Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-03 HPC Packet - Date Changed AGENDA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North March meeting - Rescheduled to April 3rd, 2019 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of minutes of February 11th, 2019 regular meeting minutes IV. OPEN FORUM - The Open Forum is a portion of the Commission meeting to address subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Chairperson may reply at the time of the statement of may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. V. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) - All items; listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Heritage Preservation Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a commission member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 1. Case No. 2019-04: Consideration of a Design Permit for new business signage. Property located at 224 Chestnut St E, in the CBD district. Tomy O’Brien, property owner and Mike Herman, applicant. VI. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Case No. 2019-03: Consideration of a Demolition Permit to demolish the existing structure and build a new home. Property located at 615 Broadway St S, in the Neighborhood Conservation District. Reid and Julie Miller, property owners. VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS – NO PACKET MATERIALS 3. 2019 Preservation Awards 4. WCHS Member Seat IX. ADJOURNMENT HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING February 11, 2019 7:00 P.M. Chairman Larson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman Larson, Commissioners Hadrits, Mino, Steinwall, Welty, Council Representative Junker Absent: Commissioner Krakowski Staff: City Planner Wittman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of January 16, 2019 meeting minutes Motion by Commissioner Mino, seconded by Commissioner Hadrits, to approve the minutes of the January 16, 2019 meeting. Motion passed 5-0. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA There were no items on the Consent Agenda. PUBLIC HEARING Case No. 2019-01: Consideration of a Design Permit for a new home in the Neighborhood Conservation District located at 401 Wilkins Street West. Ann Thompson, property owner and Scott McCormack, applicant. City Planner Wittman reviewed the case. On October 21, 2018 the property at 401 Wilkins Street West, constructed in 1946 and outside of the City’s periods of significance, suffered a house fire. Upon inspection it was deemed unsalvageable. The applicant is requesting a permit to construct a single family home on a new foundation. While the previous residence was two stories, the property owner is proposing a one story, 8/12 pitch, gable roof home. Three sides of the home will have exposed foundation with a brick pattern. The structure will be clad in vinyl lap siding with shakes on the gabled edge of the porch. Soffit, fascia, frieze and corner boards are proposed. Fiberglass windows, in a variety of sizes, will be on three of the four sides. The new residence will have a front porch that will run across half of the front of the home, constructed of cedar with two stone columns at the stairway. Staff recommends approval with nine conditions. Scott McCormack, McCormack Classic Construction, stated in response to a staff-recommended condition that the window trim all be consistent, that the windows in wells will have trim. The back of the house will not be seen due to the garage which was saved. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting February 11, 2019 Page 2 of 5 Ann Thompson, property owner, stated it was originally a single story, one bedroom home. She and her husband added the living room and the second story. Chairman Larson explained the HPC’s role in reviewing new construction in the Neighborhood Conservation District, and the emphasis on four-sided design. He questioned the lack of windows on the east and west elevations. He suggested adding a window in the master bedroom. Mr. McCormack replied the ballfield across the street is a detriment for windows on that side. Adding one window would make it look unbalanced. They have tried to focus the curb appeal on the front. Ms. Thompson added there are lilac bushes running the whole length of the east side so windows would not be seen anyway. She prefers not to have a window in the master bedroom because of the noise and parking along there especially during baseball season. When that area was a living room, they never had those windows open because it was too noisy. Chairman Larson stated that having no side windows is unattractive and doesn’t fit the character of the rest of the block. The typical house of this style on this block has windows on the ends. This is a blank wall that faces a public street. The lilac bushes could go away at any time. Commissioner Welty suggested using triple pane or one way glass. Mr. McCormack said noise would still come through the glass. Some houses in this neighborhood don’t have windows on all sides, therefore this fits in with existing homes. Councilmember Junker remarked that kids have played at Staples Field for 100 years. That is the only justification for the absence of windows. Commissioner Mino noted that staff recommends one design be chosen for the windows for consistency. Ms. Thompson said she would want the windows all to be the same. Commissioner Hadrits asked if the color of the vinyl will match the garage. Ms. Thompson replied the garage was scorched and will have to be re-sided. The colors will match. Chairman Larson asked what the concrete foundation will look like. He asked if the stone will be carried down to grade so it doesn’t appear to be suspended above the ground. Mr. McCormack stated the foundation will have a brick pattern. It will be a panel with smooth aluminum since stamping is not allowed in Minnesota. The color will be consistent with either the siding or the trim of the fascia and soffit. The stone will come down to the concrete stoop. Chairman Larson opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Chairman Larson said he would like to see consistent window trim but it is not needed on window well windows. Commissioner Mino said she understands the problems with sound and baseballs. Not having windows on two sides would be an exception to the Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines and she would like to make sure it’s clear that it is an exception. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting February 11, 2019 Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Welty said on the kitchen side there is an opportunity for a window next to the refrigerator. Ms. Thompson said she would prefer not to have a window there because the next door house is very close. Mr. McCormack reiterated that there are houses in the neighborhood that don’t have windows on all sides so it is not an exception, they are trying to do something that has already been done in that block. Commissioner Welty asked if they would consider a window in the gable. Mr. McCormack said it makes no sense to put a window in an area where there is no way to look out. Ms. Thompson commented she has lived there 38 years. To go through all this over windows in order to get a new home approved seems burdensome. She did not ask for her house house to be burned down. She asked that the HPC let her build the home because it is nice looking and will fit in with the neighborhood. Commissioner Steinwall acknowledged the HPC has guidelines but can also make exceptions. The HPC can read into the record the unusual circumstances of this house and its proximity to a well used park with lots of traffic. She suggested that as one of the conditions it be noted that the HPC is cognizant of the fact that it is making some exceptions to the rules due to the proximity to the park. Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve Case No. 2019-01, Design Permit for a new home in the Neighborhood Conservation District located at 401 Wilkins Street West. with the nine conditions recommended by staff, with the finding that the HPC is cognizant of the fact it is departing from guidelines due to proximity to Staples Field; amending Condition #4 to state that window trim with the same level of detail and with the same materials as the front of the residence will be installed on all window and door openings on all four sides of the structure; adding Condition #10 stating that the foundation will be covered to match the siding or trim; and adding Condition #11 stating that the porch post stone will be carried down to the concrete stoop. Motion passed 4–1 with Commissioner Welty voting nay. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 2019-02: Consideration of a Design Permit to remodel the existing store front on the property located at 214-216 Main Street South in the CBD district. Michael Lynskey Sr, property owner. Ms. Wittman explained that the applicant is requesting approval of storefront reconstruction and other façade improvements at 214 Main Street South, a contributing building in the Stillwater Commercial Historic District. The request is three-fold: 1. Restore a wood and glass storefront on the southerly bay, commonly referred to as 216 Main Street South, occupied by Downtown Divas; and 2. Construct a northerly three-bay, two-unit storefront of painted wood and insulated glass; and 3. Paint all historic wood and decorative metal features. Staff finds that restoration of a wood storefront with and 4” glass tile/block transom window on the southerly bay, commonly referred to as 216 Main Street South and occupied by Downtown Divas; and construction of a northerly three-bay, two-unit storefront of painted wood and insulated glass; and painting of all historic wood and decorative metal features are consistent with the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District. Furthermore, staff finds that: if the northerly three bays do not contain 4” glass tile/block transom windows, re-creation of them is not consistent with the Site Alterations to a Heritage Preservation Site and the Downtown Design Review District and, therefore, should not be re-created. This would allow for the Downtown Divas (and potentially the Mad Capper) to be restored to the original condition of this southerly building while allowing for the northern building to be constructed with its own unique and uniform design. Staff finds the proposed structure alterations are consistent with the guidelines and recommends approval with eight conditions. Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting February 11, 2019 Page 4 of 5 Brad Smith, Brad Smith Traditional Construction Services, stated the existing glass storefront tapers in, goes across and tapers out. He would remove that and bring it out to the front as the building once was. It will remain ADA accessible and maintain the same slope as the current door entrance. The brick would be removed from the columns. He thinks the old cast iron columns are underneath the brick. The columns to the north will also have brick removed and he will re-create that same column feel although the cast iron is no longer there in that location - it will be wood instead of cast iron. The three bays will divide right in the center for two tenants. Motion by Commissioner Hadrits, seconded by Commissioner Mino, to approve Case No. 2019-02, Design Permit to remodel the existing storefront at 214-216 Main Street South with the eight conditions recommended by staff. Motion passed 5-0. FYI STAFF UPDATES Case No. 2018-29 Appeal City Planner Wittman stated that the City Council overturned the HPC decision on the balconies on the Crosby Hotel and allowed full depth balconies. The Council also approved the demolition of the house at 709 South Second Street, accepting the findings of the designation study. The Council understands there are constraints with the existing demolition ordinance. Staff has applied for a grant to update all the ordinances. Regarding the Crosby Hotel appeal, Councilmember Junker reported that the Council felt the decks looked incomplete with basically bars across the windows versus a deck. The HPC denial was overturned 3-1 with him voting against. Regarding the Second Street demolition, every council member supported the designation study but he still feels there is a gap. He asked why is the City paying the $5,000 for the study? Ms. Wittman replied this application is the only one that has gone through the entire process while she has been here. She understands from City Attorney Land that if the City orders a designation study, then the City is probably responsible for paying for that. One thing the City may want to look at is whether the application fee should be $5,000 or an escrow of $5,000. The process needs clarification. The City Attorney is committed to working with the HPC and an outside consultant to update the ordinance. 