Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.12.24 HPC Agenda packet Thursday September 12, 2024 5:30 p.m. Emma J. Harvat Hall City Hall IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, September 12, 2024 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J. Harvat Hall 5:30 p.m. Agenda A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Certificates of Appropriateness Review of Roof Material Replacement Certificate of Appropriateness E) Request for Comment West-side Park Naming Proposal F) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff Minor Review –Staff review 1. HPC24-0073: 713 Ronalds Street – Brown Street Historic District (garage roof shingle replacement) 2. HPC24-0072: 323 Brown Street – Brown Street Historic District (deck railing and flooring replacement) 3. HPC24-0071: 621 South Summit Street – Summit Street Historic District (flat roof EPDM replacement) 4. HPC24-0068: 614 North Johnson Street – Brown Street Historic District (roof shingle replacement, deteriorated fascia and soffit replacement) Intermediate Review –Chair and Staff review 1. HPC24-0070: 103 South Governor Street – College Hill Conservation District (replacement of rear stoop and step to second floor unit) 2. HPC24-0007: 917 Bowery Street – Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District (front bay repair and rear porch reconstruction) G) Consideration of Minutes for August 8, 2024 H) Commission Discussion 1. Commission work plan and subcommittees I) Commission Information 1. Correspondence from John Courtney 2. Correspondence from Christine Denburg J) Adjournment If you will need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jessica Bristow, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5243 or at jessica-bristow@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240 Memorandum Date: September 9, 2024 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Jessica Bristow, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Review of Roof Replacement Certificate of Appropriateness The Historic Preservation Handbook allows for the Commission to consider some items to be staff-approvable (formerly known as “pre-approved”). These items can be approved by staff without consultation with the HPC Chair or the full Commission if they meet the pre-determined conditions. They have been issued as Certificates of Appropriateness with the conditions for approval listed. This type of review was envisioned to include things such as windows, doors, railings, and decks. This could be items that are universally acceptable or that are acceptable if certain conditions are met. For example, a certain type of handrail may only be appropriate on Victorian style structures or a deck is only a pre-approved item if it is set back from the sides of the house a certain amount. Some “pre-approved” items were included in the 2010 approval of the current handbook. In January 2018 the Commisison added several additional types of projects that could be reviewed by staff alone. At the August 8, 2024 meeting of the HPC, the Chair requested that the Roof Replacement is further reviewed by the Commission. The Certificate of Appropriateness for Roof Replacement is attached. The conditions for roof replacement to be reviewed by staff are as follows: • All details of fascia, trim and gutter remain as existing • The roof currently has flat asphalt shingles or 3-tab shingles and the new roof will be architectural asphalt shingles mimicking wood shake shingles or a flat panel standing seam metal roof, or • The roof currently has a flat panel standing seam metal roof that is deteriorated beyond repair and the new roof will be architectural asphalt shingles mimicking wood shake shingles (a new flat panel standing seam metal roof would qualify as a Certificate of No Material Effect) The final condition allows staff to approve the removal of a historic standing seam metal roof (if deterioration is documented) and to approve the installation of asphalt shingles. This condition does not take into consideration the significance of the property or the roof. Staff would recommend that the conditions are revised to include, “The house is classified as non-historic or non-contributing to a district” or that standing seam metal roofs are removed from the staff-approvable Certificate of Appropriateness. An excerpt from the January 2018 minutes is attached for reference. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION January 11, 2018 Page 10 of 15 Roof shingle replacement of certain types as minor review. Bristow said there are a lot of roof replacement projects that come up since they were included in the review beginning in 2015. She said that typically, there will be a roof material like 3-tab shingles that are really not appropriate, or the agricultural metal roof, or shingles that are appropriate but the owners want to use the metal roof system that was put on the 932 College Street house, or things like that. Bristow said it would be a little more straightforward if this could be a minor review if it is not a certificate of no material effect. She said she is not talking about replacing standing seam metal with standing seam metal; she is saying maybe it is appropriate to put shingles on a certain roof or something along those lines. Bristow said staff spelled this out in the memo. She said that all of the trim, fascia, everything needs to remain the same material profile as the existing. Bristow said therefore the roof either has flat, asphalt shingles, which are not typically approved, or three-tab shingles. She stated that the new roof will be architectural asphalt shingles mimicking wood shake shingles or a flat, panel standing seam or the roof currently has flat panel standing seam that is deteriorated beyond repair and the new roof will be architectural asphalt shingles mimicking wood shake shingles. Bristow said that again, this is not covering the certificate of no material effect that would