Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-01-04 Info Packet I r 1 wo®�W MI � City Council Information Packet CITY OF IOWA CITY January 4, 2024 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Miscellaneous IP2. Memo from City Clerk: Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Items for January 22 IP3. Building Statistics: December 2023 Draft Minutes IP4. Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: December 7 IPS. Historic Preservation Commission: December 14 IP6. Senior Center Commission: December 21 January 4, 2024 City of Iowa City Item Number: IP1. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Attachments: Council Tentative Meeting Schedule City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule nil Subject to change CITY OF IOWA CITY January 4,2024 Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday,January 16,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Saturday,January 20,2024 8:00 AM Budget Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E.Washington Street Monday,January 22,2024 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting City Hall,Council Chambers Hosted by the City of Coralville 1512 7th Street Wednesday,January 24,2024 2:00 PM Budget Work Session(CIP) City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, February 6,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, February 20,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, March 19,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,April 2,2024 4:00 PM Special Formal Meeting City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session 410 E.Washington Street 6:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday,April 16,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, May 7,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, May 21,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,June 4,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,June 18,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,July 16,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,August 6,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,August 20,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,September 3,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,September 17,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,October 1,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday,October 15,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Monday, November 4,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, November 19,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Tuesday, December 10,2024 4:00 PM Work Session City Hall,Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 PM Formal Meeting 410 E.Washington Street Item Number: IP2. CITY OF OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Memo from City Clerk: Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Items for January 22 Attachments: Memo from City Clerk: Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Items for January 22 r - ., -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY za MEMORANDUM Date: January 4, 2024 To: Mayor and City Council From: Kellie Grace, City Clerk Re: Joint Entities Meeting Agenda Items for January 22 The next joint meeting with City Councils of Johnson County municipalities, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, the Iowa City School District and neighboring school districts will be held on Monday, January 22, 2024. The meeting will be hosted by the City of Coralville. Please come prepared to discuss agenda items you would like to include on that agenda at the next Council work session on January 16th. A complete agenda and meeting date confirmation will be available in your packet preceding the January 22nd joint meeting. Item Number: IP3. CITY OF OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Building Statistics: December 2023 Attachments: Building Statistics: December 2023 8 �•��0�000$� 0����8C���� ��m� Fn Eo Sm 'gym e � Z O^OHO O�OOOgYYo oho OHO OHO O�Omm Ng^OHO ORO Om 8 L o � 8 � � 8"mO�000mO00m�m�����mN8��0 �0`N°" m� Ny°'2o208' m8 F �> 5;22-20mm 0 5;O O5;0 �2 R $ �R�mmmOgNNOmmmmm�8�y�o`'°m� m�8� �: uRLL s _ > y U U R ' m a > 0 O ._ a v = � _; 0gEoEj Ea cu E;a=q Ea EQ Ep E.�EEE i E °EpE _hx °dm� Edm�SdUdOdLdKdUnch doQd �K ° _ ° "`° E`°`o`o i` `N`5 45 d`O-y`O-y`O m 'a 15 8'8'i 1.2'E'—E'—;OA EE"o E"o E"o E"o ? EEEEEEEEEE.� E � EE E EE EE EE'N Ep�p� 72Z2Z ZZ Z Z ZZ Z Z Z Z2 ZN Z'�Z K Z KZKZ KZKZFF | ! ; 22 ! ) ; ; 0 1 ; \ ) 2 / \ \ \ \ _ \ \ \ | ( « § § ) � ( \ ) E � ƒ ( \ } � � ! « » ± cc \ ( 2 21 \ . \ _ \ } { \ \ } }\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o }} \ \ \\ \ \}} \ \ \ \ \ \ \{ o \\ \ \ \ \ \\ } t \ \ } } P \ \ } \ } \ \ \ \ \ \ ) \ \ \ ) } } } } \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \\ \ }E ! ! / ! ! \ f \ \ § \ \ \ ` \ \ ) \ ( } \ ) Item Number: IP4. CITY OF OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: December 7 Attachments: Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: December 7 December 7,2023 Draft Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Minutes Emma J. Harvat Hall,City Hall Commissioners present: Chastity Dillard, Louis Tassinary,Chad Simmons, Clif Johnson, Wangui Gathua. Commissioners not present: Sikowis Nobiss, Eric Harris, Marie Krebs, Lauren Merritt. Staff present: Redmond Jones, Stefanie Bowers. Meeting called to order: 7:04 PM. Reading of Land Acknowledgement: Tassinary read the Land Acknowledgement. Approval of minutes from the November 9 & 16,2023 meeting: Dillard moved, and Tassinary seconded. The motion passed 5-0. Next steps for Phase 2 and update on fact-finding by Kearns and West: The Commission agreed that taking a deep dive into Phase 2 and fact-fording makes the most sense. The categories for fact-finding are public safety/policing/law enforcement, naminglmemorializationlremembrances, economic development, health, environmental justice, education,and other. Commissioners briefly defined what is intended by economic development —job training and assistance and other opportunities that would assist communities in being successful. Amos Kiche suggested that the TRC develop a process for handling topics that are not on the current list or items marked 'other". Discussion on the TRC model presented by Commissioner Simmons: Simmons would like to see the TRC host an MLK Breakfast on January 15. Dillard suggested building upon existing events being held in honor of MLK.The Commission opted to participate in the MLK Day of Service,which is being held at Mercer Aquatic Center and sponsored by the City. They hope to participate meaningfully, including a listening post for community members to meet with TRC members. Additional outreach opportunities include hosting an event at ICOR Boxing in February. The Commission also noted that Phase 2 is supposed to be a model and that it would be beneficial for them to have a detailed plan from the facilitators on what this plan would entail. It was agreed that the facilitators would present a draft roadmap of Phase 2 for the Commission at its January 4 meeting date.Facilitators pointed out that the resolution creating the Commission is a good source for the roadmap. Commissioners inquired into their current financial status. Staff provided an update: the Commission can roll over funds not utilized in Phase 1 and add that to the $14,000 set aside for Phase 2. Simmons moved that the TRC allocate$5000 for the upcoming MLK Day of Service, Tassinary seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0-1, with Gathua abstaining. I It was requested of staff to order the TRC a table cover,t-shirts, and to create a brochure. Discussion on whether to hold a meeting on December 21: A quorum of members is available to meet on the 21st but would prefer to cancel the meeting.Tassinary motioned to cancel the second December meeting date and Gathua seconded.The motion passed 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:52 PM. To view the recording or listen to the audio of this meeting,visit this link. 2 r ev a a. d a, d d d o- Q- m R d d 0. 0. P.. 6. 0. 0. T o. d d n, d a, d n. n. N c y a d o. a. d a a N N o a a. d d a. a, d a a. i..r � � � O p„ 0. d 6, 0. P+ 0. 6, 0 Za' � a. o. ¢ d a a ¢ a a, d0.. F (,) a a N R S 0. d d 0. 6. 6. 0. R 0. UWN Ca zzd �� � � A W � � a. a. d a. a c. a. a, d CG W � � °� Ems., o � eC,' r GC E� v, LI w a a d a. a s a ,x A `� b a. a d a, a a d � � e � � �, a. a a a, a a a. � I L � a d li li rs d a y N N N N N N N N N W ,.X_,� M M M M l M .� n �-. N N N M M M N N N N N N W x W _ � ,. d 9 � y O +_+ y O `d � y C z = � 'W = � a E •h 'c V x � Y � z 'v', [= Item Number: IP5. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission: December 14 Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission: December 14 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 -5:30 PM— FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret Beck, Carl Brown, Andrew Lewis, Jordan Sellergren, Noah Stork, Deanna Thomann, Nicole Villanueva, Frank Wagner, Christina Welu-Reynolds MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Barry Westerneyer, Laura Hansen CALL TO ORDER: Sellergren called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: HPC23-0074: 738 Oakland Avenue - Longfellow Historic District (basement egress window and window well): Bristow began the staff report stating this property is in the Longfellow Historic District and is a foursquare house. The project is to put in a basement egress window. Bristow explained the reason it's not a staff approvable project is because of the location of the egress window, normally it would need to be towards the back of the house or on the back of the house however, they have proposed that the egress window would go towards the front of the house on the south side because that's where they're putting the bedroom in the basement. There is an existing window there hidden by a shrub. The applicants would install what is typically recommended, a casement window that on the top would look like the existing basement windows, it will have a muntin bar across the middle so that it looks like a double hung window from the outside, and additionally the window well will be a material that matches the foundation, which in this case is a stucco coated foundation. The guidelines state if new window wells are required the materials used must appear similar to the existing foundation, to add windows that match the type, size and sash with trim, use of divided lights and overall appearance of the existing windows. Bristow noted here they are just replacing an existing window and will be keeping the window opening the same width and the head of the window will remain at the same location as the existing head, they're just dropping the sill of that window to make it an accessible sized opening. Staff's recommended motion for this project is to approve the certificate of appropriateness as presented in the staff report with the following condition, that the window sashes are black. Bristow explained that is something that staff recommends anytime they're using a metal clad window since it's not as easily paintable as wood. In this case, the existing sashes are black as well but the window that they presented was white aluminum so staff would recommend that condition is met. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 2 of 17 MOTION Wagner moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness at 738 Oakland Avenue as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: The window sashes are black. Stork second the motion. Sellergren noted she has seen on other houses an egress window where there is a galvanized steel dome that is set into the ground, is that how this would be. Bristow explained that's the portion of the guidelines that states it is required that the window well matches the foundation so they would not approve a galvanized steel window well, it could be either poured concrete or concrete block in this case because it would be coated in stucco to match the foundation. Lewis asked for clarification on the statement if a casement window is used here instead of a double hung window. Bristow explained it's because an egress window has to have a certain dimension of opening for accessibility and usually unless it's a very large double hung window, it won't provide that size. A casement window when it opens fully can provide that size space as well so it's very typical to also approve a casement window and add the muntin bars so that from the outside it appears like a double hung window. Obviously, when it's open it will look like a casement. Wagner noted if it's 5.75 square feet of opening as the minimum, is there still a portion under the ground or below the soil level. Bristow confirmed there is and that's why the window well will be required. The windowsill will drop below the ground in order to have enough space to get the right size casement window installed and the reason the window well is required is to hold back the ground. She added the window well has required dimensions as well. She also noted since it's holding back the earth and would collect water it is best if they put a drainpipe in it as well, that is something that isn't always done. A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 9-0. HPC23-0002: 811 East College Street - College Green Historic District (mini-split installation) Bristow stated this property is a key property in the College Green Historic District, it has always been considered individually eligible for the National Register or for local landmark status. It is the historic Rohrbacher Sanitarium and was built in 1927. Dr. Rohrbacher had another large house on that property that he used for a long time and then he built this building, and that house was dismantled with quite a few trim details and other elements of that house used in this building. She showed images noting it went through a major rehab by Mark McCallum quite a few years ago and is now apartments. It does have a building in the rear that used to be a garage and/or carriage house. It also had a large boiler for the property that was remote in the garage. This project is the installation of mini splits for air conditioning and since mini splits require a mechanical permit it therefore requires a historic review. Bristow noted this project was completed in the past and she was notified by several members of the public that it had been done without a permit. Bristow showed an image from Google in 2022 that shows some of the piping from the mini splits that sit on the roof. The piping then travels down the face of the building, one enters in the decorative lintel above a window, another penetrates right through the decorative arch above another window. The roof has big scuppers that take the water and channel it into downspouts located on the far east side of the building likely because the builders of the building considered that the less public side, and that's where the parking is as well. Bristow stated when this project was reported to the City, they reached out to the owner, in July 2022. They tried to contact them about several things and in the meantime, they had another project on another building that they worked through and all the time trying to communicate about this building. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 3 of 17 Finally on January 6, 2023, the owners submitted an application for the project and staff provided a comment about the fact that this piping did impact the historic character of the building but didn't get any response. Staff had been working specifically with one of the owners, but in July 2023 they reached out and said that it was the other owner who was the person in charge. Staff wrote to that owner and did not receive a response. With then approach o the end of the year, staff decided they needed to get the project reviewed. Staff reached out to the owner again and stated it would be put on the agenda. The owner responded by providing a letter that stated the need for the mini split system was to remove the exterior air conditioning units, which getting rid of those would help to not damage the building. Bristow stated there was never any question about whether or not something like this could be done, it's just that staff would have worked with them to make sure that the location of the piping was appropriate. For instance, there is a house in Manville Heights, a local landmark, but before it was landmark the owner installed mini splits for the whole house and there's absolutely no exterior piping on that project, all of the mini splits are located in a place where they ran the piping down through chases they made in the backs of closets and some soffits to run it horizontally through the house. Typically, in a project like this, if the owner had reached out, staff would work with them and their HVAC contractor to come up with a plan of how to do this work. Staff's recommendation would be that piping that's exposed on the exterior should not be located on the front face of the building and it should never penetrate any architectural details.Additionally, it should always be painted to blend with the building and if the units were visible they would need to be screened as well. Bristow stated the guidelines do not talk about piping per se so this is one of those areas where they look to the Secretary of Interior standards and there are four standards that are related to this. The first standard that applies to this is Standard 2, the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved and the removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. She stated this standard enforces they should not put piping through important details because they should avoid altering those aspects of the building. Next is Standard 5, distinctive features, finishes and construction techniques are examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property and shall be preserved. This is a similar sentiment as the first standard. Third is Standard 9 which states new additions, including piping, exterior alterations or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. And finally Standard 10 is new additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Bristow also noted this type of installation project is similar to radon mitigation systems which have been approved for staff review so they don't need to come to the Commission and are approved through staff review if they meet specific conditions. The conditions for radon mitigation installation that could be considered a template for reviewing the installation of mini-splits include the fact that the system is on a non-street facing elevation and located on the rear of the property if possible and the exposed PVC pipe is painted to match the structure. Staffs recommendation is that any piping on the north wall of the building and each side of the front projecting bay is relocated, any additional piping is painted to blend with the building behind, and any damage to the brick building caused by the project is repaired with matching brick and mortar so that isn't it is not visible. Bristow stated the initial recommendation from staff was to put it through the roof and run it straight down through a chase, but the owner stated both their HVAC installer and their roofer don't think that's a viable option. Staff would then suggest an alternate option to go in the eastside (or south side) and go laterally through the building using chases or soffits. This does require work and they must then finish that wall or ceiling, however, this does preserve the exterior of the building. If this Commission were to approve the recommendation as