Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2013 Historic Preservation CommissionIOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, October 10, 2013 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J Harvat Hall 5:15 P.M. A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Certificate of Appropriateness 1. 509 S. Lucas Street (egress window, window wells) E) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff F) Discuss Annual Historic Preservation Awards G) Consideration of Minutes for September 12, 2013 — HPC Meeting H) Adjournment Staff Report October 4, 2013 Historic Review for 504 S. Lucas Street District: Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District Classification: Contributing The applicant, Paul Kozak, is requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 509 S. Lucas Street, a Contributing property in the Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District. The project consists of a new window well it an existing basement window on the front of the house, and a new egress window and new window well on the north side of the house at the location of an existing basement window. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines 4.0 Iowa City BYstoric Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.5 Foundations 4.13 Windows Staff Comments This Foursquare house, c.1910-1925, retains a high degree of period integrity, and displays original features including a brick foundation; clapboard siding, 6-over-1 windows, exposed rafter tails, and a Craftsman style porch. The applicant has recently completed the following work: • Remove earthen ramp in back yard at detached garage, remove existing deck at garage and construct new deck. (Certificate of Appropriateness issued June 19, 2013) • Replace clapboard -sided railing at front porch with new railing to match original. (Certificate of No Material Effect issued August 21, 2013) • Construct new wood steps over existing concrete steps at front porch. Remaining work includes painting the steps, and installing a new metal handrail. (Certificate of Appropriateness issued August 21, 2013) At the HPC meeting in July, the Commission reviewed an application for an alteration project that would have changed the location of the steps at the front porch. The Commission voted to defer consideration, based upon discrepancies in the application, and the need for further review by staff. Since that meeting, staff has worked with the owner and the contractor and administratively approved an alternative solution which allows improvements to the porch without compromising the historic character. The porch project is now nearly complete. The current application is for an alteration project that adds a new window well at an existing basement window on the front of the house, and a new egress window and new window well on the north side of the house at the location of an existing basement window. The window well on the front of the house is located north of the porch, at the bottom of the porch steps. Proposed construction materials are listed in the application as concrete and brick. A corrugated metal window well has been installed, faced with landscaping blocks, and with a safety grille on top. Plans for replacing the corrugated metal with concrete/brick must be confirmed. The proposed egress window and window well on the north side of the house will be at the east -most basement window. The existing window will be removed, the opening in the foundation wall will be enlarged, and a new 32-inch x 42-inch window will be installed. The proposed window is a Jeld-Wen wood casement with a simulated double -hung meeting rail. The window well will be 36-inches x 42-inches in plan, and 24-inches deep. It will be constructed of poured concrete to grade height, with a top course of brick. Note that dimensions for egress windows and window wells must meet code requirements and will be reviewed by Iowa City Housing & Inspection Services. For Historic Review, the guidelines in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook state that if new window wells are required, the materials used must appear similar to the existing foundation material. In this case, the existing foundation material is brick; a window well of poured concrete will be strong and durable, and a brick course on top will match the brick foundation. A brick rowlock course, similar to the brick rowlock sills of the basement windows, would be appropriate. Regarding windows, the guidelines state that egress windows should match the size, trim, use of divided lights, and overall appearance of the other windows in the house. In this case, it appears that all of the basement windows have been recently replaced, and the new windows do not match the original windows. Application for Historic Review is required for window replacement, but an application was not submitted, and this work was done without review or approval. At this point, the proposed egress window will look best with an added vertical muntin bar to match the light pattern of the new replacement windows. In staffs opinion, the proposed work is acceptable, and a Certificate of Appropriateness should be approved with the conditions listed below. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 509 S. Lucas Street, as presented in the application, with the following conditions: • Complete an Application for Historic Review for replacement of basement windows, for review and approval as required by zoning and building codes; • Provide Jeld-Wen egress window with simulated divided lights to match the light pattern of approved basement windows; • Confirm dimensions and all construction materials for both window wells; • Provide all above information for review and approval by Chair and Staff. v_ 2M 1i � X 1 'R mr 16 �C yr DGta.cblea� o10.raafG — �2,'Fa^Ci Application for Historic Reyiev, Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 144C. 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 For Staff Use: Q 2 Date submitted: ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Major review ❑ intermediate review ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the PCD office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) IV- Property Owner Name: - Email: �ftV l_, �Cj�/� 06A(Mlr c� Phone Number: Address: _ LiIP% � S � City: C % State: 7_ Zip Code: Z�b ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: Email: Address: City: �} Address: 5—U I 5 Lu Use of Property: 116A,115 Phone Number: ( State: Proposed Project Information C fci iA4 5 Zip Code: Date Constructed (if known): / V Historic Designation (Maps are located in the Historic Preservation Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR K-This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District I$ Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: r Contributing ❑ Noncontributing ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. ❑ Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) ❑ Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Other: Please contact the Preservation Planner at 356-5243 for materials which need to he included with application. Project Description: Materials to be Used: Exterior Appearance Changes: Proposed Project Details Y/S16/ LL ppdadmirVbistpms/app_for_historicreviewAm 12/II 7 7"' 3 3 T _I Application for Historic Revie Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district Pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 144C. 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 For Staff Use: Date submitted: ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Major review ❑ intermediate review ❑ Minor review The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month, Applications are due in the PCD office by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner Name: Email: 4vt Address: Property Owner/Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) W 7�L� Phone Number: AST City: t State: 7-1_ Zip Code: Z 7 ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: Email: Phone Number: ( ) Address: City: State: Zip Code: Proposed Project Informations t Address: ��%� •r% S-% (�j0hq 0 Use of Property: r ICE l� Date Constructed (if known): 190 Historic Designation (Maps are located in the Historic Preservation Handbook) ❑ This property is a local historic landmark. OR hg This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: KContributing 11 Noncontributing ❑ Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. ❑ Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans VAlteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Construction of new building ❑ Building Elevations ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑ Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) ❑ Photographs ❑ Proposal of Future Plans ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Other: Please contact the Preservation Planner at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with application. Proposed Project Details Project Description: Exterior Appearance Changes: M i Ae�4- Morift I Aw ar SAr /-t( dal 5-ti ? 4F ppdadmin/histpres/app_t'or_bistoricmview.doc 12/11 p- 3 31 � 3 � Business: Guest: Phone: Fax: Line kern I Oman" 100-1 1 Rough Opening: 2' 8 3/4" X T 6 3/4" Frame Size: 2' 8 0" X 3' 6 0" Unit is viewed from the outside looking in. Room Location: None Assigned MENARDS QUOTE 2605 NAPLES AVE IOWA CITY, IA 52240 (319) 358-9708 (319) 358-9605 Store Number: 3091 Store Code: IOWA Date: 9/6/2013 Team Member: Quote Number: TBD Quote Name: Unassigned Quote WCMTWoodSitelineEX Casement Left, Frame Size = 32 x 42 Frame Width = 32, Frame Height = 42 Assembly = Unit, DP Rating = DP50 Operation (Outside View) = Left, Number of Units Mulled Together = 1 Energy Rating = Energy Star, Zip Code = 52240, Energy Star Zone = EStar Northern, Glazing Type = Insulated, Low-E Option = Low-E EC, Tinted Glass = No Tint (Clear), Glass Style = Clear, Tempered Glass = Not Tempered, Preserve Glass = Preserve, IG Options = Argon 1 3/8" Bead SDL w/Perm Wood, Colonial, Shadow Bar Color = Silver Shadow Bar, External Grille Material = Wood, Interior Grille Finish = Primed, Exterior Grille Finish = Primed Wood, 1 W2H Lock Type = Stainless Steel Concealed Hardware, Hardware Type = Nested Folding Handle, Hardware Finish = White, Hinge Type = Standard Hinge, Sash Limiter = No Sash Limiter, Window Egress = Meets Egress 5.7 Clear Opening (Check Local Code) Screen Option = Fiberglass Mesh, Screen Csmt Frame Color = Brilliant White Check Info Link = Check Info link Plant Location = Rantoul IL, Phone = 1-800-301-8170 press 2, Fax = 1-800-225-9598, Email = RantoulMenards@Jeld-Wen.com, Catalog Version Date = 7/26/13 ReOrder = No Exterior Color = Primed, Sash/Panel to Match Exterior Frame Color = Yes, Species = Auralast Pine, Interior Finish = Primed Room Location = None Jamb Width = 4.5625, Exterior Trim = No Exterior Trim, Jamb Thickness = 414 JE Base $266.45 Extension Jamb $4.84 Grid $33.58 Glass $22.90 Exterior Casing -$11.95 Interior Finish $15.58 DP $20.13 Miscellaneous $21.94 link Price $373.46 Total Price $373.46" JELD WEN rrn•1 wva.'9 r�. "-- Print Date: 9/6/2013 9:08:54 AM Pages: 1 of 2 3 0 aL 3 b c d d. O C�1 IN i 00 O h� AV [Jtl d II a M ate` Elt; cd .