HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2007 Historic Preservation Commission
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, March 8, 2007
City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street
Emma J Harvat Hall
6:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda
3. Items of Consideration
A. Certificate of Appropriateness:
1. 938 Iowa Avenue
2. 946 Iowa Avenue
3. 1029 Bowery Street
B. Minutes for February 8, 2007 meeting
4. Other
Preservation Leadership Training - application information and typical schedule
Discussion of potential projects in year 2007
Discussion of Annual Preservation Awards
5. Adjourn
Application for Historic Review
Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or proper-
ties 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 secondThUl"Sday of each month.
During the summer months, the HPC may also meet on the foLwth Thursday,
Applications are due in the PCD Office by noon on Monday the week prior to
the meeting,
~~t~t:~b~~d .....~~..~_~.i.~1-..........
D~ertificate of No Material Effect....
~ C~ificate of Appt'opriateness
va Major review
D Intermediate review
D Minor review
Applicant Information
(Please check primary contact person)
o Owner ............~~~.~~.~?~~........................................................
Phone ................(~~~l.~.~~.~~......... ................................... ......
Add ress ...........~9..9.~.~~~..~~~.~~!.~..~.~~:.. ..............................
....... ... ................. .19.~.~.~!~y.:. !!?~~.. ??~~.~........ ........... ............ .....
email..................~j~.<?y.9..~.@..!!~~:.S?~.. .........................................
o Cont ractor ...T.Y.l~r..8!?~l!1~~.....................................................
Address .............7J.1..~lr.~.Q.~I........................................................
............. ....... ........I.Qw.?!..Gj.lll..!9.w.?!??7.~.!?.. ....... .... ....... .................
Phone.................@.1~.L!?~.1~.9.P.Q..................................................
email................................................................................................
U Consultant ...~bL'!~.:t1.i3J}~ry..~r9.~j.t~9!.l!.r~:~!.l.9!r..~.~rjf.l.9.......
Address ............~~.~}~.9.G.~.g!'!}~..!?rjy~.......................................
... ..., .......... ...,.......I.9.~~.~!ty.,. !<?~~..~.?~~.~......,. ........... .................
Phone .....,.......... (~~.~), ~M~;}.Q19....................,....................... .....
email..................JJ.l.~.\.l~.Q.9.IQ@.!i.~.ly.~~.~.i.l.tilil.~.gQJJ.l........................
Application Requirements
Attached are the following items:
o Site plan
o Floor plans
~ Building elevations
~ Photographs
o Product information
~ Other ...J:9.Qf.Ql?!D...........................................................
If the proposed project entarls an addition, a new structure or
a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a
sire 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 de-
scribe the scope of the project.
Provide a written description of the proposed project on the
second page of this application.
Property Information
Address of prope rty .....~.??.!.9.':'f.~.~y.~!)!!.~......._................................
............ ............ ........... .......J!?':'f.lJ!.9.!!y.,J.Qw.lJ!..!i?~1!i..................... ..........
Use of prope rty ..............I3~.~!.9.!'!!).~~.L~. ~P..~r.t!!!~D.!~.............. ..............
Date conso'ucted (if known).J.~.9.!?:J~Q.IL..................................m..
Historic Designation
o This property is a local historic landmark
OR
o This property is located In the:
o Brown Street Historic DIstrict
o College Green Historic District
o East College Street Historic District
o Longfellow Historic District .
o Summit Street Historic District
U Woodlawn Historic District
o Clark Street Conservation District
~ College Hill Conservation District
o Dearbom Street Conservation District
I:) Lucas-Governor Street Conservation District
Within the district. this property is classified as:
'0 Contributing
I:) Noncontributing
o Nonhistoric
Project Type
)Q Altel-ation of an existing building (ie. siding and window
replacement. skylights, window opening alterations, new
decks. porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar)
I:) Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps)
o Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch,
chimneys, decor~tlve trim. baluster or similar)
o Construction of new building
o Repair or restoration of an exlstlng structure that will not.
change Its appearance
D Other ..............................................................................................
Project description
The purpose of this remodeling is to restore 938 Iowa Avenue to it's historic appearance. This project
had begun due to the tornado of 2006 but has evolved into a true restoration of the residence. Further
research and documentation has led the owner and contractor to pursue inclusion of the residence
onto the National Register of Historic Places.
Please see the attached front elevation sketch, concept roof plan, and historic photo {or description of
restoration work to take place. The back and sides of the residence will also have their siding and
windows restored although at the back (north) a new covered entry stair will be added to replace the
one lost in the tornado of 2006 which is the only item not historically accurate. Because the residence
was relocated from a previous site the side Porte Cochere cannot be rebuilt as shown in the historic
photograph.
Materials to be used
New materials to be used on this project include new paint and new roofing shingles. New dormer will
utilize cement board siding and a window salvaged from the Iowa City "Salvage Barn" that matches as
closely as possible the original window. See attached front elevation sketch for additional comments
about materials.
Exterior appearance changes
Changes to the exterior appearance include removal of the existing vinyl siding and restoring the
original wood siding underneath, removing the added "dog house" roof and reframing the roof to reflect
it's original appearance, adding the front dormer that was removed at some point in the past, and
restoring the front porch to it's original condition and detailing. See attached front elevation sketch for
additional clarification of exterior appearance changes.
ppdadmlHP HandbookJApp.p65
/~~.-
Dormer to be reconstructed to match
original design, Window to be'salvaged
from Iowa City "Salvage.Bam" to match
original size and confifJuration as closely
as possible, See i~c1uded historic photo
New front door to be placed in historic
location, Door matches original size of 40"
x 8'-0" and has been salvaged from St.
Patrick's church in Iowa City via the
"Salvage Barn", Door is 2" solid wood with
beveled glass half light.
1938 Iowa Avenue - front elev8tion sketch 0226071
the above sketch reflects the intent for the restoration of 938 Iowa Avenue and was developed wrth input of the restoration contractor and owner of the property.
Roof to be restored to
original configuration - see
included historic photo and
. concept roof plan
Chimney to be restored to
mimic original design - see
included historic photo
All existing damaged
windows to be reglazed
and restored.
Stained glass windows to
be restored
All existing siding (including
scalloped areas) to be
restored - see included
historic photo
Historic architectural
detailing to be replaced or
restored
Front porch to be restored to
original detailing - see included
historic photo
Chimney to be restored to mimic original
design - see included historic photo
Roof to be restored to original
configuration - see included historic photo
and concept roof plan
1938 Iowa Avenue - southeast photo "sketch" 0226071
the above sketch reflects the intent for the restoration of 938 Iowa Avenue and was developed w~h input of the restoration contractor and owner of the property.
Dormer to be reconstructed to match
original design. Window to be salvaged
from Iowa City "Salvage Barn" to match
original size and configuration as closely
as possible. See included historic photo
1938 Iowa Avenue - southwest photo "sketch" Q2 26 071
the above sketch reflects the intent for the restoration of 938 Iowa Avenue and was developed with input of the restoration contractor and owner of the property.
New covered entry stair will
be added to replace
damaged one shown.
:- -7r-7
.'~1;.., l'
"-
-~
....
F,
/
All existing damaged
windows to be reglazed
and restored.
Stained glass window to be
restored
1938 Iowa Avenue - north photo "sketch" 0226071
the above sketch reflects the intent for the restoration of 938/owa Avenue and was developed with input of the restoration contractor and owner of the property.
..
;
.
Indicates area to be reframed by
restoration contractor. Contractor
responsible for structural framing,
sheathing and roofing materials
and methods
1938 Iowa Avenue - ~on~Apt roof pl~n 0' ,6071
the above sketch reflects the intent for the restoration of 938 Iowa Avenue and was developed wjth in put of the restoration contractor and owner of the property.
