The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/22/2005 Historic Preservation Commission IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, September 22, 2005 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Lobby Conference Room 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda 3. Items of Consideration A. Certificate of Appropriateness: 1. 730 N. Linn Street 2. 415 Clark Street 3. 528 E. College Street B. Minutes for August 15, 2005, August 25, 2005, and September 8, 2005 4. Other Discussion of application process 5. Adjourn Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process. explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook. which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at www.icgov.orgIHPhandbook. Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. Applications are due in the PCD Office by noon on Wednesday the week prior to the meeting. For Staff Use: Date submitted ......fP...:3.J.r?!J./O"E...... I:J Certificate of No Material Effect \.--0 Certificate of Appropriateness ,--. 0 Major review I:J Intermediate review I:J Minor review Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) ]a Owner ....-:Z&'O.f....K.C?iI.CJ!J:............................................... Phone ..::J.!.:L::..33.:2::..S9..S{.CP............................................. Address ......~~.~....~;....b.'bí.'J..:S±.:................................... ............u.......................................................................n..................................·....···..·..·..·· c<xf- \ rJ':;>' · email .......f..b!?">.O:..\i:-.K<a.~!~.~..@.r.7.1.ç...b..s.i.~..!;..£m......... Contractor~.J.=...........~.R~~ð-1?£......~~~~~....~::: Address ................................k.ß~.......t.~~~...n~~~.. .................................................................................................................................. Phone .....1.~.~.:..'J.~:?~.......~::.....?.2.~.....~.~.2............. email............................................................................................... c. ~," I I:J C;"ll 't.Rt ..~.......R.&~h..Wtj.~...~:O'J.....~~~±c~ Address .......................................................................................... ...........................................................................................-.........................n........ Phone ....~.!..0..=3.5.J.::..'J..y..?;J............................................. ................................................................................................................................ email............................................................................................... Application Requirements Attached are the following items: [J Site plan I:J Floor plans o Building elevations iZt- Photographs ta'"' Product information I:J Other ............................................................................ If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure. please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. Property Information Address of property ..........'J....J.Q......N;....'==J.'tJ.()...0.t.............. ................................................................................................................................................. Use of property ........º.(~.'-~.fr.>.:h~.t........................................ Date constructed (if known) .....1:~.:J.3............................................. Historic Designation o This property is a local historic landmark OR I:J This property is located in the: it Brown Street Historic District [J College Green Historic District I:J East College Street Historic District o Longfellow Historic District o Summit Street Historic District I:J Woodlawn Historic District o Clark Street Conservation District I:J College Hill Conservation District I:J Dearborn Street Conservation District o Lucas-Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: ,\ V./d Contributing \,' ""'1> I:J Noncontributing \ I:J Nonhistoric Project Type ¡;t Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations. new decks, porch reconstruction. baluster repair or similar) I:J Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) o Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch. chimneys. decorative trim, baluster or similar) I:J Construction of new building o Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance o Other Project description . .~.f~~º.~...~k:\f~!7.UW+...:...............?s?......~.4':?.~~~.......(~~...:?..~..~....~~.::::~.....~~~P.::..~..£~~..~.:-!:.~!.f.~t..f:!}~) .........................!)...~~,.~.)M~....~~~....~.~~....~~~..I..........~~.~.....~~~~~.~~...~.:.!....~~.4................................................. .........................:?~....l£g.~-:~......~~.......B).ì3......±~.~ß:....~'n~.~......~~:;....~.b\L:::b......cpe!:)......................................... ..................................................L~.......~~.......~:~~......~~~~....:~~'é...h....~.':');...rt~............................................................... .........................~~...~~.}\~~......t~~'!:t\...C~~.~~.\.~~\.....b.~......tf.~0.....~ael.....~\\....þ.Y.0~·..±b,L................ -...........b1.."J..'>b.<...fœ.a>ti..b..1:,-p¡gY:>~...Qs."-~,.-..........-..-......................--..... .........................1j......$.9:D".......~bJ..Q~............~~.....h.£.::>.......f9?'J.!.'>:J~.L....~....:k....Cf.fill.......~....................... :::::::::::::::::::þ~:¿b~~:~~:::~~jd~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...........................9.\..........:F:......~~~.......J::~.......~.....~......~0e.r-ocr.....<..ffSJ.'f!.].t......bi.:........~L.\::1.? .............................:................:1b.I?-........~r.:Its-.b>.:J.........a.c~.......~,~.....'{.l~~.}.¡.,&l4i.Û.....=*......p..~:\::..I.h....6.it...p:t.v.?M... OW.,(¿/J . fu.c.~~.I.á~ J.j.c.r..'?:~~...r:J:).;;). ~.~~... ..~L f..~...g ~f..... ........... ......... ............... .................... ............. .......... ............ .....þ...lç~tI.....Jj~.~~'::-..~;)~...~b.,...~~...vw!..~m~dlL.I~f.!....Lh;¡,1w....r.:~f...l!A-t............................... .............. ......"!:?...~~....~~~\~....~!:'~.~..;:tJ:¡~..Œ.~~...~!:...);..~~....~....t.~....~g.~~~l....~~~~:.>:J....:h....s:?{'\)g.c..dt~...~~ fJ~~ s":\:¡::: ~d \,\<..Q. "e"", ~,_...)~.r-.. . ~~""""'ð ""'~~ d= I'\o:::k- \¡o..:..'~" c.-,,,,~.. ~~~{''''' .9C>-.ì' ..::¡:.. 1Vœr:.·~ 1"t'x. ·tn <¡;.:>I'Fo:~ Q.AJ !;...<::..~"- +,~. Materials to be used ~).h~~.~...:.......Pe.Ù9.......!)~~~&...J:hoð:.....}....~J....f{0.~...t..a.)~!:~~..C)d...~.1.....º.~J~~¿f ....................................~<:.....º.~.tb.(.J........J.~CC¡~.6J).._.................................................................................................................. ~~:::.=:~~~~~=iY.2f:=~~~~~==~~~:::~~~~:~.'::.~=~:~~::':::~~~::~?~::~ .~~..;:........~~:-2..~....~:(.~h.....~~.~~~~.~~...Jr.eJL..p.)ð~.:......................................."............................................................................ .:fu:~~~..::........L~1......C~#..~~~..g~!.!.-r......~~~~~-'t.-:..~.~....f.~~...~fQU.l.............................................................. .. t.r.g~.. r....~\~ ::.....~..~... .!:.-.~.....t~Ù:~.. ...:-Th.. .~±c.h.... <: ~.~±~.;........ ........ ...... ..... ..... ... ..... ...................... .................... Exterior appearance changes .ß~y.:....£.4f:¡.J.?..f..:f0.a.Ö~r......c.t9~~....~QL~.r......0!.!.2¡::?~...±rs.0::0.....;::::........../!1.áh6....1~.....ex.!.~.hd- ................................................................n.........................................................................................................................................................................................006.................................................. .g.ff.).0.I~........~~~~......9.~~~.~.~......~.LÇ.~....~.......::b:.......ß..........l.K.~....s.b.~~......c~:......~..Q.).Jb).\}....:±b&....e..~~~ .. ..... ...b ~ .: .. ...... ..... . ................................ ..... .. ... .. ... ....... ..... .. ...... .. .......... ..... ....... ............... .. ... ............ ............. ....... .. ......... ......... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................u ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ppdadmlHP HandbooklApp.p65 Pell~ Windows & Doors are designed to last for years with carefully selected materials that deliver outstanding durability and performance. Windows & Patio Doors Pella® Windows and Patio Doors-Feature natural wood interiors that can be painted or stained to match your décor. Wood is naturally energy-efficient, too. It provides up to 1,100 times the insulating value of aluminum. Hassle-Free TM aluminum-clad exteriors are finished with our tough EnduraClad® coating (a multi-step, baked-on coating process) that's exceptionally durable and low-maintenance. Plus it's available in three Standard colors, seven Feature colors and a virtually unlimited number of Special Custom colors. Glass options-Different climates require different window technologies for best performance. Pella offers a variety of choices including unique double- and triple-paned glazing options for maximum energy efficiency. Low-E coatings-Optional Low-E glass coatings help reduce heat transfer and UV rays that can fade carpets, walls and furniture. Energy efficiency-Many Pella products meet or exceed the Department of Energy's ENERGY STAR® standards. That energy-efficient performance can mean substantial savings on your heating and cooling bills. Construction-Solid-wood construction offers outstanding insulating qualities-in fact, wood provides 1,100 times the insulating value of aluminum. Double-Hung - A more traditional appearance than casement windows. Double-hung windows are common in older homes in the eastern part of the United States. They're a great choice if you want to maximize the amount of wood on the interior of a home. Double-hung windows come in larger widths (up to 45j and may help save money. ,^=' ,- ... '-""- " -~. \~/ " " .