staff has stated it, that would involve the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 4 of 17 owner working with staff on this, which they have not worked with staff in any way on this project whatsoever to this point, but that would be a requirement. The alternative would be if the Commission felt that it was appropriate to just leave them painted as they are they could decide to approve that as well. Lewis asked if the paint currently matches the brick color because it looks like a different color so what is the actual distinction between matching and non-matching. Bristow acknowledged brick does have a depth of color and some variation in color so it can be difficult to match as well. Barry Westemever stated he and his wife both own this property together; he is the owner, the secondary owner that was referred. He acknowledges ignorance is no way to work through this, but they were working hard to restore this building and he wanted to give the Commission some background. First when they bought the building every spring and every fall he installed and uninstalled 15 window units that mounted to custom made storm windows that were basically destroying those storm windows. Also the effervescence or the condensation was running off which required them to re-tuck point that building and ended up spending close to $15,000 from the damage. Westemeyer stated they were working with a credible local contractor, and just basically went at it from the front side. The contractor had no idea and was a little mystified because he did not know if needed to be permitted but they did end up getting it permitted and paid that substantial fee of 1000s of dollars. Westemeyer has been trying to backwards engineer this to a certain extent, their HVAC guy said he would never go through the roof and a roofing contractor said that is not an option and voids the warranty of that roof. The roof is complex, it's not necessarily a flat roof, but there's some interesting trusses and how water moves to the scuppers on the east side. He thought it was most viable because they were getting the cartridges on the inside to bedrooms or living rooms, and that's where they were removing window units from as well. Westemeyer admitted he didn't know the fine details of the historic benefits that are derived and had to be concisely followed. They were just looking at it from the standpoint of not only the window air conditioners but the boiler that was contained in the basement of the carriage house was no longer viable because it was a steam system and was damaging the main building from steam hammers, water hammers, losing plaster, and they had all sorts of issues based upon that unit. Westemeyer stated they were in a bit of a time crunch to get this resolved because they were not going to have that boiler unit for the winter of 2022-23. Regarding the color, they matched the original color of the downspouts, that's the assumption they made with the color. From an ownership standpoint, he just wanted to interject that his wife and he have owned this building for over a decade now and continue to make improvements, they want that building to be the best building that it can be. Yes, it's a rental property but they try very hard to attract good tenants, they have several retirees, they have young professionals, and they have grad students, they try to avoid undergrads. They have quiet hours after 11 o'clock in that building and one of their tenants is a master gardener so great pride is taken on the grounds of that building. None of the work was done cheap, it's a building that they take a lot of pride and put a lot of work into. He is there four or five days a week doing work for tenants, yard work, maintenance and things like that so it's not an absentee landlord situation either. Westemeyer stated they live here locally, and he's been in business here since 1996. Sellergren acknowledged it's a gorgeous structure, and thanked Westemeyer for maintaining it and asked when they did decide to do the HVAC system this newer way was there any discussion about putting pipes through the roof. Westemeyer stated their HVAC contractor referred them to the person that did the roof and he said the roof warranty would be voided because it's very interesting how the roof is constructed, it's not a true flat roof, it has a membrane over the top of it and also has closed cell foam with a coating over the top of that. So to be able to get through that, it's almost like there's a mini truss system up there that moves the water in and ramps it to the scuppers on the east side, so coming through the roof was going to be very complex and almost undoable based upon their opinions. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 5 of 17 Beck asked if there is a way to adjust this so that it would meet the guidelines for approval, per Westemeyer's description of what they've tried and what seems to be unfeasible, is it is it possible for him to meet the guidelines. Westemeyer stated it would be unfeasible, to go back and redo the line sets that go into each cartridge into the bedrooms, they would have to be torn off the front, torn off that the bay portion on the west side, and have to be rerouted back over the back side or the east side. Additionally, on the inside standpoint, it's not like there are exact apartments stacked one on another, every apartment is different so to be able to move through those spaces and find places in closets, there's some of the places that the closets are half the size of this podium, so then to be able to hang cartridges in the proper space, to both air condition and heat those spaces would be a challenge. That's why they were placed where they were placed for optimization. Westemeyer stated also he's had this discussion about a retro standpoint with his HVAC contractor and the cost was a consideration as well, by the time that system was put in and wired and everything it was a six figure system, it was not inexpensively done. Lewis asked about specific guidelines for mini splits. Bristow reiterated they don't have specific guidelines for those and instead follow the Secretary of the Interior standards. Lewis asked again what the staff recommendation was regarding relocating the piping. Bristow stated the staff recommendation would remove the piping from at least those locations where it penetrates architectural details, so to either come in on the south, east or the west side. If they can't travel the pipes vertically then it would be a matter of making a soffit and traveling horizontally at the roof level, or the ceiling level in each floor. Sellergren asked to what degree Historic Preservation staff would be able to provide guidance. Westemeyer started with his contractor, and he had no idea that it had to be a permitted job. This contractor does a lot of work in Iowa City and it's the first time that he has ever had to permit a mini split system and he's never had an issue since. Westemeyer acknowledged obviously the ball was dropped, but it wasn't an intention to mislead, and he has been trying to figure out options and running into dead ends because if they start pulling all these line sets it's seasonal sensitive and these people will be without their heat and/or their air conditioning for a substantial time, the install was probably over two months. Then trying to find ways to come back into the building, going through other people's apartments to get to those front apartments. Bristow noted in 2016 the sorority on the corner of Burlington and Dodge were going to put in this kind of system and that contractor knew that these do require permits across the City always. With that project that contractor did reach out to staff and they worked with them about where they would go on the outside, where the piping would run, and reviewed the location of the things on the inside to verify locations of piping on the outside. She explained that's why staff has architectural training, to be able to work through things like this. Obviously, the owner would be in that conversation but that's the kind of project where staff would typically work with the contractor. Contractors who do this type of work often want to do it in the easiest way possible, because that's easiest for everyone, but that's not always the most appropriate installation and it is common for things like this to be worked through. Bristow stated they have to hide the piping and it can be done in some way. No, they're not going to require that they do it in the middle of winter, or in the hottest part of the summer, staff will work with owners on these types of projects to come up with a solution that works for everyone but also preserves the historic character of the building. Stork had a general question and remark about the damage that was done from the window units and the effort to have those there and remove them, it just seems like the obvious solution is the mini split and the piping but where does it go and how to they make it work and preserve the aesthetics of the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 6 of 17 building. It is a balance of pros and cons but was Westemeyer and his wife happy with the aesthetics of the white pipe. Westemeyer replied no, the intention was always to paint them. Regarding the window units, there were no window units in 1927, but were needed in later years and when they're hanging window units for six months out of the year, they're changing the look of that building, aesthetically, and it doesn't look like it was when it was built. Sellergren noted but that's not permanent. Westemeyer agreed but stated it's still there for six months out of the year and it caused gradual permanent damage. Sellergren asked if Westemeyer would be open to the idea of working with staff to approach these one by one and find the best possible