The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-28-2008 Historic Preservation Commission IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, August 28, 2008 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00 p.m. A. Call to Order B. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda C. Consent Agenda 1. 328 Brown Street D. Certificate of Appropriateness: 1. 515 Oakland Avenue E. Consideration of minutes for August 14, 2008 F. Other G. Adjournment Iowa em Historic Preservation Comlnission 1 LIIL " 10 [, \V'l,dltllgrnll Stree!, k.wa L\. 'i:?2Hl MEMORANDUM Date: August 22, 2008 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner Re: Manville Heights Survey Consultant The deadline for responses to the RFP for the Manville Heights Survey was August 20, 2008. Only one proposal was received. This proposal is from Svendsen Tyler, Inc and meets the budget and proposed scope of work expectations. Marlys Svendsen has been the consultant on multiple surveys in Iowa City and was the consultant for the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan. Staff believes that Marlys Svendsen is the appropriate person to complete this project, as she has done superior work in Iowa City in the past. Staff Report "\ugllst 21,2008 Historic Review for 328 Brown Street Structure: Key Contributing Classification: Brown Street Historic District The applicants, Jacqueline Briggs and Eric Gidal, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 328 Brown Street, a contributing property in the Brown Street I listoric District. The project is to replace the front porch steps and addition of a new handrail on the steps to match the existing porch balustrade. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.9 Porches 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails Staff Comments The Joseph Slezak House is a High-Style Late Victorian home from the transitional period between the Victorian era and the emerging Neo-Classical Revival period. Iowa City architect 0, H. Carpenter designed the residence and con tractor J. J. Hotz built the house in 1892. The house is an eclectic design combining decorative features of the Romanesque Style with Neo-Classical details. A massive hipped roof covers the main house with gable wall dormers on the front and sides and a polygonal turret on the northwest corner. The turret and two-story window bays on the sides were originally surmounted by a classical balustrade. i\ mixture of masonry materials and decorative moldings are used to give the house its distinctive design. The applicant is proposing to replace the wood front porch steps with new wooden steps that match what exists. The applicant also is proposing to build new wood handrails on each side of the steps where there currently are no handrails. The handrail will match the existing balustrade on the porch. The applicant intends to have the balusters and end posts custom made to match what currently exists on the porch. The guidelines recommend for deteriorated porch components to be replaced with new that matches the historic components in design and material. The applicant intends to replace the steps to match the historic steps. The guidelines also recommend constructing or replacing missing balustrades by choosing a style that is consistent with t11e architectural style of the building. The applicant intends to match the existing balustrade when constructing the handrail for the stall's. In Staff's opinion, the proposed project is consistent with the guidelines and style of the house. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of i\ppropriateness for the project at 328 Brown Street as presented in the application. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the PCD office at City Hall or online at: www.;cgov.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 Thursday two weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. ',-. 'u ':) Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) \1 n' "s' ,)J r\, I --r '3 o Ow n e r .'~,) Ir~.~. '!.':. t. '. .t;J,.~..!... ~I. .~.lj,i.... .:....c.. P.el..Y..... (;:; .,k ~;;..t. Ph one.....:"?. .:)...~....... .is..~ ~9. .;.i~.f~:.... ..>.~!...,................. ............. \~ c,< f'\ ----... Add . '<'I, I r' (\ \.'0 .''j H 5:.:", ress .. '"...c:..;;.....~.....\.................j..... ,................. .'e..................... ..c.}:...\..']..}..,). -2... '::I.. .~:..?.. t. ~ .!.. ..lb .~~~.,)..... .zi p .>....~. :~.~.!.:~. emai I....... .<~)' ?':. .:':.\ :~e.'.. .:~b .\.:. )9~,s:.t~~ .~~.';:[.( b ~.'. 0.'.1.,..'. .~:-:.t.......... D Contractor. ..... .\\::\.:.'.'.!..r;;...!..\......':~.~;.!...~.;:....':~......... ............. Add ress ........ ..... ..2.::? .!-;......!. .::<~......~...::. t.\5..~. .C.. ................ r'" ......... ........ .......;;;:;:.:."..~.x!:...~.\..~.. .5~./.L.....zip ...?~.7.~ l (,C", Ph 0 ne \. J...~. ~\.).. ,x 3... . P.......J...5...l.... .~............................ email................................................................................................ o Consultant ...................................................................... Add ress .... ............. ............ .................. ............. .......... ........ .................................................................................zip................... Phone............................................................................................. . email................................................................................................ Application Requirements Attached are the following items: G Site plan o Floor plans o Building elevations o Photographs D Product information o Other...... ..... ............... ........ ............. ............. .......... ........ If the proposed project entails an addition, a new structure or a significant alteration to an existing structure, please submit a site plan, floor plans, building elevations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure, please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. For Staff Use: Date submitted o Certificate of No Material Effect a Certificate of Appropriateness o Major review o Intermediate review o Minor review Property Information Add ress of property..... .2~...:-:.\.. ......J?i~.~. ......f.II.. ........ .~.((.... .~:..... Use of property ,.......... .h.9.):y.\.'~:.................................................... \ ~... r.. ) Date constructed (if known) .........~....~..,-!...:'::::................................... Historic Designation o This pr-operty is a local historic landmark OR o Thi~ property is located in the: [31' Brown Street Historic District o College Green Historic District o .E~st College Street Historic District D Longfellow Historic District o Summit Street Historic District o Woodlawn Historic District o Clark Street Conservation District o College Hill Conservation District o Dearborn Street Conservation District o Govel'nor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: G Contributing o Noncontributing o Nonhistoric Pr9ject Type [3" Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, new decks, porch reconstruction,Ql~I~=t:.=r,rep<l~~()r_~!~i1~r) o Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) o Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch, chimneys, decorative trim, baluster or similar) o Construction of new building o Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance o Other.... ....... .......... ...... ....... .......... .... ......... ...... ..................... .......... Project description ......... <;:>... ............ .................... ........ :,.......... '*'" .oj........................ ..;.................. ..~..... ..... .................... ..;~............:................................ ..;;...........:.......... ~.............. ., (' "\c. .\( 4./', (, IT J ,.., '. \".,s,.C'( ,,/ 'hi \\.' J ,", " 1.',' () -t,) ",>". ~./f ............ \.;.... "V.' .,.. i. h.~.. ~.. >...,.. .......... .... ...\..... .......... ,.".. .,....... ~l"'\!'.l..........~........1.... fr...:I.................... .~..,..,. .'>. .l. I"..... l...:..,...... .f;. .,..10........ ....,.~:... ."..... ,. ... .........JA!,-\.\\.\. .~\ .;::~..~..~'.,;~. ... ...t.\..~).~.... .k(?y..u.d.L~~;.\..!...... .y:!...i....l...I..... .L~..\;........A?..v.. .;...l.1......I'*:i~;r..~.....~:x..(~~..~.... ..t~uL..... .... ..... ;:'.,~~;:~:I:(,~~J~,~t:~~~,:~~t2'~:'~~;'I:(::'L!.i~!'