HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-10-2008 Revised Historic Preservation Commission
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, January 10,2008
City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street
Lobby Conference Room
6:00 p.m.
Revised Agenda
1. Call to Order
2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda
3. Items of Consideration
A. Certificate of Appropriateness:
821 Dearborn Street
B. Minutes for December 13, 2007
4. Discussion of amendments to the proposed draft Historic Preservation Plan
5. Other
6. Adjourn
Iowa Cin
Historic Preservation COlnmission
IhlL.t 10 I., \\a,llll1j],tlll1 Srrcd, Inwa
] \')22..\1)
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 10,2008
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Sunil Terdalkar, Associate Planner
Re: 821 Dearborn Street - Revisions to a previously approved new construction project
This project was fIrst reviewed the October 11 meeting of the Commission. At the time, the
Commission approved an application for the demolition of a garage and construction of a new two-
car garage at 821 Dearborn Street. The approved design included installation of fIve square clear
story windows on the north fa<;:ade of the garage. In December, the applicant approached the
Commission to seek approval for certain revisions including fenestration and size of the structure.
The application was deferred due to inadequate information and scaled drawings. At the meeting the
Commission also provided some direction in terms of the height of the structure, window placement
and overall compatibility.
The applicant has provided revised drawings with dimensions. The applicant is now seeking
approval to install three double-hung windows on the north fa<;:ade, a 6 foot wide French door
flanked by two double hung windows on the east fa<;ade, and two garage doors on the west fa<;ade.
The total height of the proposed structure would approximately 18 feet.
Although the revised drawings show a better design than the one presented in the December
meeting, staff believes that the fenestration and exterior fInish can be improved. The drawings
appear to have some discrepancies in terms of the dimensions and proportions of the proposed
windows and doors (proposed window size: 6'-0" x 3'-0"; French door: 6'-6" x 7'-2"). Staff has
prepared some sketches using the dimensions of the proposed structure. As seen in the sketches, the
number of openings seem to overwhelm the east and north facades. Staff recommends considering
smaller window sizes or installing only two windows on the south fa<;ade. Staff is aware of the
applicant's need for natural light and suggests using skylights to enhance the lighting conditions in
the space. Considering the size of the interior space the amount natural light from two skylights, the
French doors and windows would be considerable.
Given that the applicant is proposing a taller structure than that was approved, staff also
recommends that a frieze board should be added. Similarly, a change in the material or surface fInish
at the foundation level would help. Staff has suggested these alternatives to the applicant and the
applicant has indicated that he will consider them.
:z
~
- ~ <"'1
,- ;5
! ~
..~ "]
~ .~
~
I(J
.::t:: .~
t?. -X-
.Q:. ~
~ ~
Z t'\
~~
t-
~
~
~
~
()
~
~ '"
ill ~.~
"-
>~
,~
~~
jS~ -I...
>.::,.
.. ~
\
1: 0')
~~..
';;:::;, .=
Z \,'-..1
~\
~
~
..Q.
\j
~ .~
~'$
$:
'"
~
t-
'J) ~
III x:.
L~
I ~
4: r<l
~~.
~ ~
,z. ,
\" .
. .....J
18'-1'
I
1
18'-1'
! 12'-0'
15'.0'
-r--
2'.8'
--J-
12'-0'
6'-0'
I
15'-0'
t
I
Facade to Match Real Garage Door
l :
---j--
3'-0'
L_
m m m
l 3'.0' .J
I I
f-3'.3.--,j
L3'-4'
I
l ,------------------------------- 22'-0' --------------------------~
,-
I
25'.2" - ---------
821 Dearborn - North Elevation w/dimensions
Roof Pitch 3: 12
"
~
1ft
'.-
..
II II II
II I I II
,( III II
,,------/' ] I III II
r 2'-0't
r1'.g'1
, I
I I
I
I
)
I
9'.1'
24'.0"
26'-10'
821 Dearborn - West Elevation w/dimensions (Custom Garage Door Design Shown Below)
3'-2'
I
i
g'-O"
821 Dearborn - Exterior East/North Perspective
";1;
15'.0'
12'.0'
6'.0"
m
r-"'-'JC-1
".,.....,IIl..,r'II".....~
II
-----r-
2'.3"
18'.1"
..
7'.2"
,
~t,
ir
~~
I I
~J .
I
.- 3"0"1
6'.6"
t
8'.9"
24'.0"
26'-10"
821 Dearborn. East Elevation w/dimensions
Iowa Cit\,
His toric Preservation COlnmission
r hlL .1111 L \X,l,;Jl1IlgtOIl SIne!. [, \\\3
1\ .~2240
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 10,2008
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Sunil Terdalkar, Associate Planner
Re: Draft Historic Preservation Plan - amendments
In response to concerns raised by the Planning and Zoning Commission members, staff would like
to suggest certain revisions to the language to better reflect the overall goals in the Comprehensive
Plan. The changes are specifically related to Neighborhood Stabilization and Technical Assistance
Steps discussed in Goal 10. The suggested revisions are noted on the attached pages of the draft
Plan in highlighted boxes.
If the Historic Preservation Commission is comfortable with the suggested revisions, a motion to
amend the draft Plan may be considered.
design for construction of new secondary buildings, what may be negotiable, etc.
6. Study real estate and economic impact of district designation on market values and tax
assessments in other previously designated districts.
7. Confirm record of design review cases that have been problems versus those that were
approved in other districts-cite specific numbers.
8. Stress good news about post-tornado stories as an example of the best and worst that can
come from a natural disaster pushing a design review process "to-the max"; focus discussion
on large issues while also responding to narrower concerns.
