIONS: The Secretarv ofthe Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation: � 1. A property will be used as it was hlstorically or be given a new use that requires minimal changes to iis distinctive marerials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of disrincrive materials or alteration offeatures, spaces, axd spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physicat record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense ofhistorical development, such as adding conjecturaZfeatures or elements from other historic properNes, wil! not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a properly that have acquired historic signifzcance in their orvn right will be retained and preserved. S. Distinctive maserials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of crafzsmanship that characYerize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorared historic features rvill be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severily of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature wi11 match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missingfeatures will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physica[ treatments, tf appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatmen£s that cause damage to hisTOric materials will not be used. 8. flrcheological resources will be protected and preserved in place. Ifsuch resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior aZterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize a property. The new warkshaU be differentiatedfrom the old and will be compatible with the histaric materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to proteci the integrity of the property and ifs e�rvironment. � 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construcfion will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in thefuture, the essentialform and integrity ofthe historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Hill Historic District Guidelines: New construction General Priaciales The basic principle for new constrzection in the Historic Hil! District is to maintain the districYs scaZe and guality of design. The Historic Hi11 District is architecturalZy diverse within an overall pattern of harmony and continuity. These guidelines for new construction focus on general rather than specific design elements in order to encourage architectural innavatian and quality design rovhiZe mainfaining?he harmony and continuity of the district. New canstruction should be compatible with the size, scale, massing, height, rhythm, setbacly color, material, building element.s, site design, and character of surrounding structures and the area. Massine and Hei�ht New construction should conform to the massing, volume, height and scaZe of existing adjacent structures. Typica[ residential structures in the Historic Hil1 District are 25 to 40 feet high. T7xe height of new construction should be na lower than the average height ofall buildings on both blockfaces; measurements should be made from street Zevel to the highestpoint ofthe roafs. (This guideline does not supersede the City's Zoning Code height limitations.) Rhvthm and Directionat Emnhasis The existence of uniform narrow lots in the Historic Hill naturally sezs up a strong rhythm of buildings to open space. Historically any structure buiZt an more than one Zot used verk'cal facade elements to maintain and vary the overall rhythm of the street rather than interrupting the rhythm with a long � manotonous facade. The directional expression of new consiruction should relate to that of existing adjacent structures. � �•�- 09-916 Agenda Item V.A. HPC File #09-015 . Materials and Details Yariety in the use of architecturat materials and detaits adds to the intimacy and visual delight of the district. But there is also an overall thread of continuity provided by the range of materials commonly used by turn-of-the-century builders and by the way these materials were used. 7Tzis thread of continuity is Zhreatened by the inboduction of new industrial materials arul the aggressive exposure of earlier materials such as concrete block, metal framing, and gZass. Z7xe purpose of this section is to encourage the proper use of appropriate materials arrd details. The materials artd details of new construction should relate to the materials and details of existing nearby buildings. Preferred roof marerials are cedar shingles, slate and tile, asphalt shingles which match the approximate color and tezture of the preferred materials are acceptab[e substitutes. Imitative materials such as asphalt siding, wood-texrured mefal or vinyl siding, arh'f:cial stone, and artificial brick veneer should nat be used. Smooth four-inch lap virryl, metal, or hardbaard siding, when weld instalZed and carefully detaiZed, may be acceptable in some cases. Materials, includirtg their colors, will be reviewed io determine their appropriate use in retation to the overall design of the structure as well as to surrounding structures. Color is a sign fcant design element, and patnt colors should relate to surrounding strucdures and the area as wetl as to the style of the new structure. Building permits are not required for painting and, although the fferitage Preservahon Commission may review and comment on paint color, paint cotor is not subject to Heritage Preservation Commission approval. Buildin� Elements Individual elements of a building should be integrated into its composition for a balanced and complete design. These elements for rzew construction shauld compliment existing adjacent structures as wetl. . Roofs There is a great variety of roaf treatment in the Historic Hill District, but gable and hip roofs are most common. The skyline or profile ofnew construction should relate to the predominant roof shape of existing adjacent buildings. Most houses in the Historic Hitt District have a roof pitch of between 9:12 and 12.• 12 (rise-to-run ratio). Highly visible secondary structure roofs should match the roof pitch of the main structure, and generally should have a rise-to-run ratio of at least 9:12. A roofpitch of at least 8:12 should be used if it is somewhat visible from the street, and a 6:12 pitch may be acceptable in some cases for structures which are not visible from the street. Roofhardware such as skylights, vents, and metal pipe chimneys should not be placed on the front roof plane. Windows and Doors The proportion, size, rhythm and detailing ofwindows and doors in new construction shoutd be compatible with that of existing adjacent buildings. Most windows on the Hi1L have a vertical orientation, with a proportion of bedween 2:1 and 3:1 (height to width) common. Individual windows can sometimes be sguare or horizonfal if the rest of the building conveys the appropriate directional emphasis. Facade openings of the same general size as those in adjacent buildings are encouraged. Wooden dauble-hung windows are traditional in the Historic Hill District and should be the first choice when selecting new windows. Paired casement wrndows, although not historically common, wit! often prove acceptable because of their vertical orientation. Sliding windows, awning windows, and horizontaZly oriented muntins are not common in the distrzct and are generally unacceptable. Vertical murttins and muntfn grids may be acceptable when comgatible with the period and style of the building. Sliding gZass doors should not be used where they would be visible from the street. • Although not usually improving the appearance of a building, the use of inetal windows or doars need not necessarily ruin it. The important thing is that they should look like part af the building and not like raw metal appCiances. Rppropriately colored or bronze-foned aluminum is acceptable. Mitl ftnish (sliver) aluminum should be avoided. � �+ 09A16 Agenda Item V.A. HPC File #09-015 Porchesand Decks • In general, houses in the Historic Hill Disrrict have roofed front porches, whiZe in most modern construction the fronr porch has disappeared. Fron1 porches provide a transitional zone beriveen open and closed space which unites a building and its site, semiprivate spaces which help to define the spazial hierarchy of the district. They are a corzsistent visual element in the district and often introduce rhythmic variation, clarrfy scale or provide vertical facade elements. The porch treatment of new sirucCUres should reZate ta the porch treazment of existing adjacenl structures. If a porch is not built, the transition from private to public space should be articulated with some ofher suifable design element. Open porches are preferable, but screened or glassed-in porches may be acceptable ifweli detailed. Most, but not a11, porches on the Hill are one story high.. Along some streets where a strong contiraeity of parch size ar parch roof line exists, it may be preferable to duplicate these formal elements in new construction. The vertical elements supporting the porch roofare important. They should carry the visual as well as the actual weight of the porch roof. The spacing of new balustrades shouZd re}lect the solid-ta-void relationships ofadjacent railings and porches. Generally, a soZid-to-void proportion behveen 1:2 ancll:3 is common in the Historic Hill. Deckr should be kept to the rear of buildings, should be visually refzner� and should be integrated iruo overadl bui(ding design. A raised deck protruding from a single wall usually appears disjointed from the total design attd is generally unacceptable, Site Setback New buildings should be sited at a disrance not mare than 5% out-of-line from the setback of existing adjacent buildings. Setbacks greater than those of adjacent buildings may be allowed in some cases. Reduced setbacks may be acceptable at corners. Thu happens guite often in the Historic Hill area and can • Zend delightful variation to the street. Landscanine Typically, open space in the Historic Hi11 Diszrict is divided into public, semipublic, semiprivate and private space. The public space of the streef and sidewalk is often distinguished from the semipublic space of 1he front yard by a change in grade, a Zow hedge or a visually open fence. The buildings, landscaping elements in front yards, and boulevard trees together provide a"wall of enclosure"for the street "room ". Genera[ly, landscaping which respects the street as a public room is encouraged. Enclosures which aZlow visual penetration ofsemipublic spaces, such as wrought-iron fences, painted picket fences, low hedges or Zimestone retaining walZs, are characterisYic of most of the Historic Hill area. This approach to landscaping and fences is encouraged in conirast to complete enclosure of semipublic space by an opaque fence, a tall "weathered wood"fence or tall hedge rows, Cyclone fence should not be used in front yards or in the f'ront half ofside yards. I,andscape timber should not be used for retaining walls in front yards, For the intimate space of a shallow setbac7� ground covers and Zow shrubs wi11 provide more visual inierest and require less maintenance than grass. When Zots are left vacant, as green space orparking area, a visual hole in the street "wall" may result. Landscape treatment can eliminate this potential problem by praviding a waZl of enclosure from the street. Baulevard zrees mark a separcrlion between the automobiZe corridor and the rest of the streetscape, and should be maintained. Garaees and Parkiuu� Cf an alley is adjacent to the dwelling, any new garage should be located off the adley. YYhere alleys do not exfst, garages facing the street or driveway curb cuts may be acceptable. Garage doors shouZd not face the sireet. Ifthis is found necessary, sing[e garage doors should be used to avoid the horizontal orientation of hvo-car garage doors. � Parking spaces should not be located in front yards. Residential parking spaces should be Zocated in rear yards. Parking Zotsfor commercial uses should be to the side or rear ofcommercial structures and have a minimum number of curb cuts. Al! parking spaces should be adequately screened from the street and 4 �� 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 . sidewalk by landscaping. 