Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-14-2015 Historic Preservation Commission
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, May 14, 2015 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J. Harvat Hall 5:30 p.m. A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Consent Agenda: Certificate of Appropriateness 1. 436 Grant Street —Longfellow Historic District (chimney removal and replacement to incorporate galvanized fireplace stack) E) Certificate of Appropriateness 1. 711 North Gilbert Street— Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (chimney removal) 2. 610 Ronalds Street— Brown Street Historic District (new construction of 2 story Craftsman home and garage with accessory apartment) 3. 610 Ronalds Street— Brown Street Historic District (demolition of deteriorated contributing property and outbuilaing for replacement with new construction) F) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff review 1. 228 S. Summit - Local Landmark property in the College Hill Conservation District (removal of existing EPDM and replacement with membrane roofing ) 2. 125 East College Street- Local Landmark Property in the Downtown District- (masonry, door, wood trim, cornice and metal roof repair) Minor Review — preapproved item — Staff review 223 S. Dodge Street- College Green Historic District (deteriorated window replacement with wood windows and molding to match existing) 2. 728 Washington Street- College Hill Conservation District (replacing windows with new wood sash and metal clad frame windows including both casement and double hung with muntin bars to match existing divided lights) Intermediate Review — Chair and Staff review 1. 631 N. Dodge Street- Brown Street Historic District (removal of asphalt shingles and sheathing if necessary and replacement with standing seam metal or architectural shingles) G) Discussion of Historic Preservation Plan priorities and annual work program H) Consideration of Minutes for March 12, 2015 I) Commission Information and Discussion 1. Permits for roofs and doors update 2. 634 South Lucas Street 3. Butler House update J) Adjournment Staff Report Historic Review for 436 Grant Street District: Longfellow Historic District Classification: Contributing April 28, 2015 The applicant, Gerald Flanagan, is requesting approval for a proposed demolition and reconstruction of the chimney at 436 Grant Street, a contributing property in the Longfellow Historic District. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.2 Chimneys Staff Comments This one and one-half story gable roof house is a good example of bungalow design from the 1920s. It features the large front dormer and broad heavy porch across the facade that are characteristic of the style. The gable roof of the house extends out over the porch and is supported by heavy square posts. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing chimney and replace it with a larger chimney that will enclose the metal fireplace chimney and the adjacent venting stack that was added several years ago. The owner will use framing material, wire lath and thin bricks to construct the new chimney. Since the property does not have any other brick to match, a dark red/brown brick from Hebron Brick Company has been chosen to replicate the brick of the existing chimney. Corner pieces will provide the look of dimensional brick. A metal cap on the new chimney will overlap the brick 2 inches and be painted to match the brick color or be painted black. The guidelines recommend boxing and finishing new chimney pipes that penetrate the roof with thin brick veneer. The guidelines disallow removing prominent chimneys that are important to the historic architectural character of the building. In Staffs opinion, the existing chimney is not prominent because it is only slightly visible from the street. On the other hand, the galvanized fireplace stack is an obvious addition to the historic appearance of the property. Enclosing this stack in a new wider chimney will greatly improve the exterior appearance of the roof penetrations. The new metal cap will be less obtrusive than the concrete cap on the existing chimney and provide a better barrier from the elements. The new enclosed chimney will enhance the historic appearance of this well -maintained home. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition and reconstruction of the chimney as presented in the application. Application for Wistorie Review 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 Iou a City Historic Preservation Handbook which is available in the Neighborhood and Development Services office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.orgWhandbook The HPC does not review applications f comply with all appropriate codes and be building permit. For Staff Use: Date submitted: —�bJ3—/—b5— ❑ Certificate of No material Effect IR Certificate of Appropriateness 19 Major review ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minorreview r compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the office of Neighborhood and Development Services 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) 2!tp Property Owner Name: Gerald Flanagan Email: hig tdctl(p mrt,ci mm Phone Number. ( 319) 5.'tn-nqi a Address: 436 Grant St City: Iowa City ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: Email: State: Iowa Zip Code: 52240 Phone Number: ( State: Zip Code: Proposed Project Information Address: Use of Property: Date Constructed (if known): Historic Designation ` (Maps are located in the Historic Preservation Handbook) ❑ This Property is a local historic landmark, OR EfThis Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location) ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District East College Street Historic District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District Longfellow Historic District ❑ Goosetown / Horace Mann Conservation District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District Within the district, this Property is classified as: Contributing 13 Noncontributing 0 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 ❑ FloorPlans ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ site Plans if Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement(consWction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are suffident.) ❑ Building Elevations 'F/ 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: Remove existing chimney and build a larger chimney to include the fireplace stack. Materials to be Used: Framing material, 112 bricks, wire lath and metal cap. Exterior Appearance Changes: Chimney will be in the same place but a little wider towards the back of the house ldspres/app_for bistoricieview,dw 6/4114 I i ,:1 .^ ■:A: ��o i I �f :Sz i r• '�'� ( i �^ � p .r y31 �t 4 Staff Report May 14, 2015 Historic Review for 711 N. Gilbert Street District: Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District Classification: Contributing The applicants, Jennifer and Theodore Knights, are requesting approval tot a proposed demolition project at 711 N. Gilbert Street, a Contributing property in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District. The project consists of removing one of two existing chimneys. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guieielfnesforfilterations 4.2 Chimneys 7.0 Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features Staff Comments Except for the replacement siding covering the original narrow clapboards, this building constructed in 1928 is a well-preserved example of an American Foursquare as that term is used today to designate a particular style. Though originally a vernacular house form defined by its internal room arrangement, the name "Foursquare" has evolved to describe a 20th-century house that is usually square in mass, covered by a hipped roof with dormers, and decorated with detail elements of a variety of coexistent popular styles such as Craftsman, Prairie, or Colonial Revival. This house was built on the northern end of a subdivided lot around 1916, probably for W.J. Freeman who purchased the land that year. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing furnace chimney in the north portion of the house. The chimney will be removed all the way down to the basement. The existing systems will be directly vented and no longer need a chimney. The roof will be patched with asphalt shingles to match the existing. The more prominent fireplace chimney in the south portion of the house will remain. The chimney will no longer be used and impacts potential interior renovation if it remains. Section 7.1 of the guidelines recommend retaining any historic architectural feature that is significant to the architectural character and style of the building, including chimneys. Further, section 4.2 recommends retaining prominent chimneys that are important to the historic architectural character of the building. In Staff's opinion, the chimney that the applicant seeks to remove is not a prominent historical feature. The house has two non -symmetrical chimneys. The fireplace chimney on the south portion of the house and set to remain is also located toward the street elevation and prominent visible from that street. The north chimney, proposed to be removed is located toward the back of the house. Staff fords that removing the north chimney will not adversely impact the historical character and style of the home. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 711 N. Gilbert street as presented in the application. Application for Historic Relt2ew Application for alterations to the 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 Iona Citv Historic Presei-wition 11andbook, which is available in the Neighborhood and Development Services office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/HPhandbook I or 5toir Use: Date suhmittcd: I _ _ zo. _ ( ON ❑ Ceitific::teofNomatmalFff:ct ❑ CertificateofApprcpri:rencts Mujor re=iew tatarttcdiato rV: is ❑ "innr r:vierr The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoiing cods. W(,rk must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building divisj:-n prior to the issuance of o building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the office of Neighborhood and Development Services by noon on Wednesday three v.eeks prior to the meeting. 