solutions. Westemeyer stated looking at it from the standpoint of a sorority house, it's empty for three months out of the year, and over Christmas break, they have tenants in there full time and their tenants are their customers. Thomann noted Westemeyer stated they've had the property for 10 years, when they bought it did they know that it was in a historic district. Westemeyer confirmed he knew but didn't know the guidelines and the boundaries. They own other properties in town, but this was their first in a historic district and first older building. There's been a lot of learning on the run with this particular property but again they take a lot of pride and have done a lot of work there. Thomann asked since they've owned this property, or others, have they had to go through the historic preservation review for other items. Westemeyer replied when they replaced a set of stairs on the back he did work with City staff, but again it was also something that required special timing because the tenants weren't going to be able to get into their apartments, and they had to make a change. Lewis noted when they've had situations where this has happened, where something has been done and doesn't match the guidelines, the recommended motion is to say go back and make those changes to make it be what the Commission would have approved to begin with correct. Bristow replied the directive is whether the work is done or not the Commission always reviews as if it this is a proposal. Just because the work is done, it was done without the proper review, and doesn't matter in the Commission's review of it, they need to review it as a proposal. Sellergren stated in her opinion she feels like this is a situation where some kind of compromise needs to be reached, there needs to be some kind of alterations made to what is currently there and that will require working with staff. Bristow reiterated there's a motion that's recommended but the Commission can also approve keeping them as they are, painted, or they could make it less relocating as well, maybe relocate some, not all, it's the Commission's purview to determine what the motion is and what they want to approve. Lewis asked if they approve this motion and there is a situation where they can't move one of the lines, do they just work with staff on solutions. Bristow confirmed yes, staff will work through it with the owner and if they can't find a way to remove it they would come back to the Commission because then the alternative would be to remove that unit completely. Staff has recommended everything on the north face, plus both sides of that front north bump out be moved, if the Commission wants to do less than that, then they should state which ones they want relocated individually. Westemeyer asked if the Commission makes that suggestion, and it can be passed, but then all of a sudden a whole new set of problems evolve because once again they are going through other people's apartments to make it to those front one, what will happen. Sellergren stated they are the owner and the steward of a historic building that's in a historic district and so that is their job as the owner of the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 7 of 17 building to preserve the integrity of the historic building. Westemeyer responded that his job first and foremost is to preserve the integrity of the building to serve his customers and the fact that he is the steward of a historic building in a historic district he understands that goes hand in hand but doesn't think its his first job now. However, if he were to neglect that building, and let it fall to dust, that would not be a very good steward. Sellergren noted communication with historic preservation staff from the beginning of the project probably is what would have been ideal but at this point it seems like it would be a good idea to open up the discussion and move forward from there. MOTION: Brown moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 811 East College Street as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: Piping on the north wall of the building and each side of the front projecting bays is relocated. • All additional piping is painted to blend with the building behind. • Any damage to the brick building caused by the project is repaired with matching brick and mortar so that is not visible. Beck seconded the motion. Beck asked about the first bullet and the relocations, that's just looking at the options it doesn't necessarily mean to go through the roof correct, they may be able to route another way. Brown stated if they were able to mentally back up to the start of the project staff would have looked at various ways to approach it and come up with options to see what works and what doesn't. It might be that every apartment except for one can have HVAC if they follow all the guidelines and so they would have approved it with an exception for the one that doesn't exactly fallow the guidelines. If a property owner goes forward with a project without following the proper process, then they should be required to go back and follow the proper process. He understands then from all the different bullets of the motion they are saying let's go back and think through what process should have been followed, there may be some pipes that can't be moved. Thomann stated the Commission could just call out the pipes they feel must be moved. Bristow confirmed they could. Brown noted if they can't be moved it's because had they done the process this way from the beginning, this would be where they would have landed and would have made an exception. Bristow stated if the Commission approves this motion staff would have to work with their HVAC person to determine alternative routes for those included in the motion and then that's where it would come back to the Commission if there's one that's unique and needs revisiting. Stork wants to challenge the Commission to really ask themselves if this does ruin the spirit of the historic architecture of the building and make sure that this is such an egregious act against the historic character of the building that they can't allow it to stay as is. Sellergren stated egregious seems like a strong word, she feels they just go back to the guidelines and the guidelines say these shouldn't be there and had this come through the Commission first what would the recommended action be. Stork acknowledged the fact that this didn't come to them he is more curious why they have contractors HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 8 of 17 working in the City that claim they didn't know that this is a permit thing. On a side note, this is the third meeting in a row where they've heard tales of contractors. Bristow stated that is definitely something they should be letting the building inspectors know that they have a group of contractors who think they don't need permits. Anytime HVAC is done, a permit is required. Stork stated his only concern with the idea of is this egregious enough that they would object to it and then essentially all it takes is for a contractor to claim that they don't know something and then it's up to the Commission to always decide which of these things that didn't follow the guidelines are egregious, that's the part that he doesn't like about it. Brown agrees but really wants to try to encourage property owners and homeowners to work with the Commission, get the word out there on the streets that they're not this fearsome group that's going to be saying no to everything. Lewis noted yes, they have guidelines, but they've given a number of exceptions to things, for instance, the egress window, because they understand the costs of things and tend to be relatively lenient. Bristow noted they did have multiple complaints about this installation as well from the general public. Sellergren noted it seems like they just need more information if they're going to allow for an exception or not and what are the options. If staff and the contractors went through the conversation and tried to find a compromise but found there was no other way to move these pipes would this suggestion be to get rid of them completely. Bristow stated she doesn't know the plans of this building and hasn't been inside it so for her to make suggestions of things to happen she would need to know more information about the building. Sellergren stated it would be nice if there weren't a pipe coming straight out of one of the more prominent window arches but at this point staff needs to go in, work with the HVAC contractor, take a look and figure out what's possible and go from there. A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 8-1 (Stork dissenting). HPC23-0056: 610 North Johnson Street- Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (porch reconstruction) deferred from November 9 meeting and staff report revised: Bristow stated this home is in the GoosetowntHorace Mann Conservation District and she had a little bit more time to explore the history of this building than what was shared in the November staff report. This building used to be where Mercy Hospital built the pedestrian drop off on Market Street, right under or right west of the skywalk that is there now. It was moved by Max Yocum in 1967 to this current location. Before it was moved it had a full width front porch and a little open porch on the back. When the house was moved the porch was truncated and the little porch on the back was not reinstalled. She noted this was another project that was done without a permit and what ended up happening is that they applied for a permit on the same day they started demo and it was reported to her by a member of the public again that it was being done. Bristow reached out to the building inspector at that time. They've received a citation and they're currently going to court, she