Common objectives relating to Communication and Neighborhood Stabilization apply to older
residential neighborhoods throughout the community. They include recommendations for
education programs to increase public awareness of historic resources and encourage resident
involvement with preservation. They also include general neighborhood stabilization efforts
designed to make aging neighborhoods attractive places to live.
Communication and Neighborhood Stabilization Steps:
1. Promote heritage education efforts at local elementary schools (especially those in older
neighborhoods such as Horace Mann, Longfellow, Lincoln, etc.) by supporting establishment
of a local history education program that includes information, tours and events connected
to historic districts.
2. Recruit and train potential district residents to serve on the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission.
3. Participate in an annual or bi-annual "District Forum" for historic and conservation district
representatives hosted by the HPC. The District Forum's agenda could vary but would
regularly provide a setting for sharing information about regulatory changes, exchanging
successful ideas among districts, and offering suggestions for solving problems that cross
district boundaries.
4. Parking problems though not specifically a preservation concern, are important for the
overall stabilization of neighborhoods. To address these concerns it is recommended
that neighborhood associations and the City, explore alternative methods of managing
parking. This might include a residential parking permit program in some areas, the use
of angle parking to increase the supply of parking spaces where appropriate, and the use of
"environmentally friendly" paving techniques when parking is added to back yards. When
addressing parking solutions the conflicting issues of increasing supply while minimizing
paving in a residential setting must be considered.
5. The City should remain vigilant in addressing complaints regarding issues such as zoning
violations, removal of snow from sidewalks, weed removal and trash control that affect
neighborhood quality of life. In some locations, targeted code enforcement may be
appropriate to address perceived neighborhood decline.
6. Pr oluote l1eigbbot bood stabilization tlu OUgll the con v elsion of 1 ental pr opel ties to 0 vv llel-
occupied lesidences or duplexes by encomaging homeownelslllp, developing a Jlome
7. Establish a "user-friendly" technical assistance effort for property owners by implementing
64
the Technical Assistance Steps also listed below.
8. Develop and fund a program to alleviate lead-based paint for residential landmarks and
buildings in historic and conservation districts that is sensitive to their architectural
character.
The increasing importance of establishing technical assistance as a "user-friendly effort" was
identified as an important strategy for many neighborhoods, including those already established
as historic or conservation districts, or in some cases, where designation efforts have not begun.
The Technical Assistance Steps below and referred to by reference for specific neighborhoods and
districts provide a menu of activities for the HPC, Friends, and neighborhood associations to use
over time to help property owners who are planning improvements to their buildings-including
work that is outside the scope of formal design review but important to overall up-keep and
building preservation.
Technical Assistance Steps:
1. Develop a historic preservation technical assistance program as an on-going effort aimed at
developing and maintaining the capacity of historic district property owners to maintain or
restore their historic buildings.
2. Distribute an annual or semi-annual "historic preservation report" to property owners in
districts that includes information regarding design review efforts.
3. Add a "history corner" column in the neighborhood association newsletters received by
district residents with information on relevant subjects ranging from a do-it-yourself guide
for re-glazing windows to where the neighborhood ghosts reside to why moisture trapped
in exterior walls leads to peeling paint and dry rot. These columns could be collected at the
City website, indexed, and/or printed annually for retention at the public library.
4. Develop special topic publications in response to resident suggestions and needs identified
by the design review process.
5. Deliver technical assistance and public awareness information through neighborhood
newsletters and website{s), and direct communications with district residents, including
email.
A neighborhood strategy that crosses district and neighborhood boundaries involves the creation
of a program to encourage owner-occupancy as a stabilizing measure. The need for such a
program was identified in various neighborhood meetings and interviews. In communities
around the country, such programs are usually targeted at populations that are at or below
median income levels. Some of Iowa City's most affordable single-family homes are in northeast
Goosetown and parts of Longfellow. Potential funding sources for such a program might include
Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and major employers. The basic components of a
Home Ownership Incentive Program focusing on neighborhood stabilization are outlined below.
Home Ownership Incentive Program
1. Consider the primary goal for such program as neighborhood stabilization
2. Establish the program through the cooperation of one or more lenders. Consider CDBG/
65
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The update of preservation strategies for specific neighborhoods that follows is organized
alphabetically within larger "Planning Districts" that were adopted by the City in 1997. The
city has been divided into ten such Planning Districts including five containing historic areas
discussed below. Within these Planning Districts, other terms are used to describe various
neighborhood groups. The term "historic district" (HD) refers to a contiguous area that has been
listed on the National Register of Historic Places, designated by local ordinance, and/or both.
Historic districts are significant because of their architecture, historical associations, and other
visual attributes. The term "conservation district" (CD) applies to a local designation for areas that
share a common character, which may include both visual and historical qualities, but because of
physical integrity concerns, does not qualify as a historic district. Both local historic districts and
conservation districts are protected through a design review process administered through the
Historic Preservation Commission.
The term "neighborhood" is used is several manners in the discussion that follows. When
the word is capitalized, it refers to one of the areas of the city organized through the Office of
Neighborhood Services in the Planning and Community Development Department. This City
program supports and encourages neighborhood action and provides ideas and resources that
can help shape the future of a neighborhood. Neighborhoods actively organized in the historic
areas include the Northside, Goosetown, College Green, Longfellow, Melrose Avenue, Manville
Heights, Oak Grove. Morningside/Glendale, and Shimek.