~~;~~I~':.::':"? P":\'];I~~;:~':~~~;;;;;~( ,...............................................,.......,........................................................,.........,...................................,...........................,.....................................................,... ...................................................,....................................................................................................................,............................................................................ .,............................................,...................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................,................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. Materials to be used ..................................................................................................................................,.................................................................................................................. ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ Exterior appearance changes . ' " . j ................... ~...~> .:tt:.:'.....~.~~: ..0-.'.:::..... .Y;-":.. .,.. \\..... \.\ .~. :~.' ~;: .\1;. H'.... \. ~....~~:. ~~..... ..~.... :.\ f.~... ..>. J\~.P;:..~.;).:".... :........ "~". .~.,J...>...T~.. ".) .\....V\:-:..... .(:~. :\;.~1.J.~. .<\....:.. .. \. ..,\. . .... . . i.. -.. ... .... ... . . ....................... :t::\.~:,:,;.::. >~\i:::; C;~'h. \.. ..... .cL~...v..~.. Y. :,..:.......> .I:::... t.!....~..... .\::v... .~... \.\....... 't. V \.. :!>.c. :<J.. \.. \:. :~...... .~) .\'....\...~:. \:... \...:... ,;.....'....J....<.. ..................................,............,..................................................,.................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ,~ , .... . . ~ .. . <!> .+ . c>. .. ,.' .. ,~ '. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . ~ . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~ . ",ft'l' \ " J f L 1..__- \ ~ L2.. ~ ~~ Z>r r tIl '2 'j o ci \.~ IX! II; [Vl cl o ~--.. '-~ -- , \7 ~ e r ''1 l } Q C' r 1>0 " ['1 I{ , ,.] Q C. \__0/ -, r~\ 1,_____ ,1___----- Staff Report I\Ugllst 22,2008 Historic Review for 515 Oakland Avenue Structure: Contributing Classification: Longfellow Historic District The applicants, Scott and Jennifer Cappos, arc re(]uesting approval for a proposed addition project at 515 Oakland j\venue, a contributing property' in the Longfellow Historic District. The additjon is approximately 14' x 14' to the west (rear) of the house Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 5.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Additions 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint St:lff Comments This two-story hip roof house from c. 1925 shows strong Prairie influences. These influences include the low-pitched roof with broad caves, shallow projecting wings to the side and front, and the entrance offset to the left with a heavy porch. The only apparent alteration to this house appears to be the application of narrow metal replacement siding. In Iowa City, many almost identical houses were built and were generally clad in stucco. It was common for aluminum siding to be used when the stucco began to fail. The applicant is proposing a 14' x 14' one-story addition to the southwest (rear) of the house. The proposed addition will be wood frame construction and have a 4/12 sloped hip roof similar to the roof of the existing house. One new wood window will be installed on the south 0eft) elevation and the two existing windows on the rear elevation will be relocated to the rear of the addition. The proposed foundation is poured concrete colored to match the existing brick foundation. The trim is proposed to match the existing. The applicant is proposing the use of metal siding to match the existing siding on the house. The guidelines allow for additions, provided the addition is compatible with the existing structure. In staffs opinion, the proposed addition is compatible with the exjsting structure. The guidelines recommend that foundations on additions appear similar to the historic foundation in color, texture, unit size, and joint profile. There is an exception for Setback Additions in Historic Districts that allows addition foundations to match the color of the original foundation by using paint or masonry stain rather than matching the material and appearance of the original foundation material. Although this addition is not technically a setback addition (setback additions must be set in 8" or more from the sidewalls) it is a rear addition and not clearly visible from the street. The applicant has expressed that a differentiation in foundation material and construction will allow future generations to know which parts of the house are original and which parts are additions. Staff believes that a poured concrete foundation that matches the original in color is appropriate in this situation. The guidelines require that the addition be distinguished from the original house. The applicant has indicated that the change in foundation material and construction accomplishes this goal. However, it may be appropriate to have another form of differentiation between the original house and the addition above the foundation. Depending on the size of the addition and style of the building, a setback may be the most fitting solution; but in other situations, a vertical trim board may be most fitting. In Staffs opinion, because of the size of the addition and the simplicity of the floor plan of the original house, a vertical trim board between the original house and the addition would be the most appropriate way of differentiating between the original house and the new addition. The guidelines recommend applying siding to a new addition that appears similar in size, shape, texture, and material to the existing siding on the historic building. Since the house currently has metal siding, the use of metal siding on the addition is appropriate. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 515 Oakland 11venue as presented in the application, with the condition that there be a vertical trim board between the original house and the addition and that the new wood window being an eight-over-one pattern to match the existing windows. The applicant has the option of using true divided lights or creating simulated divided lights by using muntin bars that are adhered to both sides of the glass, but not by using snap-in muntin bars. Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the exterior of historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-4C. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservotion 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 Thursday two weeks prior to the meeting. See attached document for application deadlines and meeting dates. For Staff Use: ,''^ 'I"l Date submitted .....\":~............................................... o Certificate of No Material Effect )tf'"' Certificate of Appropriateness o Major review o Intermediate review o Minor review Applicant Information (Please check primary contact person) o owne,Sclill:.*-7S..ev..",;.f~t:...~. Phone...........$.3.~..:....i(,.Z,............................................. Address ......s:I.s:::..........Q.d,/,."L................................ ...;J;Q~......c..~lF............;;I;.A.........ziP ................... email................................................................................................ o contractorrr:Ot.~r.~...~J........C.~r.~t..ft:\\:r..~ Address ....~Q.~....(J"-I'.b.hc.~........C~............... .. ... ......1. .!.t.t.'",............... .........:xA..................zi p ..$.t?1.~o. Phone... ........St:.3..o'..;:......O.ll..1:.................. .... ...................... email.........M.9.t.t\:..K.\e.~k':\.3..@......t\~t~I.L.,...,.~~ o consulta~ ::Do~....G!J.~e.r.:....;..~A:a..~.~..... Address .......~.........~t.~/c.or...............r.:,..llce................ ......C,Q.t.filLt.\t.:.Ilf.................:rA...............zip ..SZZ.~.I Phone.............55(~":':'...r.IZ.Q.......................................... ......................................................................................................... email........d..5.\J.tj.e.f:....~.:B.e.ll..s.er..1.~Jo.e.r.:# Co Application Requirements Attached are the following items: g Site plan ..- ~ Floor plans _ Ii Building elevations 181. 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 el"Nations and photographs. If the proposed project is a minor alteration to a structure. please provide drawings and photographs to sufficiently describe the scope of the project. Provide a written description of the proposed project on the second page of this application. Property Information Address of property .........s:I.s:::....