77xe scale ofparking lots should be minimized and the vuual sweep ofpavement should be broken up by use of ptanted areas. The scale, level of light output, and design ofparking lot lighting should be compatible with the character of the district. Public Infrastructure The traditionat panern ofpublic sbeets, curbs, boulevards, and sidewalks in the area should be maintained. Distinctive features afpublic spaces in the area, such as brick alleys, srone slab sidewalks, granite curbs, and the early twentieth century lantern style street lights, should be preserved. The same sryle shauld be used when new street lights are installed. New streetfurniture such as benches, bus shelters, telephone booths, kiosks, sign standards, trash containers, planters and fences should be compatible with the character of the disirict. Brick alleys and stone slab sidewalks generally should be maintained and repaired as necessary with original materials; asphalt and concrete patches should not be used. When concrete tile public sidewalks need to be replaced, new poured concrete sidewalks should be the same width as the exiting sidewalks and should be scored in a 2 foof square or 18 inch square pattern to resemble the old tiles; expansfon joints shoutd match the scoring. Handicap ramps shouZd be installed on the inside of curbs as part of the poured concrete sidewalk,' where there is granite curbing, a section should be lowered for the ramp. Electric, telephone and cabte TV tines should be placed underground or along alleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous. D. FINDINGS; 1. The property does not meet the guidelines £or new construction in the Hill Historic District, given its current and unfinished state. The following is a partial list of'items that did not get built or � finished in accordance with the approved pians (exterior only); • The foundation was to have a rockface concrete veneer installed. • The porch was to have turxaed columns and skirting with stone capped stair walls. • The west elevation was to have a decora6ve "bump-ouY' in the dining room. • The roof was to have two large gabled dormers. • The windows on the front first floor were to be a"Chicago style" with a lazge pane and transom and two side double-hungs. • The second floor window in the center is missing. • The end-gable attic window was to be a Palladian with divided lights. • The porch roof is missing dentil molding. • The main eaves and soffit are missing decorative molding and dentils and the eave was to continue across the front elevation. • The roof was to have flared eaves. • The reaz gazage doors were to be a carriage style with wood veneer. • The siding was to be wood, with a narrow lap and mitered corners and a fiber-cement boazd was installed with wide lap, a false wood-grain texture and boxed corners. • The trim detailing was to be wood and most of it is a fiber-cement, while the soffits and eaves aze vented aluminum. • The front door was to be wood with a full-light view. 2. T'he building's massing and scale does not comply with the guidelines and does not relate to the � surrounding lustoric disirict properties. It is a lazge box shape with two very large and unbroken roof planes. The nei�boring houses also have a Iazge massing but they do not appeaz boxy because of the variety in details like dormers, porches, bays, chimneys, etc. r 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. FIPC File #06-227 3. The applicant is proposing a small shed dormer and changes to the fascia and end-gable which � add detailing to break up the large roaf plane and to manipulate the scale of the facade to fiave more traditional proportions. Staff believes the boxy massing of The property will still have a negative unpact with the surrounding pmperhies and the original proposed bay on the west eIevation was one small way in which its boxy nature was broken up. This elevation is quite visible from Lexington given the positioning of the neighboring house. 4. Not repeating tfie gable design on the reaz elevation is not tradifional and does not speak to the quality of design that is recommended by the general grinciples in the guidelines. 5. The addition of a smali window on the front eIevation, second IIoor complies with the guidelines and'unproves the more traditional relationslup of solid to void. 6. The cementitious coating over the elcposed concrete foundation is not appropriate for new construction. The guidelines state that there is a continuity of materials within an historic district anc3 that it "is threatened by the introduction ofnew industrial materials and the aggressive exposure of earlier materials such as concrete blocl� metal framing, and glass. " Staff believes the proposed foemdation wiIl not have a negative impact as it witl be minimally visible. 7. The guidelines allow for Hazdiplank in certain cases but state "Imitative materials such as asphalt siding, wood-textured metal or virryl siding, art�cial stone, and artificial brick veneer should not be used Smooth four-%nch lap virryl, metal, or hardboard siding, when well installed and care, fully detailec� may be acceptable in some cases. Materials, including their colors, will be reviewed to determine their appropriate use in relation to ihe overall design of the structure as well as to surrounding structures. " The current fiazdiplank siding is a 6" � exposure with a wood-grain text�ue and does not comply with the guidelines. Having dark, earth-tone colors will improve the massing of the building and make it more compatible witfi its historic neighbozs, which aze aII masonry buildings. 8. The windows instailed are a synthetic material and aze a Marvin Tntegrity brand. While they are missing some traditionai detaiIing such as a taller bottom rail and beveled profiles, staff believes they will not haue a negative impact provided other changes aze made to bring the property closer to compliance with the overall guideiines. The owner wants to use tbe same windows where new ones aze proposed. 9. The current soffits do not comply with the guidelines or traditional detaiiing and vented hatdipanel is proposed bnt a detail was not submitted. A flat or beadboard pattem mm�ing parallel to the wa21 would be acceptable. 10. Parking srill compIies with the guideIines as it will not be visible from the street and access to pazking will be from the alley. The double, metal garage doors were not approved but face the altey and are acceptable. 11. The guidelines state, "Electric, telephone and cable TYlines should be placed underground or along alleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous." Tfris should be followed for new construction. 12. A two-tiered retaining rvall is not consistent with traditional patterns and brick and limestone aze a more appropriate material given the properties context. The neighboring properly has a stately brick retaining wall azound three sides and matches the brick on the house. A sample of the proposed block was not submitted. � t� 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 � E. STAFF RECOMIV�NDATION: Based on the fmdings above, staff recommends approval ofthe building pemut application provided the following conditions be met: " 1. The proposed treatment on the front elevafion will be repeated on the reaz elevarion but the window and opening does not need to be changed. 2. The bump-out bay on the west elevation must be completed either as originally approved by the HPC or a revised design that must be reviewed and approved by staff andlor HPC. 3. The retaining wall shall be one wall that lines up with the neighboring wa11 and is of a height similar to the neighboring wall. 4. The siding shaii be replaced on all four sides to be a smooth, 4 inch lap hardiplank. The boxed corners can remain. 5. The porch skirt must have a pattern and more open design (not solid) and the final design shall be reviewed and approved by staff. 6. Ail final material colors and textures be reviewed and approved by stafE The two colors proposed for the house must be a medium to dazk shade and be of earth tones. There sha11 not be a lazge contrast between the two colots. 7. A final detail on the soffit be submitted and reviewed and approved by staff: 8. Any changes or revisions to the approved plans be submitted to HPC and/or staff for review and approval. 9. The HI'C stamped approved construction level plans remain on site for the duration of the project. • • [/�' .�J 09-916 Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission Deparhnent ofSafety and Inspections 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220 SaintPaul, MN 55101-1806 Phone: (651) 266-9078 HERITAGE PRESERVATTON COMMISSION DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION This application must be completed in addition to the appropriate city peimit agplication if the affected properry is an individuaity designated Iandmaz$ or located within an historic dishict. For applications $tat must be reviewed by the Aeritage Preservafion Commission refer to the HI'C Meeting schedule for meeting dates and deadlines. L CATEGORY Please check the cate�ory that best describes the proposed work �Repair/Rehabilitation CI Sign/Awning ❑ New Construction/Addition/ ❑ Moving , ❑ Fence/Retaining Wa11 Aiterarion ❑ Demolition ❑ Other ❑ Pre-Application Review OnIy 2. PROJECT ADDRESS StreeY and number: � O�1 ci �o .�( c v,d � � Q Zip Code: S S �0 3. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of contact person: � ��.. �'V1`?JL Sireet and number: I ZS �j `�i 1�'y �Q 1 „a A � F � Z City: �G i �`!' pc„� State: M h Zip Code: SS I �`� Phone number: 5 i� y� (�`�� e-mail: J«e 1 �.�02 �,� � r� S..a s� � C ��» 4. PROPERTYI Name: Street and number: City: Phone number: ( INFORMATION (If different from applicant) State: e-mail: Zip Code: � � • l J • 09-916 5. PROJECT ARCHITECT (If appIicable) • Contact person: ' .� ..� �� S�eet and number: f�'� � I �� i�i - �,.a- City: _ M; n» � ft�a �� 5 State: N1 ri Zip Code: 55 y I`� Phone nutnber: �( IZ) � ( � � �R`(¢'j e-mail: _ �� ' �y�; sF� U i GN , �G�'✓) 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Completely describe ALL eaterior changes being proposed for the property. Include changes to architectural details such as windows, doors, siding, railings, steps, trim, roof, foundation or porches. Attach specifications for doors, windows, lighting and other features, if applicable, including cotor and material samples. �7�e a `rT,c�� p1 �, _/ � A#ach additional sheets ifnecessary 7. ATTACHMENTS Refer to the Design Review Process sheet for required informafion or attachments. **INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WII,L BE RETLJRNED** ARE T$E NECESSARY ATTACHMENTS AND INFORMATION INCLUDED? �( YES Will any federal maney be used in this project? Are you applying for the Tnvestment Tax Credits? �a cs �.a✓'+' l�c5ce YES NO � YES _ NO �_ ZZ 09-916 I, the undersigned, vnderstand that the Design Review Application is limited to the aforementioned work to the afFected property. I further understand that any additional elcterior work to be done under my ownership must be submitted by application to the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Comxnission. Any unauthorized work will be required to b� removed Signature of applicant: Signature of owner: Date: 5 � ) C� Date: 5 � 6 �ate received S�_� � d� -' FTLE NO: ��- �� '�J District: ��L Jlndividual.Site: " _ . Cnntributing/Non-contnbuhng/PivotaVSupportivel: '� � (' (j�j�y� N Type ofwork Minor/Moderat� ajor _ Requires staff review SupporYin$ data I'ES' ,. .1V0:, Complete�apphcahon: 'I'ES `NO' The follorving condition(s) must be mei in order for application, to conform topreservation program: It=has been.determ�ned that t1[e_ work to'bepetfoivied.pnrsuapt to the ap affect �a� HPC staff a Date :taral confrol of#lie - - - servahon iLstrict orsite - pioval � _ � _ � _ J 3 V Requires Commission revisw �Submitted:' � .- � Sefs ofI'lzns . j �1, Set of Plans reduoed to 8 Jz" by 11-" or 11" by 17" ,[�Photographs �City Pernrit Application _ ,. . �3' Complete-HPG�Design.Review appliaahon'., �:s Heanng Dafe set,for: �j - �� - Q � City Permit # - 23 .� • • �%y >/b � General Construction Notes 1. Site shaN be prepared as required for constructlon, including removal of ebsting garage antl miscellaneous debris 2. Ebsting trees near west pmperty line shall be retained bo the eMent passible; verify trees pmposed to be removed with owners 3. Retain e�dsting front conerate steps � 4. BuiW dry-laid concrete block retaining walls with fough-faced 5. concrete blocks, squaredaced, with 7'+- step back each course 6. Reface conaete 6Wress walls at front steps wilh sWcco, � sand-float fexlure, color seiected by owners 1. 2. 3. 