2019 Grant Application Ms. Wittman said she submitted a pre-application for Stillwater to host the 2020 state historic preservation conference; and that the International Main Street Alliance is offering scholarships to the national Main Street Conference in Seattle at the end of March. Commissioners interested in attending should contact her. Commissioner Mino stated that Preservation Alliance of Minnesota is encouraging Stillwater to become a Main Street Community. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Steinwall, seconded by Chairman Larson, to adjourn. All in favor, 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Julie Kink, Recording Secretary HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 20, 2019 CASE NO.: 2019-04 APPLICANT: Mike Herman, representing Mike’s Electric Bikes REQUEST: Request for a Design Permit to paint the exterior of, and to install a projecting sign for Mike’s Electric Bikes on, the structure located at 224 Chestnut Street East ZONING: Central Business COMP PLAN DISTRICT: Downtown Mixed Use PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of the following improvements to the structure located at 224 Chestnut Street East, a contributing building in the Downtown Commercial Historic District:  Exterior painting of the existing purple, wooden façade elements to gray (Sherwin Williams Gray Clouds); and  Painting the sign band area black; and  Refinishing the main entrance door in a natural wood stain; and  The installation of 17’ by 20” dimensional sign foam lettering on the black sign band to read “Mike’s Electric Bikes”. The sign lettering will be orange and gold (with orange edges); and  Installation of three, gooseneck lights above the sign. Case No. 2019-04 HPC: March 20, 2019 Page 2 of 4 APPLICABLE GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS Wall signs are permitted at a ratio of one square foot of signage for every linear foot of building frontage. There are two units in this building. Therefore, this business is permitted to have 20 square feet of signage. The Downtown Design Review Manual indicates:  Materials: Modern sign materials are acceptable provided their design is handled with an understanding of the Victorian spirit.  Color: Choose tones with sufficient contrast to be clearly legible: dark on light or light on dark. The relationship of the colors and tones used on new or improved structures must be compatible with the color and tone patterns already established by adjacent buildings. The tasteful use of color and accent can introduce variety and charm, whereas the indiscriminate use of colors and color combinations can overload the senses and produce visual conflict and chaos. The goal is to achieve an area-wide complementary blend of background colors combined with selected and limited uses of primary and focal colors.  The color of buildings should relate to the adjacent buildings colors to create a harmonious effect.  Avoid colors which visually overpower or strongly contrast with adjacent building colors and established downtown color schemes as a whole. The standards for lighting are:  A coordinated lighting plan should be submitted for review with building plans.  Lighting fixtures should be concealed or integrated into the overall design of the project. The light source shall be hidden from direct pedestrian or motorist view. Sherwin Williams 7658 Sherwin Williams 6884 Case No. 2019-04 HPC: March 20, 2019 Page 3 of 4 ALTERNATIVES A. Approve, whole or in part. If the proposed application meets the Downtown Design Review District standards, and the standards set forth for Design Permits, the HPC should move to approve Case No. 2019-04. Staff recommends the following conditions for approval: 1. Plans shall be consistent with those submitted to the Community Development Department and on file with HPC Case No. 2019-04. 2. The entire building’s sign band shall be painted black. 3. The sign lettering height shall not exceed the sign band height. 4. The orange lettering shall be a subdued color, such as Sherwin Williams Rhumba Orange (SW 6642). 5. Pin-mounted lettering shall be done in a fashion as to reduce impact to the structure. Pins shall be directly set into a sign band or a rail painted to match the sign band area. 6. The sign and lettering shall have an eggshell finish. The sign shall obtain a sign permit prior to the installation of the sign. 7. Lights shall be painted a uniform, neutral color. 8. Lighting fixtures shall be directed towards the sign and installed in a fashion where the bulb is not visible from pedestrians. If the source of the bulb is visible, the lighting fixture is not approved. 9. If a lighting strip is required for electrical installation, the lighting strip shall be painted in a uniform, neutral color to match the lighting fixtures. 10. Lighting fixtures shall obtain an electrical permit prior to installation. 11. Any façade intrusions shall be done in the mortar to the greatest extent possible. 12. Disturbance to the exterior wall face shall be done in a fashion as to prevent excess damage and water intrusion. All holes shall be filled and sealed. 13. Prior to painting the structure, the applicant or representative shall obtain a contractor’s license as well as any required and necessary obstruction permits. 14. All minor modifications to the plans shall be approved in advance by the City Planner. All major modifications shall be approved in advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between “major” and “minor” is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. B. Deny. If the HPC finds that the proposal is not consistent with the Downtown Design Review District standards, then the Commission may deny the request. With a denial, the basis of action is required to be given. Furthermore, a denial with prejudice would prohibit the applicant from resubmittal of a similar application for one year. C. Table. If the HPC needs additional information to make a decision, the request may be tabled to the following hearing. FINDINGS The painting of a contributing building in the National Register listed Stillwater Commercial Historic District requires review. Many storefronts are all solid colors, including black, white and gray. The use of gray on the wooden storefront elements are in keeping with the Victorian Case No. 2019-04 HPC: March 20, 2019 Page 4 of 4 tradition. While gold is also a traditionally-historian color, the chosen orange appears bright. Therefore, staff would recommend a condition of approval requiring the orange to be less bright and more subdued. The painting of the sign band area is appropriate. However, painting only the half of the structure’s sign band will create disconnect on the building. Therefore, painting the entire sign band is appropriate. The lighting fixtures appear to conform to the design guidelines. However, the bend in the neck of the lights appear as though the source of the bulb could be visible by pedestrians and motorists. Therefore, the fixtures may need to be altered. If alternation cannot occur in a fashion as to eliminate the light source, the applicant’s desired fixture cannot be installed. RECOMMENDATION With certain conditions, the application does conform to the Downtown Design Review District’s guidelines. On the basis HPC Case No. 2019-04 conforms to the Downtown Design Review District standards, staff recommends conditional approval of the wall sign, painting, and light instillation at 224 Chestnut Street East. ATTACHMENTS Applicant submission HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 20, 2019 CASE NO.: 2019-03 APPLICANT: Sarah Nymo, AIA, of Rehkamp Larson Architects, representing Reid & Julie Miller, property owners REQUEST: Consideration of the demolition of the residential structure located at 615 Broadway Street South ZONING: RB – Two Family COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR – Low/Medium Density PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of the demolition of the residential structure located at 615 2nd Street South (located within the original Stillwater plat). The property owners would like to construct a new single family residence on the property. PROPERTY HISTORY, CONDITION AND VALUATION According to the 2002 City of Stillwater Architecture- History Inventory Form, the structure is believed to have been constructed in 1880. However, neither the South Hill neighborhood survey nor the City’s historical building permit inventory have greater insight to the exact date of construction or who the original owners were. In reviewing the Stillwater City Directories, the following people were found to have lived in the residence: 615 Broadway St. South, Photo Credit: Google Images (August, 2018) HPC Case 2019-03 615 Broadway Street South March 20, 2019 Page 2 Year(s) Resident(s) 1890-1891 Eldred M. Martin and Benjamin S. Miller 1892-1893 John B Hardy, collector, and FJR Aiple 1894-1895 Christian C. Behrens, bookkeeper, and FJR Aiple 1896-1897 Albert Bussiere, bookkeeper, and JJ Eichten 1898-1899 Oscar A. Garbrush, clerk Given most years it was dual occupancy with a high turnover rate, it could be assumed the residence was a rental property. The structure first appears on the 1898 Sanborn Map; this is the date when the Sanborn Fire Insurance Company started to review this neighborhood. The map depicts a small, two story footprint with a front porch on the west and a single story addition on the rear. By 1910, the map shows the same font portion of the home with a different shaped rear addition. The front portion of the home is noted as one and a half stories. A 1.5 story barn was located in the rear of the property. According to the Sanborn Maps, the property did not change between 1910 and 1924. Due to heavy tree coverage with the City’s 1946 aerial imagery, property improvements could not be determined during that time. In review of the structure and the site, it is clear modern additions and alterations have been made to the structure. As noted in the 1996 inventory and the applicant submission, the original portion of the residence has been altered in the following ways:  The front porch has been enclosed;  A bay window has been added to the south side;  The north façade’s roofline has been altered to accommodate for a second-story window;  Metal storm windows and vinyl siding has been installed. Additionally, significant additions have been added to the rear of the home. Included in these improvements are a two and a half story addition to the living space, a tuck-under garage, a screen porch and a deck. 1898 Sanborn Map 1910 Sanborn Map HPC Case 2019-03 615 Broadway Street South March 20, 2019 Page 3 The 1996 inventory record notes the property was in good condition and had good integrity. The Washington County Assessor’s office has indicated the structure as having normal condition and a (combined) 2018 valuation of $508,300 ($335,000 land value and $173,300 dwelling value). This was a 3% valuation increase in the last year and a 25% valuation increase in the last five years. As indicated in the applicant’s photographs and submission of a home inspection report, the structure does have evidence of deferred maintenance. Maintenance items included evidence of water intrusion from poorly installed siding, flashing and trim; incomplete roof flashings; rotted deck boards; deteriorated window glazing putty; and minor foundation cracks. All items are noted as repairable. The only item of “safety or significant defect” was is the garage auto reverse sensor not working. The applicants have further submitted testimony from Todd Anderson, with Lifespace Construction, Inc., who indicated that he witnessed, on one portion of the home, the home’s construction. He described the design as typical of what is found in agricultural-style buildings. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION The 2030 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2010 by the Stillwater City Council, indicates the City will:  Preserve and protect commercial and residential historic properties (buildings, sites, miscellaneous structures and districts).  Encourage compatible remodeling, restoration and/or reuse of historic buildings, including homes.  Adopt housing/historic preservation regulations and performance standards to maintain the city’s existing housing stock. Additionally, while the City has just released its draft of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the City’s historic preservation and affordable housing goals and policies have not changed. As per Chapter 34 of the municipal code, staff has determined the structure is potentially a historic resource as it: a) Is associated with significant events or periods that exemplify broad patterns of cultural, political, economic or social history. This home was constructed during the following Historic Context(s): i. Stillwater and St. Croix Triangle Lumbering (1843-1914) ii. Early Agriculture and River Settlement (1840-1870) iii. Development of Residential Neighborhoods (1850s – 1940s) o The 2002 Architecture-History Inventory Form lists this structure as eligible for local listing under this period of significance Given the association with these contexts, staff determined the structure to be a potential historic resource. While the applicant argues the structure was not listed as a contributing building to the draft South Hill historic district, staff asserts the structure was not intended to be within the district’s boundary so it could not be listed as contributing or not contributing. While the structure was not included in the district boundary, it does not mean the structure does not contribute to the overall character of this neighborhood nor the City as a whole. HPC Case 2019-03 615 Broadway Street South March 20, 2019 Page 4 SITE VISIT AND ASSESSMENT In addition to viewing the property, historical and 180 degree aerial imagery, and submitted photographs, planning staff reviewed the neighboring surroundings in relationship to historic surveys, context assessments and designation studies previously conducted by the HPC. This structure is situated near the southern edge of the Original Stillwater Town (now City) plat. When compared to some of the other river-front homes, the original house is modest. However, the style and massing is in keeping with structures along South Broadway Street, especially those on the west side of the street. Additionally, it is characteristic of many of the other homes in the neighborhood and Stillwater: vernacular style, balloon-frame residences built between 1870 and 1910. In addition to viewing photographs and historical aerial imagery, Building Official Cindy Shilts and I conducted a site visit in April, 2018. • The interior of the home contains a significant amount of original woodwork on the main floor. • Based on the exterior assessment, the main house is not in a state of disrepair or a hazard. It appears to be in a fair condition. • While there are cracks in the limestone foundation, they all appear repairable. • Many of the original floor joists are rotted and have been sistered. Some joist repair or replacement would be required. Site photographs of the interior of the structure depicting its unique construction and rotted joists are attached. PUBLIC COMMENT The City has received no public comment regarding this demolition request. STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Before approving the demolition of a building, the commission shall make findings that the demolition is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the property, or that there are no reasonable alternatives to the demolition. In determining whether reasonable alternatives exist, the commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the significance of the property, the integrity of the property and the economic value or usefulness of the existing structure, including its current use, costs of renovation and feasible alternative uses. 1. Is the building or structure a historic resource? The code defines a historic resource as: “Any building or structure that is not currently designated as a Heritage Preservation Site but which is worthy of such designation because of its historical, cultural, architectural, archaeological or engineering significance.” As indicated, the vernacular style is one of the most common architectural styles in the City. Despite the Inventory record indicating the structure having good condition, the HPC Case 2019-03 615 Broadway Street South March 20, 2019 Page 5 lack of maintenance since has left the structure in less than good condition. However, the inspection report indicates no major hazards. Rehabilitation of the structure would be necessary to bring the structure’s exterior façade back into excellent condition. As such, the home is not eligible to be nationally listed; but, it could be locally designated as a heritage preservation site on the City’s local register. 2. Is there a feasible alternative to demolition? In determining whether reasonable alternatives exist, the commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the significance of the property, the integrity of the property and the economic value or usefulness of the existing structure, including its current use, costs of renovation and feasible alternative uses. Despite staff indicating greater than 50% of the existing structure could be removed without HPC approval (as greater than 50% of the existing residence is non-historic), the applicants have submitted preliminary designs for new home construction. The applicants have indicated they would prefer an Italianate home on this site. While the applicants have submitted conceptual drawings, they minimally meet the requirements for Neighborhood Conservation District review. No building rehabilitation plans or cost estimates for demolition and reconstruction were submitted. ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the HPC open the public hearing to take public comment, including testimony from the applicant. Once all comments have been made, the HPC should close the public hearing and take action on the request. The Commissions must make one of the findings: 1. If the Commission finds that the property is not a historic resource (i.e. makes “negative findings”) or that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, but that there is no feasible alternative to demolition (i.e. makes “positive finding with no feasible alternative to demolition”), then the commission shall notify the building official that a demolition permit may be issued. In both of these circumstances, the commission may require a mitigation plan as a condition of any approval for demolition of a building. Such plan may include the documentation of the property by measured drawings, photographic recording, historical research or other means appropriate to the significance of the property. In the past the HPC has required the following condition of approval’. : a. Prior to the demolition, the property owner will advertise the home for deconstruction, selective salvage and/or relocation in the Stillwater Gazette once a week for two consecutive weeks, attempting to sell the home. A demolition permit shall only be issued by the City after 30 days has passed since the last time the ad has appeared in the Stillwater Gazette and all other conditions of approval have been met. Additionally, with the approval of the City Council, the commission may stay the release of the building, wrecking or demolition permit for up to 180 days as a condition of approval for a demolition of a building that has been found to contribute to a HPC Case 2019-03 615 Broadway Street South March 20, 2019 Page 6 potential historic district to allow parties interested in preserving the historic resource a reasonable opportunity to act to protect it. 2. If the commission finds that the property is historically significant or a historic resource, and that there is a feasible alternative to demolition (i.e. makes “positive finding with feasible alternative to demolition”), then the commission shall deny the demolition permit and direct the Community Development Director to prepare a designation study of the property. As staff has determined the structure is a potentially historic resource, the community’s preservation goals are designed to protect historic resources, staff recommends the Commission make a positive finding determination that the front 25’ portion of the structure is a historic resource, deny the demolition application and direct the Community Development Director to prepare a designation study. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Applicant Submission Demolition Request (5 Pages) Aerial Imagery (2 Pages) Sanborn Map Certificate of Survey Site Photographs Home Inspection Report (43 pages) Architectural Inventory Record (2 pages) South Hill Study Excerpts (6 pages) Builder Letter NCD Application Checklist (2 pages) New Residence Conceptual Designs (6 pages) February 22, 2019 Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission - Demolition Request Application Subject Property Address: 615 Broadway St S Stillwater, MN 55082 Applicants: Reid and Julie Miller (owners as of 12/21/2018) Application includes: · 8.5 x 11 Support Materials: o Application Index & Answers to HPC Demolition Review Submittal questions 1-8 o Appendices  Appendix 1 – professional inspection report  Appendix 2 - Stillwater Architectural History Inventory Form  Appendix 3 - pages 43-45 of the Final Survey Report for National Register Identification and Evaluation Study completed on the South Hill Residential Area in Winter/Spring 1996  Appendix 4 -pages 38-40 of the Final Survey Report for National Register Identification and Evaluation Study completed on the South Hill Residential Area in Winter/Spring 1996  Appendix 5 – NCD Design Review Application and Checklist  Appendix 6 – Builder Letter  Appendix 7 – Homeowner Letter · 11x17 Support materials o Aerial map of the site and neighborhood o Historic Sanborn neighborhood map o Professional survey of the property o Color photographs of the existing house o Professional Schematic Design drawings by Rehkamp Larson Architects, Inc of the new proposed residence HPC Demolition Review Submittal Questions 1 – 8: Question 1 A map showing the location of the building or structure to be demolished on its property with reference to neighborhood properties. Reply to question 1 See packet of 11x17 support materials Question 2 A legal description of property and owner of record. Reply to question 2 As stated in the title: The Northerly one-half of Lot 15, all of Lot 16, Block 42, Original Town (now City) of Stillwater, excepting from said lots the Easterly 35 feet thereof, Washington County, Minnesota. AND The West One Hundred Four (W 104) feet of Lot Eleven (11), and the West One Hundred Four (W 104) of the North One-half (N 1/2) of Lot Twelve (12), Block Forty-two, Original Town (now City) of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. AND The East Thirty-five (35) feet of Lot Sixteen (16) and the East Thirty-five (35) feet of the North One-half (N 1/2) of Lot Fifteen (15), Block Forty-two (42), Original Town (now City) of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. See professional survey dated November 22, 2018 in 11x17 packet of support materials Question 3 Color photographs of all building elevations. Front elevation 8x10, side elevations 3x5 Reply to question 3 See packet of 11x17 support materials Question 4 A description of the building or structure or portion of building or structure to be demolished. Reply to Question 4 Current owners, Reid and Julie Miller, are completing this demolition request application for the 100% demolition and removal of current residential structure and foundation. This application if seeking the preliminary approval for demolition with conditional expectations to furnish complete plans for reuse of the property as defined in question 6. Question 5 The reason for the proposed demolition and data supporting the reason including, where applicable, date sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition to determine why restoration or reuse is not economically feasible. Reply to Question 5 Current owners, Reid and Julie Miller, are providing the following artifacts to support this demolition application. City of Stillwater Demolition Review Process Criteria: · Construction prior to January 1, 1946 o Front 1/3 of structure was built before 1946, but the following significant demolitions and/or remodeling since 1946 has impacted the historical validity of the structure  Rear barn/garage structure has been 100% demolished (refer to Sanborn Map in 11x17 support materials)  Front façade of home has been altered over 60% with renovation of front of home and the construction of screened in porch (refer to front elevation picture in 11x17 support materials)  North façade of home has been altered significantly with renovation to roofline for upper window.  