Staff Report
March 8, 2007
Historic Review for 938 Iowa Avenue
District: College Hill Conservation District
Classification: Contributing
The applicant, Casey Boyd, is requesting approval for an alteration project that was begun without
prior approval or a building permit at 938 Iowa Avenue, which is a contributing property in the
College Hill Conservation District. The applicant has demolished a portion of the structure on the
third floor, which was damaged in the tornado last year, and has rebuilt the roof based on historic
photographs to match the appearance of the house in c. 1960s. The applicant further indicates that a
window dormer will be added on the front to match the original using fiber cement board siding and
a salvaged window.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations
4.4 Mass and roof line
4.5 Siding
4.7 Windows
4.9 Porches
4.10 Balustrade and Handrails
4.12 Chimenyes
Staff Comments
Originally built in c.1890 this house was located at 922 College Street. The house was moved to
Iowa Avenue in c. 1969. The house has undergone many alterations including t4e removal of its
porte-cochere along with the front dormer and the tall roof over the second floor front bay window.
An incompatible third-story addition was built after it was moved to Iowa Avenue. In the April 2006
tornado, this roof addition was significantly damaged. Numerous windows, the front porch and the
replacement vinyl siding were also damaged.
The applicant's contractor met with staff in early February to discuss plans to repair the damaged
building, and was informed about the review process, guidelines, and requirements. He was also
informed about a previous review and approval of a Certificate of No Material ~ffect. Per the
certificate the following repair project was approved:
1) Reconstructing the storm-damaged portions of the roof and finishing it with roofing membrane;
2) Removing the vinyl siding from the front porch area and restoring the wood siding underneath;
3) Replacing the damaged, vinyl siding using the existing vinyl siding from the front porch area; and
4) Re-glazing the damaged windows.
As the applicant's contractor was considering options/changes to the roofline, he was advised to
submit a complete application that covered all aspects of the repair project, particularly the changes
to the roof, chimney reconstruction, window replacement, removal of any portion of the building
including ramps, stairways, etc.
When the applicant's contractor returned in late February, he had already started the work and had
demolished the roof addition. At the time when this report was written, the applicant had completed
framing and sheathing for the new roof and has completed a new chimney. The work that has
commenced on the roof generally appears to match the design evident in an early 20th century
photograph of the house. Although not an exact replica, the rebuilt chimney is a good representation
of the original and staff finds that these two aspects of the project comply with the guidelines and
recommends approval.
The applicant intends to restore the wood siding and the original Queen Ann details including the
porch and he has provided general specifications based on the sketches and photographs. The
following changes to the exterior appearance and materials need approval:
Decorative details - the sketches and photographs indicate that the missing trim details on the porch
will be reproduced in wood to match the original. Staff finds that this aspect meets the guidelines
and recommends approval as proposed.
Existing widows will be restored and replacement widows will be salvaged windows - staff
recommends approval of alternative new wood sash or metal-clad wood sash windows for the
replacement windows on the dormer and reconstructed gables and any other windows found to be
beyond repair.
A dormer is proposed to replace the original that was removed when the house" was relocated to
Iowa Avenue. The replacement dormer is proposed to be finished in cement board an acceptable
material according to the guidelines and staff recommends approval. As noted above staff
recommends approval of a wood sash or metal-clad wood sash window as an alternative to the
salvaged window proposed by the applicant.
A historic salvaged door will be used for a new entry that is proposed to be located where the
original entry was located on the front fa<;ade (this entry was apparendy closed when the house was
moved). Staff recommends approval. .
More information is needed on the following aspects of the application (Staff will attempt to work
with the applicant to clarify these aspects of the application prior to the Commission meeting):
Eave and soffit details are not indicated on the application.
Porch railing - depending on the grade a taller porch rail may be necessary. A more specific plan for
the rail should be submitted.
The application indicates that a new covered entry stair will be installed on the north side of the
building to replace a storm damaged entry. Drawings and material specifications should be
submitted.
I
\j
I
I
t
i "'
... oiIi
\J
\S)
~
-
,.
,
~
,~
""iii,
-... ;,.
. ~ l
- t
I J I,
.{ , a
..'~ .
I .
I t- '11"'-
J
~ . }
J
.
I no
l 1: "
Of
, I!
J ji
J'
~J
, l
n
1
"
t
~
..<
-
-
-
--
.-
-""
-
-
,~
~~-'~ ,~~
-.. '
It p!1 .2.OtJ (0 -...
...........-:..:.. ....
"~
.....
/,.,
erJ1Ma
I' ~ r1
_I
Ap-plication for Historic ReView
Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or proper-
ties 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 Monday the week prior to
the meeting.
For Staff Us~: ;; - 2 {J "- () 1
Date submitted ........:..............................................
D Certificate of No Material Effect
D Certificate of Appropriateness
D Major review
D Intermediate review
D Minor review
Applicant Information
(Please check primary contact person)
o Owne'...~Ufv.,~ '......
Phone.................cz..~.':2s.;;.~~?JJ;~~A+r
Address ................l.1.jL......--::t.'.r.Y1!.:.~..........r
.........................................................................................................
email............................~.........~...~..:.......~..~...... .' ,..............................
D Contractor ..........ztltj"....~.~~~........
Address.........................1.fr1.f......~
.........................................................................................................
Phone.................35..y.:7G1.6.2=.........................
email..............................~..............ri-d-:;;...'ft:.........
D Consultant .............sa~.~~..
Address ................. ........................... .............................. ........... .....
;~~~~:::::::::::::::::~:3::7:::::::::J::W:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
.........................................................................................................
email................................................................................................
Application Requirements
Attached are the following items:
C1 Site plan
D Floor plans
D Building elevations
D Photographs
D Product information
D 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 de-
scribe the scope of the project.
Provide a written description of the proposed project on the
second page of this application.
Property Information
,- r~r it?
Address of property...."......9...Y..b...~..~...~
.......................................................~.r...................................
Use of property ...................e.............................................................
Date constructed (if known)...............................................................
Historic Designation
D This property is a local historic landmark
OR
D This property is located in the:
D Brown Street Historic District
D College Green Historic District
D East College Street Historic District
D Longfellow Historic District
D Summit Street Historic District
D Woodlawn Historic District
D Clark Street Conservation District
D College Hill Conservation District
D Dearborn Street Conservation District
D Lucas-Governor Street Conservation District
Within the district, this property is classified as:
D Contributing
D Noncontributing
D Nonhistoric
Project Type
D Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window
replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new
decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar)
~./ddition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps)
.A ~emolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch,
chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar)
D Construction of new building
D Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not.
change its appearance
D Other ..............................................................................................
~.~;~e,,,~~i:an..... .......... ..............................~I..)...1..J.<i~.......:~..~........~
::::=Q1:;:.:::......::..::::::::::...::::..:::~...::..::::::~:~::~::::::~
.....,...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................. .~...... ............................................................................................................................................................ ...................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Materials to be used
::::::::~~~E::?;;;~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
.......c.cla.C';g5.ic:Q.d!:;..............................................
;:.;::::;::;.;::;;::::~1~~~:~:~i~~::;::;:;::;::;:;::~::;::::;:;:::::;::;::::;;:;:::;::;::;::::;:.::;:.::;::::;::::;:;:;;::
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Exterior appearance changes
...................~............~........... ..~.................................................:)d~......~~.......~........
:::::::::::~:::::::::::k::::::::::....:...::::::::................::::...:::.:&::::::: .....:...::..::::......::::::::::~:\::.....:~::::~::::::::::
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................................................
ppdadm/HP HandbooklApp.p65
Design # 98348 ~~ 2/19/2007
*** Take this sheet to the Building Materials counter to purchase your materials. ***
You selected a garage with these options:
18' Wide X 22' Deep X 8' High
Hip roofw/6/12 pitch trusses 2' O.C.