4. � 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. . 70. 11. �2. 73. 14. 15. 76. n. 'I8. 19. 20. �t. �. 23. EYIE rior Elevation General Notes: Existing: Siding: Haidiplank lap type siding with 6' lap e�osure Fascia: 7u6 aluminum ciad; soffits: aluminum panels; window and door casing: 5/4 x 4 hardiplank �mer pilaster boards: 5/4x6 hardiplank frieze board: 5/4x70 hardiplank Windows: Double-Nung type except as noted Entranee and Rear poors: wood, vamished, with glazing panel: note: exchange frord and rear doore with each others' locations Garage Door. overtiead type, aluminum Roof. asphalt shingles Front and Rear Porch facing materials: a�uminum soffits, facing, porch ceili� Porch decking: 2x6 pinelfir Founda6on e�aosed poured concrete Proposed: Note: AII proposed hardiplank and hardipanel material to besmoothfinish �SM�'F'� Front gable facing: hardipa�� with'Ix4 hardiplank battens, 1u8 fieze applied to panel material: remove existing sitling, before insfailing new material Fascia: Front gable: hardiplank 5/4 x 7'/.+-rypical width, wiih flared lower ends; see elevation and details; porches: tx6 hardiplank with crown mold: LWM 51 Sofits: hardipanel wifh ven6ng as required Front and Rear Porch: hardiplank facing materials at beam and columns, hardipanei at ceiling; bedmold: WM74 New window dsing: 5/4x4'/, hardiplankjambs, 5l4x6 heads Windows: exisfing at typical locations; new units at front qable: Marvin doublrhung type, elad, insutating glazing shed dormer. Marvin awning, dad: 4 , wtth structurel mull; center unft frorrt elevation second floor. Marvin awning, ctad: # AWN2828 . Doors: existing: exchange front and rear doors with each others' Ioca6ons Porch decking: t&g fir on epsting joists, wifh soiid bridging as required for strudurel support Porch Skirtboard, front and rear. fronk solid hardipanels with tx4 borders, fixed mounted: sitles: same as above wRh top hinges Foundation: brushed-on camentitious matte finish coafing Caulk ali joints behveen wood and other adjaceM materiais, Other gap or crevice conditions � Painting: apply paiM per owners' color seledions: siding shall be color A, all other trim color shail be color B fnstall code-approved hand2i{ tiWh sides of fronf steps attached ta side of columns antl concrete buttresss walls. _:�� - � �- , = .3-T.YZ.UT'SK]kL'K - - �1 DI.?`r N . ��1��I".l.Q'N �. { 1¢" = ( �-a 7i` : • A � u � )I � 1079 PORTLAND AVINLIE SAINT PALII, MN EXTERIOR REMODII.ING Rnhnrt RnccnP � Design for Preservation i44+EdrtlLVe� 4arkway Minneapolts. Minnesotn 554�4 6n.3+M989 � 2y --�� R I��T-�'f�U-� -^_-'— __ , _ e _" �/ -- --_- -------_. � LA. -- - — - — -- � �-'�T�Y�I �.. 11�" =� ----- - G 1�?��_ _�� .--- � � � � L� � � �-Ll� ' I 0 W �j I l !_- � � �-�r�rr�r w��-;in p e� - � ��` - .. �Yb'�%*GLu.t� iXZ. Gt�vr� nu�t �'�x L=ri� w/ ln�v�� r'��3 ----- �"�-G-��-=bx�s ��-�� tE� t�ranti� � ct� --.�x�-�or �bRBo`N{�thll . - - - ._.� i'GC�_I�.Q-{ LiiVD`I t _'_ ' __.. J-1 �_ — �Tf�' —; nc/�T7*7'�I' �%a �d-��r rc�w- ,_�\ � \ - Y � _� � —� , ,. i ----_I�('-1�1!_-T(a,.2.(A�- .. - �'Y-�r-2s�q- - 1079 PORTLAND AVENUE SAIN'1' PAiII, MN EXTERIOR RIIvIODF.LING RnhPrt Rnc�or Design for Prezervation i4m Eart Rive� Pa�kway Minneapolts, Minnesob 554+4 6ng��-oflg9 _ ir—�—�t l �-1i� 25 Oy-�� t � I �� i; i �. ; � �� _��FS�� G�.��U� , �� =I � �' „, .•,r>. � � � io�9 PORTLAND AVENIIE sAnv�r Pau�, � EX'I'ERIOR RFMODELING B o h e r t R n< Design for Preservation iqm Easi River Patkway Mlnnwpolls,Mlnnesota554y bIY31]yqHyf `J 2 t� � .,:�. ��i- �ii� -- �xu<_�,zm� _:.. - �t�'�,�� ,., � 1079 PORTLAND AVENIIE SAINT PALII., MN EXTIlt10R REMODF.LiNG R n h r r R n c � o n Detign for Preservation � �qotEartRiverParkway � MlnneapolK,hlinMS o ; � l Z� -�i - �i/G, WISDOM DEV.ELOPMENT GROUP �t� � PORTLAND AVENUE, ST. PAUL $�` �_: 1077 PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL MN ��_ SHEET INDEX ai - nnF 9t�r A2 - FOIINDAiION ANO BASQAENT FLOOR PLAN A3 - FlRST ROOR PLAN A4 - 7ND FLO�R PLAN AS - EXIERIOR ELEYAtIONS A6 • IXTQ210R QEYA71�J5 A7 - BUILDING SEC11�N5 AND �EfNLS PROJECT DIRECTORY MISVOY OE\EtOPMENT GRWP CoNTACC NlllitEE 2286 7L5}]V COURT EASi NMlEWp00. IQI 5q1191EL• 612 490 41'!9 ARf'MI]Q'L/I1VI1V�oF 1R(V 1[rt BARBWR �AOWCFUR /iRGHI1EC15. P�l CONTACF. JOHN B.V�WR 129 SECONp SR2E[{ NORiH YMNEMIXlS, AIN 554p7 lEL (612) 339-SD33 fAX (612) 339-0{99 � • GENERAL NOTES 1. 7FiE CONIRACT DOCUfAENTS C0.N95T OF iF1E OYMER/CON1RACi0R AGREAIENT, T}1E C�JDI➢ONS OF 7HE CIXi7RACT. 7HE DRAriiNG$ THE �EpFlCA710N5, ALL AD�ET�OR ISSUm PRIOR TO AND ALL 7HE MOOIFlCATIONS ISNm AFiER FJEW110N OF AGREEAIENT. iHESE FORY iHE CONIRACT AND ALL ARE AS Fl1LLY PART OF iHE CQYTRACT AS tF AiTAGim TO 7HE A(FEEIAENT. 2 DO NOT SCAIE DRAWiNGS. 3. ALL CONSIRUC710N WORK 9iALL CONFORY TO ALL APPLICABLE C006 iNmt�anaan� aui�nixc cooc-zooz OD MINNESOTA BUILDING CODE-1998 4. V6iliY AND CDORDINATE ALL CON�I710N5 AND DINENS7DN5 PRIOR TO WDRK AND IMMmIAIELY REPORT UN OR REVIEW ALL WES110NS DISCREPENSIES AN� CON�1110N5 N11H iHE OWNQt/ARCHIiECT PRIOR TD PROCEmING XiTH WORK 5. ALL CONS7RUC110N AND OR MAIEPoALS AS INDICAIFD SHALL BE AT OR ABOVE INDI151RY STAN�AR�S FOft SIMILAR RE9�ENPAL CONSiFtUCPON. 6. ALL SURYEY �ATA �� DATA, NECHAMCAL, ElEC7RICAL AND ENqNEERING OF SYS7EMS �1ZE5 AND LAtt%1T5 SHALL BE BY 1HE RESPECTI4E SUBCON7RACTOR AND OR SIIPPLIQ2 OF THOSE SYSTEMS OR BY 07HER NECFSARY CONSULTANIS AND SHALL BE COORDINA7ID BY THE GENFRAL CON7RACTOR INf"ORMA710N 571014N M1V RGARD TO 7HESE COYCERNS IS ONLY DIAGRqMA7tC AND IS INiENDED TO PROVI�E AND INOICATION OF 7HE DESIGN INTENT ONLY. USE OF CINISIILTANT DATA BY BLOG DOES NOTINFER OR ENDORSE 1HE ACCURACY OF 1HE DATA EACN CANSl1LTANT hN0 CANIRACTOR SHALL BE RESPON9BLE FOR CIXUEEC7NES$ AND ACCURACY OF �ATA SUPPLIE� 9Y 1HE RESPECIIVE CON�LTANT OR CONTRACTIXL 7. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL CDORDUTAIE AND 97E iME BUILDING ON 7HE ONNERS LEGAL 91RVE7 AN� NOIIFY ONNFR/ARCHIIECT/EIVpNEE,F OF rWY DISCOVQtm DISp2EPEN9ES PRIOR TO ANY SITEYIORK. 6. 1FiE CDNiRACiOR SHALL BE RES�ONSIBLE FOR ALL RE�UIREO EROSION CONit2AL MEASURES 9. 7HE CONiRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE SIlE M FlRST CV55 CONOITION DIIRING 1HE PRO.fcCL ALL WASTE AND DEBRIS PROMPiLY BE RQAOYID. CONSIDQtATION 91ALL BE qYEN 70 MAIERiAL STORACE ON 7HE 9TE AND ITS lMPACT ON AOJOINING N�GHBORS 10. tHE CONTRACTOft SHALL ftPONOE fN5TR11CilONS TO ME OWNQt PEFtTAfNING TO OPERA710N AA/D HAIN7ENANCE OF MECNANICAL AN� EiEC1RICAL E�UIPMENT. SUBMIT TO 1HE OKNQt ALL WARRAN716 AND NAIN7ENANCE OPERA710N5 OATA 11. iHE CONTRkCTIXt SHALL PRONDE FlNAL CLEANING OF ALL INIERIOR AND EXiERIOR AND RE1d0YE ALL LABELS N�T INTENDm TO BE PERMANENT INSiRUC110N INFORNA710N. Q 12 ALL N9N�OW DE9GNAT11R5 ARE FOR�NDOWS N7N�OW5 ARE TO BE N"�� FRAMED, 1' ARGON FlLLED, LOW-E T1�1AL GLAZING 1RIN TO eE QISTOlA FlELD APPLIm. 7WM, MATERIAL AND 9ZFS AS M�ICAIED ON PLAN. SUPPIJ� TO 9JBIAIT WINDOW SCf1mULE TO GENERAL CAN7RACTOR FOR RENEW AND APPROYAL PRIOR TO PL0.CING WiNDOW ORDER.INNDOW SUPPl1FR TO CONFlRM 1EMP6ff0 GLA55 EM LOCAt10N5, EGRESS AND VENT YAN�OW REOIIIREMENIS. 13. REFER TO APPROYFD CABINEf 410P ORAYANGS PRIOR TO ROUGH FRAAIING FOR CAB7NEf5/BINLT-INS REPORT ANY MSCREPfN51E5 TO OWNEk/ARCHIIECT PRfOR TO PROCEEDING YATH WORK 14. �IMEN40N5 LOCATING IXIFRIOR WALLS AfEE TO THE IXiER1�R FACE OF SNO AND/OR FACE OF FOUN�APON WAl1 U.N.O. 15. DIMENSIONS LOCATING IN7ERIOR WALLS ARE GENERPll.7 TD CENiERLINE OF WALL AS$ldBLY OR TO FlNISH FACE OF GIPSUM BOARD AS INDICAiEO IN PLANS-U.N.O. 16. DIMEN90NS LOCAl1NG DOORS ANU WiNDOWS ARE TO CENTERLINE OF OPENING U.N.O. 17. ROOF TRU55 DESIGN TO BE PROYlOED BY ROOF 7RUS5 SUPPLIQL 79. ALL INiER10R BEARWG WALLS POCICEf DOOR WALLS ANO PWM&NC WALLS SHALL sE cmvsmuctm r�rr+ zxe snms o ta• o.c - u.N.a 20. IF OISCREPQJCIES OCCIIR BEiWFEN DRAYANGS, 1HE LARGFR SCALE DRAN7NG SHALL GOYERN. 21_ PROY�DE 7DdPORMY U1II2AL SUPPORT FaR ALL WALLS I1MiL WhLLS ARE ADEWETLY BRACED 8Y FLOOR OR RODF SRUC7URE 22 COOROINAIE ALL OPENINCS W/ARCHITECNRPI. SiRUCIURAI, MECHANICAL AND EIECiRICAL 21 PRONDE 4EEVE5 1HRWGH CONCREIE $LpgS AND f0I1NDAlION WALLS FIXi ALL PLUMBING SPREAD R�NFORqNG AS REpUIREll TO PRONDE MININIIM CONp2ElE COVQi FOR REiNFORqNG 24. FOOIING (ASSUME SOIL BEARING �E9GN VAWE Of 2,500 PSF ON ViRpN $OR OR COMPACIED FlLL A WALL FOO11NG5 ARE CAST-M-PIACE fAN(kZEIE W/CON➢NUdJS R�NFORCING PLACED 3' qEAR OF 80TTOA1 AND SIDES & PR041DE 24 DIA LAP AT SPLICR AAID NLL CR04ING LAP AT CORNQt M7ERSEC110NS G WALL AND COLUMN FOOlINGS ARE CENTERm UNDQ2 WALLS AND COLUMNS U.N.Q D. FOO7ING ELEVAl10N5 910NN ON PLANS ARE TO TOP OF FOOIINC. E FODTINCS FDR WALLS SHALL BE 12' 7}UCK W/A AIIMAIUAI PRO,lEC11RY OF 4 EACH SIDE W/ 2-/5'S CON11NW5 U.N.O. 25. ALL YAB$ ON GRAOE TO BE 4' 1HICK Ni1H WV1F 6X6-W1.4 X WI.4 CQJIERED VERIICALLY IN 9J9 U.N.Q 26. DIMENSICMAL WMBER A SPAqNG OF BRIDGING FOR JOISTS SHALL NOT IXCFE� 8'-0� 8. WOC9 LJNiELS AND HEA�ERS SHALL NAVE A NLL 3' LENGTH OF BEARING AT EAqi END. G DWBIE ALL JOISTS UNDQt PARALI.EL PARii110NS D. ALL BEAldS ANU JOIS75 NOT BEAWNG DN SUPPORIING kE7dBERS SHA11 BE FRAA1m 'M7H'SIMPSON SiRqYG 11E' J015T HAN(�325 E J�ISiS SHALL BEAR 7HE FULL'MD1H OF SUPPpR71NG NEAIBERS (SND WALL 9EAM5, ETC.) UNO. f. WOOD BFAMS MADE OF 2 OR YORE 1XS SHALL BE 111RU-BOLiED TOGE7HER W/ �° ROUND Y.8 O 24' O.G OR EOfNVE1.ANT SPIKES G SILL PlATFS TO BE BIX.IED 70 FOUN�ATON WALL W/ 12' �IAMEiER BDLiS � 48' O.G MAX AND TO EXIEND 15' MIN, INTO CONCRE�E FOUN�At70N WALL EACN 9LL PLAIE TO HA�E A MINIMUM OF y BOL15 W�ONE BOLT LOCAIF� W/IN tt� OF EAqi PIE(�'. H. NAIIING 70 BE IN ACCOROANCE W/SCHEOULE 23-i-p OF iliE If.B.C. ABBREVlATIONS �sv �amc A3 .1�VE FlA�IID n.roN iILT ALIEPoIAiE M �LCE55 P/Hf1 eo er orwn c� utt x ana a � ux[ CO CA$D OPWNG cr miuoc iaz co ¢n� oxnx oETAR oET!L ox oora ae ttne os r,umua mvosnL ow asrxns¢rs E� EWLL fE NmBD E1m N FlLUIm10RpR FP FltNSf PRNF FlI.II! NN6IIME � �mvu eonpn �RT,Y1L �ff'fK Xtll XOl@.IAI P'i �TP'(At R M1E on aumtt xa REtlECrtn 6�lxt PLw RYl RW WAIEALFADER s vx sr smr� mc � � ro mn oi tos roP oF s/s ltP iYRCdt I 1PA9m.'G Y�pANE w/ wm Y.c xAiER nnSLi NO YAS wow wxoow MATERIALS KEY � � � �. �' ; [ONdkIE �TT'� u� � � i- - � �� . WCCd 9.P]a1G nxxoW �t-` -'�t 8/.R W9MnpN _..�:. :t.:x �� NtlO. 31Y-Po� pR £Of1RD N.V6AAW c E1�AN9IX1 W1tT61! _ SFAI.Wt WM BAtl�R R00 ___ ___-» 41P9b BO.IW. GGIXff OR RISIFR �� PRroERIr 1➢E r-v.mcr,am �a�a - P� � T-a' IXIFNi aF ao� �-rn ' QR111' ff uw¢ - � .� � �o . ,�,i, L NGtlNA10.M pl 91E PLW 6 PR�IDF➢ itlt OE9p1 MiENf ONLT. 2 91E BW�IDN&5 t W�Ii9W5Ilff ,WPROAYAff YA f➢R 1EFEIAI� ttRY. 4I SLR\£Y AS Pf6PARfD BY AW1fYtlt ll51ID N PR0.ECf CWELiPPY 3 PROIFCT E]�SING iRr"EC �fl£fAVfN. VNUSGOPIG ! I£ 91E 449JIFlEA'15 WY ff OAYAffD fRfll NNSIRUCnar� unNiffi i BWIIDMI6 91Mt! PoR PAVOIC ARE MPROX.1YAlE t 9MRII � A0.!!SR➢ A$ A�IiE iM WffPoMS t ILg i 9ff IIdING 911�LL @1FR.LLI.r &tlllOE iIXNlt6 um a wx,u� um xwg �vav au,wnn t tnunoxt ��\ ARCHITECiURAL SITE PLAN A1 1/16' = 1'-0' W I S D O M �� q DEVELOPMENT G R 0 U P nea ra.� eo�e E.a! M.pe+roed �+ ssne ett wa ava ....xam..wwn.��m rxa.Eer xa osme PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL mbrz�woµeaEm.rutw TITLE � SHEET A1 �� - 4�-�'r� � � J �- W I S D O M /"� � DEVELOPMENT G R 0 U P uee ra..� can �� M.pa�ood MN 65tW etz wo anG wcWbGrtlopMnt.com PxOAER N0. osona PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL mrrm,vm.re.cavnulri BUILDING ELEVATIONS � tASI tLtVAIIUN 2 SOUTN FRONT ELEVAl10N A� A4 1/4� = i-0' A4 1/4'= 1'-0' // f�o d �i-�i� � � ' BUILDING � ELEVATIONS � WEST ELEVATION �1 NORT}i ELEVATION A� ns i/a' = r-a' as i/a r-o �f �/9-�i� WISDOM DEVELOPMENT • PORTLAND AVENUE, ST. PAUL 1077 PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT SHEET INDEX A7 - P7LE 31EEf AZ - FWNDAiION AND BAS�dENT FLOOR PLAN A3 ' FlRS� FIDOR PLAN A4 - 1ND FLOOR PLNI AS ' IXiERIOft ElEVAl10NS A6 - IXiER10R E1EVA710N5 A7 - BUILDING SEC110N5 AND �EfAILS PROJECT DIRECTORY MISOOY OEVELOPMQIT fRWP CONTKT: NM7 LFE 2286 iLSFN Cq1RT FASi MMlEW00p. IIN 551191EL 612 I90 41]9 ♦x�wrn�r{Q �xncr�cr �an� trrt BARBWR LAOWCEUR AROiIiECi$ P.A CIXITACT: JOHN B�WR 129 SEWND 57RFFT NORT1 NINNEAPCUS NN 55W7 iEL' (612) 359-5033 FAX (612) 739-0499 �� GENERAL NOTES t. 7FiE CONIRACT DDCUNENIS CON9Sf OF iFiE OYMERICON1RACi0R AGREAIENT, 7HE CONOI710N5 OF 1HE CON7RACL ThiE DRAINNGS, iHE SPEpFlCAPONS ALL ADDfN�A ISSIIm PRIOR TO ANO ALL THE NWIFlC0.TION5 IAUED AFfER EXEIXIPON OF AGRE�AENT. THEff FORY 7HE CONIRACT AND A11 ARE 0.5 FULLY PART OF 7HE CON7RACT ASIF ATTAq1m TO iHE AGREQAENT. 