Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout 01-13-2011 Historic Preservation Commission IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, January 13,2011 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Lobby Conference Room 6:00 p.m. A) Call to Order B) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda C) Certificate of Appropriateness a) 730 N Linn Street D) Discussion of Neighborhood Meetings and Possible Historic Designation of Neighborhoods a) Downtown b) Manville Heights c) Melrose d) Goosetown E) Consideration of minutes for December 9, 2010 F) Other G) Adjournment Staff Report Historic Review for 730 N Linn Street District: Brown Street Historic District dassification: Contributing The applicants, Scott and Thane Kading, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 730 N Linn Street, a Contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project consists of installation of light fixtures on the retaining wall in the front yard. January 13, 2011 Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: .f. () /o'Wa Oiy Histone Pffserwtion Gtltdelines JOr Alterations 4.12 Site and Landscaping /a () TJe Secrettlty o./tJe /ntenors Standards JOr .Rda/?ilitatlon StajlComments This house is an Organic Cottage with Queen Anne style detailing. It is covered with narrow clapboards and has a hip roof with projecting gable sections typical of the Organic Cottage form. There are two-story projecting bays on the north and the south, with the southern bay having clipped comers. The front porch fills the ell as well as covering the front fa<;ade. Turned porch posts, a spindle frieze, and turned balusters add a Queen Anne feeling to the porch. The applicant is proposing to install five lights on posts along the retaining wall. The location of the lights corresponds with the raised portions of the wall. A picture of the proposed light is attached. The retaining wall was constructed this past summer. Because the wall is less than 4' in height it did not require a regulating permit, thus the requirement for Historic Review was not met. However, the installation of lighting on the wall does require an Electrical Permit, thus the light fixtures are coming before the Commission for review. The guidelines do not specifically address lighting. In these situations, the Commission must turn to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The basic theme of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards is that historic properties shall be maintained and preserved as a record of time. Incompatible alterations shall be removed and a false sense of history shall not be created. The entire list of Standards are listed on page 59 of the Historic Preservation Handbook Staff believes that these many lights would emphasize a non-historic retaining wall and deemphasize the historic house. Historically, this property would have never had so many lights and Staff believes that adding so many lights would create a false sense of history. In Staff's opinion, one light directly adjacent to the stairs would be historically appropriate and would not detract from the historic nature of the house. .RecommendatIon Staff recommends that the Commission deny the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed project at 730 N Linn Street as presented in the application. Alternatively, staff recommends approving a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of one light on the raised portion of the retaining wall directly adjacent to the steps. Application for alterations to the 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 Planning & Community Development office at City Hall or online at: www.icgov.orgjHistoricPreservation For Staff Use: Date submitted: -i.l:-/ -.L/-.lQ o Certificate of No material Effect o Certificate of Appropriateness o Major review o Intermediate review o Minor review The Historic Preservation Commission does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the Building Inspection Division prior to the issuance of a building permit. 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. PrQpertyCiJwnerlA.ppliqant Information (Please checkprimary contact person) o Property Owner Name: . -7h;;.......Q ., ~ Co+)- K a (A "ci- Email: Thv......./(P...J..J(t.v)d.tr\~;tco.l\ Phone Number: (3,1) '-/3'0-- d.'t,79 Address: f'"J 3.a f.J. L""" s,:+. City: ~~ L State: :::r:A Zip Code: 9;).. '15 o Contractor / Consultant Name: Email: '?' Phone Number: ( Address: City: State: Zip Code: Address: 'l3c~ N Use of Property: "1<~ ~ clo.,+'-.Ji. PtoposedProject Information L' \ ..L.. \ /')"l .s ., ~. Date Constructed (if known): /???~ , Historic Designation (Maps are located in the Historic Preservation Handbook) o This property is a local historic landmark. OR o This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): o Brown Street Historic District 0 College Green Historic District o East College Street Historic District 0 Longfellow Historic District 12f.