be replacing it with another metal roof. Bristow said this would be basically allowing for the replacements that have generally been felt to be appropriate but not a certificate of no material effect. Swaim said that in the third bullet at the end of the first line, there should be an "and" between "repair" and "the". Agran said he thinks the wording is fine. He said the Commission is getting pretty nuanced about the standing seam roof. Agran said it is saying that one can have a metal roof but only an exact kind of metal roof. Agran said it is intriguing to him that there are instances when one cannot put in a vinyl window, because it is not historic and the material is not historic and it is not expected that those will have the same longevity. He said yet asphalt shingles that are like the definition of fake, and are also volatile, are allowed. Agran said he is of the opinion that all of those shingles all look fake on every house. He said it stands in opposition to the historic character of the neighborhood that is talked about all the time. Agran said that actually, these metal roofs that are equally old and much better investments in terms of maintaining the building stock for a much longer period of time - those roofs are a lot less volatile. Agran said he just wonders whether, when all of this is preapproved, it sort of means that one can do whatever one wants to do, i.e. asphalt shingles. He said it might be that there could be more encouragement to put a longer and better investment in, since that is something that in all other respects of what the Commission does, that is really what it's about. Agran said it's about what is the best investment to maintain the integrity of this envelope. Bristow said that the whole use of asphalt shingles that mimic wood shake shingles is a direction that has been taken from some of the preservation guidelines from the National Park HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION January 11, 2018 Page 11 of 15 Service. She said the National Park Service does recognize that as an appropriate replacement for the wood shake that just cannot be replaced because of various reasons. Bristow said the second bullet point in the handbook on roofs says, "Consider unoriginal materials that may have achieved significance, such as metal roofs." She said that is something that staff would tend to suggest to some degree. Bristow said that at this point it is still a little cost prohibitive for some people to do that. She said there are differences in the types, etc. Kuenzli asked if someone proposing this might qualify for the City's $5,000 grant. Bristow said that is possible. Bristow said that for a long time, staff thought a lot of the metal roofs were original. She said that when the tornado came through, a lot of the metal roofs that were removed had wood shake shingles underneath, showing the metal roof as the second generation roof. Bristow said for that reason, staff has generally thought that if a roof is deteriorated beyond repair and the owner cannot afford to put on another metal roof, the asphalt shingle is acceptable, because it probably had wood shake shingles underneath the metal roof. Bristow said staff does talk to owners about whether a metal roof can be coated with Acrymax and if it can be repaired. She said staff does try to have that discussion first. Agran said he is thinking more about what these kinds of guidelines encourage. He said there are endless conversations the Commission has with people who come in and claim something is cost prohibitive, and the Commission tells them it's not about cost. Agran said he doesn't quite understand why an exception is given to roof material. He said there is an anomaly here with roof materials. Agran said that with every other item, the Commission says it's not about the cost; it's about the long term future of the building. Bristow said those are valid points to think about. She said that roofing is an odd thing. Bristow said it was not regulated until a couple of years ago, so it is new to the Commission and staff. Bristow said the biggest thing is that if an owner has shingles and they are flat, but he can put on something that has more definition, that is the way to go. She said it is totally up to the Commission if it doesn't want to come to an agreement on making this a minor review item at this point. Bristow said staff doesn't consider it a certificate of no material effect to replace bad flat shingles with architectural shingles. She said that is a change that does have a material effect on the house, so staff would like that kind of thing to be a minor review. DeGraw asked if, when a person can be cited for letting his house go, for example the paint has deteriorated, is the paint on a metal roof in the same category. Bristow replied that she did not know that answer specifically. She said the inspectors have been stepping up inspections, and she believes that they do also look at the roof as well as the house itself. Agran said he believes this should proceed as written. He said he does not see any change here. Agran said that he thinks about asphalt shingles and felt it was the moment to discuss it. Baker said that the roofing item could be removed from the list, with these items still coming to the Commission until the Commission comes up with better language. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION January 11, 2018 Page 12 of 15 Bristow said that if the Commission feels that something needs to be revisited, it can also make something no longer be a minor review item. Swaim suggested the Commission pay attention to these as they come up in the staff report and if problems emerge, revisit any of the items. Synthetic siding removal as minor review. Bristow said that if the siding is steel or hard board or vinyl or asbestos, and it is being removed, it is not really a certificate of no material effect, because it usually has a very large effect on the house. She said that staff basically wants to encourage the removal of these types of materials. Bristow said the general feeling is that most of these houses show some indication of what the original siding is underneath. She said that if for some reason an owner doesn't know, it maybe would be a case to come to the Commission. Bristow said that sometimes an owner doesn't know until he gets to that point, but then perhaps it is an intermediate review, if it is in a certain neighborhood or district. Bristow said they tried to write this by listing some synthetic sidings and felt that it would be assumed that that was not the original siding. She said the only time there might be an issue with that might be with mid-century modern. Bristow said in that case, hard board could be the original siding. Bristow said the language states that any repairs may be made with materials matching the original in type, size, and profile. She said she did not include material, because there may be an instance where cement board could exist with wood or not or maybe an instance where the siding is cedar and the Commission does not want to require cedar if red wood is appropriate or something like that. The consensus of the Commission was that the language is acceptable. Window and door modifications on the back of a primary structure as minor review. Bristow said that if a door opening changes size, location, is added, changes from door to window or window to door, it comes before the Commission whether or not it is on the back of a house. She said there are times when, if a door is directly on the back in particular, it could be reviewed by staff instead. Bristow showed examples of when this might apply to a door on the back of a house. The consensus of the Commission was that the language is acceptable. Carriage house-style (two-story) garage as minor review. Bristow says there are some neighborhoods where a home may have an accessory apartment above the garage. She said there are some garages where, if the owners want to design something simple, like the garages in the guidelines, then they don't actually need to come to the Commission unless they are taking down another garage first. Bristow said that if an owner is just building a garage in an appropriate location and it fits a certain design standard, then it is basically a minor review. She said there have been a lot of carriage houses and they tend to end up looking similar. Bristow said that if the owner wanted to fit one of those designs, then it could essentially be preapproved also. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240 Memorandum Date: September 9, 2024 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Jessica Bristow, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Park Naming Proposal Juli Seydell Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation, has requested the Commission’s comments on a proposal to name a new park on the City’s west side. The park is located in the green space indicated on the attached map, between Highway 218, West High, and the Galway Hills and Lexington Place additions. The portion of the park between West High and Shannon Drive (indicated with an arrow) will have a shelter, path, and playground. Kevin Boyd, former Historic Preservation Commission Chair, has propsed to name the park after Adelaide Joy Rogers and has provided information about her life and work in the community. While she was on a historic ballot to serve as a Parks Commisisoner in 1921 (unsuccesfully), she advocated for equal educational opportunities for girls and women. Kevin’s email and proposal are attached. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240 Park location (green area west of Highway 218) with area to be improved marked by an arrow Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240 From: Kevin Boyd <kevinmboyd@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 8:36 PM To: Juli Seydell Johnson <JuJohnson@iowa-city.org> Subject: Proposal for Name of Shannon Drive Park ** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or attachments. ** Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files. Juli, I saw over the weekend in the most recent Parks and Recreation Commission packet and minutes (yes I read them) that the Commission is considering names for the Shannon Drive Park at the September meeting. I’ve long thought Adelaide Joy Rogers would be a fitting name for an Iowa City park. Would you please forward this proposal about her to the Commission? Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! Kevin Boyd 319-400-2051 (mobile) MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 2024 – 5:30 PM – FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret Beck, Kevin Buford, Andrew Lewis, Ryan Russell, Jordan Sellergren, Deanna Thomann, Christina Welu-Reynolds, and Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Brown, Nicole Villanueva STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Sellergren called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: Certificate of No Material Effect -Chair and Staff review HPC24-0043: 332 East Davenport Street – Northside Historic District (internal gutter repair) This is the Emma J. Harvat house and this time they're working on the internal gutters. The contractor is proposing to patch them with fiberglass and that can be controversial because making sure that it adheres to the substrate is important or it doesn't bond and will leak. The contractor reports they have done this quite a bit in a district in St. Louis and has not had problems with it leaking. They'll also fix the sofit by replacing it with new where it's rotten. HPC24-0059: 1003 East Washington Street – College Hill Conservation District (porch ceiling repair) Bristow noted what's actually the most interesting about this house is it looks brick but it is stucco impressed with a brick pattern. She doesn’t know much about the history of that process so reached out to one of