Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020-09-15 packetNOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING AND TENTATIVE AGENDA' City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission Tuesday, September 15, 2020 – 6:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting—WebEx hILtps://jeffersonci!y.webex.com/jeffersoncity/ j.php?MTID=m94cd90464f3 82ab8b285 f44284fb3 84c Join by Phone --+14043971516 US Toll Access code-- 146 319 8982 Password-- 1234 TENTATIVE AGENDA 1. Introductions and Roll Call 2. Procedural Matters a. Determination of quorum 3. Adoption of Agenda (as printed or reordered) 4. Approval of August 11, 2020 Regular Meeting Minutes 5. Approval of August 26, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes 6. Communications Received 7. New Business a. 619-623 E. Capitol Mural 8. Other Business a. Code Change – Update b. SmartGov 9. Dates to Remember a. Next Regular Meeting Date, October 13, 2020 10. Adjournment Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. Please call 573-634-6410 for information regarding agenda items City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Regular Meeting — Tuesday, August 11, 2020 Council Chambers — John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 E. McCarty Street Commission Members Present Mary Schantz, Chairperson Gregory Bemboom Alan Wheat Michael Berendzen Tiffany Patterson Brad Schaefer Steven Hoffman Commission Members Absent Donna Deetz, Vice Chairperson Gail Jones Council Liaison Present Laura Ward, Via Telephone Staff Present Rachel Senzee, Neighborhood Services Supervisor Anne Stratman, Neighborhood Services Specialist Bryan Wolford, Associate City Attorney Guests Present John Dinkins Alan Strope Bryan Wolford Fr. Richard Frank Gary & Doris Schmutzler Jeff Futhey Pete Oetting Herbert Turner Attendance Record 6 of 7 6 of 7 6 of 7 4of7 3 of 4 6 of 7 6 of 7 Attendance Record 6 of 7 5 of 7 Stephen Meyer Wayne Elliott Call to Order Ms. Schantz called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Patterson moved and Mr. Wheat seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed unanimously. Approval of Minutes Mr. Wheat moved and Mr. Berendzen seconded to approve the minutes from the July 14, 2020 Regular Meeting as written. The motion passed unanimously. Communication Received Ms. Senzee explained that correspondence was received from EBI Consulting pertaining to an invitation to comment on a proposed telecommunications facility installation at 909 Louisiana Avenue. Since it is associated with the FCC they are required to go through the Section 106 Review process. The proposed tower does not lie within any of the National Register Districts or local landmark areas. The Commission has the ability to choose whether to comment or not. Staff recommendation would be to send a notice saying that we decline comment at this time. After additional discussion, the Commission chose to reserve comment on the proposed telecommunications facility. Demolition Review -Under 100 Years Old A. 1560 Bald Hill Road Ms. Senzee explained that 1560 Bald Hill Road is under consideration for demolition review. This property is owned by Christopher Billings. The current structure is being demolished to rebuild on the lot. This property does not hold stand-alone historical significance in terms of heritage, cultural or architecturally. Staff recommendation for this property is demolition. The Commission discussed contacting the Historic City of Jefferson each time a property comes before them for demolition. This will allow the Historic City of Jefferson to determine whether there are any architectural items that are salvageable from that home. Ms. Senzee stated that she will contact the Historic City of Jefferson each time so that they can make that determination whether or not to salvage items. Mr. Bemboom moved and Mr. Berendzen seconded to approve the demolition review application for 1560 Bald Hill Road owned by Christopher Billings. The motion passed unanimously. New Business A. 622 E. McCarty Street Ms. Senzee explained that this property is located within the School Street Local Historic District. The property owner had some issues before the tornado and the tornado came through and made it worse. The property owner was putting on a metal roof which is not within the established guidelines of the School Street Local Historic District. However, the Building Official stopped work because they did not have a permit. The Building Official did not communicate with Historic Preservation Staff about its need to go through the Historic Preservation Commission. The Building Official left and when his staff was going through his office, they found a building permit from last November. The house has been sitting out in the elements with a tarp on it since November. The City does not have a mechanism in City Code as a Historic Preservation Commission to approve or issue a certificate of appropriateness or any other type of mechanism within the design guidelines of the School Street Local Historic District. It was staff recommendation that the Commission allow the property owner to put on the roof so that the house does not deteriorate further. City staff wanted to be transparent and expose the procedural issue. There is no action that can occur tonight. Ms. Ward suggested amending or revising the building permit application to reflect that a property is located in a known local historic district or conservation district. She suggested listing the Capitol Avenue Conservation Overlay District, School Street Local Historic District and Lower Jefferson Historic District on the application so that the property owner can mark which district their property is located in. This way the Building Inspector can verify that. Ms. Schantz asked if staff can report to the Commission each month on the progress of the code changes. Ms. Senzee agreed to include this as a monthly agenda item. This is going to be an arduous task that we are not always going to agree on how to proceed, at times, but will end up with the best possible product in the end. Ms. Schantz stated that this is really a continuation of one our goals set out in the Historic Preservation Plan. Other Business A. National Alliance of Preservation Commissions — FORUM 2020 at Home Ms. Senzee explained that City staff and Ms. Deetz participated in the 2020 FORUM at Home. NAPC will be making all of the sessions available. As soon as that happens staff will send that link to the Commission. B. Gregory Stockard Award Ms. Senzee stated that Jayme Abbott has been selected to receive the award this year. She has been notified that she will be receiving the award. Ms. Abbott will be presented that award at the August 17, 2020 City Council Meeting. C. Juneteenth Trail / Sterling Price Marker Ms. Schantz stated that Mr. Wolford distributed a memo to Commission members regarding the ownership of the Sterling Price Marker. The gist of the Conclusion is that the City owns the marker and they can move it, remove it, conceal it and also transfer the ownership of it to someone else. The following individuals spoke regarding this agenda item: Mr. Bryan Wolford stated that he is in opposition to removing or altering the Civil War marker located at Moreau Drive and Fairmount Boulevard. He is the current secretary and treasurer for Camp Lillie of Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War. He is also a member at large of Parsons Camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Mr. Wolford gave an in depth history of the battle and how some of Missouri's prominent Governors took place in that battle. His recommendation is to utilize that space, put some more information specifically about the Union's role in the battle and essentially protecting the City from the attack. Doris Opel Schmutzler stated that she believes the historical rock marker should stand. She talked about how her the rock marker has personal significance to me, my family and members of my extended family as the descendants of two German immigrants, Ehrhardt "Erhard" Johann Kautsch and Friedrich Carl Strobel. Ms. Schmutzler is the great -great-granddaughter of Erhard Kautsch. These two men were just farmers. They were in a field in a intersection of Route C and Route D just west of Jefferson City and they were murdered. She continued to explain the remainder her family's story. Pete Oetting, distributed the Battlefield Flag and