• N t+l Y �.1 pp u Itltl G E ttl W C N G7 O °�-S h4r °9..o N I Qo°e�b 3 6n �w d In1 ti IA � O � � L '� � � ❑ I�.i `� � g � �" p�j o o e• NN.� w° .E .O•N 5 ou L y ¢ • 1_hh w V1 'y C N t N rn i d o� a s E L'y d o ow W�xy a � ri -% "' i <Y K k A 00 v A lz v L � � W � • IL ❑� -_ �� �_ � a .L"�ti(}I`s.E: i:}1`;BC'1'tiil�:"i(3ii L.�ili};Zi.1S5.1t'rli. MEMORANDUM Date: Octobet 4, 2013 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Cheryl Peterson, Preservation Consultant Re: Certificates of No Material Effect, Minor Reviews, and Intermediate Reviews The Historic Preservation Handbook requires a report to the HPC at each meeting of any projects that have been approved administratively. Below are the projects approved since the September report. Certificates of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff review 108 S. Dodge Street - repair porch ceiling 409 Oakland Avenue - replace siding at dormers 314 S. Lucas Street - replace back door 427 S. Governor Street - repair foundation 741 Rundell Street - replace roofing at garage, siding at garage, stucco repair, painting, new combination screen/storm windows Minor Review — Pre -approved items — Staff review 603 Brown Street - window replacement Intermediate Review — Chair and Staff review 602 Clark Street - repair foundation at the existing one-story rear addition MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12, 2013 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Kate Corcoran, Frank Durham, Andrew Litton, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: David McMahon, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Chary Peterson OTHERS PRESENT: Doug DeMeulenaere, Jeff Frerich, Russ Garrett, Mike Hartley, Mark Kennedy, Mark McCallum, Mike Wright RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) None. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairperson Litton called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 439 Clark Street. Peterson said this property is in the C:IarK Street Conservation District, represented by a red star on a map she presented. She said this is an after -the -fact application for demolition approval. Peterson said the garage shown in the earlier photograph was demolished in the last year. Peterson said staff recommends approval. She said demolition is not what the guidelines promote, but the condition did seem beyond repair. Peterson said she does not have an application for a replacement at this time, but the owner will have to seek the Commission's approval to build a replacement. Miklo said the garage was demolished about a year ago. Baldndge stated that it looks like the garage would have disappeared on its own had the owner not moved it. MOTION: Ackerson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 439 Clark Street as presented in the application. Baker seconded the motion. The 1515 Jackson Street. Peterson said this property is in the Dearborn Street Conservation District. She said this building burned earlier in the year. Peterson said it was a commercial use in this neighborhood. She said the applicant is in the process of getting a special exception to rebuild and still have a commercial use, although part of the plan is that it will have a residential appearance to fit in HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 2 of 11 with the neighborhood. Peterson said that if at some time in the future it is no longer a commercial use, it could be converted to residential. Peterson showed a photograph of the building that burned. She showed the street and alley views, the house to the east, the duplexes to the west, and the house across the street. Peterson said the neighborhood is a mix of styles. Peterson showed what is being proposed, saying there are two versions: one is wood siding and one is brick. She said that if the owner uses brick, it would be for all four sides. Peterson said the building design is a residential craftsman style, with the wide overhang, the brackets, and the craftsman -style windows. Peterson said the attached garage is an option; the owner could build it now or later. Peterson said staff recommends approval, although she does not yet have final details and product information, so that would be a requirement. She said staff has asked for the unusual requirement of needing to see how the floor plan would convert to residential. Peterson said staff is still working with the applicant to fine tune the design and the details. She said the applicant was present at the meeting, if the Commission members had questions for him. Hartley said he has owned the dental lab in this area since the early 1980s. He said