~k/Q.'t':\.d...................... ~~~..~~.;~~~~.;~::::::'"i~~TJ~=JkZ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Date constructed (if known) ...............1.9..Z.S.............................. Historic Designation o This property is a local historic landmark OR o This property is located in the: o Brown Street Historic District D College Green Historic District o East College Street Historic District IX[ Longfellow Historic District D Summit Street Historic District o Woodlawn Historic District o Clark Street Conservation District o College Hill Conservation District o Dearborn Street Conservation District o Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: D Contributing o Noncontributing D Nonhistoric Project Type o Alteration of an existing building (ie. siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations. new decks, porch reconstruction, baluster repair or similar) M Addition to an existing building (includes decks and ramps) o Demolition of a building or portion of a building (ie. porch. chimneys. decorative trim, baluster or similar) o Construction of new building D Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance o Other ...................................................................... ........................ Project description .............../...,...........................................................................................;.......................................~.....................iil.'j'.................;................l.J;..~..... ...w.e..pt::.1"Q.:::.e.........Q".._.....s!..""~Ie...s.k..'t:.......x./'I..a.d:i,:640 ......~..............Yhf...................~..v.;?e~f...............c.e~............c..o.c""'.e.c..............af.:.........~e........kQ~...~................... ......~.............~dJ.~.t.L~................lH.i\\...........k..~lI.l:-..........a....h}f...........::k~fe............r..~Q~................................. ..........c..~.5.~..s19.w.-:\:-t.....................~.~:k:k..............~t~........f'er..~.p.d...........o.t.......~.~.\o:'t.\.e....It................................................. ................................................................................H.........................................................................................................H........................................................... .................................................u.................................................................................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ..............................................................................................................................................................t........................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Materials to be used ~.ncl.Q>.,\~o.~....~o.~.r.(.J........C'Ol(\cr..~\:c...1..colQ.r..e.J......~f.f.f.....t..fd......~......~\:cb......e'J.lst.~... J:::f.!!:\o>\...~=f.K~S\.lt....~!J.,.t'r.;~~l.lr:;-::\r.~~\~d.h...-\\.:...flkr..s.~e"-I:i....J"''dJ,...O'.:.~. ..~9.J:)~........................r..\?s.s.e.d.........9.l..S........~.......hA.r.......r..o.~....................................................................................................................... :E~r.\~r....:::::..!'\t..\"..\........s:d~"',.......:b..,...""..!J......e.x,:s.~I~'\....\.,~....e.-.......................................... . .:raf.\j..e.t~.cc...:::....ft~~...J>.r.~.w.~l\.......C!en~.'tl\~.....~...~:.~...~.r.l~\l......~fl\b......~l~;.>.L.e.J.....:-k...~~~....t:$:s~I~ ..~;~J.~.~.,$....::....R.e..\.9..<;.~-k.........e.t.:.5.4.:.'f\,.....~\!.-:\~Q~......~~t.....~....:r~f.\\\.....1...~......~oJ....~~dC)~ ..tl~.c),'r.\~....=....c.9.f.P.e.-!j..T.....:~...i...~~p"'i~C.-*... .....b.~Ml\e......:;c ........... ................ ...:.... ........................ ..~.\..r.'"~..=........TQ.......h~:n.h......e.~/~.f.l~d .......I.~.........CQ/.().c......+:......rJfe..................................... ................. Exterior appearance changes :::::::::9k::::::::~:~l~!;~Z~:::::::::;l~~;;:;.::::::::~;::::::::~~:::::::*:::::::~j2i~:::::::::=;};::::~jJ..::. .......raV-l.........?d.-kcl............~o.i......~........Q.se.............~.........~..........IIl!.t:~.......)~:ka6.'J..........I..,~s::..................... ..HH~S1._.rcu-tt:$...u.AI.I.'/.I...f.c"'~'~....HJ'...t.;.,r...e.u....U..UH..H...HHU;.H.....U......H..H........H. ........r.rR.~....... ....a... ........r/............~4............L(!),Qi:.........4;~ ...li.t!.....~~....e........."'-'~'// .AtfJl...e~~.(:.ft. HHH~.U.g,j~"'-H...H..,//Luflh'.UH.H6.e...U.<1../,&H..H:J-......6...H...VL~""...I....&""'.H'Jh. ... $.1. ~J.... .... .... ........ f'1:~.r... .lI!... ....... ..................... ............ ........... ......... ..... ....... ...... ..... ...... ........... ........ .... .... ... ............ ........ .... ..... ........tJe.........jr~........~......a~':..IIe........u~.....J1.t.U.#kS.....he.I.....4.{....~...'(lHtf.e.,.f.e/............. ........A.dJ.... .......~.fll.'~........J,.~1..........y~,.e........;;.r.:........t:<\.......tY~"...~...9.(;P.hI.I~~J:.:.....b._I.'f............. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .t.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... - lL\JSTlNG WL'\;r)('W IN KlTCIUU\' EXISTING IVD.'llOW IN L'lJPHR. LEVa RF.!.CX:A TEJ) 1\'l'<'DOWS FROM EXlS'ffi.fO HC~.'~rl L."\'TOXhW ADDJ1101, .:;'",;:.,::' ..:'.::' ',/.', :;' -.. .... ~:' .. .:;.-..;.:.:;.... :;':'.'," ",::' ..' , '.; : . . ~:' REAR ELEVATION .;',...... , . ,~',',:-' .".....;....;:.'.;... . .~ ','. ::' - .; ~', ..;.<....:: lJATCH EXISTINQ SWh~G ON NBW ADDrLl0N RIGHT ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION ~~~ ~~~ "''''8 ~~r;: 8"'1~ ~P5 o~::l Rg~l" ,- " I I I I I ~ I I I I I I : ~l~i I L _ , I I" L;; I I ,- I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I J- ~Jij ~~~@ o~~fil~ ~Zt.'iQo ~g;;;~.. ~iSffio~ ",~:5~!)j ~2@~m ~~~...!5 ~::;<o"' .01-. ~ ll! ~ '"' s ~~ I~ I .0:-;1 I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I -- J I ~I~ ,01-,11 .~ I .Z-.[ ;I~ ~Ohll ~ ZZ ~O ~E ~Q ~~ 02; O~ ~g: ~r..w Z.-l OifJ ~~ ~Q ~I O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tJ ~ ) Z5 ~E ~Q ~~ ~~ o~ 325 ~--1 ~g: t:::J ~ Vl ~5: ~E--< ~~ ~~ ....... N ~ gco4- ~ ~e....,,:Ser Crros S IS Oqk..lc.",j ::r-;w~ e'7' I LtNei\ ~ ...... N - ~ ' l:..":) {l) It ~Ot" ~ I ~~~\<f" 1/ /1 o If selllc. ~ohnson County GIS Online Page 1 of 1 Johnson Count Legend Legend Political Boundaries Centerlines Centerline Labels Parcel Lines P.'Irc<!1 Lot ./ P:trocl /' j'/ Righl'o1-W.'I)' ./ ./ IIl!;tonc..a1 http://www.johnson-county.com/servl ct/COl1l. csri .csril1lup. Esril1lu p?ScrviccN Ul1lC=j cmapOv... 8/5/2008 " . ~ ~\, ~.~ '~,~ < I / MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, AUGUST 14,2008 EMMA J. HARV A THALL PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Lindsay Bunting Eubanks, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Alicia Trimble MEMBERS ABSENT: Victor Tichy STAFF PRESENT: Christina Kuecker OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Jennifer Cook, Mike Lange, Deb Quade, Mike Wombacher CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bunting Eubanks called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 508 Rundell Street. Kuecker stated that this is a contributing property in the Longfellow Historic District. She said the applicant proposes a rear porch addition to this foursquare-type house. Kuecker said the proposed porch would be a 12 foot by 20 foot screened porch. She said the applicant has indicated that the rear porch will match the front porch in details and roofline. Kuecker added that the porch would be of wood frame construction, with the columns, soffits, eaves and other trim to match the front porch. She said the owner will use treated lumber for the construction. Kuecker said the guidelines allow for the addition of a new porch, provided the porch is consistent with the historic house. She said the applicant has indicated the porch will match the existing front porch in detail. Kuecker said that if required, the handrails must be consistent with the guidelines. Kuecker stated that pretreated porch decking is allowed for rear porches, provided the gaps between the boards do not exceed an eighth of an inch. She said staff feels this project is consistent with the guidelines and design of the existing structure. Kuecker said, however, that staff recommends that paintable, untreated wood be used for anything above the decking, which would allow the wood to be painted immediately. She said that if treated lumber is used, as soon as it is able to be painted, in approximately six months, it should be painted. Kuecker said staff recommends approval of the project with the conditions that: the screens be wood framed, the porch skirting of the same style as the front porch be installed between the porch piers; the rootline should match the front porch roofline; details such as trim, columns, soffits, eaves, and foundation piers are to match the front porch as closely as possible; all exposed wood being painted; and any handrails that are needed must be consistent with Section 4.10, Balustrades and Handrails, of the Preservation Handbook. Cook, the owner of the house, said she wanted to add a screened porch in the back and plans to match the front porch. Bunting Eubanks said that in the drawing it almost looks like the siding is actually on the columns. Cook said that is just the drawing and the program that she used. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 508 Rundell Street, as proposed, subject to the staff recommendations. Baldridge seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 2 724 Dearborn Street. Kuecker said that this is a contributing property in the Dearborn Street Conservation District and showed where the house is located north of Sheridan Street. She referred to a photograph in the packet of what the house used to look like. Kuecker stated that between the time the survey was done and the designation, the second story was added. She said the house used to have a hip roof, and now it has a gable roof. Kuecker said that the house has had significant alterations, even though it looks like a typical craftsman house. Kuecker said the applicant is proposing ajust over 26 feet by nine foot one-story addition to the rear of the property. She said the addition has a hip roof with approximately a 3: 12 slope. Kuecker said the siding is to be fiber cement board. She said that trim, porch railing, porch posts, fascia, and soffits will be wood. She said that three new double- hung windows will be installed, and the foundation is to be of concrete block. Kuecker said the guidelines do allow for additions to historic houses, provided the addition is compatible with the historic building. She said that staff finds that in general the application does meet the guidelines. Kuecker said there are currently two entryways shown coming into the mudroom: one from the porch and one from the backyard. She said that it may be more functional to only have the entry from the porch. Quade, the owner of the house, said that the fence shown in the photo would have to be moved out to the edge of the garage. She said that the point of that door is to force her dog to immediately go into the dog yard. Quade suggested having a three-quarter light door, which would look like another window from the alley if it were designed right. Kuecker said staff recommends approval of the application with the option of the owner having one entrance directly into the yard and one to the porch or only one entrance to the porch. She said that if only one entrance is desired, an additional window may be placed in the location of the door to the yard. Kuecker stated that the fiber cement board siding should have a smooth finish with a dimension to match the existing siding, all porch elements should be constructed of wood with all exposed wood to be painted, windows should be one over one double hung wood or metal clad wood windows to match the existing windows, and all handrails should be consistent with the 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails Section of the Preservation Handbook. Kuecker pointed out that if the vertical dimension is 30 inches or less, a handrail is not required. Baldridge asked about the three new double hung windows to be installed. Kuecker showed where two new windows would be located and showed on the plan where the third window would be. She said that the three other windows that are on the back of the porch are the existing windows. Ponto asked for more information about the proposed doors. Quade said that she was thinking of something like a three-quarter light, so there is more light coming in rather than a solid door. Ponto asked if it would be just one door rather than a door and a screen door. Quade said that on one of those doors she would probably want a screen door just to get more air circulation. Bunting Eubanks said that it looks very balanced from the back. She said that even though there are not three windows on the left, there is a door, which helps balance the back of the house. MOTION: Trimble moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 742 Dearborn Street, subject to conditions proposed by staff. Michaud seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. RECONSIDERATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 803 E COLLEGE STREET: Kuecker stated that the Commission first reviewed this application at its July lOth meeting. She said that at that time, the vote was four for denial and two in favor of an application to alter the roofline at the location of the built-in gutters. Kuecker said that at the last meeting, the applicant asked the Commission to reconsider the application, as he was unable to attend the July 10th meeting. She said the Commission approved the reconsideration. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 3 Kuecker said this property is at the comer of Lucas and College Streets. She said the applicant began work on the roof without obtaining a building permit or historic review. Kuecker said that when a stop work order was issued, the applicant applied for historic review and indicated there would be no exterior change to the property. She said this prompted staff and the chair to issue a certificate of no material effect. Kuecker said that when the reroofing was complete, the slope had been altered at the location of the exterior gutters, which were approved for removal or covering. Kuecker added that the applicant is now asking for approval to leave the roof as is now, with where it used to flare on the roof, straightening it out and lowering the soffit. She said the applicant has indicated that he intends to put a frieze board underneath the soffit and reinstall the decorative brackets. Kuecker showed a photograph of the roof as it is now, as well as an image from the time the survey was done showing the flare in the roof, as well as the frieze board and the brackets. Kuecker said the original staff report included three possible options to address the roof: the removal of the new roof and reconstruction to make the new roof match the historic roof; reinstalling the brackets without a frieze board, as has been done, which has been eliminated as an option; or installing a frieze board with the same dimension as the original frieze board under the soffits, along with the reinstallation of the decorative brackets. She stated that at its July 10th meeting, the Commission decided that option one was the one that upheld the guidelines, was most appropriate for the house, and would be best for the district. Kuecker said that staff recommends that when reconsidering the application, the Commission should not be arbitrary or capricious but needs to uphold the guidelines. She said that if an exception to the guidelines is made, an appropriate reason needs to be cited in order to not create a negative precedent and cause other applicants to do work without a permit and then request that the work be kept as it is. Kuecker said she included in the packet a statement from the roofer that says that the reconstruction the way the roof formerly was would not be possible. She said she also included a list of precedents of other times the Commission has discussed alternatives. Kuecker said that the Commission discussed a similar issue with regard to 517 Grant Street. She showed a photograph of the house as it is today. Kuecker said that the roof used to come down, and the built-in gutters were covered with a slightly different roof slope. Kuecker showed photographs of the property at 30 South Governor, which had a roof slope alteration. She showed a photograph of the roof as it is today and the work as it was being done. Kuecker said that at 817 Iowa A venue, a hip roof was added to what was previously a gab Ie roof. She said this was quite a substantial alteration of the roof slope, but since this