Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/14/2005 Historic Preservation Commission
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, July 14, 2005 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J. Harvat Hall 7.00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda 3. Items for Consideration 1. Certificate of Appropriateness: a. 503 Melrose Avenue b. 906 East College Street c. 1050 Woodlawn Avenue d. 426 Grant Street 2. Minutes for June 30, 2005 4. Other 5. Adjourn City of Iowa City 4 Historic Preservation Commission MEMORANDUM Date: July 8, 2005 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Sunil Terdalkar, Associate Planner Re: Agenda Item for HPC Meeting of July 14, 2005 Item 3.1.a 503 Melrose Avenue Item 3.1.a 503 Melrose Avenue was deferred at the last meeting at the request of the applicant. Please refer to HPC packet for last meeting held on June 30, 2005 for the application and staff report. The applicant has requested approval for 1) replacement wood platform of the rear deck, 2) replacement of screens, 3) replacement of gutters and downspouts, and 4) repair of soffit and fascia. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City For Staff Use: Code Section 144C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Date submitted ........ �� .=+.� .............. Handbook, which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at ❑ Certificate of No Material Effect www.icgov.org/HPhandbook. Certificate of Appropriateness Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. ❑ Major review During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. ❑ Intermediate review Applications are due in the PCD Office by noon on Wednesday the week prior ❑ Minor review to the meeting. Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) ` So...QYI. ❑ Owner... 1�.��}?U.......�..!....... W. �. ......I ....................... Phone.........'..41.15........................................................ Address..... I !9....:E�:.... ....S..�................................... email............................................................................................... Contractor ... saf).n... '!1................................... Address.............. L'b..11..... ................................ .............................. n........... ......... Phone...................... 1.............................................. email............................................................................................... '21 Consultant ...a.1,EE; �..�:..:. Lice", .................................... Address.............. ..b.?......�.......®.0....................................... :.:. .A ........................................... Phone............................................................... ........................................................................................................... email... �l..t .r�1.1.�°�..1n4`.�. �.�° 4�...................................... Application Requirements Attached are the following items: ❑ Site plan U Floor plans Building elevations 13 Photographs ❑ Product information ❑ Other............................................................................ If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. Property Information Address of property ...ap..... .,.....CaIj2Q ....j4 ................. „ Use of property r Date constructed (if known)............................................................. Historic Designation ❑ This property is a local historic landmark OR ❑ This property is located in the: ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District $d East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Lucas -Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: Contributing ❑ Noncontributing ❑ Nonhistoric Project Type 1 Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) ❑ Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) ❑ Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance ❑ Other Project description .7h >. .....C,5.....0........ m ain +e..... ........ r�...... _ � r t27 c s - � cIl i7 � .............. .... ..... .....�.h.� ..... .......� ..... ................. c,c1� �an�e� r© c�'; V'�A os�2 nod U, S'�'ori s............................................................a.......................................................�......... c, ..........°�..........�...a:..... We1.............i�w.....C�...'..�a...'..."r..s?.............. .................................. SN!...5....w.l�.......b2�.....':.?.t.«................ ..................................... ........................................................................ Materials to be used ...................�:?�... h ...Ck ...-....� n}e.............................................................................................................................. ........... .............................. .....................'7C,.tt..A...... c end 5...-.............................. ............................................................. ............. .......................................................................... .......................T11,. C 9 n...P.1 .411. rO `4. � ......... �r. }:L:............................................................................................................... .......................�:�.!.�-...-.. ...o0�................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Exterior appearance changes .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. r s.�ae w 1I I he gem v d arD �n Pads �L,c .. 1. -.o ....ta.......�.`.r 1�........ :C.c:..�.,.�....1sP. �.1.(�..,......E . I....... �..�........II� c�....0. ......���,........ �JO LlYY ; 91 �-P�2 vT2 (�� �c�n,ne. ... C re- 5U'ICH: ..................... .... ......... 1 ..... ........... .. ................v ........................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ppdadm/HP Handbook/App.p65 LGLL18£ f51£J 9911.9££ my ortts vl '= vmol 0311H:�Nb "VIV 'iN:)il I N'Vgt1S pus v�'ul� vmol NICIaN SIVA Imc! IvHc4IIv NO F op �Oli Rol rrr� �w , Staff Report July 7, 2005 Historic Review for 906 E College Street District: College Green Conservation District Classification: Key -Contributing Applicants, Alpha Phi Sorority, are requesting approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for proposed alterations at 906 East College Street, a key -contributing property in the College Green Conservation District. Proposed work includes removal of side planters and replacement of wood stairs and hand rails. The steps will be wider than existing and replaced with TREX composite decking material; metal pipe rails will replace the existing wrought iron rails. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations 4.3 Wood Recommended: Historic wood ■ Repairing historic wood elements rather than replacing them. ■ Using epoxy products, such as Wood Epox and Liquid Wood by Abatron, to consolidate deteriorated wood components, and fill or reconstruct missing wood. ■ Duplicating and replacing historic wood elements when they cannot be repaired. ■ Replacing damaged wood components with new or salvaged wood components that match the historic ones. ■ Monitoring wood surfaces for signs of excessive water damage, rot, or pest infestation. Keeping all surfaces primed, painted and appropriately caulked in order to prevent wood deterioration. ■ Eliminating excessive moisture problems such as leaky roofs, gutters, and downspouts. The improper venting of baths, kitchens, basements, and dryers may cause moisture problems. ■ Removing vegetation that is growing against the wood elements or siding. Wood substitutes ■ Substituting a material in place of wood only if the substitute material retains the appearance and function of the original wood. The substitute material must be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. For many applications, fiber cement board is an approved substitute for wood. Disallowed: Historic wood ■ Covering original wood siding, soffits and eave boards with another material such as vinyl or aluminum siding. ■ Using destructive and dangerous paint removal methods such as sandblasting, water blasting, or burning with a propane or butane torch. ■ Removal of historic wood elements such as trim, porches, cornices, and decorative elements. Wood substitutes ■ Substituting a material in place of wood that does not retain the appearance, function, and paintability of the original wood. 4.9 Porches Recommended: Historic porches ■ Repairing historic porches and conserving as much of the historic material as possible. ■ Replacing badly deteriorated components with new ones that match the historic components in design and material. Custom fabrication of columns, brackets, pedestals, and moldings may be necessary, but many porch components can be ordered through lumber yards. ■ Using vertical -grained fir porch flooring for its resistance to weathering. ■ Using wood steps for a wood porch and tile, brick, or concrete steps for a masonry porch. ■ Constructing porch skirting using a 3-6 inch wood frame with slats fastened to the back of the frame in a vertical or lattice pattern. Wood substitutes ■ Substituting a material in place of wood only if the substitute material retains the appearance and function of the original wood. The substitute must be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Disallowed: Neu, materials ■ Using unpainted treated wood for elements that would have been painted in their historic applications. Wood substitutes ■ Substituting a material in place of wood that does not retain the appearance, function, and paintability of the original wood. 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails Recommended: Historic balustrades and handrails ■ Repairing historic balustrades and railings. ■ Replacing badly deteriorated components with ones that match the historic components in design and material. New balustrades and handrails ■ Constructing or replacing missing balustrades by using historic photographs or by choosing a style that is consistent with the architectural style of the building. ■ Providing handrails on porch steps as required by the building code. Handrails should match the historic balustrade height on the porch unless otherwise specified by the building code. The handrail must have a continuous member that can be easily gripped. The handrail should either match the porch balustrade or be made of round steel pipe. ■ Sloping the top and foot rails slightly to allow water to be shed from these surfaces and help prevent deterioration of these members. Disallowed: Historic balustrades and handrails ■ Removing historic balustrades or railings. New balustrades and handrails ■ Using unpainted treated wood for elements that would have been painted in the historic application. ■ Using wrought iron elements unless they were part of the historic design. Exceptions: Applies to: Historic District, Noncontributing, Conservation Districts, All properties New balustrades and handrails ■ On buildings where a spindled balustrade would be most consistent with the architectural style, spacing spindles so that the balustrade is at least 30% solid. ■ On buildings where turned spindles would be most consistent with the architectural style, installing square spindles. Staff Comments In general the project is consistent with the guidelines. Recommendations Staff recommends approval for Certificate of Appropriateness. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City For Staff Use: Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of �} the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Dace submitted ...... E?. ... `'C' I .................... Handbook, which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at ❑ Certificate of No Material Effect www.icgov.org/HPhandbook. \.Z' Certificate of Appropriateness Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. ❑ Major review During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. ❑ Intermediate review Applications are due in the PCD Office by noon on Wednesday the week prior ❑ Minor review to the meeting. Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) ❑ Owner.....?�or. - ... Forc.�).t........................................... Phone ........... .................................................... Address....1.!.50 W00J l1,......................................................................... email............................................................................................... ❑ Contractor.�l.'�...R.4r,? rSOr1...e1........................... Address....ZR.� ......5-11-, t'::��.— .................................................. ........................S1.n.ki. C.. +' Phone................... ....................................... email............................................................................................... Consultant ..... �u`?..'r..:..`r! c hf ................................... Address .......k0......... ......... A:re............................................... ....................... ...-a..........1.P.................................... Phone...... ................................................. ......................................................................................................... email ...... a�r.1�..1.1.... . ......aV , F ......................................... Application Requirements Attached are the followin; items: `L1 Site plan !l Floor plans $91 Building elevations 'a Photographs ❑ Product information ❑ Other...................................................................... If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. Property Information Address of property ...:��,p..00d..�� ...................................... Use of property ......