- Northside Historic District 0 Summit Street Historic District o Woodlawn Historic District 0 Clark Street Conservation District o College Hill Conservation District 0 Dearborn Street Conservation District o Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: ? o Contributing o Noncontributing o Nonhistoric Application Requirements Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be postponed. o Addition (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) ~ Building Elevations 0 Floor Plans 0 Photographs -~ Product Information 0 Site Plans o Alteration (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor alteration, photographs and drawings to describe the scope of the project are sufficient.) o Building Elevations o Construction of new building o Building Elevations o Product Information o Photographs o Product Information o Floor Plans o Site Plans o Photographs o Demolition (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc,) o Photographs 0 Proposal of Future Plans o Repair or restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. o Photographs 0 Product Information . Other: e')l..k.,'('\~ h~\';. 0-, 0.. r~-1Al"'il\.t ~~ . Please contact the Preservation Planner at 356-5243 for materials whi need to be mcluded With applicatIOn. Proposed Project Details Project Description: Pkc..n~ O?d-~R.}: J~-b. 0') h. h O.:~ CWrc:..re J +fv tv) rftc....,"','J ~N.1. pj""'0\'l'ld 'I- 2~~,~ (J4\\'~) O\S el'\V\dJ .Q. rc C~erJ. . Materials to be Used: 15~~~ bc..c.-fc 01 ~~j -r;,- fu .e XG\. J- Ip. Exterior Appearance Changes: appfar hista ri creview- pdf 9938 RZ RUBBED BRONZE 1 LIGHT 1 SOW WHITE LINEN GLASS -..q; SALISBURY'M BY "".. SINCE 1938 ~tyl liS' ~ D!::es~' B ~_. 31 H1 04'5-14184 INww.kichler.com 1 l\1EMORANDUM Date: January 13, 2011 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner Re: Neighborhood Meetings and Possible Historic Designation of Neighborhoods One of the work plan goals that the Commission adopted for this year is to hold neighborhood meetings in areas that have a completed intensive level survey and were determined to be eligible for Historic Designation. At the meeting on January 13, I would like to discuss prioritization for the neighborhood meetings based on the threat to the historic resources in the specific neighborhoods and a format for the presentation of these meetings. The four neighborhoods that have been surveyed and determined eligible for Historic Designation are Downtown, Manville Heights, Melrose, and Goosetown. The Melrose neighborhood pursued National Register of Historic Places designation on their own, hiring Marlys Svendsen to prepare the nomination. Manville Heights, Downtown, and Goosetown have not been nominated to the National Register. In the Preservation Plan, designation of Goosetown and Melrose are given "A" priority, while Downtown and Manville Heights are given "B" priority I will bring maps of the areas to the meeting. Please be prepared to discuss. MEMORANDUM Date: January 13, 2011 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner Re: Certificates of No Material Effect, Intermediate Reviews, and Minor Reviews The recently adopted Historic Preservation Handbook requires a report to the HPC at each meeting of any projects that have been approved administratively. Below are the projects approved since the November meetmg. Certificates of No Material Effect - Chair and Staff review 1. 523 Grant 5t - relocation of porch light Intermediate Review - Chair and Staff review 1. 629 Ronalds 5t - Wmdow replacement on Non-contributing house 2. 802 E Washington 5t - Retaining wall replacement 3. 408 Fairchild 5t - amendment to previously approved CDA for window replacement to allow replacement of one additional window Minor Review - Pre-approved items - Staff review 1. none MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 9,2010 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Andrew Litton, David McMahon, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim, Dana Thomann, Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: William Downing ST AFF PRESENT: Christina Kuecker OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Cray, Richard Holmes RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) None. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Trimble called the meeting to order at 6:00 p,m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none, CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: Paul Helen Building - 207-15 East Washington Street. Kuecker said this is an application for a window replacement for the Paul-Helen Building. She said the owner would like to replace the windows in the building with historically accurate aluminum painted windows, Kuecker said the storefronts and doors would not be included, Kuecker stated that a lot of the upper story windows that are wood look like historic windows, but they are not the original windows. She said that the nomination form for the National Register says that the original windows were likely metal and were likely replaced in the 1980s. Kuecker said the owners would like to reuse metal windows that replicate the windows that are shown in the historic photographs. She said that when a photograph detail cannot be made out, the owners will use the existing windows as a guide, which are very similar to the style guide, Kuecker said the guidelines recommend removing non-historic alterations to a building and replacing them with historically appropriate