was a non-contributing property, it was not deemed inappropriate by the Commission. Kuecker showed photographs of 934 Iowa A venue as it is today. She said that, similar to what has happened on College Street, the roof used to have a flared edge, which has been straightened out. Swaim asked if the roof had originally extended even farther out than it does currently. Kuecker confirmed this. She said that when the roof was damaged in the tornado, the owner was not certain that it could be rebuilt without crossing the property line. Kuecker referred to the house at 830 College Street, where the owner had removed the rolled edge and straightened it. She said that the Commission required the owner to put the rolled edge back on the house, because it involved the demolition of a significant architectural feature. Kuecker said these are some examples to keep in mind when considering the application for 803 College Street. Wombacher, one of the owners of the property, said that not just that but between that and the carriage house alignment, he has put $36,588 just into the new roof. He said that fact that it has changed, and he explained last time, and it was his partner who actually filled out the form, was not saying that they weren't going to change it. He said that is where communication broke down, because they weren't going to change the pitch of the entire roof Wombacher said they didn't do what they did to add more room or to add a room upstairs. He said that they aren't changing room plans for that. Wombacher said they were doing it for structural purposes, to prevent the Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 4 deterioration of the walls, which they had because of the repeated freezing and rotting of the gutters. He said he would have loved to have just put a piece of plywood on it. Wombacher said the original bid was $7,000, so that would have saved them $29,000. Wombacher said they have done everything to this house, cosmetically, that they can do, that isn't something they had to do. He said they totally changed the porch even after it had already passed the building inspector and the review board. Wombacher said that even though it was done wrong, they had rails redone and they took the porch floor all the way out and replaced it. He said that they put all new boards under it, and had raised it up a level. Wombacher said they took the asbestos shingles off the front and side peaks to expose the wood shingles. He said they also took asbestos off to expose those shingles. Wombacher said that they took the vertical siding that was like paneling on the carriage house, to get as close as they could to match the carriage house. He said they did this to bring it back to what they thought it should look like and to look nicer. Wombacher said they still have a lot of issues. He said that the house looks like it is sunken two feet, that the ground and water just keeps washing down the hill. Wombacher said one can see the porch is lower than the driveway so there will be water issues. He said the plan is to take the driveway out and lower it back down so it will run back out to the street where it should be instead of through the basement. Wombacher said they took the metal posts off the back porch and replaced those with wood to match the ones on the front and replaced one third of the floor back there. He said there are just numerous things, even though the Commission is not concerned about the inside. Wombacher said that when doing this, he was concerned about the stability of the structure, and that is why they did that, to try to prevent any future problems. He said they didn't just do plywood and obviously didn't do vinyl; they did one by threes and one by fours, which take a lot longer to put up there but make it look a lot better. Wombacher said they had every intent to put the decorative comer pieces back up; they just were stopped before they got to that point. He said they are more than willing to put the frieze board on it. Wombacher said the pictures showed how the rooflines of some houses had changed. He said that obviously improved them, because they needed more room upstairs. Wombacher said that most of the properties shown down the street on Iowa Avenue changed and added more space upstairs and it was granted. He said he is not asking for that; he is just asking to let it go and he already knows how much it would cost to redo it. Wombacher said that he is not dealing with insurance money from tornado damage. Bunting Eubanks said that what she doesn't understand is why the owners didn't seek a building permit before the work was done. Wombacher said that as he explained, they were shingling and the original bid was $7,000. He said that when they got into it, those overhangs were fuIly rotted. Bunting Eubanks said she meant before they even started to redo the roof. Wombacher said he was not aware a person needed a permit just to shingle his house. He said they did a lot more than shingling; he understands that, but that's not what the intent was. Wombacher said it may look okay or need minor repair, but once you dig into it there is more damage. He said for example, those posts that have been redone on the porch, you couldn't even tell they were rotted, but they were rotted up inside. He said that the carpenter just did what he thought that he needed to do. Wombacher said there was no intent to hide this. He said this is on CoIlege Street, and he would not be able to hide anything about what they're doing with the roof line. Wombacher said they weren't changing the pitch of the roof but were changing the eaves, because they felt that is what they had to do. He said that quite frankly, the city building department agrees with that. Wombacher said they agree with what was done and the way it was done. Swaim asked if, regardless of the flair, the current roof extends out from the house the same as it did originaIly. Kuecker said that it is fairly close in line. Swaim said that the house on the Iowa A venue that had the property line issue does look odd and truncated. She said that regardless of the flair being there or not, it looks like too smaIl of a house with too big of a head. Swaim said that if this is extending out the same, she does not have that concern with it. She said that the lack of a flair does not concern her here because of all of the work that has been done on the house. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 5 Bunting Eubanks said the Commission will need to have a good reason for whatever it decides. Michaud said she thinks that although it is not an identical precedent, the one on 934 Iowa Avenue, because of damage there and possible damage to the future gutters and things like that, she thinks that this is an appropriate solution. Downing said that he walks by this house almost everyday and appreciates what the owners are trying to do to improve the house and the character of the neighborhood. He said, however, that in reading the roofer's letter, he doesn't think he really met the intent of what the owner said or perhaps didn't understand it. Downing said it is fair enough that the roofer has an opinion of his own, but he says, "... he does not feel it would be wise at all to put in built-in gutters, therefore am NOT willing to change it." Downing said he did not feel the Commission is asking the owner or the contractor to put in built-in gutters. Downing said that his own house was constructed with built-in gutters, but they were covered up without altering the pitch of the roof and there have been no further problems. He said that the roof can still slope, but the slope was changed. Downing said that standard residential shingles are easily put in to make the transition, so he does not think there is a technical problem. He said he thinks it was easier to splice the rafter tails. Wombacher said it actually wasn't easier, because you have to cut them off. He said the rafters on the flat part are supporting all the way through the attic. Wombacher said they had to go inside; go upstairs into apartment three, go up in the attic to have somebody up there replace every single rafter as they were bringing it on through. He said that it sure wasn't easier; it would have been easier to put plywood over it and change the pitch. Wombacher said that it still would have been changing if you put a piece of plywood. He said this is changing the pitch a little more, but it is keeping the pitch with 95%, 90% of what the pitch is on the rest of the house. Wombacher said that's why