The terms "neighborhood" or "corridor" are used to describe areas that have been formally
surveyed through the Historic Preservation Commission or are recommended for surveying
to determine their eligibility as a local historic district, conservation district, and/or National
Register district. A summary of the status for completed and future neighborhood objectives
appears at the end of this section on page 109.
Downtown Planning District:
66
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2007
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL - CITY HALL
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, William Downing, Lindsay Bunting Eubanks, Jim Ponto, Ginalie
Swaim, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Esther Baker, Pam Michaud
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Austin Chamberlain, Chris Chapman, Don Cochran, Mr. McDonough, Alan
Swanson, Jean Walker
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Melrose Neiqhborhood.
Jean Walker introduced herself as the Melrose Neighborhood Representative. She said that the historic
Melrose Neighborhood is at a crucial point in terms of its survival. Walker said the neighborhood needs
the Commission's help and support if it is not to be swept away by The University of Iowa, as has
happened to many other historic neighborhoods.
Walker said that this neighborhood is unique. She said that a majority of the neighborhood has been
placed on the National Register of Historic Places. Walker said the neighborhood is worth preserving.
She said that it is significant under the three criteria of nomination to the National Register for historic
events, individual, and architecture. Walker said that the neighborhood is a vibrant community directly
adjacent to the University.
Walker said that a concern is that the University, as a State entity, can ignore many of the restrictions that
are placed on properties by the National Register as well as local restrictions. She stated that if the
University did acquire the whole neighborhood, the City would lose, according to a local real estate
professional, approximately one-quarter million dollars in property taxes each year.
Walker said it is not some vague possibility that the University might destroy the area. She said there are
many precedents, including where the Law Building is located, where the Nursing Building is located,
where the dormitories are located, and where the Athletic Learning Center is situated.
Walker stated that the University owns some of the big, older houses along Melrose Avenue. She said
that the University buys them, stating that they are for faculty use, but shortly after that they are converted
to institutional use and can eventually be demolished.
Walker asked that the Commission put discussion of the preservation of the Melrose Avenue on its
meeting agenda in the near future. She said that before that meeting, she would submit background
information to the Commission regarding this neighborhood and would include the specific things for
which the neighborhood is asking. Miklo agreed that it would be beneficial for the Commission to see a
written proposal.
Wetherbv House.
Miklo referred to a memo submitted to the Commission by Helen Burford regarding the Wetherby House
and actions that she is proposing in relation to that and future similar houses. He suggested that this item
be put on the Commission's next agenda for discussion.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 2 of 12
New Commission Member:
Miklo introduced Lindsay Bunting Eubanks as the newest member of the Commission.
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Consent Calendar:
519 Oakland Avenue. Weitzel stated that the consent calendar is the process used to expedite a
procedure for something that already meets the guidelines and does not require a lot of discussion. He
said that unless someone had something to discuss with regard to this item, the Commission could
entertain a motion to approve.
MOTION: Toomey moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 519 Oakland
Avenue, as submitted. Bunting Eubanks seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-
Q.
Certificates of Appropriateness:
1012 WashinQton Street. Miklo stated that this item was put on the Commission's last meeting agenda in
some haste, as the Building Department found the outbuilding on this property to be in a state of disrepair
and had some concerns about the safety and potential collapse of the building. Miklo said that the owner
was cited by the Building Department, and the Commission was asked to give the item its immediate
attention. He said that Terdalkar put it on the Commission's agenda and attempted to leave a message
on the owner's answering machine regarding the situation, but apparently the message did not get
through. Miklo said the owner therefore did not have an opportunity to present his view, so this item is
being presented for the Commission's consideration again.
Miklo stated that the building is in pretty rough shape. He said that there was not much of a foundation
here to begin with, and there are obviously some structural problems, including the leaning of the
building.
Miklo said that there used to be several small barns like this throughout neighborhoods in Iowa City, but
they are becoming increasingly rare. He said the building inspector felt that the building could be
stabilized fairly simply with some fairly simple internal braces, and there is the possibility that a future
owner might decide to rehabilitate the building. Weitzel said that when someone is cited, if the property is
in a historic district, the Commission has a chance to comment on the appropriateness of the action. He
said the Commission previously voted to not allow the demolition of the building.
Chapman, the owner of the building, said that the building was repaired and stabilized once before, when
he was cited by the City ten years ago. He said that the bottom line is that his insurance company was
not impressed with the building. Chapman said the building was not leaning before the tornado but was
plumb straight, square. He said that as a result of the tornado, the building was partially lifted off the
foundation and developed a lean that is partially racked.
Chapman said his insurance company would only pay him the money to tear the building down. He said
that doing something to the building represents significant expense for him. Chapman said that because
the building is situated so close to the alley and traffic is going through the alley, it is a concern for him
that he would be at risk for a future insurance claim. He said that he is afraid that if he takes the expense
and time to stabilize the structure, he may be back before the Commission in a year or two. Chapman
said that he is looking at the long-term situation here.
Bunting Eubanks asked Chapman what the cost was when he stabilized the building ten years ago.
Chapman said that basically it was the roof and the foundation. He said that the original foundation was
piers made of a soft brick with a crumbling mortar. Chapman said that was replaced with concrete
masonry units on top of poured concrete below grade.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 3 of 12
Chapman said that the building rests partially on the ground on the south side and has a partial poured
concrete foundation. He said that the manner in which it was constructed leads him to believe that the
building was not original to the site. Chapman added that the building has never had paint on it.
Chapman said that the eave brackets mentioned in the staff report are not original to the building but
were installed during the last repair. He said the expense of the last repair was mostly for the roof.