2x4 Wall Framing Material 07U !(/' ~
12" overhang
7/16" OSB Wall Sheathing
1/2" OSB Roof Sheathing
8" Cedar Lap Siding
30 yr. Oakridge, Desert Tan Shingles
No Roof Vents Are Selected
Cedar Soffit & Fascia
Royal Brown Regular Roof Edge
Cedar Overhead Door Jamb \ a _ / ~~ I J!
3J)'~ k uJ/~ r~
.~~.wJJl ~~ ~
Front View
Back View
~
~~
~ ~
\.
__'111:
~
.
, ,~
1
, I
I
~
,I I
".
I
I
I
L
Staff Report
March 8, 2007
Historic Review for 946 Iowa Avenue
District: College Hill Conservation District
Classification: Contributing
The applicant, Jim Buxton, is requesting approval for the demolition of the garage on the property
and construction of a new garage to match the existing.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
6.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for New Construction
6.2 New Outbuildings
7.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Demolition
Staff Comments
Originally built in c.1930 this garage was damaged in the April 2006 tornado. It features the typical
style of the garages built at the time. The garage door appears to be a newer replacement door. The
garage has moderately pitched pyramidal roof with open rafter soffits. The existing garage is finished
with shiplap siding and measures 18 feet x 20 feet.
The applicant is proposing to demolish the garage to rebuild a new garage that matches the original
garage. The specification sheet submitted along with the application notes that the proposed garage
will measure 18 feet x 22 feet. The applicant is proposing to use cedar siding-8-inch lap, salvaged
garage door, new metal-clad wood windows (24-inch wide, 30-inch tall). The applicant is also
proposing to install a new metal-clad half-light door on the south fas:ade.
The decision to approve is to be made based on the condition, integrity and architectural
significance. The applicant has not provided information about the condition of the garage.
Although the garage walls appear to be leaning, staff does not have adequate information to believe
that, the structure is beyond repair. However, if the applicant is considering building a new garage,
staff believes that it should be compatible with the house.
In staffs opinion, the project is generally consistent with the guidelines and however, recommends
that the approval be subject to 1) the siding being either a shiplap siding to mat~h the existing or be
narrow-lap (4-inch wide) siding to match the house and 2) the windows be barn-sash style to match
the existing.
Applicant Information
~ers
Iowa City, IA 52240
Consultant
Susan L. Licht, AlA, Architect
608 5th Ave.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Or
2030 Landau St. SE
Salem OR 97306
3193312942
503 364-6018
Sue licht@msn.com
Property Information
1029 Bowery St
Iowa City, IA 52240
Residential
Built 1936~
Project Type
Addition / remodel of existing building
New detached garage
Project description
This project includes remodeling the existing breezeway and single car garage into a
bedroom! den and small bathroom, adding a new connector space along side the original
garage and adding a new screen porch.
Great care has been given to minimally impact the existing house, both on the inside and
the outside. The breezeway's decorative archway will be retained and a wall built behind
it to house a new toilet room. A small window will be added in this wall (see new partial
east elevation). The original garage's appearance from the street will change only
minimally: the overhead door on the south side will be removed and a series of 3 French
doors will be installed in the original overhead door opening, retaining the original trim
and siding.
The connector hall on the west side of the garage will tie the kitchen to the screen porch.
The connector bypasses the original garage and breezeway so they can remain in place in
their original configuration.
The porch is in proportion to the other living spaces in the original house. It will have a
carefully designed screen system that will have fixed screening on the exterior and a
stacking storm window on the interior; thus retaining its more "period appropriate"
screen design on the exterior while providing the owner with the ability t.o "close up" the
porch from the interior in the event of bad weather.
An additional patio will be added next to the porch.
In the SW comer of the yard will be a new 2 car garage. Many details from the existing
garage will be replicated, including the siding and trim. At least one original window and
the original side door will be relocated into the new garage.
Materials Used
The materials used on the addition and remodel will match the existing house materials.
The exterior of the connector hall will have wood shingles to match the existing garage.
The eaves and trim details will match the existing house including exterior casings and
sills. Other details will be duplicated as necessary.
The new garage will match in detail as well, except that the shingle siding will be painted
cement board.
,'Exterior Appearance changes
New garage in SW comer of yard.
New French doors in garage door opening
New wall with stucco siding set behind the decorative arches on the east side of the
existing breeze way
New screen porch will be visible (although set back about 45') from the Bowery street
sidewalk.
New connector and screen porch visible if you are in the driveway or the, far SE comer of
the lot, although not a complete view at this point.
The west side is not visible except to the neighbors.
~.~- t
~.._-.~ !
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.
---,----- I
I
I
I
~
,/1'
It
~B
(-
~.,
i'
,
!
I
(l/i.
"! :
. . '....
", .
.............. , ,.'
j-
~.
"
?
;;l
o
I
, I
I
-=f~-+
. 0-- ..-- I
- . I
!
, I
-=- +-~-_..+
--~_....
\
I
/, ~h}I'
I .o:!.~n... r .:L I
I .ill., 3 /.., '\'
. \L ~/ I
I _.01 I
-,- --' ~ 'I
i > 11' I
0",
in W 'I
~x
1
I
I
--1
)
!
I
I
i
/1
1 r----~
/'
. -
o
-;:t;.(
\ll~
:z
r:
I
I
\
'~
rfy
\'i: 1cit"
I vh !
, ,
I, "._, "I '
~',~' I I
/ r . ; J,(
. \ ' "",1 i
'1 '>i-!i1 I
I ,~} L~L"_-':C_~
r-
I
.:..:......:.:.... .
. -\)
~
,tI 'j
'il
\
\[ ;i
,I
1.
"'2:I:c:-
410:)_
~ c.I- x
u;;? """
IIl...- -
-.----=...-..
, ~
. J '
- -==--~..:-:--.~ ":_-__--.:.~-- I
- , ,
, /~-I (";
<, -, r: y~_
\,//,'M
rj~
' ~-,
1-
IJJ III
t-: ()
4 N
>- 4
51 <..':>
P-
/
I,
\
~-:-
. f
>~
,b~
- \U
1- l\J
t, lfi,
it~
81tl-
-J u)
'~ .v
Cl~
~~
)
'.~l
\- p
~t-
'" //
111 ";: /
,-,
w.::2 ,.
It ll1~
'1 (I- r-
-O~
dJ 1--,1.
~~;
'2 ~ t;z
jl.O:2
"
-:2
4.
....J
{l-
~
o
9
U--
I-
If)
at
JJ.-
o
uj
~
U)
Q
o
2:
w
C'L
~"
~t
tA
.- .~-----
, 't'rL:"::.:L::.:::.:n
. .) I n-"'-ff"~"-ll I,
.//' 1[14111."".'. ..i.... .I.....~
/ . I tk"'-t!~ --:- 't
<:. 'j, . , "
"" i; rrt"i .. ~.":,
'" l!ll' .l.,.....i(.j
". ! I ~-' ::::;t;.
"',- JJL:::':'1' -... - .
''':''.
.r
t
-1
, \1
~'-:'
r '.
. .....-'
9JF'
. '.'. ;,..,.----;:}
~ W . '. ...,--- .
. I . . ..
~~,' ,,'
.' ..,~ .- '.)3-
"'"r ",.,
"+--
;zJ.
I:: ·
:;E~
.\
. . c :~
:1
,
'j
J"
... . t
'- ...
..
.\}.\:.~
......-
~+~-t~
. (.
. ,'t':."
..,~:
.~'I
'.0: '.
.'- '
...,
1":.
a,1' ~v j' '
.I. .. ;.,,~-;.,
." v, I .'.
-" ~..,'r /,. "
..<-,~. o' Y,..'
, ~lg~t
.>J
',31''', !'I.,
" .-
___1.:.
i
;.al "I'~:
.. '
j
, ~.
. . 1--.
';, ."
./~')'
t":",
o
-::z
-..,'
=<
V
::1"
<.J
t-
~~
~
...
&>
i
.L
!
I
r
J
-::
,~
-;-
.
ol--ii1..
