Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-07-03 Info Packet � r City Council Information Packet CITY OF 10"IA CITY July 3, 2024 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Miscellaneous IP2. Memo from Fleet Transition Plan Staff Committee: Fleet Transition Plan - Study IP3. Building Statistics: June 2024 Draft Minutes IP4. Historic Preservation Commission: June 13 July 3, 2024 City of Iowa City Item Number: IP1. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT July 3, 2024 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Attachments: Council Tentative Meeting Schedule City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule nil Subject to change CITY OF IOWA CITY July 3,2024 Date Time Meeting Location Monday,July 15,2024 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting TBD Hosted by the City of North Liberty 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,October 21,2024 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting TBD Hosted by the City of University Heights 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 July 3, 2024 Memo from Fleet Transition Plan Staff Committee: Fleet Transition Plan - Study Attachments: Memo from Fleet Transition Plan Staff Committee: Fleet Transition Plan - Study r -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: June 21, 2024 To: Climate Action Commission From: Fleet Transition Plan Staff Committee (Sarah J. Gardner, Climate Action Coordinator; Daniel Bissell, Climate Action Analyst; Dan Striegel, Equipment Supervisor; Mark Rummel, Transportation Associate Director; Jim Baker, Police Systems Analyst; Mike Edwards, Refuse Assistant Supervisor; Shaun Bradbury, Engineering Special Project Administrator, Michelle Reidinger, Engineering Senior Facilities Design and Construction) Re: Fleet Transition Plan/Study Background Beginning in August 2023, Iowa City staff have been engaged in a review of the current municipal fleet of light-, medium-, heavy-duty and non-road vehicles, as well as the facilities where these vehicles are housed and serviced, to explore possible pathways toward a fully electrified fleet. This process has been led by ICF, a consulting firm with expertise in fleet electrification that has advised multiple municipalities across the nation, and involved conversations with Iowa City staff representing Equipment, Transportation Services, Resource Management, Streets, Parks and Forestry, Police, and Climate Action and Outreach. The purpose of this memo is to capture key takeaways from those conversations and the final report produced by ICF. The plan detailed in the report outlines a fleet electrification strategy based on replacing each existing vehicle in Iowa City's fleet with an electric vehicle (EV) equivalent, if one exists at the time, as it is retired from the fleet. The analysis contained in the report suggests this approach would take an estimated 15 years to complete. Although the City does not anticipate having a fully electrified fleet within the next 15 years, it does hope to be well underway in that effort. In addition to identifying a process and infrastructure needs to support a fleet transition, this plan also supports those efforts by strengthening future funding applications. Increasingly,federal incentive programs such as the Low or No Emissions Grant program previously used to purchase electric buses for the City either require or are weighted to favor municipalities that have fleet transition plans. Because in many cases infrastructure upgrades will be required in advance of further electric vehicle purchases, this memo begins with key takeaways related to facilities followed by those related to the vehicles themselves. Facilities— Key Takeaways • To enable this transition, a significant investment in charging infrastructure will be required both within our facilities (charging stations, conduit, panels, and switchgear) and on the grid (transformers) made in collaboration with the utilities. Conversations with the utilities should begin now and be ongoing due to the lead-time required for grid upgrades. • As EV technologies evolve, the City may not strictly adhere to the vehicle replacement recommendations outlined in the plan. However, the infrastructure recommendations included in the plan are expected to remain relevant, serving as a blueprint for determining the necessary infrastructure buildout and its associated budget implications. • The appropriate charging scenario should reflect the allowable dwell time and usage specific to the vehicles. In departments in which all vehicles are unlikely to be deployed at the same time, for example, sharing charging stations among two or more vehicles will be the preferred scenario, while departments with high vehicle utilization or limited dwell time are likely to utilize a scenario in which each vehicle has a dedicated charging station assigned to it. From a cost perspective, little difference was found between a scenario in which each vehicle is assigned a dedicated charger and a scenario in which two or more vehicles share a charging station. • Just as new facilities for the City should be designed to allow for the addition of solar generation, they should also be constructed with future fleet electrification needs in mind, allowing extra space for future chargers and additional electrical capacity to be added to the facility. • The City currently relies on a number of diesel generators for facility back-up power in case of emergency outages. As the percentage of electric vehicles in the fleet grows, emergency power generation at these facilities also will need to grow in order to support fleet operations during prolonged power outages, necessitating the purchase of additional generators, battery backup systems, or some combination of both. Vehicles— Key Takeaways • Despite higher initial vehicle cost and needed infrastructure investments, financial analysis that includes reduced fuel costs, maintenance costs, and non-competitive financial incentives such as tax credits available through 2032 suggests EVs are roughly cost competitive with current fleet vehicles. Over time as vehicle costs decline the balance may tip further in favor of EVs, though infrastructure costs are anticipated to rise over time. • Not all vehicles in the City fleet currently have a viable EV equivalent. For the purposes of this study, post-market retrofits of new internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles were recommended to provide a basis for estimating charging and infrastructure needs, but the plan is best used as a living document with vehicle replacements updated as new EV models become available rather than pursuing costly vehicle retrofits. • In some cases the transition to EVs may require additional vehicles or a change in operations, particularly for emergency scenarios in which certain heavy duty vehicles currently operate 24-hours a day without returning to a facility. Procurement timelines for such vehicles may also shift and should be flexible depending on vehicle needs, use cases, budgets, etc. • Certain non-road vehicles, most notably mowers, floor scrubbers and ATVs/UTVs, can serve as valuable early test cases for fleet electrification as facility upgrades to support their charging needs are comparatively minimal, cost-effective equivalent EV models are currently available, and the vehicles are not utilized for emergency response. • Diversifying the composition of the fleet to include new makes and models of vehicles typically necessitates the purchase