Miklo asked Chapman if his insurance company is aware that the building is in a district that requires
historic preservation. Chapman responded that he told the company that the City was leaning toward
asking him to repair the building rather than demolish it, as the Commission had not yet made its decision
at that time. Miklo stated that often when an insurance company finds out that City Code has to be met,
then the company is willing to compromise. Chapman said that he is no longer with that insurance
company, and his relationship with that company has been terminated.
Weitzel said that there are competing interests here. He said the owner doesn't want to spend a lot of
money on this building. Weitzel said that this building, however, especially in a denser neighborhood such
as this one, provides a buffer between this property and the ones behind it. He said that it may be
situated close to an alley, because at the time it was built, it was probably used for either livestock or
carriages. Weitzel said the alley probably still doesn't have as much traffic as a regular street.
Toomey said that the racking of a building is really not that expensive and doesn't come anywhere close
to what it would cost to remove the building. He said one could use a couple of comealongs going to the
corner to the furthest parts of the racking, and after it's pulled up square, plywood would be put on the
studs on the inside. Toomey said that plywood is a new material, but it can't rack. He said the process is
not expensive or difficult and should cost less than one thousand dollars.
Chapman asked if that would correct the lean as well as the racking. Toomey said that it was done with
much bigger and worse structures all the time.
Swaim stated that she feels that the building should be saved. She said that it represents a certain period
and was probably for horses and cows before making the transition to automobile storage. Swaim said
that there aren't many of these buildings left in Iowa City, but they tell the story of that period of time.
Toomey pointed out that the owner could not get a building permit today to put the building back where it
is now. Chapman agreed that height restrictions would prevent him from rebuilding this, and setback
restrictions would prevent him from putting this building back this close to the alley.
Bunting Eubanks asked how much it would cost to restore the building to its original condition. Toomey
said he could not tell from the photographs. He said that for stabilization, a maximum of eight sheets of
plywood at $30 each would be required, and the total cost would be less than $1,000. Toomey said that if
there are foundation problems, that is another thing. He said that most of the wood looks okay from the
photographs, and the building has not been altered much from its original status.
Bunting Eubanks stated that she drove by the building earlier in the day and noticed that one doesn't
really see it from the street. She said she did not think the removal of the building would affect the
neighborhood itself in looking different or less from the period.
Brennan said the Commission would need to distinguish this building from the garages the Commission
has allowed to be demolished, particularly in the College Hill District, that were far more structurally sound
than this one appears to be. He said the guidelines just prohibit the demolition of buildings that could be
saved, but the Commission allowed them to come down.
Ponto said he feels this building has more significance than some of those one-story, single-door
garages. Brennan said that all of the same buildings have the same designation under the ordinance. He
stated that there have been others that the Commission has not allowed to come down. Toomey asked if
they were two-story buildings. Brennan said that they were garages that were salvageable, which is what
the guidelines speak to.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 4 of 12
Toomey said this is not even a garage. He said that the historic value of the building is quite a bit different
than the relationship of a garage that is built on. Toomey said that this can't be replaced with something
that is significantly the same; once it's gone, it's gone.
Weitzel said he agreed with Brennan that the Commission, regarding buildings that could have and
probably should have been saved, has allowed the demolition of those buildings. He said, however, that
bad decisions in the past don't justify bad decisions coming forward, but it does address the question of
what is proper and fair. Miklo said that the guidelines do not just refer to the condition of the building. He
stated that the Commission is directed to consider the condition of the building, the integrity, and the
architectural significance of the outbuilding.
Bunting Eubanks pointed out that stabilizing the rack does not address the foundation problems. Toomey
said that the foundation is a mixed bag. He said that over time, as he understood it, it has been kept level
by putting materials underneath it. Toomey said the base would need to be jacked up and some like
material would need to be inserted.
Bunting Eubanks said that she finds the owner's safety concerns regarding the building's proximity to the
alley somewhat compelling. Miklo said that the building official's concern is the leaning and racking of the
building. He said that is what is causing the building department to say this needs to come down or be
stabilized. Miklo said the building inspector did feel the building could be stabilized.
Miklo said that the City does have hundreds of buildings in close proximity to alleys. He said that is the
way they were built, and this is not an unusual situation, although now the City Code requires a five-foot
setback from the alley.
Weitzel suggested the Commission focus on the historic integrity and significance of the building. He
asked Commission members if they felt the building is significant. Miklo said the Commission must weigh
both the condition of the building and the integrity. He pointed out that the building will probably not be
restored by the current owner and questioned whether the Commission feels the building should be
stabilized to potentially be rehabilitated at some future point.
Ponto said that it is fairly rare to have a structure like this of this age in the City. He said that while the
rareness in and of itself isn't significant, he agreed that the building represents the time when the focus
went from animal storage to automobile storage. Ponto said there are not many other examples of that in
the City. Weitzel agreed that the City has lost quite a few of those buildings in the last ten years.
Swaim asked how much traffic this alley sees. Chapman said that the alley dead ends. He said that there
are three houses to the west of this with alley access, and four if one counts the house across the alley.
Chapman said that one of the houses does not currently have parking in the alley, although one of the
houses is a rental property with two basement apartments that use the alley. He said the house on Iowa
Avenue also has a parking area on the alley.
Bunting Eubanks stated that if the Commission postpones this for a future owner, there has to be an
owner who would be willing to rehabilitate the house. She said she was concerned that this would be an
eyesore for the next 50 years. Toomey said that is in the eye of the beholder. He said that the building
has been here like this for a very long time.