Monument Policy as approved during the 136th National Encampment in Lansing Michigan in 2017. Mr. Oetting is connected with Sons of Union Veterans. He is the Commander of Camp Lillie. The national encampment policy letter from Lansing, Michigan in 2017 states, among other things, the Sons of Union Veterans is against the removal of any war monument or marker. Mr. Oetting identifies the marker on Moreau Drive as a Civil War Marker. Mr. Oetting has known people in Jefferson City that did research based on that marker. He stated it would be a shame if this community went down the road of changing names and changing monuments. Mr. Oettng indicated the Camp Lillie chapter would be interested in putting a marker alongside the Sterling Price Marker which would commemorate the Battle of 1864 for the Union side. Fr. Richard Frank is the Chaplin of Camp Lillie, Sons of Union Veterans. Fr. Frank was against doing anything to the monument because it does not glorify the Confederacy, it does not glorify slavery, it simply states a historical fact that the Confederate Army was stopped. Fr. Frank believed the monument should stay but also add some additional interpretation. The State has put up many beautiful interpretive signs at various places relating to the Civil War. He just saw a whole bunch of them at the Battle of Athens in far northeastern Missouri. A beautiful wayside or interpretive display about the size of this podium would be good to put at that spot as well. Ms. Schantz asked Commission members whether we want to take the lead from the Human Relations Commission and come up with a specific recommendation or to send a memo to the City Council that summarizes the testimony that has been presented and/or other ideas the HPC might have. Ms. Ward stated that the first step would be to take this issue to a City Committee such as the Administration Committee or the Public Works and Planning Committee. She explained that she serves on the Administration Committee and would be able to put this issue on the next agenda. After additional discussion, Commission members agreed that summarizing the testimony from the July 14, 2020 meeting and from tonight's meeting and providing to City Council would be an appropriate action. After additional discussion, Mr. Berendzen moved and Mr. Hoffman seconded to not remove the marker and additional information specifically about the event can be added as money and time allows. Mr. Berendzen amended the original motion to include a summary of testimony received from the July 14, 2020 meeting and tonight's meeting and provide to the City Council. After no additional discussion, the Commission's vote on the amended motion was unanimous. D. HPF Grant Proposals Ms. Senzee explained that staff would like to redo the Historic Eastside Survey and continue the survey along W. Main Street where the previous survey ended. Discussion centered around the survey boundaries for the continuation of the W. Main Street Survey. Mr. Berendzen suggested surveying W. Main Street on both sides of the street to the Water Tower. E. Jefferson City Exterior Structural Survey — Missouri State Capitol District & Munichburg Commercial Districts Ms. Senzee reported on the structural survey for the downtown area and Old Munichburg area. A public meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 18, 2020 at 5:30 p.m. A structural survey was completed to determine the viability of over 100 the structures in these areas. The consultant gave each building a condition of green, yellow or red. F. CDBG-DR Action Plan Ms. Senzee reported that the State of Missouri published the State's CDBG-DR Recovery Plan for flooding and the May 22, 2019 tornado. Cole County is eligible for approximately $7 million. The plan proposes funding for voluntary buyout in the flood plain. It also proposes acquisition of property and new construction of 5+ unit multi -family housing development. Restoration activities are not eligible as well. Staff will be making comments that the proposed plan does not address the needs in that area. Ms. Patterson stated that she would like to see the City's recommendations and make comments on those. Ms. Schantz stated that the Commission's consensus is to review the City's recommendations and make comments on those. G. National Register Nomination -2113 W. Main Street Ms. Senzee explained that a National Register nomination is being prepared for 2113 W. Main Street, also known as the Sugarbaker property. The Colonial Revival home was built in 1939 and was purchased by Dr. Everett and Geneva Sugarbaker in 1950. A 500 square foot laboratory was built in 1953. Dates to Remember A. Next Regular Meeting Date, September 8, 2020 Since this meeting date falls the day after the Labor Day Holiday, the City Council will meet on this date. Ms. Stratman will look at moving the meeting date to September 15 and notify the Commission. Adiournment Ms. Patterson moved and Mr. Berendzen seconded to adjourn the meeting at 7:37 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Special Meeting — Wednesday, August 26, 2020 Council Chambers — John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 E. McCarty Street Commission Members Present Mary Schantz, Chairperson Gregory Bemboom Alan Wheat Michael Berendzen Tiffany Patterson Brad Schaefer Steven Hoffman Donna Deetz, Vice Chairperson Gail Jones, Via Telephone Council Liaison Present Laura Ward Staff Prpspnt Rachel Senzee, Neighborhood Services Supervisor Anne Stratman, Neighborhood Services Specialist Karlie Reinkemeyer, Neighborhood Services Specialist Ryan Moehlman, City Attorney Guests Present Frank E. Wallemann Herbert Turner Danny Creason Jacqulin Johnson Jenny Smith Terry Lyskowski Roger Baker Doris Schmutzler Gary Schmutzler Fr. Richard Frank Edith Vogel Scott Randolph Susan Randolph Jan Schumacher Dick Dalton Pete Oetting William Musgront Jay Barnes Patsy Johnson Nimrod Chapel Jr Glover Brown Rebecca Ambrose, via telephone Call to Order Ms. Schantz called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Attendance Record 7 of 8 7 of 8 7 of 8 5 of 8 4of5 7 of 8 7 of 8 7 of 8 6 of 8 Adoption of Agenda Ms. Deetz moved and Mr. Wheat seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed unanimously. Other Business A. Sterling Price Marker Ms. Schantz stated that the Historic Preservation Commission is not the deciding body for this issue. She stated that the City Council will be the final decision body for this issue. Ms. Schantz explained the HPC is an advisory committee and in that role it can make a recommendation to the Council. She stated that the public will have an opportunity to testify again to the City Council. Ms. Schantz explained that the Historic Preservation Commission heard this issue twice, once at the July 14 meeting and again at the August 11 meeting. Mr. Paul Kiekhaefer testified via telephone at the July 14 meeting. She stated that at the July meeting the HPC did not know who owned the marker. At the August 11 meeting the testimony was centered around keeping the marker and contextualizing the spot. Ms. Schantz explained that shortly after the August meeting, information was received from Mr. Jay Barnes about research he did on this issue. Ms. Schantz thought it was relevant and was not something the HPC had heard before and began the process of organizing a special meeting. She stated that the HPC will hear from Mr. Barnes and one representative from those that feel the marker shall remain and one representative from those that feel the marker should be removed. Mr. Jay Barnes, 715 Swifts Highway, submitted a one page sheet with screen shots of text from literature from the United Daughters of the Confederacy. He submitted a 32 page document titled "Jefferson City in the Civil War". Mr. Barnes stated it is important to recognize that people who would like the marker removed do not want to erase history at all. "We want to celebrate the true history of our community. Our community and the Civil War has a history that everyone should be proud of. In 1861, a steamer landed at the foot of Jackson Street and dropped off troops. In 1862, Mr. Bernard Bruns was elected Mayor of our city. In 1863, Jefferson City was a beacon of freedom for slaves in Boone County and Callaway County. The only marker in the city commemorating the Civil War is the marker on Moreau Drive. An article in the News Tribune by Jenny Smith told the story that the Union troops and the citizens