believes there's a court date next week. Within one week that work was done so staff was never given any opportunity to review the work. The owner has stated that it was an emergency and a life safety issue however the building inspectors and the building department are the ones who determine if a property HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 9 of 17 is a life safety issue and they are the ones who will instruct an owner how to make a property safe for occupants. That is already something set up within the City, it does not fall on the owner to determine if it's a life safety issue and that they should therefore do work without a permit. The building inspectors would have made that determination and helped the property owner make the situation safe. Additionally, generally life safety is not something, especially with this project, that would preclude the idea of going through historic review. Staff communicated with them several weeks later and provided them with some options and it was at that point when she knew it would be coming to the Commission for the project approval. Bristow noted they have had two members of the public reach out and email, she will read those to the Commission later as they were received after the agenda has been published. The project was the reconstruction of the entire porch floor area, Bristow showed pictures of some of the deterioration and noted this porch is different from most because there is a part of the basement that extends out under the porch and it doesn't have typical piers. She pointed out some rotting in the corner, a little bit across the front, and a lot on the outer corner. Sellergren asked if the safety issue was one could fall into the basement. Bristow replied that is the building inspector's purview, not hers and not necessarily the owners. They replaced several elements of the porch floor structure, they put plywood over it and install a treated floor. They also rebuilt the stairs, there are some requirements for stairs that the owners have agreed that they would go back and fix. They also replaced two porch posts. Bristow noted this does not meet the guidelines for several reasons. She noted porches are very complex and when they reconstruct a porch they follow the guidelines and elements of a porch must align in a certain way and have specific flooring and prescribe the installation of that flooring as well. All these guidelines are in an effort to prevent the kind of damage that is seen on this porch. The guidelines require vertical-grained, Douglas fir, but can approve an alternative material by exception, and they can approve a different tongue and groove. The guidelines state a vertical-grained Douglas fir because it's super hard, very insect and weather resistant, and historically used and still available. It's tongue and groove so that it fits together well. It is installed so that the grooves are perpendicular to the wall of the house and the porch floor slopes slightly down. Therefore, the grooves lead out away from the house so that the water goes out. All historic porch floors are going to be installed that way and if a porch turns the corner, it's mitered so that it still does that. This is why some of the original porch floors that are over 100 years old are still structurally sound because they were installed and cared for properly. Similarly, the porch has a floor structure, including a rim joist, with a piece of trim material that's put over that(skirt board) and the floor is to overhang that so that the water drips off instead of staying in the porch structure. Looking at the porch that was constructed, all the tongue and groove is parallel to the house, they probably also made it a flat surface so any water's just going to stay there. They did make the floor so it over hung the rim joist around but then they put the trim piece over that (butted against the end of the flooring- instead of the flooring overhanging) and made it flush with the top of the floor and filled that gap with caulk. Caulk deteriorates, it does not last long, so that's another place where they're going to get water into that structure and so that's why the HPC doesn't approve floors in this way. Bristow explained the first guideline about porches has to do with columns and brackets and details: if they have historic ones they need to replace them to match; if there are some missing then they install new ones to match the others. In the guidelines about the flooring, most porches have porch piers but this one does not and there is a way to deal with that which she will discuss later. The senior building inspector told Bristow he has some concerns about the structure of this porch floor because they're basically cantilevering onto a board that they didn't make into a beam so the entire roof load is going HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14; 2023 Page 10 of 17 down on to the outer columns that are not potentially supported as needed. Therefore, there will be a staff recommendation that if additional structure is required piers are installed under the outer corners of the porch. Those piers could be poured concrete or concrete block, the house has a brand-new foundation because it was moved in 1967 so it's not like it would require stone or brick or rock face block or any unusual material. For the skirting required, using unpainted treated wood for elements that would have been painted in their historic applications is disallowed in the guidelines. There is also another section on wood and it recommends duplicating and replacing historic wood elements when they cannot be repaired and they should be new or salvaged ones that match the historic ones. They don't approve vinyl elements and it's disallowed to substitute something that does not have the paint ability and function of the wood. Staff let them know that they couldn't approve a vinyl column and of the columns they suggested, none of the columns match the historic columns. Bristow explained there are a couple options, first since this house was moved the historicloriginal porch columns were removed. This is a Foursquare and it would not have had turned Queen Anne columns. They could approve those two columns on each side of the entryway to match the columns that are there because the guidelines allow that. However, staff would recommend though that if they could not match those columns and the proposal is to replace all of the columns, that they would be replaced with a column that was appropriate for a Foursquare instead. The Commission could approve replacing those two four-by-four posts with columns that match the existing or replace them with columns appropriate for a Foursquare. Bristow noted with Foursquares they sometimes see tall piers and short columns. On a regular full-size column there could be a simple square column, it would be a true eight inches on each side and have mitered corners. Or it could have a round classical column and those types of columns are available in an eight-inch size. So if the owner did not want to try to match those columns to the outer corner ones staff would propose something like either the box column or the round column, which frankly could give them the opportunity to potentially not need the central columns, it will all depend on what the structure of the frieze board and the box beam is that they have around the porch and if that could potentially be bolstered or increased in its structural carrying capabilities on the inside, staff just wouldn't want to make it expand outwards any more than it does. Regarding the porch piers, this house has a complete concrete basement and it fills some of the space under this porch. They could use wood to create fake piers and then installed skirting in between. One of the difficulties with the property is the fact that they have windows in some of their basement wall so staff would recommend that skirting is still installed but framed openings are made in the skirting to allow the light to penetrate to the window. Sellergren asked what the columns are resting on now and where's the bottom of the column. Bristow showed where they are resting and noted that's why the building inspector has questioned the structure of the porch. The staff recommendation is just that in this case, with this type of property, if some kind of structure is required below that floor structure that it's not just wood posts but some concrete block piers so it would look more traditional. Bristow noted the porch railing also didn't follow the guidelines and at first staff thought it would need to be altered, but they did just set it aside and reinstall it so staff is not making any recommendations to change the railing. It is reused instead. Its replacement with another railing was not part of the scope of the project. Staff does have a recommended motion and currently the motion reads that the porch floor is replaced as described in the staff report which means: It would be vertical-grained Douglas fir, it would be installed perpendicular to the front wall of the house, and it would overhang the skirt board. They'd have to replace the current floor. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14,2023 Page 11 of 17 • the porch columns are to be replaced as described in the staff report, which means they would either match the outer columns with the inner two or replace all of them with something more appropriate for a Foursquare. • that framed porch skirting is installed between false piers or true piers with openings for the windows in the foundation. Bristow stated she had an email from Daniel Kinney and he states "Dear Historic Preservation Commission, I'm a neighbor of 610 North Johnson Street in the Brown Street Historic District. Recently, I witnessed the porch get rebuilt with two by fours and four by fours without conforming to the guidelines for historic preservation that I followed on my porch. I do not believe the owner of this property submitted a plan to the Historic Commission for approval before being granted a building permit and if not, why not? Why should anyone else living in a historic district bother to follow the steps of review and approval?" Bristow stated she did follow up and clarified to him that they did not get a building permit either. Continuing with the email "I'm writing to insist that the historic preservation guidelines be followed and enforced for this property, in part to maintain the integrity of the Commission and its guidelines. I fear that if we enforce the guidelines for private residents living in their properties, but not wealthy property owners of rental properties within the district, the City is perpetuating an unjust two-tiered system." Dana Harris also sent an email and wrote "Historic Preservation Commission and city of Iowa City. As you know, the front porch at 610 North Johnson was rebuilt without a permit or review by historic preservation. Even if I were not a homeowner in a historic district, I would be dismayed that the City allowed the porch rebuild without either a permit or review by historic preservation." Again, Bristow ensured her they did not allow it. The email continued "I hope that this deceitful tactic is addressed and that corrections are made to the new porch to conform with the historic preservation guidelines." Laura Hansen (Prestige Properties) stated deceitful was a strong word. Mike Olivera, her colleague is the owner of the property is not here. She would like to first address the timeline of when they did see that there was an issue that was a little more severe than just a bouncy porch and then how that went. Originally on that porch, they had got a certificate of approval for the black pipe rail. The original complaint that came to them said that that wasn't approved but it was. After visiting they did notice that the damage was more severe than just the corner and they knew the porch was a little bouncy but didn't realize until they started opening a corner how bad it was. She showed a photo with the open floor and noted that the porch isn't just open to a portion of the basement, there is basement underneath the porch. So when they realized that those trusses were as bad as they were, and how the water damage had come through and really affected the whole structure, they did do the demolition as it did become a life safety issue. There are tenants that lived there, it was an occupied home and that was a life safety issue to them specifically. Also by removing part of the porch floor that suddenly made the house open into the living area as it's a basement of the house so they needed to get it closed up as quickly as possible. What their builder did was a sister system in order to quickly add structural stability to that porch and with those trusses, going already perpendicular, that's why they went ahead and went horizontal again with the flooring. It is tongue and groove, and it is treated pine which is also very durable and weather resistant. It is very similar to the staff recommendation as it doesn't deteriorate as quickly as regular pine and it's still a nice material and painted it's really difficult to tell the difference. Hansen noted one of the things that is really important is that they did contact the City as an emergent situation stating this was an emergency that they really needed to address, they were adamant about that when they contacted the City for the building permit and the historic preservation certificate of approval. She even reached out again and said this is an emergency and needed to hear from the City quickly. The email she received back literally said the City does these in a first come first serve basis, which was really hurtful because this was an important situation. So yes, they continued with the work HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 12 of 17 but as a life safety issue they really felt that they had to. She also wanted to address the work that was done where those posts would sit. Their builder did do a lot of structural reinforcement on those corners to bear the load of the columns for the roof of that porch. The contractor said it shouldn't be an issue and that it'll hold an elephant. The two by fours that were there originally, and the posts that were there originally on those corners sat between the joists and were sinking so that's why the two by fours that were by where the stairs come up were took off there, they looked like a banana because they had been bearing so much load. The porch definitely had some issues and they request an exemption on the direction of the porch simply because they did try to reach out but had to do this because that is all living space under there and they needed to close it back up. Also because of the nature of the way those joists were rotted they just didn't feel that without going ahead and creating the structural stability there that they could do anything different, they couldn't wait and take them out and make them horizontal in order to make the floor perpendicular, so they do ask for an exemption to have the porch the direction it is. They don't feel that it egregiously affects the aesthetic of the historical nature of the home, especially since this is a house that was moved and the porch isn't an original historic porch. Moving on to the skirting, the guidelines talk about skirting and say that it's to fill the space below the porch floor and the grade but in this case there's no ground below that since it is open and part of the basement below. Any pier that would be there would be false and she thinks it looks less aesthetically pleasing having the entire foundation being monotone especially since it's so narrow between that little overhang piece of the porch and where the pier would go. She stated they would also have to disrupt a lot of the landscaping that's there, some of it is established, some of its newer, but aesthetically that looks worse than just having that one monochrome color block. Therefore, they do ask for an exception as well for the skirting. The installation around the window, that could be worked with, the piers they would probably have to do something as their builder says there's just really not a lot of room to do anything there, especially a pier. So on that basis that's why they are requesting an exception for the piers. Regarding the posts, the existing two by fours posts were so bowed and they did extensive work under there to see how it can bear the load and be nice and strong. They did consider just removing the four by fours and going with just the two outside but one of the things that their builder said they'd have an issue with is how to connect the rail because after a few years they can get wobbly, especially being a rental, so he likes to have something to put the rail to and create more stability for the rail. That being said, with the columns, one of the things that they are agreeable to is replacing either a matching one or replace all four with other ones that match more of a Foursquare. She admitted she is not a really huge fan of the railing at all and in the future that may be something that they address. Hansen noted they have worked with this Commission many times before, over the past few years they've had 10 projects, eight of them have been easily approved. They've applied, they've heard back, and gotten the work done with a certificate of approval. One of them they scrapped and decided not to do the project, and then there's this one. So it's not that they don't know the system, and it's not that they don't agree with the system, it's that this was an issue of expediency and that's why they went forward on this. She reiterated the house is kind of an anomaly since it was moved. They did apply and did try and reach out and made it known this was urgent, they really had to go ahead with something. Additionally during this time they were there on the property cleaning gutters for the winter, they also check eaves for bats, and other maintenance in order to make sure the property was well taken care of and protected. So the ask to the Commission is to understand the explanations of what they did, they just want it to be fair and understood that with it being that open and with the instability of the trusses the way they were, they just really didn't feel they had an option other than to go forward and make the necessary repairs. Welu-Renyolds asked how long Oliveria has been working on the building. Hansen replied he's owned that house since 2010. Welu-Renyolds asked, then in 10 years inspecting it then suddenly it becomes a problem? Hansen explained, no, they knew there was an issue with the porch and it was on their long term project list, they just didn't understand until they went to check this complaint out how bad it had HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 13 of 17 gotten. She noted they are also trying to help keep affordable housing as well as beautiful housing and to provide the alternative of obviously the cookie cutter high rise with tissue paper walls type of rental experience. To do major repairs they would have to raise the average monthly rent per resident. Henson noted that actually was presented at the Council meeting last night from the undergraduate student group and they had that slide that shows where Prestige falls in accordance with some of the other landlords in town and how Prestige's rent is more affordable than a lot of them and they don't want that to change. Welu-Reynolds asked what that has to do with the porch. Hansen replied the fact that when they have expenses going up due to any of the repairs that they do, especially like if they have to tear this all back out and redo