2 DO NOT SCPLE DRAYANGS 1 ALL CONSiRUC7i0N WORI( SHALL CONFORY TO ALL APPLJCABLE COOES INIII2NA110NAL HUIIDING CDDE-2D02 AIINNESOTA BUILDING CODE-1998 4. YERIFY AN� CAOROINA7E ALL CONW110N5 ANU �IMEN510N5 PRIOR TO WDRK AND IMkmIA1E1T RfPORT AND IX2 RENEW ALL WES7IINJ$ DISCREPEN51E5 AN� CONDITIONS N11H 1HE ONNER/ARCHIIECT PRIOR TO PROCEEDING MiH WORK. 5. ALL CONS7RUCTION AND OR MAiEf�ALS AS INDICAIED SHALL 8E AT OR ABOYE INDUSiRY STANDARDS FOR SIMILAR RE9DENTIAL CONSiRUC110N. 6. ALL SURVEY DATA, SOIL DATA MECHANICAL, ELECiRiCAL ANO ENGINEERING OF SYSTEMS, 51ZE5 AND LAYdJTS 91ALL BE BY THE R6PECTIVE SIIBCONTRACTOR AND OR 9JPPI1Q2 OF THOSE SYSiEA1S OR BY OTHER NECESSARY CONSULTANTS ANO SHALL BE COORDINATF➢ BY 1HE GENQiAL CONTRACTOR INFORIAp110N SHOqN IN REGARD TO 7HESE WNCERNS IS INJLY DIAGRAMAIIC ANO IS IN7ENOm TO PRON�E AN� INOICATION OF 1HE DE9GN M1ENT WILY. Uff OF CqJ5l1LTANT DATA BY BLDG DOES N0T INfER OR ENDORSE iHE ACCt1RACY OF 1HE DATA EACH CANSULTANT ANO CONIRACTOR $HALL BE RESPON98LE FOR CORRECiNESS AND ACWRACY OF OATA SUPPIJED BY 7HE RESPECIIVE CONSULTANT OR CONIRACTOR 7. GENERAL CONIRACTOR SHALL COORDINAIE AND SIIE 7HE BURDING ON 1HE ONNFRS LEGAL SIIRVEY AND NOPFY OWNQt/ARCHIIECT/ENpNEER OF ANY DISCOVERm OISCREPENSIES PPoOR TO ANY SIIEW(NiK. 6. 1HE CONiRACTOR FiALL BE R6PON9BLE FOR ALL REWIRm Qt09qY CONiRAL NEASURES 9. 7HE CON7RACTOR SHALL 11AINTAIN 7HE SIIE IN FlRST CLA55 CON�1710N DURING 7HE PROJECL ALL WAS7E AND OEBRIS PROAIPRY BE RQADVE➢. CONSIDQ2APON SHALL BE GIVEN TD MAIERIAL STORAGE ON iNE 97E AND I1S IMPACT ON A�JOINING N�GHBORS 10. 7HE CONiRACTOR SHALL RPONDE INS7RliC110NS TO iHE OWNER PERTAINING TO OPERAiION AA1� MAINIENANCE 0. MECHANICAL ANO EIECTRICAL EQUIPMEIVT. SUBMIT TO 7NE ONNQ2 ALL WARRANP6 AND NAIN7ENANCE OPERAti0N5 �ATA ii. THE CAN7RACTOR SHALL PRONDE FlNAL CLEANING �F ALL IN7ERIOR AND EXiERIOR ANU REAIOVE ALL LABELS N0T IN'(ENDm TO BE PERMANENT MSTRUC110N MFORMAPON. Q 12 ALL WINDOW OE9GNATORS ARE FOR�NDOWS 4NN�OWS ARE TO BE W000 tRAMED, 1' ARGON FlLLED, LOW-E 7H��CRIAAL GLAZING. 1RIM TO 9E CUSTOAI FlE1D APPLJm. 7RIA1, MAiERIAL AND 51ffS f5 INDICAIED ON PLAN. SUPPLIER TO SUBMIT WiNDOW Sq1EDULf TO GET'QtAL CONiRACTOR FOR RENEW AND APPROYAL PRIOR TO PLACING N7NDOW ORDQt.1NN00W 5l1PPLIER TO CONFlRM iEMPERED QASS LOCATIONS, EGRE55 AND YFNT 'MNDOW REOUIREMQJ75. 73, RffQi TO pPPROVED CABINEf 910P ORAYANGS PPoOR TO ROUGH FRA1fING FOR CABINETS/BUILT-INS REPORT ANY DISCREPENSIES TO OWNER/ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PROCEEDING HiiH WORK 14, DIMEN90N5 LOCAiING IXiERIOR WALLS ARE TD iHE EXIII210R FACE OF SNO AND/OR FACE OF FOUNOA�ON WALL U.N.O. 15. DIMEN90N5 LOCA➢NG INIERIIX2 WALLS ARE GENERAILY TO CQV7ER4NE OF WFLL ASSEMBLY OR TO FlNIS4 FACE OF 61PSUA1 BOAR� f5 INDICAIED IN PI.ANS-U.N.O. 16. �IMEN90N5 LOCAPNG DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE TO CENTER(1NE OF OPENING U.N.O. 77. ROOF iRUSS DESIGN TO BE PROVI�EO BY ROOF TFiU55 9JPPLIFR 19. ALL MiER1IX2 BEARING WFLLS. POCI(ET UOOR WALLS AND PWMBING WALIS SHALL BE CON57RUC1EU W17H 2X6 SNDS Q 16' O.C. - LLN.O. 20. IF OISCRFPENCI6 OCCUR BEi1VID! DRAiNNG$ 7HE LARGER SCALE ORAKINC _ SHALL GO N. _._. . GROUP PAUL MN 21_ PRONDE 1QdPORART LAiERAL 5l1PPQ'tT FOR ALL WALLS UN1IL WALLS pRE ADEWEILY &2ACED BY fLWR OR ROOF S7RUC7URE. 22 COORDINAiE ALL OPQiINGS W/ARCHRECNRAI, STRUCNRAL, MEqiAMCAL ANU ElECTRICAI 21 PRONDE 3FEVES 7HRWGH CANCfiEIE 4pB5 AND f011NDATiON WALLS FIXi ALL PLUNBING �REAU RE7t60RCMG AS REpUIRED TO PRONDE MINIMUM CONCREIE COVER FOR RE7NFORqNG 2F. FOOi1NG (ASSUAIE SOIL BEAWNG DESIGN VA1UE OF 7,SD0 Pg ON hRGIN S�IL OR COMPACTED FlLL A WALL FOO11NG5 ARE CAST-IN-PLACE CCNCREIE W/CON7INUWS RONFIX2qNG PUCED 3' CIEAR OF BOTTOM AND 9D6 B. PROYIOE 24 DIA LAP AT SPIJCES AMD FULL CR�S9NG LAP AT CORNER INTERSECilONS G WALL AND CqLMN FOO11NG5 ARE CEN7FRm UNDER WALLS AND COLUTANS U.N.O. D. F007ING ELEVA110N5 SHOYM ON PUNS ARE TO TOP OF FOOPNG E FOOTINGS fOR WALLS SHpLL BE 72' 7HICK W/A MINIMUM PROJEC7IQY OF 4' EACH SIDE W/ 2-(5'S CONiINWS U.N.O. 25. ALL SlABS ON GRADE TO BE 4' THICK 'M1H WdF 6X6-WI.4 X WI.4 CEN7ERED VERiICA1LY IN SLAB 17.N.Q 26. OIMENSIONAL WAIBE7[ 0. SPAqNG OF BRIOGING FOR ,I�575 SHALL NOT IXCEED B�-0' B. WOOD LINIELS AND HFPDERS SHALL HAVE A NLL 3' LQJGIH OF BEARING AT EACH END. G DWBLE ALL JOISiS I1N�Qt PARALIEL PPRP710NS �. ALL BEAMS AND JOIS75 NOT BEARING ON SUPPORIING MQ/8ER5 SHALL BE FRAMED YA1H 'SIMPSON 51RONG 11E' JDIST HANGQ25 E JOISTS SHALL BEAR 1HE FULL PoD1H OF SUPPOR7ING NQABERS (SND WALL BEAN$ ETC.) UN0. F. WOOD BEAMS MADE OF 2 OR AIORE 2X5 SHALL BE 7FiRU-BOL7ED TOGEiHER W/ i' ROUND 61.B. 0 24' O.G OR EQUIVELANT SPIKES G SILL PUTES TO BE BOL1E� TO fIX1NDAPON WALL W/ 1Y �IAMEIQ2 BOLTS � 48' O.0 MAX AND TO IXiFNO 15' AIIN, INTO CONCRETE FWNOA710N WALL EACH SILL PLAIE TO HAYE A MINIMUM OF 2 BOL7S W/ONE BOLT LOCA7FA W/IN 72' OF EACH PIECE H. NAIUNG TO BE IN ACCOR�ANCE W/SCHE�ULE 23-1-Q OF THE I1.B.G ABBREVIATIONS MATERIALS KEY aev �aa�c 1fF I9oYE FlwslEn F1DOR -'.-.'-+-.�=_� E.1nlH LLT .LLIIXHAiE " " IP lLSESS PlYEL eo er owEx , �� CP GSI N M� _ _"_" . _ . a ¢xnx urff J' N L.t4D�PE18N6 � YASttUtY cr ¢a.uoc tec m ao� mrm ocrpn ocoa -'� sra� ox oaxa ox 000a � � o�o� ✓1�TC: OW �L41W.140t SfIl EO EW�1L rt �naaflu um ru Fx�um uecem 7�; ; ww aooaxc N FAEOSI PROOF NfA' NRILNIE mo cmvu eoum - �" n.nwm �� K - Mbi N60iLL p�� . � "yzr�� BAR�9IV,TM att aAVim aa �enn �xs a,a �� w�. mn-iam ax roeinn xaunw RK RUN WAtEA IFA�ER s swc sr smr¢ mE iW iEl@]6➢ �? C�/I5W WIETd11 m mv ar _- ns tor cF s�s lYP TflGL . SFALAVi YIIN &1q�R R00 N WI91WC YA�RlE '--�- w/ wix '___ --, cresw ea�4 rnart ce r✓srtrs Y.0 NAIIX 4➢4T - _ . . MO Y�SO --'--. Y.OY' WNW'd pS11NC W�SIPoILII�I � _�� i� � �. � `�I ,.,u {'-C 9Dfl'AAU gre�a �+�.'= xnic W 1 S D O M �� DEVELOPMENT G R 0 U P zzee n.an co�n �t M.ple.00d MN 6s118 812 /i0 tRi rrr.WieWrelopmentwm ewa�m xa oswa PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL mwimua�ve�ert.r�u.w L NitlNAMM p191E PLW 5 PROYIDm Ftlt OE9tll xm�r arx 2 91E BWXU,V�S k OC2N9R1S IJff IP%tOAYAff MD f➢it IEiFAEN� ttAY, gE AIR�fY AS NEPMED BY 9.RYEM ISIED N PR6ET OWFCfORY S%.GIfCT Ell�iiWG 1REF$ VEI{fAlIIX1 LVIDSfARVG k 91E I&ROVE10112 W1d WY ff OAYA� FROY ans�ttna Awnt¢i l&1tAARE3 910Mt1 FOR PAWl6 /�S A PRpYWAIE k smun ec .�n�mm u,� pxrexui[ �nx unmaus 21L4 5 91E IIG41N6 9LLLL l£]ipU11Y W6LOE %XNIffS um. a e�x�¢ um xoug �x aumn a �uctmxt � ARCHITECNRAL SIiE PLAN A1 7/IG = 1 0 TITLE - SHEET A1 �� y-�� _• • � Easr DEVELOPMENT G R O U P 2288 Tdesn Cart Eut MapkMaod � 331�8 B12 �80 4TlY �w.YlspsrYapnmteam flroECf rM. asoaa PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL BUILDiNG ELEVATIONS A4 7/4' = 1'-0' A4 1/4 1�_� . � // 7� Q�-�ii� � � • � BUILDING ELEVATIONS � WEST ELEVAl10N z NORTH ELEVAl10N A5 AS i/4' = 1'-0� AS 1/4'= 1"-0' �r 09-916 SUNIMARY MINUTES OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMNIISSION • CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA L,ower I,evel — Room 40, City HaIUCourt House, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard May 28, 2009 Present: Sherry Enzler, Pat Igo, Cazole Kralicek, Paul Larson, John Manning, Mark T'homas, Diane Trout- Oertel Absent: Cazol Cazey (excused), April Haas (excused), Dick Paricy (excused) Staff Present: Amy Spong, Christine Boulwaze CALL TO ORDER: 5:05 PM by John Manning (Chair) I. Approval of the Agenda — Approved as presented. Trout-Oertel, Igo (8-0) II. Conflict of Interest — None stated III. Chair's Announcements A. New Commissioners Sherry Enzler and David Riehle were introduced. B. Chair Manning thaniced everyone involved with the Awards prognm. IV. Staff Announcements A. Staff announced the approximate Central Corridor timeline for presentation and public hearing in August. B. The faqade improvement program was announced. There is $900,000 available. The HPC will rank • need and importance and report to the City Council. C. Historic Saint Paul held a brown bag discussion on conservation districts. Spong participated in the panel discussion. A resotution was put on the City Council agenda. Staff did not have time to comment. There are some language issues as well as timeline and staffing issues. Donna Drummond will ask for a three week layover. D. HPC staff will relocate to PED after the middle of June. V. Public Hearings A. 1079 Portland Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Joel Jensen, for a building permit to renovate the exterior or the residence. File #09-015. Staff read the report recommending conditional approval and gave background about the project including the lot split, HPC review, compliance issues, red tag, sale and foreclosure. Staffthen outlined the revised plans. Commissioner Larson had questions about the windows and siding and commented that staff had made an effort to reach a compromise in the findings. Staff explained this would be a new style and what was constructed was a panelized home. Some details that were not constructed would not be able to due to the Iimitations of construction type. Addressing the massive roof planes and the lack of proposed mouldings were an issue along with missing or inappropriate window styles, (ack of stylistic respect for neighboring properties and a change in the details and style that would allow some of the details to remain. Commissioner Trout-Oertel recognized the concessions that were made by staff with this difficult situation. Joel and Mary Jo Jensen, the new owners, were present to discuss the proposal and answer questions. The Jensen's talked about the exposure and texhare of the lap siding and wanting it to remain due to cost and to be "green." There was also discussion about building code and the bump out that was originally proposed on the west elevation. Commissioner Meyer asked for • ciarification from the owners regarding the staff recommendations. The Jensen's had issues with recommendations # 2 and #4, but were okay with # 1 and #6. The replied that concerning #3, they would not construct a retaining wall, regazding #5, the verticai porch skirting would be okay and as for #7, the soffit design would be a smooth, vented Hardie board. A�t7 09-916 Mr. Jensen stated he did not want to alter the reaz gable to look like the proposed front gable. Commissioner Manning stated the design that was built lacked mouldings and details that were originally proposed. Steve Rupps, 1076 Portland Avenue, stated he was thankful that someone bought . the house and feels strongly that the siding should have a 4" lap to fit in better. As for the bump out, he didn't not feel that it would make a difference. Commissioner Meyer motioned to approve the application with modifications to staff recommendation #2 that the appticant shoald come back with an alternate design to break up the massing and scale of both side elevations. Commissioner Kralicek seconded the mofion. Commissioner Larson idenrified the lack of dimension on the side elevations and suggested adding "shelf roofs" over the suggested window bay. Commissioner Igo asked if this were considered a remodel or new construcrion. Staff informed this is a compliance issue and is considered new construction. The motion passed 5-2 (Itiehle abstained). B. 340 Summit Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Chris Arlandson, Principal Engineering, for a building permit to construct a new three-stall garage with storage above. File #09-016. Staff read the report recommending conditional approval. Commissioner Trout-Oertel had quesrions about the circulaz drive plan. Commissioner Enzler inquired about the percentage of impervious surface. Diane Anderson, owner, and Dean Johnson, designer, were present to discuss the pmposal. Ms. Anderson stated they were only adding concrete to the existing turn-azound. Commisioner Larson comment the design was sensitive to ihe house, but he did have issues with the projections at the narrow ends. Commissioner Meyer stated the proportional massing of the porch component was difficult to understand the relationship to the house without an isometric drawing. Johnson and Anderson replied that the garage was designed to mimic elements of the house and have functionality. Susan Short from the Coltege of Visnai Arts, 344 Summit Avenue, thanked the Andersons and Johnson for the design changes and stated that the colleges concems about engineering and water runoff were addressed in the engineers report. She added appreciarion for the staff recommendation that the west elevarion have the • same materials as the rest of the building. Ed Conley, 329 Summit, stated he appreciates the Anderson's pIans and process of conslructing a garage and added that the design will be an asset Sazah Conley, 329 Summit, added that it is important to hide vehicles. Commissioner Larson motioned to approve the application with staff recommendations and an additional condition that the northern bay be brought in two feet on both sides and keep the same degree of projection. Commissioner Meyer seconded the motion. Lazson added this is a wonderful proposal and a great house. Trout-Oertel offered a friendly amendment that the added condition be a suggestion. The friendly amendment was not accepted. Igo reminded that suggestions do not work. The motion passed 7-1(Trout-Oertel). VI. Committee Reports A. Station Area Art: No reports from Commissioners Meyer or Thomas B. 3M Committee: Commissioners Cazey and Lazson gave an update and summarized the process thus far. VII. Adjourn — 6:55 Submitted by: Chrisrine Boulwaze C� `a 29 09-9��e 1 of 1 Amy Spong -1079 Portland Ave Hearing _ - �-� — _� .