HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-10-2022 Historic Preservation Commissionlowd City Historic Preservation Commission
Thursday
March 10, 2022 �M
n
5:30 p.m.
C. C
nr.
P
C ,. c r• : MIN �. •.
r
Hai -vat Hall
r �
City Hall I inn nn4Emma
vvmdmiH�csrarco��FoR�.ao� C
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, March 10, 2022
City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street
Emma J. Harvat Hall
5:30 p.m.
Agenda
A) Call to Order
B) Roll Call
C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda
D) Certificate of Appropriateness
HPC22-0005: 810 North Johnson Street — Brown Street Historic District (solar array installation)
E) Report on Historic Preservation Fund Projects FY 2017-2022
F) Consideration of Minutes for February 15, 2022
G) Commission Discussion
1. Annual Historic Preservation Awards
2. Commissioner'rerms
H) Adjournment
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jessica
Bristow, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5243 or at j essica-bri stow(& ,Iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged
to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Staff Report March 2, 2022
Historic Review for HPC22-0005: 810 North Johnson Street
District: Brown Street Ilistoric District
Classification: Contributing
The applicants, Laura Stunz and Thomas Mittman, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration project
at 810 North Johnson Street, a contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project
consists of the installation of a solar array on the south -facing roof slope.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Altera tfons
4.4 Energy Efficiency
4.7 Mass and Roof Ines
10.0 Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
Staff Comments
This house was built in 1918 as a west -facing gable front house with a side (north) facing crossing gable. The
house has several Craftsman details such as the clipped gables, shingle siding, and exposed rafter tails in the
bottom of the eaves. Several details seem to be inspired by a Colonial Revival style such as the steep roof and
full-length shed -roof dormers which give the house a Dutch Colonial appearance. Many of the double -hung
windows on the house have a multi -paned upper sash over a single-pancol lower sash and are considered
original.
This house may have had multiple additions. One addition in the 1960s added a first -floor addition and a
lower -level greenhouse. In 1999, a remodel project for a kitchen and laundry room was approved by the
Commission and changed some of the openings on the north and west side. In 2016 the owners were
approved to replace storm window sashes that were used in five second floor windows, with more
appropriate metal -clad wood sashes. In 2020, the Commission approved the removal of the solarium on the
south side of the 1960's addition and its replacement with a screen porch addition.
The applicants are proposing to install a solar array on along the lower edge of the south -facing upper
(dormer) roof surface. The location for the additional equipment is unknown. The electrical meter is located
on the south wall of the house under the west -most pair of windows. The solar array will have dark frames to
blend in with the roof edge.
Section 4.7 Mass and Rooflines recommends against installing antennas, vents, solar collectors, skylights,
satellite dishes, or other mechanical devices on prominent street elevations. Standard #9 of the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation states that new additions, exterior alterations, or related new
construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to
protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.
In 2020, the Commission approved skylight installation as a staff review if specific conditions are met. A copy
of that Certificate of Appropriateness is attached. The current application is not eligible for staff review
because of the proposed location of the solar array and likely because of the proposed location of the
additional equipment.
In 2011, the National Park Service (NPS) published illustrated guidelines on sustainability for rehabilitating
historic buildings. Since our local guidelines include very little information on this type of project the section
of these guidelines on solar technology is attached. This section recommends installing a solar device in a
compatible location such as a non -historic building or free-standing and only installing on the historic
building if other options are infeasible. When mounted on the historic building, it is recommended to install
solar devices so that they are not visible or only minimally visible from the public right -of way. It is also
recommended that the installation does not damage historic roofing material or negatively impact the
building's historic character and is reversible.
In Staffs opinion, many elements of this project were eligible for staff review including the installation close
to the roof surface and the frame (and possibly the brackets) being a color that blends with the roof surface.
The location made it necessary for the Commission to review the application. The proposed location is on
the side of the house but since the house is located on a corner lot, the roof slope faces the main street,
Brown Street. The location for the remainder of the equipment is not known at this time, often they are
located near the main fuse or breaker box which is also located near the electric meter. On this house, the
electric meter is on the south side but has been painted to blend with the house, so it is not highly visible
from the street.
In evaluating the location for the solar panels, staff requested that the applicant include photos of the house
from Brown Street. The photos show that the panels would be visible from Brown Street and that the house
is set back far on the lot from Brown Street. The proposed location is the upper, lower -sloped roof over the
south -facing shed dormer. The height and slope of this roof helps to minimize the visibility of the panels.