~, " .-P ÛJ X I J . 1 () N ~ ,,-- , ""',"""C" ~'¡. ""'- " '" ", ',"<: ,''<,,:', "">,J&y J'..> * -" ',iF '_" ""'>:~t,<",, . z z ,,- -1 '" z () r<) ~ '(,' 0"". :,~(\\,';;:>:"", /, . , ., ,., "', "/'; ", " <H '"," ," , ¡'" \' ,~ ' " " .. '"" '," CO :!',:)SR~ \',' +"<i" .' .., 'i";;? .;, '" ,),,'" >:,," ""'I". <;;,,"'''' ':';;:¡:! ,,,, ,'" /' 7XN~ J-!NN Sþ~ Staff Report September 22, 2005 Historic Review for 730 N Linn Street District: Brown Street Historic District Classification: Contributing Applicant, Thane Kading, is requesting approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for proposed alterations at 730 North Linn Street, a contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The applicant is proposing to replace approximately 20 existing windows with aluminum clad wood windows. The applicant also plans to repair/replace the soffit and fascia boards and replace the external gutters. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: Please refer to following sections: 4.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations 4.7 Windows Staff Comments This 1891 house was built with the influence of Late Victorian architectural style with Queen Anne features. Despite some alterations such as the addition of the screened porch on the southeast and some window replacements, the main structure is intact and retains many of the original features. The guidelines recommend repair rather than complete replacement for the windows and sashes. The guidelines recommend preserving the historic windows by repairing the sashes and frames and if they are badly deteriorated replacing them with wood fames and sashes that the historic windows. The guidelines do allow use of replacement with metal clad windows when they can be painted and match the existing windows. The Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation recommend original wood material rather than synthetic or metal clad windows. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible when replacing material beyond repair, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. In staffs view, possibilities of repair should be thoroughly examined. It may prove to be feasible, cost effective and would be good preservation practice to repair as many windows as possible. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. Applications are due by Wednesday the week prior to the meeting. For Staff Use: Date submitted .....O~)¡...t4.¡.f)S-::........... I:J Certificate of No Material Effect !XI Certificate of Appropriateness ......er Major review Q Intermediate review Q Minor review Applicant Information Property Information (Please check primary contact person) I:J Owner .........J~nt~.!.~.Rg.~~.............................................. Phone ..............;?;?7.:-.4.º4.~............... ............................................. Address ..........4.J.?..Ç.~~K~g~~!............................................. .........................}~~~..q.D.'1.!A..?~~1?.................................... email ..... ............................... ............................................... .............. I:J Contractor ..~~~~º~~~p.~............................................... 631-3950 Phone ............................................................................................... 321 Kirkwood Address ........................................................................................... .........................J?~~S.~~;..~~..?.~.~.~Q................................... email................................................................................................. ~ Consultant ..~þ.~.U~.Y..MçÇ,¢.J.~.m:......................................... Address ..........f6~.S.:.~Mmm.Ü..~1r.~~.t.#.º1.......................... .........................JQ~ª.qD:,JA..~.7..7.4.º.................................... 541-4047 Phone ............................................................................................... .............................................................................................................. . shellrnac@att.net emall ................................................................................................. Application Requirements Attached are the following items: Q Site plan I2i3 Floor plans ~ Building elevations I:J Photographs I:J Product information Q Other .............................................................................. If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the Address of property ..1J?.ç.!~~..~~E~~.~......................................... ........................................ê.~~f.~.Y..ß~~q~.~~~.......................... Use of property ...................................................................................... Date constructed (if known) .............................................................. Historic Designation Q This property is a local historic landmark OR !XI This property is located in the: Q Brown Street Historic District Q College Green Historic District Q East College Street Historic District Q Longfellow Historic District o Summit Street Historic District Q Woodlawn Historic District ~ Clark Street Conservation District Q College Hill Conservation District Q Dearborn Street Conservation District Q Lucas-Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: !XI Contributing Q Noncontributing Q Nonhistoric Project Type Q Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) ŒI Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) Q Demolition of a building or portion of 'a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) Q Construction of new building Q Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance Project description T.N.~..!§.~.~~!1~~.J].~.!9..!h~.~4.~!~QJ]..~!.}.Y.~.ªp.p.t~y'~.g.þ'y'..~~.ªP'ç.~.J]..§.~.p.~~mg~t.ª:...r.Q~.ªP.P.E£~~ê.P.~9.P'9.ê~.~~............ ~.UmJ~!~.~~..f.:...:~þ.IJm..P..:Q~e.9.~.~~.~!.~~ª~.Qf.~~.~gJ!!QP:.~.g.~~!~!14..~~.!!gª!!!9.~.ª:.:.!Q.!h~.~Qtfu:..Th~.þ'ª~~.J;g........ ~~ªg.~.)YQ~ªJ?~mQ~.~..f!QJ;g.!h~.~Qtfu.~J.~~.~!A~.J]..!~ß!~.~ê§.!..~~~y'ª!!QP::ß~.~~.h~g.9.!.ª~gê:................................................ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................................................................'..................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Materials to be used ~~~.~.p.!~Y.!9.~~y..ªP.P.~.Qy.~ª:......................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................................................10.... Exterior appearance changes ......................................................10....................·...·.·.·····.··..·······..··········.............................................................................................................................................. .....10.......................·············.·············.................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ....1010...................·····························....................................................................................................................................................... ................................1010........................................................................................................................................................................ .................10..............................···.··.................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .........................................1010..10................................................................10...................·..·.··.························........................................ ,,;:..' " -.s: -- ~ "'" '::'. -- -~ ..n ,-~~ "",> .~~- ~ 'S;" ..'T ~, - f-----.--.- : If ()¡ :)? / P'.·. T'7"~""'...,., - 1-------------1 I L I . il I : I I I , I I "- () ~I C<) ........ I t: :f\ ';2: ~ ~ : ._.~_J. --t I -t-l- I [ ! I ~ I I ,~I I 4J1 '" I I --:¡/T&--~ c.:*----;7;"?-11- II ¡,. ,,<7 If /. ---"--ç~þ/--"--'-- -- /f ¡- 'z S ~ ~ \\-...: ~ ~ ~ ---=.=--~\-, -------/J~I ~ / /1 , / /;'" ,,/ ¡ \ / // II -- -- - /"0 / ,,". "" I ! ' "'~."",~ ',- " ' ., " "\,"l -- ~ ~~ >~s ~ l~ ~ ~ ~ ~' /' , II I i 1 I 1 I I 1/ 1/ "q' .. ~, Staff Report September 22, 2005 Historic Review for 415 Clark Street District: Clark Street Conservation District Classification: Contributing This is a second revised application from Bill Dostal, requesting approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness for an addition at 415 Clark Street, a contributing property in the Clark Street Conservation District. The revised proposal for the first floor addition, measuring approximately 27 feet x 16 feet, will be at the rear of the existing structure. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: Please refer to following sections: 5.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Additions Staff Comments The general mass of the proposed addition will be very similar to the previous proposal. However, this proposal differs from the previously approved proposals in the footprint, fenestration placement and roof mass. A 'bump out' on the eastside of the proposed addition has been omitted. Instead of two double-hung windows on the north façade the new proposal includes one small circular light and the east wall of the addition, behind the garage will have a bathroom window. The addition is, in general, consistent with the Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines. Staff recommends approval. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Meeting schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the fourth Thursday. Applications are due by Wednesday the week prior to the meeting. For Staff Use: Date submitted .....J!...0.[!..?!..~.................... o Certificate of No Material Effect !XI Certificate of Appropriateness o Major review o Intermediate review o Minor review Applicant Information Property Information (Please check primary contact person) o Owner ...........H~.