MOTION: Swaim moved to deny a certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of an
outbuilding at 1012 Washington Street. Toomey seconded the motion.
. Ponto said he feels that this building could be stabilized at a fairly low cost. He said that if the building
comes down in the future, then so be it, but in the meantime, it's there, and he is in favor of the motion.
The motion carried on a vote of 7-1. with Buntina Eubanks votina no.
Bunting Eubanks said she recognizes the historic significance of the building but does not think the
building is in very great shape. She said she agrees with the owner's safety concerns.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 5 of 12
521 South Governor Street. Miklo stated that this property is in the Governor-Lucas Conservation District.
He said that there was a mistake in the staff report in that this property is actually non-contributing, which
provides a lot more flexibility in terms of how the project should be viewed.
Miklo said the building was remodeled at some point and now has more of a 1950s/1960s appearance.
He stated that the proposal is to put a one-story addition on the back of the house in order to add living
space to the ground floor. Miklo said that Terdalkar found the project to be in general conformance with
the guidelines, and since this is a non-contributing property, the use of vinyl siding would be permitted.
Miklo said the original proposal was for a roof with a 3:12 pitch, but that has been increased to a 4:12
pitch. He said there is an existing window that would make it difficult to increase the pitch any more than
that. Miklo said there was also discussion regarding whether the windows on the back could be more
symmetrically placed, and the owners have agreed to that.
McDonough, the contractor for this project, said he was available for questions.
Weitzel said that there is a window placed right next to the door on the north elevation where there would
normally be a little bit of space. He asked if that is there so the trim for the both the door and window are
adjacent.
McDonough said that he would probably have to get rid of the window to get space there. He said that
with a full light on the door, the removal of the window would probably not be a big issue if the
Commission does not want it there. Weitzel said that the window would allow for ventilation where a door
would probably not. He said he was just thinking about symmetry and the spacing of the windows.
Toomey asked about the original siding on the house. McDonough said that the original siding was cedar
shakes. He said that was torn off and replaced with aluminum siding in 1956. McDonough said that the
aluminum siding was then later removed and replaced with vinyl, and there is no original siding left on the
house.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 521 South
Governor Street as proposed, with the exception that the window next to the door on the rear
elevation be removed as discussed by the Commission. Trimble seconded the motion. The motion
carried on a vote of 8-0.
430 Oakland Avenue. Miklo stated that this is a contributing structure. He said that the building is pretty
much in its original design state. Miklo said the owner proposes enclosing the porch on the north side of
the property to make it habitable space. He said the guidelines discourage or disallow the enclosure of a
front porch or a porch that is highly visible from the street.
Miklo said there are some unique circumstances with this building. He said that unlike most porches, for
this one, the only access to the house is through the entry's vestibule, so it doesn't really serve a function
in terms of providing much usable space. Miklo said that the house also has two other porches: a sun
porch and a larger, unenclosed porch on the southwest corner.
Miklo said he looked at some house planning books for houses with a similar gambrel style and found
examples where there was a side wing not dissimilar from what is being proposed in enclosing this
particular porch. He said that if this were the only porch on this house, the Commission probably would
not want to allow its enclosure.
Hirschman, the owner of the house, said that he wants to update the house but keep everything historical.
He said that the floor plan has a really odd layout, and one issue is that one walks in the front door where
the first door to the left goes out to the porch on the north side of the house. Hirschman said that he
would like to remodel the kitchen to increase its size and would like to use the present bathroom and
laundry room to add space to the kitchen. He said that he would like to keep a first floor laundry room and
bathroom, and the only place to put these rooms without detracting from the historic character on the
inside of the house is the present porch on the north.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 6 of 12
Weitzel said he had a couple of issues with the proposed design. He said that most of that centers around
the fact that this was probably a mainly decorative feature that was added on to add balance to the sun
porch, and the highly decorative trellises and the classical columns lend a classical colonial revival air to
the building. Weitzel said he assumes the porch was not used much and was probably never intended to
be used much but was intended to add a certain look to the building. Weitzel said he is not necessarily
radically against enclosing the porch, but he would like to see something to address the columns and the
trellises.
Hirschman responded that he and Miklo and Terdalkar discussed this and found there is not a good way
to make it look like it fit with the house originally. He said that he is going to make it look as similar to the
sun porch as possible, minus the windows. Regarding the trellis, Hirschman said the trellis work on the
south side of the house will remain, but there is not a good way to keep any of those features while
enclosing the porch.
Miklo said they had discussed the possibility of constructing some type of pilaster using the current
columns, but given that that feature isn't found anywhere else on the house, felt it would be better to just
make it look as if it was part of the original length of the house, versus a porch that was later enclosed.
Swaim asked about windows on the enclosed porch. Chapman replied that there would be a window on
the porch on the front side of the house.
Bunting Eubanks said there had been a suggestion that other areas of the house could be used to update
it. Miklo stated that Terdalkar's thought was that there could be other ways to do this without changing the
porch. Miklo said, however, that it sounds like the owner has explored other alternatives.
Bunting Eubanks asked if there is a basement in the house, and Chapman confirmed this. Chapman said
that the basement is damp and is not a livable, functional area. He said that it could be turned into a
functional space for a laundry room, but it's not convenient or extremely functional.
Bunting Eubanks said she thinks this is a charming building, and enclosing the porch takes away some of
that and makes it a little more asymmetrical. She suggested that the owner put a laundry room in the
basement instead of using the porch, especially since it is viewable from the street.
Ponto said there have been other houses for which the Commission has allowed side porches to be filled
in. He said, however, that none of those had quite the architectural significance or visual appeal that this
one has.