�. , �� • From: "Rucks Steve" <Steve.Rucks@bobstgroup.com> To: "Amy Spong" <Amy.Spong@ci.stpaul.xnn.us> Date: 5/28/2009 9:10 AM Subject: 1079 Portland Ave Hearing Hi Amy, I am the homeowner (with my wife Sheliy) of 1076 Portland Ave who spoke with you last week. Thank you for sending me your report. 1 plan to attend the hearing today. Just so you know our position. My wife and 1 have three priorities for compeletion of the 1079 Portland property. 1) Change the siding - after staring at this house for almost two years what really makes it stand out (in a negative way) is the modem siding. 2) Finish the porch with all of the detailing that you propose - with the house being efevated the front porch is the up front visual that you see from the street. 3) Either leave front slope in grass (like house to the east) or do one retaining wall to match the wall on house to the west. The two retaining wall proposal by the homeownerwill make the house stand out. The slope is not that dramatic that a two wall tier is required. These are just the priorities of items that the homeowner has not proposed to do. We agree with and expect that they wi(l do everything on the list that they have proposed especiaUy the windows and "tudor" elements. Look forward to meeting you tonight. Steve • Bobst Group North America Steve Rucks Regional Sales Manager Celt Phone: 612-819-7994 Tei: +� y7s zzs a000 �: 4276 <Maiito�steve rucks�bobstqrou�.com> h ttq: //www. b obs ta ro u p. co m • �� fi.lr��/l(`.\Tl..i...w.o++to ov.A Co+t�++r*o\or..�r�r�o�rY.v\T n�ol Ca+ti++r+e\TamnlXAnrn«�+ca\d� 7F{dFSm S/�R/�!1l10 CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor June 2, 2009 7oe1 Jensen 1253 Ashland Avenue #2 Saint Paul, MN 55104 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTION 09-916 Bob Kessler, Director COMMERCEBUILDING " Telephone: 651d66-9090 375JacksonStree{Surte220 Facsimile: 65I-266-9124 Sa"mtPau! ATmnesota55107-]806 Web: xnuw.stpmdgov/dsi Re: 1079 Porttand Avenue, Hill T-Iistoric Dishict May 28, 2009 - HPC Review, Agenda Item V.A. HPC File #09-015 Deaz Mr. Jensen: As you know, the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) considered at its May 28, 2009 meeting your application for a building pernrit to renovate the exterior of the residence at the property listed above. The HPC voted 5— 2, with one abstenfion, to condifionally approve your application. This decision was based on the discussion at the public hearing, public testimony and findings by HPC staff. The application will be approved provided the following condition(s) are met: 1. The proposed treatment on the front elevafion will be repeated on the reaz elevation bnt the window and opening does not need to be changed. 2. The applicant shall come back to HPC and/or staff with an alternate design that results in breaking up the boxy massing of bottc the east and west elevarions of the residence. This could be accomplished by constructing a"bump-ouY', as originally proposed, or by adding small shed roofs over windows. 3. The retainiug wall shall be one wall that lines up with the neighboring walt and is of a height similar to the neighboring wall. 4. The siding shall be replaced on all four sides to be a smooth, 4 inch lap hazdiplank. The boxed comers can remain. 5. The porch skut must have a pattem and more open design (not soiid) and the final design sha11 be reviewed and approved by staff. 6. All finai materiai colors and texfures be reviewed and approved by sfaff. The two colors proposed for the house must be a medium to dark shade and be of earth tones. There shall not be a Iazge contrast between the two colors. 7. A fmal detail on the soffit be submitted and reviewed and approved by staff: 8. Any changes or revisions to the approved plans be submitted to FIPC and/or staff for review and approval. 9. The HPC stamped approved consiruction level plans remain on site for the durafion of the project. r1 � � U . AA-ADA-EEO Employer 3� 09-916 • You or any aggrieved pariy has the right to appeal the Heritage Preservarion Commission's decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Such an appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of the HPC's order and decision. Chapter 73 states: (h) Appeal to city councii. The permif applicant or arry party aggrievad by rhe decision of the hetztage preservarion commission shail, within faw-teen (14) days of the dare of rhe keritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order and decisian to the cify cozmcil. The appeal shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the divisian of planning [DSI] of two (2) coples of a notice of appeal and statement sening forth the grounds far the appeaL The division of planning [DSI] shall transmit one capy of the notice of appeal and statement to the city council and one copy to the heritage preservation commission. The commission, in any wrinen order denying a permit apptication, shal! advise the applicant of the right to appeal to the city council and include this paragraph in ali such orders. Please note, an HPC approval or conditional approval does not obviate the need for meeting applicable building and zoning code requirements, nor is it a permit to allow for work to commence. An HPC approval or conditional approval expires after one year if no permit has been issued. If revisions to the approved plans aze made, be aware that addifional HPC and/or staff review will be required. Please feel free to call staff at 651-266-9078 if you have any questions. This application will be on hold until the conditions are met and a complete building permit application and final plans aze submitted for review and fiirther processing. • Sincerely, / �! 1/ ' Chrisrine Boulware Historic Preservation Planner cc: Jon Hegner, DSI building inspector Robert Roscoe, Design for Preservation File ✓ • �� r� LJ . C� �S-I �ubli �. t-��+ n� 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 CTTY OF SAINT PAUL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMIVIISSION 5TAFF REPORT FILE NAME: l Oxx Portland Avenue DATE OF APPLICATION: Apri18, 2006 APPLICANT: John Bazbour, Barbour Ladouceur Design Group OWNER: Vihn Le, Wisdom Development Group DATE OF HEARING: Apri127, 2006 HPC SITE/DISTRICT: Summit West Historic District CAT`EGORY: New Construction CLASSIFICATIOI3: Building Pernvt STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Axny 5ponglChristine Barr D ATE: April 20, 2006 A. SITE DESCRIPTION: This vacant lot was divided from 1075 Portland Avenue on January 5, 2006. The HPC did not review or comment on this lot split. The proper[y to the east at 1075 Portland Avenue is abrick two- story, Cape Cod style cottage constructed in 1948 and categorized as non-contributing to the Hill Historic District. The property to the west at 1089 Portland Avenue is a two-and-one-half story, brick, classical foursquare residence designed by E.J. Donahue, constructed in 1906 and categorized as pivotal to the Hill Historic District. B. PROPOSED CFIANGES: The applicant is proposing to construct a new single-family house with an attached garage on a lot measuring 40' wide by 150' deep with a secfion cut out of the northwest comer (see lot split survey). The proposed house is to be setback 41' from the sidewalk and will have an open front parch that is 6'-6" deep that spans the first floor elevation. The footprint for the house measures 31'-8" wide by 49'-4" deep. The house is two-and-one-half stories tall with an intersecting gable roof. C. GUIDELINE CITATIONS: Tlze Secretarv of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal changes to its distincfive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatiaZrelationships that chw-acterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property wilZbe recognized as a physicaZrecord of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense ofhistoricaZdevelopment, such as adding conjecturalfeatures or eZementsfrom other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, fnishes, and construction techniques or exampCes of craftsmanship that characterize a property wiZ1 be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features wi11 be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacementofa distinctivefeature, the new feature wiZZmatch the old in design, color, textz�e, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources tvill be protected and preserved in place. Ifsuch resources must be disturbed, 33 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 mitigation measures will be urdertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, • feahmes; and spatial relationships that characterize a properly. The new workshall be d�erenfiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New addirions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a mcmner that, :f removed in the future, the essentialform and inzegrityafthe historicproperryand its emironmentwould be zaeimpaired. Hill Historic District Guidelines New consttucfion General Ptincinles The basic principle for new construction in the Historic Hill Districts to maintain the districPs scaZe and quaZity of design. The Kzstoric Hill District is architecturally diverse within an overall pattern of harmony and continuity. These guide[ines for new construction focus on general rather thcro specifzc design elements in order to encourage m�chitectural innovation and quaZity design while maintaining the harmony and continuity of the district. New construction should be compatible with the size, scale, massing, height, rhythm, setbacl� colar, material, building elemenr, site design, cmd clumacter of s�rowzding structures and the area Massine and Hei�ht New construction should conform to the mcrssing, volume, height and scaZe of existing adjacent structures. Typical residential structures in the Historic Hilt DistricYrre 25 to 40 feet high. The height of new construction should be no Zower than the average height of a11 buildings on both bZock faces; measurements shouid be made from street level to the highest point of the roofs. (This guideline does not supersede the City=s Zoning Code height Zimitations,) • Rhvthm and DirecNonal Emnhasis The existence of uniform narrow lots in the Historic Hfll natzrrally sets up a strong rhythm of buildings to open space. Historically rnxy structure built on more than one lat used ver&ial facade elements to maintain and vmy the overall rhythm of the street rather than interrupting the rhythm rvith a long monotonous faccrde. The directional expression of new construction should relate to that of existing adjacent strttctures. MateriaLs and Details Yariety in the use of architecrural materials and details adds to the intimacy and visual delighi of the district. But there is also an overall thread of continuity provided by the range of materials commonly used by turn-of-the-century builders cnd by the way th�se materials were used. This thread of conrinuiry is threalened by the iniroduction of new industrial materials cmd the aggressive exposure of earlier materials such as concrete blocl� meial framing, and glass. The purpase of this sectioras to encourage the proper use of appropriate materials and details. The maderials mad details of new cons2ruction should relate to the materials and details of existing nearby buildings. Preferred roof materials are cedar shingla�, slate and tile; asphalt shingZes which match the approximate coZor and rexture of the preferred malerials are acceptable substitutes. Imitative materials such as asphall siding, wood-teztured metal or virryl siding, art�cial stone, and artificial bricln�eneer should not be used Smooth four-inch Zap vinyl, metal, or hardboard siding, when weZl installed cmd carefully detailed, may be acceptable in some cases. Materials, including their colors, wiZl be reviewed to determine their appropriate use in relaffon ta the overall design of the structm-e as well as to surrounding structures. Color zs a sign�cant design element, and paint colors should relate to surrozauling structures and the area as we11 as to the style of the new structure. BuiZdirg permits me not required for painting and, � although the Heritage Preservation Commission may review and comment on paint coZor, paint color is not subject to Heritage Preservation Commission approval. 