of our town banded together to fortify our city and defend it, thereby tricking General Sterling Price into believing there were far more troops than there actually was. The people of our community fought a war to prevent slavery. Sterling Price made his decision to turn away at the site of the Wallendorf Cabin. He never came close to where that marker is. Honoring our history means more than removing this marker, it means erecting other markers and other monuments in our community about our real history." Roger Baker stated he wanted to talk about history. He metal detects as a pastime. "If I understand history correctly Confederate forces carried infield rifles. Just down the street from where the marker stands now and about 5 houses going southeast on Moreau Drive I dug infield rifle rounds out of one of the yards. Confederate forces did reach Moreau Drive within about 5 houses where the monument stands. I also dug infield rounds in McClung Park. I cannot guarantee that they were not northern rounds but they were infield rounds. I believe that if not Price himself but some of his army did get into the city. I'm bothered; I don't know where this is coming from to remove everything historical from our country. We can't change history; if we do we are going to relive it. I don't necessarily mean the monument is a good thing. The monument recognizes the high water mark of General Sterling Price's attempt to come into the city. That is a big plus for the Union troops. I don't care whether the monument stays or goes. If we remove every vestige of history for whatever it is, we are bound to face it again." Patsy Johnson, 908 Lafayette Street, is a Commissioner in Jefferson City, a member of the NAACP, a member of the National Organization of Women Jefferson City Chapter and a member of the Racial Equity Group. She stated that she spends a lot of time working for human rights locally and in other national organizations. As a child she had walk past the monument on her way to school. Upon reading it she found out it was a Confederate monument by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. She was hurt because the monument was in a public place and that told her it was important. This was an uncomfortable area to be in because of the treatment we received. "There are more positive things that we can embrace in this community to share because it gives different messages to different people." Rebecca Ambrose, 1001 Fairmount Boulevard, stated that she has read the monument many times and does not see that it glorifies Sterling Price. "Without that monument there would be no known history of the Civil War in Jefferson City. With that marker we at least know that the Confederate forces were in our neighborhood." She found a Civil War bullet and mule shoe in her front yard. "They at least came through there but nothing says that the General stood at that spot. We need to use history to show what a great country this really is." Ms. Ambrose stated that she would welcome ideas to change the wording. She would like to see something done that would keep this history alive. Terry Lyskowski, 1722 Hayselton Drive, stated that it is important to say that people are not against historical monuments. "What is important is accurate history. The monument on Moreau Drive is a fixture in her memory as a child. As an adult it is not an innocent patriotic monument. It needs to be removed. This is an opportunity for the community to come together and say that they are not against public monuments, but that they are against inaccurate history." Frank Walleman, 4627 Shepherd Hills Road Apt 410, stated that he searched Civil War monuments and found that this marker is 1 of 2 markers in Jefferson City. The other marker sits on the Capitol grounds right across from the Post Office. "I am concerned with what the monument says. I do not see how that language can be interpreted as memorializing General Price unless it is memorializing his failures. He intended to attack Jefferson City, he failed and he retreated. I think we are memorializing that spot. As a historical marker I think it is important to stay. This marker was put there to locate a site of something that happened that was extremely important to Jefferson City. Jefferson City avoided a major Civil War battle, loss of life and loss of property. That particular spot was as close as they Confederate soldiers got to the City of Jefferson." Mr. Walleman submitted a Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, Civil War Assessment Form that another marker is located in Jefferson City in the general vicinity of the State Capitol. Nimrod Chapel, 701 Primrose Court, stated that his family did not elect to live in the Moreau Drive neighborhood because of the marker. "That is a marker dedicated to the Confederacy by the Daughters of the Confederacy." To Mr. Chapel the Civil War was not a fight about property, but a fight about human dignity. "There is nothing historic about the marker. The marker needs to be removed completely and not moved to another place." Glover Brown, 1700 Valley Hi Road, stated that he was at the July 14 meeting and would like to go on record and straighten out a comment made. "I want to go on record as saying that I am for any monument that is recognized by the National Park Service, historical society or city where it sits. When you start removing monuments you start removing history. Instead of removing monuments, correct the history. When the younger generation looks at what is going on there is nothing there. If we could sit down and have a dialogue we can correct any injustices. As far as Sterling Price he represents something that happened around Jefferson City." Bob Priddy, 1744 Englewood Drive, stated, "We at least need to change the plaque on that stone. It is true that a number of Civil War artifacts have been found at that site. That rock does not represent the high water mark of the Confederacy when they attacked Jefferson City. That rock has been moved from its original location about four -tenths of a mile further down the road. That is where it was originally located. Historians say that is where the Confederates started to turn west. Union forces were four -tenths of a mile towards the city. Halfway between the original and present locations of the rock was a home where traditions tell us Union forces on the roof monitored Price's movements. I think moving that rock to a new location with a new plaque that tells the true history would probably be the best way to repudiate the whole idea of the United Daughters of the Confederacy had when they put that memorial there. We need to have historic monuments in this town that tell the truth of the Civil War." Jenny Smith, 1211 Elmerine, stated that she supports removing the monument and replacing it with one which more accurately honors the event on October 7, 1864. "So many people did not know about this encounter on the southeast end of Jefferson City. The whole city was involved in defending Jefferson City, the citizens and the army that was here. There were guards that were sentried on top of Nick Monaco's house on Moreau Drive. They were also at the Dulle House watching the rebel movements to the southeast of the city. There has been mention that maybe the monument is in the wrong spot because it has been moved. My position is that it is in a good spot to honor the Union effort that took place. There were serval thousand Union soldiers camped on Fairmount Boulevard which at that time was the Cole County Fairgrounds. They also camped at McClung Park, Nick Monaco's house, Elmerine and Lee Streets. That monument is at the center of a lot of Union activity. The rebels had crossed the Moreau River at the bottom of Greenberry Road. I am interested to hear of Mr. Baker's finding of artifacts to support the fact that the Confederates were up here. This also supports the fact things did happen. There were skirmishes by the Osage River where the rebels crossed the river. There were estimates of 10,000 to 12,000 rebels approaching our city and crossing the river in waves. Some reports said they were 3 miles long in their march. The Union had a vigorous defense at the river to defend the city against their approach and slow the rebels down. I support preserving history. This monument is offensive and it should be removed." Dick Dalton, 1311 Isom Drive, stated that he recently learned about what was written on the marker