During seasons where trees are leafed -out, they would be less visible. While the roof of the new screened
porch and the rear addition would be preferred locations for solar panels, it does not appear that they have
enough roof area for an array of this size. It is not known whether the applicants investigated free-standing
solar panels. Any location between the house and either street would not be considered an appropriate
location for that, leaving only the north edge of the lot which has a heavy tree cover. For the equipment, the
preferred location is inside, the back of the house, or the north side. If the equipment is minimal and can be
masked like the electric meter a south side location may not impact the historic character of the house.
Otherwise, it is not recommended for the equipment to be installed on the exterior of the south side of the
house.
Recommended Motion
Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 810 North Johnson Street as presented in
the application.
81(.) North Johnson Street- NW corner from Johnson Street. The front of the house is to the right.
810 North Johnson- south elevation taken from yard
hma Cit%
.1. listoric Preservation Carlirnission
tau I Ldl'dl H tov'
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Solar Panel Installa Lion
A meeting of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission was held in an electronic meeting platform
because of the dangers of COVID-19 on August 13, 2020 at 5:30 pm. The following members were present:
Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Lyndi Kiple, Jordan Sellergren, and Austin Wu.
By a vote of 6-0, the Commission approved Solar Panel installation as a pre -approved item eligible for a
Minor Review if the following conditions are met:
• The solar panels are installed on:
• an outbuilding roof, or
• the rear -facing roof of a primary building, or
• a non -street facing side elevation, not impacting the street view of the house, if the preferred
locations are not possible
• The solar panels are installed close to the roof surface and at an angle that is similar to the roof
surface
• The frame and brackets for the panels are a color that blends with the building roof material
• Any equipment is located away from a street -facing elevation, preferably on the back of the structure.
Pre -approved items may be approved by a Minor Review conducted by Staff if all conditions are met.
The project is approved subject to the conditions specified in this certificate, notations in the application, and
the discussion by the Commission as provided in City Code Section 14-81.�1-2. All work is to meet the
specifications of the guidelines unless otherwise noted. Any additional work that falls under the purview of
the Historic Preservation Commission that is not specified in this certificate will need a separate review.
Approval by the Historic Preservation Commission does not constitute final approval for a project. Contact
the Building Department to determine if a building permit is required to carry out the project. The Historic
Preservation Commission does not review applications for compliance with zoning ordinance and building
code.
Kevin Boyd, Chair.
Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission
oo�
Jessica Bristow, I storic Preservation Planner
D �t of Development Services
8/18/2020
Date
o
Z Zr 0 o
0 =>
L1_ N N
W V)L.Li C/)cc
aim u
(�-, f
N m u
_ Z F
U
LLJ m W
F— J Q m
Cw= C/�H O�
W F— =—C..4) ��
l_t_ �
:-0
CO
��lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
wrmumumomomomomom
uuum uuuuuum
���imumumu
��IIII
wi�
=
i
^
L•NL
mama
I,��,w �
""'uuumHm
u
00
_
u muuu
olololololololololololololololol
m
u
10
I uuumuu ul�
uuuuu uuuulo
uuuuu�I
—
in
Illf uluuuu
ul
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum
mmmmmmmmlmm w
uuumuuuuuuum
'
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
m
���^'„�wwmuw
wwu�Iuwwwwwww
�luwimm
i i uuuu°°°
�mm
�
�m�mlillllllll°l ulomuuuuuum
uuuuuuuuuuuuum
W
III
�
III�muumilmlum
II
Vu uuuuuuuullum
Ou
II
um
mm
oumum
I
iummuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum
II
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu�U
llluumlu
iiiiiuuuuuuuuuuuu
�""""
�
a--�
m
it ilillliliHillilililil
uuuu0
�i luau im
u
uumml uuuuuuuuo
IIIIIIIIIV
II
L
uuumE
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
l umro
olololmu
i IIIIm
...............
wwwwwwww mwwlmlIlIllI
llluuuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuu"m
IIOII
�lololol
flu
. _
IIIIII
lolololou�nolololololm
uuuuuuuu� uuuuuum
w
ww
uull �
l uuuuuuuuuuuuuuum
l l l
L
V
mumul
wn
I�w��'
uuuuu uuuummmw
ommlololololololololololmq
°
oio�olololololololo
W
iul�ul
� ml
mm �lolololM
C.