~~~.~.~~Y.!g.~Y.!.f.2!.~............................... Phone ..............J~1:-.9..~.~2........................................................... Address .............?~&g:.çgJt~g~.§Y.~~L............................... ........................JQ~~..q.!Y.J..~..?~~~g.................................... email ................................................................................................. I:J Contractor .................................................................................. Phone ............................................................................................... Address ..................................... ......................... ............................. ............................................................................................................. email ............... .......... ..................... ........................... ........................ ~ Consultant ..~.Þ.~º~.Y..MçÇ,~~tt.Y.......................................... Address ..........7.6~.s.:.~mnro.\t.~P.:~.tt!.R4.......................... ........................Jº~!!.Ç.~!Y2JA..~.7..7.~º.................................... 541-4047 Phone ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... . shellmac@att.net emall ................................................................................................. Application Requirements Attached are the following items: o Site plan ëiI Floor plans !XI Building elevations 129 Photographs I:J Product information o Other .............................................................................. If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure. please submit a site plan, floor plans. building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the Address of property ..?.~~.g:..Ç2H~g~§~~~~............................... SinCT1e-famil Residential ...........................................~~............Jy.................................................. Use of property ...................................................................................... Date constructed (if known) .............................................................. Historic Designation o This property is a local historic landmark OR W This property is located in the: o Brown Street Historic District ëiI College Green Historic District o East College Street Historic District o Longfellow Historic District o Summit Street Historic District o Woodlawn Historic District o Clark Street Conservation District o College Hill Conservation District o Dearborn Street Conservation District o Lucas-Governor Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: !XI Contributing o Noncontributing o Nonhistoric Project Type o Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations. new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) ëiI Addition to an existing building (includes decks and rámps) o Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) o Construction of new building o Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance Project description Th!=?..~.P..~U£~~.~º~s1.H~~.~º.~~MQ.~.P.r.~YiQ~.~~Y...~.l?Pr.Qy~g.~'p'PH£!:1:!ÁºM.f.qI~.~.r.~£9.~~ITY.Ç.~.~Q~.9.f.~.J?Qx~h~g.~þ:~Q:..Th!=?... <?gg!~.~.p.ºK£hh~.~.}yQQg..g~Ç.~.~~.~~.!:1:ºº~~..~.~.~£h~§.~Þ.Qy.~.g~~.~:..Th~.~ºQQ.~~~.çM!~£~b:.Q~.fu~.gr.º~g..~~ÁÇ.þ:........., ÇQMÞi.þ'~!~g.~º..~t~..g~~~gQ~~!9.~.~g.X~p.J.~£.~!p'~gtQy'~r..fu~.Y.~~.~..T.º.P.~Y.~~t§~£h'p'ºxþ'!~.!p'~.!g.fu~..fu~~~..fu~.~p.P.!Á~t~.~... ~~g~~§~!g&.!þ'~!.~.~-ºg~X~!~A~£~.Þ.~.~pp.m.y~g.xf!!Þ.~r..fu~.x~m.riI1g.!:1:.~ºQQ.Q~£~:...þ'U~gQ!!t<?~J9..!~~£9.~Ç.!=?æ.!hf!tf!.~<?'Qø 4~£.~.~m.~Y.~M~~ty'.Q~!~gQr~!~.~Q.~~~J9..þ.~.r.!=?p.t~~.g~..fu~.£Q.~!.Qf.}yQQg.hê§..~~º£~~!~g..~.~~£!=?.~~£!:m~.K~~~:....... Th!:1§..~.£9.~Ç.~~~.g.~~.~U.t~º!-ºg!Y.J~.§jW.:g£~!QrJº.~g~r...j~.~~.tþ.~.~P.l?X9.?9m!:1:~.1.Y...$.J...?gºJ~~~.!Q.£9.~~ITY.£!:..I<?~p.r.º.Y~ ~~.!Qº.~.9.f.fu~.£ºg£X~.~~...!h~..~.l?pH£.~Ü~'p'Xº'p'º§.~g.!º..~Qg~..fu~.£Qg£K~!~..~.~f.!-Þ..~fu.~.§Q!Q~.~LÇ.Q~§~-º.f.þ'g£.~.!º.m~!£Þ:.fu~. I?:º~:........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .............................................................................................................·····························.··.··.··.............u......................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... Materials to be used _~~~.P!~Y.!9.!:1§.~Y..~P.P.~-ºY.~Q:......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 'I....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .;)....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................."....................................................................................................................................................... Exterior appearance changes ~~.~P.P.~.~~~~.~?~~.~~.~.r.~:.~.~~.~~.~~~~~~~~~.~!~..~.~~~~~~!~.~~~~.~~.p.~~~~.~p.~~~.~.~~~~~?~~!:.~. I?~~~.~:..f.\~.~~.~~~~~.~~~~~~.~~~.~.~.~~~~.~:..?r..~?~~~~~~;.~~~~.~:..~.?~.~.~~~p.~~~..?r..~~.~~.?r..~~.~.:~~~~.~.~~~.f~~......... I?~~~.!.:?~~~~~?~~~:..~.~.~.~.~~~?~.~.~.~~.~~~~.~.~~~~~~.~~.~!~.!!~~~~).~!..?~~..~~~~~~.:..~.~:?~~.~..~~.!~~..~~?~.P.?!.~.~. of the Grant Wood House on Court Street. Attached is a photo of the Pratt House and additional photos will be ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... provided at the meeting. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ...............................................................".......................................................................................................................................... In addition, the applicant has already invested substantially in rehabilitating this house. It is likely that the amount invested iñtïiëïiöüsëïiäS'ëxëëëd'éd'iišmäfi(é't'ÿäiüë:"TIiërërörë:'iiië'ä¡;¡;ïiëäiitreqüësts·tïiåtthëïüö¡:ë·äi¥ördäbïëäppröäëiïbë········ åp¡;rövëëf.'·····..······································..····························..········..········..··········..·········..···.. ............................................................ ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2x wolmanized ledger bds. 2x roof joists @ 24" O.c. 2x4 Crown moulding to match original or sim. (2) 2x8 cont. header Extg. soft brick wall Bead bd. ceiling 12 ~"" "..: .", .. '. ", , i' "1 I I I ) : ( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,-1-_-1, I I L___---.I 3-tab asphalt shingles to match extg. over 301b felt over 17/32" aSB sheeting 1 x6 cedar fascia bd. Half-round gulter Crown moulding to match original or sim. Cedar frieze board Salvaged decorative frieze to match original New columns to match original (by Warren Hanlin) 4" reinforced concrete slab Brick soldier course edge; brick to match ext'g in color and texture ã3 -æ 1;1 c: 'c co;, => 'C: 0 Š õ ~ c: .2 c: 16 8 8 0 -' « Q; E 8 ~ '" "''E "§.8 .... x CD _ N ~~ Z oð "8.~ ~~ l~ .2:.g, ",,,, (/)0 r------,-, I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , ICJ ICJ frlVI Óì/l.Ç' A-ppððV &J -------------4-1 I I I , , , , , , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I , I , ____.../--------:.._J c 0 :¡:::ø '" CO C> > I ..- Q) II W <0 ..- ..c: ?5 1:::: Q) 0 ro Z 0 CJ) ----''---------f-; I I I I I I I I I I I r r r r r r r r , I , I I I I I I I I I I I r I I I r I r I I r r r , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I r , r I fre'1<'ìô1.Jll -A-þ P rD VA\ . c: 0 :¡::; b ro I > ~ Q) II CD W ~ - ......... M en Q) ro co W (,) en ,~^'" ".,'. {, fJ"jif " ""'''' C'"'' '-- "",i '""-"'0,',,,,,,,.(; "\A1'" w-.¡'+·'" V"""" ""W(U" ''Ä''''2i?r' '11D'"'0'1'.\\ij!ifjf&0'(~W:0i!f"f10h:"tkz&jgJ0'XÝ.1ii1it\'!!@)¡J5*k\§¡;;!,@j.!t"'+'5tý&-%_;;;"i!#K!%:"'&'Ù';jf;'-I!r'1I"~"400~Ø~Á\h10ií\W))"\\)¡V-*0Yt~%íJ0:{V@)ft9"';iji%Nj¡P}Si:&iJÄ)~'&ii\tiff*\Yii1'011\Kj;\/fL&J'illMh'ff2-(0.0k¡:§h-'¡&"""'(fiœ\0ww0""h*!iÞ)"('1"",",,,,,,, '_",,^W"%'0\iN' ,.«; ,''''i,,_,v'Wß;/Y'h, "",-"Ò''<'' "</~:;0,t!;¥ÞA)R~tr$.5!;f¥m1;;t\Z«,Hts\'IYM!;~~;%0mJ;/¿<ss'(!0:':::\J-0{7:';é'{£{7&~!4;;;Pj¥8(-,&(ìi?A&~01%¡%ig4hf;P;;djy;~;jJ,~?¿k.:0t,#¡t?t,!>t:;1.<@tYAY'ii,*,Þ'!1\;j.\f;%{«Ji{;\'¡;t'0.1*K&"Ji{~i;,~¥'è\;;tt4f,SfÆ¥;}&{'£;,(j*;~;i}W#1':?;A;§y;yg~,>¿f;Í'jsi5i;;,'!~ti:*$;g{1;.'f~s~;\tI\;r\}J;t~;\{1T*;\0..Jfb:%;6t~';éi%1iff;";-i&j1\-j¡$¡\{*YM~YHt'~ifSY0Þ"4fi{f1j{¡)X~0»ftjl!P&:;:~lV:t~{;'f:~.!Y'YX¿tHE;gþj¿;~;U0Þ5'Y*,'i,Š_*<}Y:~:¡t}{j~:,'-':;~'~~;<:;'(>:~' ,-'C,'" ,:'.' ", ,",",' '" ,,' ,'" ':-- ""',", .",,<,, '" '/: ,".', ' '\" --':'--._'-:, "-",::,<"",,:,'{;¡'-»'\')"/<'<?'>'~)."'>'/;"<::)y,,,;.;,;""'~:,'""''';,,,;:--,>;,,::;,, "':"j-":>"::>'/":"'" ',':0;'/:>"::;:"': :'>:"<'::'''J,;:''<';'-'''',,,"- ·:c.;:':Oô,",,'}<-,;-,,__ ,':'':'':'-'-',,<,:y,:.'!:',:;,,,,:,, «f,'i';'-,',,;>!,"" ':"';':",'/:--':->'f';,;~'L::':'/' ';"":-",,,;:',"""';::__,<:__, ,.,"-::".". ",' ';.," , ': ," , ':,'" ,",", " " ',': __;'_" ';, ",',,, --,,,,,,",, "','",, ,",,', ·'.-",'"N "" ',,,:,--,,,' . ene ftttA un ðthe r n> erfieb e ð Cf) "''''' ~ Staff Report Historic Review for 528 E College Street District: College Green Historic District Classification: Contributing September 22, 2005 Applicants, Helen and Kevin Burford, are requesting approval for an amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness approved for the reconstruction of the back porch and shed at their property, 528 E. College Street, a contributing structure in the College Green Historic District. The revised proposal is to construct a concrete deck for the porch instead of a wood deck. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4,9 Porches Staff Comments The demolished porch had a wood deck. The guidelines do not allow substituting wood with materials that do not retain the function appearance of the original wood. The applicants are proposing to use a concrete deck due to the low floor level. The guidelines allow exceptions for using a concrete deck on the porches with a floor level less than 18 inches above grade on noncontributing properties. The property under consideration is a contributing property in the district. The applicant has indicated that a brick course would be used to "improve the look of the concrete". In staffs view, this may create false appearance of a style that was not original to the house. MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMAJ. HARVAT HALL SEPTEMBER 8, 2005 PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Justin Pardekooper, Jan Weissmiller STAFF PRESENT: Chris Ackerson, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Bestor, John Cordell, Maria Duarte, Kurt Dyer, Mike Lange, Shelley McCafferty, Owner of 1022 E. College Street, Roger Shultz, Rose Shultz, Jenni Thielen CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 520 Clark Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the Clark Street Conservation District. He said the application is for an addition to the back of the house that would be over the existing addition, measuring approximately 24 feet by 18 feet. Terdalkar said that one of the issues to be addressed includes the size and proportion of the new addition in relation to the house. He said that the guidelines specify certain criteria, which are mentioned in the staff report. Roger Shultz said that the preferred way to add on to a colonial is to place the addition to the side or to the rear. He said that the addition involves the rear of his property, to increase the size of the upstairs. Roger Shultz said that the addition would take advantage of the east and south sides to enjoy natural light and enjoy visual access to the oversized rear yard. He said that he does not propose to expand any of the footprint of the existing house, which would keep the emphasis on the main house and simplify construction above an already-made addition. Roger Shultz said that the gabled roof would be perpendicular to the existing gabled roof. He said an eleven-inch extension would be given to the east side to match the existing house. Roger Shultz said that plans show that the roof is actually twelve inches higher than the original roof. He said this was done to maintain the pitch very close to the original roof pitch but still allow an eight-foot ceiling line in the addition. Roger Shultz said he plans to add French doors in the back, a protective railing, and a sunburst window similar to a fan lamp that would be found in a colonial house. He said this would be recessed into the addition by six feet. Roger Shultz said that he would also like to place windows as close as he can to match the existing windows in the house. Roger Shultz said that on the south side, he is looking for a proud vertical stance that is typical of earlier colonials. He stated that adding windows that are as close as he can find to the original home will contribute natural light. Enloe said the owner wants to have an eight-foot ceiling height next to the walls inside the addition. He asked the owner what he has on the front part of the house on the same floor. Lange said that there are approximately five-foot knee walls. He said the owners want to avoid that. Weitzel said that the Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) had concerns about the roof ridge that would be taller than the original building, the fact that the fenestration would not match the original building, and the loss of original windows that are somewhat unique on this house. He said the DRS noted that the roof rising above the original height is not in keeping with Standards Nine and Ten of the Secretary of the Interior, which state that the addition should remain subordinate to the original house. Weitzel said that the Commission's Guideline 5.1 recommends that a design professional be consulted to harmonize the structure with the original house. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 2 McCallum asked if the roofline was being lifted in order to maintain an eight-foot ceiling height. Lange confirmed this. Ponto said that to still have enough slope on the roof, it would end up being that tall. McCallum asked if this were being done to match the roof angle of the original house, and Lange confirmed this. McCallum asked if there would be any other way to do this. Lange said that the pitch of the roof could be reduced, but it would then not match the pitch of the existing house, which the owners thought would look better. Terdalkar noted that the proposed pitch does not reflect the pitch of the original house. Gunn said that the pitch would be slightly less. Lange said that if he went with the extra pitch of the existing house, it would be that much higher. He said that the rise would be about 12 inches higher than the original. Lange said that typically that would be framed in a triangle in the front that would be proportional to that. Lange said that he could modify the truss design to bring it either to meet or slightly below. Maharry asked where the chimney fits in. Roger Shultz said that the peak comes just to the right of the chimney. Weitzel said that a 7 Y2 foot ceiling is required by code. Lange said it would have a cathedral ceiling effect so that the sidewalls would be eight. McCallum said that if it is then only 7 Y2 feet on the sides then that would probably be functional. Gunn said that he put a one and one-half story addition on the back of his house and had the same problem with the sidewall. He said that he went up to a full eight feet, and his addition was higher by probably 18 inches. Gunn said that he just pulled the angle back so that it was not visible from the street. He said it was the exact same issue, but he pulled the wall back at an angle so that the peak is back behind the line of sight from the street. Gunn asked if there is anything on the north side. Lange said there is one back window on the north side. Roger Shultz said that there are two existing windows that are spaced, and then there would be one more window to the left of the last existing window. He said that farther over there is a closet where they originally put a window but later took it out, although he would have no objection to putting it back. Gunn asked about the current addition. Roger Shultz said that it was added on in 1978. He said that the wall is flush, and the siding runs all the way across. Gunn asked if there are cornerboards on the house. Roger Shultz said that the house has aluminum siding, and there are cornerboards on every corner. Gunn asked about the siding for the proposed addition. Roger Shultz said that he would use hardi-plank and would paint it as close as he could in color. Lange said that if there is an objection to continuing the aluminum on it, he would probably use the hardi- plank on the prior addition as well as the new one so that it would be consistent. Gunn suggested using a full vertical cornerboard, even though the plane doesn't change. He said the huge north face that is all flat could at least be broken up with a vertical rail. Regarding the windows, Lange said he tried to mimic the windows of the addition versus those of the existing house. Roger Shultz said that on the east side, they matched up the window sizes. He said that there are a number of different-sized windows on the house. He said there tend to be more panes on the bottom sash than on the top sash. McCallum said that the trim around the windows on the original house is not really wide. Maharry said that is a good question, whether the second floor should look like the original house when the first floor doesn't whatsoever. McCallum said he agrees with Lange's assertion that what is on the addition should be consistent with what is on the current addition, because it might draw less attention to itself that way. Weitzel said the guidelines are written to recommend that the windows match the historic windows, not the addition windows, with respect to type, proportion, trim, and appearance. Enloe agreed that the guidelines are clear on that point. Weitzel said the language doesn't mandate that the windows match but does recommend it. Gunn said if it were a new addition from the ground up, it would be an easier issue. He said that narrower windows on top of wider windows would look a little odd. Weitzel said that the DRS also looked at the placement of the windows. Maharry said that there is already currently asymmetry on the first floor, as there are two on the south side and one on the north side. Gunn said that on the south elevation, the triple wide windows look out of scale even for the addition below. He suggested that three pairs of windows instead of two triple windows would get a lot closer to the scale, Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 3 size and look of the windows of the historic house. Gunn said it would give almost as much light. Roger Shultz said that they would be willing to consider using two or three pairs of windows there. Weitzel said the DRS also had comments regarding the custom window over the door in the back. He stated that one suggestion was a half moon fan light. Roger Shultz said that there are also semi-circles on the side of the house that are vents. Gunn stated that the sharp corners don't really fit. Roger Shultz said that they could change that to more of a fan shape. Lange said that the window is actually set in six feet so that the window would not be the focus of the appearance. He said that there would be six feet of wall, plus a gabled ceiling, and then the window. Weitzel said one would have to be directly due east of the house to see the window. Carlson asked if a wide recess in the middle of an end gable would be an appropriate historical feature. Roger Shultz said that it is a very typical way to modify a colonial to have the opening centered like that on the second floor. Weitzel said that there are actually little balconettes built in the 20s and 30s, but he thought that generally they used a flush wall. Carlson said he had not done any research on it, but that was also his impression. Rose Shultz said they thought it would be a nice break and would be a nice focal point. Carlson said the fact that the