5::e attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information jllca.r sunk nrmwr3 crminct jnr<nn; MA Property Owner blame: C e3y—Y1rtiU r- ru-tA —16-c A o fE_ %lh t(^.. W-< �..-.. Email: k �'iSWFlONit"i'�C.r'����2YttLi_ii.Q}tYlPhoneNumbcr.(xji'jl_..: 'i�-..[ ..— — Addresi: rrtl L il!aer� Sk• _ City: —FtsWEi C'jj J State: lft LipCode: Js 3�i.3 ❑ Contractor / Consultant Name: Finail:..�,� Adch ecs: City:.-- — --- Phone Number: ( State: Zip Cad:: Proposed Project Information <� Address: —r ill U. .irk c7'�lbe Use of Property: TES Ct? tGtlYti I3, Date Consimcted (if knvun): Historic Designation (Maps arc kmatal at the HotaoV F'm%Lrvainm liaorlbcv ) ❑ 1 his Property is a local historic landmark. OR AThis Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown Street Historic District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ East College Street historic District ❑ Longrellow Ilistoric District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ woodlawn Historic District W jthin the district. this Property is classified as: ❑ Clark Street Coosar ation District ❑ College Hill Cun,cnation Dktri.; ❑ Dearhorn S•ree: Censer. anion Di,trict X Goo,-oown; Ilorace `.tann CSns:nAon Distnei ❑ Govemor-Lucas Street Cun,ervation District AContributing ❑ Noncontributing ❑ Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order w ensure application can be processed, please inclulu all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may 6e rejected. ❑ Addition (Tvpically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, p,rrh. d��k. eta 1 ❑ Building Elevation ❑ Floor Plans ❑ Photographx ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans ❑Alteration (Typiwlly projects entailing work such as siding and w indow replacement, skyli, 1%i v.inckm rnrning dtorati(,-, dczk or �,,rcb replacement`consuuction. baluster repair. or limiter. if the project is a minor alw aion, ph,unm%ti+hs awl dro+in �s to do ciiiss: rLe scope of the project are sufficient.) ❑ Building ilevationa ❑ Photographs ❑ Pmduu Inlorm.uinn ❑ Qnstruction of new building ❑ Building Flevations ❑ Flour Plans ❑ Phulug-_+pfis ❑ Product Information ❑ Site Plans YA Demolition (Pmjcets entailing the demolition of a primary stmemreor outbuilding, or any portion of.1 huikhwn , such s, porch, chimm:• , decorative trim, balu ter, etc.) NPhotographs ❑ Proposal of Futon: Plan, ❑ Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its app,�aranr c. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product lnfom+ation ❑ Other: Please contact the Prescrsation Planner at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with application. Proposed Project Details Project Deaeripidon: Qyprwrtl,: r'jon . C 1teYttllFt.4 — fiCOtyt Pt`C' - :,E >�3� c :___ Materials to be Used: — lYlca� t? r7 ct1S —6 ikk- ' M0,JP ff iy7It J CIA i 4t2 Exterior appearance Changes: hispe, Vp„to, h.tm:,0ew.dm : 14 I .IMI. Staff Report Historic Review for 610 Ronalds Street District: Brown Street Historic District Classification: Contributing May 14, 2015 The applicant, Prestige Properties Development, LLC, is requesting approval for a proposed demolition and construction project at 610 Ronalds Street, a Contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project consists of demolition of the existing house and garage and construction of a new house and a garage with an accessory apartment on the second floor. This staff report addresses only the demolition project. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 7.0 Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features 7.2 Prevention of Demolition by Neglect 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines 8.4 Northside Neighborhood Staff Comments This little gabled -ell house is dated by the assessor to 1920. Jacobsen's 1981 historic site survey dates it to 1889 and indicates it was moved to this site in 1917. The presence of a brick and tile/cement block foundation neither confirms nor denies the suggestion that this house has been moved. Replacement siding obscures the underlying wall treatment making it more difficult to date the house. Windows and their configuration suggest the 1920s date, though they may not be original Regardless of the construction date, this house is capable of being evaluated as a folk house (small vernacular style houses built in parts of the Northside and Goosetown). This house represents one of the several periods or styles in residential architecture that appear in the Northside neighborhood. Close -in to the downtown commercial activities and the university campus, the area was an attractive place to live for both the skilled working and middle classes. The earliest houses in this neighborhood, constructed at the middle of the 19d' century, were often of modest size and used native materials. Early buildings were followed by the larger and popular vernacular houses of a growing middle class during the last quarter of the century. Prosperity in Iowa City and the Middle West during the early 20ffi century resulted in the last of the vacant neighborhood lots being filled in and many replacements of older houses, by more modem, technologically efficient houses. It was not uncommon for existing houses to be moved to nearby lots to make space for new houses. This may explain the two construction dates (1889 and 1920 noted for this house and reflects the historic evolution of the neighborhood. Land transfer records do not record an owner for this land until 1913 when Charles Katzenmeyer transferred it to Stanley E. Maresh; in 1917 Maresh transferred it to William Mocha. In 1926, Mocha severed the lot in two and transferred away the west half, keeping the east half on which this house sits. Mocha is not listed in this 1928 city directory, but Mrs. Eva E. Dayton (a widow) is listed as residing in the house. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing house and garage and build a new single-family home and garage on the property. The applicant contends that the existing building is unsound and irretrievable due to a decaying foundation, an inhabitable 2°d floor and strong odor from cat urine. Documents (copies attached) submitted by the applicant in support of these claims include the following. 1. A statement of intent from the applicant that summarizes the other documents and discusses the main issues including cat urine and subsequent health hazards caused by this, 2^d floor code non- compliance, and an older foundation with some damage. The applicant states the intent to build a new single-family home that blends in with and enhances the neighborhood. 2. r1 letter from VJ Engineering and James Jacob that states that the fist floor framing joists are over - spanned and that added columns only carry one joist each. The clay file foundation shows some areas of soft/missing mortar, only minor bowing, and delamination of some of the cementitious coating covering tile above -grade. Some brick masonry had surface spalling and basement window framing was severely decayed. The roof rafters are also over -spanned. The letter also addressed whether or not a second floor could be added and determined that more investigation would be required. 3. A letter from Billy Lopez of Servpro, a professional cleaning company, addressing the removal of odor from cat urine. Lopez determined that all wall and floor finishes, cabinets, lights, switch covers, and vanities would need to be removed down to studs and subfloormg. The ductwork would also need to be removed. Air scrubbers and other equipment would need to process the au and then the interior would need to be sealed with an anti -microbial sealer. Servpro could neither assign an exact cost not a guarantee of results from this work. The estimate was roughly $30,000 to $40,000. 4. A letter from Johnson County Public Health and Jason Decker. The letter states that inspecting the home is not one of their typical functions but tbev do have concerns for the future health of any persons living inside the structure with the current "strong obnoxious odor" that is present. The guidelines disallow the demolition of any primary building on a contributing property within a Historic District unless the owner can demonstrate that the building is structurally unsound and irretrievable. The Commission will consider the condition, integrity and architectural significance of the building. Before a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition will be approved for a primary building, the Commission must approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the building that will replace the one being demolished. In Staff's opinion, this application and evidence should be considered point by point to determine if the building meets the requirements of structurally unsound and irretrievable. It is a reasonable assumption that the home would need to be remediated from cat urine odor prior to occupancy. It is assumed that if remediation is successful, Johnson County Public Health concerns about the current odor would be resolved Therefore, the main concerns are whether the existing home is both structurally unsound and irretrievable due to the current cat urine odor. . The letter from VJ engineering does not actually state that the existing home is structurally unsound. Elements of the foundation show deterioration but considering the at least 95 year age of the home, this is not surprising. Foundation repair and maintenance should be able to fix these concems. VJ engineering also mentioned that the floor joists and roof joists are over -spanned. Most historic homes could be considered over -spanned because of historic building practices and this alone would not make a property structurally unsound.. The foundation structural issues sound like they are a repair and maintenance issue and not irreparable. The applicant's letter raises concerns about a second floor on the home. The Iowa City Assessor and the Historical survey consider the property a single -story home. The building inspector did not have a permit on file for the property to convert the attic to living space and insists that it is considered a single -story home. Assessing the structure as a two-story home is not a necessary part of determining its structural integrity. Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines also do not support adding a second story to a historic home if it alters the roof line. Any discussion related to a 2nd story on the existing home would not be put of this application but need to be discussed in a separate application proposing to add a second story. Related to this discussion of the nature of the existing home is the applicant's statement in his letter that this home has no significant or redeeming qualities. On the contrary, the existing home is representative of a known vernacular Ell -house design and is a contributing property in a historic district. The current aluminum siding likely obscures details such as trim and siding. If the aluminum siding is removed the house would have more of a historic appearance. The final element of the application is the possibility of remediation from cat urine odor. It has been noted that all finishes need to be removed. It has not been determined that the subflooring need be removed. Servpro also stated that they cannot guarantee the results of remediation. Staff consulted by phone with a Servpro representative from the Des Moines area, a larger metropolitan area, who did not visit the property. They were not aware of an instance where a house was deemed 'irretrievable because of animal odors even in the case of an animal hoarder. They were aware of a case where a house was determined worthy of demolition that had animal odor and mold but it was the mold that lead to the determination, not the animals. A separate phone conversation with Servicemaster 380 (another professional cleaning company), who again had not visited the property, included a discussion of many of the same remediation steps that Servpro had discussed in their letter. Servicemaster 380 stated that given the assessed value of the property, they could not envision a case where the cost for contamination removal would lead to the need to demolish the house. With the opportunity to provide a formal estimate they could provide a price to remove the odor. Whether or not a company such as Servpro or Servicemaster 380 would provide a formal guarantee of the results of their work for any type of disaster recovery is unclear. Costs are a factor that may be considered when discussing the remediation necessary. Removal and replacement of the interior finishes as listed in the Servpro letter may seem extreme but also could be considered typical renovation work on an historic home that has seen mistreatment and lack of upkeep. The applicant included costs for different scenarios. When evaluating these costs it should've noted that the estimates provided by the applicant's own company far exceed those provided by Servpro. In Staffs opinion, if cost alone were to be the determining factor in a discussion of demolition, the costs would need further review and in some cases more information. Clearing the house from cat urine odor seems to be the largest issue in the discussion of whether or not the existing building is irretrievable. In Staffs opinion given the importance of this portion of the discussion and the permanent results of demolition, the issue of cleaning needs further investigation including additional estimates and expected results. Recommendation If the Commission finds based on the information submitted that the house is structurally unsound and irretrievable, then consideration should be given to the application for the new house and garage. If a design is approved for the new house and garage then a motion approving the demolition of the house and garage may be considered by the Commission. If the Commission determines that the house is not structurally unsound and irretrievable then a motion to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition project at 610 Ronalds Street should be considered. r i •a r �.. �iX . fi 7'F Y n —_ •_ t ':' ro h Date: April 22, 2015 To: Historic Preservation Commission: From: Desk of Mike Oliveira Subject: 610 Ronalds Attachments: Exhibit A, B, C, D and E I purchased 610 Ronald's Street on 12/15/2014 with the intent of remodeling this structure according to the guidelines set forth by the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission for single family residences. We knew at the time of the sale the house had been unoccupied by humans for the past several years. Rather the house was occupied by more than 20 cats that were cared for by the former owner's husband and hired help. The smell from the house was considerable. The neighbors, of which I am one as I live at 617 Ronald's, had the pleasure of smelling the stench emitted from time to time during the hot summer months. Upon inspection of the home it was discovered that cat urine had penetrated the surfaces of the home so thoroughly that even the metal floor registers were disintegrating. When we acquired title to the property we began researching the best and most cost effective way to make the structure safe for a family to live in. There were issues of building code compliance as well as the obvious penetrating stench. I met with Bob Miklo to discuss the issues we faced. His recommendation was for us to get some expert opinions to see what we could do with the existing structure and if we could not fix it see if we would meet the criteria to tear down and build new. We hired VJ Engineering to get a structural report and provide a recommendation if we could raise the existing 2nd floor to make it livable and code compliant. The current second floor, like many older homes, was lived in for years but was not legal habitable space and does not meet current codes. We wanted to see if we could raise the roof to support higher wall heights. We also had the firm look at the foundation and crawl spaces. The basement consists of old clay tiles which are decaying and experiencing a lot of water seepage. The basement does not have a sump pump system or radon mitigation system in place. The report is Exhibit A. We also asked a representative from ServPro to come out and give us a bid on ridding the property of toxins and odor. The company said in their report the cost would be excessive and due to the severity of the exposure they would not warranty their work for this project because they could not remove all the potential health issues. The report is Exhibit B. We then sought the counsel of Johnson county health department to help in determining if this structure posed any health hazards. The inspector got physically sick when doing the inspection. His report reaffirmed the house had contaminants that were embedded in the structure of the building and would need to be removed for the safety of future inhabitants. That would mean removing all building materials from the interior of the house and replacing them all with new. The report is Exhibit C. We hired Tom Gourguechon, President of Prairie Sun Building Services to do a financial analysis of three scenarios, one of attempting to remedy the issues and remodel the structure as is. The second was to expand and remodel to larger livable home and the third is a newly built a green energy efficient home based on Carlson Design Team's Design and input from Historic Preservation Commission. This details of the report are in Exhibit D and Carlson Design Team has supplied new architectural documents in the application package. Finally, due to the potential litigation of not getting 100% certainty all health risks are migrated from remodeling the structure, we believe it is a risk nobody should have to bear. We have attached some articles to this effect supporting our claims in Attachment E. In summary, we believe the neighborhood as a whole would be better served by having this building removed and building a new single family home that blends in with and enhances the neighborhood. There are no significant or redeeming qualities to this particular structure that deems it worthy of the radical treatment required making it habitable. The building is unsound and irretrievable due to the decaying foundation, the uninhabitable height of the 211 floor and the impermeable and unsafe contaminants in the structure. We are asking the committee to allow us tear down the structure and build in its place a new single family home that will enhance the neighborhood and provide safe and attractive housing. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Mike Oliveira C- xhib;�A- VJ engineering 2570 holiday road, suite 10 Coralville, iowa 52241 Ph: (319) 338-4939 fax: (319) 338-9457 Engineering — surveying 2/18/2015 Prestige Properties 329 E. Court St. Suite 2 Iowa City, IA 52240 Attn: Mike Oliveira Re: 610 Ronalds, Iowa City, IA Dear Mike: At your request I conducted a structural inspection of the reterenced residential building. The building is a single story wood frame with a partial basement and an attic space. The basement walls are composed of 8" clay tile masonry with some small areas of brick. The north addition is over a shallow crawl space with CMU masonry foundations. The first floor framing consists of 2 x 8's at 16" c-c. Spans vary from 12'-6" to 14'-6". All of these floor joists are over spanned -particularly the 14'-6"spans. Two columns were added in the west basement area but these columns only carried one joist each. The clay ffie masonry walls were covered with paneling on the west and south walls. Small areas of paneling were removed to gain some visual access. The clay tile had some areas of soft and/or missing mortar and showed only minor bowing in the areas that could be viewed. There was a cementious coating on the clay tile exterior surface above grade. This coating was delaminating in some areas. Some of the brick masonry had surface spalling. The basement wooden window bucks were severely decayed. The roof rafters were 2 x 4's at 6' c-c and they were over -spanned also. The asphalt shingles were severely curled and needed to be replaced. You asked about the potential of adding a second floor. The addition of a second floor from a structural standpoint could be accomplished if footings were verified to have adequate capacity and first floor studs are inspected. Obviously any interior walls used for bearing will also need to be verified as capable to transmit loads to basement walls and footings. If you have any questions please give me a call. Sincerely, lam s C. Jacob, P.E. I hereby certify that this engineering document was prepared and the related engineering work i was Ixr' .1 by me or under my direct personal supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Q Wf pg+fr•.._si.m•d ir•mrer wid :der lay fate of lip i. Licensed- ' - James C. J roh. P.E. License #08895 Date Jorn ' " :?' M 1' Nate' December IS = • r. ; y license renewal is ecem r J ` JtiCOIi •: �� • / F °a, `• • . ° . •"° ��``� Pages or sheets covered by this seal: __—_.