(:............................................... , Date constructed (if known) .... ....................................... Historic Designation. ❑ This property is a local historic landmark OR ❑ This property is located in the: ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District XWoodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Lucas -Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: ❑ Contributing `Q Noncontributing A Nonhistoric Project Type ❑ Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) ❑ Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance ❑ Other Project description ..............dd.....�.�oo.m.. :�... :..... .....a:......h..s . Ea.. , ................................................................................... ...........Ea.. .....v... cQ. S..... ..t Qa:Yti�t..................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ..........................................................................................................................................................................:....................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ......... .............................................................................................................................................................................. .............................. ... ......... I............... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Materials to be used .......�.....:�.......::.o.....m o�-I- ch....s? .?. S�: n. ....C.(?ro ..�.� e... ...0 io)....................................... ...... .........N�...W.�a.�s.....-.:o.....b?.....�.a ...wo..............................`.................................................................................................. .....................k n.!?\ }A2 .... ,t.hzr�lass...©r...S-.Q-............................ 7 c n...................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ,.... �p �.....�..i.S S.-W.......z....P.eH5;h.I �1... )........................................................ ............................................................................... ...........................)..................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Exterior appearance changes .1..��........=�.....�.rner.....a.�d...add.....�ree.r...:�orcP�....�?n.................................................................... `.l .'!.....�.t.11�4 a''. v.... 1. .... .:........................................................ ................................ .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ppdadm/HP Handbook/App.p65 L6111BE (51V B(61E) 04ii5 7I Alo tlR1'A110 01 B4ffi5 tll'AUO vrnol '3AV i5Ttl1000m 0501 � a O "ONI 'J3(O1I119 'NOSN190�i TC 'iHO17 NOUICICIV CINY 13aow3N g v ,I NV'sns 0311HONV bid 3:)N3C1153N 1NG N?Jb� LL -� u 0 1 LfLLiff Me) 5btt5 8'a:) (HE) ql 'A110 gm01 O ObttS VI 'AlID gf1101 '3/,q WW000m 0501 � a �g 'ONI 'N34'11119 'NOSNI9ON TO N011lddb' (3Nd 13CIOW36 : 10311HO Jb "bid "1N)Il '1 NdSt1S 3ON34I83�! 1Nb J 1b� N e o 5y� � 7�1 3 m 1 Lklisl (SIC) MICE (61E) Ob225 YI'w11:)VRi01 ")NI 'N3d11119 'N09NI90N TO 1D311HONY "bid '1HOIl 'l NG9119 bl'All� Ym01 �./ y�3�C' WiIV/11d00T 0501 ly 4 a O N0I1I44 V aN V i3UoW3N 30N30193N 1NVNNV� p b $ R r 3 10 B(GE) dl All7 VIAOI O V1 ObtLS ,110 'A110 VA101 RAY wvlao0an 'ONI 'Naring 'NOBN GON 'm'4 NO lIQQ d QNb 73QOW3J 5 g g . i�alin��d bld 'lr+�n Ndsns j 3QN3QI5321 1Nb�l�Jb � � Y. L ; IS Staff Report July 7, 2005 Historic Review for 1050 Woodlawn Avenue District: Woodlawn Historic District Classification: Non -Contributing Applicant, Pat Farrant, is requesting approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for proposed alterations additions at 1050 Woodlawn Avenue, a non-contributing property in the Woodlawn Historic District. The structure was built in 1950 with ranch -style. Currently artificial stone masonry, vertical and horizontal siding are used for exterior finish. Proposed work includes addition of 1) a room and patio at basement level, 2) a sunroom and a screened porch at first floor level, a wood ramp entry way with deck and 3) removal, replacement and installation of certain windows and doors. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: Please refer to following sections: 4.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations 4.7— Windows and 4.8—Doors And 5.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines forAdditions 5.1— Expansion ofBuilding Footprint and 5.2 — Decks and Ramps Staff Comments In general the design and use material are consistent with the Guidelines and character and style of the house. The railing for the addition of ramp and landing at the proposed entry are not specified. Use of appropriate material — wood or wood alternatives is recommended. Recommendations Staff recommends approval for Certificate of Appropriateness. A[ Aication for Historic P view Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at www.icgov.org/HPhandbook. Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. Applications are due by Wednesday the week prior to the meeting. Applicant Information (Please check/Oct primary contact person) ❑ Ownerv.:'.61 ... �� �: ell �' h Phoneo.:..i6_�I.. . �?.t1..©.. ....(.... .1.)................. Address ..... l..O".i.....1:................................. ....................4f !... ti...... ? ...�.. �.. ....� d � �..... email ... ..� 5 ��,..Y1..a .?...`.4G�... ...:.�. iY!......................... mPf.s... �.....�.4�1' ❑ Contractor ............................ . Address ..&.5....... :Lott i.. ........l...r�.V.iift .......... Phone........ 1......1.........�.. �.. o.S......................................... email................................................................................................. ❑ Consultant................................................................................... Address........................................................................................... Phone............................................................................................... email................................................................................................. Application Requirements Attached are the following items: ❑ Site plan ❑ Floor plans ❑ Building elevations AW09iliPhotographs ❑ Product information ❑ Other.............................................................................. If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. For Staff Use: ,q Date submitted.......�J !..[.: )�..... ❑J Certificate of N Material Effect ,XJ C rtificate of Appropriateness Major review ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minor review Property Information r �L., Address of property .......��.!U......6` ..Z ....:....... ........................ ... '..... .` ...,. ./l j..... ...