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 Buildine Elements � Individual elements of a buildingshould be integrated into its composition for a balanced and complete design. TFcese elements far new construction shouZd compliment existing adjacent structures as we11. Roo£s There is a great variety of roof treatment in the Historic HiZT District, but ghle and hip roofs are most common. The skyline or profzle of new construction should relate to the predominant roof shape of existing adjacent buildings. Most houses in the Historic Hill Dzstrict have a roofpitch of beiween 9:12 and 12:12 ('rse-to-run ratio). Highly visible secondary structure roofs should match the roof pitch of the main structure, and generally should have a rise-to-run ratio of at least 9.�12. A roofpitch of at teast 8.12 should be used if it is somewhat visible from the 3reet, and a 6:12 pitch may be acceptable in some cases for structures which are not visible from the street. Roof hardware such as skylights, vents, and metal pipe chimneys should not be placed on the front roof plane. Windows and Doors The proportion, size, rhythm and detailing of windows and doors in new construction should be compatible with that of existing adjacent buiZdings. Most windows on the Hill have a vertical arientation, with a proportion of between 2:1 and 3:1 (height to width) mmmon. Individuat windows can sometimes be square or horizontal if the rest of the building conveys the appropriate directional emphasis. Facade openings of the same general size as those in adjacent buildings are encouraged. YYooden double-hung windows are traditional in the Historic Hill District and should be the fzrst choice when selecting new windows. Paired casement windows, although not historically common, wi11 often prove acceptable because of their vertical orientation. Sliding windo�, awndng windows, and • horizontally oriented muntins are not common in the district and are generaZly unacceptable. �ertical muntins and muntin grids may be acceptabde when compatible with the periad and style of the buiZding. Sliding glass doors should na* be used where they woutd be visible from the street. AZthough not usually improving the appearance of a buildzng, the use of inetat windows or doors need not necessarily ruin it. The importani thing is thttt they should look like part of fhe kilding and not like ruw metal appliances. Appropriately calored or bronzetoned aluminum is acceptable. Mill finish (sliver) aluminum shoutd be moided. Porches and Decks In general, houses in the Historic Hill Aistrict have roofed front porches, white irmost modern construction the froni porch has disappeared. Front porches provide a h-ansitional zone between open and closed space which unites a building and its site, semiprivate spaces which help to define the spatial hierarchy of the district. They area consistent visual element in the district ttnd often inrioduce rhythmic variatzon, clarify scaZe or provide vertical facade elements. The porch treatment of new structures should retate to the porch treatment of existing adjacent structures. If a porchs not buidt, the Zransizion from private to public space shauld be articulated with some other suitable design eZement. Open porches are preferable, but screened or glassedin porches may be acceptable if well detailed. Most, but not all, porches on the Hill are ane story high. Along some streets where a str-ong continuity of porch size or porch roof line exists, it may be preferable to duplicate these formal elements in new constructioa. The vertical elements supporting the porch roof are impotant. 77xey shoudd carry the visual as well as the actual weight of the porch roof. The spacing of new balustrades should reflect the solidto-void reZatianships of adjacent railings and porches. GeneraZly, a solidto-void proportion between 1:2 and 1: 3 is common in the Historic Hil1. Decks should be kept to the rear of buiZdings, should be visuaZly refzned, and should be integrated into , overall building design. A raised deck protruding from a single wall usually appears disjointed from the rotal design and is generally unacceptable. 3�f 09-916 Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-227 Site Setback • New buildings should be sited at a distance not more than 5% ouEOf-Iine from tiie setback of existing adjacent buildings. Setbackr greater than those of adjacent buildings mcy be allowed in some cases. Reduced setbacks may be accepfable at comers. This hqopens quile often in the Hzstoric Hill area and can lend delightful variarion to the street. Landscanin� TypicaZly, open space in the Historic Hill District is divided intcpubZiq semipublic, semiprivate and private space. The public space of the street cmd sidewalk is often distinguished from the semipublic space of the front yard by a chcmge in grade, a Zow hedge or a visually open fence. The buildings, landscaping elements in fronl yards, and boulevard trees togelher provide a"wall of enclosure"for the street "room". Generally, Zandscaping which respects the street as a public room is encouraged. Encloszo�es which allow visual penetration of semipublic spaes, sueh as wrought-iron fences, painted picket fences, Zow hedges or limestone retaining walls, are chmacteristic of most of tlze Histaric FIi11 area This approach ta landscaping and fences is encouraged in contrast to complete enclnsure of semipublfc spc�e by an opaque fence, a tall "wealhered wood" fence or tall hedge raws. Cyclone fence should not be used in front yards or in the front half of side yards. Landscape timber should not be used for retaining walls in front yards. For the intimcrte space of a shalZow setbac� ground cavers and low slvz�bs will provide more visual interest and require less maintenance than grass. When lols me left vacant, as green space or parking area, a visual hole in the street "wall" may result. Landscape trec�ent can eliminate this potential problem by providing a wall of enclosure from the street. Boulevard trees mark a separation betrveen the automobile corridor and the rest of the streetscape, and should be maintained. Garaees and Parlane If an alley is adjc�ent to the dwelling, any new garage should be located off 1he alley. Where alleys do no1 ` exist, garages facing the street or driveway curb cuts may be acceptable. Garage doors should not face rhe street. If this is found necessary, single garage doors shald be used to avoid the horizontal orientation of two-car garage doors. Parking spaces should nof be located in front yards. Residential pm�king spaces should be Zocated in rear yards. Parking lots for commercial uses should be to the side orrear of commercial structures and have a minimum number of cza�b cuts. All parking spaces should be adequately screened from the street and sid"ewalk by landscaping. The scale ofparking lots shoutd be minimized and the visual sweep of pavement should be broken up by use of plcmted areas. The scale, Ieve1 of light output, and design of parking Zat lighring should be compatible with the clu�acter of the disirict. Pub&c Infrastructure The traditional pattern ofpublic streets, curbs, boulevards,mul sidewalks in the area shouZd be maintained. Distinctive features of pubZic spaces in the area, such as brick alleys, stone slab sidewalks, granite curbs, and the enrly riventieth centwy lantern styZe street Zights, should be preserved The same style should be used when new street lights are installed. New street fumiture such as benches, bus shelters, telephone booths, kiosks, sign standards, trash containers, planters and fences should be compatible with the chcmacter of the district. Brick aZleys and stone slab sidewalks generaily should be maintained and repaired as necessmy with original materials, asphalt and concrete patches should not Ee used. When concrete tile public sidewalks need to be replaced, new poured concrete sidewalks s7ould be 1he same width as the exiting sidewalks and should be scored in a 2 foot square or 18 inch sguare pattem to resemble the old tiles; expansion joints should match the scoring. Handicap ramps should be installed on the inside of curbs as part of thg�oured concrete sidewalk; where there is granite curbing, a section should be lowered for the ramp. . Electric, telephone and cable T'V lines should be placed underground or along addeys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous. 0 09-91 b Agenda Item III.I. HPC File #06-22� D. FINDINGS: . L The property is currently vacant and was split from 1075 Portland Avenue. 2. The two-and-one-half-story building has a proposed height of 39'-1" tall and complies with the guidelines for massing and height. 3. The directional expression of the proposed new construction relates to that of e�sting adjacent structures and complies with the guidelines. 4. Asphalt "heavy-shake" style shingles for the roofing is considered an acceptable substitute to wood shingles, tile and slate. Narrow wood lap-siding with mitered comers, trim and detail relates to the materials and details of neazby siructures. 5. The gabled roof appeazs to be of a pitch that is consistent with the guidelines and neighboring buildings. The proportion, size, rhythm and detailing of the proposed wood-frame, double- hung windows complies with the guidelines. Staff also believes the open front porch complies with the guidelines. 6. The front setback complies with the guidelines and is average for the historic homes on the block. 7. A landscaping plan was not submitted. 8. Pazking complies with the guidelines as it will not be visible from the street and access to pazking will be from the alley. 9. The guidelines state, "Electric, telephone and cable TT� lines should be placed underground or along aTleys, and meters should be placed where inconspicuous." This should be followed for new construction. � E. STAFF RECOMMENDATTON: Based on the findings above, staff recommends approval of the building permit application provided the following conditions be met: 1. All final material colors and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. 2. Window and door detail be submitted to be reviewed and approved by staff. 3. No mature boulevard trees may be harmed during the construction. 4. Any changes ar revisions to the appmved plans be submitted to HPC andlar staff for review and approval. 5. The HPC stamped approved construction level plans remain on site for the duration of the project. � S 35 09-916 - Saint Pmd Heritage Preservation Commission Clo Office ojLicense, Irespedions and Errviromneraal Protection � � 8 Fourth Sbeet E., Suite 200 p SainlPaul, MN 55101-1 a24 n� Phone: (651) 266-9078 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMIVIISSI(JN DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION This application must be completed in addition to the appropriaYe city permit application if the affected property is an individually desig}tated landmark or located cvithin an historic dishicC For applicarions that must be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission refer to the HPC Meeting schedule for meeting dates and deadlines. Please check We category that best describes the proposed work O RepairlRehabilitation ❑ Sign/Awning �New ConstructionlAddition I7 Moving ❑ FencelRetaining Wall ❑ Concept Review Only ❑ Demolition ❑ Other �'• .�� n�' !' I �� I_.i';�� , • ��' � ` Nameofcontactperson: .j0l�(� '��1�� .�..� Street and number: 12 � �1 2�'O �T �� City: �p(_. State: �_Zip Code;�`a Phone number: �Z �'�� - S�__T?> e-mail: ��( f�j6cl(' A��gy� _Ce+�i Name: Streetandnumber: '�7"�j(�, ��t�7 �OVR-T �L}5� , City: 1V1/� (�l.