0)
1
...,~
,.j.....
..,:
l-
oW'
..
.'
, .
'" .~
........J
j
..
"-
L
"' . ----..:
'f
I
~~.-:---~
: "
:'[3" '..
~ \ . oj}
~ . -< ..:J
j.~ .- ',::. .>. ~ ~~ .
n'- .... .' 0.1::'''''''
r .....:. ' ;;~c;.r
~ _.,;, ..' u~!:t-
ci .' ')I-:r.
~;;l-~
1-".,0 u
;' :'
. '~'l "
i-
'"
~,
(/
I
\
~"i
C-'.' i
... 'j
--~ !
L_",~~ \
'Ll
~~
f~
~.
...
.~
I",
+~
'll'
'!;t~
,J
~
,j
<:j
'.
~'
!
hi
/ 1 ~i
I ~ I1t
I Hi
,i H~
Vt...... 1.li
\ ~ ..}
. ~ ,,:",'j
.' ~'l
\ ' ~ it
'\...~..I.~.
. ~ I"
~ i1
, ','
\ ~..~
~,r..1,.
\':.';W'
\ t-u
t ~ \..~ ~~\~
lJJ- ..---
j
o
,-- - ---- ------ --
.,i.;.
'-':'::~
--; l
!
i
"
(
~"i~:r~::.".'- ..,.... .'.'
-"; .-
- ~...-.';...;
',--'0.,;,
~:\
I
I
I
I
\
I
j
I
!
!
I
\
I
I
\
1
I
I
I \~.
(-u- i1----J--~ \i ,. --, .--
~.. ,_("----~~ LJ T--J---- -= I
...
.'
-1
f
0:.-
~
-'t""
')
~~f1
~ '-._ u
~ ~-mil>
u>
r-
'2
f
0-t
V
v1
~
.c
~
. tfl't
J~
tf
t>!
gi
p
'---"
"'---"
~; (Y): lo...r
f Ol'"ci\
'-
Ed 1.0; n L~f'd J' ~
(}J,'('O () a...) M N. 19 'lIP
EXAMPLE
'--
@
PORCH ENCLOSURES
SPECIFICATIONS,LAYOUT AND INSTALLATION GUIDE
i"
" ,t
"'~
"~ .
Complete 3-lile
Floor-to-Ceiling
Window/Screen
Wall Units..
Use Glasswalls to
. Remodel a seldom
used screen porch
. Enclose a patio,
breezeway or deck
. Add a new room
addition with a Itotal'
view of your outdoors
. Create a room for
year-round enjoyment!
:The.~e UJ i \, be. on
\()~,.,J-e. ~ pord')_
c.I.\'S+Crn ~s
c::n"I · h,'~+or,'c." e.xt~r-'\~
SPECIFICATIONS
ARCHITECT SPECIFICA TIONS Sc:ope: Units shall be Glasswalls as
manufactured by Mon-Ray. Inc.. In sizes and types indicated by reference
numbers on drawings.
ConstructIon: Units shall be constructed by window manufacturer with wood
frames. Frames shall be assembled with screws and all joints shall be weathenight.
Lower subsill section shall be a hollow box type for easy installation and for housing
electric wiring and heating equipment. All sash frames shalt be extruded aluminum
with accurately mitered corners and assembled 10 be weatherllght.
Malerial: Window and screen sash shall be made from accurately extruded prime
aluminum 6063- T6 alloy. Aluminum finishing shall be a 202R1 Clear Anodized Finish
(Dark Bronze Anodized Is ophonal.) All wood shall be clear and free of defects and
preservative-treated 10 specifications for IOXIC, weter-repellent preservatives. WOOd
jambs shall be 1- t i 16" x 3-1/2" finished dimensions.
Glazing: Glasswalls shall be factory gtazed wIth clear 1f8" tempered safely glass set
In a wrap-around non-migrating vinyl glazing channel. Units shall be designed for
factory glazing. but in case of replacement. sash may be dismantled and glass
replaced on the premises without special tools. Storm panels lor double glazmg are
Optional and shall be mounted in same recess as screen Glazing of storm panels
shall be clear DSB glass.
Screens: Screens shall be one piece and cover the enbre ventllatmg area. Screening
shall be 18 II 14 mesh Charcoal Fiberglass installed al factory and held securely by a
VInyl spline which romoves to replace screen.
Hlrdware: All sash shall op'erate on tempered steel tension springs in zinc-alloy
channels. Spring-loaded stainless steel pin-locks shall be bolt-end-plunger type.
Continuous extruded sash lifts shall be provided on all sash units. All meeting rails
shall be W9alherstripped.
Instl"ltlon: All windows shall be installed plumb and level, adjusted and
weathertight. Caulking compound shall be used in critical areas and between
concrete slabs (or floor) and sill.
Operation: All glass panels shall operate vertically in separate channels. All sash
shall be equipped with pin-locks to hold glass panels closed and In predetermined
open positions. All sash shall be removable from inside. Full length screens shall be
completely removable.
STOCK UNIT SIZE- WIDTH 29.114-- 33.1/(" 31-1/4" 29.114" 33.1/4" 37.114"
I
UNIT . I-
i Ih j . I
i~! . i'-. :!;
~ i-I
SIZES -li -
!-I Po
:;:5 - ig~
$ - --. lD
.p...~ I 11
FOR MULTIPLE OPENINGS I II
ADD 'h" TO OVERAU .. --- .. .. -
TOTAL WIDTH OF UNITS -
#3069 #3469 #3869 1#3081 *3481 ##3881
HOW TO LAY OUT
Before installing GLASSWALLS on an existing slab or
deck. the information below should be established and
recorded. preferably on a floor.plan with elevation
drawings. These general rules will provide the most
atlractive floor plans.
1. WINDOW SIZES AND LOCATIONS. Use the largest
window size which will go into a rough opening in
exact multiples. If it is necessary to use units of
different widths in one opening. locate the larger units
in the middle and balance the smaller units on both
sides. The difference between unit widths in the same
opening should not exceed 2". Remember to allow an
extra 1/2" on rough opening width when installing a
group of units.
Glasswalls should be located as far outboard as
possible to increase the room area. Normally the
Glasswalls line is determined by either the header or
I,
i
1\
....;. \ \
HEAD
ICJH[
IT-=rmr
MEETING
RAIL
MEETING
RAIL
"
SUB SILL
~ 4
I
, \
\ '
.
" \
,\
MAIN Sill
TYPICAL INSTALLATION
corner posts. Space for inside and outside header
trim should be provided. Joints between fascia board
and outside header trim must be watertight (Fig. A).
When aligning the Inside edge of the units. be sure
that the inside edge of the sill is 318" inside a plumb
line dropped from the inside edge of the proposed
header. The inside edge of the sill must also be
located 3/8" inside a wall stud or corner post. The
3/8" is necessary to provide a baseboard trim nailing
surface. to match the water seal lip on the unit subsill.
See Fig. C.
2. BUILD-OUTS. (See Fig. B.) If the width of the rough
unit opening is larger than the total width of the units.
build out from walls or corner posts. Space between
Glasswalls only for structural support. If it is
necessary to build oul from one side of a corner post.
build out the other side an equal amount.
3. REMOVE AND REPLACE POSTS AS NECESSARY.
4. HEADER FILL-IN. If it Is necessary to reduce the
height of a rough opening, build the header down
rather than the sill up.
5. DETERMINE LOCATION, DIMENSIONS, SWING
AND FRAMING OF DOORS.
6. DETERMINE LOCATION, SIZE AND TYPE OF ALL
ELECTRICAL OUTLETS AND WIRING.
7. HEAT LOCATIONS. Heating equipment, using warm
air. finned tubing or electric radiation can be easily
installed in the bOl( sill beneath each window uni/.
Sill face fits standard baseboard heater.