Weitzel said there was a very similar case on Summit Street involving turning an open concrete porch into
a sun porch. He said there were walls that were attached to the columns, but it retained the look of the
porch at that point.
Swaim asked if there is any way to enclose the porch but keep it airy looking. Chapman said that he is not
opposed to putting more windows on that side. Swaim suggested that there be three windows as on the
other side. Swaim stated that if there were to be three windows on the front and the trellises were left, it
would have more of an airy feeling.
Miklo passed around a book showing gambrel style houses with open porches, sun porches, and a
combination of the two. He added that they did tend to have more windows than just one, as proposed.
Toomey said the porch seems like more of a decorative element as opposed to being anything functional
like a porch. Ponto suggested the Commission consider, assuming nothing was there now and the owner
was requesting something brand new, what one would want it to look like.
Miklo stated that there has been some discussion about building a garage on this site as well. He said
that since there may be further work on the property, the Commission may want to consider the site
comprehensively. Miklo said the owner is under some time constraints, and that's why the owner wanted
to go ahead with this aspect of the project.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 7 of 12
Chapman said that because of where the house sits on the block, he almost cannot put an addition on the
house. Weitzel asked Chapman if he could borrow from the screened porch. Chapman said that he could,
but there are windows looking into the screened porch from all sides that are connected to it, so that
would be taking an exterior window.
Weitzel said that in the time period of this house, gardens were a big thing. He said that a larger house
would have pergolas and garden structures out in the yard. Weitzel said that houses with this size lot
didn't have that option, so they built it attached to the house. He said that a lot of these are seen on
houses on Grand Avenue in Cedar Rapids, and to him it is character defining.
Miklo stated that the lot size is a little deceiving in that the City right-of-way is actually quite a bit further
back from the curb. He said that much of the green space on the south side of the house is City right-of-
way, which makes it difficult to add on to the house.
Swaim asked if all of the options have been exhausted and questioned whether the proper solution is to
have three windows in the front to match the right side. Trimble said that if one tries to make the left side
look symmetrical, it would actually look less symmetrical. She said that because of the chimneys and the
door, the house isn't supposed to be symmetrical.
Miklo said that this project is a problematic application in terms of the guidelines. He said that the
Commission may want to defer this, unless there is a majority that feels that it is appropriate to enclose
the porch. Miklo said that other opportunities could be explored during the deferral period.
Bunting Eubanks said that she would be interested in knowing whether one of the other spaces that is not
viewable from the road could be used for more functional space. Toomey said that the Commission is
generally not concerned with the use of the building but is concerned with the outside appearance.
Weitzel said that in some cases, the functional space somewhat determines what the skin has to look
like, although the Commission doesn't concern itself with occupancy and that type of issue.
Ponto agreed with Trimble that if one tries to make this look symmetrical, it never would. He said it might
be just as well to only have the one window so it is obviously not symmetrical. Toomey said that keeping
consistent windows is not necessarily symmetry - that is just standard, particularly in terms of height.
Regarding a motion to defer, Swaim stated that if there could be any other solution to this, she would
rather defer this for the time being than vote it down. Chapman said that he is okay with the Commission
dictating what this should be if it can be passed. He said that he wants the Commission's input to make
this as historically accurate as possible. Chapman said that he is in a bind with the functional footprint of
the house in that he can't easily expand except in this one place where there is existing roofline and an
existing historic foundation.
Toomey said that he wouldn't defer this just to string the owner along. He said that he doesn't have a lot
of problem with turning that porch into a functional space, but he would like it to still fit with the house.
Weitzel said that he would like to know more about the floor plan and would like to explore other options
to either take space from the screened porch or other space off the back, even if it's a small addition. He
said that this isn't a large addition, so a small space off the back could be a possibility.
MOTION: Ponto moved to defer consideration of a certificate of appropriateness for a project at
430 Oakland Avenue to a future meeting o;f the Commission. Swaim seconded the motion.
Ponto said that to him, this porch is a realily distinctive feature of this house. He said, however, that
because there is an existing roof and existing foundation, it would be fairly easy to enclose this and not
have it look terrible. Weitzel said that the Commission needs to know more about the foundation in this
case and whether it can be rebuilt.
Brennan said that he is sympathetic to the use considerations but does not see any way around the
disallowance of a highly visible porch enclosure. He said that for that reason he would vote against
deferring, because he does not think this can be approved.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 8 of 12
Weitzel said that he is skeptical that he would see a plan that would make him happy with enclosing this
porch. He said that for him a vote for deferral would be to find other options on the site to accommodate a
first floor laundry. Weitzel said that deferring this would keep all the options open.
Ponto said that from the applicant's point of view, he deserves to have some idea where the Commission
stands. He said that if called to a vote right now, he would probably vote not to approve this. Ponto said
that looking at other options would be his strongest preference.
Miklo said there are some zoning setback issues here, and there is a procedure to allow some variation of
setback through the Board of Adjustment. He said he would discuss that possibility with Hirschman.
Brennan said he had no problem voting to defer if that is the applicant's preference.
The motion to defer carried on a vote of 7-1. with Toomev votina no.
2460 South Gilbert Street. Miklo stated that this is a landmark property also known as the McCollister
Homestead, and it has been on the agenda before. He said that this house is quite significant in the
community's history in the 1860s to 1870s era. Miklo said that it is an Italianate farmhouse with several
outbuildings associated with it.
Miklo said that there was a garden shed/greenhouse of concrete cedar block on the property that the
applicant enclosed and built as a garden shed without a building permit. He said the building official cited
the owner and required him to bring it into compliance by obtaining a building permit, which requires a
certificate of appropriateness.