eave of the addition would not be significantly higher than the eave of the rest of the house seems problematic. Weitzel said Terdalkar had pointed out that it should match. Roger Shultz said there is not an eave problem on the north side, but the eaves would be slightly different on the south side. Weitzel said that bringing the eaves down does bring a certain set of problems, and the best way that DRS could think of to fix that would be to put on an historic large gable on each side. He said there would then be a triangular roof with projecting large shed gables that could run the whole length of the addition and even run into the house roof. Enloe said that seems like a fairly extreme solution to have the roof go to a higher point from starting at a much lower point. Weitzel said that the angle of the roof is determined by the base. He said that to go all the way to the ridge point is pure geometry; there is not much else one can do. Enloe said it seems more extreme than the existing plans. Weitzel said the real roof is really still the shed dormers. He said a gambrel would be another option, but that would add an entirely different stylistic element to the house. Lange said that structurally there may be some problem with the roof load not going over the outside wall. Weitzel said that the side beams would have to be beefed up to carry the load. Lange said that running 20 feet with the TGls as it is would be quite a lot and would not be very practical. Weitzel agreed that it would be a lot of wood. Weitzel said that the guidelines basically ignore the first addition. Roger Shultz said that in the end, he wants people to look at it and have it look like one house. Weitzel said that the Commission would want it to blend in harmoniously but not want it to look like it was built with the house. Enloe said he is less distressed by the idea of the flat façade of the original, even though it does not have triangular gables. Regarding the inset, Carlson said there are balconettes that simply would be flush or perhaps slightly recessed. Terdalkar said that a balconette would be similar to what the Commission approved on some non-historic houses, projecting about 18 inches out from the wall. Enloe said that the projection is not the question; the question is the six-foot inset toward the interior of the house. Terdalkar said that balconettes are generally not inset; the door opens right on the plane of the house. McCallum said that the design infill guidelines generally suggest this type of pattern to get balconies recessed versus projecting outward. Lange said that the owners' original thinking was that where it is somewhat of a walkout plus the original addition plus the addition is potentially a flat surface without doing something to break up the back side. Maharry encouraged the Commission to look at whether the proposal is going to be an improvement over what is there now and if it will in general look better than what is currently there. He said that it probably does improve the appearance. Maharry said even though it is a large addition, it moves more toward what the Commission would want than what is currently there. Carlson said he disagreed. He said that what is there now is unobtrusive compared to the proposed plan. He said that he thought it would be overpowering, and not in a particularly historic way. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8,2005 Page 4 Gunn said that the detailing maximizes the size of the recess. He said that if it were trimmed more narrowly and with a curve, it could be much more discrete and in a style that is more appropriate to the house. Gunn said that some curves and narrow boards would minimize the size. Weitzel suggested having an arch there instead of the angular peak. Lange said he did not think that would be an issue. Weitzel said that a window and top to match would soften the façade. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for an addition at 520 Clark Street with the following changes: 1) the front of the second story roof addition shall be cut back so that the ridge is not visible from the street, 2) the south elevation on the upper story shall be changed to have two pairs of windows with reasonable spacing in between, 3) the details of the balcony opening shall be changed to minimize the size, with an arch at the top that will be more appropriate to the style of the original house, and 4) a vertical seam shall be installed at the original east corner of the north elevation to visually separate the addition from the original house and a vertical inside corner installed on the south side of the addition as well, Brennan seconded the motion. McCallum said he thought this would be a nice compromise. Carlson stated that even with the minor changes, this will be an overpowering addition and not particularly sympathetic to the original house, so he would vote against the motion. Weitzel said he had some problems with this but thought that the Commission was probably doing the best it could do with this. Gunn said that he would vote in favor of the certificate. He stated that this is a large addition, but the Commission also ran into problems with trying to control the size of the additions. Gunn said that when the guidelines were written, the Commission tried very hard to incorporate language to control the square footage and the scale of the additions, but the legal staff would not allow it. He said that the guidelines only control the appearance from the street and the size of the façade, because the legal staff said that the square footage cannot be controlled as long as the project meets the Building Code requirements. Weitzel said that he believed the National Trust due process pamphlet would side in favor of the local jurisdiction over the Secretary of the Interior for something of that sort, where it is such a strong codified difference from the Secretary of the Interior Standards and is locally prevalent. Maharry called the question, McCallum seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-2, with Carlson and Enloe votina no. 1022 East Colleqe Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a key, contributing structure in the East College Historic District. He said that the proposal is to replace the roof on an addition on the back of the house. He said that in the process, the roof pitch will be changed to attain practicality regarding drainage issues. Owner said that the flat section of roof over an addition is buckling in the center. She stated that water is pooling and damaging the clapboards on the original historic section of the house, and there is leaking into the house. She said that she is proposing to pitch it a little bit to allow for proper drainage into the gutter so that the water is not pooling or running back against the wall of the main part of the house. Owner said that because of the overhang of the other part of the addition, it won't be a high pitch, because the roof can only go up about six inches or so anyway toward the back of that. Gunn asked if it would get as high as the eave of the original. Owner said it won't touch that; it would stay beneath the existing addition roof. Weitzel said that the DRS had no problem with this, especially in light of the roof problems. He said the DRS recommends a durable, low pitch type of material for the roof, such as EPDM. Weitzel also suggested putting an ice barrier up behind the first two clapboards as a flashing. He said that metal flashing was acceptable. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of a roof and change of pitch at 1022 East College Street. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 5 1027 East Colleqe Street. Terdalkar said that this is a non-contributing structure in the East College Historic District. He stated that the application is for the addition of a porch on the front; the size would be approximately 25 feet by 10 feet and that the applicant has agreed to provide revised drawings of the porch with balustrade design. Thielen, the owner of the house, said she planned to build the deck first and then later build the roof to the porch. She said that the foundation needs some repair for the winter, so she would like to get started on that now. Thielen provided an elevation of what the porch would look like. She said that it would have a hip roof with a gable right over the entrance. Weitzel told Thielen said that she would also have to have a handrail on the stairs. Weitzel said that if there are four treads or more, a handrail is required by the Building Code. Terdalkar said that it depends on the height of the deck and number of risers required for the stairs. He said that if four or more risers are required for the stairs, a railing will be required. Thielen said that she didn't have a problem with having a handrail. Weitzel said the first choice would be a simple, black pipe rail. He said it is the simplest and easiest thing to do and has the least conflicting style with the house. Weitzel said the other choice would probably be a wooden balustrade type railing. Thielen said she thought she would prefer that to match the railing [on the porch]. Weitzel said that if the railing matched the drawing, that would be fine. He added that he thought the Commission would suggest a simpler newel post for the base than the large newels posts at the top, but she could probably go ahead and match one of those too. Thielen asked if the newel posts at the deck height were okay. Enloe said they were actually pretty massive. Gunn asked what type of house this is. Weitzel said it is probably an Italianate in the far back but has had some additions. He said that the front wing is an addition. Weitzel said he thought it was probably a Queen Anne and had a wraparound porch at some pOint. Weitzel asked Thielen if she had scaled back from the plan to have the (porch go all the way around. Thielen said that she still plans to extend the porch back to the side door, and the roof would