from Ms. Johnson. He has gone by the marker many times and did not realize what it was about. He realized that the United Daughters of the Confederacy was what the rest of the country had been talking about for several years. "Culture is shifting and it is time to re-examine our culture." The more he read about the United Daughters of the Confederacy, "this was not a gift that we would be proud of. This war happened all over the place. There is not a way for us to memorialize every place. History happened; we are not forgetting the Civil War. I am for the removal of the monument. We want to start over that and find some way other way to represent history." Pete Oetting, Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, stated that he has spoken to the Commission before about the Sons of Union Veterans' stance on the removal of monuments. "We are just past the 100 year anniversary of the Battle of Verdun in France. In the Battle of Verdun over 650,000 to 700,000 died. There were 17 French villages destroyed. Still today in Verdun, France there is a monument to the German high water mark of the Imperial Army. Here in Jefferson there were over 750 Union soldiers that are buried in the National Cemetery that died in this location, 75 to 80 of them came from the Centralia area. There are also Confederate soldiers that died too. If we remove this monument how long is it before we start to remove and desecrate graves and tombstones. They cannot speak, that is why I am here to speak for them. People in the Republic of France left a German monument alone even as brutal as the imperial Army was. I think we can leave the Confederate monument there too. I would like to reiterate that the Sons of Union Veterans would also like to occupy that space." Fr. Richard Frank, 803 Air View Drive, stated that he spoke at the last meeting and expressed a concern of the trend today of trying to revise, alter or erase history. "What is being done to monuments in our country is a part of that. Even though the United Daughters of the Confederacy gave us this monument, I do not like to refer to it as a Confederate monument because it doesn't glorify the Confederacy by the simple wording and it doesn't justify slavery, it just states a historical fact. In fact if anything it illustrates the defeat of the Confederacy since they did not attack due to the Union efforts. I do have a personal interest because my great grandfather served in the effort in the Missouri Calvary 5th Regiment. He served in the effort to keep the Confederates from coming into the city. We recommended at the last meeting to keep the monument but add interpretation." Jan Schumacher, 2026 Trenton Court, stated that she has been involved in historic preservation in various communities and projects for the last 20-25 years. Ms. Schumacher read a portion of the statement from the National Trust for Historic Preservation Statement on Confederate Monuments. "The National Trust for Historic Preservation has previously issued statements about the history and treatment of Confederate monuments, emphasizing that, although some were erected—like other monuments to war dead—for reasons of memorialization, most Confederate monuments were intended to serve as a celebration of Lost Cause mythology and to advance the ideas of white supremacy. Many of them still stand as symbols of those ideologies and sometimes serve as rallying points for bigotry and hate today. To many African Americans, they continue to serve as constant and painful reminders that racism is embedded in American society. We believe it is past time for us, as a nation, to acknowledge that these symbols do not reflect, and are in fact abhorrent to, our values and to our foundational obligation to continue building a more perfect union that embodies equality and justice for all". Ms. Schumacher stated that she would like to see the marker removed and have other information about the Civil War in other locations so that they are more prominently seen and also an accurate reflection of the events that happened. Paul Kiekhaefer, 1602-A Street Northeast, Washington, D.C. testified via telephone. He stated that he wanted to address some of the concerns that he heard throughout the process and tonight where a number of people have mentioned they don't want to revise history. He wanted to clarify this monument in itself is revising history. "The monument itself is revisionist history, the effort to remove the monument is an effort to tell history in a way that is coherent and clear and respectful to those who were oppressed in the past. Let's be creative, we are a city that cares about history. We are a city that has a wonderful monument in the State Capitol. We can come up with something that tells the history of the Civil War in a way that is respectful. We do not need the United Daughters of the Confederacy to tell that history." Mr. Berendzen stepped out at 6:55 p.m. Mr. Berendzen came back in at 6:57 p.m. Edith Vogel, 800 St Mary's Boulevard, stated that she is the owner of Camp Lillie of the Union Army during the Civil War. She is the private landowner of that piece of property which consists of about three acres remaining from G.H. Dulle's farm that was confiscated by the Union Army for General John S. Fremont as Camp Fremont. She stated that she listened interestedly to everyone's testimony and would like to step forward and address the Commission that she is willing to help the situation. If the Commission recommends to the City Council removal of the stone and plaque from Moreau Drive, Ms. Vogel would be willing to put it up at Camp Lillie minus the bottom part that says presented by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. Brian Kaylor, 3725 Scarborough Way, stated that as cities across the nation remove monuments honoring Confederate traitors and enslavers our city should too. Monuments and memorials are not about history but honor. "You would not be able to learn about the Civil War by splitting our Confederate rock. We teach the past in classes and in books. Monuments on the other hand, are about who we wish to honor today and what values we wish to honor in the future. Removing this marker will not be rewriting or erasing history; it will be removing an honor to a traitor and enslaver." Public testimony concluded at 7:01 p.m. Ms. Schantz stated that the Commission has a couple of choices, they can change the recommendation made at last month's meeting which was to let the marker remain and be contextualized or they can leave it the same. Mr. Schaefer inquired of the motion made at last month's meeting. Ms. Schantz stated that the motion was to not remove the marker and additional information specifically about the event can be added as money and time allows. She stated that this motion passed unanimously. Ms. Patterson moved and Mr. Hoffman seconded to reconsider the Historic Preservation Commission's decision from the August 11, 2020 meeting. The motion passed 8-1 with the following role call vote: Aye: Berendzen, Deetz, Hoffman, Jones, Patterson, Schaefer, Schantz, Wheat Nay: Bemboom Mr. Berendzen stated that at the last meeting the goal of the motion that was made and voted on was to contextualize the monument to bring it more into perspective with what actually happened. "We have the choice of either removing or keeping the monument. I am also wondering if there is not a middle ground that helps to not only contextualize but also get the correct history that happened in that area. One of the things that I have considered is rather than removing or keeping the monument but replacing. Replace the existing marker with a marker that more accurately depicts the history that occurred in that area." Ms. Patterson stated that she agrees with contextualizing the marker. "There is a point in the museum and historic preservation field where the money has to meet the road. If there is no money to do this than 15 years from now we are going to have this same discussion because there has been no money to remove it. So I am a historian and I work in museums and we are all about saving and preserving and contextualizing history but there is also who is going to do this. We can make a recommendation to the City Council that it be contextualized but where is the City Council going to come up with the funds. I would personally move to remove the marker because at this time in our history we cannot easily contextualize it because