his understanding from the contractor is that they're not changing the pitch of the roof. Downing said that the guidelines and the agreement do not refer to the pitch but talk about the roofline, which is different. Wombacher said you still change the roofline a little bit. Ponto commended Wombacher for the work that he has done. He said that 517 Grant Street is a good example in which the built-in gutters were covered over and the slight change in pitch at that point allowed drainage, but the soffit and eave height remained the same. Ponto said that one of the key factors here is that in changing the roofline, the height of the soffit was changed so that it is much closer to the top of the windows and doesn't allow the frieze board and the decorative pieces in between. Baker said that in the guidelines, in section 4.11, it says, under what is recommended, "Covering original built-in gutters and applying exterior gutters only if the roof slope at the gutter is not altered." She said that this has that. Wombacher said it depends on which side of the gutter, and if the slope comes to the gutter, then it flattens out, so it really isn't a change. He said there is still the slope going to the gutter; that's why you continue that. Downing stated that the guidelines refer to the original gutter. Wombacher said that she (Baker) is saying pitch. He said that the gutter is down here, and the pitch goes to the gutter, and that's why it makes the gutter close to the pitch, because one gets the flow of water. Wombacher said that now we've got it coming outside, then the pitch is the same pitch as what you had in here; it just so happens the flat part is sticking on over. He said that it's all a play on words, but it's true; the pitch is the same at the point of the gutter. Baker said that the roofline has been changed so that the flare is no longer there. She said that was the characteristic, architectural feature of the roof of the original house. Baker said the guideline is to maintain that. She said that has not been maintained, and that is where the issue is here. Baker said that there are roofs around Iowa City that have that flare that have had new shingles or newer roofing materials put on, but that flow has been maintained. She said that the Grant Street property is an example of where it has been altered slightly, but the nature of the roof has been maintained, with a solution that didn't get rid of the flare. Baker said what happened here is the removal of that flare feature that was an architectural feature that was Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 6 significant to that era of house the way it was originally built. She said that is the issue the Commission is dealing with here - the flare is gone, and the Commission needs to decide if that is allowable or not. Baker said that if chair and staff had known at the time the owner came in and said no change was going to be made that the owner didn't intend to maintain that flare, it never would have been approved. She said the Commission is currently dealing with the fact that it was approved based on assumptions that the flare would be maintained. Baker said the way the roof exists now probably will have better drainage, but the truth of the matter is that there are other contractors in town who have made roofs like this work. Baker said there are so many different places in this process where something broke down, including the co-owner coming in and saying there would be no material change. She said there is also the issue of the contractor not being willing to maintain the flare. Baker said there is the example of the house on Kirkwood in which the contractor was not following what was approved in terms of reapplying stone. She said the owner had to hire a different contractor who was able to do it the way it was approved in the certificate of appropriateness. Baker said there have been examples certainly in the Commission's recent history in which owners have been required to change back after doing something that wasn't approved. She said she is very concerned about the precedent this will set to allow people to go out and do what they want and come back to the Commission after the fact and have it approved. Baker said it is a slippery slope. She said that while she appreciates the work being done on the house, there are guidelines and procedures, and other people have been made to change things back. Baker said she does not see in this case a reason in the guidelines that would allow the Commission to say that this is okay. She said she would have to vote against this. Bunting Eubanks said the dilemma is basically that the Commission has to be just in what it does. She said that a very specific reason has to be cited, such as impinging on someone else's property line. Bunting Eubanks said there has to be a specific reason for making an exception to the guidelines, which are there for a reason. Swaim said the interpretation of the guidelines is up to each individual Commission and the guidelines should be seen as recommendations. She said that while the Commission wants to be fair and consistent, there just has to be a case-by-case approach. Swaim said that the level of work done on the house compared to what had been done before is great. She said she understands the argument against setting a precedent, but she does want to take into account in this case _ what else has been done to rescue this house from deterioration. Swaim said she continues to believe that because of all the other features on the house that have been maintained or restored, the flare is one of several things that characterized this house, and the flare is gone, but there are other things that maintain the integrity sufficiently. Michaud said she agrees. She said that it's fine to be a high and dry house with one little roofline to consider, but when one is considering a major reconstruction and restoration of a very threatened property, one has to think about the scope of things. Michaud said the fact that they are going to have to excavate and remove the driveway indicates the level of concern with the drainage situation. She said that house always looked really threatened and was sitting right on the ground. Michaud said that she could see where that would be the overriding concern, the water and the drainage. Michaud said the idea is to let the community understand how important historic preservation is without making enemies. She said she understands the concern and feels it is too bad that we lost this here, but this is a person who, like other people, is restoring a rental property. Michaud said she walks past this house three times a day. She said she goes down Washington Street and it's ugly. She said she walks down Iowa and it's intermittent. Michaud said that Burlington is hideous. She said that College Street is one street that one can walk down and most properties look nice. Michaud said that the pitch and the scope of a huge project under way that will run far more than expected is something the Commission should consider. Michaud said that she could see the confusion about the permit, because he was just restoring the roof. She said she can see where the permit was not an issue. Michaud said she can not say it strongly enough that the Commission cannot alienate someone who is working blood, sweat, and tears and a lot of money and then say we're not going to pay attention to his concerns. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 7 Michaud said there are the guidelines, but the Commission cannot apply its approach to each case without a little discretion. She said this person is here pleading his case and the Commission should listen. Bunting Eubanks asked if there is a possibility of restoring the decorative frieze board. Kuecker said that was there is a list of three options. She stated that the one she had eliminated does not respond to frieze board at all. Kuecker said that if the roof were kept the way it is, the frieze board that went along and then broke at the windows would be necessary for the brackets to be reinstalled. She showed how the brackets were before and then how the brackets being reinstalled right under the siding. Kuecker said that looks inappropriate, and there needs to be a board behind those brackets as there was originally. She added that she believes that losing both the brackets and the flare would be extremely detrimental to the historic quality of this house. Bunting Eubanks said that because the windows were so high, the frieze board would have to be broken in between. Kuecker said that is correct, if the roof is kept the way it is. Downing said the bottom of the soffit now is flat, but it had been sloped. Kuecker confirmed this. Downing said then the brackets have been changed. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 803 East College Street, allowing the roof to stay as it currently is with the stipulation that the frieze board of the same dimension to the original frieze board be installed with the decorative brackets. Swaim said that she is recommending an exception in terms of the roof flare because of extenuating circumstances, because of the scope of the project and the many historical elements of the house that have been restored, and because of the confusion in the process of communication, which is unfortunate and not the owner's fault. Michaud seconded the motion. Baldridge said he spoke before, when this was first considered, about the need for educating the people who do the work. He said that both Baker and Swaim have persuasive arguments. Baldridge said that he is tempted to come down on the practical side that the work has been done, and he abhors having to tear something up to redo it unless there is a really substantial reason. He said that flare is a significant architectural feature which could come under the category of substantial. Baldridge said that he falls on the side of hoping that this is an educational experience for the Commission and for others in the business of restoration. Downing said that as a counterargument, this also might be an educational process for those in the business of restoration who just do something and then come back and say, "Well, it's already done." Wombacher said that obviously he is not a professional, but when one has to have things approved, it is so hard to do a project ofthis magnitude. He said that almost every little thing to a certain extent on there needs approval, but you didn't know it until you got into it. Wombacher said that once one lets the house sit there for five weeks with no gutters, which you cannot put in, because the carpenter can't finish, and the painter can't finish until the carpenter finishes, and the gutter guy can't finish. Wombacher said that in the meantime, the water goes right in on the other side of that trap door and went down to the whole basement. He said that the pile of mud sitting out in the driveway is from the guys he has hired to go down and keep shoveling out. Wombacher said it is his own fault, because it is his piece of property. He said that, however, it is so hard to do something and all of a sudden realize this is deeper. Wombacher said that when one gets into something, then he realizes he needs another permit to do this. He said he knows there is a permit process and appreciates what the Commission does. Wombacher said though that it is so hard to do a project if you have to stop and get approval at every single step. Wombacher said that his contractor is a craftsman and has done great work for him in the past. He said the contractor did what he thought was right. Wombacher said he himself would take the blame for that, but they Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 8 weren't trying to get away with anything. He said he spent a lot more money than he intended to, and it is not like he did it to cut comers or to benefit himself by doing this. Wombacher said there was no benefit whatsoever. Wombacher said it is very hard to do this not knowing what you're going to need to get permission to do, because then it takes another month to get another okay to do step by step. He said he guessed that was what professionals can do. Downing said there is a counter to that in that it is possible to hire design professionals. Wombacher said they don't know if it's rotten until you start getting into it. He agreed that is what professionals do. Wombacher said that it's so hard to determine ifit's rotted and it's something they need to change or get another approval. Wombacher said that right now the foundations and the stone work are not exposed, because it's all covered. Wombacher said that the foundation and stonework is in horrible condition, and he'll need to do that. He said he did not know ifthere was something he would need to get approval for, even though it's not exposed. Wombacher stated that there are so many issues that he just can't go into. He said he has time to work on it this weekend but didn't know if they could do it. Swaim said that if Wombacher considers hiring a professional designer, it would be wonderful ifthat person were familiar with preservation to add to their skills, however, Swaim said the Commission will always be working with people who are taking on a project and with contractors who have a variety of skills with restoring old houses and preservation. She said that this is another way of educating the public. Swaim said that she doesn't think that is fair in this situation. She said that applicants have come before the Commission several times on different projects that they say they didn't know they weren't supposed to be doing. The motion was denied on a vote of 4-4 with Baker Downin Ponto and Trimble votin a ainst and Baldrid!!e, Buntin!! Eubanks, Michaud, and Swaim votin!! in favor. Michaud said that she understood the people who voted no to defeat this. She stated that she believes that if someone is going to try using this decision as a precedent, they should get the message by looking at the history. Baldridge commented that the Commission has made people go back and redo things. Bunting Eubanks said her concern is that she doesn't want to lose the house, although she feels the contractor could have picked up the ball and known more about what he was doing. Baldridge asked what kind of steps the Commission might recommend be taken. Trimble said she feels that if there is anyone to blame, it's the contractors. She said it is part of the contractor's job to know what to get permits for and know when a permit becomes necessary. Downing said that in Iowa City, as soon as one replaces any sheathing, then a building permit is required. He said that does not just apply to historic districts. The Commission discussed methods for getting the word out about when a permit is required. Swaim said there is a need to be positive and proactive about this but also a need to let people know that if they do something the wrong way, there are penalties. She said she was uncertain whether the letter says that sort ofthing. Burford said the City just came out of a situation after the tornado where Iowa A venue had a renaissance because of the fact that there were regulations. She said that the process was ongoing, and needs to include the entire community . Michaud said there were compromises on Iowa A venue rooflines. She said that one thing the Commission could do is that if there is a roof that they have to bring a photograph in to building inspection - that should be a red flag - that building inspection immediately says the flair has to be retained. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 9 Baker said if one is only reshingling, the flair is not impacted. Kuecker said that if someone comes in for a building permit, they are sent to her if the property is in a historic district. She added that in this case, no permit was requested until someone reported that the work was going on. Kuecker said that when she went to the site, nothing was happening on the eaves and she assumed they were being retained. She said she was told at that time that the decorative brackets were being reinstalled, and she assumed it would look the same after the reroofing as before, as indicated on the application. Burford said that if there had been the opportunity to observe the original gutter and get a structural engineering report or architect's report or technical advisory report from the State that this was unworthy of reconstruction, then it wouldn't cause this situation of potentially setting a precedent. Michaud said one option might be to require a permit to reshingle for a property in a historic district in order to get total review. Kuecker said that in other parts of the City, a permit is not required to redo windows, although it is required in the historic districts. She said that might be looked into with regard to reshingling. Baldridge asked if the fact that it is in a historic district for that raises a caution flag. Kuecker said that if an owner comes in for a building permit, it does. Swaim suggested contacting