� fn{OOD State: �ij,(�} Zip Code: �� Phone number. (Z e-mail: WY•.�b•�. W Ig��ti'G�0(�tYI,EV3'�.C,�ln/] � 3� ::-5:'�I20JECT�IF `t-�-_+i+ti - 3e_t Contact person: _ com�y: Street and number: City: Phone number: ( State: e-mail: Zip Code: 09-916 Completely describe ALL eaterior changes being proposed for the property, Inctude cfianges to architecfiral deta�7s snch as windows, doors, siding, ra�7ings, steps, trim, roof, #onndation or pomhes. AEtach specifications for doors, windows, ligbting and other featares, if applicable, inelnding color and material samptes. t��k� }��56 0 � �Gt�T1.-'� 't1dtPC,U i �: � � Attach additionalsheds ffneccssary Refer to the Design Review Process & Checklist for required informatioa or attachments: **INCOMPLETE APPLICATIOiVS WII.L BE RETURNED** Ai2F THE NECESSARY ATTACHMENfiS AND INFORMATION INCLIIDED? � �$ Will any federal money be used in this project? Are you applying for the Investrnent Tax Credits? YES YES � • .`'� � � 2 . ��` 'FOR.�IPGOFFICE _ , `: 09A16 � C J P � H�.�.sz.� s` DQmc� 1.n ps�sa�.. �'�{� w � T.t-+ _ E: �-CAf� S� VELB'S7 _ Sa.r-�.ZY �L-P-�s . Pr.�c�+�.__ 173 FC�oN� 1 GY��'i�X.�2v._ GeNTP�K�T: p�NGGO�ST � . . '2„IIS BL-AaS'�l''cb-�-- l+N� _ . . M�7LS,rv.�.+ 6T�4xrq _ Soo_4_h3_'"rr35_2.._--- _ _ ...�'�_� �L?NT... C2. P O#?.. �1""�Z,1'�-- �[��,--_°` 4' - o.. - � � � II_�� ---�t� �: , .� _ ..�� J.�`shv - ...__ -- =� �" � 1' - o' � • GP��-v Mf�'� _ � ! 'F' 1.: Stic+' �'-.r[ = r ^ l"'" ? M Dcf'G }-11 , ! ��.v�. ��Ea h[�v.a�t1 _ �+AH.tr 5;�"�Y?L� '-�7h� �zi�_.. N�a" � t� b � �. t-a � P-;ca 3'–� 4'_-0' ____. __._. � • _ - PROJEC� NO 05033 � DATE '�� ' `�-- PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL �AT}BUDFS7 S`TG`RGROUP 1077POFTLANDAVENUE,ST.PAUI,MN 0 �� BaM.lE� �t Ot YINM EAIOLII,YMiNQ�� ttl.ifLt00t � SHEET TITLE SCALE SHEET ■ NC � WISDOM DEVELOPMENT GROUP � j � ► � ...• f �� \ S (' l � ry zt�t iuu curt EnW�pb�ssa. YX iitl/ �{�sV � ��... ��L 7� +� •-• 1 tl3�Y0�D� •snMNY��lee�pLao� � l.A z y� �+rs�,� �,�G�.�,r�-: c�x.va,-nt�N -'�� =.1.'� c� ' J � � _ � � 4 1 !� ' � -i:1 � � . Q ; .� +/'�/' ,`��. ` --{`_-__�_ � f � I'X-�-� I „ I�-�`� + �(��.i z �L I ,.�;:-- .- I ti � ��I �� - � �.J v e.�,�.•� � F't-.6.N b�'Atc_. �� - i I/ 1� l^ /� `.J O fc'C C7 MV L-L\ O`t�) � S�GT\ �j C�I ' f C�7.��Mb��v.`�.^Q�l . -��.^ `` _ p � '__._ \D" ,3��.��-�� Sv�ST1SV�� Mt�t�1�3, �1N4�Ws� �t�'Ct��fJS.��'M�Pa��t�� . � `f�' �� PROJECT NO 05033 , • . `°- �-' --' "' `� PORTLAND' AVENUE SAIHT PAUL �� GROUP }077pOR7LANDAVENU�SLPAOC,µN 12aM.tECOMpiTpEEt �t0! YIMREA�OLIi,4M61<01 �ti.it�.ap�y �� WISDOM DEVELOPMENT GROUP ttU TiR�� Cp�rt £��tYt.bv�e6. YM �6110 tlfND4Rt is .NhDM1HeP��IAe• SHE� TITLE 1-. t Y 1 tv c�s N c� w 1 sy bc�N o6$ro 6 SHEET Nc sk- �, �__E7�.e R�.\V�NC�_4�c�0'f`7`1 . �� 7 _ — M .d� � . T� f � �Pr..u�.. �� Mv��,.�o.-.� , �11rt�t�.00'DN� PIG'tJR.� ��J �.. �,.' Pr� ._ ... \�-3�v � ,.� , G -� � ) /{ '� ip�� -< � �/ k-. - � .__7 P�,��5 � �1 � ` � .i �or?t.�rtio� sti�! �_w_±��5 �5! /' � /L \ �; �, `�� i �� .�u �r-� �s` - 2`� ss.swv. G o ,.� ,r' \ �.�. V v � $ � �..�.. • �lc-t- � N t �l�o �Y'_...C�+.� �� GD��'n'c+t --' ��avCy e> At [ K.�' rROV�T �Nb�l 7s.ss� nn�a..��{ - �' 1-L = �. _ o . . X�c� r�o�� Hvr�c�- �3•� ��-E�. � � �< �' r � `�°';: �1 �-, �2 �v�5rtitcx rt�rq-ul►v ��cvt��cs wrrt�l Yt�t's��tvt�GNS. �,it^�PRascs.Z--- . .. . _� ��. ��iNCi . : -; -.�� D�G�OA-��UESiGN GROUP @YM.�FCOMpiiPEEf ��4I MIYYfAlOLIt,YY�NOt �fi.�lI.IOU �� WISDOM DEVELOPMENT GROUP ti�� TNq tertl E��fV�p��eo�, YM IU4 ItiUOUt1 •��.MMD�v�lep��4a• PROJECT NO 05033 POR7LAND' AVENUE SAINT PAUL 10 SHEET 7lTLE {�� W 1 s�1S� o�i.� S LE ��-r�t�..s �`1 DATE o��ti O�j}Ctl�, SHEET N� s�. 3 . � l J G � � 5 �� S'L-'t>N `� j=oCZ w G S� cv.� � -- �" ��i � �,-r.�.v r�. £-c- F�G • P�rJC � V ` �� b� bZ` .� � p �� v r-� - -�.�.`{�.� D 3 =1`-0•. �.XT"�i:l'4� .loE/a..1�N.P-- P-S� .31_L1.._:CT? �}JJSIa-.�l�1�--- Z1a�.T�c.dB �S�L:� _fj�L'fQ�(•t��- � W t?t�r -rc�L- •r: vP�1--�'O`N L t'� _f � F',M8 _ � .�.. _ �... o.. a 09-916 , �+� �-'f�ZZw 3�? tg¢ , �� `�--' � 1( `r: � � � � � Ns?v_±�+.CA Ct.Ze�oF�lL; L ��3 , ��1•_0•. � �--� �--.� �-.�,,� � � s�sr�� .�ttc� wtr��av.tiz wC1�1 v��'R. Wi�f�, r'�aM��v�.tav�b _ -� _ -- - �,,,r Nosts , AV<n�S � 1.�1CA0 c�F �aT��s`� P�- �vo t3C>x�,t�Q- S\v.n��-AP-� . � � PROJECT NO 05Q33 � � .�- -.- r! � �-_ ' c�t?o0 PORTLAND AVENUE SAINT PAUL — �A�UFTTCAIS _ STfiTTGROUP 1077P08TLANDAYENUE,StPAUL,MN O6�Id tiD .10! YINMEAlOLU,¢M6µ0f tl2.UI.fON SHEET 71TLE ({S SCALE SHEET I .� �� WISDOM DEYELOPMENT GROUP � : i +ii•• en.n Ea�lY�pbfeaG. YX �e��o T � � 1G �� r�\^� t� \ �� i � r}f1.Drt.be�u�ae• � � •0 b � 1••a11 �-__ ,-__�.,. _ , � �� _:_ ---- — . .� � -�:� , ..� �°'�.` °�� - . �� :_ .� � _ '1 - - �� . t�� - ' - — :: �' �` ' �� - ; . �� , _ - �: ; �'� " � a'' — — —�-, = � `� � ,� . , _ , _ _ _ '.. � °=�i � � ti ; ' f i �_:-� _ - � ' .1 � � * - �� 9 � .s --�- � �, uf' ^ i ��G L "' - ' � 'T� ; = ° , i b .�'a 3� � . m i i u .-.��`K� �_ �_.. / _.- ` � � � _ �� .. .� �_u 09-916 • • - � 1 _ x/ � . ._ �- — — — — -- " ��' + �� 3 �. ` �s ,p� W��, . � r � _ . W � �p6�,� �� ° — .. . � 1 3� i �� ,.r -, � ._.____.-�---�--�-- ,. _� � _ � - __ `\ ,� __ .. - . . . � p , � �` `QG�ir ,.�,sG . . � y .�� a�`,a� � � + k j >,—�� . .r �'x' � l ' ��a 7.3'm@ 7 �a � � i �' .�Y—a e716� H.:—� 7 7 �+, r � f ' t � ��'�! . , � � � 9 i - k $ � , t � i . , 4 �"�G� �a� � ��: . t �� ' �. ;� �_: a �`�„4��rt� i s t l ��tl��a �� r ; � �� ;_� ��'� t F f :��_ �� t tt 3 S �e�� (_ j �+ _„-�, � ] �s' �ak' ��li ��J'w ' , ,� , �'�,� , t a ' �+�� , /� � .�_ �� F � n, ��V�� ,� � ��Y"_4f�� —+,^--„'� �� y " ' Y �S 9�t�r r�� V��S�fa�� s' �' � � � �1 � � � 1 `- i � S� : � �" �`, � k � t i � �� R � � ��+, „'�, A \ A ° r `L�il'O,R�.�1S��. A. �C+c��'c� .� . ? .. �f . , df, z . . . a �� ~� � r °��+�,� 35�' ' - . . . . R . � ,- _. �� `�� _ _ _ �- �`�a.� �a.t� ��'� `.E�.'", _ �q i 4�G` i�� ♦�� •' � � � �� E� " '� � � L�,� � \� � � _ _ t?f� ��px*.y ^'+n.: ° d . — .. . �� f' V �(Y� �..y "4 _ . _ �� A��_ .c � � . �� `�. `"' a __ � �` � _ � . .. ' ! 'J� ,'� E�y \ �" ��E�� •`–.� I .�_ . . � � �.6�YV'�i'�4.�-9't V„� � : i� � . G�!� ��, �� C14 f� i��s..c� _ I .� �k� ��{�' �� _ �_ � , — � �� r - � � �� , _�� < ��i� - fi � � ; z ,.s��, : -- _�. r ' � � . �� _ — i�� i ( -��+ _ ` � � �� c�. y ) '!' : ,. . . m [ t �fj'''��°��i$� f,� ��' � C, < �� .�c f ` � ` `•�._�41��s.� F - , � �y,�� "" ,_ �s� `a � "��o ��5_" - . yq� y "'� ��^.��tir*� �'U'�irn a J� nx"' - . ��? <{"' l '�u t� � C�: 9 � "� ��e� �� K'� � �'.x e C� ''��"'<,��i,.:gv ., �„} 405 � - �1IDY.'�R[��s �eA\ k ��j�y\ Try �1 C \ – � ' , • yL1YY � Fu,,, ^'-.'� y .. � . � n� �Rw : � . . �. � "�tia�,�� f%�=e-c�'�''` �, ��"�.� `'� ... , - . ,x �.�- Y°- ,4,�� \ . . .. �" '�"�'"� ey �' %"' - � �° �'� � -`. � a 4e �� , � �� i, \ � . -.�- , � � �, �;,. esx '�' = a, � # � � �� g� _i � �.� i . .. dS/�� .��`2r]��'Y_^mOd� �..._ . ..�v_.. ._ _. ._.._.:_..:_ ....:_... _. ...�._ ` ai i � `.'jl._� _. _. � "' �'�I 1 : �j ' —i ,— '3 _ « _ �; F �� . . ' ' x , �xt �: � �- � � . .. . . �V' ' — � --• i�a�.:�'." . — — , � , , �� '� �� . � � � . ' ��`�2 � ' � � .: �I ? w_ __ . , . �. i r I 4 �.r�, � � 'j� Q � - - . . . � w,� a'; ....�y..' . � �'�.i� � � �� . ! ..�::: -_ _ +._, ` i, ...�:- ` - ! " i - � � �� __. _ _ , _ _ _ _ �'_ _ _ . � . _ _.. . _ .. . _. V +'��.� .__ � . . 1 �.�Y ��'�.-' � ..1 � f .. T `4:� . : � � . � . � � l � h' � I �_��i. � � ' - l! : '� �e t o . _' '' 1 . . �., ; r ' \ ,,,. ;Y � I ', ` �z ' �;` �;- � ' - �` �r'� ,t � ��t . �i, � , � �� :�, ; 1 � �,5�� 5 � �`�•"}� , �Ria'� ; �q � � �"X' 6� `. �� 4 C 1 > �� . Y9 S3 ,,u � �� t`�4F g� ,�." e . _� , ��R ' �-a ,� _ �� °:� � i r i � ( i � � 1 b . 1 : + s; 1 09A16 NIINUTES OF THE HERTTAGE PRESERVAI'ION COMNIISSTON CTTY OF SAIN'T PAUL, MINNESOTA L.ower L,evel — Room 40, City HalUCourt House, 15 Wast Kellogg Boulevazd April 27, 2U06 Preseut: Susan Bartlett Foote, Richard Faricy, April Haas, Pat Igo, Paul Larson, John Manning, Lee Meyer, Dick Nicholson, Daniel Scott, Diane Trout-Oertel, Shari Taylor Wilsey Absent: Cazol Cazey (excused) Staff Present: Amy Spong, Christine Barr 1. 2. F� CALL TO ORDER: 5:06 PM by Susan Bartlett Foote (Chair). APPROVAL OP THE AGENDA: The agenda was approved. (Wilsey, Scott) CONFT.ICTS OF INTEREST: Nicholson recused himself from Item TII.E. PERMI'T REVIEW/PUBLIC HEARING A. 753 East Seventh Street, Dayton's Bluff Historic District, by Lawrence Signs, for a sign permit to replace signage with new. File#06-220. Staffpresented ihe report recommending conditional approvai. Spong noted cuirent front lawn sign is intemally lit. Spong informed the applicant had phoned staff and would not be able to attend, but supports the staff recommendations. Lazson and Spong discussed the signs being framed with a dark color, such as black or dazk green, and the lighting. The public I►earing was closed as no one was present to speak. Wilsey motioned to approve the application witfi staff recommendations. Meyer seconded the motion. Larson added that black or dark green would work well as a color for the framing of the si�s. The motion passed 10-0. B. 270-280 Easf Fifth Street, Lowertown Historic District, by Sherman Associates, for a building permit to construct a new indoor market with lofts above. File #06-185. Staff presented the report recommending conditional approval. This item was laid over from the Mazch 23, 2005 public hearing to work out the details. Trout-Oertel, Lazson and Spong @iscussed the akernate design choices proposed at the last meeting and the commission's reacrion. Art Bartels was present to answer questions and discussed changes and details. Lazson and Bartels discussed oprions for the overhead doors and continuation of the mullion pattern to the side iights. Bartels presented a material board for review. T'he pub&c hearing was closed as no one else was present to speak. Spong added Margot Ferhenbacher, architeet in Planning and Econotnic Development was present. Scott motioned to approve the application with staff recommendations. Wilsey seconded the mofion. Larson added two friendly amendments that the proposed overhead door and carner window mullion patterns on fhe first level have the mullion pattern eatend across the span of the openings and employ the more traditional cap instead of trellis. The motion passed 11-0. C. 455 Dayton Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Lakeland Door and Reroofing, for a buiidiag permit to replace windows. File #06-221. Staffpresented the report recommending conditional appmval. Spong suggested applying aprocess similaz to that used with window replacement for the Commodore Building so that individttal condo �e.�-�- pa�-e. ---� „r,�S r� L � - 09-916 Staff presented the report recommending conditional approval. Byron Kremenak and Nancy Walden, owners, were present to answer questions. Lazson asked why they were redesigning the � front porch. The owners repiied it was to tie into the design of the addition. Wilsey and Meyer commented the plans looked nice. The public hearing was closed as no one else was present to speak. Meyer motioned to approve the application with staff recommendations. Wilsey seconded the motion. The motion passed 11-d. H. 1731 Summit Avenue, Summit Avenue West Historic District, by TrueLine Builders, for a building permit to construct a two-story rear addifion and screen porch. File #06-226. Staffpresented the report recommending condifional approval. Boh Swalve, TrueLine Builders, was present to answer questions. Swalve stated issues with the staff recommendation regazding the grids in the windows, soffit detail and metal siding. Swalve added the siding could only be cut at 12 foot lengths. Chip Michel, owner, stated the plan was to rearrange the siding from the sides to the reaz addition. Wilsey and Spong discussed whether taking the siding offthe existing home would require the applicant to return to a more tradition siding material. The public hearing was closed as no one else was present to speak. Scott motioned to approve the appiication with staff recommendation #2 being stricken. Spong and Lazson discussed the soffit and windows. Larson stated the windows weren't original. Larson added the friendly amendment that staff recommendation #1 be eluninated. Wilsey questioned recommendation #4. Scori retracted his motion. Meyer motioned to approve the application with the deletion of recommendations #1 &#2 and with recommendation #4 being changed to read the siding match the existing in texture and profile. Nicholson seconded the motion. The moHon passed 11-0. Wilsey stated she had unresolved issues with the design of the porch addition. � I. 10� Portland Avenue, Hill Historic District, by Barbour Ladouceur Aesign Group, for a building permit to construct a single-family home. File #06-227. Staff presented the report recommending conditional approval. Bayard Englehart, azchitect, was present to answer questions. Meyer suggest more windows and lazger windows. Englehart stated they took design cues from the houses across the street. Lazson stated the design looks fake historic 1905 and suggested varying ornamental detail and spanning the windows on the second floor. Wilsey stated there is a lot of variation in style on that block. Matt Mejia, 1060 Portland, stated that the neighbors liked the plans and it seemed to fit into the block. The public hearing was closed as no one else was present to speak, Meyer motioned to approve the application with staff recommendafions. Meyer suggested the applicant work with staff regazding the size of the windows and window configuration on the second floor of the front elevation. Faricy seconded the motion. The motion passed 10 -0. A. ANNOI3NCEMENTS: There were no announcements. 