© Use of property......5!Ti ...... ......... Date constructed (if known).............................................................. Historic Designation ❑ This property is a local historic landmark OR 1 '+❑ This property is located in the: ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District Longfellow Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Lucas -Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: w❑ Contributing ❑ Noncontributing ❑ Nonhistoric Project Type ❑ Alteration of an existing building (ie., siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) ❑ Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) ❑ Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance Other S j rr s r 0 Project description /1 ..... ... - ..�.1......... ' ..�.......,....... 1...1 ............. 4u�...I.,�w......... ...... [............................. C' ,........Q.�........... fit..... �..... Q�.1. ..1 .....00.. ....-f.................................... ........ .. a.. �.....:......... ............s`f'e....S......1.a..(....... .....� ........ :� ......... ...a.r..................................... P dd ............................ .. ..3.. ........ . .. . a. r .%..�...... . ...�-...�. ,�....0 ... �.. ,�.... .... �avu... A :.... �..r�....... Lm........ waode, ►......................... .......... ........ .�.d� 0......o...... fi.y r �,..O�.. n.................................................................. ........... ............................ ...... .... ...... ..... .... ................................ .4., .C.`. ........... ...... ...........�...r...s...�.......�... o►......��t.......G,,a.�d...r�........................... r-c...wr.................:...... ...............-........G`.......................... ..e.. ...........I ......$�-,...d.. . ,..1....... s.............................................................. .................L ............................... .................... :........�. �.�..... r�'� `d n ..ar:....a .r?...... ?'�. � r ............................... ......... . All Material§- ............ to be used ....... V ...+..!...............�.u..r,�..�.......�....(l d?.6.�4 '... ....I�z.�......-�...) ...�:... ..l ..G......... VA ..........r.e ........ per............. .................:..... �. .......................cd...- P C ...................................................................................................................................................OA) .a r,....................................... Exterior appearance changes ppdadm/HP Hand book/App.p65 IYU all, Staff Report Historic Review for 426 Grant Street District: Longfellow Historic District Classification: Contributing July 7, 2005 Applicant, Walter Seaman, is requesting approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for installation of railing for stairs for the front porch and in the front yard at 426 Grant Street. It is a contributing single-family house in the Longfellow Historic District. The applicant has proposed to use metal pipe railing. This is a revised application after the denial for the installation of a wrought iron railing. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails Balustrades (guardrails) and handrails serve as both decorative and functional elements on porches, balconies, and steps. For historic properties, the design should be consistent with the architectural style, but not at the expense of safety. Recommended: New balustrades and handrails ■ Constructing or replacing missing balustrades by using historic photographs or by choosing a style that is consistent with the architectural style of the building. ■ Installing top and foot rails that are at least 2 inches in thickness. These can be made with 3/4-inch and 5/4-inch lumber glued together. ■ On buildings where a spindled balustrade would be most consistent with the architectural style, spacing spindles so that the balustrade is at least 40% solid. Spindles must be spaced so that no gap between the spindles exceeds 4 inches as required by the building code. This is for child safety. ■ Providing handrails on porch steps as required by the building code. Handrails should match the historic balustrade height on the porch unless otherwise specified by the building code. The handrail must have a continuous member that can be easily gripped. The handrail should either match the porch balustrade or be made of round steel pipe. ■ Providing balustrades on the porch as required by the building code. When the porch floor is more than 30 inches above grade, the balustrade must be 42 inches high except for single-family and duplex structures where it may be as low as 36 inches. ■ Sloping the top and foot rails slightly to allow water to be shed from these surfaces and help prevent deterioration of these members. Disallowed: Nesv balustrades and handrails ■ Using unpainted treated wood for elements that would have been painted in the historic application. ■ Using wrought iron elements unless they were part of the historic design. Exceptions: Applies to: Historic District — Noncontributing, Conservation Districts — All pmoperties New balustrades and handrails ■ On buildings where a spindled balustrade would be most consistent with the architectural style, spacing spindles so that the balustrade is at least 30% solid. ■ On buildings where turned spindles would be most consistent with the architectural style, installing square spindles. Staff Comments In general the project is consistent with the guidelines. Recommendations Staff recommends approval of Certificate of Appropriateness. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 30, 2005 — 7:00 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Gunn, Mark McCallum, Justin Pardekooper, Jim Ponto, Jan Weissmiller, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, James Enloe STAFF PRESENT: Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Kurt Dyer, Kaiser (This refers to the gentleman representing Kaiser Construction; he never gave his name), Michael Maharry, Richard Wayne CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificates of Appropriateness. 503 Melrose Avenue. Weitzel stated that the Commission would defer this item, as requested by the applicant. 946 Iowa Avenue. Terdalkar said that this house is a contributing structure in a conservation district. He said the proposal is to remove the asphalt shingles used for siding and replace them with vinyl siding and to also use aluminum for the window trim. Kaiser said that he represents Jim Buxton, the owner of the house, and said that Kurt Dyer, who was also present at the meeting, is Buxton's maintenance foreman. Kaiser said this house is on the corner of Iowa Avenue and Evans. He said that it is an eyesore. Kaiser said that the three dormers on the house already have vinyl siding and aluminum soffit, fascia, and gutters, as does the whole upper part of the house. He said he would like to remove the asphalt from the bottom two-story section, insulate it, and put vinyl siding on it. Kaiser said that fiber cement board would cost him about two and one-half times the cost, between material and labor, of his proposal. Weitzel said that it is a common mandate from the Secretary of the Interior Standards on down to not use vinyl siding. He stated that fiber cement board