we do not have the funds to do that." Ms. Patterson moved and Mr. Hoffman seconded to recommend to the City Council that the Sterling Price Marker be removed. Discussion: Ms. Jones stated that she is in agreement that the marker should be removed, "because if our history is also supposed to be educational they are stating that it is not the correct information that is depicted on the rock so it needs to be removed. If you want to do something else in place of it I am all for that." Mr. Schaefer stated that, "we should still add verbage to add some context to it or replace it. They will find money to remove it, if they can look towards something to replace it." Mr. Bemboom stated that, "it is not what the plaque says; it is who gave the plaque. It is part of the history of Jefferson City, but I totally disagree with the United Daughters of the Confederacy but it is still part of our history. So if we could leave it with a new plaque of some kind. I'm a little opposite of taking it away but I don't know how to recommend it. I don't agree with what's there." Ms. Schantz questioned the idea of asking the City Council to consider doing something in that location that would tell the proud history of Jefferson City's role or what happened in Jefferson City during the Civil War. "We are trying to accommodate everyone's thoughts on this." Ms. Patterson stated that she is all for the Commission recommending improved interpretation of the Civil War history in Jefferson City either there or at another location. The current location is not the easiest access point for the majority of the City. Ms. Schantz reiterated that the motion before the HPC is to remove the marker and it has been seconded. In absence of a friendly amendment accepted by the maker we have to vote on this motion as is. "Does someone have additional language that they would like to give to this?" Mr. Berendzen asked if Ms. Patterson would accept a friendly amendment. Ms. Patterson stated that what people want to say in a friendly amendment is that we recommend removal of the marker and add context that looks to the future to better interpret the Civil War in Jefferson City through additional markers or monuments. Ms. Schantz reiterated that the Historic Preservation Commission is recommending to the City Council that the monument be removed and that they should consider better interpretation of the history of the Civil War in Jefferson City through markers and other appropriate means. Mr. Bemboom stated that he is thinking about leaving the rock and redoing the plaque. The rock is itself part of history and people talk about not knowing what is on the rock. Maybe there is a way to leave the rock and put on a new plaque or something more encompassing history. Ms. Patterson commented that the rock is as much of a gift from the United Daughters of the Confederacy as the plaque is. Mr. Bemboom stated that, "sadly the United Daughters of the Confederacy is part of history and I do not agree with one part of it." Ms. Schantz stated that maybe, "we should just go ahead and try to make a decision on the motion before us. The motion before us is to recommend removal of the monument. There has not been a friendly amendment yet. Is the friendly amendment that there be a better interpretation of the history of the Civil War in Jefferson City through markers and other appropriate means. Ms. Deetz stated that she sees where Mr. Bemboom is coming from. Again it goes back to freedom of speech. Mr. Bemboom stated that he does not agree with so much of that, "except it is a part of history and I would like it to be a more inclusive history. It is still part of history whether I like it or not." Ms. Schantz reiterated that the Jefferson City Historic Preservation Commission recommends the removal of the monument and the City Council consider providing a better interpretation of the history of the Civil War in Jefferson City through other markers or monuments or appropriate means. Ms. Patterson stated that is a friendly amendment is fine and she accepts that amendment. Mr. Berendzen offered as a friendly amendment that he recommends to the City Council that in addition to removing the existing marker, it also replaces the marker with one that more accurately depicts the historic events in the Moreau Drive and Fairmount Boulevard area. Ms. Patterson stated that she accepts that amendment. Mr. Bemboom stated that, "as a Commission I feel like it represents the feeling of everybody we heard here. We are interested in history, we are interested in a marker, and we don't love that marker. I don't think we as a Commission can recommend anything more inclusive to the people here." Ms. Schantz asked of Ms. Patterson whether she will accept the friendly amendment as originally stated by Mr. Berendzen. Ms. Patterson accepted that friendly amendment. Mr. Hoffman seconded the original motion and accepts the friendly amendment. Ms. Schantz stated, "the motion before us that we will recommend to the City Council that the monument be removed and in addition that we replace the marker with one that more accurately depicts the historic events in the Moreau Drive and Fairmount Boulevard area." The motion passed 9-0 with the following roll call vote: Aye: Bemboom, Berendzen, Deetz, Hoffman, Jones, Patterson, Schaefer, Schantz, Wheat Adiournment Ms. Patterson moved and Mr. Berendzen seconded to adjourn the meeting at 7:27 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. City of Jefferson Department of Planning 6 Protective Services 320 E McCarty Street Jefferson City, MO 65101 Phone: 573-634-6410 icolannina(Nieffcitymo.ora www...jeffersoncitymo.gov APPLICATION FOR MURAL PERMIT The undersigned hereby petitions the Director for a permit to display a mural. Please type or print clearly. Please attach the application fee of $55. (Revised July 1, 2018) Part A. Applicant and Property Information; complete Applicant Information Form and attach. Name of Applicant: CLA\\- a,\ N'Ac �.oMM\SS\O^ Name of Sponsoring Organization, if any: 3. Property Address: E. La -q �to\ ^v, i W__'� I 0-V- 4 Legal/Property Description (or Attach): 5 Zoning Designation of the Property: PU Q 6. Is the Property located in a National Historic District, Local Historic District or Local Conservation District? _No Yes, Name of District: Ca.etko\ A\72 E)�SEoric D'�sFc c� 7. is Pjoperty located in an area covered by a registered business or neighborhood association? No _Yes, Name of Association Part B. Describe the mural below. ` 1. Location of mural: on Fo ce ocCT'\ocN lc. oW (019 66 e lccic c\c_2_ 2. Mural Dimensions - Height: CWidth (o5 --tor Area: 390 sq. ft. Graphic Medium - �( Paint (specify type) �cc Constructed (specify material If constructed, specify �( Other (specify) vat y,\ method: 4. Will the mural be lighted? X No _ Yes (Specify type, location of lighting) 5. Time frame: Anticipated start date: Cl /a 1 Jo16.10 Anticipated completion date of the mural: io 5 Fjoac> 6. Staging area requirements: �( On-site only ❑ On public street or sidewalk On adjacent property (please attach permission letter from property owner) For Staff Use Only: Fee Received: Cash: _Receipt # Check: _Check # Date Received: Application Number. M - Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. Page 1 of 8 Part C. Attachments. Please include the following attachments with the completed application: ,lt Applicant Information Sheet Copy of the contract between Artist and Property Owner Plan -view of the site and mural location depicting information required ,N Project narrative describing the proposed design, materials and name of designer or artist; U If mural is to be lighted: Lighting plan indicating type, location and intensity of fixtures; electrical plan ` 4 Rendering or reduced -size copy of the proposed mural U Permission letter(s), if needed, for staging areas $55 application fee Part D. Signatures and Certifications. The artist and all property owners must sign the application. If additional signatures are needed, please attach separate sheets. Artistes Certification. I certify that the information contained in this application is complete and accurately represents the proposed mural. I have read Sections 3-30 to 3-38 of the City Code and agree to abide by the requirements relating to murals. Artist's Signature: Date: Q 2 v Applicant's or Sponsor's Certific 'on. I certify that the information contained in this application is complete and accurately