go all the way around to that. Weitzel said that one concern is the short columns, and for the pediment above the doorway, those usually have columns supporting it, because it is a classic revival. He said there is almost always a pediment with two columns beneath. Thielen said she thought that the front elevation needed the pediment. Gunn asked what the dimensions are there. Thielen said that it is 21 feet across to the edge of the house, and the extension to the side door is four and one-half feet. Gunn said that if the column were moved over to have symmetry with the door, then the span shouldn't be too long to get out to the corner. Weitzel showed a drawing with a wider pediment supported by the columns. Gunn said the idea is to center the pediment and the columns in line with the door to make it symmetrical about the front door. Enloe agreed that the pediment should be symmetrical over the door. Thielen said she had the one in the center because the Building Department was looking for a footing there. Gunn said the footing could be under the column, with the column moved over. Weitzel agreed that it could be moved a little bit toward the door. Maharry suggested that the Commission approve the concept and leave the design details to Terdalkar and the Chair for final approval. Weitzel said that because this house is non-contributing, it can have square spindles. Carlson said that the columns look a little wide for both Italianate and Queen Anne, which would have had narrower posts. Enloe suggested eight inches or smaller. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the addition of a front porch at 1027 East College Street with the conditions that the posts be placed at the ends of the pediment centered about the door; with smaller posts for the handrail and railings for the stairs, if Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8,2005 Page 6 necessary; with lattice or simple vertical bars for skirting; and with final drawings to be approved by the Commission or staff and the Chair, McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. 228 South Summit Street #A2. Terdalkar stated that this is a key-contributing structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said that the project involves the replacement of two double hung windows with casement windows for the purpose of having egress windows. Terdalkar said that this alteration would be at the back of the building. Cordell, the owner, said he intends to replace two double hung windows with casement windows for egress. McCafferty, the consultant, said that there are currently no egress windows in the apartment. Weitzel said that the DRS felt that the window replacement made sense, according to the guidelines. McCafferty said that there are other casement windows in the first floor of the building. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of windows at 228 South Summit Street #A2, Ponto seconded the motion, The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. 328 South Governor Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District. He said that the application is for the replacement of six inoperable windows in the attic with double hung windows of a slightly larger size. Weitzel said that the DRS noted that the replacement would impact several probably original Queen Anne/Edwardian type windows in this house that are central panels fixed in lead with other small squares around the panel. Dyer said there really needs to be some ventilation up in the attic where living space would be added. He said that on the back he wants to put a dormer and egress window, but that would be the only ventilation. Weitzel said that vinyl or vinyl clad wood windows may be used for replacement of basement windows for conservation districts for historic, non-contributing, but there are no upper-story window allowances. McCallum suggested that skylights would give flexibility and some functionality and would save the original windows. He pointed out that they could be used in the rear elevations. Weitzel said that he would rather see skylights here than the removal of the windows. He said there are some skylights that are pretty flat that have a low profile. Gunn said that would also give a lot of light. Weitzel said the skylights could go on the proposed addition on the back. Ponto said that everyone on the Commission would like to save the windows. Dyer said he thought that two skylights would be acceptable. He said that the dormer is only about three feet wide. Terdalkar suggested one each on the south and north end one on the east roof surface of the house. Dyer agreed that would work and added that they would not then be seen from the street. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness to allow two openable, flat skylights for ventilation, one each on the north and south ends of the eastern roof at 328 South Governor Street. McCallum seconded the motion. Weitzel said the Commission would recommend metal skylights because this is a roof component. Carlson asked if the gable was approved as part of this application. Weitzel said it was a separate application subject to final plan approval by the Chair and staff. Terdalkar said the certificate for the dormer was approved subject to the final plan being approved by the Commission or the staff. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. The consensus of the Commission was to review the proposal for the gable. Weitzel read from the memo, "In staff's view, the dormer as proposed would be very large and would not fit in the roofline or mass of the structure. This will effectively add another gable end to the roof changing the roofline significantly. The guidelines allow new dormers that are designed'... such that the face of the dormer is primarily composed of window area. '" Weitzel said that the DRS thought that the size of the plan indicated a gable addition, not a dormer addition. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 7 Terdalkar showed what the Commission originally reviewed and asked if the Commission would approve of the final drawing, the revised proposal. Dyer said that the revised proposal is not much bigger than four feet long and eight feet wide as shown in the original. He said that it is hard to draw it on a computer to go with an eight/twelve. Weitzel asked for the final dimensions for the dormer to be approved. Dyer said that it would be about eight feet high, eight feet from south to north, and would sit on a soldier wall and come out three feet from the roof at the top of it. Carlson said that it looks much bigger than what was approved on June 30th, although it might be just in the way it is drawn. Dyer said that it is only out about three feet. He said that that length of the ridge is only about three feet. Enloe said the Commission still needs design drawings that show the real dimensions. Enloe said that Terdalkar's rendition is more acceptable than the applicant's proposal. Weitzel said that Terdalkar made the drawing because there was no plan. Dyer said it sits on the soldier wall and goes straight up and then comes out three feet. Weitzel said the original plan said four feet long and asked if that was from extending on the ridge four feet and now it would just be three feet. Dyer responded that it would be three to four feet. Terdalkar said his drawing was done to interpret the applicant's drawing and try to find out how to put up a window of egress height. McCallum asked Dyer if Terdalkar's interpretation of what the Commission approved is acceptable to him. Dyer said he is only talking about three to four feet to get level going out. Enloe referred to the soldier wall. Dyer said that the dormer should be standing on that. Enloe said that it is then much more accurate in the second drawing that the Commission has, which appears to make it a lot larger gable than the other rendition, if it comes all the way out to that wall. Dyer said that it is a real little dormer. He said the problem is that the addition goes inside, and then there is a wall there. Dyer said it is hard to visualize, although he knew that Enloe was saying that it has to come way out to hit it. Enloe said the distance from the peak of the current gable to the soldier wall is greater than three or four feet. Dyer said he did not believe so. Weitzel said it would have to be about five feet from the gable top to this point. He said the drawing shows the roof as beginning at a point behind that gable, so that is five feet plus, not three or four feet. Weitzel said the Commission needs a final plan with dimensions. Dyer said that there is a ten-inch overhang too, and the wall is back inside there. Dyer said the Commission wanted the pitch to be at an eight/twelve, so it has to be that big. Weitzel said the preference was for the roofline to match the existing house. McCallum asked if the reason for this was to get height for a staircase. Dyer confirmed this. McCallum said then that a big dormer is not really needed, and Dyer confirmed this. Weitzel suggested trying a different kind of dormer to give room over the staircase, perhaps an octagonal dormer. Gunn said that if the Commission knew where the headroom is needed and had dimensions, that would help. He said that this doesn't sound undoable, but the revised drawing seems much bigger than it needs to be, and the other drawing is much less precise than the Commission needs to approve it. Gunn said the Commission needs measurements, including how far in from the gable end is needed for clearance. He said he was sure the applicant didn't need a dormer that is higher than the existing gable. Gunn said it would be below that and would be in a ways, but the Commission can't approve what it is uncertain about. Dyer said that eight/twelve is the existing pitch. Weitzel said that a shed dormer might work, depending on how it was designed and how it looked. Dyer said he thought that what is really needed is a wall on one end as indicated by Terdalkar. Gunn