does allow a house to breathe, whereas vinyl siding collects moisture, contributes to rotting of the structure, and tends to become brittle. Kaiser said that is true if you use cheap materials. Weitzel responded that all vinyl eventually becomes hard and brittle. He said that the longest lasting vinyl siding will last 50 years, and, as far as he knows, fiber cement board will last over 100 years. Kaiser said he is looking at it from the viewpoint of the cost to his customer. He said that Buxton has invested money and is trying to improve the house, and he cannot see why the owner should be required to spend $22,000 instead of $9,000. Weitzel said the Commission is charged by City Council and by ordinance to look at the historic nature of properties, to preserve neighborhoods, and to preserve the quality of those structures, and that has a lot to do with whether the Commission will allow vinyl siding. Kaiser said the whole top of the building is already covered with synthetic siding. He said he was at the meeting probably to be turned down so that he could appeal his request to someone else. Kaiser said that vinyl siding is now treated to reflect the ultraviolet light so that it does not become brittle. He said that it comes in 25-foot panels so that there are fewer seams, and it is the only product on the market that has a double lifetime warranty. Maharry asked Kaiser if this is warranted against the rotten wood on the inside of the frame of the house when the moisture sticks inside. Kaiser said that the insulation that he puts on it is breathable. He said that good quality vinyl siding has weep holes in it so Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 2 that any moisture will drain out of it. Maharry asked Kaiser if he warranties the house or just the plastic. Kaiser said he warranties the product. Weitzel said that because this property is in a conservation district, the applicant can go to the Board of Appeals if this is denied by the Commission. He said the latitude of the Board of Appeals is to determine if the Commission's decision was arbitrary and capricious. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 946 Iowa Avenue, as proposed. McCallum seconded the motion. Gunn said that this discussion regarding siding has been going on for a long time in Iowa City. He said that when the Commission began looking at the guidelines, which took a couple of years to develop, about seven years ago, these issues were discussed over and over at many meetings. Gunn said the guidelines were then written and adopted by the City Council to disallow vinyl siding for contributing structures in conservation districts. He said that in the five years since adoption, it has never been approved on a house, and he will vote against this. Gunn said this is clearly against the guidelines, and he did not think there was a choice. Ponto said that the directive comes down from the Secretary of the Interior Standards, and in this case, it is pretty straightforward. Weissmiller said that if the owner wanted to restore the house in a more expensive way, perhaps the whole block could be brought back such that one wouldn't necessarily have to rent the house to the people with the least money. She said that in the end, it might actually be worth restoring well. Weissmiller said that as the population ages and people drive less, especially with the price of gas going up, then they will want to live close in, which would make it a good investment to restore this house well. Weitzel said the Commission does not have a problem with vinyl siding for new construction but can't approve it for historic properties. The motion failed on a vote of 0-6. 14 North Johnson Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said the proposal is to install a double hung window on the garage, using aluminum trim for the wood windows and doors and using aluminum siding for the garage, and replacement of the soffit with aluminum soffit. Dyer said that the house has vinyl siding on it currently. He stated that the house has 28 windows, and 19 of them are wrapped with metal. Dyer said that he also wants to replace two windows in the garage with double hung windows. Weitzel asked about the condition of the current window. Dyer said that it is not decayed, but he would like to get some ventilation in there, because the current window does not have a movable sash. Dyer said the window would be the same size as the current window. He said he would like to use a single -pane wood sash, double hung window. Weitzel said the materials are consistent with the guidelines. He said that the other thing the Commission looks at is style. He referred to a sample provided by Terdalkar of a historically authentic divided light window that is available as a replacement sash. Weitzel said that the swinging door is probably original and asked Dyer what he plans to do with that. Dyer said he would leave it as it is. Kaiser said that he would side up to the edge of the frame and cap the casing. Kaiser said that the house already has 35 to 36 squares of vinyl siding on it. He said it would perhaps take eight square maximum to do the garage, and he would just like to match the house. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposed project at 14 North Johnson Street. Ponto seconded the motion. Gunn said that the guidelines are very clear about wrapping the trim and putting on the siding. He said the Commission is not at liberty to say it will enforce them now but is not going to enforce them next time or vice versa. Gunn said that the window, however, is not a problem. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 3 The motion failed on a vote of 0-6. Regarding the sash, Ponto said he was in favor of having some ventilation up there, as long as it looks basically the same, and it is going to be the same size. He said the existing window is broken into four, so that it would be nice to have a double hung and then uprights in there. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for replacing the sash with two over two barnstyle, wood double hung windows with a movable sash. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Gunn suggested that if the applicant wants to appeal the Commission's decision regarding siding, he might want to do some research. He said the appeal isn't about whether or not the Board agrees with the siding decision, it is about whether the Commission's decision was arbitrary or capricious, which is a pretty difficult standard. 