--- VJ Engineering Paos'l.a1ofz Mike Oliveira From: Billy Lopez <Billy@servpro.me> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:43 PM To: 'moliveira@prestigeprop.com' Subject: 610 ronalds st Attachments: prestige property man..docx Attached is a letter for the property at 610 Ronalds St. Iowa City. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks of Iowa City/Corolville .� of Ottumwa/Oskakwso 14c 6 Yickx: CF:cru;o R iwl'mar' Billy Lone 4172 Alyssa Ct, Suite B Iowa City,1A 52240-8603 Office:319-338-8550 Office: 641-682-0782 Fax:319-338-0956 Email: billy@servpro.me Like it never evon naps Snecializina in: Water Damage Mitigation Maid Remediatinn Biohazard Cleanup Construrtion Services Odor Removal Genernl Hnlwe-wide Clennina Carpet & Furniture Cleaning Tile & Grnut Clennina Find us on Facebook Fire & Smoke Damage Cleaning Dirt Clranina Lead Removal 24 Hour Fmeraenev Servirec Post Construction Cleanup Pnek-nnt/Content Clennina Commercial Carpet & Furniture Cleaning Cnnerete Flnnr Clranina 9--, �, b A- B f2a4a a o F Z To whom it may concern; After assessing the home at 610 Ronalds St in Iowa City, we would need to remove all materials remaining in the home. This would include all drywall/plaster and lath, flooring, cabinets, lights, switch covers, vanity's and so forth. The HVAC system would also need to be removed, this would include all duct work as well. We would get the home down to studs (for the walls), and subfloor for the floors. Also would need to set equipment to help deodorize the home as well as air scrubbers to help clean the air. After all demolition and deodorization the entire home on the inside would need to be sealed with a microbial based sealer. Not sure of an exact cost of what it would be to mitigate the home but we would be somewhere in the 30-40,000 dollar range. This will not include any repairs to the home. Therefor we would not guarantee that all odor would be removed. Thanks for your time: Billy Lopez Servpro Iowa City/Coralville, Ottumwa/Oskaloosa 46x1, •b; 4- G Johnson County; jr PUBLIC HEALTH Douglas Beardsley, MPH Director Promoting Health. Preventing Harm. 02/19/2015 To Whom It May Concern: This department was requested to view the property located at 610 Ronalds St. Iowa City, IA to identify any health/nuisance violations. I visited the property with Mike Oliveira on February 19, 2015. After entering the establishment an unpleasant odor was identified immediately. The odor is said to be from multiple cats living in the home for multiple years urinating and defecating throughout the home. The odor seems to be stronger at different locations in the home, and became more pungent as I moved throughout the building. After leaving the property, I experienced a light headache from what I suspect is from the foul odor. Conducting inspections inside the home is not a typical function of Johnson County Public Health, but per this request; it is evident a strong obnoxious odor is present at the location listed above. This property is not currently violating the Johnson County Board of Health Regulation of Health Nuisances, but this department does have concerns for the future health of any person(s) living inside this structure. Should you have any questions regarding this -matter please feel free to contact me at (319) 688-5864. Jason A. Decker Environmental Health Specialist cc: James Lacina, Environmental Health Coordinator Property file 855 S. DUBUQUE STREET, SUITE 217 ♦ IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ♦ PHONE: (319) 356-6040 ♦ FAX: (319) 356-6044 610 Ronalds Estimate of Extra Costs to Retain Existing Structure Exhibit D materials testing, lab analysis $ 7,250.00 Sampling and lab testing before and after demo to assure successful contaminant mitigation eemove Contaminated Materials $ 4,400.00 Intl all floor finishes, all sub -flooring, baseboards/trim, plaster, insulation, cabinets, ductwork, etc. Protection for Workers $ 3,800.00 Special breathing apparatus, disposable outer ware, eye wash station, decontamination station, etc. Containment for Demo Debris $ 2,250.00 All demo debris bagged and sealed prior to removal from building ice for Extra Dump Fees $ 1,000.00 Contaminated demo materials may require use of special disposal site treatment to Mitigate Odors $ 17,D40.00 60 day duration at$284/day al Sealant Sprayed on All Surfaces $ 8,900.00 Applied to all exposed sturctural elements, Intl framing, foundations, interior slabs, etc. Inant Migration Containment $ 4,550.00 Fully enclose entire structure (outside) to limit migration of contamination ary, filtered ventilation system $ 2,100.00 Used during contamination removal and microbal spray procedures ice for delay and disruption $ 6,000.00 Costs attributable to Interim interest expense, lass of income, Injuries, prim inflation impacts, Wage inflation, etc. ice for extra legal expenses $ 8,000.00 Legal research, contracts clause preparation, indemnifications, notices,etc. , for litigation expenses $ 15,000.00 Initial costs of potential litigation to protect current investment and defence of 3rd party claims insurance hazard endorsement $ 3,000.00 Additional insurance premium to cover risk oftaxoplasmosis infection and residual ammonia fume allergy for asset value reduction(20%) $ 79,000.00 Residual asset will lose significant value due to disdosure of possible taxoplasmosis and ammonia hazards. ant air cleaning system $__2,820.00 Added central air purification system installed on peranem HVAC system, Intl UV sterilization unit. Original purchase (gross) Carrying cost on purchase Extraordinary Expenses Estimated rehab/new construction cost Total project costs $ 135,000.00 $ 135,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 164,110.00 $ 164,110.00 $ 170,000.D0 $ 235,000.00 $ 504,110.00 $ 569,110.00 ket value upon completion (net) $ 353,525.00 profit/loss $ (150,585.00) $ 416,175.00 $(152,935.00) $135,000.00 $ ,.00 $ 24,616.50 PRAIRIE SUN $01,885501.0 $396396,501.50 BUILDING $443,025.00 SERVICES, LLC $ 46,523.50 i5rk-jo+ 9 PaI-e / of H Toxoplasmosis From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Toxoplasmosis is a parasitic disease caused by the protozoan Toxopiasma gondW.111 The parasite infects most genera of warm-blooded animals, including humans, but the primary host is the felid (cat) family. Infection occurs: 1.) By eating infected meat, particularly swine products. 2.) By ingesting water, soil, or food that has come into contact with infected animals' fecal matter. This is most commonly spread in feces by household cats. 3.) By transmission from infected mother to fetus during pregnancy. This is why physicians recommend pregnant women not to clean litter boxes or eat under -cooked meat products,121 Up to a third of the world's human population is estimated to carry a Toxopiasma infection.f31141 The Centers for Disease Control and Preventionnotes the overall seroprevalence in the United States as determined with specimens collected by the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) between 1999 and 2004 was found to be 10.8%, with seroprevalence among women of childbearing age (15 to 44 years) 11 %.151Another study placed seroprevalence in the US at 22.5%.141 The same study claimed a seroprevalence of 75% in El Salvador.141 Official assessment in Great Britain places the number of infections at about 350,000 a year.lel Toxoplasmosis is usually asymptomatic,1711e1 but during the first few weeks after exposure the infection may cause a mild, flu -like illness.191 However, those with weakened immune systems, such as those with AIDS and pregnant women, may become seriously ill, and it can occasionally be fatal.mThe parasite can cause encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), neurological diseases, and can affect the heart, liver, inner ears and eyes(chorioretinitis).1'el Recent research has also linked toxoplasmosis with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, andschizophrenia.1111 Numerous studies found a positive correlation between latent toxoplasmosis and suicidal behavior in humans.l1211's11141 Research related to the effects of toxoplasmosis on personality and mental health was awarded the 2014 Ig Nobel Prize in Public Health.1151 Charles Nicolle and s Manceau) first described the organism in 1908, after they observed the parasites in the blood, spleen, and liver of a North African rodent, Ctenodac44us gundi. The parasite was named Toxoplasma gondY, from the Greek words T61�ov (toxon, "arc" or "bow") and rrhdupa (plasma, "creature"), and after the rodent, in 1909. In 1923, Janku reported parasitic cysts in the retina of an infant who had hydrocephalus, seizures, and unilateral microphthalmia. Wolf, Cowan, and Paige (1937-1939) determined these findings represented the syndrome of severe congenital T. gondif infection."" Health Effects From Breathing Cat Urine Odor huh, b1•1-oE ,049e- zaf5Y By Julie Anne Fidler Cat urine contains ammonia which becomes stronger the longer it sits. Ammonia in liouid form at high levels can be quite corrosive. Most cat urine does not contain enough ammonia to cause serious health problems; sometimes, however, if it is concentrated enough, perhaps because it has sat too long in the litter box or seeped into the floor, it may cause unpleasant physical symptoms. Cat urine is very concentrated, so a small amount can smell very strong. Dried cat urine becomes crystallized, which causes strong odor. Generally, healthy people are not at risk by smelling it. IIowever, if the odor is particularly strong and the concentration is particularly high, some people may have negative physical symptoms as a result. Many people suffering from cat allergies believe their pet's fur is the cause of their suffering. This may not necessarily be true. People with allergies have oversensitive immune systems, which causes them to be allergic to any number of things. Often, cat urine is the culprit. Symptoms of a Cat Urine Allergy Symptoms of a cat allergy include coin=hing and wheezing; hives or a rash on the chest or face; red; irritated eyes; and a runny, itchy or stuffy nose and sneezing. Allergies aside, excessive cat urine can also cause other unpleasant physical effects such as headache, dizziness, sore throat, lightheadedness, nausea and vomiting. Serious Illnesses Contributed to Exposure to Ammonia Those that are exposed to highly concentrated cat urine ammonia, or are exposed to it over a lengthy period of time, are susceptible to developing serious illnesses and injuries such as bronchitis or pneumonia, burns to the trachea and lung irritation. In extremely dire situations, people can experience Asphyxiation (suffocation.) Breathing, in ammonia irritates the airway, often making it difficult to breathe. Couching up phle-.m is often a symptom of a resoiratory infection. Children are at greater risk for developine symptoms and illnesses due to the fact that their body weight ratio is lower ♦gran n.i„7t,; Read more: http:,4www.ehow.com/list 6110897_ health-breathing-cat-urine-odor.html Elcbf*br+- E 10.y9¢ .G? af-y The Dangers Of Cat Urine: Why You Must Eliminate Cat Urine Odor From Your Home July 30, 2012 by Mane Cat pee isn't just disgusting, it can harm your health, too. The dangers of cat urine aren't always obvious, though. No doubt you realize that cat urine, like all human and animal waste, carries bacteria that could cause illness. So you dutifully wear gloves when cleaning up waste and while washing the mops, sponges and other items you used to clean it with. (Cleaning your mops and other items with bleach kills bacteria, but apply bleach only after thoroughly rinsing out all traces of urine with plain water to avoid risk of producing noxious fumes). No problem there. It's easy to assume that once the urine stain and germs are gone, that lingering odor is nothing but a harmless nuisance. Remember, though, that odors are composed of microscopic particles of the thing that caused the odor. So by inhaling cat urine smell, you're actually inhaling cat urine. Just the thought is enough to make you sick, right? Wait, it gets worse... Ammonia's Effect on Respiratory Health Cat pee contains a particularly high concentration of ammonia. Although this is a natural compound containing nothing more than nitrogen and hydrogen, it's not exactly good to breathe. The good news is that most cat caretakers won't need to worry about this. A comer of the living room carpet that smells faintly of kitty piddle isn't going to harm healthy lungs. The risk occurs when either there's a very strong odor of cat urine in the room or someone in the household has a respiratory condition, such as asthma. The amount of ammonia in a room that reeks of cat pee can irritate and eventually harm healthy lungs. Lungs that are already compromised, such as in someone with asthma, may be irritated by even a mild odor of cat urine, especially if they're frequently exposed to the odor. Odor's Effect on Mood Scent has a very powerful effect on our mood and behavior. Just think of the way a certain scent —like a particular perfume or dish -can bring memories flooding back. Clinical research has proven that the scent of lavender can reduce agitated and aggressive behavior in those with mental health issues, such as dementia. Why am I telling you this? xh h14- E A*Ya �H Because the dangers of cat urine smell don't stop with your lungs. In the same way pleasant scents improve our mood, bad smells can make us unhappy and irritable. Even when you're used to it, cat urine odor definitely qualifies as a bad smell. Let's put it this way, which would put you in a better mood -coming home to the smell of cinnamon buns or cat piss? So if you find yourself, your partner or your kids irritable and just plain ill- tempered in a room with lingering cat urine odor, it may be the nasty smell that's ruining the mood. Traces of urine odor can also cause your cat to come back to the soiled area and strike again. To get your cat to stop urinating outside the litter box and to save your health and mood, you'll need to neutralize all cat nee smell in the house. For a detailed guide to the causes of inappropriate urination and effective methods for eliminating that nasty cat pee odor, check out Cat Urine Problems Eliminated Staff Report Historic Review for 610 Ronalds Street District: Brown Street Historic District Classification: Contributing May 14, 2015 The applicant, Prestige Properties Development, LLC, is requesting approval for a proposed demolition and construction project at 610 Ronalds Street, a Contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project consists of demolition of the structure and construction of a new house. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 6:0 Guidel6ies for New Construction 6.1 New Primary Structures 6.2 New Outbuildings ZO GuideAuesfor Demohnon 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features 7.2 Prevention of Demolition by Neglect 8.0 Nci-hhorhood District Guidelines 8.4 Northside Neighborhood Staff Comments Refer to the demolition staff report for the information concerning the history of the existing primary building. The applicant is proposing to construct a new two-story Craftsman -style home and two -car garage with accessory apartment on the property following the demolition of the existing building. The proposed primary building is 2, 560 SF total with a 1,316 SF first floor. The new primary structure would include a 25 foot wide and 8 foot deep front porch with a low -slope hipped roof At the rear of the building, a single story projection would include a 2nd story deck. The applicant is proposing to use a wood substitute for the railings, square posts, and columns. This is the same product the architect used on the second floor front railing at the Shambaugh House on the University campus. The product, Typon Molded Millwork, accepts paint. The system elements they propose are Square balusters, a top rail with reveals along the top and bottom edges, a square bottom rail with an extended base, plain square newel posts with flat post tops, a tapered column with base extending to grade, and a solid skirting The main portion of the house is a two-story cross gabled form with a fiberglass shingle roof and cement board lap siding. Exposed soffits, with an 18 inch overhang, would include brackets and decorative exposed rafter ends, similar to the house at 608 Ronalds which is a much smaller scale property. Above an eave-height band board the siding would change to shingled siding. The foundation would be insulated -form reinforced concrete with stucco over the exposed insulation. Window wells would be poured concrete and include a polycarbonate window well cover. The applicant proposes to use the Jeld Wen Smooth -Pro Fiberglass Glass Panel Exterior door. The windows would be Jeld Wen Custom Wood Double Hung Windows with multiple vertical panel upper sash grille designs. The proposed two-story portion of the house is 46 feet long and 26 feet wide with a bump out on each side. The 8 foot deep porch and the 8 foot deep single story portion in the rear are not included in the 46 foot length. The peak of the roof is 28'- 10" above the finished first floor and the eave height is 18'-6" above the finished first floor. These heights vary in relationship with changes in the site grade. The proposed two-story garage includes two single -car garage doors with four double -hung windows above on the north (alley) side, an entry door, first floor window and second floor window on the east side, and two second floor windows on the west side. Interior stairs lead to the accessory apartment on the second floor. The garage is detailed with the same siding, exposed rafters, brackets, doors, windows, and roof material as the primary house structure. The garage is 24 foot wide, 30 foot deep and is about 21 feet to the roof peak from its finished floor. The guidelines recommend that in the Northside Neighborhood, the surface area of the ptimary structure street elevation may not exceed 1200 square feet. New structures must be one -and -a -half or two stories in height. A new building must reflect the historic styles in the neighborhood including the Craftsman style. This style will inform the design of massing, roofline, siding, windows, doors, porches, and other architectural features. Craftsman homes are two stories with a law pitch roof up to 8/12 with 18 to 24 inch overhangs. The soffits are open and include exposed rafter tails and brackets. Siding material changes at a wide band board often placed at the transition from first to second floor. A water table band board is located at the top of the foundation wall. Windows would include upper sash divided lights. Porches may be small, incorporating only the entry or full -width. Porch columns are square and tapered. Railings are either solid panels, solid with siding, or square spindles. The porch ornamentation should be similar to the rest of the house. The new building setback should be consistent with setbacks of existing principal buildings along the same frontage. The siding should be consistent with the architectural style of the building. Fiber cement siding with a smooth finish is an acceptable substitute for wood. Doors on the front or side elevations should