roofing contractors and the people who are actually doing the work. Michaud said that a letter could be sent to all of the roofers. Baker stated that there are people who don't realize they're living in a historic or conservation district, and that's a problem. She said there are people who don't know when they do and do not need a permit. Baker said there are contractors who don't get that working in a historic district is not the same as working in a non-historic district. Baker said the Commission needs to start looking at getting information in newsletters and talking to the realtors. She said the Commission can't count on having the letter to those in affected areas being sufficient to educate homeowners. Baker said there is no easy answer to the education component. She said that it needs to be ongoing and constant and at every layer of the process. Burford said that Terry Larsen, a realtor at Blank and McCune, is in the Press-Citizen writers group. She said that maybe Larsen could be approached to write a column about historic preservation issues. Baldridge said he would like to see the Commission project an image of trying to be helpful to citizens, owner, renters, contractors, and workers all up and down the line. He said that people should be encouraged to ask for help, and any article in the Press-Citizen should point out that historic preservation is helpful to citizens and is not intended to be a barrier or to make someone's life more difficult but is to serve the nature of the community and make it easier for people to do that. Bunting Eubanks stated that communication is a big issue, and it was brought out in the Historic Preservation Plan as a goal. She said that she would be willing to work with Kuecker to draft a letter to professionals regarding historic preservation and what it means. Bunting Eubanks asked if anyone would be willing to head up the effort to contact the Press-Citizen and speak on behalf of the Commission. Swaim said she would be happy to review whatever is put together. Bunting Eubanks said that one point for an article in the paper could describe how Cedar Rapids is losing its historic properties, because it doesn't value preservation. Downing agreed to help with getting something into the Press- Citizen. The Commission discussed some facets of the application for 508 Rundell Street. Baldridge said that there should be some horizontal support on the porch. Kuecker said she sends a letter with every certificate and will include the fact that the Commission had some concerns about this. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 10 Baldridge said there is a gap between the floor and the horizontal panel so that when one is hosing off the porch, water will be allowed to escape. He said that otherwise there is a lot of screen length in each of the panels. Ponto agreed that with screening ofthat length, there would need to be a few horizontal members to add to the panels. Kuecker said she would include in the letter to the homeowner that she would be available to answer questions that may arise. Bunting Eubanks said the decision regarding the reconsideration for 803 East College Street was a difficult one. Ponto said that it demonstrates that there is a diversity of opinion on the Commission. He said it shows that there is a good mix, which stimulates discussion and is good for everyone. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JULY 24. 2008: Bunting said that there is a reference in the minutes to how she would approve something if it wasn't going to alter the historic status of the property. She said it was more along the lines of her being much more willing to reconsider it, rather than just flat-out approve it. MOTION: Baker moved to approve the minutes of the July 24th Historic Preservation Commission meeting, as amended. Downing seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of7-0. OTHER: Trimble said that she has been working with property owners in Cedar Rapids who had flood damage. She said that they are looking at rebuilding, and some people are kind of concerned that the commercial district on the Czech Village side has never been surveyed. Trimble said they are in a cultural district as designated by the City. She said that New Bohemia is in the district and Czech Village is in the district, and they want the two to stay kind of in their historic manner as they are being restored. Trimble said the residents wanted her to ask if anyone had any ideas of what the City could do. She said it would be almost impossible right now to get 51 % to turn it into a historic district. Burford said that at the last meeting of Friends of Historic Preservation, the Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation Commission (CRHPC) asked to have an open kind of meeting. She said the National Trust had informed the CRHPC that it had to form a non-profit in Cedar Rapids to decide certain issues. Burford said there was a lot of good to come out of the meeting. She said there were a lot of very instructive points that focused on historic preservation. Trimble said that a lot of the property owners supported that, and actually, a lot of property owners have been bought out by their neighbors who want to restore the property historically. She said that with so many people displaced, it is difficult to track down everyone to get a 51 % majority. Burford said that Rod Scott is with the Iowa Preservation Alliance. She said that the people at Brucemore actually work very closely with the people at the National Trust. Burford said that one has to get out on the street and talk to people, and it is a huge effort. Baldridge said there was a decision to create an NGO similar to Friends so that they would have an arm that could do what Friends does in Iowa City, as opposed to limitations placed on a City commission. Burford said that the crux of the problem 30 days ago was that the City of Cedar Rapids didn't want its historic preservation commission to be proactive. She said the City of Cedar Rapids wanted its commission to be consultative to make recommendations. Burford said the City itself did not know what it wanted to do. She said the City is throwing roadblocks in the way of making decisions. Trimble said that the City originally told them not to survey the Czech Village and gave instructions to survey around it. Historic Preservation Commission August 14,2008 Page 11 Trimble said that the residents are really interested in a return to the Czech-influenced American architecture in that area. She said that they don't want the buildings to be totally modem now and don't want to return to that seventies style. Regarding historic preservation loss, Burford said that the tax credits are really in place for developers and business people, not really for homeowners. Trimble said that with the tax credits, it takes the State 30 days to turn around and then the feds another 30 days to turn around, and the residents can't get any money back before that. Trimble said she was told that there is actually a bank that will float money for the tax credits for a certain percentage. Kuecker referred to a memo in the packet regarding potential historic preservation awards. She said the Commission needs to compile a list of properties to consider for the awards, which are held in October. Kuecker asked Commission members to notify her of eligible properties in the next few days. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s/pcd/rnins/hpc/2008/hpc8-14-08.doc c .52 f/) ,~ E E o o c o ~ CG '= Q) f/) e a- U 'I: .s ,~ :I: "C ... o U Q) 0:: Q) 00 U 0 C 0 CG N "C C ! <C 'lit I LU I I .... >< >< >< >< >< >< 0 I >< >< >< >< 0 >< 0 I >< >< >< >< 0 I >< >< >< >< 0 0 >< 0 I (g I I I I N I LU LU LU I N >< >< >< 0 >< 0 0 >< >< >< >< >< >< >< >< 0 I 0 >< >< >< 0 0 >< >< 0 >< >< >< 0 >< >< >< M I I I I co I LU LU I LU LU N I >< 0 >< >< >< >< 0 I 0 0 >< N I I I I 0 I LU I LU .... I >< >< >< 0 >< >< >< X 0 - I I .... I I IJ) ...... CIl co 0 ...... CIl 0 CIl ....... CIl 0 CO E.~ ...... 0 0 ...... ...... !;2 ...... 0 ...... !;2 ...... 0 - - 0; - - - 0; - - 0; ale. CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl I-~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ N N N ~ ~ N M M - M M - C") C") C") C") C") C") C") C") CIl C'l III C'l c: " >- " lG ,5 ~ j CIl CIl Qj m ';: ... c: c: c: lG .s E >- E :c J:I E " ~ c: ~ lG .s: 'n; .s: E e .c (,) c: 0 "Qj ro i;j lG j i 0 ~ (,) 0 ";: z co co co 0 w CL. l/) j:: l- I- 3: "C m l/l :J U x LU :;::. --~ c: c: l/l mm.o l/ll/l<t: ~.o a..<t:1I ~II II ~ ~><OO