8. PREPARE A MATERIALS LIST FOR SILL AND
TRIM. (Not fumished - obtain locally.) Main sill
should be 2' x B' treated lumber or Redwood to
minimize potential damage from water pentration.
~CEIIllfl UlIllI AIID WILD OUT IlIUAllY fROM
OORIIIR I'OSTS If IlfCUSARY
..........~..._......-................. '"" .........-
.. ....... ....... ......o. ........ ...........J.............4.. ......... ~
:: z IUIlD OUT OT1tER IUlUNfOUAl UlDCJNl : :
~ : i ~
~ i ! ~
,~ ~4
. i ::
. ..
. .'
: ::
: : ;
I : ..
-1 H
: ::
. . .
. . .
,: : :
. .
. .
.1 ~~
! : i
. . .
i ; ;
. . .
. i;
/~ /. .'// .
Staff Report
March 8, 2007
Historic Review for 1029 Bowery Street
District: Clark Street Conservation District
Classification: Contributing
The applicants Jason & Jamie Powers are requesting approval for a project involving alteration,
addition and new construction at 1029 Bowery Street, which is a contributing property in the Clark
Street Conservation District. The applicants intend to convert the existing garage and breezeway
into livable space and build an addition, which includes a 'three-season' porch, connected with the
house and the existing garage with a new breezeway. The applicants are also proposing to build a
new detached two-car garage on the property.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations
4.5 Siding
4.7 Windows
5.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Additions
5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint
6.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for New Construction
6.2 New Outbuildings
7.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Demolition
Staff Comments
This Tudor Cottage was built in c.1935 and sits on corner lot on the intersection of Bowery Street
and Clark Street. Designed by architect J. Bradley Rust, the house has the typical Tudor elements
such as massive brick chimney, steep gable roof that has a slighdy concave prof11e, a small dormer
with hipped roof as well as large shed dormer on the rear. The house was finished with a variety of
materials including stucco, stone, and shingles. The house is in near pristine original condition.
The applicants are proposing to convert the existing garage into a bedroom and the breezeway into a
bathroom. The garage door on the south fas:ade is proposed to be replaced with new French doors
and the windows in the garage are to be replaced with new windows to match (material not
specified). While the applicants are proposing to maintain the size and trim of the original garage
door, after proposed the alterations with new full-light French doors, its appearance will significandy
change. Staff believes that the half-light doors should be considered as a compromise between full-
light doors and a garage door appearance. This would allow the conversion from garage to
bedroom while still mimicking the original design of garage structure. The applicants have indicated
that they would prefer full light doors to allow more light into the proposed bedroom.
The applicants are also proposing to build a new 'three-season' porch (measuring 14 feet x 17 feet)
approximately 10 feet to the west side of the existing garage and 10 feet to the south of the house.
The applicants intend to install panels of fixed screen on the exterior and stacking storm windows
on the interior of the porch. The space between the new porch, the existing garage and the house
will be ftiled with new entryways. The new additions will have low-pitched hipped-roofs. The
applicants' architect conferred with staff about the design of the roof and it was agreed that a
shallow pitched roof would be better than matching the distinct high pitch of the original house.
The proposed shallow pitched roof makes it clear that the addition is subordinate to the original
house. A highly pitched roof would have competed with the original design.
The applicants further intend to build a new two-car garage on the southwest corner of the property.
The garage footprint will be 22 feet x 24 feet. The applicants are proposing to use an 8:12 pitch
gable roof, two garage doors that match the existing. The applicants are also proposing to use
matching windows, shingles and trim and a salvaged or matching entry door. Staff believes that the
garage, despite being large, will be a subordinate outbuilding and will also be a distinct but
compatible structure.
Staff recognizes that the applicants have made an effort to minimize the impact on the original
house and have submitted a design that is generally compatible with this uniquely designed structure.
Staff believes that the plan is generally consistent with the guidelines. Staff recommends that the
application be approved subject to any new widows matching the materials and design of the
existing widows. Staff also recommends that consideration be given to requiring the proposed
exterior bedroom doors be half-light rather than full-light French doors to better to reflect the
original function of the garage.
Preservation Leadership
Training
APPLICATION
Please provide thefollowing information:
./ Name, Mailing Address, E-mail Address, and
Daytime Phone
./ Are you or your organization a member of
National Trust Forum? If yes, please include
membership number.
OWATONNA, MINNESOTA
JUNE 23-30, 2007
./ Sponsoring Organization/Agency
./ If your organization is proposing a second
participant, what is his/her name? A separate
application is required.
Local Partner
Owatonna Area Chamber of Commerce
& Tourism
./ Education (schools attended, major fields of
study, degrees)
Made possible by the generous support of the
Bush Foundation
./ Resume, including preservation related paid
work and/or volunteer experience
./ One letter of recommendation
Jane Ferris Scholarshipsfor Wisconsin provided by the
Jeffris Family Foundation
./ In 100 words or less, explain why you wish to
attend this program and what you hope to
accomplish.
Participant Costs
./ If your participation depends on scholarship
assistance, please demonstrate why the
assistance is needed, why the National Trust is
the only source of assistance available to you,
and how you partiCipation will contribute to the
preservation movement. See website or call for
details.
The tuition fee for the program is $450.
Applicants who individually or through their
sponsoring organization are members of National
Trust Forum are eligible for a discounted tuition
fee of $350.
Participants are responsible for lodging costs,
meals, and transportation to and from Owatonna,
Minnesota. The hotel nightly rate will include all
lodging & meals. No additional meal fee will be
assessed for overnight guests.
Two (2) copies of application materials must be
received by March 30,2007. Please forward to:
See other sidefor application information or
visit www.nationaltrust.orgjplt.
Center for Preservation Leadership/PL T
National Trust for Historic Preservation
1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
fax: 202.588.6223 / e-mail: plt@nthp.org
Applicants will be notified by May 4, 2007.
A limited number of scholarships are available.
Please visit our website for details.
Preservation Leadership Training I National Trust for Historic Preservation
Page I of I
Typical Schedule
The links in the schedule will take you to the appropriate section of the Preservation Leadership Training Goals and
Educational Objectives.
SATURDAY
Welcome and Introductions
SUNDAY
Program Overview
Introduction to the I!'LC!mPrQj~cJ:
Community Preservation Issues
MONDAY
CO_mJTIj,JJ}[tYJ,._e.9_QeLsh iQ
TUESDAY
Politics of Preservation
tlumC!J1R~soJ,Jrc_es
WEDNESDAY
$trl'lJegic_P@nn!JJg
Fin;:,!QclC!lReJiQ_urc.es
THURSDAY
!,gggLJ~oJs
Economics of Preservation
FRIDAY
J:LaD-(;!s: OnJ2~sjgJL W o Ossb..Q.Q
Public Presentation of I~qmErQiecJ Findings
SATURDAY
Program Wrap-Up and Evaluation
http://www.nationaltrust.org/pltlschedule_plt.html
2/13/2007
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2007
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
Preliminary
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, Michael Gunn, Pam Michaud,
Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: John McCormally
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Burford stated that she wanted to report a few things to report to the Commission and thought that the
Commission should invest some time in these issues. She said that one of the commission members Jim
Ponto and one of the members of Northside Neighborhood Association Claire Sponsler attended the first
of two meetings regarding the Northside Marketplace planning meeting. Burford said that there is a great
interest in retaining the pedestrian orientation and balance and scale of this neighborhood. She said there
was some discussion about the benefits of designating the area as a historic district. Burford said this
would be an opportunity for the Commission to find a way to speak with the property owners and the
business people to do an educational effort and explain the economic benefits of both a national historic
district designation and a local historic designation.
Burford said the eclectic nature and the uniqueness of the area were also discussed. She said this is also
an opportunity to talk about the Main Street program, as well as federal and state tax credits. Burford said
this is also a chance to reach out into the community and talk to architects, the Chamber of Commerce,
and other groups.