the local historians and she didn't know about it either so it's something that they'll need further research someday. However, this project is the front porch ceiling, which was just a plywood ceiling covering the bead board which was actually in good condition. They'll be painting it and replacing a piece of crown molding filling the gap between the beam and the ceiling. Bristow noted they also approved them to do it on the back porch too but is not sure if they intend to do so. HPC24-0060: 316 Church Street – Northside Historic District (porch floor structure and flooring replacement) This is a historic house in the Northside Historic District, which is interesting because it is taller without any windows at all in the second-floor façade. It has windows on the two gable ends. Bristow discovered during review of this project that the floor portion of the porch had been built by the owner and they are going to be replacing it. The original floor lasted 30 years or so. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2024 Page 2 of 5 HPC24-0064: 713 North Lucas Street – Brown Street Historic District (replacement of a portion of the foundation wall) This house has a shed roof extension on both of the back corners yet, on the historic maps it looks the existing footprint. Bristow noted an area where foundation is different under the porch because they filled in the porch. The NW corner is the same material. This NW corner of the house must have had the foundation wall replaced in the past, but they need to fill in that area again and this time match the other part of the foundation Minor Review - Staff review HPC24-0054: 721 Brown Street – Brown Street Historic District (roof shingle replacement) This project is a simple asphalt shingle replacement to new asphalt shingles. HPC24-0056: 820 Bowery Street – Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District (front and rear step replacement) With this house there was an issue as they needed to replace the steps and they built the steps without a permit. The staff approvable steps will have closed risers and a toe kick or overhang on all the steps. There are also code requirements for riser heights being the same. The owner had rebuilt the steps but did not meet the guidelines. He knows he needs to replace them. HPC24-0058: 312 South Governor Street – Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District (front step and railing replacement) Last month this house had the driveway and the sidewalks replaced and now they're removing the steps and in order to do that they have to regrade the front yard so it's going to change how the steps meet the yard. They are also rebuilding the railing, it currently is a wrought iron railing and that will not be approved however when there are instances like this with a big historic column that is not east to attach to, a standalone railing is the best option HPC24-0062: 721 North Linn Street – Brown Street Historic District (roof shingle replacement) The Phillips house on the alley in the Brown Street District is a roof shingle replacement. HPC24-0063: 604 Ronalds Street – Brown Street Historic District (front porch roof cladding replacement) This property is a key property in the Brown Street District, and they've been working with them on replacing various roofs and now they're doing the front porch. While normally black is recommended and they want white and since it won’t be seen a white membrane roof was approved. HPC24-0067: 619 North Johnson Street – Brown Street Historic District (metal roof replacement with shingles) This house went through the UniverCity Partnership program so they flipped it and improved it. There was a deck in the back that was removed. This house did have a historic metal roof and it was approved to be replaced with asphalt shingles. Sellergren asked if normally going from a metal to shingle roof is something the Commission used to vote on. Bristow confirmed yes it used to be however a few years ago the Commission approved it as a minor review so that staff could review it. Sellergren feels that something they should move to put back on the Commission. Bristow stated that is something they could put on the next agenda to discuss. She stated there are times when it might be appropriate to change a house from a metal roof to asphalt shingles, for example the houses with the standing seam metal roofs may not warrant the expense of another standing seam metal roof and it’s possible the Commission could approve shingles on a house like that. Bristow will put this on the September agenda for further discussion. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Intermediate Review -Chair and Staff review HPC24-0055: 812 South Summit Street – Summit Street Historic District (minor revision to a previously approved COA) Bristow noted the Commission had already seen and approved a design for the ramp for Deluxe Bakery but during the building permit process it was noted there would need to be a change. The ramp goes basically to the property line and then comes back towards the sidewalk and along the face of the building. It was all to be concrete which fit with the stoop that they have and the metal railing. However, during the building permit process they requested to change the portion that runs in front of the building to a wood deck floor instead of concrete, a more commercial wood deck construction than what one would find in a residential house wood deck. Staff questioned the changing from one material to another and the reason why they wanted to do this had more to do with the owner's concern about having to put the same type of footings under a concrete ramp adjacent to the stone foundation. Bristow noted there could be ways to get around that but it would require additional expense and it isn't good necessarily to put concrete adjacent to the stone. So the goal here was to be able to use a different type of footing and a different type of pier to support that portion of the deck. Additionally, it will be behind the planter and won't be visible. HPC24-0025: 121 North Linn Street – Local Historic Landmark (new sign and awning installation) This is the Economy Advertising Building and they have new signage that will go over the area that was Linn Street Café. Bristow noted that the signage must be mounted through the mortar joints only and no new holes are allowed in the historic brick. They will mount the signage to a bracket so all of the letters will be attached to the bracket and that will be attached to the wall to minimize the amount of connections. They are also doing an awning which will be installed with the existing mounting hardware. HPC24-0066: 504 East Bloomington Street – Local Historic Landmark (rear one-story wall, concrete step and cellar access wall reconstruction and cellar door replacement) Just north of the hospital is this big brick house that has a wall failing and the brick was being pushed in by the concrete paving adjacent to it. There's no expansion joint or anything so every time there's a freeze and thaw the concrete just pushes further into the wall, causing it to bow out and the whole wall is collapsing. They are using a mason who will be able to rebuild it mostly by salvaging brick with a few new bricks needed to piece in. The cellar walls are also brick and they are completely falling apart so he'll re-lay concrete block down there and will salvage some of those bricks as well and be able to use them in the wall reconstruction. They will cut back the concrete to create a permanent expansion joint and put on a new steel door on the cellar opening. Sellergren had a question regarding the paint because with brick houses in Iowa City they often see a kind of creamy yellow and is that the historic standard or just a preference. Bristow replied it is not a standard but is very common. HPC24-0069: 923 Dearborn Street – Dearborn Street Conservation District (non-historic brick removal and siding patching) Bristow stated this house is non-contributing at the very end of the Dearborn Street Conservation District and the Commission, in the past, approved a second story addition which the guidelines would not allow now. Regardless, at the time when they added the second story, the house had a non- historic patch of brick cladding on the façade that is falling away. The owner was concerned that she had to rebuild it but of course since it's a very modern thing that's added she can definitely remove it. Underneath, the historic siding is covered with asphalt shingle siding with metal siding over that so she's going to just patch with metal siding. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 11, 2024 Page 4 of 5 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 13, 2024: MOTION: Wagner moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's June 13, 2024 meeting as amended. Welu-Reynolds seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JULY 11, 2024: MOTION: Wagner moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's July 11, 2024 meeting as amended. Thomann seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Work Plan and subcommittees: Sellergren noted they had a good meeting regarding the awards ceremony and have committed to February 27th at the public library. They have now made a working order of what they need to be doing over the next couple months and they will be meeting monthly to stay on track. The other subcommittee regarding future landmarking, in particular with the Downtown District, the previous chair Kevin Boyd had worked with the Iowa City Downtown District chair at that time, Nancy Bird, and they developed an incentive proposal that did not end going anywhere with the City Council. Perhaps now is a really good time for a subcommittee to form and look over that and maybe start having conversations with the current chair of Iowa City Downtown District to talk about how they can actually move forward and put some protections on those buildings. Bristow suggested that the communication this time includes staff because part of the concern from the original proposal was that there was not any staff input and it was felt that some things might not be as feasible as other things. It would be good for this subcommittee to meet with Anne Russett or Danielle Sitzman to discuss ideas/options. Sellergren agreed having a meeting with senior staff to explain the relevant issues and they need staff input to actually move forward and be successful. She does think they have City Council’s ear and the public's ear since the landmarking of the building including Pagliai’s and could hopefully make some progress. They could start with some of the low hanging fruit in the downtown area that's owned by people who are supportive of landmarking to set an example. She has been hearing from people who are business owner’s downtown who have a lot of concern about what's happening so now is a good time to move forward with further protection so if anybody is interested in being on a subcommittee let her know. ADJOURNMENT: Thomann moved to adjourn the meeting. Lewis seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:15pm. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2023-2024 NAME TERM EXP. 9/14 10/12 11/9 12/14 1/11 2/8 3/21 4/24 5/22 6/13 7/11 8/8 BECK, MARGARET 6/30/24 X O/E X X X X X X X X X X BROWN, CARL 6/30/26 X X O/E X O/E O/E X X O/E X O/E O/E BURFORD, KEVIN 6/30/27 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- X X LEWIS, ANDREW 6/30/26 X X X X X X X X X X X X RUSSELL, RYAN 6/30/27 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- O/E X SELLERGREN, JORDAN 6/30/25 X X X X X X X X X X X X STORK, NOAH 6/30/24 X X X X O/E X X X X X --- --- THOMANN, DEANNA 6/30/26 X X X X X X X X X X X X VILLANUEVA, NICOLE 6/30/25 X O/E X X X X X X X X X O/E WAGNER, FRANK 6/30/26 X X X X X X X X X X X X WELU- REYNOLDS, CHRISTINA 6/30/25 X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member