Miklo said that the building in question is not a historic structure. He said the Commission reviewed the
building and found that it did not meet the guidelines in terms of the false impression of history that it
might create. Miklo said board and batten siding was discussed as an alternative to make it look more like
a farm outbuilding that would be appropriate to the period. He said the owner then altered the building
again without seeking a permit or approval and is now back seeking approval.
Miklo said that from a design perspective, this is a big improvement over the log siding that was on the
property. He said that the roof shape is quite unusual but not necessarily unlike a chicken coop or an
agricultural building. Although this is not a historic building, Miklo said there are still some things that are
quite odd about it, including where the logs between windows are not filled in. He said the porch is quite
elaborate in design for a simple structure like this. Miklo said that Terdalkar suggested removing the
decorative crossbeams. He said that Terdalkar also identified the vinyl windows as an issue. Miklo said
the guidelines are quite clear that vinyl windows are not allowed for primary structures in a historic district.
He said that when discussing outbuildings, the guidelines don't go into much detail about windows.
Miklo said that he did not feel the windows are a strong concern in that, given the size of this building and
its function, it will probably not be a permanent building on this site. He said that the board and batten
siding makes a big improvement, so the biggest issue is the crossbeams on the porch.
Cochran, the owner of the property, said that the key thing for him was to not take away from the primary
house. He said the building is a modern, non-contributing building and was not functional the way it was.
Cochran said that the windows were put in for light. He said this is primarily being used as a garden shed
to store tractors and tools. Cochran said that the guidelines do allow for an exception on modern
buildings.
Regarding the brace, Cochran said that it is not functional in that there is not enough weight on the roof to
need a brace. He added that he has done some research on barns and outbuildings, and in most rural
areas, a lot of times those crossbeams are there for decoration. Cochran said that this is the most simple
timber frame design that one can do. He said that there is an inch or so cut out of the lower one to give a
little bit of a curve, but he wouldn't call it decorative. Cochran said he would like the ability to cover it with
siding, because that is what one sees on other machine sheds, and usually the siding is wrapped around
the brace.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 9 of 12
Miklo said the issue isn't that the braces are decorative. He said that usually one wouldn't have a porch
on a building like this, and adding the braces brings more attention to it. Miklo said that simplifying the
building would make it less obvious.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 2460 South
Gilbert Street as proposed, with the exceptions that the bracing be removed and the log spaces
between the windows be covered up. Bunting Eubanks seconded the motion.
Ponto said he was okay with this, since it is a multi-functional garden shed that is a secondary building
way back on the lot.
The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
821 Dearborn Street. Swanson introduced himself as a friend of the owner of this property, Ron Cohen,
who is out of the country. Swanson said the Commission approved the construction of a garage on this
property in October. He said the design presented at that time was an elementary design with two doors.
Swanson presented a packet of information and said that since that time, the owner has decided he
would like to have one door instead of two and would like to have his studio in this building and have the
north light.
Swanson said that he believes the new design would result in a better structure than was proposed
before. He said the owner really wants it to look right with the house. Swanson said the owner plans to
match the roof pitch as much as possible. He said that the cupola may not be there at first, but the
trusses have been designed so that it could be. Swanson said it could be a flat roof if the Commission
does not like the cupola, but it would let more light in the garage.
Swanson said that the sides of the garage would be 22 feet. He said the owner wants muntins if that is
acceptable to the Commission. Swanson said the proposed windows are casement windows, but they
can be changed to sash windows if the Commission would prefer. He said they tried to make the design
symmetrical, and the band proportions on the garage are similar to those that are on the house.
Swanson said that the proposal shows four three by six windows. He said that there is a window on the
house facing the garage that is about three by six. Swanson said that the house has many different sized
windows.
Miklo said that the presented information is all new information to the staff and the Commission. He said
that if the owner is willing to vary the design this much from what was previously approved, he would
suggest a deferral so that Terdalkar can examine the design based on the guidelines. Miklo said that
what was previously received was a drawing that proposed more light, and staff thought there might be a
solution to doing that, although not necessarily the proposed version, because the proportions and
divided lights don't take their cue from other outbuildings in the neighborhood or the house itself. He said
that there is probably a solution in terms of adding more windows to make this usable studio space. Miklo
said that if the owner wanted to work from the original drawings and come up with a window
configuration, that could probably be done. He said that a totally different design would probably require
deferral to give time to review the new plans.
Chamberlain said that what the owner came up with is not really different from the other plan; the cupola
is just a feature that the Commission can take or leave. Chamberlain said that the main issue is the
amount of windows. He said there are probably four or five six by three windows on the house.
Miklo asked if the walls would be taller. Swanson said they would be a little bit taller. Miklo said that would
be another departure from the original plan. Chamberlain said he wanted it to have a little bit of a carriage
house look with a craftsman look to try to match the house. He said that what the new plan would do
would be to go from five barn sash windows up high to four double hung windows the same size as some
of those on the house.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 10 of 12
Weitzel said that what was approved at the last meeting had historic precedence in that it borrowed from
the house and some of the other smaller buildings in the neighborhood. He said that this new proposal
does not borrow from any historic tradition. Weitzel said that therefore staff will need some time to see
how to match the guidelines, historic precedence, etc. He said it would be difficult to do that extensive
review at this night's meeting.