what he had was a business and an attached apartment. Hartley said he realizes he will not have any kind of apartment with the new design, should he get permission to rebuild. He said the new building is designed to be converted to a single-family dwelling, which is the zoning for this vicinity. Hartley said he will do what he needs to do. He said that as a small business, it is much more beneficial to him to be able to continue to use this property that he already owns, as opposed to the cost of trying to find something else. Hartley added that he could answer any questions and also brought his contractor, Doug DeMeulenaere, to answer any questions. Durham asked how the design will make this convertible to a single-family residence. DeMeulenaere responded that it will be fairly simple. Peterson said that getting the window placement and the plumbing would be the main things, so that if this is ever converted to residential, those things would not have to be changed. DeMeulenaere said that basically, it is a very simple design. He said they placed the kitchenette in an area where a few walls could be changed to form a kitchen. DeMeulenaere said the bathroom is centrally located. He said the large area where the lab would be could easily be split up into some bedrooms. DeMeulenaere said that the attached garage would basically make it a complete residence. He said that, as shown on the elevation, this looks like a home; it does not look like a commerciaVindustrial-type building. DeMeulenaere said he has worked on hundreds of historic restorations and projects. He said this is a pretty good design for the elevations. DeMeulenaere said it will look like an older home, but it will be brand new. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1515 Jackson Street as presented in the application, with the following conditions: provide product information for windows, doors, garage doors, siding, shingles, and all HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 3 of 11 other exterior materials; provide schematic floor plan showing possible future conversion to residential use; and provide final design of new building for review and approval by chair and staff. Durham seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud. and Swaim absent). 727 Grant Street Peterson said this house is in the Longfellow Historic District. She showed a view of the historic front porch; the proposed project is a rear porch that completes an addition the Commission reviewed and approved last year. Peterson showed the rear of the house and the new addition. She showed a drawing with the proposed rear porch. Peterson showed the comparison of the front and back porches from the north elevation. She said the plan is to make the back porch look as much as possible like the front, in the detailing. Peterson said staff recommends approval of this. She said it might work better if it was actually wider than the five -foot -six-inch width that is being proposed. Peterson said that is something she can work with the applicant to confirm. She said the drawings misrepresent the dormer by making it look a lot smaller than it is in the actual construction. Peterson said the porch might look better if it was wider also. Baldridge asked if this would be narrower than the one in front. Peterson confirmed this and said it is different because it is attached, rather than tucked in. Baldridge asked if the addition requires any attention to the dormer. Peterson said it does not; the intent was to replicate the one that was there before. She said that it was built to match, but the drawing does not show it the correct size. Peterson said the roof and the balustrade design are shown as required by the guidelines. Baldridge asked if there is a structural reason, when the dormer was included in the rear, that it was not the same width. Peterson stated that when the addition was built last summer, the owner wanted to build the new dormer to be exactly like the one that was there originally. She said she believes the proportions and dimensions are the same as what was there, but the drawing makes it look a lot smaller. Peterson said the stoop might need to be wider than what is being proposed so that it matches the other components of that rear elevation. Mark Kennedy, the contractor for the project, said he discussed widening the porch with the owner. He said the issue with that is that the owner is very concerned about the daylight inside the home. Mark said he was just planning on stretching the porch from window to window on each side of the door. Kennedy asked Peterson if she is talking about the soffit and the overall look. Peterson said she did not think the windows needed to be covered but thought there was an opportunity to make this a little bit wider than the five -foot -six and still be between the windows. Miklo said the drawing shows it short of the windows. Kennedy said that is correct. He said they want to stretch it all the way out to catch another six inches so it does look like it fills that space between the two windows, window to window, and still keep the integrity of the trim and details of the windows. Kennedy said that other than that, they are pretty much all on the same page. He said they just want to make it look exactly like the front porch. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 4 of 11 Peterson said that the packet contains photographs of the original porch that was there. She said that it looks like it was six or seven feet wide. MOTION: Ackerson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 727 Grant Street as presented in the application with the following condition: confirm proposed materials and final dimensions for review and approval by chair and staff. Durham seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud. and Swaim absent). 113 South Johnson Street Peterson said this property is in the College Green Historic District. She said this property is going to be converted into a bed and breakfast. Peterson said the new owner was at the meeting to answer questions. Peterson said the project involves four windows to be replaced. She said that the main floor window on the northwest, which is not original, would be replaced with a double hung window. Peterson said the attic window on the north would be replaced with an egress -style window made to look like a double hung. She said that on the south side, the two basement windows would be replaced with egress windows that would, in fact, fit into the existing window openings. Peterson said the staff report was incorrect in that regard. She said the window wells will have to be redone, because these windows will be egress windows. Peterson said she will need more information on the construction of the window wells. Peterson said she included photographs of existing conditions. She showed a photograph of one of the windows at the basement level. Peterson added that none of the windows to be replaced are original. McCallum, the applicant, said photographs submitted were for the third floor, (attic). He said the third floor windows are poor replacement windows with the metal track. McCallum said the third floor windows are all replacement windows of some sort, and he wanted to point out that he is not replacing anything with ropes; he is not replacing any good wood windows. McCallum said the one on the main floor is for a double hung, although he would also like the option to do an egress window in this location. He said it would be a casement window that looks like a double hung, like what he is doing up on the third floor. Miklo asked if an egress window would be required here. McCallum replied that he has not definitively planned what he is going to do with that space. He said the cost is only an extra $90, so he thought it would be worth having more egress versus less. Miklo responded that the guidelines allow the casement windows only if they are needed for egress. He said the Commission could approve this subject to it being required as an egress window. McCallum said he has not yet finalized his plan for that area. He said he had planned to initially do a pantry/office area there. McCallum said he is probably not planning for a sleeping area. HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONMUSSION September 12, 2013 Page 5 of 11 McCallum said that the others definitively have to be egress windows, except that only one egress window is needed for the basement. He said that for balance, however, he would like them both to look the same in appearance. Peterson asked about the attic. McCallum said he is just replacing one in the attic. He said the other windows in the attic are in poor condition. McCallum said that eventually he will probably have to come back to replace the windows on the west and south sides. He said the windows on the front are ornamental, fixed glass. McCallum said if the Commission wanted to approve a similar type of double hung window, he would consider replacing all the windows on the third floor. Peterson said she recommends approval of the proposed project with the condition that staff approve the size and profile of the meeting rail on the casement. McCallum said he called his contractor today, who said the bid refers to a two-inch bar. Peterson said the other condition would be for staff and chair approval of design materials and dimensions for the window wells. McCallum said he is open to using whatever materials the Commission would like him to use. He said that he believes the space has to be three feet by three feet to meet code, according to the City's website, so the windows can open out. McCallum said one well itself is 32 inches, and the other one is 35 inches down. Peterson asked if this would be landscaped with limestone. McCallum responded that he has used timbers before on window wells like this. He said the hard, plastic ones work pretty well, because one can landscape right up to them pretty nicely. McCallum said he has also done limestone window wells before. He said the landscaping blocks sometimes do not work well, because if there is an offset, it's hard to make them square. McCallum said he could try a poured form, although it is probably cheaper for him to do a limestone one himself than to hire a contractor to pour a limestone form. Miklo said the guidelines would encourage this to be similar to the foundation material so that either the concrete or limestone would work. McCallum asked if he could use a combination of those. Miklo said that would work, but metal or plastic would not meet the guidelines. Durham asked the Commission members if they wanted to make the motion subject to confirming that egress would be required for the window in the main floor room. McCallum said that it would not be required, as he does not see that room as a bedroom at this point. MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 113 South Johnson Street with the following condition: provide information on proposed materials and dimensions at new window wells for review and approval by chair and staff. Durham seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud. and Swaim absent). 