represents the proposed mural. I have read Sections 3-30 to 3-38 of the City Code and agree to abide by the requirements relating to murals. Applicant's Signature: Date: 2-1 -caro Property Owner's Certiflca the applica not the property owner, a property owner must complete this section and signature be notarized: I certify that I am the owner of the property referenced in Item #2 above, and I hereby grant permission to the Applicant to establish the proposed mural described in this application upon the referenced property. (Only one property owner is required flp sign.) Property Owner's Signaturow. r Date: Property Owner's Signature: L Date: Do not write below this line - for City use only If APPROVED this application becomes the MURAL PERMIT. All work is to be done in compliance with the laws and ordinances of the City of Jefferson, Missouri and in -- — conformity with the application, plans and specifications filed with and approved by the Department of Planning and Protective Services. By reviewing and acting on Mural Permit applications, the City is not considering, assessing or acknowledging any responsibility for copyright and related matters. The research and assessment of copyright and related matters shall be the responsibility of the Applicant and Artist. This application for MURAL PERMIT does not conform to Article III, Chapter 8 and is DENIED for the following reasons: of Planning and Protective Page 2 of 8 ❑ APPROVED U CONDITIONALLY APPROVED This application for MURAL PERMIT conforms to Article III, Chapter 8 and is APPROVED subject to the following conditions: Department of Planning and Protective Services: /s/ Date This application for MURAL PERMIT does not conform to Article III, Chapter 8 and is DENIED for the following reasons: of Planning and Protective Page 2 of 8 City of Jefferson Department of Planning 8 Protective Services 310 E. McCarty Street Jefferson City, MO 65101 Phone: 573-634-6410 iculanning0leffcitvmo. ora www.Jeffersoncitym o.gov Project Information (Please use additional sheets if necessary) Name of Project Ga Ow\ Finte Location/Address t!p jQ Submitted by Applications Submitted (Check box and circle item) ❑ P&Z: Zonin¢ Amend Comp Plan Amend Special Exception PUD Sub Plat Annexation ❑ BOA: CUP Variance Appeal ❑ Staff: Site Plan Bldg Plans Grading Plan Change of Use Temp Use ❑ Clher: Consultant(s) (List lead consultant and all others who are responsible for major project elements) Lead Consultant Name 4AA�A-n Pot \\O Firm Name SC- PACKS Address to LCJ Q rj • Telephone Number - Ljp - Fax No. E -Mail 190Tce\\o - e -WC\:% t MO • cw Consultant Name �M QpejC Firm Name P0.f Address 12qg 5k. Telephone Number G3 `-\I - (05-7-1Fax No. E -Mail ASc\.Coeper 4�%`l Mb .00 Consultant Name %fn Firm Name Address CORY LMO O Telephone Number SCA - 9 - c* \ Fax No. E -Mail 0, reeA-,boX\K g3 mca,\ . cope. Property Owners/Applicants (List owner; Mark "X" next to the name of the primary contact) Owner Name ft -k1 {i r4 LLL Address 1� (_.' E lTb IME, glut }Cf G In Telephone No. ��'J' �J3-�D 333 Fax No. E -Mail \\ C Stt t t r �l�G Applicant Name Address Telephone No. Fax No. E -Mail Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. Page 3 of 8 Excerpt of Chapter 3 of City Code, Adverting and Signs Article III. Murals Sec 3-30. Intent and Rules. The intent of this article is to protect the public interest and safety, to enhance preserve, and protect buildings and - structures, and promote art, aesthetics and high standards of appearance within the city while permitting certain murals. The purpose of the Mural Permit is to provide a method for reviewing proposed murals to ensure that the mural complies with the criteria outlined below. A. The provisions of this article shall apply to the erection, alteration, reconstruction, construction, maintenance and removal of all murals as herein defined. B. To the extent that any other provision of this article shall be more restrictive than the provisions set forth in this article, the more restrictive provision shall apply. C. The sections, paragraphs, clauses, and phrases of this article are severable and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this article shall be declared unlawful by the valid judgment, decree or injunction order of a court of competent jurisdiction, such ruling shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this article. In the event that, contrary to the policies, interests, and values of the City, a court of competent jurisdiction issues a judgment, decree or injunction order that this article is unlawful because of any omission or prohibition in this article, then all provisions of this article not specifically declared to be unlawful shall remain in full force and effect. In the event that a judgment, decree or injunction order declaring all or a portion of this article to be unlawful is reversed or vacated by a court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions contained in this article shall remain in full force and effect. D. By reviewing and acting on Mural Permit applications, the City is not considering, assessing or acknowledging any responsibility for copyright and related matters. The research and assessment of copyright and related matters shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. Sec. 3-31. Definitions. Erect: To construct, build, raise, assemble, place, affix, attach, create, paint, draw or in any other way bring into being or establish. Mural: A painting, graphic design, or pictorial representation applied directly or attached to an exterior mounting surface or exterior wall that is visible from any point of any public right-of-way including public street, sidewalk or greenway trail. Any representation which identifies a business or building by logo, product, service, trademark, message, or slogan shall be considered a sign. Sec. 3-32. Permit Requirement. A. A permit is required for the display of a mural. No mural may be painted directly on a wall, fence or building surface except as authorized by a mural permit issued pursuant to this article. 1. Mural Permits are obtained through an application procedure. The application shall be provided by the Department of Community Development (hereafter known as "Department"). A Mural Permit sha"e issued by the Director of Community Development or designee (hereafter known as "Director") only after staff review of the application. (Ord. No. 13301, 11-5-2001) 2. If lighting is proposed, a separate Electrical Permit shall be required. The Electrical Inspector shall inspect all electrical work for compliance with the Jefferson City Electrical Code. Sec. 3-33. Application for Mural Permit. A. Any person, firm, or corporation owning real property within the City may file an application requesting a Mural Permit for the property. B. All applications shall be accompanied by: 1. A check payable to the "City of Jefferson" in an amount as set forth in Appendix Y; and ----- 2. A copy of the contract that allows an artist to paint a mural on the property. The provisions of the contract shall be in accordance with this article. Page 4 of 8 (Ord. 14272, §4, 10-15-2007) C. The application shall be on a form supplied by the Department and filed with the Director and shall include: 1. Address and legal description of the property location; 2. Correct zoning designation of the property; 3. Name, address telephone number and signature of all property owners; 4. Name, address, telephone number and signature of the artist; 5. Name, address, telephone number of the sponsoring organization; 6. Description of the proposed mural, including: a. Location depicted upon a plan -view of the site; - --- b. Rendering or reduced -size copy of the proposed mural, with placement, height, and overall area of mural indicated and drawn to scale; C. Graphic medium i.e., whether painted or constructed, and types of materials to be used and anchoring methods; d. Lighting and electrical plan; - -- — e. Project narrative describing the proposed design, materials and name of designer or artist; f. Time frame for the completion of the mural; g. Staging and construction area. The area around the proposed mural needed for staging and/or construction shall be indicated upon the plan. Sec. 3-34. Mural Permit Processing. A The Director shall review and rule on Mural Permit applications submitted for any mural proposed within the incorporated limits of the City of Jefferson pursuant to the regulations and procedures set forth below: 1. Within thirty (30) days of submittal of an application for Mural Permit to the Director, an adminisrr-ativp hearing shall be scheduled. The application may be continued for a maximum of sixty (60) days from the date of the first hearing. 