Secondly, Burford said that the budget notes discuss the funding of the brick paved streets, which are not
just in Iowa City's historic districts but other parts of the city. She noted that they are funded by the capital
improvements budget, and this comes up annually for review. Burford said the budget for this line item is
$20,000.
Burford said that the cost of repairing a square yard of a brick street is roughly $125, and the cost of
repairing concrete is roughly $65. She added, however, that a well-maintained brick street can last over
100 years, but a concrete/asphalt street is expected to last 15 to 20 years. Burford said that brick streets
also add to the value of a community.
Burford said that she did some research and found that Davenport, Iowa is considered one of the
examples in the country of how to handle brick-paved streets. She said that Davenport actually has a
simple ordinance that reads, "Streets and alleys shall be maintained as brick streets and alleys. This list
shall be subject to revision from time to time. No other type of repair shall be allowed to these streets and
alleys other than that described under this section." Burford said the ordinance gives detailed instructions
on how to repair a brick street.
Burford pointed out that Coralville just constructed a huge brick street for its riverfront. She said that
having an ordinance for something like this would protect the brick streets. .
Third, Burford pointed out that the Friends of Historic Preservation Board is asking to postpone the
preservation awards until the fall. She said that this would give people in the community more time to
work on their projects. Burford said she talked to the Chair of the Johnson County H'istoric Preservation
Commission, John Christiansen, who has asked to be involved in the preservation awards.
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 2
Miklo stated for consideration that there were a few years in which the preservation awards were a joint
effort with the County. He said because of the number of projects that the program went on very long and
some attendees started to leave before the program was over.
Burford discussed the Glenda Castleberry's lecture on the economics of historic preservation in which
Castleberry referred to a model showing the impact both direct and indirect of historic preservation in a
community. Burford said that she went to that website and then suggested to Sunil Terdalkar that every
time there is an application that it be entered into the model in order to start building some numbers to
show the impact of historic preservation on the community.
Weitzel said the Commission has discussed applying for a CLG or HRDP grant to have an economic
impact study done. He said it has also been suggested by members of the City Council that this be done
at some point. Burford said that the model can be found online under "Preservation Economic Impact
ModeL"
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION:
November 21. 2006. Carlson stated that he had typographical corrections to submit. Weitzel stated that if
there are no corrections of substance, then the Commission can agree to file the r:ninutes by consensus.
It was the consensus of the Commission to do so for these minutes.
December 14. 2006. Swaim stated that on page twelve, in the second to last paragraph, the last sentence
should read, "...there would not be much depth between the buildings."
Carlson said that on page eight, in the second to last paragraph, it should be corrected to show that
Weitzel voted no instead of Gunn. He added that he also had typographical corrections to submit.
MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the December 14, 2006 minutes of the Historic Preservation
Commission, as amended. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
National Preservation Awards
Miklo said that he and Terdalkar thought that the tornado recovery efforts of the Commission, Friends,
and the community in general might be a good project to consider for this. Miklo said that the Iowa
Chapter of the American Planning Association gave the community an award for its efforts, so that is an
indication that this is an award for the effort. He added that the National Trust did. provide some funding
for some of the repairs.
Miklo asked if the Commission would be interested in nominating that process/project. He said that a
nomination was compiled for the Iowa Chapter of the American Planning Association Award, and that
could be amended to meet these criteria. Miklo asked if anyone on the Commission would be willing to
spend three to four hours on the nomination. He said that the nomination deadline is March 15\ and the
award announcement would be in September.
Weitzel agreed that this is a great idea for a nomination. Miklo said that another project would be the
Englert Theater. He said that is a worthy project but is not as timely nor as dramatic. Miklo said that the
requirements would include a 750-word maximum description, letters of recommendation, and before and
after photographs, which are already available. He said that it would be a matter of just compiling the
information; the only new requirements would be to update the letters of recommendation and to update
the text. Swaim volunteered to work on the project.
Weitzel informed Swaim that she could have access to all of his photographs. Miklo said the application
would not be for any specific buildings but would refer to the overall effort. Weitzel stated that this entire
effort has received a lot of attention, and the Johnson County Historical Society is looking at doing an
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 3
exhibit, perhaps a permanent display, regarding this. He said he would be working on that. Miklo added
that this is an opportunity to show the results of the Commission's efforts and the possible effects that the
Commission's work had on Iowa Avenue and other damaged areas. The consensus of the Commission
was that this project would make for a great application.
Trainino Opportunities. Miklo said that Preservation Leadership Training (PL T) is a program that some
members of the community have attended. He said that it is several days in length, usually in a historic
community. Miklo said the training is pretty in-depth, including technical aspects of preservation,
economics, the politics of preservation, and the regulatory aspect. He said that if there is a commissioner
or two interested in attending, particularly someone who would be on the Commission for a while, the City
might be able to find some funding. Perhaps Friends of Historic Preservation might help pay some of the
expenses.
Weitzel said he believes the conference lasts for three to four days. Miklo said he would e-mail the details
to Commission members. Weitzel commented that this is a great chance for someone who plans to be on
the Commission for a number of years and is an excellent opportunity to bring more training and skills to
the community.
Preservation Plan Update. Miklo said that Marlys Svendsen was in Iowa City last month for a meeting of
downtown business and/or property owners. He said that the meeting concluded the public input phase of
the Preservation Plan. Miklo said that Svendsen has prepared a rough draft that will be amended and
presented to the Commission within the next few weeks, hopefully in time for the March agenda.
Burford asked about the meeting on Friday morning at 9:30 regarding the downtown area. Miklo replied
that there is a meeting of the City's Economic Development Commission. He said the City Council wanted
a market analysis done of the downtown area and put out a request for proposals for consulting firms for
this purpose. Miklo said the City Council is seeking advice as to what can be done to improve the
downtown, keep it economically viable, to improve the mix of businesses, and decide what the City
should be looking at in the next five to ten years. He said preservation should be one aspect of that.
Weitzel commented that things the Commission has talked about in the past include fayade improvement
and revolving loans. Regarding the Preservation Plan, he said the Commission had hoped to have it
before the City Council by now, the project was delayed due to the tornado.
Update on 923 Iowa Avenue and 411 South Governor Street Proiects
Miklo said that the Commission's decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement
building at 923 Iowa Avenue was appealed to the Board of Adjustment. He said 'that the Board's initial
review of the appeal in November resulted in a tie vote. Miklo said the applicant requested
reconsideration in January, and at that time the majority of the Board felt that, based on the discussion in
the minutes and the references to density and zoning matters, the decision of the Commission was not
based on design or scale and bulk issues but on density.
Miklo said the Board had to rely on the minutes in making its decision. He said therefore there may be a
lesson here that in the future, on very significant projects like this, the Commission members should refer
closely to the guidelines and Secretary of the Interior Standards and iterate how the project does or does
not meet them.
Weitzel said that the Commission could probably have done a better job of articulating what is already in
the guidelines when discussing the issues, including some of the neighborhood concerns. He said that
because the Commission didn't cite any other relevant guidelines, the Board of Adjustment was restricted
to Sections 10.1 and 10.2 in its deliberations, which left a lot of the discussion out of the picture. Weitzel
said the Commission should also have made it clear when discussing some of the other underlying issues
whether they were being used as items for consideration or not. He said the Commission can talk about
those things but needs to make it clear that that is not what the decision is being based on.
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 4
Miklo added that the decision of the Board of Adjustment is appealable. He said that a neighboring
property owner could appeal the decision, as could the Commission. Miklo said that the next level of
appeal is the District Court. He said that there would be a difficulty there in terms of the Commission
making the appeal in that the City Attorney's Office represents the Board of Adjustment and would
therefore not be available to make the case on behalf of the Historic Preservation Commission. Miklo said
that therefore to appeal the decision would require the Commission to seek funding from the City to hire
an outside attorney.