materials, She added that the guidelines state that metal windows are not allowed unless they are original to the building, Kuecker said that because the applicant has provided evidence that the original windows were metal and the proposed windows will match the historic windows, staff believes it is appropriate and qualifies for the exception to the guidelines. Kuecker said staff believes that the window replacement will have minimal impact on the historic integrity and is recommending approval. She said that some members in the Planning Department recall that this building may have received tax credits when it was restored in the 1980s and want to make sure that if there is any statute of limitations that this will not cause any problems. Kuecker said therefore she has forwarded this on to the State Historic Preservation Office for review, but she has not yet heard from that office. Kuecker said staff recommends approval as presented with the conditions that there is determination of the State Historic Preservation Office level of review, and approval, if necessary; and that the new windows retain the details, proportion, size, sash width, trim, and overall appearance of the historic windows, She added that there are several historic photographs in the Commission's packet, as well as the National Register nomination form, Historic Preservation Commission December 9,2010 Page 2 Cray said he only wanted to clarify that it is really all of the second and third floor windows that are kind of shot. He said they are not opening and closing properly, many of them have broken mechanisms, and the ones on the front have a lot of rotted wood, Cray said the photographs don't show it, but there are windows on the side facing the pedestrian mall that were put in after the adjacent building was tom down, He said they don't know how old those are, but they are definitely bronze-colored metal windows, as are the ones that face the alley, Cray said, they are planning to replace all of these windows over some period of time, not necessarily all in the same year, Baldridge asked what is wrong with the metal windows on the west. Cray said that Marv's Glass and Knebel Windows have been out for numerous service calls, because the windows don't open or close properly. He said the window companies have basically said that the mechanism is shot, parts are unavailable, and there is nothing more they can do. Cray said they have basically stated that whoever owned the building at the time bought the lowest-cost windows possible, He said they now want to replace them with something that looks right considering the historic nature of the building and something that is a quality window and hopefully pick up a little energy efficiency in the process. Michaud asked if the new windows would be double paned glass, Cray confirmed this. Swaim said that on the second floor, it seems like each square is equal to the next one and the top is narrower, Cray said that both the bottom and the middle sections open, but the upper piece is a fixed piece of glass; it does not open He said that it is the whole casing that will have to come out and have a new casing put in a new window, Cray said the intent would be to put in exactly what is there now with an upper and lower portion that open and a fixed top portion, kind of a transom piece, that does not open. Baldridge asked if that is true on both the second and third floors. Cray said that is true of both the second and third floors in the front. He said that the very top section, roughly 25% of the height ofthe window, does not open. Baldridge asked if this was going to be painted aluminum, Cray responded that he would think it would be a dark brown color, as the storefronts are all that dark bronze color, He said that is what is on the side and the back now. Cray said that they would replicate that, unless they are instructed otherwise, to match the storefronts' colors, Kuecker said that Marv' s Glass had indicated that the windows would have a dark finish. She was not certain if he said they would be painted. Baldridge said that alumimJm really does not like to hold paint. Kuecker said that maybe Marv's was saying they are paintable but have a finish on them, Baldridge asked if the Commission needs to specify anything about the surface finish in terms of its approval. Wagner said he would say yes, because the appearance of the thing was a dark window frame, Kuecker said the owner has indicated that the window frames would be dark, but the Commission could make that a condition of its approval. She said the application states that the windows will be painted black. Kuecker stated that whether that is a painting or a finish, Staff doesn't really care one way or the other, Baldridge said that for the betterment of the building, it would be advisable to have something that will last. Cray agreed and said that he does not want to do this again in his lifetime, MOTION: Baldridge moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for the Paul-Helen Building at 207-15 East Washington Street as presented in the application, with the following conditions: that the new windows retain the details, proportion, size, sash width, trim, and overall