1113 East Colle-ge Street. Peterson said this property is a large foursquare on the south side of the street in the East College Street Historic District. She said the project is on the rear and involves building a second story where there is now a one-story attached porch. HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONMUSSION September 12, 2013 Page 6 of 11 Peterson said the footprint would stay the same; the owner would just extend the existing walls upward. She said the new roof would be a hip roof to match the existing. Peterson showed a design with the existing windows on the first floor and then new walls, windows and roof above that. She said she did not know if the project includes a new porch, but she had asked the contractor what that might look like, and a couple of proposed porches for the back door are included in the packet. Peterson said the materials and everything about the project are within guidelines. She said staff recommends approval. Peterson said she had a question about matching the roof and whether the flare at the eave on the existing would be duplicated on the new roof. She added that product information is still needed for windows and doors, and then final approval could be done by chair and staff. Miklo stated that on the existing house, compared to the proposed drawings, the windows are closer to the roof soffit. He said that it is staffs understanding that the same relationship would be repeated with the new addition. Garrett, the contractor, said he would match the same roofline; he would pick up the detail of the flare. Regarding the chimney, he said it would stay. Garrett said he would go higher up on the chimney and just re -flash at the point where the roof hits it. Peterson asked if the porch is part of the project. Garrett said he likes the new porch designs but did not know the homeowners' preference. He said that at this point, there has to be a set of steps and at least a three-foot landing at the top. Garrett said he believes there are four risers there now, and he is going to need at least that many for the new stairs. Peterson asked if the door to the basement would remain. Garrett confirmed this. Peterson said the handrails and balustrades would be expected to meet the guidelines. Garrett agreed; he said he can match what is there, except they will have to be a little bit taller. MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1113 East College Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: confirm roof pitch with flared eaves to match existing, provide product information for new windows and doors, and provide final design of porch for review and approval by chair and staff. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud, and Swaim absent). 528 South Governor Street Peterson said this property is in the Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District. She said the house has new owners, and they want to build a new garage. Peterson said the lot is narrow such that removing the old garage is about the only option to get a new garage. Peterson said the garage would be on the alley. She showed the carriage house garage that the Commission looked at several months ago at 513 Summit Street for reference. Peterson said the proposal is for a plan that the applicants have not yet purchased, but when they do purchase it, they will work with staff to make sure it meets all the guidelines. She said HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 7 of 11 the applicants want to make sure the demolition is approved before getting started on the plan. Peterson said she believes that staff can work with the applicants and meet all the guidelines for new garages. She said the basic plan and layout seem to be okay. Corcoran asked if the doors of the garage and the single door would face the alley. Peterson confirmed this. Frerich, the owner of the house, said, regarding the back of this that would be facing the house, that he would like to put double doors there in the workshop area to store equipment, etc. Peterson said that has been marked as such on the plan in the packet. MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 528 Governor Street as presented in the application with the following condition: confirm all proposed products, materials, and final design of the new garage for review and approval by chair and staff. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud, and Swaim absent). 