of parts for maintenance and customization that have not been previously stocked. The vehicle recommendations made within the fleet transition plan provide some bounds by narrowing the field of all possible EVs to a selection deemed to be the most suitable for the Iowa City fleet as determined through collaborative conversations between ICF and Iowa City staff. However, as new electric vehicle models come available these recommendations will necessarily be revisited. Utilizing a similar process to evaluate available models based on daily and annual mileage, use profiles, dwell time, and cost can help the city focus vehicle purchases and avoid the added costs that come with one-off purchases. Next Steps The design of the new transit facility is currently underway and will serve as a valuable comprehensive pilot project providing key insights into how electric vehicle purchases and facility design will inform each other. Ongoing documentation of this process can help identify challenges encountered along the way and opportunities to optimize the process for future fleet electrification efforts. In the meantime, smaller pilot programs consisting of one or two vehicle purchases that do not necessitate significant grid-level infrastructure upgrades, such as the purchase of an EV patrol vehicle for the Police Department, can serve as department by department test cases to help further refine vehicle preferences and needs. Combining lessons learned from the larger, more comprehensive transit pilot and smaller vehicle pilots can help chart a course toward electrification for future facilities. Finally, in the coming months Johnson County will be undergoing a similar process to develop a fleet transition plan for its vehicles, and both CAMBUS and the Iowa City Community School District have signaled an interest in future electric bus purchases. A working group with representatives from each of these entities as well as MiclAmerican Energy should be formed to help collaborate and coordinate on fleet electrification efforts, both to share knowledge gained through these efforts and to optimize investments in grid level upgrades. N6 N `I U O Ul r =-%,- Amp I` 7 Iv - 4 f � � ,y c6 i N c O a) CL a N L U (6 U 4 3 0 O N 4+ O U � � N 0 V o as d O U cn cn I � c ca a o o ca Q ca L a' L ++ ca C L b bD c U � ca b—i0 co co s a U o +� 0O c N U ca N U o ca � co co N N r Q iE > V cZf E E i _N U N V V W c N N p 3 N N ++ Q N LL W o Cl) b LL U m L ca ca m m 0r 00 010 \ ^� > 0 bD c O O c (n , 3 U) Cl)N ca w O U w O c c}6 O > (D O N +J 4-J ca ++ � c N Q N c c-j �.CD 0 N N c6 c cU Q 0 + v °' W c6 � � oi w c M L6 co � . 0 c > U O Cl) m N o m Cl) m .— +� L � +, m C � t ca u U — c� m > CO 4—J > m }' N U m Cl) > `� o � : eco LUU � •Cl) Cl)j O m U � Co _ W E � Q C i N CD m m � 'b � U y 0 0 N > t O 4- m m t m U O N 0 U Q > N • �:�IIII O } m 0- E m a) m a 70 `Q LVJ E O U • 0 W U) w w N O U U L N i O L • - N -6 N J p = c0 - - O N.. C 7 7 > U .tl; f6 i i LL1 O w C U! U! i 4-6 () N f6 f6 O + L (CULN A C C W 0 U LL u1 u1 N In N U j j C N t C C (6 (6 0 U W O C C t t 0 > Q Q U U d — V 0 L CN N O N W U_ a) M (1) 0 N W > a) — Q Q CU E ._ N 7 4-J 7 _ LL 70 U) Lr- (13 r-(6 Q _Q m LLL 0 a J o ❑ a c T a° I Y 3Q m vdi U 0 ❑ � J U V N � 3e m N > > > C Q y > a� m y p / Y T a J � c ❑ f m a .m m s � > Y 7 J M O n ^ J W � LL M bD�^ J m a ap M J N N I )( C W L Y U Y Z d 9 O U U 0 F ~ 3e F J j 3e C E d E N j pp p d N z a j 2 N m1 F P W O M M n (MO 0 N Cl) N (O Cl) N (O N 0 W F M d C p_ O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O M • O CL W (') 0 0 O O O O O O a 0 0 a O N m 0 O O O O N O M (? (4 O co (O rn (D 0 00 d c LL VI IN .. y (V Cl) m (Q 0 N O co 0 0 0 N D p �^ R N ��V! U' a 4-J J O Y N O U > a Y c ~ O N N a+ 0 1+ 7 7 ` 'O C v r u m m F w m J W a > v Y c > m a `m y w m 2 a > w m m w m' = z w 0 ~ LU YC C N > O O_ O N 7 f6 O X as+ i f6 W NNC 3 O (a C w E > C N O N C U � N S O � w S a+ N • • Y � N O 3 • O' � N N U N > CD N � U N o E t � a w O a) U o N > c o,o o � a� z V E x W •i Q U- O 0 Y) » / q E 0§ w ) bD a / § E § \ 7 f / \ ( >CA \ L 0 2 2 k � Lu q a) m 2 ,� e 2 co % to < bD ' / f § � 4� / C6 / \ § 2 / { \ 7 ) / k CA '/ k o \ k ƒ t 2 S E \ 0 E g o § J ® _ � \ k o ® ° 2 ) 't \ � E \ S [ / / £ 4y = % 4- mq ( = m % a Q % § ® e � $ 2 a E E o E% ' ° ° o Q) y y § m ƒ \ \ $ a % § E \ 2 § E 5 § 7 2 2 2 t 2 to \ 2 f § '[ \ 0 2 § n / E \ \ \ / \ E \ to \ / \ ® \ 0 § 3 E R 2 o � E E a E o g a ( / k k \ § t k E w 2 0 % \ ƒ a 2 C 2 = W 'I e \ E D m m k Q o f -0 0 \ ) ƒ ' / § k � \ � E < q / $ c 0 < „ N � W Battle Motors- Battle 0 (�1 LET BYD Forward Truck ca �' •� M Xos Stepvan E �; M Hyundai loniq E Tesla Model 3 o Lion 6 Bucket Truck 4-1 Chrysler Pacifica E � F-150 Lightning e. 0 Chevrolet Equinox �a 0 ZEVx - Ford F-350 W \ �2 Phoenix -ZEUS 400 •U P LO Ninssan Leaf LO Peterbilt - 520EV \�\ m Peterbilt - 220EV ,. 0 Maxwell Vehicles -ePro N Gillig 40'ePlus ro Chevrolet - Blazer PPV ' . (Police) N ZEVx- Ford F-450 `r LOChevrolet Silverado EV 0 O 0 0 0 0 JmegmGJJJ7 ! § m § \ § § y JJ \ 9 ; § ; \ 2m § % B § § ) B / ) gEH \ gMJJ ` m . 0 2 ca 2 � ® 2 ) } { \ { g ƒ S % a7 - k ! ) ) k E - _ / ; \ \ � ) / ? ! \ \ \ [ { j \ � _ oo „ ) § ) ` fa : � 22 § § _ ® ! yi § ® ® ! O lm : « ` : ! # a2gq Q L2 - J \ ` 66 _ ! ! ` { ` � ) ) d ^ } \ ` } ! ! 4-1 ( E $ Q ca � $ . � L \ k \ \ ! ) \ / k 0 puadg le;ideO ss90x3 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x0 0 0 0 0 N d Y a N d Y M y d Y N y Y U W C Y fl- m (n m w cc U > m }1 c ^^ rn E • W U cc U d y Y C d N U N N d Q Y � K � W W 7 W U c6 N M > y W d Y N cc 0 Y d 0 O O O O M N N A;b 910iy9A 0 > v N 0 H 4 Q O M UJ N N LO O Y � (n m 8 LL t 0 s W N .. -4 +� 8 Ld 8 c ° po r (6 co O N (j (D 0 to N EH t � 4 4-J LU • 8 $ � +., LO M OD ^c' N M LO � W f9 Efl EH [fl EA M • Q V M V LO CV) LO 0 W w m LO CY) LO O � V N Cd rn v p Cl)OO caGo 44 W Nt LO CA V O M U • i» ib 'Al _ • 0) LOV ^ M (O M / N I- 0)OD CIT M V co M rrl 0 'GO 10 � -4 ca 40 NO a (n (K `� 2 � � Z F puedg le;ideo sseOx3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 M OM N O O E9 E9 EA EA EA EA � E9 E9 E9 N d > O IzN d > Cn N > W O W M C �/� d N a d M a N n ca � C U U C N> H t6 N e +� - � W W ^Y, 1 W a V d (6 M R m > W N A d ca Y \V 0/ LL O N O O Z A;guenrj e1Oiy9n peOA-uON \ J ° Q) F— y . co bDb $ 4 / \ bD 2 k § 0- � • � � 2 � % f . t E © Q) >� CO e 2 o . � y � . § $ / k @ CO o -, LLm $ / 2 bD ° E .g E E Co e § 2 r / C k . ƒ 6 ƒ ] $ E d O m . � . 0 | | � ■ ; � � a� N (6 O s Q 4-1 r N (o o 0 =4-1 N N i 4q � V 0 . cn s ao + N bD ca > bD •� "� " I o o s U Q) > CL y N N lao (U W V � Q , ■ �� • � � § § \ j LU e § § * # ± U z 0 t % � 2 i LU » ) t3 k k < 2 | sj ~ @ n q a 00 Q 77 § j j . ® ( m CA m = _ C § d \ 2 2 § \ 7 / _ _$ U- \ e \ � \ & E 2 2 § e n / 2 \ \ c R j 0 § w g g2 2 \ kf -k ± -k } � \ 0 CL a. � C � O � 2 d a a N O E N E c w m m ca o sm Jo m w vii ++ Y Y 0 3 A n LO NN�w OO CO 2O O N 2 '� N C • WI / / to c m m w r U N U 7 '� 7 00 U CL a m i N Q N Q U `' ` U p 0 • a0 a o 0 a CL 1 o o ! o ! O ca c° � 3 c° o E y a .. m • V •� E `w N N co E m E m > iJ a `a � ¢ w a' a 3 a U 3 7 I, N 7 V O_ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Z Z Z CD c V U O U) v� ^ ' N 3 A > � Y Y T M M N a v v r j Y Y H N v v N Y � Y O a w v O O o O 2 N N Y Y N _ O Y w •V Y n O n Y M U `u - A Y € Y � � a � . 