South façade has been altered over 50% with renovation of side of home with 1) installation of bay window structure and 2) installation of octagon windows inconsistent with 1880s construction o Rear 2/3 of structure was built after 1946 and has been constructed in multiple “phases”, often without permits and/or consistent with building code/ordinances (see appendix #1 inspection report) o Entire home has been resided with aluminum siding inconsistent with any historical building practices o These are the obvious, non-invasive, conclusions without removal of all siding and/or interior finishes to further understand the numerous post-1946 renovations. · Building or structure, or a portion thereof, on the National Historic Register o No, the structure at 615 Broadway Street S is not on the National Historic Register · Designated local heritage preservation site or contributing structure or building in a designated National Register historic district o No, the structure at 615 Broadway Street S has been identified as “not contributing” to the historical significance to the City of Stillwater and the South Hill as documented in the City of Stillwater Architectural History Inventory (appendix #2) and also on pages 43-45 of the Final Survey Report for National Register Identification and Evaluation Study completed on the South Hill Residential Area in Winter/Spring 1996 (appendix #3) Other Considerations: · Architecture Alignment with South Hill District o The structure at 615 Broadway Street S has been identified as a “Homestead” architecture style and is not well aligned with the Gothic Revival, Italianate, Victorian architecture of many of the structures in the South Hill District as documented in the City of Stillwater Architectural History Inventory form and also on pages 38-40 of the Final Survey Report for National Register Identification and Evaluation Study completed on the South Hill Residential Area in Winter/Spring 1996 (appendix #4) · Integrity of structure o The structure at 615 Broadway Street S has numerous concerns ranging from structural deficiencies, water intrusion, code/ordinance violations. See inspection report for more details (appendix #1)  Foundation – deteriorating original foundation including foundation cracks, failing mortar, rebuilding needed.  Footings – Footings for rear additions not on suitable footings (porch).  Main floor – main floor original structural wood is decaying/rotting. Prior owner “sistering” lumber next to rotting wood to “buy time”. It is safe to assume that floor structure would not support loads consistent with current standards and could fail leading to an unsafe situation.  Electrical code violations – electrical issues exist throughout the original structure AND the historical additions. In addition, electrical wiring runs “through” the deteriorating floor structure including the rotting and sistering joists which will cause electrical failure at some point.  Plumbing – improper plumbing been installed with makeshift methods, potentially requiring a significant reinstallation of major plumbing components and piping.  Window/siding – Windows and siding installed in last renovation do not meet code and have visual installation deficiencies and moisture intrusion. Current siding is failing, pieces missing, flashing incorrect, caulking missing.  Water intrusion/mold – Visible signs of water intrusion, rot around doors, windows and behind “buckling” siding of home as well as staining interior plaster.  Stairways – unsafe and not consistent with historical or current standards  Incomplete construction – Rear additions to home do not appear to be completed. Question 6 Proposed plans and schedule for reuse of the property on which the building or structure is located. Reply to Question 6 Current owners, Reid and Julie Miller, have engaged architecture firm, Rehkamp Larson Architects, to develop Designs/Plans of a single family residence to be presented to the Stillwater HPC/DRC and will be consistent with guidelines in the Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines. Current expectations are that the design of the new structure will strongly follow Italianate architecture. See packet of 11x17 support materials Question 7 Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements. Reply to Question 7 Current owners, Reid and Julie Miller, have engaged architecture firm, Rehkamp Larson Architects, to develop Designs/Plans of a single family residence to be presented to the Stillwater HPC/DRC and will be consistent with guidelines in the Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines. The home will comply with all zoning requirements. Current expectations are that the design of the new structure will strongly follow Italianate architecture. See packet of 11x17 support materials Question 8 A description of alternatives to the demolition. Reply to Question 8 Current owners, Reid and Julie Miller, in coordination with their architects from Rehkamp Larson Architects have reviewed options to keep/re-use elements of the existing structure. Given the artifacts provided in Question 5 (above) it was deemed illogical to use the existing structure. BROADWAY STREET SOUTHPID#2803020440059CONTACT:Reid T MillerMobile: 1-612-747-5474remiller@deloitte.comUNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM FIELDSURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE SURVEYOR MAKES NOGUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCHUTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYORFURTHER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWNARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES CERTIFY THATTHEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE INFORMATIONAVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST.COUNTY/CITY:REVISIONS:PROJECT LOCATION:DATEREVISION615CALL BEFORE YOU DIG!TWIN CITY AREA:TOLL FREE:1-800-252-1166651-454-0002Gopher State One CallLEGAL DESCRIPTION:BROADWAY STREET SOUTHCITY OF STILLWATERWASHINGTONCOUNTY11-22-18INITIAL ISSUECERTIFICATION:I hereby certify that this plan was prepared byme, or under my direct supervision, and that I ama duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws ofthe state of Minnesota.Daniel L. Thurmes Registration Number: 25718Date:__________________615BROADWAY ST. S.0NORTH1530ZZ18521SURVZZ521CERTIFICATE OFSURVEYLAND SURVEYING, INC.CORNERSTONEPROJECT NO.FILE NAME11-22-18LEGENDUNDERGROUND ELECTRICUNDERGROUND CABLE TVUNDERGROUND FIBER OPTICUNDERGROUND TELEPHONEOVERHEAD UTILITYUNDERGROUND GASSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATERMAINFENCECURB [TYPICAL]CONTOURSFOUND MONUMENT 1/2" IPMARKED RLS 15480SET 1/2" IRON PIPEMARKED RLS NO. 25718CABLE TV PEDESTALAIR CONDITIONERELECTRIC MANHOLEELECTRIC METERELECTRIC PEDESTALELECTRIC TRANSFORMERLIGHT POLEGUY WIREPOWER POLEGAS MANHOLEGAS METERTELEPHONE MANHOLETELEPHONE PEDESTALSANITARY CLEANOUTSANITARY MANHOLECATCH BASINSTORM DRAINFLARED END SECTIONSTORM MANHOLEFIRE DEPT. CONNECTIONHYDRANTCURB STOPWATER WELLWATER MANHOLEWATER METERPOST INDICATOR VALVEWATER VALVEBOLLARDFLAG POLEMAIL BOXTRAFFIC SIGNUNKNOWN MANHOLESOIL BORINGSPOT ELEVATIONTRAFFIC SIGNALCONIFEROUS TREEDECIDUOUS TREEAREA:TOTAL AREA AS SHOWN = 19,289 SQ.FT.DENOTES EXISTINGACCESS CONTROL ASSHOWN ON RECORDPLATBUILDING LINEBITUMINOUS SURFACECONCRETE SURFACEHOUSE = 1,748DECKS/PERGOLA/MISC = 498CONCRETE/PAVERS = 4,095POOL = 335WALLS = 785TOTAL = 7,461 SQ.FT.38.7% OF TOTAL AREAEXISTING IMPROVEMENT AREAS:(IN SQUARE FEET)Suite #2001970 Northwestern Ave.Stillwater, MN 55082Phone 651.275.8969dan@cssurvey.net1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON COORDINATES SUPPLIED BY THEWASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEYORS OFFICE. (NAD 83)2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOT SHOWN.3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE NAVD 88.4. NO EASEMENT DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED TO US FORREVIEW AND/OR TO SHOW ON SURVEY. EASEMENTS MAYEXIST THAT ARE NOT SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY.SURVEY NOTES:(AS SHOWN ON TITLE RESOURCES TITLE COMMITMENT NO.1297695, DATED OCTOBER 18, 2018)The Northerly one-half of Lot 15, all of Lot 16, Block 42,Original Town (now City) of Stillwater, excepting from saidlots the Easterly 35 feet thereof, Washington County,Minnesota.ANDThe West One Hundred Four (W 104) feet of Lot Eleven (11),and the West One Hundred Four (W 104) of the NorthOne-half (N 1/2) of Lot Twelve (12), Block Forty-two, OriginalTown (now City) of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota.ANDThe East Thirty-five (35) feet of Lot Sixteen (16) and the EastThirty-five (35) feet of the North One-half (N 1/2) of LotFifteen (15), Block Forty-two (42), Original Town (now City)of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota.THE PERFECTED PLAT OF STILLWATER BY MYRON SHEPARDAPPROVED FEB. 20, 1887, RECORDED MARCH 19TH 1981 ASDOCUMENT NO. 416049 WAS USED TO CONTROL THEBOUNDARIES AS SHOWN ON THIS CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY.STILLWATER SECTIONAL MAPS DATED 1906 AND 1960 WERERELIED UPON FOR OTHER MATERS OF RECORD. 615 Broadway Street South | Existing House ImagesFRONT (WEST)FRONT & SIDE (WEST/ SOUTH) SIDE (SOUTH) 615 Broadway Street South | Existing House ImagesREAR (EAST) SIDE (SOUTH) SIDE (NORTH) 615 Broadway Street South | Neighborhood ContextHouse to Left House to Right WEBER HOME INSPECTION SERVICES RESIDENTIAL REPORT 615 Broadway St S STILLWATER MN 55082 Reid and Julie Miller OCTOBER 17, 2018 Inspector Michael Marosok 6127417420 weberhomeinspectionservices@gmail.com Agent Anne Anderson 651-428-6529 anneanderson@edinarealty.com 2 3 5 6 8 18 22 25 27 29 33 34 36 40 43 Table of Contents Table of Contents SUMMARY 1: INSPECTION DETAILS 2: ROOF 3: EXTERIOR 4: BASEMENT, FOUNDATION, CRAWLSPACE & STRUCTURE 5: HEATING 6: COOLING 7: PLUMBING 8: ELECTRICAL 9: FIREPLACE 10: ATTIC, INSULATION & VENTILATION 11: DOORS, WINDOWS & INTERIOR 12: GARAGE 13: BUILT-IN APPLIANCES 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 2 of 43 2.1.1 Roof - Coverings: Tree branches 2.3.1 Roof - Flashings: Incomplete Installation 2.4.1 Roof - Skylights, Chimneys & Other Roof Penetrations: Chimney rain hats 3.1.1 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Evidence of Water Intrusion 3.1.2 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Flashing/Trim Improperly Installed 3.1.3 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Damaged Siding 3.1.4 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Loose Siding 3.1.5 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Caulking 3.1.6 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Paint 3.1.7 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Vegetation 3.1.8 Exterior - Siding, Flashing & Trim: Trim Missing 3.3.1 Exterior - Walkways, Patios & Driveways: Driveway Trip Hazard 3.4.1 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Deck - Rotted Boards 3.4.2 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Railing Openings 3.4.3 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Deck rail construction 3.4.4 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Masonry stair deterioration 3.4.5 