2. The Director of Planning or designee shall notify adjoining and affected property owners within one hundred eighty-five (185) feet of the mural site of the date and time of the hearing at which the Mural Permit Application will be considered. The date and time of the Mural Permit Application hearing will also be posted in the local newspaper as notification to the general public. - 4. The Director shall approve, deny or conditionally approve the Mural Permit, with reasons. 5. The decision of the Director shall be final unless an appeal is filed within ten (10) business days of the decision. Appeals shall be filed with the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Sec. 35-100 of the Jefferson City Code, and shall include: a. The mural case or project being appealed, --- - b. Reason for the appeal; C. Printed name, address, telephone number and signature of each appellant. B. Criteria for Approval of Mural Permit. The Director shall approve the Mural Permit upon finding the mural meets the following criteria: - — 1. The mural meets the definition of Mural and is not a sign or form of advertisement. 2. The mural content is not obscene. For purposes of this section, any material is obscene if applying contemporary community standards: 1. The predominant appeal is to prurient interest in sex; and 2. The average person would find the material depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; and Page 5 of 8 3. A reasonable person would find the material lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. 3. The mural conforms to the Mural Design and Construction Standards outlined in Sec. 3-35. 4. The mural harmonizes with the structure or structures on the parcel on which it is to be painted and will not negatively impact the historic resources within Jefferson City, nor cause these resources to lose their state and national register eligibility. Murals proposed for properties within designated local historic or conservation districts or national historic districts shall be subject to review by the appropriate review agency, as indicated below. The Director shall submit the Mural Permit Application to the appropriate review body: a. National and State Districts: State of Missouri Historic Preservation Program; b. Local Conservation or Historic Districts: City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission - or -Neighborhood Association, as appropriate. 3. In the event that the Director submits a Mural Permit Application to a review body of another government agency, the Director may allow another sixty (60) days for concurrent review by the City and the other government agency. When this occurs, the application shall be processed in a maximum of ninety (90) days. 4. The artist, property owner, and, if applicable, organization have provided proof of a written contract that allows the artist to paint a mural on the property. 5. The placement, height, and overall area of mural shall be as approved by the Director. Sec. 3-35. Mural Design and Construction Standards. A. Location 1. Murals shall be authorized only in the Commercial and Industrial districts, or as part of a PUD Plan approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. All applications for murals, including those proposed for location in PUD zoning districts, shall be processed in accordance with this article. 2. No mural shall be located closer than five hundred (500) feet to any other mural. B. Lighting. 1. All lighting within murals, located on murals, or directed to murals shall not exceed the maximum foot candles of illumination provided for in Chapter 35, Zoning Code, for the zoning district in which the mural is located and adjacent to. 2 No revolving or rotating beam or beacon of light that simulates any emergency light or device shall be permitted as part of any mural. No flashing, intermittent, or moving light or lights will be permitted. 3. External lighting, such as floodlights, thin line and gooseneck reflectors are permitted, 1. Light sources that are directed upon the mural shall be effectively shielded so as to prevent beams or rays of light from being directed onto any portion of the public right-of-way or onto adjacent property; 2. Illumination or lighting device shall not reflect or shine directly into the adjacent public rights of ways in such a manner as to hamper the vision of a pedestrian, cyclist, or motor vehicle operator thereon; 3. No mural shall be so illuminated that it interferes with the effectiveness of, or obscures, an official traffic sign, device or signal. C. Construction of Murals _.. 1. All murals shall be constructed so as to be free from hazards, and shall be strongly supported with braces, posts, or cables if necessary. They shall be kept in good repair and all surfaces shall be maintained in good appearance. D. All electrical lighting shall conform to the Electrical Code. E. If the proposed mural materials are not compatible with surface mounting, the Director may allow for the mural to be placed on its own substrate, set off from the mounting surface. Page 6 of 8 Sec. 3-36. Mural Types Prohibited. A. After the effective date of this article, there shall be erected, constructed or exhibited none of the following: 1. Murals or other representations which imitate or appear to imitate any official traffic sign or device or which appear to regulate or direct the movement of traffic or which interferes with the proper operation of any traffic sign or signal, or which obstructs or physically interferes with a motor vehicle operator's view of approaching, merging, or intersecting traffic; 2. .Murals placed on areas of public ownership including street rights-of-way and public sidewalks except that a projecting mural may extend no more than twelve inches from a building over a public sidewalk 3. Murals with moving parts, including solar, wind- or water -driven devices. 4. Murals affixed, applied or mounted above, upon or suspended from any part of the roof of a structure- -- 5. Murals which incorporate reflective or metallic paints or materials; 6. Murals which fail to meet the lighting standards of Section 3-18 B. Sec. 3-37. Preparation of Surface and Maintenance. A A Mural Permit is issued with the understanding that the property owner or organization shall be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and removal of the mural. C. In Sand and high pressure water blasting are not allowed as a cleaning process, for either surface preparation or for mural maintenance purposes in the National Register or local historic overlay districts. The Department shall inspect or cause to be inspected every mural in the City. The Director shall require the— maintenance, repair, removal, or covering with opaque paint or other appropriate material, of any mural which is found to have been displayed in violation of this article, including any mural which is: Not maintained, faded or in disrepair; 2. Not securely affixed to a substantial structure;3. cyclists, pedestrians, or motorists. 