Miklo stated that the Board of Adjustment is a semi-judicial body and by law has to come to findings of
fact to state very clearly how their findings meet the law. He said that the Commission can consider
whether or not to appeal this decision, but he thought it would be a difficult task. Miklo said that this was a
difficult case and added that the Board of Adjustment was split three to two on the decision. Weitzel
asked if any Commission members would be interested in appealing.
Swaim said that it speaks both about physical mass and visual mass. She said that physical mass would
certainly seem to have something to do with visual mass. Weitzel said that when the Commission next
revises its guidelines, that definition should be made very clear. He said he did not think there was a clear
definition provided. Weitzel said the Board did not really come to a consensus on what that meant either.
Carlson said that he believes there are Secretary of the Interior Standards for new construction as well as
for rehabilitation. He suggested that the Commission look at those and cite them in the guidelines for new
construction.
Miklo said that physical mass is something that can be defined, and the guidelines do that but limit it to
single-family homes and duplexes in that there are actual figures or percentages. He said that the way
the guidelines evolved - the fact that there were guidelines written for the districts and also guidelines for
apartment infill that were drafted by another committee - would indicate that the Commission's overall
intention was that the overall dimension parameter should have applied to multi-family. Miklo said it was
qualified to apply only to single-family houses and duplexes at some point when the other guidelines for
apartment infill were put into place. He said that the others are more subjective in terms of the visual
mass, and that is where there is a lot of gray area that can be argued either way.
Weitzel said that one of the things the Commission is always going to have trouble with is that when one
comes to something involving findings of fact, there is so much that is personal opinion. He said that it is
necessarily subjective, and that's why Commission members need to be clear when it comes to citing the
qualities that lead to their decisions.
Toomey said that the house on the corner of Iowa Avenue and Dodge Street with the large apartments
next door is an example of visual mass and how the mass of the apartment building overwhelms the
house. He said that would apply in this case, where something that was once a home is to be replaced
with something that will result in a dramatic change in the neighborhood.
Michaud said that the 923 Iowa Avenue and 411 Governor Street projects were very similar, because the
owners of both wanted to build deeper. She said that both applications had very emotional presentations.
Weitzel said that at some point, the Commission may make a questionable decision, and that's why there
is an appeal process. He said the Commission should learn from the experience, go forward from this
point and be prepared to be diligent in the future.
Swaim said that during this coming spring and summer there should not be the same large number of
applications that the Commission had last year. She said that when there is a large number of
applications to get through, the Commission has to feel comfortable in tabling something for further study.
Swaim said that even though postponement may be frustrating, it's better to make the right decision over
two meetings. Weitzel agreed and said that is particularly true when the Commission needs more
information.
Miklo said that there is some question as to whether the Commission's guidelines require a vote at the
meeting at which it considers an application. He said that the Planning and Zoning Commission handles
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 5
that situation by having a 45-day time limit for a vote. Miklo said that when the Planning and Zoning
Commission is in a situation in which there is new information, not enough information, or some doubt as
to whether the project complies with a rule or regulation, it will tell the applicant that if he wants a vote the
Commission will vote, but the Commission will have to vote against the project because more details are
required. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission informs the applicant that it would like to work
with the applicant by deferring the application to the next meeting in order to have adequate information.
Miklo said that there are a couple of letters from the State Historical Society regarding the application
approval for 411 South Governor Street. He said that when T erdalkar first reviewed the project, he had
the sense that it would not comply with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Miklo said that Terdalkar
therefore referred the project to Jack Porter, the architect at the State Historical Society. Miklo said that
Porter, after a cursory review, gave an initial indication that there were some problems with the project
meeting the Secretary of the Interior Standards, so that would have been grounds to defer the application
until the issues could have been delved into more thoroughly.
Miklo said that 411 S. Governor Street went on to the Board of Adjustment agenda. He pointed out that
this particular property and the zoning in that area is such that this building could not expand and nothing
could be done to this property as a religious institution because of the overall zoning requirements. Miklo
stated that there is a bonus in the zoning ordinance for historic buildings that allows the Board of
Adjustment to waive almost any zoning requirement if it is determined to be necessary to preserve a
historic site or structure or cultural asset. He said that because this is a National Register building, that
allowed the church to make an application to the Board of Adjustment, but it also required a certificate of
appropriateness, which it would have required anyway because it is in a conservation district.
Miklo said, however, that the level of scrutiny that the Commission was allowed, because of the zoning
issues, was greater than that required for the typical certificate of appropriateness. He said that in fact,
because of the historic sanctuary, the issue of breaking up the interior of the builaing is pertinent to the
discussion, and that perhaps was not emphasized enough in the discussions.
Brennan said that certificates of appropriateness, by definition, are for material changes to the exterior
appearance of a building, so by the ordinance, review is restricted to the exterior. Miklo stated that the
ordinance that the Board of Adjustment operates under for a special exception refers it to the Historic
Preservation Commission to evaluate the effect on the historic features, so it's broader; it's not a typical
certificate of appropriateness. Miklo said the point of the special exception is to allow something that
would otherwise not be allowed in order to save a historic landmark or feature. He said that in this case,
the sanctuary is a historic feature. Miklo said the original building is the historic feature, the building as a
whole.
Miklo said that when the church went on to the Board of Adjustment with an application, there were
several other issues with the project in terms of parking, drainage, one of the neighboring property
owners being affected, and setbacks that were problematic. He said the zoning ordinance ties the special
exception allowing the waiver of some of the other requirements to preserving the historic structure. Miklo
said when the letters came in from the State Historic Society indicating how the changes to the building
would actually detract from its historic significance, it was clear that the Board would have a difficult time
granting a special exception for the parking waivers, setbacks, etc.
Miklo said that at this point, the church is rethinking how it will approach this application. He added that
Friends of Historic Preservation has offered to provide some funding for design assistance by hiring an
architect with some expertise in adding on to historic buildings. Miklo said that hopefully the church will
come back with a new design, including a substantial breezeway between the original building and the
new building and with the roofline of the new building not overwhelming the roofline of the old.
Brennan asked Miklo for an explanation of the procedure. Miklo replied that it is a two-step process in that
the application has to receive both Historic Preservation Commission and Board of Adjustment approval.
Brennan said that the last time this was considered, the Commission was operating under its ordinance
that prohibits consideration of the interior. Miklo said that was incorrect - that the application was to the
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 6
Board of Adjustment for a special exception using the historic building status. He said that the church
could not have even come to the Commission for additions to the building without that status, because
zoning wouldn't have allowed it. Miklo said that this building, because of zoning, is pretty confined; it has
no parking and doesn't meet the setbacks. He said there is a relief valve, however, that is an incentive to
preserve the historic resource. Regardless whether the interior is regulated or not, it appears that the
exterior alternatives proposed by the church do not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
could result in it losing its National Register status. The National Register status is necessary for the
Board of Adjustment to waive zoning requirements. '
Gunn asked if the Commission ever had the right to override any other zoning. Miklo said the
Commission does not. He said the Board of Adjustment does, and the Commission is a partner in that in
that the Commission has to find that what's being done would preserve the historic resource. Miklo said
that the Board of Adjustment also has to consider whether a historic resource is being preserved, taking
the Commission's recommendation as part of that but also looking at how it will affect the neighborhood in
terms of traffic, parking, etc. Gunn asked if the Commission's vote in any way takes away all of the zoning
considerations from some other body. Miklo said they aren't taken away, but the Board of Adjustment
could consider waiving the other requirements, given that the Commission voted in favor. He said the
Commission's vote is one factor in the Board's decision.
Swaim asked about the procedure when the church reworks its plans. Miklo replied that the church will
have to bring the application back before both bodies. He said that an example of this would be the
Preucil School of Music. Miklo said it is in a residential zone but had no parking. He said that this
pertinent clause was written into the zoning ordinance a number of years ago in order to encourage the
preservation of buildings like this. Miklo said that Preucil was relieved of some of its parking requirements
through this clause and was required to preserve the building.