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Localized damage 3.4.6 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Stairway Handrails 3.4.7 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Improper Footings 3.4.8 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Porch Structure 3.4.9 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Perforations 3.4.10 Exterior - Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Improper Joist Bearing 3.6.1 Exterior - Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls: Retaining wall deterioration and movement 3.7.1 Exterior - Windows: Glazing Putty 3.7.2 Exterior - Windows: Missing Screens 3.7.3 Exterior - Windows: Cracked or broken Windows 3.7.4 Exterior - Windows: Paint 3.7.5 Exterior - Windows: Sill Rot 4.1.1 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Foundation: Foundation Cracks - Minor 4.1.2 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Foundation: Mortar deterioration 4.1.3 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Foundation: Rebuilding Needed 4.2.1 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Basements & Crawlspaces: Typical moisture 4.3.1 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Floor Structure: Typical cracking 4.3.2 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Floor Structure: Sills Near Grade Level 4.3.3 Basement, Foundation, Crawlspace & Structure - Floor Structure: Improper Support Posts 5.1.1 Heating - Equipment: Low flow 5.3.1 Heating - Distribution Systems: Ducts Not Sealed SUMMARY 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 3 of 43 5.3.2 Heating - Distribution Systems: Return Vent at Furnace 6.1.1 Cooling - Cooling Equipment: Older Unit 6.3.1 Cooling - Distribution System: Ducts Sealed 7.2.1 Plumbing - Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems: Improper Plumbing 8.1.1 Electrical - Service Entrance Conductors: Tree branches 8.2.1 Electrical - Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Marginal Electrical Service 8.3.1 Electrical - Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses: Abandoned Wiring 8.3.2 Electrical - Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses: Loose Wiring 8.3.3 Electrical - Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses: Wiring Exposed on Surfaces 8.4.1 Electrical - Lighting Fixtures, Switches & Receptacles: Cover Plates Missing 9.4.1 Fireplace - Cleanout Doors & Frames: Inadequate Clearance 10.1.1 Attic, Insulation & Ventilation - Attic Insulation: Attic access 11.1.1 Doors, Windows & Interior - Doors: Door Sticks 11.5.1 Doors, Windows & Interior - Ceilings: Stain(s) on Ceiling 11.6.1 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: Baluster Spaces Too Wide 11.6.2 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: No Handrail 11.6.3 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: Missing railing 11.6.4 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: Stairway configuration 11.6.5 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: Steep stairs 11.6.6 Doors, Windows & Interior - Steps, Stairways & Railings: Head Clearance 11.8.1 Doors, Windows & Interior - Bathrooms: Loose Toilet 12.2.1 Garage - Floor: Typical cracking 12.3.1 Garage - Walls & Firewalls: Fire Barrier 12.5.1 Garage - Garage Door Opener: Auto Reverse Sensor Not Working 12.6.1 Garage - Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home): Door Does Not Meet Separation Requirements 12.6.2 Garage - Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home): Not Self-closing 13.3.1 Built-in Appliances - Range/Oven/Cooktop: Missing Control Knobs 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 4 of 43 General: In Attendance Client General: Occupancy Furnished, Occupied, Utilities on General: Style Two story General: Temperature (approximate) 45 Fahrenheit (F) General: Type of Building Single Family General: Weather Conditions Clear, Dry 1: INSPECTION DETAILS Information Limitations General ALL COMPONENTS DESIGNATED FOR INSPECTION IN THE ASHI STANDARDS OFPRACTICE ARE INSPECTED, EXCEPT AS MAY BE NOTED IN THE "LIMITATIONS OFINSPECTION" SECTIONS WITHIN THIS REPORT. THIS REPORT IS NOT AN ASSESSMENTOF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN INCLUDING A MOLD, MILDEW, LEAD, ASBESTOS,WATER QUALITY, SEPTIC, POOLS OR RADON. ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING REQUIRESLABORATORY ANALYSIS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS INSPECTION ANY WATERINTRUSION INTO THE HOME CAN LEAD TO MOLD AND MILDEW. SINCE THERE IS NOSUCH THING AS A COMPLETELY DRY BASEMENT, IT IS COMMON TO FIND MOLD ORMILDEW IN SOME FORM IN THIS AREA, USUALLY CONCEALED BEHIND WALL BOARDFINISHES. ANYONE CONCERNED ABOUT MOLD OR MILDEW SHOULD SEEK ANASSESSMENT FOR THESE CONDITIONS FROM A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL. THISINSPECTION IS NOT AN ASSESSMENT OF SUB-SURFACE MOISTURE. THIS INSPECTIONIS VISUAL ONLY. A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF BUILDING COMPONENTS ARE VIEWEDIN AREAS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION. NO DESTRUCTIVETESTING OR DISMANTLING OF BUILDING COMPONENTS IS PERFORMED. IT IS THEGOAL OF THE INSPECTION TO PUT A HOME BUYER IN A BETTER POSITION TO MAKE ABUYING DECISION. NOT ALL IMPROVEMENTS WILL ALWAYS BE IDENTIFIED DURINGTHIS INSPECTION. UNEXPECTED REPAIRS SHOULD STILL BE ANTICIPATED. THEINSPECTION SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A GUARANTEE OR WARRANTY OF ANYKIND. THE INSPECTOR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PAST PRESENT OR FUTURE DEFECTSOR DAMAGE OR INJURY ASSOCIATE WITH DEFECTS. PLEASE REFER TO THE MESSAGETO THE CUSTOMER OR PRE-INSPECTION AGREEMENT AND ASHI STANDARDS OFPRACTICE FOR A FULL EXPLANATION OF THE SCOPE OF THE INSPECTION. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 5 of 43 Inspection Method Ladder, Roof Roof Type/Style Gable, Flat Coverings: Material Asphalt, Single ply membrance Coverings: Life expectancy 15 or more Years Roof Drainage Systems: Gutter Material Aluminum Roof Drainage Systems: Gutter Discharge Above Grade Flashings: Material Aluminum, Galvanized Steel Skylights, Chimneys & Other Roof Penetrations: Chimneys Masonry 2: ROOF IN NI NP 2.1 Coverings X 2.2 Roof Drainage Systems X 2.3 Flashings X 2.4 Skylights, Chimneys & Other Roof Penetrations X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Coverings DECK OR PORCH OVER ROOF Inspection of the flat roof is obstructed by the deck or porch and cannot be inspected or evaluated. 2.1.1 Coverings TREE BRANCHES AT THE NORTH WEST Tree branches in close proximity to the roof may cause physical damage to the roofing and should be removed. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 2.3.1 Flashings INCOMPLETE INSTALLATION AT THE SOUTH SIDE PORCH COVER Flashing details are either poorly or incompletely installed. Leakage Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 6 of 43 Flashing details are either poorly or incompletely installed. Leakage may occur. Repairs should be undertaken as necessary. If leakage occurs, patching can be attempted, otherwise, replacement is necessary. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. 2.4.1 Skylights, Chimneys & Other Roof Penetrations CHIMNEY RAIN HATS OVER THE MASONRY CHIMNEY Rain hats and vermin screens are recommended on the masonry chimneys to prevent water and moisture intrusion. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 7 of 43 Inspection Method Visual Siding, Flashing & Trim: Siding Material Vinyl Siding, Flashing & Trim: Siding Style Shiplap Exterior Doors: Exterior Entry Door Wood, Metal Walkways, Patios & Driveways: Driveway Material Concrete, Pavers Walkways, Patios & Driveways: Walkways Concrete Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Steps, Porches, and Decks Covered Porch, Deck Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps: Material Wood Eaves, Soffits & Fascia: Soffit and Facia materials Metal Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls: Exterior Level Grade, Graded away from house Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls: Retaining walls Unit masonry, Stone Windows: Windows Vinyl, Wood 3: EXTERIOR IN NI NP 3.1 Siding, Flashing & Trim X 3.2 Exterior Doors X 3.3 Walkways, Patios & Driveways X 3.4 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps X 3.5 Eaves, Soffits & Fascia X 3.6 Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls X 3.7 Windows X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps RESTRICTED ACCESS AT THE FRONT AND REAR Inspection below the deck or porch was either restricted or there was no access. Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls OBSCURED VIEWING Vegetation or storage obstructed viewing and inspection. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 8 of 43 3.1.1 Siding, Flashing & Trim EVIDENCE OF WATER INTRUSION AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EAST GARAGE STALL Siding showed signs of water intrusion. This could lead to further siding deterioration, mold or structural damage. The siding should be removed and any concealed damage repaired as necessary. Recommendation 3.1.2 Siding, Flashing & Trim FLASHING/TRIM IMPROPERLYINSTALLED AT THE SOUTH SIDE PORCH Flashing & trim pieces were improperly installed, which could result in moisture intrusion and damaging leaks. Repairs should be undertaken as necessary. Recommendation 3.1.3 Siding, Flashing & Trim DAMAGED SIDING AT THE NORTH EAST CORNER Damage to the siding should be repaired or sealed as necessary to prevent water intrusion and damage. Recommendation 3.1.4 Siding, Flashing & Trim LOOSE SIDING AT THE SOUTH SIDE Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 9 of 43 Loose siding should be resecured as necessary to protect the underlying structure from weather and pest damage. 3.1.5 Siding, Flashing & Trim CAULKING AT THE MECHANICAL VENTS ON THE NORTH SIDE Any openings, gaps or connection points in the siding should be caulked or sealed against moisture or insects. Recommendation 3.1.6 Siding, Flashing & Trim PAINT AT THE FRONT PORCH Areas that show signs of peeling paint should be cleaned, primed and painted to preserve the exterior. Maintenance Item 3.1.7 Siding, Flashing & Trim VEGETATION Vegetation should be trimmed back from the exterior of the house. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 10 of 43 3.1.8 Siding, Flashing & Trim TRIM MISSING ABOVE THE GARAGE DOOR AND BELOW THE SIDING AT THE GARAGE, AND AT THE SOUTH SIDE BAY WINDOW Damaged, missing or improperly trimmed details should be repaired or replaced. Maintenance Item 3.3.1 Walkways, Patios & Driveways DRIVEWAY TRIP HAZARD AT THE TOP OF THE HILL The settled and uneven driveway represents a potential trip hazard. Leveling or repairs should be undertaken as necessary. Maintenance Item 3.4.1 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps DECK - ROTTED BOARDS AT THE SOUTH SIDE One or more deck boards are showing signs of rot. Repairs will extend the useful life of the deck and prevent the spread of rot. Repairs should be undertaken as necessary. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 11 of 43 3.4.2 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps RAILING OPENINGS AT THE DECKS There is an unsafe opening in the railing. The spacing on the rail should not exceed 4". An opening greater than 4" is a serious safety hazard especially for children as their head or other body part can become trapped. These standards change over time. Maintenance Item 3.4.3 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps DECK RAIL CONSTRUCTION The deck rails do not conform to recommendations for horizontal loading. The can fail under heavy loads. For safety, they should be improved or rebuilt as necessary. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Maintenance Item 3.4.4 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps MASONRY STAIR DETERIORATION AT THE FRONT YARD The concrete stairs show signs of spalling or deterioration. If the stairs become a trip hazard, they should be replaced. In some cases patching can extend the useful life of the stairs. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 12 of 43 3.4.5 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps LOCALIZED DAMAGE AT THE SOUTH WEST There is typical aging, rot and deterioration of the deck/porch. Repairs will extend the useful life of the structure. Recommendation 3.4.6 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps STAIRWAY HANDRAILS AT THE FRONT YARD Handrails are recommended at all stairways with over 4 step rises. Maintenance Item 3.4.7 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps IMPROPER FOOTINGS AT THE EAST SIDE DECK Deck posts appear to be improperly founded. This is usually indicative of non-professional practices. Improvements should be undertaken with any sign of movement. Maintenance Item 3.4.8 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps PORCH STRUCTURE The trusses used in the construction of the rear porch and pergola are home-made. They are improperly Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 13 of 43 The trusses used in the construction of the rear porch and pergola are home-made. They are improperly constructed using screws of an insufficient number at the gusset plate connections. Gusset plates are exposed to exterior weathering and may be prone to failure. Horizontal collar ties at the pergola are over spanned and improperly jointed. It would be wise to inquire with the city into permits, inspections and design approval. Repairs should be taken as necessary. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. 3.4.9 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps PERFORATIONS AT THE SOUTH SIDE Abandoned joists and construction members penetrating the wall on the south side should be sealed against water intrusion. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 3.4.10 Decks, Balconies, Porches & Steps IMPROPER JOIST BEARING AT THE SOUTH SIDE Joists are improperly embedded into the foundation at the south Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 14 of 43 Joists are improperly embedded into the foundation at the south side. The can lead to rot and deterioration of the concrete. They should be removed from the block, resupported, and missing or damaged block replaced. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. 3.6.1 Vegetation, Grading, Drainage & Retaining Walls RETAINING WALL DETERIORATION AND MOVEMENT ALONG THE FRONT YARD There is spalling orsurface deterioration, and movement of the retaining walls related to age. This is the result of natural forces including the freeze thaw cycle and moisture. Although there is no immediate need for improvement, this condition should be monitored over time. Maintenance Item 3.7.1 Windows GLAZING PUTTY AT THE LOWER NORTH SIDE Deteriorated glazing putty or glazing stops should be repaired. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 15 of 43 3.7.2 Windows MISSING SCREENS AT THE LOWER NORTH AND LOWER SOUTH SIDES, AT IN THE TOWER Screens are missing. It would be wise to inquire as to any screens that may be in storage. Otherwise, screens should be replaced as necessary. Recommendation 3.7.3 Windows CRACKED OR BROKEN WINDOWS AT THE LOWER NORTH SIDE AND THE NORTH BASEMENT Cracked or broken windows should be repaired or replaced. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 16 of 43 3.7.4 Windows PAINT AT THE SOUTH SIDE Windows should be painted and caulked. Recommendation 3.7.5 Windows SILL ROT AT THE LOWER SOUTH SIDE AND THE KITCHEN There is significant rot in the window sill. Repairs or replacement will inevitably be necessary. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 17 of 43 Inspection Method Visual Basement configuration Basement Foundation: Material Masonry Block, Stone Floor Structure: Basement/Crawlspace Floor Concrete Floor Structure: Floor structure Wood Beams, Wooden joists, Wooden support posts Floor Structure: Sub-floor OSB, Plank Floor Structure: Crawlspace No Crawlspace Wall Structure: Wall Structure Wood Frame Ceiling Structure: Attic Structure Ceiling Joists, Rafters 4: BASEMENT, FOUNDATION, CRAWLSPACE & STRUCTURE IN NI NP 4.1 Foundation X 4.2 Basements & Crawlspaces X 4.3 Floor Structure X 4.4 Wall Structure X 4.5 Ceiling Structure X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Floor Structure STORAGE Storage restricted access and viewing of components. Floor Structure CONCEALED COMPONENTS Components concealed by finishes cannot be fully examined, evaluated, or inspected. Wall Structure CONCEALED STRUCTURE Concealed structural members cannot be fully inspected or evaluated. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 18 of 43 4.1.1 Foundation FOUNDATION CRACKS - MINOR AT THE FRONT PORCH Moderate cracking and movement was noted at the foundation. This is common with age and construction practice. Recommend monitoring over time. Here is an informational article on foundation cracks. Maintenance Item 4.1.2 Foundation MORTAR DETERIORATION ALONG THE NORTH SIDE Deteriorated mortar should be repaired or replaced to preserve the foundation. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 4.1.3 Foundation REBUILDING NEEDED AT THE CORNER ON THE NORTH EAST HOUSE Rebuilding of foundation wall components is required to maintain the integrity and stability of the building. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 4.2.1 Basements & Crawlspaces TYPICAL MOISTURE There is evidence of typical moisture in the walls and floors of the basement not indicative of a chronic Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 19 of 43 There is evidence of typical moisture in the walls and floors of the basement not indicative of a chronic problem. The fact is that all basements can leak given the right conditions because they are below ground level. It is impossible to determine accurately the frequency of leakage occurrence during a one-time home inspection. The majority of basement leakage is related to improper drainage, poor landscaping, improper soil slope away from the house, downspouts discharging near the house or a failing or inadequate sump pump or drain tile system. In the even leakage occurs, landscaping and drainage improvements are recommended as a first resort. In severe or chronic cases, excavating, damp-proofing and/or the installation of drain tiles are required. In the event leakage occurs, landscaping and drainage improvements should be undertaken as a first course. Be wary of contractors who recommend expensive solutions as a first course of action. Recommendation Recommend monitoring. 4.3.1 Floor Structure TYPICAL CRACKING There is typical cracking in the concrete floor of the basement. This cracking is the result of settling and shrinkage of the slap, is not a structural component, and does not represent a significant concern. Maintenance Item 4.3.2 Floor Structure SILLS NEAR GRADE LEVEL The sills of the structure at the lower south side are near grade level. This is a common condition in older homes that should be carefully monitored over time to ensure against rot and decay. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Maintenance Item 4.3.3 Floor Structure IMPROPER SUPPORT POSTS Support posts are not approved for permanent use. They should be replaced with posts approved for this use. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 20 of 43 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 21 of 43 Furnace Age 6+- Years Furnace normal Life Span 16-20+- Years Heating Zones 3 Zones Boiler Age 14+- Years Capacity 140000+- BTUs Boiler Life Span 16-20+- Years Equipment: Brand Carrier Equipment: Energy Source Gas Equipment: Heat Type Forced Air, Hot Water Radiant Equipment: Accessories None Distribution Systems: Distribution Non-insulated, Radiant piping AFUE Rating 92+ AFUE (Annual fuel utilization efficiency) is a metric used to measure furnace efficiency in converting fuel toenergy. A higher AFUE rating means greater energy efficiency. 90% or higher meets the Department of Energy'sEnergy Star program standard. 5: HEATING IN NI NP 5.1 Equipment X 5.2 Normal Operating Controls X 5.3 Distribution Systems X 5.4 Presence of Installed Heat Source in Each Room X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Equipment INACCESSIBLE This area was obstructed and inaccessible. If you are interested in having this area inspected, please contact me about a follow-up inspection. Equipment CONCEALED DUCTING Ducting, piping and components behind finishes cannot be fully inspected or evaluated. Normal Operating Controls ADEQUACY Without doing a total heat loss or gain calculation, it is impossible to determine outside of general rules, 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 22 of 43 Observations Without doing a total heat loss or gain calculation, it is impossible to determine outside of general rules, the adequacy of the the heating system. Distribution Systems ADEQUACY OF DISTRIBUTION Adequacy of distribution cannot be determined during one visit to the home. Presence of Installed Heat Source in Each Room ADEQUACY OF DISTRIBUTION It is difficult to determine the adequacy of heat distribution on a one-time trip to the home. Except as otherwise noted, a heat source has been provided to each significant space of the home. Presence of Installed Heat Source in Each Room MECHANICAL COMPONENTS FAIL Furnaces, like all mechanical components can break down or fail without notice. 5.1.1 Equipment LOW FLOW AT THE CENTER AND SOUTH GARAGE FLOOR Low flow to areas of the house should be further evaluated by a qualified professional. Recommendation Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor Recommendation 5.3.1 Distribution Systems DUCTS NOT SEALED Sealing the joints and connections in distribution ducting will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the distribution system. Maintenance Item 5.3.2 Distribution Systems RETURN VENT AT FURNACE A return vent is located close to the furnace. This is improper Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 23 of 43 A return vent is located close to the furnace. This is improper practice that can lead to back drafting of the furnace. The return should be relocated. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 24 of 43 Cooling Equipment: Brand Carrier Cooling Equipment: Energy Source/Type Electric, Central Air Conditioner Cooling Equipment: Location Exterior North Cooling Equipment: AC Size 3 Ton Cooling Equipment: AC Size 36000 BTU Cooling Equipment: AC Age 17+- Years Distribution System: Configuration Central Cooling Equipment: SEER Rating Unknown SEER Modern standards call for at least 13 SEER rating for new install. Read more on energy efficient air conditioning at Energy.gov. 6: COOLING IN NI NP 6.1 Cooling Equipment X 6.2 Normal Operating Controls X 6.3 Distribution System X 6.4 Presence of Installed Cooling Source in Each Room X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Cooling Equipment LOW TEMPERATURE The A/C unit was not tested due to low outdoor temperature. This may cause damage the unit. A/C condenser coils cannot be fully examined or operated below 60 degrees Fahrenheit. 6.1.1 Cooling Equipment OLDER UNIT The air conditioning condenser is an older unit. Over time, breakdowns and performance issues should be anticipated. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 25 of 43 6.3.1 Distribution System DUCTS SEALED Sealing the connections and joints in the accessible ducting in the basement is not critical, but will improve the efficiency and distribution of the system. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 26 of 43 Filters None Water Source Public Main Water Shut-off Device: Location Basement Main Water Shut-off Device: Main Water Line Copper Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems: Drain Size 1 1/2" Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems: Material PVC Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems: Cleanout Location Basement Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures: Distribution Material Copper Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures: Water Supply Material Copper Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures: Exterior Hose Bib Shut-offs Basement Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures: Main Water Shut-off Basement Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Capacity 50 gallons Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Location Basement Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Power Source/Type Gas Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Water Heater Age 14+- Years Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Water Heater Type Tank, Basement Fuel Storage & Distribution Systems: Main Gas Shut-off Location Basement Sump Pump: Location Basement Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents: Manufacturer Not Identified I recommend flushing & servicing your water heater tank annually for optimal performance. Water temperatureshould be set to at least 120 degrees F to kill microbes and no higher than 130 degrees F to prevent scalding. Here is a nice maintenance guide from Lowe's to help. 7: PLUMBING IN NI NP 7.1 Main Water Shut-off Device X 7.2 Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems X 7.3 Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures X 7.4 Hot Water Systems, Controls, Flues & Vents X 7.5 Fuel Storage & Distribution Systems X 7.6 Sump Pump X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 27 of 43 Observations Water Supply, Distribution Systems & Fixtures CONCEALED PLUMBING Plumbing concealed from view or behind wall or ceiling finishes cannot be fully examined or inspected. Sump Pump SUMP PUMP A sump pump can be critical to preventing basement leakage or flooding. If the sump pump runs regularly, or during heavy rain or spring run-off, it may be wise to install a back up system in the event of a pump failure or power outage.. There are several options of backing up the sump pump. 7.2.1 Drain, Waste, & Vent Systems IMPROPER PLUMBING In the floor of the basement there is a very unusual configuration of drains and basin containers. It is constructed of makeshift materials and in a makeshift method. It was impossible to determine the purpose of this configuration. This entire construct should be reviewed by a qualified plumber to repair as necessary. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 28 of 43 Service Entrance Conductors: Electrical Service Conductors Overhead, Aluminum Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Main Panel Location Basement Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Panel Capacity 100 AMP Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Panel Manufacturer Not Identified Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Panel Type Circuit Breaker Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Sub Panel Location Basement, Exterior Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device: Grounding Water Pipe Connection, Copper Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses: Branch Wire 15 and 20 AMP Copper, Aluminum 220 only Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses: Wiring Method Romex GFCI & AFCI: GFCI Location Exterior, Bathrooms, Kitchen, Garage Smoke Detectors: Smoke detector location Inside Bedrooms, Outside Bedrooms Carbon Monoxide Detectors: CO detector location Outside Bedrooms 8: ELECTRICAL IN NI NP 8.1 Service Entrance Conductors X 8.2 Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device X 8.3 Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses X 8.4 Lighting Fixtures, Switches & Receptacles X 8.5 GFCI & AFCI X 8.6 Smoke Detectors X 8.7 Carbon Monoxide Detectors X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Service Entrance Conductors CONCEALED ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS CANNOT BE FULLY INSPECTED. Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device HIDDEN WIRING Wiring concealed by finishes cannot be fully examined. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 29 of 43 Observations Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses STORAGE Excess storage or cars restricted inspection. Lighting Fixtures, Switches & Receptacles ACCESSIBLE RECEPTACLES AND SWITCHES When present, furniture and storage can limit access to receptacles and switches. GFCI & AFCI CONCEALED COMPONENTS Electrical components concealed from view cannot be completely inspected or evaluated. 8.1.1 Service Entrance Conductors TREE BRANCHES For safety, tree branches and vegetation should be removed from the entrance wires by a qualified professional. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Maintenance Item 8.2.1 Main & Subpanels, Service & Grounding, Main Overcurrent Device MARGINAL ELECTRICAL SERVICE The size of the electrical service supplied to the home may not be sufficient, depending on the lifestyle of the occupants. A marginally sized electrical service is not a safety concern, but may represent and inconvenience if the main fuses (or breakers) blow, shutting down the power in all or part of the home. If it is found that the main fuses (or breakers) blow regularly, a larger electrical service may be desirable. If care is taken not to run major electrical appliances simultaneously, it is unlikely that the service will overload. The addition of gas fired appliances will also reduce the load on the electrical service. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 30 of 43 8.3.1 Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses ABANDONED WIRING IN THE EAST BASEMENT CEILING Abandoned wiring should be removed, placed into service or properly terminated in a box. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 8.3.2 Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses LOOSE WIRING AT THE WEST BASEMENT Loose wiring should be properly secured. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 8.3.3 Branch Wiring Circuits, Breakers & Fuses WIRING EXPOSED ON SURFACES AT THE SOUTH SIDE PORCH LIGHT Wiring exposed on interior finishes should be relocated or protected by a conduit. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 8.4.1 Lighting Fixtures, Switches & Receptacles COVER PLATES MISSING IN THE GARAGE, FRONT PORCH, AND IN THE ATTIC One or more receptacles are missing a cover plate. This causes short and shock risk. Recommend installation of plates. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 31 of 43 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 32 of 43 Firebox Wood Stove Type Wood Vents, Flues & Chimneys: Material Metal, Masonry 9: FIREPLACE IN NI NP 9.1 Vents, Flues & Chimneys X 9.2 Lintels X 9.3 Damper Doors X 9.4 Cleanout Doors & Frames IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Vents, Flues & Chimneys CONCEALED VENTING Concealed flues or venting cannot be fully examined. 9.4.1 Cleanout Doors & Frames INADEQUATE CLEARANCE AT THE WOODSTOVE Proper clearance to combustibles has not been maintained at the wood burning appliance. A proper fire barrier should be installed. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 33 of 43 Flooring Insulation None Attic Insulation: Insulation Type Batt, Fiberglass, Loose-fill Attic Insulation: Inches 12-16+- Inches Ventilation: Ventilation Type Soffit Vents, Box vents Exhaust Systems: Exhaust Fans Fan Only Basement insulation: Basement Insulation None Basement insulation: Crawlspace Insulation No Crawlspace Basement insulation: Crawlspace or Basement Insulation 0 inches 10: ATTIC, INSULATION & VENTILATION IN NI NP 10.1 Attic Insulation X 10.2 Vapor Retarders (Crawlspace or Basement)X 10.3 Ventilation X 10.4 Exhaust Systems X 10.5 Basement insulation X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Attic Insulation CONCEALED INSULATION Concealed insulation cannot be fully examined or evaluated. Vapor Retarders (Crawlspace or Basement) CONCEALED Vapor barriers cannot be verified or concealed behind finished surfaces. 10.1.1 Attic Insulation ATTIC ACCESS Ideally, the attic access hatch should be better insulated. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 34 of 43 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 35 of 43 Doors: Panel Windows: Window Manufacturer Not Identified Windows: Window Type Casement, Double-hung, Single Pane, Storm, Thermal Floors: Floor Coverings Carpet, Tile, Wood Walls: Wall Material Drywall, Plaster Ceilings: Ceiling Material Gypsum Board, Plaster Countertops & Cabinets: Cabinetry Wood Countertops & Cabinets: Countertop Material Laminate Countertops & Cabinets: Appliances Range, Electric, Disposal, Dishwasher 11: DOORS, WINDOWS & INTERIOR IN NI NP 11.1 Doors X 11.2 Windows X 11.3 Floors X 11.4 Walls X 11.5 Ceilings X 11.6 Steps, Stairways & Railings X 11.7 Countertops & Cabinets X 11.8 Bathrooms X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Steps, Stairways & Railings STORAGE AND FURNITURE Storage and furniture restricted the inspection. Countertops & Cabinets APPLIANCES Listed appliances are operated, but not fully inspected or evaluated. 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 36 of 43 11.1.1 Doors DOOR STICKS AT THE BASEMENT Door sticks and is tough to open. Recommend sanding down offending sides. Here is a helpful DIY article on how to fix a sticking door. Maintenance Item 11.5.1 Ceilings STAIN(S) ON CEILING IN THE DINING ROOM There is a stain on ceiling/wall that requires repair and paint. Source of staining should be determined. Recommendation 11.6.1 Steps, Stairways & Railings BALUSTER SPACES TOO WIDE BETWEEN THE FAMILY ROOM AND THE KITCHEN The baluster space is not up to modern safety standards. The space between balusters should not be greater than 4 inches for child safety. Recommend a qualified handyman or original installer repair and bring up to code. Recommendation 11.6.2 Steps, Stairways & Railings NO HANDRAIL IN THE BASEMENT Continuous handrails are recommended at all stairways Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 37 of 43 11.6.3 Steps, Stairways & Railings MISSING RAILING IN THE BASEMENT For safety, railings are recommended at stairways. Maintenance Item 11.6.4 Steps, Stairways & Railings STAIRWAY CONFIGURATION The configuration of the spiral and tower stairs is such that it is not safe and difficult to navigate. It may be especially difficult during an emergency. Unfortunately, improvements can be costly and difficult. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 11.6.5 Steps, Stairways & Railings STEEP STAIRS The stairway is steeper than current standards dictate. This is a common condition in older homes. Use caution when navigating the stairs. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Maintenance Item 11.6.6 Steps, Stairways & Railings HEAD CLEARANCE Stairway head clearance is less than the 6'8" normally required for safety. Repair or improvement is often not practical. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 38 of 43 Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. 11.8.1 Bathrooms LOOSE TOILET AT THE MAIN LEVEL TOILET Loose toilets should be repaired to prevent leakage and floor damage. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 39 of 43 Floor: Floor Concrete Walls & Firewalls: Firewall Material Drywall Garage Door: Material Metal Garage Door: Type Sectional Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home): Passage Door Solid Core, Hollow Core 12: GARAGE IN NI NP 12.1 Ceiling X 12.2 Floor X 12.3 Walls & Firewalls X 12.4 Garage Door X 12.5 Garage Door Opener X 12.6 Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home)X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Ceiling STORAGE Storage and/or vehicles restricted inspection of the garage. 12.2.1 Floor TYPICAL CRACKING There is typical cracking in the garage slab related to settling, heaving, and/or installation methods. No improvement is necessary at this time. Recommendation Recommend monitoring. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 40 of 43 12.3.1 Walls & Firewalls FIRE BARRIER The fire and gas barrier between the garage and the house is incomplete. Repair will protect the house and contain the spread of fire or carbon monoxide to the house structure. Vents or openings should be sealed. Recommendation Contact a qualified professional. Recommendation 12.5.1 Garage Door Opener AUTO REVERSE SENSOR NOT WORKING The auto reverse sensor was not responding at time of inspection. This is a safety hazard to children and pets. This can be as simple as adjusting the sensitivity control on the door. Safety or Significant Defect 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 41 of 43 12.6.1 Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home) DOOR DOES NOT MEET SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS Door separating garage and home does not meet safety standards. Doors in firewalls must be at least 1 3/8-inch thick, metal/steel, or a 20-minute fire-rated door. Recommendation 12.6.2 Occupant Door (From garage to inside of home) NOT SELF-CLOSING Door from garage to home should have self-closing hinges to help prevent spread of a fire to living space. These are often missing in older homes or removed in newer homes due to convenience. DIY Resource Link. Maintenance Item 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 42 of 43 Laundry Appliances Washing Machine, Dryer, Electric, Washing Machine Standpipe Discharge Dishwasher: Brand Not Identified Refrigerator: Brand Not Identified Range/Oven/Cooktop: Exhaust Hood Type Re-circulate Range/Oven/Cooktop: Range/Oven Brand Not Identified Range/Oven/Cooktop: Range/Oven Energy Source Gas Laundry Appliances: Dryer Power Source 220 Electric Laundry Appliances: Dryer Vent Metal (Flex) 13: BUILT-IN APPLIANCES IN NI NP 13.1 Dishwasher X 13.2 Refrigerator X 13.3 Range/Oven/Cooktop X 13.4 Garbage Disposal X 13.5 Laundry Appliances X IN = Inspected NI = Not Inspected NP = Not Present Information Limitations Observations Dishwasher OBSTRUCTED This area was obstructed and inaccessible. If you are interested in having this area inspected, please contact me about a follow-up inspection. 13.3.1 Range/Oven/Cooktop MISSING CONTROL KNOBS Range/Oven was missing control knobs. Recommend contacting manufacturer for replacement parts. Recommendation 615 Broadway St S Reid and Julie Miller Weber Home Inspection Services Page 43 of 43 Lifespace Construction, Inc. Todd Anderson 651-246-4456 todd@yourlifespace.com February 21, 2019 To Whom It May Concern Regarding 615 Broadway Street S., Stillwater, MN: Having been a licensed Minnesota residential contractor for over 30 years, my company has worked on dozens of homes that were built in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s in an around the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Stillwater areas. These projects ranged in scope from basic interior cosmetic upgrades to complete historic restorations and extensive multi-story additions, often time times tied into repairing or replacing limestone or boulder wall foundations. In most of the historic residences I see there are many era specific features: original woodwork, trim (some simple, some intricate,) doors, built-ins, staircases, etc. that we replicate and bring into new areas. We also often see architectural features such as arches, crown and cove mouldings, brackets, fireplaces with mantles and surrounds, original glass windows, lap siding, etc… We also typically see balloon framed side walls usually cut from white pine. In 2017, my company performed moderate demolition on this property to relocate a second-floor bathroom at which time we discovered unusual framing not previously encountered in any other project. This structure has 2” x 12” plank lumber standing vertical from foundation to roof with 2’ x 4’ horizontal members running 19’ on center at the interior, as would have been found in an agricultural type building. It was also noted that there didn’t seem to be any original features or components that you would hope to see in a home built in 1880. All things considered remodeling this structure and correcting its current foundation, structural components, and mechanical and thermal deficiencies (as well as the many non-historic components that have been added/changed over time) would be extensive and not cost effective. Sincerely, Todd Anderson 2019 Preservation Awards Discussion HPC: March 20, 2019 Page 1 of 2 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 20, 2019 REGARDING: 2019 Preservation Awards Discussion PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner May is National Historic Preservation month. The City has preservation awards to individuals and organizations whose actions have furthered historic preservation efforts in the community. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the City’s annual awards program. Attached are a list of the awards given to date. Additionally, the following organizations annually seek nominations in the following categories: Preservation Alliance of Minnesota (PAM) Projects People  Adaptive Reuse  Advocacy  Addition/Expansion  Career Achievement  Archaeological Site/Protection  Community Effort  Education/Interpretation/Publication  Emerging Leader  Preservation Planning  Stewardship  Restoration/Rehabilitation  Sustainable Design  Main Street/Downtown Design Saint Paul Chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA)  Restoration/Rehabilitation/Adaptive Reuse of a historic building:  New construction in a historic district or neighborhood; new addition to a historic building  Historic landscapes and streetscapes: including cultural landscapes, comprised of plantings and the built environment, and designed landscapes such as cemeteries and parks.  Individuals: for an individual, professional or volunteer, who has made an excellent contribution to heritage preservation  Cultural Heritage: project, organization, or individual making a significant contribution to the recognition of the city’s cultural heritage  Vote of Confidence Award: given to a quality preservation-related project having difficulty  Organization and community education projects: for overall contributions to preservation, rather than bricks-and-mortar project  Stewardship: recognizes outstanding efforts towards the long term maintenance of a historic property or site The Commission should utilize these categories when reviewing 2018 projects (a list which is also attached) in relationship to 2019 awards. Additionally, the HPC may want to consider 2017-approved projects that were finalized in 2018. Therefore, staff has provided the 2017 and 2018 Case Reports as well as the history of awarded projects and individuals. The Commission will be asked to discuss and make decisions for awards in April; however, the Commission is welcome to discuss potential awards in May. Once the Commission has provided direction to staff, staff will prepare awards materials to be presented at one of the May City Council meetings. Granted Site Location Award Type Type Awardee 1994 Pure Renovation Commercial St. Croix Designs 1994 101 Water Street S Renovation Commercial The Lumber Baron's Hotel 1994 Façade Renovation Commercial Cameo Costumes 1994 Signage Commercial Traditions 1997 301 2nd Street S Reuse of an Existing Buidling Commercial The Gr& Banquet Hall 1997 New Development Commercial ABS Company Building 1997 Façade Renovation Commercial Loggers 1997 Signage Commercial Sebastian Joe's 1998 225 Main Street N Reuse of an Existing Buidling Commercial Maple Isl& Hardware Store 1998 Façade Renovation Commercial Sammies Womens Casual Attire 1998 Signage Commercial Tasteful Thymes & Grama's House 1998 New Development Public WA. Co. Historical Society Carriage House 1999 218 Main Street N Reuse Commercial Images of the Past 1999 125 Main Street S Renovation Commercial John Karst Building 1999 Façade Renovation Commercial BP Amoco 1999 Signage Commercial BP Amoco 1999 Special Achievement Individual R&all J. Raduenz 2000 Renovation of a Building Commercial Mark S Balay Architects 2000 Signage Commercial LaBelle Vie 2000 103 Main Street S Heritage Award Commercial Frieght House 2001 217/219 Main Street N Reuse Commercial River Market Co-op & Valley Bookstore 2001 Signage Commercial Dreamcoat Café 2001 233 2nd Street S Use of Otudoor Space Commercial Camrose Hill Flower Studio 2001 Design Commercial Ascension Episcopal Church 2002 402 Main Street S Design Commercial Joseph Wolf Building 2002 Façade Renovation Commercial Jarchow & York Building 2002 204 Main Street N Signage Commercial Let there be Light Antique Lighting 2002 Special Achievement Individual James Melton 2002 Architeural Contributions Individual Michael McGuire 2003 Façade Renovation Commercial Darla's Gill & Malt Shop 2003 229 Main Street S Building Transition Commercial Marx Wine Bar & Grille 2003 Signage Commercial Brunswick Inn 2003 423 Main Street S Heritage Award Commercial The Brick Alley 2004 Signage Commercial The Central Hub 2004 Preservation Effort Commercial The Peace House 2004 Old Post office Reuse Commercial Gartner STudios 2004 610 Main Street N Collaboration in Reuse Commercial Terra Springs 2004 Historical Contributions Individual Donald Empson 2004 Historical Contributions Individual Kathleen Vadnas 2005 Signage Commercial Toy Lounge 2005 302 Main Street S Façade Improvement Commercial Whitey's 2005 Renovation of a Building Commercial The Arcola Building 2005 602 Main Street N Heritage Award Public Warden's House Museum 2006 120 Main St N Signage Commercial Aprille's Showers Tea Room 2006 402 Main Street S Renovation of Joseph Wolf Brewery Commercial Steven Bremer 2006 207 Nelson Street East Renovation of Teddy Bear Park Barn Public Tom & Sherry Armstrong 2006 209 3rd street N Residential rescue & restoration Residential Thomas F Huninghake 2006 Residential Renovation Residential John & Kim Brach 2007 114 Churchill St W Façade Renovation Commercial Charlsen Trucking 2007 402 Main St N Signage Commercial Stillwater Art Guild Gallery 2007 324 Main St S Use of Outdoor Space Commercial Stones Restaurant 2007 224 3rd St N Renovation of a Building Public Stillwater Public Library 2008 102 Main St N Signage & Building Mural Commercial Pulp Fashion 2008 101 Pine St W Long Term & Continual Preservation Public Historic Washington County Courthouse 2008 502 Churchill St W Residential Preservation Residential Brent & Christine Peterson 2008 411 Sixth St S Residential Preservation Residential David Johnson & Carroll Davis-Johnson 2008 907 Willard St W Residential Preservation Residential Gaye Lundstrom 2009 Personal Contributions Individual Mark Balay 2009 Personal Contributions Individual Brent Peterson 2009 Personal Contributions Individual Suki Thomsen 2009 Personal Contributions Individual Kay Thueson 2010 132 Main Street S Facade Restoration Commercial Gartner Studios 2010 208 Main Street S Facade Restoration Commercial Arlen & Jill Rivard 2010 519 Laurel Street West Facade Restoration Commercial Karen Dahlquist & Steve Olesen 2011 201 Main Street S Facade Restoration Commercial Gartner Studios 2011 208 Main Street S Retain Sign Award Commercial Holly Arps 2011 223 Pine Street West Residential Restoration Award Residential Richard & Suzanne Van Horne 2012 219 S Main Street Storefront Window Restoration Commercial Brines 2012 229 Main Street S Façade Renovation Commercial 45 Degrees 2012 Personal Contributions Individual Roger Tomten 2012 501 Laurel Street West Residential Restoration Award Residential Shane Fatl and & Bryan Schreier 2014 233 Main Street South New Commercial Infill Commercial HAF Group 2014 113 Main Street South Façade Restoration Commercial St. Johns Lodge No. 1 2014 212 Main Street North Facade Restoration Commercial Candyland Inc. 2014 Personal Contributions Individual Howard Lieberman 2014 220 Chesntut Street West Residential Rescue and Restoration Residential Chris Rustad and Vicky Simon 2015 108/110 Main Street South Façade Reconstruction (Main Café)Commercial Michael and Barbara Lynskey 2015 308 Chestnut Street East Signage Design Commercial Wedge & Wheel 2015 Personal Contributions Individual Scott Zahren 2015 208 Chestnut Street West Residential Addition Residential Richard Dirnberger and Wendy Mortimer 2016 126 Main Street North Façade Restoration Commercial Tim Michel / Stillwater Main LLC 2016 Personal Contributions Individual Randy Randuez 2016 514 St. Croix Avenue West NCD Infill Residential Jeremy and Sara Imhoff 2017 123 2nd Street North Adaptive Reuse Commercial JX Event Venue 2017 Personal Contributions Individual Jeff Johnson 2017 915 2nd Street South Residential Restoration Award Residential Chris Rustad and Vicky Simon 2017 12588 Boutwell Road North Residential Rescue Residential Washington County Historical Society 2018 227 Main Street South Storefront Reconstruction Commercial Neon LLC (The Miller Family) 2018 Personal Contributions Individual Traditional Construction Services 2018 Personal Contributions Individual Tom & Carol Billig 2018 Personal Contributions Individual Siegfried Construction 2018 816 4th Street South Residential Rescue Residential Amelia Boo & Samuel Scott 2018 404 Owens Street North Residential Rescue Residential EZ Home Solutions LLC