430 South Lucas Street Peterson stated that this property is also in the Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District. She said this is a University project, so the owner right now is the City. Peterson said the project proposes that the second floor window on the front be replaced with one of the egress -style casements with the simulated meeting rail. She said that also on the front, the large window on the main floor would be repaired, rather than replaced. Peterson said that the front door, the back door, and the kitchen door are all scheduled to be replaced. She said there would be repair of the siding in multiple locations, and there is also foundation work to be done. Peterson said staff recommends approval, although the application did not include any information on the windows or doors, and staff would like to know what brand and design those are to be. Regarding information on the windows and doors, Wagner said that projects like this tend to go with the lowest -bid contractors so that staff would want to make sure that the windows purchased meet the guidelines. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 430 South Lucas Street as presented in the application with the following condition: provide product information for egress window, replacement doors, and screen doors for review and approval by chair and staff. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud and Swaim absent). DISCUSS PROPOSED HORACE-MANN CONSERVATION DISTRICT: Miklo said the Commission received a letter from Mike Wright, of the Northside Neighborhood Association, requesting that the Commission consider a conservation district for the Northside Neighborhood. Miklo said that several months ago the Commission identified its goals for this year, and this was one of them, along with the Melrose Historic District. He said that, in terms of HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 8 of 11 proceeding with the Melrose District, staff is working with the neighborhood leadership there but has not yet had a cue as to when they want to go forward. Miklo asked if the Commission wants to proceed with the Commission initiating the designation of a Northside district. He referred to a new version of the map that was distributed to the Commission. Miklo said the gold color refers to non-contributing properties — newer buildings or buildings that have been remodeled to the extent they no longer have historic integirty. Miklo said the properties shown in blue are buildings listed as not federally eligible for a historic district but contributing to the character of the neighborhood - buildings that are older and predate 1950 in most cases. He said they have some historic qualities, such as porches or a window pattern similar to an historic building, but they also have been remodeled. Miklo said that generally, siding has been added or minor changes have been made that disqualify them for the National Register of Historic Places, but they are still of a quality that is worth preserving, which is the idea of a conservation district. He said the thought is that over time, as these properties are invested in, porches will be restored, siding will be removed and the original siding restored or an acceptable siding such as cement board will be put in place. Miklo said the properties represented by fuchsia would be contributing properties. He said these properties are not individually eligible for the National Register but as a grouping could be part of a National Register district. Miklo said the properties colored red are key properties. He said they are indivigually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places either because of their historic significance or because of the character, quality, and state of preservation of their architecture. Miklo said that something to consider for conservation districts, based on direction provided by the State of Iowa, is that if more than 60% of the properties in the area are eligible for the National Register, then rather than designating the area a conservation district, the area should instead be considered for historic district designation. Miklo said the idea is that the State Historical Society does not want municipalities taking the path of least resistance. He stated that when an area really is eligible to be a National Register district, they want it to be a National Register district. Miklo said that in this area, there are a total of 200 properties, and less than 50% of them are eligible for the National Register. He said this would therefore qualify under the State guidance for a conservation district. Regarding the boundaries, Miklo said staff worked hard with the neighborhood association to find what it feels is a defensible boundary. He said that Swaim, the Chair of the Commission, was also in these discussions. Miklo said that they excluded properties on the edges that are non-contributing properties, and they included the bulk of areas that had contributing or non- contributing for the National Register but contributing to the idea of a conservation district. Miklo showed an area that has a greater concentration of buildings that are eligible for a National Register district. He said that area was excluded based on the thought that some day that area could be an extension of the North Side Historic District. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 12, 2013 Page 9 of 11 Wright said he is the Coordinator of the Northside Neighborhood Association. He referred to the letter he had sent to the Commission. Wright said he was available to answer questions. He said this request is the result of some months of conversation in the neighborhood. Wright said the neighbors feel that if the Commission does take this on, the Northside Neighborhood will be able to hit the ground running with organizing and getting the positive word out, countering any misinformation that goes out. Baker asked Wright if he feels there are enough people in the neighborhood who are in favor of this that it won't be impeded. Wright said he feels there is significant support, although he thinks this will ultimately require a supermajority vote by the City Council. Corcoran asked about the process to get this approved. Miklo said the first step would be for the Commission to initiate the zoning application to establish this as a conservation district. He said that if the Commission decides to do that, staff would then schedule a public hearing and would identify all of the property owners and invite them to present their views. Miklo said the Commission would then vote, and if it votes to recommend to the City Council that this be designated a conservation district, it would go on to the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission would then review the proposal, and the City Council would have the final say. Corcoran asked if this would have to pass the City Council with a supermajority vote. Miklo replied that it would have to pass with a supermajority vote if more than 20% of the owners of the property within the district object to it being designated. He said that commonly occurs with historic and conservation districts. Baldridge asked what the restrictions would be on non-contributing properties. Miklo answered that they would still be reviewed, although the guidelines have some exceptions for the non- contributing properties. He said the idea is that if they are remodeled, they should not detract from the neighborhood any further than their current state. Miklo said vinyl siding and windows are generally allowed. Baldridge suggested there be fairly effective promotional information that would be the situation for these properties. He said that property owners seem to have a belief that if they are in any kind of a district, there will be limitations on what they can do. Baldridge said that if that can be undercut from the very beginning, this will be well ahead. Wright said that is part of the literature that the Neighborhood Association will be distributing to the neighborhood. Baldridge said this would be sort of a hybrid district. Ackerson said he thinks this is a fine idea, and he hopes it moves forward. He thanked Wright and staff for the legwork and the effort to survey the properties and lay out the boundaries. MOTION: Baldridge moved to proceed with the process of designating the Horace Mann area, as proposed on a map presented by staff, as a conservation district. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (McMahon. Michaud and Swaim absent). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COACWSSION September 12, 2013 Page 10 of 11 REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Peterson said there were four Certificates of No Material Effect, although there have been more since the report was written. Peterson said there were five Minor review items, all items that the Commission has pre - approved. DISCUSS ANNUAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS Miklo said staff is looking for one or two volunteers to serve on a committee to help organize the annual awards, which are usually in November, after the construction season is wrapping up. Peterson said this is a joint project with Friends of Historic Preservation and the Johnson County Historical Preservation Commission. She said this would involve looking at the properties being considered for awards and helping to narrow down the selections. Corcoran volunteered to work on the subcommittee. Baldridge also volunteered and said he is also a member of Friends of Historic Preservation. Peterson said she would be meeting with Alicia Trimble, who is the staff person for Friends of Historic Preservation, to get ideas for properties to nominate and to narrow down a time and location for the awards ceremony. Miklo asked Commission members to e-mail staff with information regarding any property anywhere within City limits that might be eligible for an award. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR AUGUST 8. 2013: MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's August 8, 2013 meeting, as written. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 061cMahon. Michaud, and Swaim absent). ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:16 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte N r x X X X X X I X co O O O X X X 0 0 X X X O O N X X X X X 0 X X X w X n X X X X X X D X X 0 X A I CO) 0 0 X 0 X X D X X X X y x x x' x x x o x X x 0 a x x x x x X x X a X X X 11 X X X X X X M rc5l; X X X i I X 0 X X X X a X X X I X X N O O O O o X X X I x X X X X w 00 a x x x i iD x x X o x X X xi I X 0 X X X X c x x x ,, x 0 x x x x iM x x , I.x x 0 0 �.x 0.X Lu a X H W rn rn rn m rn rn rn rn W rn rn ! wLU 1 W O Y x W F i Q~Q Y z W o J a Z W H I Z y Z LL Z LL Q Q W W a' O Q Z! Z 2 C Q f W 2 IX Q 2 Z FF =.01 � m d N � U E t� d m<< z a¢¢z n u n n XOWI O Y