Weitzel said this is obviously for 'significant buildings, not for any residential buildfng that is old. He said
the Commission needs to be clear in these types of questions that it is enabling a special exception
based on the decision that it is not negatively affecting the historic integrity.
Miklo said there have only been two cases that have used this provision: the Preucil School and the
Bethel AME Church. He said this is a way of encouraging the reuse of the building and therefore its
preservation. Brennan asked if the church was a local landmark. Miklo said that the church is a National
Register building but is not a local landmark.
Miklo said that in 1996, all buildings listed on the National Register were nominated as local landmarks.
He said that with exception of the Davis Hotel Building (the property owner objected), they all were listed
as local landmarks. Miklo said that since that time, buildings have been added to the National Register,
and the City has not necessarily followed through to have them added as local landmarks.
Miklo pointed out that it doesn't matter in this particular situation. He said the Board of Adjustment
considers this clause in relation to a building that is on the National Register, is a local landmark, or is in a
historic or conservation district. Brennan asked if any other building in that district could use the provision
to propose a similar expansion. Miklo said that theoretically it could be done, but because most of the
historic buildings in Iowa City are residences, there isn't much that would need to be waived in order to
make them work or function. He said that a single-family residence only requires one parking space, and
a zone allowing multi-family usually has enough room on the site to allow additional parking. Miklo said
that when this provision is used it will mostly be for commercial or institutional buildings.
Miklo said that the idea is to preserve the building in the long-term. He said that the point of the ordinance
is to preserve the historic resource by granting waivers of certain other regulations in order to do that.
Gunn said that the issue of mass and scale is obviously difficult. He said that the Commission has tried to
write the guidelines to address that. Gunn said the Commission came up with the street elevation,
coupled with the zoning guidelines, to regulate scale to a degree. He said that is objectively about as far
as the Commission could get. Gunn said that it is very difficult, when people are passionate about their
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 7
projects and when the lawyers get involved, to make the Secretary of the Interior Standards enforce mass
and scale guidelines.
Carlson said that until the City allows the Commission to regulate square footage or side elevations of
additions, it is forcing the Commission to stick with this objective system. Miklo said that with the special
exception process, the Commission has the tools to regulate this building to allow an addition of an
appropriate size. Carlson said that is true in this particular case but is not true for any addition in any
district or for any landmark property.
Regarding the appeal for 923 Iowa Avenue and some of the other cases cited, Miklo said that the
Commission has done a very good job over the years. He said that some of the smaller houses have
actually doubled in size, but those were done at the rear and the roofline was not higher than that of the
original structure itself. Miklo said they were very sympathetic in design in most cases. He said the
Commission has not approved anything that is really out of line with the guidelines. Miklo said the
Commission has approved additions that have made very small houses viable for continued use, given
what people expect in a home today.
Miklo advised the Commission, in a situation like this, to ask the applicant for consent to defer to another
meeting and let staff do some more research. He said that without enough information, the Commission
can always go to outside experts, such as the State Historical Society as in this case.
Michaud pointed out that the December meeting was almost five hours long, and there were a lot of
applications to consider. Weitzel said that the Commission tries to accommodate people when it can, but
one thing the Commission could do would be to ask applicants if they would be willing to come back for a
special meeting to review their applications.
Miklo said that Svendsen's draft of the Preservation Plan recommends streamlining the application
process in that there are more activities that could qualify for certificates of no material effect in which
applications could be reviewed by staff and the chair, such as replacement stairways, railings, windows if
from an approved list of window types, etc. He said then not every detail would have to go before the
Commission, allowing it to focus on more significant projects.
Weitzel said that in the past year, the Commission reviewed 120 to 130 applications. He said the
Commission was extremely accommodating to people but doesn't want to burn out. Miklo said that
through some reworking of the requirements, the process could be streamlined, and the Commission will
have to put some faith in staff and the chair for some of these minor projects.
Michaud suggested some type of time limit for application presentations. Miklo said that if the discussion
goes over 20 minutes on one item, it is probably not a complete or solid application. Gunn said that the
most difficult issues aren't necessarily the incomplete applications. He said that 923 Iowa Avenue and
411 Governor were complete enough, but the issues were difficult, although over four hours is too long for
a meeting.
Gunn said that the applicants could be directed more ahead of time toward something that the
Commission is more likely to approve. Weitzel agreed that perhaps some applications could be screened
ahead of time as a potential problem. He also said that the Commission might want to make better use of
small committees. Gunn commented that if an applicant wants the project before the Commission as it is,
there is not much staff can do about it. Miklo said that was the case for 411 Governor Street. Ponto
commented that oftentimes an applicant will ask for something additional to be reviewed while they are at
the meeting. He said the Commission tries to be accommodating, but in some cases people are trying to
take advantage.
Weitzel said that some other issues for the Commission to consider include election of officers and the
work plan. He suggested that the Commission look at its two or three big priority items. Weitzel asked
Commission members to consider what those items will be for the next meeting. He suggested that
Historic Preservation Commission
February 8, 2007
Page 8
updating and acceptance of the Preservation Plan might be one of those priorities, and another might be
the Preservation Awards.
Weitzel discussed the National Register of Historic Places workshops to be held on April 2ih in
Washington, Iowa and on May 11 and October 26 in Des Moines. He said they are really good
opportunities to see what it takes to register a building on the National Register. Miklo stated that if
someone wants to attend a conference or workshop, he can work to reimburse that member for travel
expenses.
Carlson said that the survey that was not funded for the Near South Side and Manville Heights might also
be considered as a priority. Weitzel said it was recommended by the Historical Society panel that
reviewed the application that the two areas be taken apart and considered separately.
Miklo said that another approach might be to ask the Manville Heights residents for funding. Carlson
suggested that the Near South Side seems more critical at this point. Weitzel said that grant was written
very quickly, because the Commission is reviewing so many applications and is missing out on
opportunities like this. He said that streamlining the process will allow the Commission to do more edifying
and fulfilling things.
Miklo stated that the Commission receives a lot of grief because of its regulatory nature. He said,
however, that the Commission can be proud of what it has done and the effects of its work to preserve
historic structures and neighborhoods, especially when looking at Iowa Avenue. He said that it's important
that the Commission be recognized for the positive things it has done for the community.
Regarding Iowa Avenue, Swaim said that the third house from Evans on the north side no longer has a
for sale sign. Miklo said the house changed hands, and the buyer has hired an architect to prepare plans
to restore the house. He said the new owner plans to use an appropriate roof pitch and reconstruct the
porch.
Burford complimented Swaim and the State Historical Society on its presentation for its 150th anniversary.
She said that the Society has developed an architectural library that is open stack. Burford said there is
no other library in Iowa City that has as much detail as the one that the State Historic Society has.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
Pcd/mins/hpc2007/2.8.7.doc
=
o
.-
VJ
VJ
's
6"'0
o -
u 8
= ~
o~
._ ~ to-
.....~o
~ = 0
E: ~ M
~"'O
~ ~
-.....
~.....
~<
.-
-
o
.....
VJ
:E
QO >< >< >< f::::!
c::> >< >< >< >< >< ><
-. 0
M
'" 0-- 00 t- t- oo 0-- t- o-- 0-- 00
E .~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-. -. -- --
'" c.. 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0-- 0--
!- >< ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
UJ --
M M M M M M M M M M
.t;>
";j
= = e ~ ....-
0: ... = e '" '"
Il) ... = 0 = 0 0: 0 e .tl
~ ~ = '" U .c .... ";
;: =
'" ... ... = 0 "~
0: ... 0: = ~ i 0 ~ 0 ~
z = = u ~ i:l-o ~ Eo-
"'0
Q) l-<
rn Q)
;:j on..o
~ s:: a
~..;:l Q)
s:: ~ :::8
EE~:::8~
~Q)..ooo
~15~ZZ
~ ~ II II "
~ II " ~ :::8
~><OOZ