it, they don't want to have to pass any additional expenses on to the residents. They are also really trying to be good stewards of the property like the other gentleman said those are their customers and they are trying to keep the goal of affordable housing and beautiful housing together. Lewis noted this Commission is not the ones who they would come to for an emergency situation, that would be a different group of people. Bristow reiterated it's the building inspectors 100% that have that purview. If they tell her that a project is an emergency project, then she will review it in an emergency, but if they do not tell her that she will review it like all other projects. She also reminded them that the demo on this project was started the same day they submitted the application, they should have not started demo, they should have just submitted the application gone through the review process. If it was an emergency situation, the building inspectors would have prescribed a way to handle that, and staff would have reviewed it and approved it. If it had followed the guidelines, it could have even been approved as a staff review. Only if it wasn't going to follow the guidelines would it have come to the Commission. Hansen noted she did use the word emergency in both her applications, she made the application for the building permit the same day she made application for historical approval. Sellergren stated the historical preservation handbook is available online, if the property owner is aware of the guidelines and had access to the handbook, and as somebody who owns 10 properties or more should know that information was available. Hansen stated they do own 102 properties and the property owner is pretty familiar with the guidelines in most cases but again because of the emergent situation, the life safety issue of not knowing the structural integrity of those joists and not having the time to change that whole structure and remove the whole joist and change the joists from horizontal in order to have perpendicular flooring, there just wasn't time. Sellergren stated in a situation where a hurricane takes a roof off, one would respond to that emergency situation by putting a blue tarp on the roof and that would be considered temporary. In this case, because it's a historic property in historic district, this solution would be considered temporary and would need to be replaced according to guidelines. That's the answer and that's what the Commission is here to uphold. There was a solution that the property owner felt needed to happen but there are reasons that there are guidelines and that is ultimately to protect the integrity of the house and long-term safety issues. Stork asked if there was a tenant living in the basement right under the porch area. Hansen replied no, not in that area but it did leave the entire basement open and they had to do some work on that house before where they've done a lot of moisture mitigation throughout that basement. Wagner noted it looks like they have plywood OSB underneath that plastic under the flooring and then HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 14 of 17 it's probably insulated underneath there. Bristow added once the plastic was on it was effectively closed in and they did not need to continue on by installing the floor, or they could actually install the correct flooring in the correct orientation because they have the plywood on there so it doesn't matter which direction the structure is installed. If there wasn't plywood there then yes, the floor joists have to run the opposite direction, but in this case it does not need to go in the opposite direction of the floor joists because of the plywood. Sellergren asked if the joists would not need to be replaced, really the flooring would need to be removed to fit the guidelines and then the flooring would be replaced. Bristow confirmed the recommended motion would also have them install false piers if structural piers are not required, it's basically wood trim for aesthetic purposes, not 100% aesthetic purposes because it's required all traditional porches, and the guidelines require skirting if the gap between the bottom of that joist and the ground is 18 inches or more. Sellergren asked how the columns will be supported structurally according to the recommendation. Bristow replied they are not getting into that; the building inspector had suggested that there was potentially a problem with the structure but they will have to work that out through the permitting process and whether or not whatever they've done is a fix that works for the building inspector. The building inspector will determine if structural piers are required, and if so then staff would have a recommendation for that because the guidelines are clear. If they're not required, false piers are fine. Sellergren noted it's not terrible, enormous undertaking to follow the guidelines. Bristow confirmed they'll just have to replace the floor and probably have to patch the nail holes that they put through the plastic or replace the plastic. MOTION: Wagner moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 610 North Johnson Street as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: • the porch floor is replaced, as described in the staff report. • the porch columns are replaced as described in the staff report. framed porch skirting is installed between false piers or true piers with openings for the windows in the foundation. Thomann seconded the motion. Bristow noted staff would like to make a comment on this because there was some discussion about the columns. If all four columns are replaced, staff would only recommend two columns are installed, not the center ones. They could have short ones or posts for the end of the railing. There could be some need to reinforce the beam that is supported by the columns, but staff would not recommend putting four eight-inch box columns across there, or even three because it would hit right in the middle of the door. It would be the same with a classical column, it would only be four columns if it would match the current installed ones. Sellergren asked about the issues with the stairs. Bristow explained the issue with the stairs is it requires a closed riser by Code. It is required on all porch stairs, and also required is a toe kick that overhangs on the stairs. The owners have agreed to make those changes as well as painting the exterior wood. A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 9-0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 15 of 17 REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: Certificate of No Material Effect-Chair and Staff review HPC23-0069: 230 Fairchild Street— Northside Historic District (roof repair and reconstruction) Bristow noted this house is a key property in the Northside District because it had special shingle siding and brackets at the time the district was created. However, right before that owner sold it they put vinyl siding on the whole thing and staff didn't know that until this project was investigated so under all that vinyl siding is some really great trim and siding. However, the scope of this current project is the fact that there was a fire here. Originally, they actually wanted to replace the entire roof and wanted to raise the roof. They're working with insurance and it is just a limited replacement of an area of the roof that was approved. Bristow stated they have not talked about the windows yet and this is another rental property. HPC23-0071: 515 Clark Street- Clark Street Conservation District (concrete step replacement) Bristow stated this house changed hands and they're replacing the concrete stairs. Staff is making a point to have them not use brilliantly white modern concrete but concrete that matches at the entry stoop. HPC23-0076: 1033 East Washington Street-College Hill Conservation District (outbuilding foundation repair) This property has an outbuilding that was historically a dairy and they're going to start a rehab project. The first step is foundation repair which was easily approved. HPC23-0072: 515 Rundell Street-Longfellow Historic District (siding and trim repair and rear basement window replacement) This is a Moffitt that originally was just a portion of the current structure with a garage. The garage was filled in and a second floor was added. The owner might want to make it a garage again at some point, but they will have to work through some zoning issues with that. Currently, the house is in a poor condition and hopefully some historic preservation funds will be used to help the new owner with this project. All the windows have been replaced already, they will keep the historic trim and historic siding. Intermediate Review -Chair and Staff review HPC23-0053: 614 Clark Street- Clark Street Conservation District (new garage construction) Bristow noted a new garage when there is no garage to demolish should be a minor review but this project took a long time to review and they had to do it at intermediate review for a couple of different reasons. The property is a former church owned by Mark Russo and he actually won an award and was published in a magazine for the stunning interior flip that he did on it. Its not historic inside, it's modern and very interesting. Anyway, there are some mobility issues and there's no garage. Bristow showed the site plans and the driveway that leads to nothing, and the location of the curb cut. They're going to move that and put the garage in another location in order to get the space distances required by zoning. The reason this was an intermediate review is a garage approved by staff would have lap siding or board and batten siding, but they're going to use stucco. The owner is a designer and he wanted stucco because he has a brick house. They looked at the process that they're going to use and approved it. The other aspect that really didn't follow the guidelines specifically was the whole HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2023 Page 16 of 17 pavement area, the guidelines require an eight-to 10-foot-wide driveway. Because of mobility issues the owners wanted more paving which is totally understandable. At the same time, the fact that it was coming all the way out to the sidewalk and there was a historic curb cut that used to be there that they were going to remove, staff was concerned that it would just basically become another driveway. So what they have done is remove the portion of the paving between the sidewalk and the street and they are creating a planter in between the driveway and the paving. HPC23-0063: 1030 E Burlington Street- College Hill Conservation District (mini-split installation and screening) This is the other mini split that was approved. In this case, the air conditioning unit was haphazardly located next to this pretty little bay on the west side so it was recommended to put it on the other side of the house. The contractor however said that the fact that the property slopes meant he couldn't get his lift in there and for a variety of other reasons they've decided to allow them to put it on the side of the house with the air conditioning unit and are requiring that they screen it which also gets the air conditioning unit screened. The screening will basically look like the porch skirting. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2023: MOTION: Villanueva moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's November 9, 2023, meeting. Beck seconded the motion.The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bristow reported Sellergren and her had a pleasant meeting with the owner of 302 East Bloomington last week, the Pagliai's building. He has been caring for that building exactly how a preservationist would care for it forever. His family are the original builders of the building. He can no longer do the work himself, so he's decided to sell it. His reason for not wanting to have it be a landmark is because he wants to get as much money as possible and he is working with a realtor who does development who helped him price it. Sellergren asked colleagues in the planning department for what the development potential of that property is and it is very limited as parking is going to be their biggest problem. They couldn't build the type of building that the Webster is in. Until they move forward with the landmark designation they won't know if the owner will decide to submit a protest or not. Friends of Historic Preservation is helping by having someone write up the site inventory form, the historic description of the building, which is helpful. Bristow is expecting that it'll probably come before the Commission at the February meeting. Bristow stated in addition at the February meeting they will review the annual report. Next month they will discuss the work plan and she'll put something in the agenda about what they've had in the past. They will also have somebody from the Parks and Rec come and talk about where they are with the City Park pool. In January, they'll have updates based on their focus groups, they've had public input, and after that they'll start working on designs. This Commission doesn't have a purview beyond talking about how it's a historic pool and trying to encourage them to save it and so once that determination is made not to save it, they don't have any say in it. Parks and Rec staff are coming back because this Commission has requested to talk about that and the public's interested in the historic nature of the pool. ADJOURNMENT: Welu-Reynolds moved to adjourn the meeting. Thomann seconded.The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 pm. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 TERM 1112 219 3122 4113 5/11 6/8 7/13 8/10 9114 10112 11/9 12114 NAME EXP. BECK, 6130/24 X X X X X O/E X X X O/E X X MARGARET BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/23 X X X O/E X X — - — -- — BROWN, 6130123 O/E O/E X X O/E X X O/E X X O/E X CARL LARSON, 6130/24 KEVIN SELLERGREN, 6/30/22 X X O/E X X O/E X X X X X X JORDAN STORK, NOAH 6130/24 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X THOMANN, 6130/23 X X X X X X X X X X X X DEANNA VILLANUEVA, 6130/25 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X NICOLE WAGNER, 6/30123 X X X X X X OIE X X X X X FRANK WELU- 6/30125 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X REYNOLDS, CHRISTINA LEWIS, _ _ _ _ _ _ X X X X X X ANDREW KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E= Absent/Excused --- = Not a member Item Number: IP6. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT January 4, 2024 Senior Center Commission: December 21 Attachments: Senior Center Commission: December 21 Preliminary Minutes December 21, 2023 MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION December 21, 2023 Assembly Room, Iowa City Senior Center Members Present: Lee McKnight, Warren Paris, Nancy Ostrognai, Susan Mellecker, Angela McConville Members Absent: Tasha Lard, Jay Gilchrist Staff Present: Kristin Kromray, LaTasha DeLoach Others Present: Sarah Caven CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Gilchrist at 4:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 19. 2023, MEETING: Motion: To accept the minutes from the October 19, 2023. Motion carried on a vote of 510. Warren/McKnight PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. VISITING NURSES ASSOCIATION PRESENTATION: Sara Caven from the Visiting Nurses Association reported data from the community clinic that is held at the Senior Center. VNA provides blood pressure clinics twice a week and monthly foot care and cholesterol clinics at the Senior Center. The VNA and the Senior Center worked to revamp the Senior Center clinic space this year. Unfortunately, the VNA recently lost the grant funding for their community care clinics and homemaking services and are looking at additional grant and funding streams. Other services that the VNA provides that are not affected by this grant funding are skilled nursing, physical, occupational, and speech therapy, and home health aides. I Preliminary Minutes December 21, 2023 The VNA is partnering with the Senior Center on a balance program where the VNA's physical therapist will provide balance assessments via equipment that the Senior Center purchased. Caven noted the VNA merged with Iowa City Hospice about three years ago and they now share administrative staff and the location on Sycamore Street. Caven asked if anyone had any ideas on what community members might want at the Senior Center, Ostrogna noted that skin cancer screenings might be of interest. OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW: DeLoach reported the January/February program guide is now available. The Black History Ball will be held on February 3rd in conjunction with the non-profit Sankofa. There will be food, jazz music, and a presentation. A mask making class will be held at the University of Iowa prior to the event and some of these masks might be on display or available for purchase. In addition, the Stanley Museum will have some African art pieces on at the Senior Center during the month of February. Other upcoming programs include a Pawentines event with the Iowa City animal shelter, a presentation by the police department, a Matter of Balance program funded by Heritage Area Agency on Aging and Friends of ICSC. Evening hours are now available Monday —Thursday until 7 PM. Weekend hours will start early next year. The building exterior project is still slated to begin next year. A new projector for room 302 will be installed next month and a repair to the AR projector is forthcoming. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Paris noted the expansion in hours are greatly appreciated. Ostrognai reported back regarding the vacant lot across from the Senior Center that Mayor Teague stated the space will be used by the community and will ask for community feedback. DeLoach and McConville are working together on a presentation for the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. They are confirming if they would like a presentation or a written report. 2 Preliminary Minutes December 21, 2023 NOMINATION FOR CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, SECRETARY_ McConville noted Melleker and Ostrognai were the nominating committee for the executive commission seats. Ballots were distributed. Jay Gilchrist was nominated for chair, McKnight for vice chair, and McConville for secretary. McConville asked if there were any additional nominations from the floor. There were none. Kromray collected and tallied the ballots. Results for officer elections are as follows. Gilchrist elected Chair. 5 Ayes McKnight elected Vice Chair. 5 Ayes McConville elected Secretary. 5 Ayes McKnight reported on items he followed up on after the presentation by Sarah Gardner. He reached out to the Iowa Utilities Board as well as receiving a home energy audit from the City's climate team. McKnight noted that he had heard from a community member requesting additional computers in the lobby. Meeting Adjourned. 3 Preliminary Minutes December 21, 2023 Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Name Term Expires 1/19/23 2/16/23 3/1623 4/20/23 5/18/23 6/1523 7/26/23 8/17/23 9/21/23 16/19/23 11/16/23 12/21/23 Jay 12/31/25 NM NM O/E NM O/E X X X X X NM O/E Gilchrist Tasha 12/31/24 NM NM X NM X O X O X O NM O Lard Angela 12/31/24 NM NM X NM X X X O/E X X NM X McConville Lee 12/31/24 — -- X NM O/E X X X X X NM X McKnight Susan 12/31/23 NM NM X NM X X X O/E X O/E NM X Mellecker Nancy 12/31/23 — -- — — X OE X X X X NM X Ostroenai Warren 12/31/25 NM NM O NM X X X X X X NM X Paris Key: X=Present O=Absent O/E=Absent/Excused NM=No meeting --=Not a member 4