328 Governor Street. Dyer said this proposal involves finishing the attic. He said he needs to put a small dormer out for headroom for the stairway. Dyer said that the dormer would be below the chimney. Terdalkar said that this building is a contributing structure in the Lucas Governor Street conservation District. He said the request is for the construction of a dormer with double hung windows. Dyer said he would like to replace all of the windows in the attic and put an egress window in the dormer out the back. He said that the dormer is about four feet down from the chimney and would probably have about a 6:12 roof. Dyer said it would only extend out two feet. Weitzel asked Dyer if he would change the roof pitch from the first group coming up into a new pitch or continue the same line. Dyer said this would tie into it, and he would not be changing any of the roofline. Weitzel asked Dyer how flexible he is on the design of the dormer. Dyer said that whatever design the Commission recommends would be okay. Weitzel asked Terdalkar if he could come up with an appropriate plan. Gunn said that what is lacking here is a proportional overhang and fascia. Dyer said he could have an architect draw up some plans. Gunn said that Dyer would have to build it with rafters anyway to extend out, so this is about details, not anything major. Pardekooper said this sounds doable, but the Commission needs to see some plans on it. Weitzel said the Commission could give a consensus as to whether or not this is allowed as an idea but would probably ask for further study and design to make it structurally sound and as historically accurate as possible. The consensus of the Commission was to allow the addition of a dormer to this house. Weitzel asked Dyer to work with staff or an architect or contractor of his choice for technical assistance with the design. Dyer said he would also like to replace the windows up there with the same size double hung windows. Weitzel asked if the windows had fixed sashes and if Dyer wanted to add ventilation, and Dyer confirmed this. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 328 South Governor Street, as submitted, with the stipulation that the overhang, trim, and fascia of the dormer be compatible with the existing building, with the dormer to be drawn or approved by staff. Dyer said that the current windows have the boards separating the windows. Weitzel said the Commission would want to see replacement windows that match what is on the house right now. He said that on this age of house, the Commission would probably prefer to see very even rectangles such as two over two or one over one. Weitzel said that the house currently has the Queen Anne windows. Gunn said there are lots of simple double hung windows on the house, and he would not have a problem with a simple double hung window in the dormer. Weitzel said that as simple of a double hung as Dyer can get is probably what he will really want. Dyer said that the egress window is a rollout window. He said Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 4 that it is just one pane, but he can get a divider for it. He said that he would get whatever the Commission wants. Weitzel said the Commission wants what will look good and help maintain the value of the home. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Gunn moved to amend the motion to include a single light egress window with a horizontal dividing bar to make it appear like a double hung window, for the dormer. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried. on a vote of 6-0. 422 Brown Street. Terdalkar said that this house is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. He stated that the application is for the installation of new windows and a replacement window. Wayne, the owner of the house, said that he was available to answer questions from the Commission. He said that the design of the proposed window is a casement window. Wayne said that he looked at the international, residential egress requirements. He said he learned that the minimum egress size for a double hung window would be, in rough opening, 66 high by 38 wide, but a casement would be 48 high and 30 wide. Wayne said that there is a small window there now, and this would be a much larger intrusion. Wayne said that this is supposed to be an egress window. He said that the clear opening height of the double hung is 26 inches for the minimum sized 66 by 38 rough opening, but for the casement, it is 42 inches. Wayne said that if he had to get out of a window fast, he would much rather get out of a vertical space. He said that because of the appropriateness of the casement window to the purpose, which is egress, the casement window would be the choice. Wayne said that the casement window would also be a smaller intrusion, and also, the casement opens out so that it will bring in a breeze. Wayne said he therefore thought the casement would be a safer egress window. He said this is for an enclosed porch on the main part of the house. Wayne said that the windows in the front are not double hung but are just two windows, one on top of the other and are of leaded glass. He said that the windows in the front don't correspond to any specific architectural style. Wayne said that the house was built in the late 1940s or early 1950s. Weitzel said that even if the Gaslight Village itself is significant, supposing that it is, then the Commission would still want to look at the context and character of that and would want the new windows to match that context. He said that it can be a historic structure without being an architecturally significant one. Weitzel asked if HIS is requiring a window here, and Wayne confirmed this. McCallum said that visually it would be more appealing to have an opening on this porch, versus a blank wall. He said that casement - style windows are made with a bar in the middle to make them look like double hung windows. Gunn asked if the egress window would be on only one side of the porch. Wayne said there would be an egress window on each side for each bedroom. Gunn asked if it would be possible to put a double hung, of a similar size as those on the front, on each side. He said there would then be six windows that are fairly consistent with the decorative one in the middle. Weitzel said that would architecturally balance out the front fagade. Gunn said that there are two paired windows on the front. He said that if Wayne just installed a single one of the same size on each side, maybe set back the same distance from the corner, then there would be some continuity to the porch. Wayne said that a legal egress window with a double hung design would only give a vertical opening of 26 inches, but the casement would give 42 inches, which he thought would be easier to egress from. Weitzel said there is a precedent of what is on the front so that matching that would be the best bet. Wayne said then that where he wanted to put a casement egress, the Commission would like to see him put a double hung egress window matching in size as closely as possible what is on the front. He said that this sounds reasonable. Weitzel said that he thought the Commission could probably approve that. Wayne said that the window to be put in the house would be a double hung window in the kitchen, to give it ventilation and light. He said that the top of the window would be level with the top