5. ADJOURNiVIENT: 8:16 P.M. Submitted by: Christine Barr � 4 �� From: Thomas McCarthy <stick@visi.com> To: Amy Spong <Amy.Spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 4(17/2006 Y129:00 AM Subject: Re: Re: Amy, Thank you for your reply. Best, Tom McCarthy On Apr 77, 2006, at 9:11 AM, Amy Spong wrote: > The lot was splif from 1075 Portland and a single family home is > proposed to the west of 1075. i can fax you proposed drawings if > interested. The design is very traditional, with a full front porch, > gabied roof and tradi6onal materiais. > > Let me know what other informafion you`d like. > > Amy > »» Thomas McCarthy <stick@visi.com> 4/16/2006 12:23 PM »> > I am a homeowner on Portland Avenue. I received a notice regarding a > > hearing for the construction of a single-family home at "10�oc > Portland Avenue." Can you tell me what that address is, where that > site is, and any other information you have? > Thank you. > Thomas J. McCarthy > 1025 PorUand Avenue u uu �i � � � �� - - _ - - Amy Spong - Heanng - April 27 Page 1 . From: To: Date: Subjecf: Jan Carr <jan@carrcreafives.com> Amy Spong <amy.spong@ci.stpaul.mn.us> 4/16/2006 1:28:49 PM Hearing - April 27 Amy, i got a notioe about an FiPC meeting set for Apri127 for a property that is apparently ciose to me. However neither the address nor the owner's name was noted. It came through as: "10�a Portland Avnue, Hifl Historic District, by Sarbour Ladouceur Design Group for a building permit to construct a single family home." Do you have the exact address for the permit, and the namefaddress of the owner? Again, is this a case where all the prefiminary meetings have already been held, and the April 27 meeting is mainly for a rubber stamp approval of what you and the owner have already agreed to? You'll remember that was the case for the new house on Summit that will be built just behind me. Thanks. � Jan Carr 10D0 Portland Ave. St. Paul, MN 551Q4 TEL: 651-222-3691 FAX: 651-222-3387 r � ��iur P.aV1 � AAA11 CTTY OF SAINT PAUL Christapher B. Coleman, M¢yor May 1, 2006 John Barbout Barbour Ladouceur Design Group 129 N. Second Street #103 Minneapolis, MN 55402 OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND ENVIR0�IMENTAL PROT'EGTTON Bob Keuter, Director COMMERCEBUILDlNG 8 Fovrtk So-eet Eas4 Saite 200 St Paul, Minnesota 55/07-IO24 Re: 10�c Portland Avenue, Hi11 Historic District Apri127, 2006 HPC Pernut Review HPC Fi1e #06-227 Dear Mr. Barbour: 09-916 Telephone: 657-266-9090 Facsimi(e: 651166-9124 • LYeb: uonv.liep.us As you know, the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) considered at its Apri127, 2006 meeting your apptication to constract a new single-family house at the property listed above. The HPC voted 10 — 0 to condifionally approve your application. This decision was based on fhe discussion at the public hearing, public testimony and findings by the HPC staff: The applicarion will be approved provided the following condition(s) be met: 1. All final material colors and textures be reviewed and approved by staff. 2. Window and door defail be submitted to be reviewed and approved by staff. 3. No mature boulevard tcees may be harmed during the conshuction. 4. Any changes or revisions to the approved plans be submitted to HPC aadlor staff for review and approval. 5. T1te HPC stamped approved conshrucrion level ptans remain on site for the duration of the project You or any aggrieved party has the right to appeal the Heritage Preservafion Commission's decision to the Saint Paul City Council under Chapter 73 of the Saint Pau1 Legislative Code. Such an appeal must be filed within 14 days of the date of the HPC's order aad decision. Chapter 73 states: (h) Appeal to city council. The permit applicant or any pariy crggrieved by the decision of the heritage preservarion commission shall, within fourteen (14) days of the date of 1he heritage preservation commission's order and decision, have a right to appeal such order cmd decision to the ciry coimcil. The appeal shall be deemed perfected upon receipt by the division of ptcmning [LIEP] of [wo (2) copies of a notice of appeal cmd statement seifing forth the o oundr for the appeal. The divrsion of planning [LTEP� shall transmit one copy of the notice of appeal cmd statement to the city council and ane copy to the heritage preservation C07i1rilISS1072. The commission, zn arry written order derrying cr permit application, shall advise the applicant of the right to appeal to the city council cmd include lhis paragraph in all such orders. AA-ADA-EEO Emp]oyer �� 09-916 _. Please note, an HPC approval or conditional approval does not obviate the need for meefing applicable building and zoning code requirements, nor is it a permit to allow for work to commence. If revisions to the approved plans aze made, be aware that additional HPC and/or staff review will be required. Please feel free to ca11 me at 651.266.9079 if you have any questions. Our records indicate that a permit application has not been submitted. This proposal will be on hold unril the building pernut application is submitted. Sincerely, � �: - Amy Spong Historic Preservation Specialist cc: Vihn Le — Wisdom Development Crroup Uno Development File ✓ � � �� ;�� ; a s .}: � � � _,� ;� ,, � 1L � '*5, . , ,; ,G ,,; � . � ;� ,��t�aS � ,:•� : � � �� . - `' "' ,� � �,,,. . �}�., j �.�: x 'Ji+ xf ' x � ? P � / F/ � s .e� :i.�� ,. ' � S., �a w , , � �'. ! > M � , � " , �. -r�S �v � � i t `t Y ..F�. ;`r .`. . '�; �� ._., ��:c.°-- .. ...... . �\ .. .i • ._ :. ..�- .. . � �� .' .._�__ t.. . .. � . ... .. —._�_ �` '_ i. �'f : �� I � - �� - ; � � � � � �, _ r, � � °~-- - � - ; � ---_"� � �'; r� i � � �� . _£��`s�3e �� . �i � � i � s 9`5 `Y � : ' . - �£ � a} �� •�. ; � - g � � � � L ' �T� +�� aU i � 4 . ' i � � al �SC�� { � � ��!� . � s � �.�.._va.. _ 1 J j y 4 ♦ � ; � '�i t F �T�' f �,� i � .. f� T �y �{+ ! j 4 � �ti L 'J! � � �� . / . /` 'tl 1 1' � .. :N�1 /�� • �. ��. . . � f 1 '. '. � :, i . . . . •. �.�i:. . .. . . .. . . � ,.._._ `iA: .. . � ir-.:Y'� , ._. 'S`�j. r i„ • i _ `.� s 4 j �v.�ti . � � .. . . t . 5 � 3 Sf�� t �� "� � � _ r �� , �P � J� t . .p ��- f'�� ' . _ - �, x � 4E '.�1� �� ' . � `l C � yT� 1� �,� . L f " . Vi � � yR � 'Y � f l . . �. '� . � �� +... � T ^ .., y � . . � l � ." ,�� 4 p - 1 ��' a y� �. � t � . . � ' r�# ��a� � ��'� .!� . . . L . ( +j ' ! : �1 � ��+t . . ..� ..� 9�� j� L�' ��1{s ✓�. . � . . ��, ' J .4 ..r t b' . { . , _ K r� : .. i. . . . ...� . e tr. ��' . .. . ` �. � . . ' „ . R. .-� ;C ! � '+r ... � . ' _ � ' f � . ' . . .. ' � �:' .. , �.� � u �.�a�• � ��, � "�• � a,'{. �� ` �tr. , . .'�� r �� 's��. � � H ~'� - �` � - . . a ��. -er ; � �-.+ ' t f % i �d S W �� b; � - . � ,'i ' ` j � � ✓ + a ` t / : ± t `� � . r l t � �} � "�r k t f � � � . ; t� y �� i Ct Y ' < '�T'�� .t � .�. r-: i :t q� � o � t .- �" .� , +�+, y , [ r . � .. ' S t s l� -iV�n' ... 1' : .a .Yf u - .., , 4 , � � � L� ,. ; � . L / � +� - T � . i ��^�j.� . � { � � � � � V � S � � � � `� � I � `. � Y ..��i�j . �_ �� .�r�� : �. : . � �` .� e `. ' `"�';� ��;� , , � , � E vs � ` �,' ° ;�,,�`� " `� ,- �' � �� ,�. � . i <. � � 'P� :.'* yw r �� ; e �� E ,,. v� 4 � � � V � / �� I 'i {r � .�. 1 •� 4 �� .'� ?,, 1.6.t �j jfi> < S � 1 G _ 4 � y. it ' 4 1 r F�t S ` ��'�� . "� .o.�" ../ F ' � e, r � ' �, i. � -. � 4 il� ��4' 1•�9: �,� �� ,�� :. �� _� F � ,:. � . :��. _;�� e ,� � j �< � �� . ,�� + � i: f i I i 3 �: � 4S � b{ ' .: �, y � - � �,`�-> �t . . � ' <r l��w. P : � _ � � @,�.. � .� N; $ n, v) J" - � t � � - !i _ I_ I II � � � .� ;� - _ -- � � j _ � ° _ � _�� ' t � �_ � � � , — : _ �5' _ � a �� I � � � � _:�i ��`' � - � — . �. f,F ,_ � -� _ _ ti a , ,� � ' � 1 ! .. � t .1, _ :'� $ � Q � t � * �� , � \ t �# ? t [ f , .°"'-_-�� ' = F� ` z �`� � 3 ; +R ' .. �^S . .\ } . '.. `GC J'� �g.�y �' - - � r . �.�_.._� x.: _ � .. .. .c.�- . ', 3 _.� ' ��+�' k � �� _ � '" ' t ` ,j - �_ t � ]ti l ' �- �� •. � � � ��°� �' 1 �� q �v� 4 PV ' <`` 'x � ��^3'� �a �� a .��.�� .. �~ -� �� 'S` � � - � m�� _ r �' ` � � '� ��' � -�� . -� ^� � ��' � �� ' • a � �� 1 � - F�m �se: : � �; � .a, �., c... ' , _" =� _ + 3 t ;. � i:i'•' .a - qf ' . _ a�� . � _ � tl.. � �� - � Y I �' e� � ) c� � . . . _ .`.} .t . _ . . . � t � o 'r \x� !( • 1 F ��YL� > '�="u'�� >7�p'tz � �t 9 � �� ' E��T�. j d �� . : � � �. � f _� �` '� �� ', '�,� �'�.�":R� =3�'. . . . . _....�. _„� y "'uc `vy � � � f = 3 � 3 J � � � � l� j � � ,�� _ ��°� r.�_ sa�F� �� aR,�� , � y �i�� } . _ . x �� q�� . � - i5`�`-. t . ��.�. t�3 � �� . ' . ' � n � i� � _ e�i p � p �is� i3 . . 9 �� 4 � �� . ` . I, � ; 3 E �.p � ti . 3 9 � � a�- t a �� ' 3� t � � �� y�° � ��,`. _ � i �'�� 1 � � � �_' , -'.��' `_ � �`�„-�-; i< ? ' t a ;a : j . ' `� t _ } £ i: t ''�j, : . �� 4 R �' 1 L ��' �,J �� a � � ,� J " F ,� 1 5'< q��'", �'. '' ..� J� Jr „r "� �. � � . � { � � 6f ` _ ?.�. ..� . .. ... '�_ . � ..-.uk�. � T•R�mar.- .� . -��— - ".�...��.r, _ '�T'� +��w� .. . .; _ _ _ .. � " -�� ,f- i ! � ��. � -, �, � � � �; � � �--- �+ =�" �;. _ �� I�,y 3 ,� . 4 _ �� rv „ a 3' � �v'k'i - .�'n: �-' � � ��q� �t�a�` ; �r' � � . �..u,�. � �� .4 � � 'E : '; .,�. � � ` � > ,�:, � �. =r �� r� � �. � xG v ' � � `,.� � 4 � � � � § ti � I ��'* � � rY � � I � y51 �, ' Y 2tt .. S . � � , T- 4Ev"w�E �`a,.:� � ' ' v,R*. p� � a�� .. M�f� �� {;� i � t , .,. y kZ � ii��' . �E�� e ; � � �� s � €" � �� _ : �,�� , ��--�� -- , �'�� F � �� j � �r , I�� '� � ; �� _;; - - ,� � {f � ��' .� y � �� Y�. . itl � ,�, . I /! '� ,f� . �'�' t yr . .�� ' �� '`:.5 r � . � ;;`� ; ��_. _T , ; _ _ r _ � �- ; -- _ , __�, . :_ _ .� _ T >» . ':1+�� .,.�: ? � ':��'1.s�$�'`;�,r - � t.. .�. _ ;: , _ : =�.cY �� , �r ` E �, •�-_ �� `� �e � '. � '� � �� s +`_ �•' .� q� �r � a „ ti„ ,r- �.' � �= �- 1 '�` , �'e � i �. �" ��i :`. ;h. . a,�ay'. �° � �1�� i p. .} .�_ �' - - � . � ...x. - �`> �..3(�9'7r ,� .:� .' " . . � +i, � " Y�,� ys t . ' � j . �; z .� .�.i+�, 1� � r y F �. k' a ), n1 ��: �1'� r.` / a�.' 1 f��i: � '�Y�� n"� . �s �� . .� (�� i �,�� .. � ; � ,. � .�.� . � y:` " _ 'R � �r I � Y �� = > � ,j ' �_ , y ' � �' � � I `, Y � .'' � ` � [ .� y.. �'EE � � ' �' i l � "�. . . � .; .. � ' y �y' y k ��' N' G . �� ; � � SS� v"i ,y( i J � • t 7 r c' � <•�� ... � � `� k�W} �� k�'��'\ �� ?�Jk. � _ y t � � ' _ �;� * ., 5 +t �� ,T� v�'t.rt��:7Y ~ P% . i ...� �'�, {�� ? �� 'lv � _ _ .� �. i �.r �' y �� i y t � °R . � _ 1 �, ; ;.i'1 . \ ' Y . -�. ' V, :� ' R.. k^ � � '1� � . � ..d:�r`.3i�,�w� �r y, ? . � (c . .,_ _ .. . � .' ti�'. "'-�'7 , �-�., . �,' . 4 ,�� - �-;.�n .. ., � ga�a�4 � . �� = 'y gt i `� -; _. _._ �+s .� . . :rr � r �`` 'h *i " � `. ��.= � , � ' � 'S''�� 'S. �; �' � a �v�. �. - � �� .. I t' . �� :� � n1. s.:��. - . 1 .-_'��. ,� � I '��' . !�' �-` ��;' ` . ' � '� - �)�..y.9 .�ti � . � y 3 f� " 1 � � '. 1 _ .J �� \4 iF i i � Y -� 'y �y a .��#t� � T � ��: �� y S:. r y � % +� � � ,.�"y'_.� .: . ._f. �1 < , � �-w� �..�.-T.Y. _:siau . n � �. � �, S t�' �c '' �i@� r' , � _:: � � � �� ! f�;��:`= �� '�� ;� � ;� T�� . , �` �� I �'' � ' � � `� � �zT!_ 1 �, .� � ��1 �A. � t ! a � �� .e�'"'4` . ��- . q �� - ; � ' � �.,s'� F _ � � . �: \ { a l� i 1 � �� .... �` .,� �� .-. ..�. .. �..,,_:_-. �� .; '�� =�� c. yr i` r t� . 1 i �� - $ �Va��s� + . � a <�, T'i ' �j�?a'� _ �� _, . 1 � �_b � �G�l ..j . � �, � < � R ,�� ' Ec . '�'$ 1� �G� � �� =� }i � C..y S , 3 S �. � U : i � � � � F � " `� : _ �. �';' �� . ; � �� ` � _�.,., tkw.a....-'.�:> _ s