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