appearance of the historic windows, meaning that they will be dark; and determination of the State Historic Preservation Office level of review, and approval, if necessary, prior to the issuance of the building permit. McMahon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Downinl! absent), Swaim said there was some concern that dark might be too vague of a term, AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Baker moved to amend the motion to include a specification that the new windows be either black or dark brown. Swaim seconded the amendment. The amendment carried on a vote of 10-0 (Downing absent). Historic Preservation Commission December 9, 2010 Page 3 AMENDED MAIN MOTION: The motion, as amended, carried on a vote of 10-0 (Downin2 absent). Consideration of Pre-Approved Item, Ramps. Kuecker said that at its last meeting, the Commission considered a temporary ramp, and it was suggested that it be made a pre-approved item, She said staff is therefore recommending approving new, temporary ramp construction as a pre-approved item eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met: the new ramp is constructed without footings in order to emphasize the temporary nature of the ramp and to facilitate removal after the ramp is no longer needed; the ramp being removed once it is no longer needed; the ramp being placed on a side or rear door if possible, Swaim asked how temporary is being defined, Kuecker said that the nature of the structure having no footings would make it a temporary ramp. She said it would depend on the need of the person living there, but a temporary ramp would have no footings, Swaim asked if that means the ramp is removed when the person with the need for it no longer lives in the house and by what kind of process is that being monitored. Kuecker replied that only three temporary ramps have been installed; she said it is something she will just have to keep track of. Trimble said the Commission is not requiring that the homeowner demonstrate proof of a need for a ramp. Ackerson said that it is somewhat subjective, Baldridge asked if it would be beneficial to include language regarding whether there is a change in the situation or the inhabitants. Kuecker said the ramps that have been installed have either been rental ramps or loaned to the users, so that is another reason the ramps will be removed, Michaud said that may not always be the case. She suggested including language in the motion to call for a review at certain time intervals. Trimble said that it would be like any another Code violation if the ramp was there, but the owners or occupants weren't there anymore. She said that otherwise the Commission will be renewing someone's ramp every few years, Ackerson said the fact that this is being discussed as a temporary ramp says to him that it is coming out. He said that if the Commission does not have the mechanism to make certain the ramp comes out, it should not start talking about a temporary ramp that is not. Ackerson said that the ramp the Commission considered at its last meeting was a kind of pre-built structure consisting of a couple of sections that will just come out when no longer needed. Baker added that the nature of the ramp, in that it does not have footings, makes it something that a person is not going to want to keep there unless he or she needs it. She said that if someone is permanently handicapped and is going to need a ramp for more than a year or two, he would want to construct a ramp that has footings and will have to come before the Commission for approval. MOTION: Baker moved to approve new temporary ramp construction as a pre-approved item eligible for a Minor Review if the following conditions are met: the new ramp is constructed without footings in order to emphasize the temporary nature of the ramp and to facilitate removal after the ramp is no longer needed; the ramp being removed once it is no longer needed; and the ramp being placed on a side or rear door if possible. McMahon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Downin2 absent). UPDATE ON CITY HIGH CUPOLA. Kuecker said the Commission's packet includes the letter that the Chair and staff wrote to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as well as the response from SHPO and the school district superintendent. She said that apparently the cellular antennae are coming down, because they were not constructed as approved. Baker asked what would happen with the chunks of wood that are missing, Kuecker said they will be replaced. She said that as she understands it, if AT&T doesn't do it, the School District will contract for the replacement and charge AT&T for it. Historic Preservation Commission December 9, 2010 Page 4 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 10, 2010: Thomann said that the meeting was not in Harvat Hall so that the location should be corrected, MOTION: McMahon moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's November 10,2010 meeting, as amended, Ackerson seconded the motion, The motion carried on a vote of 10-0 (Downing absent), OTHER: There was none, ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m, Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte