Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-2017 Historic Preservation CommissionIowa City Historic preservation Commission Thursday August 10, 2017 5:30 p.m. Emma Harvat Hall City Hall IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, August 10, 2017 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma Harvat Hall 5:30 p.m. A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Certificate of Appropriateness 1. 641 S. Governor Street — Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District (new outbuilding) 2. 314 S. Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District (demolition, new construction, and addition) E) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff Certificate of No Material Effect —Chair and Staff review 1. 314 South Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District (partiall foundation reconstruction) 2. 26 East Market Street — Old Brick — Local Historic Landmark (rear foundation work) 3. 447 South Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District (rear chimney reconstruction) 4. 408 Fairchild — Northside Historic District (cedar shingle siding replacement) 5. 415 Brown Street — Brown Street Historic District (repair of internal gutters and trite) 6. 728 Fairchild Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (windows reconstruction) Minor Review —Staff review 1. 828 Dearborn Street — Dearborn Street Conservation District (partial window and storm window replacement) 2. 409 Grant Street — Longfellow Historic District (siding and trim replacement on non - historic house) 3. 815 East Bloomington Street — Goosetown Horace Mann Conservation District (front step and railing reconstruction 4. 1601 Center Avenue — Dearborn Street Conservation District (front window replacement) 5. 125 North Gilbert Street —Jefferson Street Historic District (porch and step reconstruction) 6. 1029 Court 7. 839 Roosevelt Street — Clark Street Conservation District (front step replacement) 8. 625 Davenport Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (porch railing replacement) n 9. 721 Brown Street —Brown Street Historic District (foundation repair, rear step and railing replacement 10. 1029 Court Street — Longfellow Historic District (deck repair and new stair landing) 11. 723-725 South Seventh Avenue — Dearborn Street Conservation District (new deck) Intermediate Review —Chair and Staff review 1. 827 Brown Street — Brown Street Historic District (curb cut and driveway widening) 2. 104 E. Jefferson Street —Jefferson Street Historic District (new monument sign) F) Consideration of Minutes for July 31, 2017 G) Commission Information and Discussion 1. Preserve Iowa Summit 2. Brochure: Preserving Black History in Iowa City: Tate Arms and the Iowa Federation Home H) Adjournment If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Bob Miklo, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5240 or at bob-mildo@aiowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Staff Report August 3, 2017 Historic Review for 641 South Govemor Street District: Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District Classification: Contributing The applicant, Adam Rake, is requesting approval for a proposed new construction project at 641 South Governor Street, a Contributing property in the Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District. The project consists of the construction of a new studio outbuilding in the rear corner of the lot. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.3 Doors 4.7 Mass and Rooflines 4.11 Siding 4.13 Windows 4.14 Wood 6.© Guidelines for New Construction 6.2 New Outbuildings 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines 8.1 Longfellow Neighborhood Staff Comments This house was built around 1925 as a single -story gable -front bungalow. The house has a rock -face concrete block foundation, a projecting bay on the north side and a half -width front porch with its own gable roof. The porch columns are clapboard wall sections integral to the solid clapboard balustrade. The original clapboard siding with half-timbered gables and exposed rafter tails at the eaves are elements of the architectural character of the house. The house also appears to have all of its original windows and storm windows. This property never had a garage. In 2008, the installation of a radon system was approved with the suggestion that it was painted to blend with the house. The system was installed but not painted. In 2009, the removal of a non-histotic basement door on the back and replacement with French doors was approved. The applicant is proposing to construct a studio outbuilding in the northwest corner of the rear of the property. The adjacent alley is unpaved and not accessible. The new outbuilding would have a 24 foot by 16 foot rectangular footprint. The cave height on the tall thin building would be 16 feet with a 20 foot ridge beam height. The house has a 24 foot ridge beam height but the house also sits approximately 5 feet higher than the new outbuilding because of the slope of the property. It is unlikely that the new building would be visible from the street. The proposed studio building would have a lower level of shiplap siding on the front or east end to create a human scale for the main entry area. A sliding barn door and window are also shown at this level. The track for the barn door marks the location of the change it material with the rest of the studio having board and batten cedar siding. In the upper level of the front, a strip of windows lets light into the space. While the cave overhang or the building is 2 feet to match the house, on the east end, the overhang is extended to 4 feet over a paved area. The south side includes a door and another window. The applicant intends to seek out salvaged windows for the project and will build the s:iding barn door to match the drawings also using salvaged windows. The guidelines recommend that new outbuildings in the Longfellow Neighborhood have a total surface area of the street elevation no more than 750 square feet. New outbuildings should be placed at the rear of the primary building and should clearly be subordinate in size and ornamentation to the primary structure. Windows should be relatively small and rectangular. New outbuildings should reflect the style of the primary structure. An exception exists for new outbuildings in Conservation Districts that allows the design to reflect historic outbuilding styles in the neighborhood instead of the primary building. In Staffs opinion, the size, scale, and location of the new outbuilding meets the guidelines. The applicant followed examples of local barn/ outbuilding structures for the design because the law bungalow style of his house would not allow the volume of space needed for his art. The roof shingles and configuration of the double -hung windows will match the house. The exposed rafter tails will also appear similar to those on the house. The board and batten siding and natural cedar appearance follows the other barn examples instead of following the color and siding on the house. The building includes a small strip of ganged windows that are more reminiscent of a transom window than a double -hung window. While there does not appear to be precedent for this window in the house or in other barn examples, staff finds it acceptable to include them on this building because it is new construction, in a Conservation District, placed at the rear of the property, and they do not appear to negatively impact the architectural character of the new building. They will also allow more light into the space. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 641 S. Governor Street as presented in the application. VIA- FN If I I 0. APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC REVIEW 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 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the Neighborhood and Development Services office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.org/histoiici2reservationresources For Staff Use: Date submitted: 17/19/2017 1 ❑ 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 office of Neighborhood and Development Services by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See last page of this application for deadlines and meeting dates. PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT INFORMATION (Please check primary contact person) © Property Owner Name: JAdam Rake Email: adamrake hotmail.com Phone Number: 614-595-2684 Address: 1641 South Governor Street City: Ilowa City State: ® Zip Code: 52240 ❑ Contractor/Consultant Name: N/A E:( Phone Number:—� Address: City: State: F Zip Code: PROPOSED PROJECT INFORMATION Address: 641 South Governor Street Use of Property: lHome Date Constructed (if known): circa 1420 . HISTORIC DESIGNATION (Maps are located at the following link: v_aww icggv gMI13ktg icp ationreso A=) ❑ This Property is a local historic landmark. I OR ® This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown St. Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ College Green Historic District ❑ Summit St. Historic District ❑ Dearborn St. Conservation District ❑ East College St. Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Goosetown/ Horace Mann ❑ Jefferson St. Historic District ❑ Clark St. Conservation Conservation District ❑ Longfellow Historic District District ® Governor -Lucas St. Conservation District Within the district, this Property is Classified as: 0 Contributing ❑ 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 Alteration (Typify 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 ❑ Product Information ❑ Photographs ® Construction of a 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 ❑ Evidence of deterioration ❑ 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 Specialist at 356r5243 for materials which need to be included with applications APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Project Description: ,essory building for an artist's studio and storage to be placed in the Northwest comer of the property. 7 icture will be built on a poured concrete slab and have vaulted ceilings for maximum light and space for purpose of making and displaying art work. The structure will also include a loft for storage. Materials to be Used: Exterior Appearance Changes: Noun INSPIRATION NUT- "CIA GNIO N .1 f 4.. Ai�. I r ir INWRATION NOT. 6.6CM ERID 'Ae - , `i1' 'A 7k e�i-'T�91T 4, s . 01 lip 4-W Back of home above and area for studio belovy, a - I Al` 4 4ft j7 Aw, Local barn examples used as design inspiration 0 •rr -r rrr • •- •. -r • • rr• - -rr 2 Staff Report August 3, 2017 Historic Review for 314 South Summit Street District: Summit Street Historic District Classification: Contributing The applicant, Jenn Lynch, is requesting approval for a proposed demolition, new construction, and alteration project at 314 South Summit Street, a Contributing property in the Summit Street Historic District. The project consists of the demolition of the heavily deteriorated garage and the north dormer, a second -story sunroom and lower porch, a small south side porch, and a one-story addition on the back of the main house. A new two -car garage with carport and accessory apartment will be constructed at the back of the property. A new two-story porch and sunroom will be added to the back of the house to replace the existing. The north dormer will be rebuilt slightly larger. The front porch support will be rebuilt with a new column configuration. The south side porch will be rebuilt to match the porch under the rear sunroom. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa Crty11istoricPreservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.1 Balustrades and Handrails 4.3 Doors 4.6 Gutters and Downspouts 4.7 Mass and Rooflines 4.8 Masonry 4.9 Paint and Color 4.10 Porches 4.11 Siding 4.12 Site and Landscaping 4.13 Windows 4.14 Wood S.0 GuideAnesforAddidons 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint 6.0 Guidelines for New Construction 6.2 New Outbuildings 9.0 Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines 8.1 Longfellow Neighborhood Staff Continents HISTORY The Iowa Site Inventory forms say this house was built between 1910 and 1920 however evidence seems to point to a much earlier construction date. It is shown on the 1920 Sanborn Map (the earliest one to include this area). Currently the home appears to be a good example of the common Foursquare design. It has gently flared eaves, a pyramidal hip roof with hipped dormers, a hip roof projection on the back, and a broad Porch across the front with some Craftsman -style detailing. Based on trim and plan changes on the interior and some trim and massing elements on the exterior, the house appears to have been an asymmetrical Queen Arne when it was originally built. It was apparently remodeled in the early 20th century to incorporate the newer styles. The northwest front corner on the first and second floor was enclosed to add space and create the Foursquare form. The front porch would have been modified or rebuilt at the time with the broad flat arch for the support of the roof The house appears to have original lap siding and trim, including a double -layered inverted scallop fascia below the soffit (which is currently metal) and turned columns with delicate brackets on the rear porch under the sunroom. Several additions have been added to the back since 1933. The south side porch has matching turned columns, a turned -spindle balustrade and a spindled architrave (the support beam across the front of a porch). In 2015 the porch roof and ceiling were replaced due to storm damage. The front steps were also replaced without approval. In 2017, the new owner received approval for basement foundation repairs. GARAGE Project: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing two -car garage on the rear, northeast coiner of the property and build a new two -car garage with accessory apartment and carport at the rear, southeast comer of the property. The garage will have a main pyramidal hip roof with a hipped projection to the north for the interior apartment stairs. The shingles, siding, fascia trim detail, and window trite will match the house. The windows and doors will match the proposed new windows and exterior doors for the house. The carport, which has a deck above, will have a railing, columns, and piers to match those proposed on the front of the house. Guidelines: The guidelines recommend retaining historic garages. Where it is not possible to save an existing garage, the guidelines recommend designing replacement garages to be compatible in design with the primary structure and/or other outbuildings in the neighborhood. New outbuildings should be constructed to the rear of the property and subordinate in size and ornamentation to the primary structure, but should reflect the style of the primary structure. The Summit Street Historic District limits the total surface area of the street elevation of a new outbuilding to 750 square feet. Windows should be relatively small and rectangular. The guidelines also recommend against removing significant historic site features on the property such as brick driveways and iron fences. Garage doors should be carriage -style or flat paneled wood doors. Staff review: The site inventory forms say the garage is non-contributing. In Staff's opinion, the existing garage has deteriorated severely beyond repair to the point that it is structurally unsound and irretrievable and should be removed. The location of the new garage, to the south, allows it to align with the driveway. The brick driveway has been removed to prevent construction damage, is palletized, and will be reconstructed at the end of the project. The design of the garage fits well with the current Foursquare configuration of the house. The siding, trim, roof and similar details will match. The support piers and columns will also match those on the house. The garage doors shown are flat panel doors with a row of small windows. Carriage -style doors would bean appropriate option for this garage. The size of the garage, even with the accessory apartment will be subordinate to the size of the house. The north projection allows a slight inset for the apartment door and maintains the pyramidal form of the main roof. The carport with upper deck is an unusual inclusion on an outbuilding. While there does not seem to be precedent for this design, Summit Street with a few larger carriage houses, is an appropriate location for a garage with this type of design element. The architects have confirmed that the building meets the surface area limitation for the neighborhood. Staff finds this design acceptable. HOUSE Project: The applicant is proposing to remove the front porch columns, arch, and paneled balustrade and rebuild them with a more open, profile to let more light into the front of the house. The existing columns will be modified to remove the arch and raise the astragal (small trim piece near the top of a column) so that they are taller, tapered columns supporting a straight, heavy architrave with sufficient size to catty the roof The existing piers will be retained but supported on new footings and the paint will be removed. The porch railing will be simple square spindles between the rails. The existing membrane porch roof will be replaced with shingles to match the main roof. The applicant also proposes to remove and rebuild the south side porch, the rear sunroom and lower porch which have been heavily damaged by weather, and the north facing dormer. A small one-story addition on the back of the house and a small projection on the back of the second floor will be removed. Several windows on both sides of the back portion of the house will be removed and replaced in a different configuration due to interior floor plan changes. New windows incorporated into the house and garage will be Loewen wood double -hung windows with one -over -one sashes. New exterior doors will be custom wood doors with three- quarter Ete over single panels. The north dormer will be rebuilt wider incorporating three windows instead of two to allow space for a new attic stair inside. The roof slope and dormer height will match other dormers. The back second floor sunroom will be rebuilt with taller windows, a new roof and paneled siding below the windows. The porch underneath will have new columns and brackets matching the original and a new door. The south side porch will be rebuilt with new columns matching the rear columns instead of the original. The railing will be removed and the porch will have full -width stairs to grade. The remaining windows will be assessed for repair. The entire house will be reshingled with Certainteed Landmark Shingles in a black or dark gray color. New copper half -round gutters will be installed and the existing metal soffit will be replaced with headboard soffit mitered at the corners. The house will be painted gray with white trim and black sashes. Guidelines: The guidelines recommend removing additions or alterations that are not historic and that significantly detract from the building's historic character or that are structurally unsound and are a safety hazard. The guidelines disallow the removal of any historic architectural feature, such as a porch, chimney, bay window, dormer, brackets, or decorative trim that is significant to the architectural character and style of the building. New dormers should be designed to be of a size, scale, and proportion that are consistent with the architectural style of the house. The face should be primarily composed of window area. Hipped dormers should have roof pitches similar to the pitch of the main roof. New additions should be designed so that they do not diminish the character of the historic structure. New balustrades or handrails should be constructed in a style consistent with the architectural style of the building. Removing historic balustrades is not allowed. New doors should be trimmed to match existing doors and should be of a style that matches the historic character of the house. Color schemes should be consistent with the architectural style of the building and sashes should be painted black. Painting preparation should follow lead -safe practices. Historic porches should be repaired and as much historic material as possible should be conserved. Badly deteriorated elements should be replaced with ones that match the historic ones in design and material. Vertical -grained Douglas Fir flooring should be used for its resistance to weathering. Wood steps should be used for a wood porch. Skirting must be used below a porch. Historic siding should be repaired and replaced only as needed with new or salvaged wood siding that matches the original. Synthetic trim and siding should be removed and replaced with wood. New windows should match the type, size, sash width, trice, use of divided lights, and overall appearance of the historic windows. New windows should be added in a location that is consistent with the window pattern of the historic building. Historic wood elements should be repaired rather than replaced. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards as listed in Section 10.0 state that the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Staff review: In Staffs opinion, this house is a complicated mix of at least two styles from at least two different periods. While it may seem beneficial to remove contradictory styles, the goal of preservation is to conserve the historic changes that are evident on the building. While the south side porch needs new column footings, the porch roof, columns, and spindle detail at the architrave should be retained and repaired instead of removed. The proposal to remove the porch stairs and construct new stairs across the full width of the porch may make the porch more useable if the balustrade is removed. While the guidelines recommend against removing porch balustrades, this one is on the side of the property instead of the front and may or may not be original. The spindles seem thinner and more widely spaced than is customary. Staff finds that an exception based on location or for non -historic materials could be used for its removal. With full -width stairs, a stair railing would be unnecessary. The existing stair railing is not historic. Replacing the door to this porch with a new full -height door instead of the existing door in a blocked -down opening is appropriate. The second floor sunroom has been damaged and is structurally unsound. The proposal to rebuild it with new taller windows and a paneled base will be more consistent with the architecture of the house. In order to do so, the porch below will need to be reconstructed. Staff recommends retaining and reusing any columns and brackets that are in good or repairable condition instead of replacing all of the columns and trim with new. The adjoining single -story addition is not historic and staff recommends removing it to clarify the architectural character of the house. The small second floor corner bump out on the back of the house appears to be a remnant of the original Queen Anne architecture. Because of plan changes on the interior, the fact that it is on the back and has an awkward relationship to the roof above and the surrounding structure, staff recommends approval of its removal. The pair of windows on the second floor of the south side over the porch is proposed to be removed and replaced with two smaller windows (with raised sills) and a single double -hung window because of interior plan changes. The smaller windows align with the door and window below. The double -hung does not align with the window below. The original pair of windows did not align with the windows below either and this area is toward the back of the house. In order to incorporate the bathrooms and other plan changes, staff finds this reorganization acceptable. On the north side of this rear portion of the house, three windows of varying sizes that are not aligned will be removed and replaced in a regular pattern matching the rest of the house. This change will also incorporate a new window where the one-story addition is removed. Staff finds it acceptable to remove the odd -sized windows and replace them with matching windows in a regular pattern. Since one existing window on the first floor may be in good condition, staff recommends that the applicant consider relocating that window to its new location instead of replacing it. The reconstruction of the north dormer to incorporate a new attic stair is acceptable and the design of the new dormer fits with the architecture of the house. While the other dormers have two windows, adding a third window to this dormer because of its larger size is acceptable and follows the guidelines. The current configuration of the front porch is not original but has reached historic status. The pier on the southwest corner has sunk and needs new footings, pulling the angle of the roof down. This may not be the extent of the structural problems with the porch roof. The applicant proposes to rework the column and arch condition in order to allow more light into the front of the building and to refine the way the porch design works with the house. Examples of this type of full -span arch exist around Iowa City. This is not a unique porch construction. On this particular house the arch seems heavier than normal. The arch on the sides of the porch joins the house in an awkward unfinished arch. Staff finds that the proposed new design will let more light in, fits with the Foursquare configuration of the house, resolves some of the structural issues, and refines the porch design. The porch currently has a paneled balustrade that the applicant proposes to remove and replace with a square spindled balustrade. It is unknown whether the balustrade is original to the current porch or not. Staff finds that there are two possible recommendations for the balustrade. Maintaining and repairing the existing balustrade would create a similar language between the front porch and the rear sunroom with the panels below the windows. Alternatively, replacing the porch balustrade with spindles could be an acceptable way of replacing a deteriorated balustrade and a new porch construction so that they work within the same architectural language. Recommended Motion Motion 1: Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the garage demolition at 314 South Summit Street as presented in the application. Motion 2: Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of the new garage with accessory apartment and carport at 314 South Summit Street as presented in the application with the following condition: ■ The garage door product material is approved by staff and chair. Motion 3: Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the renovation of the house at 314 South Summit Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: • The south side porch including trim detail is retained instead of removed but the porch railing may be removed, the stairs may be reconfigured, and porch footings may be added; • All porch floors that are replaced use vertical -grained Douglas Fir; • Paint removal to the existing porch piers follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for the removal of paint on masonry; • Any windows that are determined to be deteriorated beyond repair are reviewed by Staff and Chair for approval of replacement prior to their removal. - y > �k APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC 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.icggv.org/histc)ricpreservatioriresources For Staff Use: Date submitted: ❑ Certificate of No material Effect pi 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 office of Neighborhood and Development Services by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See last page of this application for deadlines and meeting dates. PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT INFORMATION (Please check primary contact person) ® Property Owner Name: JJenn Lynch Email: 'ennl ch il.com Phone Number: 503-927-3811 —� Address: 1520 SW Clifton St. City: lPortland State: OR Zip Code: 97201 © Contractor/Consultant Name: Neumann Monson 7rchitects Email: 'rechkemmer neumannmonson.com Phone Number: 319-338-7878 —� Address: 221 E. College Street Suite 303 City: Ilowa City State: IA Zip Code: 52240 PROPOSED PROJECT INFORMATION Address: 1314 Summit Street Use of Property: FSTiTg-1cFamily Residential Date Constructed (if known): 1904705 HISTORIC DESIGNATION (Maps are located at the following link: www.icggv.org/Msigric reservaggrixesource © This Property is a local historic landmark. OR 71 This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): ❑ Brown St. Historic District ❑ Northside Historic District ❑ College Hill Conservation District ❑ College Green Historic District ® Summit St. Historic District ❑ Dearborn St. Conservation District ❑ East College St. Historic District ❑ Woodlawn Historic District ❑ Goosetown/ Horace Mann ❑ Jefferson St. Historic District ❑ Clark St. Conservation Conservation District ❑ Longfellow Historic District District ❑ Governor -Lucas St. Conservation District Within the district, this Property is Classified as: ® Contributing ❑ 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 ® 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 Product Information ❑ Photographs Q Construction of a 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 ® Evidence of deterioration ® Proposal of Future Plans ® Repair or Restoration of an edsting structure that will not change its appearance. ❑ Photographs ❑ Product Information ❑ Other Please contact the Preservation Specialist at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with applications APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Project Description: Interior renovation; alteration of exterior including reconstruction of rear and side porches that have fallen into disrepair; repair, selective replacement, and repainting of existing clapboard wood siding and trim with duplication of wood trim elements where they cannot be repaired; replacement of windows and doors; repair of significant settling at front (west) porch; replace gutters and downspouts; foundation tuck pointing and waterproofing; replace roofing; replace metal soffit with vented wood soffit; and demolition and replacement of existing garage. Materials to be Used: (Windows: Loewen solid wood replacement, painted, double -hung (one -over -one); Exterior Doors: custom, wood, painted, single lite, clear glass; Roofing: CertainTeed Landmark Pro designer shingles; Gutters: ;copper, half -round; Garage Doors: custom, wood, painted, clear glass lites Exterior Appearance Changes: Dormer at north elevation to be reconstructed to allow for extension of interior stair to attic space. (roof slope, materials, and windows to match existing construction and adjacent dormers). Porch; rear (east) I+f elevation to be reconstructed in a manner to match existing construction - following window spacing and using matching porch support/trim detailing. Construction of new garage with granny flat above - form, roo f slope, windows, siding, and trim materials to match house. Wood stairs, decking and balusters to match SUBMIT S13311HOUV NOSNOW NNVWf13N a � � ¢¢ 9g( 33@gag ygpg�A 33� gpgp� � jj a €€ ® Z `F fa}4e:aAaa6@£ElaA8929:€6a A 88£! l�pu 8G A pg�pgqq y o .iSi45G.2as!ffiasa�aea9asa ol eaii o i 0 �z 3:li �k�owo cc:- CO oil e i M go S133111-1321V NOSNOW NNvv4n3N (�—Zz JUDI I 3dld.� 0 FS Al 38vnb5 Nid aNnki V l ON 3dld llNnOA d f C]Nnoi E 101 101 NI aaaSV7-M SV J,Tq,CC r;s NOLLVOOI 03080028 3dld ,L oNnoj 30 ISV3 6 I dVO S ON Fro Nid j aNnoj 13RHAS HOADMunso S13311H38V NOSNOW NNvwn3N 1e�iu IePF P'$i Nr J Ell S13311H3UV NOSNOW NNVwn3N Q S13311HOHY NOSNOW NNYWf13N 9 bv N S13311HOHV NOSNOW NNvwn3N N U T < fill M Q S13311H3UV NOSNOW NNVWf13N N U t # lf{IN N r Q Ian Igo, I F S13311HOUV NOSNOW. NNVwn3N m C3 .+ U m A � 4 O pgpg p; j pl 77� F a m ftio° w71 gay' `k t J Aft I e to, I AIL 71 x ,.t �tyF.�E `�.v: '� .•yam a _ >� I F. CL a N1 F V W F x V a z 0 in z 0 2 z.. z 4 [- � z >>o W ,. Z k oc, Double Hung, interiorview DOUBLE HUNG The Loewen Double Hung is the epitome of Classic American Architecture - authentic and charming. Through years of research and design with architectural experts, we are able to seamlessly blend traditional aesthetics with leading -edge technology. The Loewen Double Hung is constructed with Coastal Douglas Fir or Mahogany to create a beautiful natural wood interior. The exterior can be specified with low maintenance, extruded aluminum cladding or natural wood. All configurations present authentic details such as stile and rail aesthetics, tall bottom rail, narrow checkrail, and a hidden jamb liner. Thanks to the innovative balance system, Loewen Double Hung window open and close smoothly. A single-handed Lock/tilt mechanism allows for inward tilting of the sash for easy cleaning - or complete removal. Luxury grade hardware is standard on all Double Hung units in a variety of finishes. TO FIND YOUR NEAREST LOEWEN DEALER GO TO WWW,LOEWFN.COM OR CONTACT US AT: E-mail: Canada and U.S.A: International: info@loewen.com 1.800.563.9367 1.204.326.6446 www.Loewen.com PROGRESSIVE PERFORMANCE • Innovative balance system allows windows to open and close smoothly • Single -handed Lock/tilt mechanism allows for inward tilting of the sash for easy cleaning • Integrated structural sill block and metal nailing flange allows for enhanced moisture management and maximum protection against water infiltration • Triple glazed option for maximum energy efficiency • Thermally broken aluminum sill for improved energy efficiency SUPERIOR DESIGN • Integrated glazing Leg • Extruded aluminum cladding • Authentic stile and rail aesthetics • Hidden corner and sill keys • FULL and half -screen options • OptionaLjamb jacks for improved site installation • Removable jamb covers for serviceability • Impact tested (Liberty option) WOOD SPECIES Available in Douglas Fir or Mahogany. METAL CLAD COLOR SPECTRUM Choose from a variety of standard, architectural and custom colors. CASING AND SILL NOSINGS / SUBSILLS • Clad casing: 2" brickmould, 31/2" flat casing, Adams and Williamsburg • Clad sill nosing: standard, BC, Heritage, and MuLti-cite • Wood casing: 2" brickmould, 31h' & 51/2' flat casing, Adams and Williamsburg • Wood subsilt: Standard, BC and Heritage HARDWARE FINISHES Double Hung locks, keepers, and sash Lifts are available in Linen, bronze, sandstone, black, bright brass, antique brass, brushed chrome, satin nickel and oil rubbed bronze. GLAZING • Standard is Heat -Smart® (Low-E2j insulated glazing with Y2" (12mm) air space; upgrade to Heat -Smart® T for triple glazing • Decorative glass and custom glazing options available • Simulated Divided Lites (SDLs) available in'/i', 1 Ys" and 2" widths. Please see the Loewen Technical Guide • Standard for SDLs to have internal spacers, where possible For full details, contact your Authorized Loewen Dealer. Trademarks owned by C.P. Loewen Enterprises Ltd. Used under licenses CC.P. Loewen Enleryrises Ltd. ALL rights reserved. Information subject to change without notice. Information subject to changewitlwut notice. Distributed by Loewen Ind. in the USA and C.P. Loewen Enterprises Ltd, in Canada and internationally. Trade Marks owned by C.P. Loewen Enterprises Ltd. Used under License. ® C,P. Loewen Enterprises Ltd. AR rights reserved. Hidden jamb linar with i Traditional hand traditional Rush checkrail I with removable head and square Game edge I parting stop Luxury grade sash lifts (shown in Oil Rubbed Bronze) Luxury grade lock and keeper [shown in Antique Brass) Historic lap, bottom rail, 2' I Williamsburg casing brickmound and standard i [also available in nosing non -clad units] Double Hung, exterior view ale %4 Rerycled Paper Printed in Canada P01FAA 1216 CertainTeed Designer Shingle's 5'I n. T :�. .7%jfl #i � iltr I 0 21 Siding , Norlh Woofla" Single 7'Straight Edge Rough-Spfit Shakes in Cypress logr'am' Double G" Clapboard in Natural Clay - ReWoration-Mlillwork7-inn II'I Nalval tNhl(e LANDAMWPRO color palette Def Cnbblestone. Gray E Max Dcf Colonial Slate I Max Del Weathered Wood Max Def Mission arown m Max qef Shenandoah Max Def'Prairie Wood E Max Def Moire Black Max:l Georgetown Gray E Max Def Pewter Max Del Driftwood MA4ex �_t .ur^� Sry nn_. Max DM Hunter Green M Max Der Heather Blend 1 1 V.'#6 man son ■■■ a_ in® oil 1401 o. / k � � _0§)0\2 k \k\$)\f§7�/{k l�EE,o�E-! a..�)m;[ t,�], E;�w®t!,■;;7E �)]()(� �0 \ƒ&$J( k\N}!)2flko =;:` :%044p / �wvtg0 }CE0!«220 f){c4§ \r<,=«§]#7 kC,k�§) =§ #�!)� i2 t9c .-�■ !/($){){km E0 \))\ƒ- }} !Q{r�§§ a■0!2!|!mw �j{t%�kG\k$2/k 2f)$|;«;§§E§£( w- a`�;■_aa.�� ad N a � a 1 Z? o ° t 3 a dG E 3 e° c Q 1' a o + Qbp a V a C $ C O o = o L' C a c O a a v N� O 3 y Q o m v tv C O Q ti a yyI E '6 a C a C NO 3 N a 9 N W tm c °° 0 c. w �'' ,z w Q 3` S L41 eo v m a ° o ° a`+ a $i a N N f0 N G 3 t0 L L m a Y Y E •a w a-' d a N N 10 C C N '�i •`-''Cir m w; j E a E w a m E o m a C s O a s 0 a 3 0 9i S c u m Eo a E u m 0 N Qui ~ y N o m a V C N 10 y v �i .E m mv N c H o m a m OC „ aC9Y! tF o =O '.°a E m o w ,S E- Ey c a yy E m w tO m aCi m ° o d ° c ami Si aGG YLL� �. y r o $ IE m 46 G E mY Y a m h °' a m Y i5 '& O o c '^ i0 A 3 a o m a c1° LL m 3° m z MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 31, 2017 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Esther Baker, Gosia Clore, Sharon DeGraw, G. T. Karr, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Boyd, Zach Builta, Cecil Kuenzli, Frank Wagner STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Philip Beck, Thomas Berry-Stoelzle, Nick Lindsley; 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. Swaim thanked the Commission for coming to this extra meeting. She welcomed the newest member, G.T. Karr. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Bristow referred to the discussion in the staff report. She said there is also an applicant statement, a site inventory form, an e-mail letter sent by Swaim to the City Council, and a few additional photographs. Bristow said that in order to qualify as a local landmark, the subject property must meet approval in criteria A, B, and either C, D, E, or F or more than that. She said that A refers to significance in American and/or Iowa City, architectural, archaeology, and culture; and B: possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, and workmanship. Bristow said this property is the former Unitarian Universalist Church at 10 South Gilbert Street. She stated that the church was built in 1907 as a Tudor revival in kind of a more residential -style church architecture that was popular with the Unitarian Universalists after the turn of the century. Bristow showed the northwest view of the church. She said there is an extension that was built at the front entry to be church around 1986 that is very sympathetic to the original entry. Bristow said the windows match the existing windows and the detail at the eave is a little bit more simplified than the original but otherwise fits in well. Bristow showed the south view and showed where there was an extension that may have been built around 1954 and had a courtyard area between the church and the addition. She pointed out that it has been removed so that one can see the original architecture. Bristow said there are buttresses with stone caps, stone lintels, segmental arches above the windows, and the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 31, 2017 Page 2 of 7 triangular dormers which are a play on the eyebrow dormer that was popular in the English arts and crafts that is one of the influences for this Tudor revival style. Bristow showed the west side, pointing out the original church and the addition. She showed an interior photograph around the time of the completion of the church. Bristow said that even the area in the north gable wing is there, and it looks as though it might have been enclosed with some kind of paneled door. Bristow showed current photographs with the view from the sanctuary space into that north area. She showed where there is a basement stage area. Bristow presented the two images showing that both areas have a fireplace in them. She said that in Swaim's e-mail, Swaim discusses Eleanor Gordon and her importance to the Unitarian Universalists here in Iowa City and to the development of their style of church architecture in the West and Midwest. Bristow said that style involved many kinds of home -like touches. She said that the two fireplaces are examples of that type of residential -style architecture, making up a kind of home -like place. Bristow showed photos of the rest of the basement and a stage area. She showed the view from the sanctuary space and showed the northwest corner. Bristow said that staff finds that the church meets criterion A by virtue of the fact that it is a piece of Tudor revival architecture that is important to Iowa City and important to this area. She stated that when it was built it would have been surrounded by homes and other residential architecture. Bristow said it is important to the Unitarian Universalists because of the fact that it is part of this newer, more residential style architecture. Bristow said that the previous church was across from Iowa Book and Supply on Iowa Avenue, and it was taken down sometime in the mid 1900s. She said it was much more Gothic, with a really large tower and spire. Bristow said this new church was a departure from the old ecclesiastic architecture with the spire and these kinds of elements. She said that criterion A is met, because of the church's importance along these lines. With regard to criterion B, Bristow said that this is a building where the biggest addition has been removed. She said that a scar can be seen on the south side where it was, but one can still see the original architecture, and the other addition has blended in very well with that. Bristow said that the integrity of style here is very clear. Bristow said that research has been done on this property and on Eleanor Gordon by Professor Cynthia Tucker. Bristow said she thinks there is a possibility, with more research, that the church could actually meet criterion D, associated with lives of persons significant in our past. She said that is kind of a high threshold to meet, as it has to be a person who is very significant to our history or culture. Bristow said staff believes it might be possible with further research. Bristow said staff definitely feels that this building meets the requirements of criterion E: high artistic value, showing the methods of construction, and the integrity of architecture. She said this is something that really stands out as evident of the historic architecture that is seen in this building. Bristow said staff finds that this meets both criteria A and B, as required, and criterion E as well. She said staff recommends that the Commission consider this as a local Iowa City landmark. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 31, 2017 Page 3 of 7 Swaim explained the procedures for the public hearing. Lindsley said he works for Neumann Monson Architects and was at the meeting to represent Jesse Allen. Lindsley said his company is very excited at the opportunity to save this building. He said the building is very important to the history of Iowa City and is an integral part of how the development agreement for this building works. Lindsley said that in order for this to pass City Council, the building needs to be saved with historic landmark status. He said that was part of the basic agreement on which the City Council has voted. Lindsley said that to get the whole TIF agreement to go through, along with the rezoning and development of this property, they need to make sure this is preserved. He said that if this building is not preserved, the project may not move forward, and it puts the building in jeopardy as well. Beck said that he is a member of the Unitarian Universalist Society, although he was not at the meeting to represent the group but was speaking only for himself. He said that this church is very, very important. Beck said the church is important historically to Iowa City for all the reasons outlined by Bristow, and he urged the Commission to grant historic landmark status to the church. He said the church is a beautiful part of old downtown Iowa City that should be preserved, along with all the new that is going up. Trimble said she represents Friends of Historic Preservation. She stated that this church is very significant as part of a larger movement in Iowa City. Trimble said that some of the first settlers in Iowa City were Unitarians, which was unusual at the time, but probably led a lot into how Iowa City has always been a forward -thinking and progressive community. Trimble said that along with that, this church hosted some of the first women pastors in the country. She said it has also been a place for community meetings in the past. Trimble said the architecture of the church represents the time when the Unitarian Universalists really decided that they were going to be more of a community than a church. She said that is why this looks like a house. Trimble said the architecture of this particular building reflects the fact that the Unitarians meet on an equal basis. Trimble said that a lot of people worked really hard on the actual development. She said it is one of those unique opportunities in which everybody wins. Trimble said that in this case, a historic church will be saved, the parking lot will become apartments and townhouses, and affordable housing, although not on this site, will become available. She said that this project represents a lot of good things that have happened because of people taking the time to listen and because of the developer being so open and receptive to different ideas. MOTION: Agran moved to approve the designation of 10 South Gilbert Street, the former Unitarian Universalist Church, as an Iowa City Historic Landmark based on criteria a, b, and a for local designation. Michaud seconded the motion. Baker said it is clear that the Commission members agree with the comments from the public that this is a very worthwhile project. Michaud said that as far as significant contributions to broad patterns of our history, Unitarians have been very active, probably from the very beginning at this location if not from 1849 when their first church was downtown. She said the Unitarians have always promoted liberal thought HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 31, 2017 Page 4 of 7 and movement at least as far back as Suffrage for women, World War II, civil rights, GLBTQ, and immigrant rights. Michaud said they have been active in all of those things. Swaim said she is very pleased that this is making its way along to clearly being preserved. She said the Commission has been urging this since early 2015 if not before. Swaim said the Commission is grateful that the developer and the City have come together to try to preserve this building, and it looks like it will be happening. Swaim said it is also important that this be saved, because downtown churches in any community are often threatened by a congregation that wants a larger space, both interior and exterior. She said this is an example of a community coming together and saving a downtown church, even though the congregation has outgrown it. Swaim said she is glad the building will continue to be a part of the community. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Boyd, Builta. Kuenzli. and Wapner absent). Miklo said this item will come before the Planning and Zoning Commission on Thursday at 7 p.m. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 503 Melrose Avenue. Bristow said this is a local and National Register landmark property. She said it is the A.W. Pratt House. Bristow stated that the house is basically Italianate. She showed the original house and a pre- 1907 addition. Bristow said there is a one-story addition on the side, and in the back there is a sun room and exterior staircase leading from an upper porch to the ground. She said the columns have been replaced, but this is not the original porch. Bristow said there was an earlier, smaller porch on the house before the early addition was put on. Bristow stated that this application is to remove two windows in the basement of the early addition. She showed the location of the windows, saying that they have a flat lintel. Bristow said the area is only partially excavated, as it is kind of a crawl space with a dirt floor under the addition. She said there is a full basement under the original part of the house. Bristow said that because of some grading issues that can be partially but not fully changed and the heavy infiltration of water coming in where the windows are, the applicant is requesting to remove those two windows and replace them with brick. She said there is brick on the site that matches other brick on the house, and it would be recessed just slightly so that the location of those windows would always show. Bristow showed a photograph of the flat lintel. She also showed another one and said that it is an example of one of the lintels on the back of the original part of the house that has segmental arches. Bristow said that the two in the addition do not. She said this therefore is not the removal of something that works in the same language as the original house, it will not be very visible, there is matching brick available, there is a water problem, and there is not access to this part of the house from the inside. Bristow said staff finds it acceptable to remove the windows on the front part of the addition and recommends approval. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 31, 2017 Page 5 of 7 MOTION: Baker moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 503 Melrose Avenue as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Boyd, Buiita, Kuenzli, and Wapner absent). 1016 East College Street Bristow said this is the house that was presumably built and occupied by F. X. Freyder. Bristow said he was a mill owner, builder, and local architect. She said this house is currently the only key, contributing house in the East College Street Historic District. Bristow stated that this is a very complicated house, and the roofline is extremely complicated. She said it is a story and one-half. Bristow said it has a main hip roof, three projecting gables, and a variety of dormers. Bristow showed the front view with the wide porch and showed each side view, pointing out the dormers. She showed the northwest comer, the back of the house, and the third projecting gable. Bristow said the Commission approved a kitchen remodel that added the single -story space and the rear entry addition. Bristow said the current application is to basically add a second story on top of the laundry room space. She said it is complicated in that it would add an additional type of roofline, a shed roof, to a house that already has gables, a hip, and dormers. Bristow said that in order to get the correct head height to get into the new space, the shed roof addition compromised the side of the special dormer on the west. She said that because of the importance of this property and how complicated it is, staff worked further on coming up with some alternative ideas. Bristow said that the original plan was to allow access through an existing closet to create a bathroom. She showed the side of the dormer and where this would tie into it. Bristow said that they did not move forward with the original plan, because they did not want to compromise that dormer or add an additional type of roofline. Bristow said the next idea was to add another gable. She showed how it would look but said they could not really come up with an architectural way for the hip and the gable to meet. Bristow said the owner then came up with the idea of reducing the scope to just adding a dormer. She said this would turn the closet itself into the bathroom space. Bristow said it proved to be successful. She said they can meet the horizontal lines of the other dormers and can match the same roof slope as the other dormers. Bristow said the windows can be the same size as windows in the other dormers. Bristow said this is not adding a dormer to the front of the house, so it will not disturb the view from the street in any way. She said this dormer would fit within the language of the house. Bristow stated that all of the siding, the rooflines, and the material would match. She said the windows would match what was done in the earlier additions on the first floor - the kitchen additions. Bristow said that because of the fact that the west windows are looking directly into an apartment building and this house does have a really nice view into its own back yard and carriage house, the owner has requested adding a window on the side of the dormer. She said HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July31, 2017 Page 6 of 7 this is a little bit unusual. Bristow said the dormer itself has windows on the angles and the face. She said the house itself has some language of oddity to it. Bristow said the dormer in the front corner could not even be modeled, because it couldn't really be measured easily by staff. She said that the way that it meets with the roof is very unique. Bristow said staff therefore finds that actually adding the window to the side of the dormer on this, since it is completely on the back and won't be visible even from the alley and because of the uniqueness of many of the things going on with the house, to be acceptable. Swaim said this house is unique and a challenge and thanked the owner and contractor for working with staff to make this work out. Berry-Stoelzle, one of the owners of the house, said that this whole project has been a great learning experience. He said what they really wanted is one additional bathroom, and that is how the project got started. Berry-Stoelzle thanked Bristow for the time and effort spent to help them with this project. Baker stated that Berry-Stoelzle and his wife are her neighbors. She said that other than sending them to talk to Bristow, she did not have any impact or influence on this project. Agran asked if the window that is going in will have a diagonal, lower sash. Bristow said that at this point, they will figure out what kind of custom thing can be done. She said that if there could be something operable, that would be wonderful, but she did not know if it would be possible. Bristow said that basically it would be a square with the bottom stile at an angle instead, so it would still have four sides. Agran said that there are other houses around town that have those moments where they have unusual spots that get filled in with some kind of leaded window. He said that there does seem to be a degree of precedent for this. MOTION: Agran moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1016 East College Street, as presented in the staff report. DeGraw seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Bond, Builta, Kuenzli, and Wanner absent). CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 15. 2017: Swaim asked if, on page three for the 1322 Muscatine Avenue paragraph, Bristow could clarify the first sentence. Bristow said she could clarify it to read, "the very last Moffitt cottage next to the bridge at Court Street in the small district along Muscatine." MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's June 15, 2017 meeting, as amended with the clarification on the Moffitt house project. Agran seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Boyd. Builta, Kuenzli and Wagner absent). COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Miklo said the next meeting will be held as regularly scheduled. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:03 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte n x x x x x x x I � I x x x x x x 1 X x x x x x x x I x x x M l x X x X X I p X X X W M 'p X X x x I X x X X N X X X X Q x I X x X X N x X X X X I x X { O X x o x x x I x x o X x o x x x x I x x x x WO' c X x x x p I X X X 6 °0 x X x x x x I x x x x rn Wo` x I XIXIo I X Q x x f x. I x X x i x x X X � O N O] O W W O W W W CO a N F W n n n n r- � h ti n � n Q O W W he x a = Z y F: V J z > ¢ y 4 W Y t9 v! 0 V G e= ¢ c a w Z OF w g O J O e( 0.' Z Q ED CDV m W Y y w Y