4. Not in conformance with this article. Creating a dangerous or unsafe condition for An order to maintain, remove, repair, or cover a mural may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment, pursuant to Sec. 35-100 of the Jefferson City Code, who shall schedule a hearing on the matter. Sec. 3-38. Violations and Penalties. A. In case any mural is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, converted, or maintained in violation of this chapter or other regulations made under the authority conferred hereby, the Director or designee shall institute proper action or proceedings to: 1. Prevent such unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, conversion, maintenance or use; 2. Restrain, correct or abate such violation; or, 3. Prevent any such illegal act, conduct or use. It shall be the duty of the Director to afford the offending party notice of the specific complaint by United States Mail, giving said person ten days notice of the violation(s) or anticipated violation(s) and order the correction of the violation. Appeal of decisions of the Director. Where it is alleged there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the Director, any aggrieved person may appeal the order, requirement, decision or determination to the Board of Adjustment in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 35-100 of the Jefferson City Code. Page 7 of 8 The City has the right to remove any non-compliant mural. If the Director shall find that any mural is unsafe or insecure, is a menace to the public, is abandoned or maintained in a dilapidated condition, or has been constructed or erected or is being maintained in violation of the provisions of this chapter, written notice must be given to the organization or property owner thereof. If the organization or property owner fails to remove or alter the mural so as to comply with the standards herein set forth within a reasonable time specified in such notice, such mural may be removed or altered to comply. Any expense incidental to such removal or alteration shall be char&ed to the owner of the property upon which the mural is located and shall constitute a lien upon the property. D. The owner of a building or premises where a violation of any provision of this chapter has been committed or shall exist, or the mural artist, organization, or any other person who commits, takes part, or assists in such violation or who maintains any building or premises in which any such violation shall exist, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not less than Ten Dollars ($10.00) and not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for each and every day that said violation continues after due notice as provided— herein, but if the offense be willful, on conviction thereof, the punishment shall be a fine of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) nor more than Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) for each and every day that such violation shall continue. Any person who, having been served with an order to remove any such violation, shall fail to comply with said order within ten days after such service or shall continue to violate any provision of the regulations made under authority of this chapter in the respect named in such order, shall also be subject to an additional penalty of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00). E. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful actions as may be necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. (Ord. 13260, §4, 94-2001) _ Page 8 of 8 NPS Ir9O)10-900 4M6 No. 10024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form 1. Name of Property historic name Capitol Avenue Historic District other names/site number NLA 2. Location street & number The 400 - 700 blocks of Capitol Avenue. 104 and 200 blocks of adjacent north - south streets from Adams to Gherry Street. [n/al not for publication city or town Jefferson City [n/al vicinity state Missouri code M4 county Cole code 051 zip code 65101 3. State/Federal_ Agencv Certification as re or cemrying by cet.N that this rte o et fjQ I Binn b�Cl� �arntsQlr�:Jnyimthat gis property be PO Gate Missouri Department of Natural Resources State or era agency and bureau in m opinion, the pro �y [xJ sets rLdoes not eet the National Register criteria. { Se� oonbnuatEon shet for additional mments].} Sig—nature o certifying offic-iabMitle State UFFeaeral agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that the property is: j entered in the National R rster See continuation sheet ]. j determined eligible for the National Register See continuation sheet � . ] determined not eligible for # e National RegisTer. j removed from the National Register other, explain See continuation sheet [ J. Signature of the Keeper Date Property Located at 617, 619, 621 & 623 E Capitol Ave. Jefferson City, MO 65101 Legal Description: All of Inlet 137, in the City of Jefferson, Missouri; and, The Easterly part of Inlet No. 136, in the City of Jefferson, Missouri, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of said Inlet; Thence Westerly along the Southerly line thereof, 57 feet 10.5 inches; thence northerly parallel with the Easterly line of said Inlet, 198 Feet 9 inches, to the Northerly line thereof; thence Easterly along the said Northerly line, 57 feet 10.5 inches, to the Northeasterly corner of said Inlet; thence Southerly along the Easterly line thereof, 198 feet 9 inches, to the point of beginning; and, Part of Inlet 136, in the City of Jefferson, Missouri, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of said Inlet No. 136, a distance of 20 feet Easterly from the Southwesterly corner thereof; thence easterly along the southerly line of said Inlet, 26 feet 6 inches; thence Northerly parallel with the Westerly line thereof, 198 feet 9 inches, to the Northerly line of said Inlet; thence Westerly along said Northerly line, 26 feet 6 inches; thence Southerly parallel with the Westerly line thereof, 198 feet 9 inches, to the point of beginning. Containing approximately 0.86 acres. Parcel ID Owncr Name Mailing Address City State Zip Property Address Property Description Subdivision Book -Page -Date I Book -Page -Date 2 Book -Page -Date 3 Sec-Twn-Rng Sq Ft -Above Grade 1103080003002018 STITT BARONY L L C 619 E CAPITOL AVE JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65101 619 E CAPITOL AVE E 84.38' IL136 & ALL IL137 CITY OF JEFFERSON INLOT 655-259 6/22/2015 618-189 5/30/2012 277-791 11/22/1983 8/44/11 m Basement Type Fin. Bsmnt Sz-Sq Ft Year Built Date Certified Prop Value -Land -Comm Prop Value -Land -Ag Prop Value -Land -Res Prop Value-Imprv-Comm Prop Value-Imprv-Ag Prop Value-Imprv-Res Appraised Value 0 1/1/2019 $112,400 $0 $0 $283,700 $0 $396,100 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. TTMap Scale tis is not a 0 feet 5 = 1 inch legal document and should not be substituted for a title. eearch,appraisal, survey, orfor zoning verification. 5ch = 520 Project Narrative Proposed Project: Capitol Ave Fence Mural Location: 619 E. Capitol Ave. Proposed Timeline: September 21, 2020 — October 5, 2020 This project is a collaborative effort between the Cultural Arts Commission and property owner Holly Stitt. Capitol Ave has been integral part in enhancing the cultural arts in Jefferson City. Capitol Ave and the Avenue HQ property that was destroyed by the tornado played an important role in bringing more art opportunities to our town. Recent events include Porchfest JCMO, Art around Town Gallery Crawl, comedy nights, Showdown Academy camps, and much more. With the revitalization taking place, this mural will represent the resilience of our community. This mural design was created by the property owner and artist, Amy Greenbank. It represents JCMO Arts and honors the memory of Avenue HQ. Acrylic paint will be used on the fence and then sealed with a varnish sealer. An anti -graffiti coat will be applied to protect the mural from vandalism. JC Parks Cultural Arts Specialist Leann Porrello will oversee the project and future maintenance by working with the artist. I Jim Custom Art Commission Contract This Agreement is made on the day of SPS (month), 2 u Z u (year), between the following: The Artist Name:+���t Address: Phone: -SU ? - �-4 d � - os�! Z Email: The Pr( Name: Addres Phone: Yt FP—rSo%— 0 Agreement between Artist & Property Owner: 1. Artwork: The Property Owner has commissioned the Artist for the following work of art: Medium: IQc.c \'.4 `� P Dimensions: Cn ° `7 D Description: e c c. Price: � 1� The Artist will create a work of art based on the description above. The Artist agrees to create up to three preparatory sketches from which to obtain Property Owner's approval before beginning the commissioned artwork. These images may be emailed to the Property Owner for approval. All sketches are the property of the Artist. Artist Propert O ne Mural Fee Revenue Account We are ready to move the $55.00 application fee to the account 10-100-450255. Please let us know when you are ready for us to transfer those funds and we will get that complete. Thank you! Leann Porrello Cultural Arts Specialist 573-403-7812 Iporrello(a ieffcitymo.ora Proposed Mural Date: 09-08-2020 619 E. Capitol Avenue Please contact Ahnna Nanoski with the City of Jefferson at 573-634-6410 if you have any questions. rj _ „� � �,` •«,,�,, - - ��� � -La #It C11 ri-t .`' ]rMyir �-`` �� - C+..: il� - .� o-- .._ �` C9.Sv,r.�i � \'I� \` t rmiVT.'✓C'^3C""':� +,versa-� -tves- -.rte+-snw... � .�^•a.K.+---""�"' Proposed Design �0 11-7j- 714 �o FR 9� /�d L T 9LF Location Map 0 20 40 80 Feet N W ® E S