of the big window that is there now, and it would be a double hung window. Weitzel said that typically the Commission would like to match the size and style of the window that is already there. Wayne said that there is no room for something like that and Weitzel agreed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 5 Weitzel said that the Commission would look for some way to put the window in there that will be sympathetic to the structure and will make a balance. Gunn suggested widening the existing opening out a little and putting in a pair of double hung windows of the same height. Wayne said that in the inside of the house there is an original archway that he would like to keep. He stated that it would have to be removed to enlarge the present window and make a double window. Weitzel said that a double window can be installed with a wall in between. He said that often a window is located next to a wall and another window next to that, but the spacing is maintained outside to look like a row or pair of windows, while in fact in the intervening space between the windows is actually a full wall. Ponto said that from the outside he would like the idea of the window matching, but from the inside it would be too big and too low. Wayne said that he agreed. He said that is why he is trying to maintain the proportions and make it a double hung with matching trim on the inside but just smaller. Wayne said that it has to be above the stove. Weitzel said that the house has been heavily altered, and if it has any significance, it will be under criterion b, not under architectural significance. He said that the Commission will want to maintain the feel of the place through that period of significance. Weitzel said it wouldn't have to be exact but should be something with that character and feel. Wayne suggested something smaller, with the top still matching the top of the existing large window but a little bit more discreet yet in the same style. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of three windows on the house at 422 Brown Street: two double hung windows to reasonably match the size and trim of the windows on the front porch for the sides of the porch and a double hung window of the same style that exists on the original house to go beside the existing large window with the top of the window at the same level and at least six inches of the original siding visible on either side of the window. Weitzel said that the Commission would want to see the sill with the ears on it, and all of the trim should match the existing but just be on a smaller scale. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. 619 North Johnson Street. Terdalkar said that this is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. He stated that the proposal is for the demolition of the wood porch stairs and the reconstruction of the stairs with concrete, installation of a wood railing, and the removal of the wood decking on the porch to be replaced with a concrete slab. Terdalkar said that since the application was submitted, he has talked to the applicant, and the applicant is willing to replace everything with wood. He added that no design has been proposed for the railing yet. Weitzel stated that this is a very wide set of stairs. He said that if the applicant will have to build a railing, the Commission could specify that it match the balustrade or be of a simple black pipe design. Gunn said that there is some unusual architecture in this district so that the house could have been built just like this. Terdalkar said that the survey states that the integrated porch was original. Weitzel said it is a simplified Queen Anne so that asymmetry is to be expected. Gunn said it appears to be a fairly straightforward project of adding the balustrade as required by code and running it or a pipe rail down the side of the stairs. He said that doing it all in concrete would be against the guidelines. Gunn suggested that the applicant come back before the Commission with more complete plans. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the concept plan for the project at 619 North Johnson Street and to require that the final plans be approved by staff and the chair. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. MINUTES: Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 6 June 9, 2005. Weitzel said that on page four in the reference to Mitch Behr, it should include his title of Assistant City Attorney. Ponto stated that on page one in the last paragraph, the first sentence in the motion should read, "...a black pipe hand rail..." He said that on page three, in the second paragraph from the bottom, it should read, "Ponto asked about the status of the Commission pursuing a reduction of the fee..." MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the June 9, 2005 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as revised. Gunn seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. OTHER: Maharry said that when vinyl burns, it produces cyanide. He stated that one has 15 minutes from when he breathes in cyanide to get the antidote before he dies. Weitzel said that statistically most people die before the smoke gets to them in a vinyl fire. He stated that he is currently working on an article regarding vinyl siding that will eventually be on the website. Ponto distributed a press release that the University put out for the old Hydraulics Lab, which discussed the building being named as a national historic landmark. Maharry said that the building was named through the National Hydraulics Association, not through the National Park Service. Weitzel stated that he and Terdalkar attended a conference in Mason City and heard some great economic incentive talks, although some of it was geared toward revitalization of a vacant downtown. He said that he and Terdalkar would write up a memo summarizing the points of the conference. Weitzel said the Commission has a potential first demolition by neglect coming up at 404 Summit Street. He said that HIS has approached Terdalkar about necessary changes to make the building safe. Weitzel said that the Commission needs to get a firm procedure set up with HIS so that if HIS is going to do something like this, they need to talk to the Commission before telling the owner what to do to the building so that the Commission can review it first. He said the Commission also needs to be thinking about these things so that if the Commission sees something like that, it can act on it and not wait for HIS to do it. Terdalkar said that this arose after a complaint by a neighbor. He said that HIS prefers not to act on its own. Weitzel said the Commission will need to approve exterior changes. Terdalkar said that the property owner has been given information regarding the need for the Commission's approval. Weitzel said that the homeowner will need to apply for exterior repairs, and the Commission will need to act expediently to help