have half - or full -light windows and/or raised panel construction and be consistent with the architectural style. Windows should be wood or metal -clad wood and accept paint with divided lights created from muntin bars adhered to both sides of the glass. Non -wood windows will be finished in a dark color, preferably black. Window type, proportion, shape, profile and divided -light pattern should be based on the architectural style. Window trim should be 3 to 4 inches wide. Small decorative windows should be included in the front gable end if consistent with the architectural style. Front porches should be consistent with the architectural style and include vertical -grained fir porch flooring, wood or an approved wood substitute that accepts paint for the posts, trim and other components, a floor elevation at least 18 inches above grade, and skirting between the porch piers. Second story porches are placed above first -floor interior spaces or first -story porches. New outbuildings including garages should be clearly subordinate in size and ornamentation to the primary structure but also reflect the style of the primary structure. Garage doors should be a smooth panel type or a carriage -style type and single -car type. Trim should be added around the garage door to reflect the trim of other doors and windows on the building. Windows should be relatively small and rectangular. In Staffs opinion, the applicant's proposed elevation with a wide band board at the eave and the change in siding approximates a Craftsman siding detail Exposed rafter ends, brackets and double -hung windows with upper sash divided lights also fit the Craftsman style. The window types selected for the house fit the style (if the new windows have a permanent finish, they should be specified in the dark or black to complement the historic style of the building). The quantity of windows included would be the minimum possible to reflect a Craftsman style. The current setback of the proposed primary building does not align with the existing houses on the block. Both the proposed porch and the front wall of the building are positioned further forward than the neighboring properties. The front wall of the proposed house should align with these properties and preferably the larger one at 618 Ronalds because it is similar in scale. In addition, the depth of the proposed building and the several feet it extends beyond its neighbors may be a concern. its it is currently drawn, the two-story portion of the proposed building extends 8 feet beyond the entire structure at 618 Ronalds with the single -story rear portion of the proposed building extending another 8 feet beyond that for a total of 16 feet. This single -story portion is also roughly 8 feet further than the depth of the entire structure at 608 Ronalds. If the proposed building is moved back on its site to align with the front walls of the neighboring buildings as recommended in the guidelines, the distance it extends beyond its neighbors will be even greater. Staff recommends that the total depth of the house should take into account the neighboring houses on either side. In closely packed historical neighborhoods rear walls of houses align fairly consistently. This was perhaps to assure that the views from side windows were not totally blocked by the house next door — looking directly out of the window occupants would see the neighbor's sidewall, but looking out the window at a diagonal They could see an opening to a long view towards the neighboring rear yards at the back of the house. Although there is no formula or exact rule for this, it should be considered when deciding how much farther back than the neighbors to extend building footprint. A few feet may be fine, but extending it too far would not be neighborly and would not be consistent with the historic pattern. The front elevation scale of the proposed building is similar to that of the neighboring house at 618 Ronalds but larger than the house at 608 Ronalds. From the street, the scale of the proposed home seems appropriate with the neighborhood. The main concern is the scale of the side elevation. As mentioned above, the house is much longer than the neighbors. This length is amplified by the massing and scale of the side elevations. The cross gables help break up this elevation but an additional wide band board at the change from first and second floors and aligning with the fascia on the front and sear porches in addition to the upper wide band board and siding change already shown might add a human scale to the side elevation massing of the building and improve the Craftsman detailing. While 18" overhangs are a minimum standard in a Craftsman design, and appropriate for a home of a smaller scale such as 608 Ronalds, extending the overhangs to 24 inches would be more appropriate fox the overall scale of the proposed building. In Staffs opinion, the Craftsman character of the front elevation could be unproved with bracket detailing on the porch similar to the main roof and the rear porch roof as well as the additional overhang depth. The doors on the rear elevation should not include heavily divided light patterns. This style is more typical of a Colonial style house and not appropriate on this building. If there are to be any divisions, vertical divisions or a simple prairie -style division pattern would be more appropriate. The proposed garage design more clearly fits a carriage house design, which could be appropriate for the Northside Neighborhood, than a typical historical garage. The garage detailing echoes the house detailing and fits within the Craftsman style. Windows on the North Elevation do not reflect the recommendation of small windows on an outbuilding. If the garage is considered more as a carriage house the size of the windows could be considered appropriate. The pattern would better reflect the Craftsman style if they were paired or reduced to two windows toward the outside comers like the primary structure window patterning. It is recommended to terminate the siding at one level point instead of having it step down on the south side. Even though this would result in a wider exposed concrete foundation wall, it would appear more consistent. Carriage style garage doors would be more appropriate such as those being installed at the applicant's 331 Gilbert street project. Product information regarding the garage doors should be submitted. While the proposed garage is clearly subordinate to the proposed primary building, it may be a concern that the roof peak height is approximately the same as the primary building at 608 Ronalds. This neighboring primary structure is also only 1 foot wider and 6 feet deeper than the proposed garage structure. Given the number of conditions proposed and comments raised, if the Commission needs more time to consider this application it could be deferred to the June meeting. Recommended Motion If the Commission decides to allow the demolition of the existing buildings and is satisfied that the length to which the proposed building extends into the lot is appropriate then move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 610 Ronalds as presented in the application with the following conditions: • Revise the front setback so that the main front wall of the house does not protrude beyond that of 618 Ronalds. • The substitute porch railing material must be approved by the commission or changed to an approved material • Clarify the porch flooring material and submit information for approval by staff and chair if not a material currently approved. • Resolve the rear door and window divided light pattern for approval by staff and chair. • Resolve the window patterning on the north elevation of the garage for approval by staff and chair. • Revise the garage doors to a smooth panel or carriage style for approval by staff and chair �. Application for Histone Review 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 Neighborhood and Development Services office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/HPhandbook For Staff Use: Date submitted: 4/ Z f/ S� ❑ Certificate of No material Effect ❑ C10cate of Appropriateness Major review ❑ Intermediate review ❑ Minorreview 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 office of Neighborhood and Development Services by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner/Applicant Information . .. -.-.,. -:. (Pleaseehrck prmwty contact person) � ' ❑ Property owner Name: Prestige Properties Development LLC Email: moliveira@prestigeprop.com Phone Number: (319) 512-7616 Address: 329 E. Court St. City: Iowa City State: IA zip Code: 52240 ❑ Contractor/Consultant Name: Carlson Design Team (Bob Carlson and Jessie Clark) Email: iclark@_cdt-pe.com Phone Number:(319)338-0066 Address: 1210 S. Gilbert St. Suite 100 city: Iowa City state: IA zip Code: 52240 Proposed Project Information Address: 610 Ronalds St. Iowa City, IA 52245 Use of Property: Single Family Residence Date constructed (if known): Existing house- built in 1920 Historic Designation .. Maps arelocated mthcH/atnlre Presm"non Handbook) ❑ This Property is a local historic landmark. OR El This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location) Brown Street Historic District ❑ Clark Street Conservation District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ East College Street Historic District ❑ Dearborn Street Conservation District ❑ Longfellow Historic District ❑ Goosetown / Horace Mann Conservation District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ Govemor-Lucas Street Conservation District ❑ Summit Street Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District Within the district, this Property is classified as: N Contributing 11 Noncontributing 0 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 Plnm ❑ Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacemeat/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 )1`I Building Elevations A Floor Plans ❑ Photographs ]� Product Information i Site Plans ® Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition o 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: Demolition of existing house and garage for new construction. Highly energy efficient two story, single family home, built to meet accessibility needs for clients of the aging population New two car garage with accessory apartment at the rear of the lot. Style: Craftsman Materials to be Used: Siding: Cement board K' reveal, smooth face) Windows: Jeldwen Custom Clad Double Hun Soffit: ppen eaves, exposed rafters Balusters and Railings: Polyurethane Millwork Porch flooring: Clear vertical grain fir (Similar to Fypon Brand, samples will be submitted Exterior Appearance Changes: May 5th. See attached product data pages.) hispms/app_for_historicrevimdoc 6/4/14 gM4=5 Smoulh-RoFlberglass I JEW-WEN ows & Wkw ws noergiass mass vanes cxrenor uoor SMOOTH -PRO FIBERGLASS GLASS PANEL EXTERIOR DOOR + ADD TO MY PROJECT +PRINT Like Options Price Range:$$ Group Model All Nodel r .