said that would certainly minimize the size. He said that if the wall can be positioned based on where the headroom is needed, then everything else should fall into place. Maharry said the motion passed by the Commission at the other meeting said that the Commission or staff could review the final drawing. He said then, that at any point when the drawings come in, the plans Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8,2005 Page 8 can go to staff for final approval. Ponto said that the Commission has already agreed in principle, and the details just need to be worked out. 517 Grant Street. Weitzel recused himself as Chair and from consideration of this item. Carlson led the meeting at this point as Vice Chair. Terdalkar said that this is a contributing structure in the Longfellow Historic District. He said that the application is to cover the built-in gutters on the existing house. Terdalkar said that the proposal is to do it in such a way that the roof slope at the end of the gutters will be changed. Duarte, the owner of the house, said that the main problem is on the south side of the house, where she has been fighting leaks for years. She said that the built-in gutters are very attractive. Duarte said she has tried different ways of fixing the gutters. Duarte said that the awning is the bump out in the dining room, which is the problem area, because there is also a dormer right above that. Duarte said that from the information she has been able to gather, putting some kind of membrane lining there would work for perhaps five years. She said she did not think she should constantly have to worry about whether or not she would have a leaky ceiling because she lives in a historic district. Duarte said that all of the roofing contractors she has spoken with have recommended this as the most practical and secure way to take care of these problems. Duarte said that she would like to also do the north side, for symmetry with the south side. Duarte said she has driven around the neighborhood and does realize that some things were grandfathered in. She said it does seem, however, that this is indeed the preferred method. Duarte said that what she proposes may be against her original structure of the house but is certainly consistent with the historical way of solving a problem. She said that while these gutters may aesthetically be very pleasing, she thinks that functionally it is a design flaw. Duarte said she hopes that common sense overrules strict adherence to a historical artifact. She said that neither Grant Street nor much of the Longfellow District has anything architecturally that is really all that wonderful. Duarte said she would like to have her house not leak and would like to be able to do it in the simplest way. Duarte said that this change is small and is pervasive in the neighborhood. McCallum asked if there would be an endcap, and Duarte confirmed this. Carlson said that the DRS discussed this project, and, unfortunately, it seems very cut and dried. He said that under disallowed, the guidelines include "altering the roof slope near the gutter and uncovering historic built-in gutters." He stated that the Commission actually does not have any leeway to allow this. Carlson said the question for the Commission is what other alternatives it can come up with. Duarte said that if the Commission will not consider any kind of exception, then basically what is there is the flat solution. Weitzel said that on the north side of his house, he put in a membrane roof and an ice barrier product sufficiently far up the slope so that there will not be snow or ice damage back up there underneath the shingles on the roof, where he suspected the problem was. He said that before he bought the house, there was a slope put on the south side where snow collects. Weitzel said that snow sits there for three or four days and then all comes off at once. He said that on the north side, where he installed the membrane and ice guard over five years ago, he has never had a leak. Duarte said that her house has the original gutters. She said she also has an avalanche of snow coming off on the south side but does not have one on the north side. Duarte said she was disappointed that the Commission would not make an exception for this. She said she feels her only choice is to enclose them with a flat solution, although she was not convinced that this is not going to continue to create some problems in the long run. Duarte asked, if she were inclined to go ahead with her project, what the consequences would be of her being in violation. Brennan said that technically each day that this is in non-compliance would be a separate violation, theoretically, although he did not know if it ever went that far. McCallum said that if the change were voted down, this could be appealed to the City Council. Weitzel said it could be overturned only if the decision were arbitrary or capricious, and this is clearly in the guidelines. Enloe agreed that the guidelines are very clear on this point. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 9 Duarte said she finds maintaining the gutters that she currently has to be unacceptable and sees this proposal as her best option. She said she should be able to know what the penalty is for continuing with the project. Terdalkar said that the City would impose any penalty, and the Building Department would decide if there would be a penalty. He said he believed that it would be double the price of the building permit, which would depend on the construction estimates. Duarte asked if the fine would be imposed per day. Brennan suggested that Duarte call the Building Department and/or the Legal Department to get information about the fine. Enloe suggested that Duarte consider looking at alternatives. He said that there may be higher technology solutions to the problems that she is currently experiencing. Enloe said there are more options, and the options of flat solutions may be greater than Duarte is currently aware of. He said they might not be so onerous to install and they may be quite effective, so that it would be worth exploring with roofing contractors. Gunn said that his porches have internal gutters and they're fine. He said that the internal gutters have sometimes been covered with a very low pitch, essentially flat, and then the external gutter is applied. Gunn said it is not a full internal gutter, but it does retain the roof lines, and there is a gutter applied on the outside. Duarte said that she is certainly willing to consider the idea of a flat cover if it will keep her house dry. She asked if the Commission would approve some kind of flat cover. McCallum said that would not change the appearance of the house. Maharry said that if the appearance is not changed, there is no material effect. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 517 Grant Street, as proposed. Enloe seconded the motion. Enloe stated that it is clear to him that the guidelines forbid this. McCallum said that he did not feel that it was that big of a modification and said he would support it. Brennan said he did see anything wrong with the proposal. He said, however, that the guidelines are clear on this subject, and the City Council adopted them, so he had no option other than to vote against this. Enloe called the question. Maharry seconded, The motion failed on a vote of 1-6, with McCallum votina in favor, Carlson relinquished chairmanship of the meeting back to Weitzel. 415 Clark Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the College Street Conservation District. He said that the Commission had recently previously approved an addition proposed for this property, with certain conditions. However the applicants have a new proposal and he added that the proposal is, in general, consistent with the guidelines. McCafferty said that the addition has been revised will be detached from the garage to get rid of the roof issue. She said that the eaves may have to be a little deeper than what is on the house in order to get appropriate ventilation but will still generally look similar to the house. McCafferty said the two double hung windows on the south elevation are much wider than the applicants wanted on that side. McCafferty said that there is actually an existing window on the dining room side right in front of the garage. She said the owners would like to have windows of that dimension, but because this will be used for sleeping, it would not meet egress to do a double hung window of that width. McCafferty said the applicants therefore request to install windows of that same dimension as the one in the dining room, but they would have to be casement windows to meet egress. McCafferty said that because of the [revised] roofline, the owners likely won't have to take out the second story dormer window. She said she would ask the Commission to approve an alternative to allow the shortening of the window minimally probably about four inches, if necessary, to accommodate the pitch of the roof on the addition. McCafferty said she would have to change the roof and thought she could get the window in just below, but she wanted that option if things turned out differently during construction. She said that the roof on the existing addition then can get to three/twelve and still get in just below that Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8,2005 Page 10 window, but she said that it might have to be bumped up. McCafferty said that it would be a minor adjustment. McCallum said that this proposal is very nice compared to any of the ideas previously considered. He said that he would support this as proposed. Weitzel said that the DRS felt that changing the window would be regrettable but that it would be better than losing the whole window. Carlson asked about the south elevation window changes. McCafferty referred to the drawing and said that the windows would be the same size as on the dining room on the north elevation but said they would have to be casement windows for egress. Weitzel asked why the vent on the new addition is shown off-center. McCafferty replied that it would be aligned with the ridge of the primary roof. Weitzel said that otherwise the whole project is balanced and proportioned well. Carlson asked if there would be a panel above the existing four-pane window on the west elevation. McCafferty said that it would be an arch-head window. She said the truss is such that there would be a tray in the ceiling, and then the arched head would actually extend up into that tray. McCafferty said that this would extend beyond the garage a little bit on the north side. She said the primary reason for that is to get the addition aligned with the new window with the arched head so that there is some symmetry inside. Maharry asked if the owners would still like to keep the original four- paneled windows and would be putting in the muntin bars. McCafferty confirmed this. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an addition at 415 Clark Street, as proposed, with the option of raising the upper window up to four inches, if necessary to accommodate the roofline. Enloe seconded the motion, Gunn asked if the guidelines would allow casement windows here. Weitzel replied that casement windows are allowed where appropriate to the style of house. He said that there are several sun porches and a prairie craftsman style house on Grant Street with casements built into the house from the original construction. Carlson said that a house of this period could have had casement windows, and also, they are not all over the addition but are just on this one façade. Ponto said he is more open to using casement windows, because they are to be used for egress. Weitzel read from the guidelines, u... when they were not original to the building, consistent with the architectural style, or required for egress" and said that all three of the exceptions to disallowing casement windows are met here. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. 801 Bowerv Street. Terdalkar said that this is a contributing structure in the Governor Lucas Street Conservation District. He said that the applicant has revised the application to have fewer steps, but the landing will still be required. Terdalkar said that from the application, it looks like this will be over 30 inches to the deck, and if that is the case, a guardrail will be required. He said the application proposes to use pipe rail for the handrails on the stairs with two or four wood newel posts. Weitzel said that the DRS felt that the pipe rail between two newel posts was very unusual and recommended using a compliant piece of wood instead. Terdalkar said that the baluster being used for the stairs handrail would not be required, so the owner can just use four newel posts and a handrail. He said that as long as they are above 30 inches for the deck, a guardrail would be required, and it should probably be something simple. Weitzel noted that skirting may also be required. Terdalkar said that from prior discussions with the owner, he felt that the owner was opposed to the idea of being required to install the handrails and guardrails. Weitzel said that the Legal Apartment has indicated that if the Commission has the applicant's approval, it can modify fairly freely, but if the applicant is not willing to modify his design, the Commission has to vote down the application and cite the reasons per Code, guidelines, or standards, for doing so. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 11 MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 801 Bowery Street. McCallum seconded the motion, Maharry said that the Commission has never approved anything that is not consistent with the historic preservation guidelines, such as this combination pipe and wood. Carlson said that the kind of wood to be used for the project has not been presented in the application. Weitzel said that this is therefore an incomplete application. The motion failed on a vote of 0-8. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the design proposed by Terdalkar for the application at 801 Bowery Street, as an alternative to what was submitted by the applicant. McCallum seconded the motion. Maharry asked if skirting would be required here. Terdalkar said that the Building Code requires skirting below a certain height. Maharry said that it turns into a little porch here, and there is skirting on all other porches. Carlson said the guidelines say that consistent materials meeting the guidelines should be used for both the handrails and the guardrails. Regarding the skirting, Ponto stated that the guidelines refer to vertical or lattice. Weitzel said this is clearly a Queen Anne house. Weitzel said he would be happy if the skirting matches the guidelines. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Gunn moved to strike the words "may be" from the proposed drawing; to require the material to be consistent with the guidelines, especially regarding paintability and disallowing untreated, painted wood; and to require the skirting to be consistent with the style. McCallum seconded the amendment. The amended motion carried on a vote of 8-0, 1143 Maple Street. Weitzel said that this is a non-historic house. He stated that the owner wants to change out the basement windows with sliding windows. Weitzel said that there is already a wide variety of windows on this house, and the DRS recommends approval. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of windows at 1143 Maple Street, as proposed. Maharry seconded the motion, Carlson said the DRS did not oppose the slider windows because this is a non-historic building, and the windows are at least consistent with the style. He said that the windows will also be below grade and not particularly visible anyway. Weitzel said that slider windows are allowed on non-historic properties in conservation districts. He said that the disallowed statement refers to u... installing modern types of windows, including sliding, awning, and so forth, when they were not original to the building, consistent with the architectural style, or required for egress." Weitzel said that if any of those apply, then the sliders can be allowed, and he believed that they are consistent with the style of this building. Weitzel said he thought that the slider windows would be acceptable because this is a non-historic house, and there are two or three kinds of windows on there right now. He stated that this is the kind of house that the sliding or awning windows were built for. Weitzel said he did not think they would change the appearance that much, because the windows to be replaced are two-paneled windows, and the sliders will have a similar appearance. He said that the house already has awnings upstairs, a casement window upstairs, and a big picture window upstairs. Gunn said that he was okay with this. Carlson said that it meets all the exceptions for non-historic properties in Section 3.3 of the Guidelines. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. MINUTES: Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 8, 2005 Page 12 MOTION: Enloe moved to defer consideration of the August 15, 2005 and August 25, 2005 minutes to the Commission's next meeting. McCallum seconded the motion. Terdalkar noted that the tape recorder did not work for the August 15th meeting, and Commission members should consider the parenthetical expressions to see if they can fill in the blanks. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. Weitzel said that Commission members should refer their comments regarding the RFP to Terdalkar. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcd/minutes/H PC/2005/hpc09-0B-05.doc = o ..... ~ ~ ..... 5 5"0 o '- u 8 ~ §~ ..... ~ trì .....CJO C': = 0 è C': M ~"O ~ = ~ ~ '-..... ~..... CJ< ..... '- o ..... ~ ..... == I ~ ~ ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: C'I I 0 I In ~ I ~ !:::! ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: 0 I 0 IX) I In ~ I ..... ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: ;x: -.. 0 I IX) I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ..... ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: I ;x: ¡:::: 0 0 I 0 I ~ ~ I I ~ 0 0 ;x: I ;x: ;x: ;x: I ;x: ;x: 0 I I \.Q I I ~ ~ I I ~ ;x: ;x: I ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: ;x: \.Q 0 0 I I I I I ~ I !:::! ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: 0 I ;x: ;x: \.Q I 0 I I I \.Q ~ I ~ I ~ !:::! ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: 0 I ;x: 0 I 0 I 0 In I I M I I ~ ..... ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: 0 ;x: I ;x: -.. I I 0 In I I IX) I ~ !:::! ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: 0 0 ;x: I ;x: I 0 ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ..... ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: I -.. 0 I 0 0 ~ I ~ I ~ ..... I ;x: 0 ;x: ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: ;x: ;x: -.. I 0 I") I In I ~ ~ ..... I ;x: 0 ;x: ;x: 0 ;x: ;x: ;x: -.. I 0 0 M I ~ I ~ ~ ..... I ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: -.. I 0 0 M I I") I I ~ ~ ~ ..... I I ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: -.. I I 0 0 0 ..... I I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ;x: ;x: ;x: ;x: ..... I I 0 0 0 0 0 I I CI) eo r- \.Q r- eo \.Q r- r- or) \.Q eo e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ -.. -.. -.. -.. ..... .- C'I 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ o 0.. f-< ;.< ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -.. ¡:¡.¡ ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., .. e .. .. ;., 0.. '" ~ = -= C> OIl = .. -ª .. ïš .. = .. .. = C> = OIl .c: Q) = '" .. = .c: U .. C> .... CI) J:j .. ;: C> = OIl ... "0 .... C> '" .¡> § .. OIl ë ~ ~ .. = e .¡> = u c OIl C> \I:J ~ ~ ¡.¡¡ Q., Q., z ~ ~ ..; ~ ~ ~ ..; ..; -< ..; ¡..; "'C Q) ..; en Q) ;::j OIJ..o ~.s s f5 ~ Q) ~~~~~ en en en 0 ~ ~..o..oz 0 ~« z II II II II II ~ ~:E ~;x:ooz