the homeowner get this done in a reasonable time frame. Weitzel said that he and Terdalkar took an architectural tour of Mason City. He showed an example of a granite plaque stating what the house is known for and what the style of the structure is, in the sidewalk in front of the house. Weitzel said he and Terdalkar considered putting these in the neighborhoods through the Public Art Program and discussed approaching neighborhoods that are interested in having their key and landmark structures identified with a plaque in the sidewalk. Terdalkar said that if the district name is listed on the plaque and then the boundaries are later changed, that could be a problem with the idea. Weitzel said the Commission needs to get the Design Review Subcommittee going in order to speed up the approval process. He said the Subcommittee would hold informal meetings to iron out details of the applications. Weitzel said that there are currently three members of the subcommittee: Carlson, Gunn, and himself. Gunn said that the ordinance and by-laws are in effect to utilize the subcommittee. Pardekooper said that he would also be interested in serving on the subcommittee. Weitzel said that there is an August deadline for CLG grant applications. He said one possible project for the Commission would be to hire a consultant to look for economic incentives in town and how to establish them locally. Weitzel said that another possibility would be to hire someone to do the neighborhood brochures on the website. He said that someone would have to volunteer to write the grant in the next month if the Commission wants to apply for it. Weitzel said that Kerry McGrath discussed the historic site preservation grant with him. Weitzel said that would be a way to get 50% funding to work on the Montgomery -Butler House. He said that McGrath Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 7 would get back to him on the current significance of that house, since the porch has been lost and the roof is in bad shape. Weitzel said that this was the last day to submit historic preservation award nominations. He stated that Commission members could nominate a building, a contractor, an outstanding person, or outstanding agency or organization. Weitzel said to inform Burford regarding any nominations. Weitzel said that McCallum wanted to reopen discussion of an incentive zoning proposal for addition to the new zoning code rewrite. McCallum distributed copies of his proposal to Commission members. He stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is currently getting feedback on its rewrite of the zoning code. McCallum said he looked at different models and came across the Des Moines, Iowa model, from which he took his particular proposal. He said that he is asking for consideration of this idea and, if there is strong enough support, a vote up or down. McCallum said that Des Moines is doing a much more aggressive job with zoning incentives. He said that he proposes this for the multi -family zones only that are either historic districts or conservation districts. McCallum said these areas are primarily rental properties, and the model discusses an owner/occupied live -work model. McCallum said he did not include the residential office zone, because a lot of the proposed changes are already allowed in that zone. He said that this would enhance the area. McCallum said that a lot of landlords opposed the Commission on the North Linn/Gilbert Street District. He said that something like this in place might be helpful in alleviating property owners' concerns that their rights are always being taken away, as this gives them a different option. McCallum said that he is looking for feedback on this proposal. Weitzel said that he discussed this with Bob Miklo, Senior Planner, who felt that the Commission had already reviewed this with staff, and the Commission said that it was not going to propose any changes to the new zoning code. Weitzel asked if Karen Howard had seen the draft proposal. McCallum said that he had just sent her the Des Moines model so far. Weitzel said Howard informed him that the special exceptions applied to any zone and will encompass any kind of dimensional requirements and changes in the new code. McCallum said the other reason for putting this together in a package and having it endorsed by the Commission is for the Commission to say that it is open and that this is a unique area and to try to identify it as such. Weitzel said that the City does not allow a lot of this in the residential areas right now. McCallum said this would only be for multi -family areas and said that there could be a review process for appropriateness of the uses. McCallum said that this is really what the Planning Department has been advocating for one area of town, the Peninsula. He added that one would have to live in the property to do any of these activities. Burford said that this is a very creative community, and it is encouraging to allow people to own their own home businesses. She said her only question is how some of things would work in terms of the building code. McCallum said that other standards would still apply. Maharry asked if alterations to historic buildings would be allowed. He stated that a lot of buildings would potentially require handicapped ramps. Weitzel said that parking restrictions would also have an effect on what could be done in various zones. Weitzel stated that the Commission will need to decide if it wants to take this up as a cause. Gunn said that he would be willing to look it over and discuss it at the next meeting on July 14th. Ponto said that he likes the idea of a converting a big rooming house back to a single family home with a business. Burford said that this would make more structures eligible for federal tax credits because of the commercial nature of the uses. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 30, 2005 Page 8 Weitzel suggested that McCallum also discuss this with the neighborhood associations of the areas he is targeting to get their support. Gunn said that would essentially be College Green and College Hill. McCallum said that in the meantime, he would submit this to the Planning and Zoning Commission under his name. McCallum said that, at his request, the Planning and Zoning Commission changed the language in the amendment to the new zoning code regarding historic structures. He said that for properties on the National Register and local landmarks, giving flexibility for special uses on those specific types of properties, the Planning and Zoning Commission lowered the standard quite significantly by changing the wording "is necessary' to "will help." McCallum said that will give the Board of Adjustment more flexibility in interpreting whether something should go forward or not. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:19 p.m Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcd/m nutes/HPC/2005HPCminutes/hpc06-30-05.doc