� !f f • Top View (� `' 3-Light 2- Panel Glass Options l Clear rptions d door ance FEATURES Panel Options: smooth Finish Options: ready to paint or stain Glass Options: energy efficient, protective, privacy, direct glaze, decorative, grilles, blinds between the glass, venting door glass Maintenance level: minimal Sizes: Typical sizes include 3'0" X 6'8", TO" X 8'0." For detailed available sizing please contact your Dealer. Project Type: new construction and replacement ENERGY STAR® Qualified Options: yes Warranty: limited lifetime BACK TO TOP RELATED PRODUCTS Build & Installation Tech Documents HAVE A QUESTION? Our customer service team is happy to assist you tea` CONTACT US hltp#wwwjd"m,00m/cafdo wde ot-dmmfsmugll•pro'flberglesstplass-p M#gro*-Nl&modd-moddl9W 112 4114015, cost" Wood I JEW-WEN toes $ WlMowa winoow CUSTOM WOOD DOUBLE -HUNG WINDOW 11 . + ADD TO MY PROJECT + PRINT Like a Options Price Range: $$$ :Model (Exterior 9 iGrille Designs No Grille Exterior Color �, ■ Options ■�■ ■ Brilliant White - ■ Looking for more frame, glass, and grille options? DESIGN YOUR OWN Product Overview Design Options Glass Options Both the upper and lower sashes slide open vertically and tilt in for easy cleaning. Built from Aura Last® Wood (Pine) and available in multiple wood species and 41 clad colors. FEATURES • Custom Capabilities: size, shape, design, finish, texture, wood species, glass, grille designs • Color Options: 41 clad exterior colors, copper cladding, 10 wood interior finishes • Wood Options: pine, knotty alder, douglas fir, mahogany, oak, walnut, cherry or custom options • Trim Options: exterior clad and wood trim profiles, interior wood trim profiles, distressing options • Glass Options: energy efficient, protective, textured, tinted • Hardware Options: Window Opening Control Device (WOCD) option available • Maintenance Level: moderate Project Type: new construction and replacement • ENERGY STAR@ Qualified Options: yes Sustainable Solutions: Aura Last@ Wood (pine) with reduced VOCs is standard. Two wood -source certification options are available on Aura Last@ Wood: Sustainable Forestry Initiative@ (SFI) or Forest Stewardship CouncilT" (FSC@). . Warranty: 20 year general warranty & lifetime limited warranty against rot and termites Build & Installation Tech Documents HAVE A QUESTION? Our customer service team is happy to assist you t CONTACT US tWM% wjdd•wen:gomlaelalookO doWskuMemiwooddoble4imOpad-lahs 112 ISure_ Baluster BAM16SQ' 5" 16" 13/4" 517/16" BAL2X20SQ* 5" 20" 5 T11w" j BAL2X24$Q' S" 24" 13/4" 517/16" BAM28SQ" 5" 28" 1314" .. 5 71/16" .: . BAL2X325Q' 5" 32" 13/4" 511/16" —B BAL2X48SQ' 5" 48" 13/4" 5"hfi BAL5X28SQ 7",12" 28" 4 7/B° 813/1s" NOTE: Baluster images shown above may not be an accurate representation of every size within each _ category. For additional line art images, please visit www.fypon.com. ACan be used with BBRS6X96, BBRC6X96, BTRS6X96, BTRC6X96. "Can be used with baluster panels on p.178 to fill space if needed. Beaumont Baluster__ BAL4X22BE 7" 22" 191/P' 1'A" 13/4" 4" 23/8' 69/321' c BAL5X19BE 7", 12" 191/e" 161/4" 11/ab . 1 "A" 5114" 23/4' 62ah," F BAL5X22BE 7", 12" 22" 161/8" 21/8' 3 3/4" 5" 3 3/1s' 7 B/32 B A : .- BAL5X31BE 12" 31" 247h6 219/32" 41/32" 5IN' 27/s" 69/32' D . -._. BAL5X34BE 12" 33 7/B" 24 7h6' 3 31/32" 5 i6/32" 5 3/4" 2 7/8" 6'/8" E BAL6X22BE 12" 21'/e" 161/a" 21/16" 3"he" 6'AB" 4" . 7"/16" NOTE: Baluster images shown above may not be an accurate representation of every size within each category. For additional line art images, please visit www.fypon.com. 176 I BALUSTRADE SYSTEM www.fypon.com ;Baluster Panel$ ►r#°��*e� BP28X28QXH'" 5,7,12 Fr+. BP28X28S" ® 5, 7,12 28" .. 28" . • 11/4" 28" 28" 1 '/4' 1'' 1"t A, }� � BP28X28P"llM 5, 7,12 28" 28" 11/4' -Available to order April 2015 x SAL2X28SQ on p.176 can be used with baluster panels to fill space if needed. Top Straight Rails 0000000 311/z" 009©000 ®o©o©®O B Ic 31 1/2" 0 I—e—I —Ir 31 '/21, 0 1t- c BTRS6X96 , " , " 1 c i 5 96 3 /z 3 /32 3 /z �~ BTRC6X96' ® 5" 96" 4 3/4" 41/4' 4 3/a" j (? O - A - BTR5X96 5" 96' 31/4' 31/8" 4 S/e' � ` } BTR5X144^' 5" 144" 31/4" 31Je° 45/e" �• 'A- BTR7X96 7" 96" 51/2" 51/4" 7" BTR7Xl20'\ 7" 120" 51/2" 51/4_ 7" c BB ;1O, BTR7X144^ 7" 144" 51/2" 5 '/a" 7" 1�— A -Available to order April 2016 178 I BALUSTRADE SYSTEM www.fypon.com Top Straight Rails Cuntinued BTR12X96 12" 96" 9" 51/4" 111/811 e. BTR12X120^ 12 .. 120" 9" 51/a" 11'Ie" BTR12X144 11 /a ^ 12 1�„ .... 9„ _ 51/4" , „ ^ Maximum rail span distance for field applications is 96". Bottom Straight Rails BBR12X96 12" 96" 111/8" 51/4" 9" _ t * a BBR12X120^ 12" 120" 11'/a" 51/4" 9" B " a BBR12X144^ 12" 144" 117/8" 51/4" 9" ^ Maximum rail span distance for field applications is 96' *Available to order April 2015 POLYURETHANE CATALOG I 179 1.800.446.3040 Plain Newel,. Post NP6X48 511 W 51/2" PS=P $TrRP . sID i 706 TOF PSMFP NP8X48 ]" 48" 71h"I PPsT oxro TOO A Decorative Newel -Post NOTE: Post tops shown are sold separately. Corner Panel Newel -Post NPCP6X48- ® 5" 48" 51/2" PS�T7XTP BED a— TC6 �1 NPCP8X48 7" :` 4811 8" ! ?CBS .:..� A fr PST13X:i3FP NPCP13X48 12" 48" 121/2" PST14XX14F PSTIWAP 1 -- ------ *Available to order ApHl 2015 POLYURETHANE CATALOG 1181 1.800.446.3040 `Post,:Accessor.,es Cbntinued PSTWF 5" 6 lb" 4 W' 1 '/z" NP6X48 . Flat Post Top PST10X1 OF 7" 91/2" 61/4" 2" NNPWaX 8 HatPostTop NPSPUAB A—� PST13X13F 12" 12'/2" 8 2'/3z" 1 '/P 1 BlW3 NOTE Image FlatPoslTop 46 represents Flat Post -fops PST14X14F Flat Post Top 12" 14" 8 "/16" 3'/6" NKPIWS N.%P13X48 i C PST12X12F" 7"" 11 Th6" 10'/2" 1 6/16" NP1g 443 .+.�:^^.. FlatPWTOP . A —� MAN 5" 6'/2" — 1 '/2" NP6X48 Peaked.Postrop I [ PST10X10P Peaked Post Top NOTE Image shown tpresents Peaked Pos`Tops PST13X13P Peaked Post Top PST14X14P Peaked ftTop 7" 9'/z" — 12" 131/2" — 12" 14" — NP8YA8 3 NPCP8X48 NMP8X48 1'/2l NP12X48 5n NPCP13X48 NPSP13X48 �-i-C �— A --� _�F 184 I BALUSTRADE SYSTEM 1 www.fypon.com • 2 |:§)( 'e§ §|| �£%»(;| ƒ §. \ !| 8;w §�$ §-d`% §|§ eeee .... § § � N 0. fa§§|,6q ■ � / ■;K;/ ! �| !w H;k §H ! R � |!) $ #» ) § � § 6 } i � Ii § $ �i )§!k\\ Vol. ^ cti MZ11 III ED] I ilk z 0 Ir LU 7 LLI Fs E F- 0) LU LU 3m EMU .:I 1 ��I _J i J q = V a� W J 4 @i u� 3�cm k o a S W .i n� yo wX o :E _ 4q V' T MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 9, 2015 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Thomas Agran, Esther Baker, Gosia Clore, Kate Corcoran, Andrew Litton, Pam Michaud, Ben Sandell, Ginalie Swaim, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Frank Durham .iessica Bristow, Bob Miklo Alicia Trimble RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Swaim called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CONSENT AGENDA: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: Swaim stated that consent agenda items are looked at to see if there are any questions or discussion. She said that if the information presented in the packet is sufficient, then the Commission can go ahead and vote. 829 Kirkwood — Landmark. MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 829 Kirkwood Avenue, as presented in the application, with the following condition; choose color to blend in with the building with approval by staff. Litton seconded the motion. 727 Grant Street — Longfellow Historic District. MOTION: Litton moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 727 Grant Street, as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0 (Durham and Michaud absent). Michaud joined the meeting. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 429 Ronalds Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District. Miklo said this property is in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District at the corner of Van Buren and Ronalds Streets. He said the property was built around the turn of the last century and has had some remodeling, including removal of the porch. Miklo said the Sanborn maps do confirm that the house had a full front porch, which is shown on the map as late as the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 12, 2015 Page 2 of 6 1960s. He said it is believed that at the same time the porch was removed the house was sided with aluminum siding. Miklo said the applicant proposes to rebuild a fairly simple porch. Without a photograph of what the original porch looked like, staff feels this is a pretty good replacement. Miklo said it would have details similar to other porches in the neighborhood and fairly simple square columns with molding at the top and the bottom. He said the proposed pitch of the roof is similar to existing porches in the neighborhood, and the depth of eight feet is typical of porches in the neighborhood and similar to what is shown on the Sanborn maps. Miklo said room has been left for possible alterations in the columns. He said the applicant is looking at the appropriate spacing, given the load, so it is possible that the column spacing may change after further study. Miklo said the general concept of the porch as presented is what would be approved. He said staff recommends approval of the application. Wagner asked what material would be used for the decking. Miklo said it would be treated decking material, not tongue and groove. He said this is a conservation district, and cedar or other decking material that would be found on a back deck is allowed in a conservation district, provided it is closely spaced. MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 429 Ronalds Street, as presented in the application, with the following condition; resolve the post spacing for review and approval by staff and chair. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Durham absent). Swaim welcomed Jessica Bristow, the new Historic Preservation Specialist, to the meeting. Miklo said the Jessica will be working part time to help review projects. She is trained as an architect and has studied art history so is well suited for the position. 725 South Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District. Miklo stated that this property is in the Summit Street Historic District and has been before the Commission in the past. He said the house was covered in asbestos siding until about ten years ago, when the siding was removed and replaced with cement or hardi-board siding. Miklo said the owners did a very good job of re-creating the historic siding details. Miklo said the proposal is to add a sunroom to the back of the house. He said it would have the appearance of a back porch and would also have a deck on the roof, and a door would be added where there is currently a window to provide access to that second floor deck. Miklo said there are a number of guidelines, detailed in the staff report, that apply to additions and porches. He said staff finds that this meets the guidelines and has received information that this will be a fiberglass door that meets the guidelines. Miklo said staff recommends approval of the application without any conditions. MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 725 South Summit Street, as presented in the application. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Durham absent). REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 12,2015 Page 3 of 6 Miklo said staff had provided a few photographs to show what was approved. Certificate of No Material Effect. 829 Kirkwood Ave. Miklo said staff and chair approved repair of soffits and trim. Wood material that matches the original design will be used. MINOR REVIEW - STAFF REVIEW. 1104 East Burlington. Miklo said this was a project on Burlington Street that is a University Neighborhood Partnership house. He said this building is being converted to single-family use, so the second floor kitchen in being converted to a bedroom with a casement window that will provide emergency egress. Miklo said it will have a partition to make it look like a double hung window. He said one of the basement windows is being replaced, as the other basement windows have already been replaced. Miklo said that was approved administratively. 620 Oakland Avenue. Miklo said this project involves radon mitigation. He said that on the back side of the house there will be a pump and a pipe that will be painted to complement or match the house that runs up the side of the house. Miklo said this is one of the items that staff is allowed to approve without review. 1113 East Colleae Street Miklo said the insurance company has told the owners of this house that they need some kind of railing for safety reasons on the concrete stairway. He said staff approved a simple, black metal pipe railing for this. 305 South Summit Street. Miklo said this is a non -historic property in the Summit Street Historic District. He said the house was built around 1960. Miklo said the proposal is to replace the existing wood windows with vinyl windows. He said that is an exception that is allowed for non -historic buildings, so staff approved that administratively. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM: Swaim stated that the subcommittee, chaired by Corcoran, has been handling this. Swaim said that Ackerson, Baker, Corcoran, Sandell, Alicia Trimble, and herself comprise the subcommittee. Corcoran reported to the Commission that the subcommittee has met a couple of times. She said that she and Trimble have taken on the task of reviewing the survey forms. Corcoran said HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 12, 2015 Page 4 of 6 that Trimble raised the possibility of finding some University student/interns who might want to get some experience to look at this. Corcoran said they also questioned why this information isn't digitized and talked about getting some kind of grant for that. Corcoran said that she and Trimble reviewed the survey forms in several sessions, and the subcommittee looked at about 25 of these and weighed in on rating whether or not a particular property had the potential to qualify for landmark status. Corcoran said that after that meeting, she and Trimble met again a few more times to look over the information and came up with about 28 more properties to be reviewed. Corcoran proposed that the subcommittee meet again and go over those properties. She said she felt the productivity of the full Committee would be enhanced if the subcommittee reviewed these additional properties. Corcoran said photographs could be prepared, and then the subcommittee could compose and finalize a list for presentation to the full Commission for the next Commission meeting in May. The other members of the subcommittee agreed to meet again. The consensus of the Commission was to postpone action until the subcommittee's report at the next meeting. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 12, 2015: MOTION: Ackerson moved to approve the minutes of the March 12, 2015 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, as written. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Durham absent). HISTORIC PRESERVATION INFORMATION: Iowa Preservation Summit. Miklo said the Iowa Preservation Summit is scheduled for June in Winterset. He said it is a gathering of preservation commissions' staff, developers, and property owners on a State-wide basis. Miklo said there is a lot of educational material. Miklo said that Bristow will be attending, and the City would pay travel expenses, lodging, registration, and a small per diem for meals for one or two Commission members to attend. Swaim said she had attended a couple of years ago and loved it. She said it was maybe the best conference she has ever attended. Swaim said there was a lot of nuts and bolts conversation about education and trading of ideas. Corcoran volunteered to attend the upcoming conference. Michaud said she just returned from a trip to Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia. She said that Charleston is beautifully preserved, and their mayor has been totally dedicated to keeping historic structures, not just the mansions but other styles and modest properties as well. Michaud said that one reason they have had so much success is because of their wonderful visitors' center. She asked if Iowa City could have something like that and suggested the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 12, 2015 Page 5 of 6 Unitarian Church as a location. Michaud asked if there are any ways to move ideas like this forward and if there was any response to the letter sent to the Unitarian Church. Swaim said that she and Corcoran met with the City Manager. She believes the City Manager was inviting the community, as the Commission encouraged, to send in ideas and comments on whether this is a worthy building to maintain to serve the community in different ways. She said the intent that the building can be reused seemed important to the City Manager as well as to the Commission, but people have to speak up and be involved. Swaim said she suggested that the building be used as a meeting and events place, such as for weddings, recitals, art exhibits, workshop space, etc. She said she does not think it will be hard to come up with ideas but will be difficult to come up with the force to make it happen and the finances. Corcoran said the City Manager had mentioned that there were other meeting places in Iowa City and there might not be a need for another, but she said this is a totally different type of site. She said she did not feel that this would be resolved right away. Michaud asked if the posting for the demolition permit has gone up. Miklo said it was posted, and they are required to post it for a certain number of days. Corcoran said one critical point in the Commission's letter was that the Commission did not want to see the City Council rewarding a developer by giving incentives for the property if the building is demolished. Swaim said the citizens really need to insert themselves into this conversation. Corcoran agreed and said that people will need to participate in the process. Swaim said that the letter the Commission composed was sent to the City Manager, the City Council, and the church. She said the church replied that it was looking forward to hearing any response from the City. Swaim said everyone has many ties to people in the community. She said people could get the word out there that this is a building worthy of saving and reusing. Michaud asked if anyone is associated with the Iowa City Community Foundation. She said they have fundraisers and have money at their disposal if they go through certain procedures or have a certain time frame. Michaud said she would re -contact them to see if there is any way to use that Foundation to retain the building. Miklo said Commission members were given survey forms from the Human Rights Commission. He asked Commission members to insert them in an envelope and for the last person to seal the envelope. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:04 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte G O U W W N V 4 Z G N Z W H Q +vojx O � X x x x x XXXX x o X X X X XIX X X X N LLI X X X X 0 x X x X X X X X X X X X x LU N X X X x x x x X X W P O X 6 6 X X X X X X X X m w w X X X X X X X X X O O x x x x x x x x x o x v X - x X x X X p N X X x x x x x x O O O o x x x x x x x x x o W) 0 w X 6 X X X X X X X �o r m m co r ro m m IL 8 rn rn rn rn rn rn a a rn rn W N N N N N N N N N N N F m Cl)M M M W Q W Q Q z W g' z J z Y p Y a m Q r O p LL O ~ W Q Q W W z L z L p ¢ z Q p �_ V z Q Y Y 0K F� t9