13— L2 Y W Y a O a m . Y m � Y M O M ry y N 2 w Y O Y 111 N W Y O O O O O O O O O O W N V N O WV N O O O O O O O O O O va5jey0;o jagwnN m m o m o 0 0 0 fA �A � C � O 2 ry a °1 a N 2 o s � m o m w y 1caY Y O N N (o��//�� 10A N L 0 -°� ¢ ti E a U U N U ° 0 -C a Co a •� N aN a °m (6 LL 0 U 0 4.9 00 C 0 daj p U N v v o oca a, s m m " 3 N 3 a a - • /N� 7 C /07 c O 10 ' C N O. A d N O ii Q ii U L E A �i D r jp N N \ \ w of a 3 10 ¢ U 3 3 CO 0 7 d Z Z 0 y 0 h Y 3 " � Y r •X N p r 1° cc N M M 7 N 2 � Y y L N 7 Y Y O p m m v Y m � a i r w cc Y U iR N N ry a _ O Y Y i0 J- � 2 Y w Y a 0 _ V O Y 0 y M y N LU Y O \ r / w W Y 00000oooo OW0VNO V O O O O O O O O O O ' \ vaBjegoiojagwnN m m o w o 0 0 0 fA �A o ■ a c N + 3O @ > o m a x N c N ■ (6 C �wyRRo o c ^ e �y �Y s N " U N e (6 O c x p0 J W N U � o m n m NV M V V N C N N V N \V ■ I I M I I M M I vm c N i ■ 3av � voasavy € € m $ LL 00 $� mp� avmpwcc M3 � g Z m N�\ Q M O m M O M t8n 8 N 2r 2r — O t n ��/ W M N 6 V T (V 6 O, M m V/ V) N a as N ca � U N i U o ■ co N o (6 m i °aA _ C:on — S c aA bD o Y ryY C13 -2 s e 'bD U N O 3 (6 o o N s Um n m sx N W W I I N > m V V V, N r V, O N W W ^ V oo r ■ I M M M I 1 M . I M a _ U in l7 Z , Mo ¢ gS33 omw mm omEMM M odM M 8 N W W m 6 6 V m N 6 M IA M m V N N m .y y C W O ^ O W W M Y a W M a N 0 O � O cE 0 o d 3 = 0 C W W O W o Y m U o W 0 o N U N W N N •� •y W N C � L o W = W 3 0 a' iL w 0 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ M fA = m ■ O_ O a ++ y Y N W W 0 W W U J O O a U c o r W V ++ Y W E 3 m 3 a a m C N o'o °a 0 °�' _ 0 GL N l6 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ M N C w C � W C m cn M ■ LU i LU �' N W i+ (6O } F U M M W N a. W } V W W } W m i m i y y N W L y Y O W W } � a bD m `m W } m O `m N `L/ a `m W } N � i caca N N o s � c } . ca ca U N m m a o m m a N o t r U �/L/ x /'1r� x sia8iey0;o jagwnry LL a 9 c I In w _ n a � N ' Q V � « L x X N N V � U YJ Q a1 L1 w v N M C ru U • A w c V � —• n 7 i N C O C V/ v C: � � V O d ••� O] 0 CA L `6 N o� �yv �Z O V i _N LL W O O O � O V m Om c `o `o A� 0N (6 U H H U -d N w ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ P 4 y�i �a J °'alb p.� 4ypn O 4L, I1 jyP �4'pJ 4 IN 061, �4spn ca a i � II■ %,� J% A, V LO oo ■� !� 41 N o {f} 1 ■I �� P ys d co co LO g g g d 60 eq eq Cl) e (AdN)ISOO baa WIN LL w Biu N b g C) 00 0 0 d o 0 z z 0 b b IR 0) i c co u� M Cl? LO a 61) to t ani U c • p ri r _ a v) fA w U O aO O O O r N � �6 (uo!II!W$)Ool Q 4-1 's 4- o L O 0 N ~ .U. > +a i w la ° y a) U a C +r 0 o _ � � O o IGs � y O �M Co c c O m (� cn U ,} ccoaa) o .U d U a) CO a) v► O LL m J z ' ® #A . / ALLI IL . � > Im amIA ~ ^ 043 LU LU Ln . LUKIM LU ] ) LU LIn J § / . . i ! M wO M U U w rn � O Lu 3 C: c m � N � > Oc Lu F 3 N U C O > N _ > o > v L w U • a) 0d c •� C � O w a) l!l T WAA N ru O ns v � LO co N M w tfr = v c6 orQ -,09Ja a) N m o w m � mbD O " o w •� Ow //\ b4 0 V/ Z bA m 0 M!d o O c •i o .� Z m v rq mom 'm 3 O O v U � LL M � AA, � No` N Yp 0 'a •� Lri � ou O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O e+ O ui O Lri O Lri O Lri O ui Lr) ITI, V m m N N I I 64 I q v� lsr tsq yr w <s)- vl A q N U_ 6 � T N > Q y C0 T O • .0 V O N N on o " °D • • > . c a F- a . • O E 0 00 • • � O • r? oE � 8 � � o 0) � ` 00 o � c a � w � w N H O c6 N O c6 ZU > N V b. }r LO '� S 0 72bo y X `~ N N > N -0 O O s co > " i a) c Z i N � N (6 O N W 0 CO c -0 c o ° o 0 10 (1) N O6 •- C N N :3 C: 4-J cc m U y 000 w 0 c C: c6 caO N N L +1 N U Q c� E - m .N O Q -0 -W O C O N to � � � (6 C: O Cl) 0 . w 0 0 .� U S N > O 0 cn CO O b.0 Ocn 0w x 0 Ln 4-1 •� co m Cl)m 0 O E c6 s W > LU 7 � 0 u ¢ /+ y C4 � | \ \ [ o / ( U -C ^ ` CL C E \ . . ww � 0 \ 2' S ° � 0 � . 0 _ 4� § § | 0 0 \ au § & e . � � ® > 0 £ 0 § � 7 ] 3 \ > ° . jf = o & 0 .� / 2 0 E2 o = - S 2 \ y\ 0 C» 0 o P \ / © . \ $ 0 / © »2 L- _ , i = @ - \ 0 '� \ . � � N ._ ._ ._ � � � N � � O V a � � ca � s � +� 0 0 •- .� •— � � c� +� �' •� � � � � y � � c� H � � � � N o � � o � a w w V c O � � a � � s � � � � � � � �, •- o � � � � . � ,° vi = i � 4. c ��; \ a• N C O N N 7 L6 SIV 0 Y `TI U LL �> _U � N (6 - S IL O U E E o ° " o G o (D . O -2 u s Vro DID O LL ply 7iC Item Number: IP3. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT July 3, 2024 Building Statistics: June 2024 Attachments: Building Statistics: June 2024 / E ! ! § ! i $ ! _ ; . w = _ ,. . = m ;= m ;_ !: = m y m y !; . : § _ ] ! ! ! ! §! ! ) !; ! ) |) /) \ ) ]! o | ! : ! ) ! !` \� \ {\ z\ \ \ z\ \ \ z\ z \ \\ \ \ {\ \\ /\ { \ ) \ /} CD \\ \ \ a \} \ \ \ } } '-5 \ - - EE � }} \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � \\ 66 ( \ ) ( ) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 2 ! ! _ 0 0 _ - - - - / i ) \ - - - - 4 ® 4 ® 4 ® < < < a ® - Q t ! $ � ) ) \ \ \ \ ! |� ` k ` k : } - ad - { — § { 66 }\\ } \ \ \ / }{ < \ { \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ( / / V \ ( / / ; S S V § s S / } } } } } \ J \} /} /} § { § : - \ \ \ \ . \ } \ \ : ; \ ! /# \ ! ; - - 2 2 - / ° \ ( \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \ ) \ \ } \ \ \ v; \ \ \ / 66 }/ _ 1 _ \ , \ \ \\ \\ . \ r \\} \ \\ \\} & ) \ &15 ig te _ \ \ \ \ ( § \ \ \ } 2 } \ \ 0 } O 0 0 o O o o O 0 O O V O m p O N W W W W M W M N W c v c c v 2 E J J v ¢ x ❑ c .. w 3 0 T W O m Q v Y a S c v w 2 o w E o o p o � � w N 3 m '" v p J 2 r ✓ w w H 3 OC' O W ✓ c U v p C ° q ° i c w v 3 w g E > c — E o o x ° 3 0 $ r E v 2 W C W > C Ol Yu ° ° O C 2 Q o " o w u o v o c r 'v 3 v c c N2- a : ❑ w 3 ¢ w � v a c 3 m 'o � p o s a u E v a E w s m Y E o w r 3 s 3 0 °- 3 c om p o �c v v c m s o c o > o a v a c m i — J O v"i vYi O N O O O V E E i2 i2 o m V m m ❑ ❑ m o z t Q rr ❑ z z z Y ~^ z U ¢ 1 o ¢ ¢ z m z x z ¢ ❑ x in o j n wN z S z n o u d m m v z m Y m m z 0m � r m N O] t0 O O O N ON N N N N V N V V N N N N O O O O N O N N O O NO O O V V O O O O O V O \ O C C C m m m N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O V V V V V V V V V V V V N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m m m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m m m m m m m m m m m m C W ao ao 0 aWo Cao W Cao W Cao W 0 W Cao N Cao W Cao W Co o o o o o o o aN Co aW Co aN a o a o a o E : E E E E E E E E : : : ° : : : v v v v v v v v v v m y v v v v v v v v v v v v « re re •- re re •- re — m .- m .- m .- m .- m .- m m ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ c o y a r a a c A m w C ,Q 9 - J y. 0 0 0 m m o 0 0 o n b o 0 T Y � W '° o s c o z z c ° c o o iy d U O E E w E c 5 v v 'w o o ❑ ❑ c m a a 5 9 J ❑ c o U p E r w v a v _ o v 2 K Y 2 N K > z v a m w o ° Q Ti 5 w a G 3S w 3 Q N v c 4 1p a s 3 .°- z •�- m Y om 'v v c c '" m c O r o N m w vC .o- o o m m N U as m m Y „ Y o o w °- u 5 oN 0 m �o m — w x o v v m p a v a o c g a rn a o N o v : _ uw m m vr u c rn t - v 0 c w u c -voo o o Z. Q x vs °0 c E r. —°- o °' m m S c 3 a o Q q oE v E w o 3S v o w s a 'w c c a s v . o o ° c w $ a w a 5 m o 3 0 0 m w s = m 0 3 0 °' w o o °' o E u v 66 o Z x c m 3 c 3 c r w a w u u 2 O v a c _ c r° q o a q m j O m N O m m O O N 2 u C p 0 m = o v v — v w a a m v = a m : U rt c r 3 a rt a ¢ v i2 3S i2 a o re 3 ¢ 3 z .n tn G 0 G w o G a '¢ z > 2 z i 3 a N u G ¢ ¢ s o ❑ z J 'g w zz Y 0 5 k w w i 3 5 LL o J w < V V1 N N N V1 N � N V V V V V V V V V V V N N N N N N N N N N N V O O O O O O O O O O O No N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O V V V V V V V V V V V V N N N N N N N N N N N N K K K K K K K K K K K K ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m m m m m m m m m m m m Co- Co- o Co- Co- Co- Co- Co- Co Co o o o o o o aN Co aW 3 - o `w v `w v `w v `w v `w v `w v `w v `w v `w v w w z z « re « re « re « re « re « re « re « re « re « re ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ c o u a Y EO w a c z A m � C ,Q 9 - J y 0 0 $ o o O o 0 00 0 S eO V n O w N NN M M M N M1I NN N M � H Q N M W W W � Z N q 2 p• p E E E E _O _O _O _O W N O VI 3 c_ y O O O O U'd LL � U VxWi O 3 � m Q d c c J E O O 4 4 « d W « W in in d d OI OI m m d � 2 O O OI OI O1 °1 ✓ °U C OI � d Q ry A 0 O q N N N Q E C d — m U E E w u p_ ` $ v v v p = d n vm vm vm om om c ; a $ s m o i o a 5 w « V 9 d 9 d V V °E 2" m m d oO_ a °. w `w `o VI VI OI VI OI N N ❑ i � K S° � -TK Q d K K K K 0 0 w w w w F K z ~ ❑ z z z z z VQi VQi VQi VQi 0 m z Z Q z y z N �D OJ O tD N N O Ol O O O V O O N N N N N N �D OJ N Ol N N N N N N N V V N N O O O O O O N N O NO W W W W W O O O O V\1 D C m o m N N N O O O O O O O O O O V V V V V V V V V V K K K K K K K K K K ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m m m m m m m m m m z z z z z w n z adc A � d c v m Item Number: IP4. CITY OF IOWA CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT July 3, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission: June 13 Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission: June 13 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2024 -5:30 PM— FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret Beck, Carl Brown,Andrew Lewis, Jordan Sellergren, Noah Stork, Deanna Thomann, Nicole Villanueva, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: Christina Welu-Reynolds STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Simon Andrew, Martha Norbeck, GT Karr, Mark Russo 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: HPC24-0038: 4261430 Church Street—GoosetownlHorace Mann Conservation District(aarape demolition): Bristow noted this is in the GoosetownlHorace Mann Conservation District on the corner of Church and Van Buren. 426 Church Street is the house and it had aluminum siding removed recently so some of the photos she showed were old. 430 Church Street had a long-term owner and it has recently changed hands. The subject of the project is the shared garage between the homes. The houses were built on a lot that used to extend all the way to the alley and then it was divided in half north and south and then divided again in half east and west. Both homes are catalog homes built about the same time and have a shared driveway and a shared garage. Bristow said the issue with the garage is that it's 16ft by 16ft and a legal parking spot is 9ft by 18ft so it is too short to fit modern cars. Since the 426 property was purchased by the current owner they've been talking about this garage. With the previous owner there was no need for the corner property to have driveway or garage space but then the property changed hands and now both property owners are interested in being able to park on their property so that they don't have to park on the street. Staff has been working through this for a long time with the homeowners trying to figure out ways to first save the garage but there was no way to just add to it and make it workable, especially for two cars, and Iowa City's zoning code does not allow a garage to be built that crosses property lines. They need to have required setbacks, which can be reduced, but not to zero. The current garage not only crosses the property lines but it also is within a foot or two of the rear property line and all of the properties have to maintain a certain amount of open space. For the corner property, adding a driveway off the side street and putting a garage in the backyard would mean that they have no open space. So the solution they came to was that the garage would need to come down. Typically the Commission would look at the condition of the garage prior to approving demolition and this one does need repair. It has been repaired in the past, the doors are bead board with the framing HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 2 of 11 on the outside but garage doors can be replaced and they can also repair the garage itself as it is not beyond repair to the point where they would normally allow demolition. However, in this case the only way to allow both of the properties to have a place to park is to remove the garage. The proposal is to take down the garage and have a parking pad on each side of the property line. They do plan to separate it by 6 inches, Bristow is not really sure exactly why they plan to do that perhaps due to some code requirements that a property owner doesn't have water that drains from one property to another. Also, when driveways are on the property line it's required to curb them so that the water just does not run onto the adjacent property but in this case it would be difficult for either vehicle to really get from the shared driveway and the apron into the space if it was curbed so it will just become a parking pad. Bristow stated that again they don't tend to approve a demolition for a building that is not beyond repair and if they have a contributing building and it's going to come down they typically require a new one is constructed, especially a garage to avoid surface parking, especially in a rental neighborhood. She explained that is not possible with this project so staff does recommend that the Commission approves the demolition so that the property owners can have parking. Bristow stated it would need to be approved through the use of an exception, and the recommended motion is to approve the project using an exception for the uncommon situation of very small lots with a shared driveway. The guidelines related to this special exception are that sight and landscaping, the provided parking is behind the primary structure which they'll be doing. There is not a new driveway, they're using the same one, but the guidelines talk about driveways being 8ft to 1 Oft in width which this does comply with. The guidelines also stated to have driveways typically from an alley if possible but there's no alley here. In the guideline section about demolition it talks about retaining historic garages and designing replacement garages but again that will not work in this situation. Lewis asked about the limitations on where a garage can go and why that is not the same for parking pads. Bristow believes the parking pads can be closer to the property lines as it is just concrete on grade. Stork asked if they would be allowed to put any type of covering over these parking pads. Bristow replied no, they would not be able to have a carport due to City zoning code. Stork asked if carports have the same limitations as garages. Bristow doesn't know if they're exactly the same but they're similar as again they don't want a structure near the property line because if there's a structure fire it spreads to the other property, that's one of the reasons for setback requirements. Thomann asked if there is any way for them to come back in a couple years and request a garage. Bristow replied again no, there's no possible way. Had this garage been taken out by say a tornado they could rebuild it within a certain limited time period regardless of the zoning code because if something's taken out by weather or fire it is allowed. However, they wouldn't have been able to make it bigger to fit two cars. Bristow also noted they had looked at options to add weird little bump outs so that they could come in and park, or to add a lean-to extension and that would solve the length issue but it wouldn't solve the problem with only one being able to park one car in it. MOTION: Wagner moves to approval of a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 426 and 430 Church Street as presented in the staff report using an exception for an uncommon situation. Villanueva seconded. Thomann noted it really is an uncommon situation and feels bad because the garage reminds her so much of her own garage but of course she does haven't to share it. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 3 of 11 Sellergren is curious if they are planning on just fully demolishing it or if they going to put it up on Craigslist. She always asks about garages because she needs one. Bristow is unsure. Stork is curious how common this is in districts to have shared garages. Bristow replied she knows of a few shared garages but all of the other garages that she knows about are of a size where two cars can actually park in them. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. HPC24-0040: 726 Ronalds Street—Brown Street Historic District(new construction): Bristow noted there may be some places in the report and agenda that list the address as 728 but the address is 726 Ronalds Street. This is in the Brown Street Historic District and previously the property had been divided with the student-built house built on the western lot and this application is for the house construction on the eastern lot. Bristow noted there are quite a few guidelines, and they're all listed in the packet, but one of the important parts of new construction in a district is choosing a style. The Foursquare style was chosen partly because of the fact that there are so many in the neighborhood. While it's definitely prevalent in the neighborhood there's quite a variation between them. A basic Foursquare is generally cube shaped, often slightly rectangular, with a hip roof and then a regular pattern of windows basically in each corner of the square. Some of these houses are from a transitional period so the roof type may vary. The Foursquare came out of the development of the Prairie Style so they often have a wide overhang. Submitted as part of the application were some catalog homes that provided inspiration for the design. Bristow shared the site plan noting where the first house that was built on the west side and the property line that divides the lot in half, she reminded the Commission there was an odd sewer easement that very much impacted the depth of the house on the western lot which then impacted the style and what type of architecture would be used. This house on the eastern lot has a little bit more room but there is a steep drop off from the sidewalk, there is only about 1 Oft or so and then it drops off sharply to the backyard and so that also impacted the design. Bristow said it will be a rectangular Foursquare with a full width front porch and a walkout basement in the sunken area of the backyard with retaining walls around it. The front facade of this house will have three columns, it is typical to often have three columns if they're the thinner columns. However many of the Foursquares with Classical Revival details, like in the Longfellow neighborhood to the south, have large piers and box or ganged columns and so they'll have two instead of three. Bristow pointed out the pattern of double hung windows in a matching pattern. She showed the rear elevation and where on the foundation a door will be cutting through grade and the stairs going down away from the door. The retaining wall will require a railing along it because it'll be greater than 30in. tall. The basement plan walks out and there's the steps up to grade, so it is a sunken patio area, there's a bedroom with an egress window, a bathroom and mechanical stuff. On the first floor is the main entry with the dining room, the kitchen, living room and a bedroom and bath. Upstairs is a series of bedrooms and a bathroom. Bristow said the Housing Fellowship owns the property and has a goal to be able to house some larger families so having this many bedrooms would allow them to do that. Bristow also noted the building HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13,2024 Page 4 of 11 inspections and zoning code staff have noted that they would not be able to turn the basement into an accessory dwelling unit so it would not be able to be a separate living space. All new buildings follow guidelines related to how big the fagade is and this one is just over half the limitation so it's fine, the height of the building being one and a half or two stories, the front setback is consistent with the neighboring property, adding doors that match what is typically seen on a historic building and using siding that is consistent, in this case a smooth LP product with a flat casing. The windows have been submitted as part of the project and is a window that has been approved before. One of the issues is the guidelines do require that a new construction in a historic district is built so the first floor is at least 18in above grade. Iowa City has had very few new constructions in a historic districts, one of them was a Habitat home over in the Dearborn Neighborhood which is a Conservation District so they did require that the front porch on that house be 18in above grade as they were able to create their zero step entry, which is required on all new constructions, at the back door which was right next to the garage and would be the main way that the occupants of the home would enter the house. In this case because of the fact that the lot slopes so drastically off in the back it's not possible to have a zero step entry into the main living space at the back. This is also the case with the property next door they're creating that zero step entry at the front porch and therefore an exception needs to be made to allow that. Also, because the porch floor will be concrete and the guidelines would have any new porch on any property traditional porch construction, an exception would need to be made for having just a concrete slab on grade. Bristow said the American Foursquare styles often have attic dormers or roof dormers on their hipped roof but this one does not, partly to reduce cost and complexity since they do have students that are building the house. There are many examples in town of Foursquares without roof dormers so staff finds this acceptable. One of the questions was about the porch columns. The porch columns as drawn are considered a round classical revival column but because of ease of construction and everything they would prefer to do a square column and staff finds that it would be acceptable to do a square column but with some added conditions to make sure that they're sized properly. The staff recommendation for this application includes conditions that the door product information and the porch column design are reviewed by staff. Sellergren is curious if there is a side door on this house. Bristow replied no, there's the rear door on the basement level but no side door. Bristow noted an entry canopy is something that they might want to consider adding over the back door. Wagner stated it's not required because of the grade, but he noted they might consider some type of porch railing for accessibility and ease of access to the home at the front door. Bristow said it's not required but they did consider that. Simon Andrew(The Housing Fellowship) stated they are very pleased with how the first house turned out and they are excited to get the second one going. Bristow also wanted to point out the plan for the basement shows a window on the side and it's not included in the elevation because of the fact that they have already accomplish the required egress window on the bedroom on the back. Staff would assume that this is a traditional basement window size as that would also prevent them from having to put a window well into the side of the hill and the setback requirements that are involved with that. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 5 of 11 Martha Norbeck(C-Wise)stated these are her drawings so everything mentioned she has thought about. With the basement window they need to have a 24in deep open web trust so that they can run the duct work so that means that basement window is suddenly 24in down from the water table and they have to have a window well and that adds so much cost and complexity and they already the door with the light and the egress window they're going to wind up with no window there. It would have been great to have the extra light in there but from a logistical standpoint it just won't work and again since this is a student build they don't want to be too complicated. Also, a lot of these decisions are being driven by cost for the Housing Fellowship as well as the constructability for the students. They've already got the guard rail necessary for the entry in the back and had the stairs there so to add the railing going up to the upper level made the kitchen/living room situation untenable by creating that access to that door. She wound up actually deciding to make that first floor room an accessible bedroom and accessible bathroom, which takes up a lot of space, and to make the living room and kitchen work in a way that actually felt like a place she would want to live and therefore got rid of the first floor back door which saves the cost of the overhang over that exit and then it also saves the railing and the landing at the at the top. GT Karr(General Contractor, Sueppel' s Building and Remodeling) wanted to take the opportunity to talk about the positive things and how things turned out at 728 Ronalds Street. They had 16 students on the build, they're going to have a family that's a block away from Mann moving in and they got affordable housing ,LEED gold certification, historic district house on the Parade of Homes. He noted they had a 20-year hiatus from student builds but have 26 students involved for next year. His favorite story is it's been on the parade and other than just seeing the kids and the turn out from the neighborhood and all the positive feedback, the Parade of Homes is judged by other home builders' associations, people in construction from Des Moines and Davenport, they judged this home against the half million dollar homes. He's had 150-200 people go through the house last weekend as well but when people in construction who are doing it for a living think they just redid a house and not build from scratch, that is showcasing the good work the students did. MOTION: Lewis moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project of 726 Ronald's Street as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: the door product information and porch column design are reviewed by staff. Beck seconds the motion. Thomann noted she was able to be at the open house on Saturday to see the new home there and it does look like an old home that got a facelift so they did a really good job and she is also pleased with this design too and excited to see something that will accommodate even a bigger family. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. HPC24-0045: 1210 Sheridan Avenue—Longfellow Historic District(rear addition): Bristow stated this house is in the Longfellow Historic District and is a Minimal Traditional with an entryway that is Tudor Revival because of the asymmetrical steep angle of the roof. The lap siding with the mitered corners is pretty much the only ornamentation on this home, there had been shutters on it at one point in time, but it is unknown if those had been added or were historic. Bristow noted the grade dropping off behind the house. The windows on the house have been repaired recently. Showing an image of the back elevation of the house Bristow pointed out a little door and a bump that she is not entirely sure when that was done. Bristow showed the 1933 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map and noted this house was pasted in and that means that it's an alteration to that Sanborn Map. Iowa City's copy of the maps were altered eight HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 6 of 11 different times up until the 1970s and so there are a lot of pasted in pieces but that is consistent with the fact that they think this house was built in the 1930s and it would have been built after 1933. The picture on the map does have that projecting entry but it does not have a bump out on the back. Bristow did note sometimes Sanborn Maps have errors but not too often so she would tend towards thinking this is accurate. She also looked back through the old housing inspector's forms where they'd sketch properties and make notes of things and the first time they visited this house was 1973 and it did have the bump out at that point in time so she is assuming because of the Sanborn Map it was an addition that happened within the first 30 years or so of the house being built. When she was talking to the owner who proposed an addition Bristow noted that little bump out complicated things quite a bit as they have a very small house and so they want to make any addition simple and not complicate the house too much. She was not sure how they would resolve the roof and some of the set-in requirements because of the grade falling off. Bristow used the property information viewer image and sketched in where an addition would be and it looked like they do drop two feet or so by the time they get from where the current back is to the new back of the house. Bristow showed the existing house plan with a living room, kitchen, two bedrooms and a tiny hall bathroom. The proposed addition is to increase accessibility because as of right now to come into this house and go to either of the bedrooms one would have to enter into the small hallway with doors that don't allow for wheelchair accessibility. The plan proposes an addition where that bump out is. Where the bedrooms were in the original plan, one is now labeled closet and it will have the window replaced with a door that goes into a large bathroom that's accessible and a large bedroom that is also accessible through the kitchen area. The roof issue is resolved by basically removing one wall of the bump out and the roof will be replaced to go over the entire addition including the porch. Bristow compared the existing rear elevation noting the existing door and the two windows and looking at the new addition elevations. She noted that the new addition is set-in on the west side and the wall of the new bedroom is technically set-in on the east side as well by encapsulating both the existing bump out and the new addition under the one roof it keeps it simple for a small house. Staff would recommend approving this addition even though it doesn't necessarily fit some of the ways they normally like to see additions done as they're not maintaining the roof on that little bump out but removing it and basically keeping the little salt box that was probably built historically with a crossing gable coming off the back. The main gable roof of the house is much taller so they won't be seeing this addition from the front and since the new wall is set-in that won't be visible either. The porch will have the beam that is typically seen on a porch. The one thing that did come up in the guidelines was the guidelines are very clear that a new porch must be built with traditional porch construction which means that the one column will have a pier under it and whether or not there is skirting under there would be up to them because its going to be close to grade but it would need to still have that traditional porch construction. Also doing so would help them reduce the size of their foundation so it might help reduce the cost too. Bristow showed the west elevation and the entryway to the existing house and the addition. She noted the windows will be separated by framing with a piece of trim instead of being ganged directly together. On the east elevation she pointed out where the existing bump out area was on the existing house and the recessed area for the new addition. She noted they don't want to see a large expanse of wall that doesn't have a window in it but because this is also recessed into the porch staff doesn't find it really concerning. Bristow shared some of the guidelines such as doors trimmed to match other doors, preserving the original roof pitches and spans at least with that front salt box at the entry and all of that, preserving the original walls and vertical corners that define the massing of a historic building and while they are not preserving the roof for that bump out they are setting in from the northwest corner and preserving the actual bump out, adding windows that match the type and everything of the historic windows, adding new windows in a location that's consistent and this does have a few more paired HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 7 of 11 windows on the back that are somewhat traditional in spacing so staff didn't find that concerning. Bristow noted again they want the addition to be set-in so they can distinguish between the historic structure and the new but yet still need to match the eave lines, the window sill and head heights and those other horizontal lines on the building. The siding will match, it will be a lap sighting that has mitered corners to match the historic house, the foundation will need to match. The recommended motion for this project is to approve it with the conditions that the porch follows the traditional porch construction since the drawings didn't indicate that and that the windows are revised as noted and approval of the door product. Thomann is curious as they've got the porch that's at the back of the house but the stairs are coming off to the side, why not off the back. Bristow stated in this case it is because of the slope and change in grade to avoid a larger number of stairs. Sellergren asked if there are any guidelines about having a porch or stairs off the side. Bristow is not aware of any, it is required that the stairs have closed risers and some other things that are part of the design but the only time they would really want a stair on the back is if it was a two-story stair for something that's maybe not as historical. But if that is an issue for the Commission they could discuss it further. Mark Russo (1210 Sheridan Drive)is here with his wife Diana and stated the whole purpose of this addition is that as they age they want to get into a simpler arrangement and this is all one floor. He acknowledged the grade doesn't cooperate real well but it would be easy to grow old in this house because it's all one level. He noted the reason the stairway is on the side is because there's a flat area of grade at the back of the existing bump out that's about 8ft and then there's a drop off of at least 30in or more and there's nothing in the back except a yard so that stairway needs to return whoever is using it to the front which is unfortunately where they have to park because whoever landscaped this house years ago did not allow for any garage nor the ability to put in a garage unless they build a 10-ft retaining wall to the east and that's just not going to happen. If they did go to the north with the stairway it would have to be probably a 15ft stairway they're trying to avoid those issues. Also, regarding the age of the bump out, it wasn't in that original drawing but the siding is all continuous, so he has a hard time believing that this siding was removed to accommodate the bump out. The siding is mitered so it starts at the south end and goes all the way to the north end and additionally in the basement the cement wall was framed and not cut because there is a funny little storm shelter underneath, and somebody built a cement bench. This was all likely done in 1939 or 1940, prior to the nuclear age but that's what he knows about that and it might have been original. He will have to go back and look at it all more closely, it's an odd little structure that is a little dining area off of the kitchen and it's about 6 by 6 so two people can have breakfast or dinner in there but that's all. They did recently rebuild the windows by Wadsworth Construction and bought storms from Adams Architectural so all the fenestration is original and completely working. His hope is they can find a manufacturer that at least in terms of look can replicate that. This house has been gone through the mill apparently it was owned by a an anthropology professor who left every summer for an archaeological dig and turned the yard over to the neighborhood as a community garden but it was really never attended to and up close the siding is really an issue because it's all peeling and there's so many layers of paint that have been applied and then blistered off. Bristow noted when she looked at the past inspector's notes both of the times they said it desperately needed to be scraped and painted. Russo stated four years ago they had it scraped and painted and now are right back to it looking as it did before. He is afraid he'll have to be a little more aggressive do a project and perhaps have the siding removed and run through a machine to get it off because they HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 8 of 11 just can't scrape it off and there are also issues of lead, but that would be a different project to discuss later. Wagner had a question about which Sanborn Map Iowa City has because he stated one can go to the Library of Congress and go to their Sanborn Maps and they have each year that it's issued. Bristow acknowledged that but said they just don't have the 1930s ones and that may have something to do with what's in the public domain. MOTION: Beck moves to recommend approval of a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1210 Sheridan Avenue as presented in the staff report with the following conditions: the porch follows traditional porch construction,windows are revised as noted, and door and window product information is reviewed by staff. Wagner seconded the motion. Beck noted this is a lovely house and appreciates them sharing their stories about it and really respects and appreciates that they're wanting to age in place. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: Bristow noted in an effort to not have as many projects without a permit they are going back to what the Zoning Code really says and it does require that they review anything that requires a regulated permit that makes a material change and is in a historic district. So that means they will be reviewing some basic venting and stuff like that. Generally these are issued a certificate of no material effect and as long as it's not in an impactful area staff is approving it. However now the Commission will see these in the staff report. Certificate of No Material Effect-Chair and Staff review HPC24-0035: 722 East Colleae Street—College Green Historic District(mechanical venting); Bristow stated they have a kitchen area down in the basement of this church and are putting in some vents. There will be one on the side wall and the rear, both in areas where they are not visible from the street. HPC24-0036: 903 Iowa Avenue—College Hill Conservation District(mechanical venting): Bristow explained on the back of the house it will have a vent between a back entry and a window that for a bathroom venting as they're adding a bathroom this house. This property is very interesting, it is a key property in this Conservation District and yet it has synthetic siding. It was damaged during the tornado. HPC24-0042: 1501 Center Avenue—Longfellow Historic District (siding reolaoement): Bristow stated one of the recent storms blew off the siding of this Moffit house. This house is contributing to the District and has had synthetic siding applied but in this case they approved them to just replace what's in the gable and they could match it and are going to paint it because that gable was the only part that was damaged from the storm. Also the porch is a reconstruction, it would not have had these spindle columns. HPC24-0049: 515 Rundell Street—Longfellow Historic District(concrete stoop replacement): Bristow noted this house changed hands recently and it's been glorious to see its transformation. It was probably just a rental house before and now has been purchased by an owner who is completely HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 9 of 11 reworking things which is exciting. This project is replacing the concrete stoop. Minor Review—Staff review HPC24-0017: 818 Rundell Street— Dearborn Street Conservation District(railing replacement and exhaust venting): Bristow stated this is a house on Dearborn that has synthetic siding, the porch has been reconstructed, it is actually a house that would have never had these spindled columns or this spindled railing, the railing is off the shelf from Menard's and it's way too small and too far apart in spacing. They needed to replace the railing now since it's falling apart and staff suggested square spindles and to matching the guidelines with the spacing. HPC24-0047: 030 E Davenport Street—Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District(enlarged rear stoop and stairs): Bristow explained they're replacing the railing and on the back the house has several bump outs and additions and several little stoops. One will be enlarged slightly and the railing will now follow the guidelines. Intermediate Review-Chair and Staff review HPC24-0037: 820 Park Road— Local Historic Landmark (roof shingle replacement with shingle-style metal roof): Bristow explained it's time to replace the roof on this house and it has actually always had an asphalt roof. This was a house built by an engineer and the City proposed to do a metal shingle and the Chair and staff agreed that could fit within what Ned Ashton probably would have wanted to do given the fact he was an engineer and given the fact that they have come pretty far in being able to make these shingles look like historic shingles now. Bristow showed some examples of what the shingle tends to look like when it's installed and the color that they're going with. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR MAY 22. 2024: MOTION: Wagner moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's May 22, 2024. Beck seconded the motion.The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Work Plan and subcommittees: Bristow stated they started emailing about the awards and stuff so that's good. She was going to get a list of potential landmarks from the past hasn't done that yet. Sellergren noted Ginalie from Friends of Historic Preservation sent out an email to all of their members requesting nominations this afternoon. Bristow noted they try not award the same properties and the same people all the time and also do awards for residential rehabilitation on anything on the exterior if anyone has nominations. There are also stewardship awards for anyone who has maintained it for a very long time over time. Sellergren stated the goal is to have a good list by July and the next thing they'll need to do is pick a date and find a location. COMMISSION INFORMATION: Sellergren went to the forum but was only there for a few hours but it was very interesting and they got a tour of Mount Pleasant. The town square is very nice with some really cool brick buildings like a large HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 13, 2024 Page 10 of 11 brick hotel in the corner of the square and the first woman lawyer in the United States was sworn in at one of the buildings that's facing the square, the first courthouse in Iowa was located, there's also Iowa Wesleyan College there which just recently closed, it has a lot of old buildings and was the oldest college west of the Mississippi. Bristow did a lot of tours and attended a session that was more geared to mid-century properties and what's historic and working with them. One of the tours had to do with the Underground Railroad and what's interesting is a town south of that had a large Quaker population and the Quakers felt that they were not beholden to the laws of the land but beholden to higher laws and so they helped the Freedom Seekers. They toured a house owned by a Quaker family where they had places basically below the floor where people could hide. She also went on a tour that included the house that James Van Allen lived in and one of the descendants of one of his brothers was there for part of the tour. There was also a house that was lived in by one of Abraham Lincoln's sons and his wife. Sellergren and Bristow both saw a tour related to rehab and Bristow went on another one that was adaptive reuse. Their city hall building now is offices down below and apartments above. It's a tiny city hall and not anything like what Iowa City would have but interesting. It was a very good conference, and she made notes for things that relate to Iowa City. Sellergren noted next year it's in Muscatine which will be interesting as a river town. Bristow stated the only other thing is Commissioner elections will need to happen at the July meeting. Beck was reappointed and Stork is cycling off the Commission. Bristow thanked Stork for his service and noted it has been very good to have him on the Commission because it is necessary to have a dissenting opinion as they do not need to be a unanimous voting body and it's very valuable to have people like him who live in the District and know what's going on be on the Commission. Wagner discussed the Terrace Mound open house on Saturday, it's a house he has been working on at 5053 Highway 6 East, right across from Kinder Farm. It is an 1873 house that has been renovated and restored, the open house is Saturday from 1 pm to 4pm. ADJOURNMENT: Villanueva moved to adjourn the meeting. Lewis seconded.The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:43pm HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 TERM 7/13 8/10 9/14 10/12 11/9 12/14 1/11 2/8 3/21 4/24 5/22 6/13 NAME EXP. BECK, 6/30/24 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X MARGARET BROWN, 6/30/26 X O/E X X O/E X O/E O/E X X O/E X CARL LEWIS, 6/30/26 X X X X X X X X X X X X ANDREW SELLERGREN, 6/30/25 X X X X X X X X X X X X JORDAN STORK, NOAH 6/30/24 X X X X X X O/E X X X X X THOMANN, 6/30/26 X X X X X X X X X X X X DEANNA VILLANUEVA, 6/30/25 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X NICOLE WAGNER, 6/30/26 O/E X X X X X X X X X X X FRANK WELD- 6/30/25 O/E X X X X X X X X O/E X OtE REYNOLDS, CHRISTINA KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E= Absent/Excused --- = Not a member