Downing asked about the height of the buUding. Chamberlain said it is 15 feet at midcap, which is the
City's maximum. He said that the roof pitch, which is the same as that of the house, makes it so that the
15-foot midcap uses twelve-foot walls. Chamberlain said that makes the walls a little bit taller, because
the roofs are difference from the other roofs in the neighborhood. He said there is really nothing different
in this design except the elimination of a garage door.
Weitzel said that the fenestration on the new plan is entirely different than that of the old. Toomey said he
would like to see a staff report on the changes. Weitzel said that Terdalkar will be looking for ways to
increase the amount of light with fenestration with a facing, size, and proportion that make this look like a
historic building.
Swanson said that he would be glad to meet with Terdalkar. Swanson asked if the new plan was at least
on the right track. Weitzel said that what the Commission approved previously was a building that clearly
isn't the original but did match the house. He said it was a stucco building with the option to do board and
batten, and it was a building that had a very prairie school look. Weitzel said the windows on the new plan
make a huge difference. He said also that garages typically don't have casement windows. Swanson said
that they don't need to use casement windows but added that he would talk to Terdalkar about the
windows.
Downing suggested that Swanson and Chamberlain also discuss the roofline with the City's Building
Department. He said the Building Department might take a different view of the roofline and the
calculation of maximum height.
Swanson said that the cupola was added to increase the amount of light. Ponto asked if the skylights are
gone, and Swanson said they have been removed from the proposal because of budget constraints.
Weitzel pointed out that the house is from the Prairie School of Architecture out of Chicago with
influences of Louie Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright. He said that those are the design precedents that
should be matched in the garage.
MOTION: Toomey moved to defer consideration of an application for a project at 821 Dearborn
Street to a future Commission meeting. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote
of 8-0.
Minutes for October 24. November 1. and November 7.2007.
November 7. 2007 Minutes: Downing pointed out that the person referred to on pages two and three as
Eric should be listed as Eric Hindrichson. Brennan said that on page three, in the fourth paragraph, line
four, "...question is can this be done..." should be changed to "...question is whether this can be done..."
Brennan said that on page six, paragraph five, line five, the first word should be "last," not "least."
October 24, 2007 and November 7, 2007 Minutes: The minutes for these two meetings were filed by
consensus.
OTHER:
Weitzel said there will be a public hearing on Monday from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. in the Public Library regarding
the federal tax credits program as administered to the State. Miklo said the issue is that the way the tax
credits are structured is not very useful, and the State is looking for ways to improve that. He said that
Marlys Svendsen is developing a list of talking points that the Commission could present. Downing
agreed to attend the meeting and present the issues as developed by Svendsen.
Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2007
Page 11 of 12
Miklo added that the Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on the Preservation Plan
as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on December 20th.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
c
.2
In
.!!!
E"
E ...
o 0
uCJ
(I)
co:::
.2 (I) .....
"'CJO
cuco
~CUN
(I)"
In C
e~
c..<c
CJ
'i:
o
...
.!!!
:r:
l'f'l f:I:! I I I f:I:!
- ><: I ><: I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
......
N 0 I I I 0
- I I I
t- I I I f:I:!
S2 ><: ><: I ><: I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
- I I I 0
- I I I
- f:I:! I I I
S2 ><: I ><: I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
- 0 I I I
- I I I
..., f:I:! I I I
!::::! ><: I ><: I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
Q 0 I I I
- I I I
- I I I f:I:!
- ><: ><: I ><: I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
......
Q I I I 0
- I I I
t- I I I I ~
- ><: ><: I I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
...... I I I I
Q'\ I I I I
~ I I I f:I:! f:I:!
><: ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
QC) I I I 0 0
I I I
N I I I f:I:! f:I:!
- ><: ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
t:: I I I 0 0
I I I
QC) I I I f:I:!
!::::! ><: 0 I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
I I I 0
\&; I I I
N f:I:! I I I f:I:! f:I:!
- ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
...... 0 I I I 0 0
\&; I I I
- I I I f:I:! f:I:!
~ ><: ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
I I I 0 0
on I I I
t- f:I:! I I I f:I:! f:I:!
- ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><:><:
iIi 0 I I I 0 0
I I I
N I I I f:I:!
- ><: ><: I I I ><: ><: ><: ><: ><: ><:
...... I I I 0
..., I I I
QC) f:I:! I f:I:! f:I:! I f:I:!
S2 ><: ><: I ><: ><:><: I ><:
0 I 0 0 I 0
l'f'l I I
QC) I f:I:! I
S2 ><: ><: ><: I ><: ><: ><:><: I ><:><:
I 0 I
N I I
Vl 0\ 00 t- o t- oo 0\ t- Q'\ 0 Q'\ 00
E ,g 0 0 !'2 - !'2 !'2 00 0 - 0 0
...... ...... ...... ...... ...... --, ...... 0;; 0;;
OJ ~ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\
C:! C:! C:! N C:! C:! N N N C:! C:! C:!
E-[.lJ ...... ...... ...... ......
<"l <"l <"l <"l <"l <"l <"l <"l M <"l <"l <"l
~
-;
= ~ e "0 Ilol ....-
~ = = ... = ::c; Ilol Ilol
Cl) ... = 0 'c = 0 ~ 0 e e .:l
S Ilol = '" u -= '; e
i: ~ = ....
~ Ilol (j = 0 '0:;
ttl ~ ... ~ 0 = (j ,- 0 ~ ';: 0
Z =:i =:i U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 Eo- Eo- ~
"'0
Cl)
'"
8 01)
~ ,S
~'[)
d Cl)
~~1A~
Cl) Cl),.o 0
~.2<z
~ < II II
~II II f:I:!~
~><:ooz