�wwwwww wwwww� w
C-
uuuuuuuuuum
fpp u
f
LmL-
uumlillllllluumllll�illll
luuuuullllmuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
Q
�I
u
IuIII
imuumuu�
muuuuum Muuuumuuum
mmm
uuolmuuuuumuuuuuuuu
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuo
IMF
m
u
lolololo u�i�l�l�l�l�lu
i
olwry
,�mm�wa
IIIM"IIIIII
m uuuuuuo
l�uuum um uuuu
cr)
�lmlmu�
IOIIoIo�'�lololololololololololmu
I
uwwwwwwwwwwwl
w
ummumumu lmumum
00 111 uu
�l�mum uuuuumuuuulo
ololololololololololololololn�
cz
ff
puuuuuuuuuumuuuuuuuuuu
olololololololololololololol
uuuuummumuuuuuuuuu
cn
Cl
cz
5
14�
O
7� 14
> > .5 T
C\j m � x 0 It (10 x 0 N
—1 —1 r-H —i C"i C\j
ON U
-zi
ID4
2 -z�
QJ U
In
CL, CL.
141
0 R
9
Ln
r-
O
W
O
Z
W
O
V
W
O
Z
O
W
O
Z
W
O
V
W
N
r
o
O
_
v
4-
v
>
p
o
�
>
n
E
o-�
N O
O
t0
v
>O
n
U
c
C1.
O
O
a)
Q
}:
U U
c v i
m
co
00 to
i-+
0.O
O
p
w
C
f6
_
U
-�--� +-'
v
O
U U
bA
'O
-0
O Q p
-0 L-
_
bA
a
O
O
o
N a
E
-6
N L
c
O
E
N
N
+� > .-
N
"O
O
.-
+-
bA
O_
O
U
p
bA
C
bA m �
C bA U
U
@
b!J
p
-0
U
uo
p uo
Ln
c
(n
O
.-
— .E
O
O
O
+-'
O
m -O
!ten
—_ N
N
_m
U
N
N '�
U
O
U)
ODO
bA
c
a)M
U
c
a)v
v
c
v
'U a
O
O-
E
E
O
_a
NN
ca O
v
U r >
O
OD
+'
-O
U
u
U p
ca
N
O
O
N
O
N
U
qp
O
+cn N
v-
O_
U
N N
to
(6
+�-+
O
bA +-�
O
U>
E
O
v-
Q
O
O
U
y
U
O
v
�N-+
-i-•
-O
>,
N=
O
p
c
CO
C
O O
p
fl_
M
+�
N
O
p
—_
Co
O
E
(�
v
w
v 4J
o-
v
a
v
p
O
to
c E
>
O
c
O
+-'
"O
>
N O
v
a)bA
+�
c
T
on
bA
O
E
O
T U O
a
O
O'
E
-O
EM
O
v
E
C
v
N
v
4- O •�
N u
U
p
to
N
>j
U
' �
p
Ln >
v
O
O
i""'
U
-ti.
O
O
-E
0
U
>
O
-4
bA
c
t�jp
cll
E
O
bA U
u
c
+�
-c
c. bA
p
to p
O
C
p
ci
Q
'S
U
Q
O -O O
p
—
-2
O
O
p
— -0
p
r
W.-
LO
G
W
G
Z
W
O
u
ui
Gt
h
O
Z
O
W
O
Z
W
0
c�
W
00
r,
b°
�.�
o
s >,
a a
N
o
u
>
c
? �
2 "O
0p O T
A O
b4 C
t o E o
O Q
O
,@ u o_
U O
t C C
0 O 0
o u
>
s i2
o
c'
u C o
,n
o
o o.��
o
i c E
Q
o
N 0 U o
u a
rn
^ u v
w E
1
vi
`p N v a
_
C N
c
E b:
N
C 0 O- N
bbo
E N
N N Q@
u O
y Qv O
E u 0
E- N.�
o a) o 0
Z a o
i
U
bA
0
v
—
Oco
v >
G -
0
'-
E
ob
E N
N
OC
T
v
v
bOA
E
�O
�O
-p
a)U
O
E
Ln
'S U
O-
a)Lo N
m
U
0
> U
U
co
-O
)
(a
N
v (6
p�
(6
O
m
0-
a)C
N -C
N
0
U
U
U
_
a O
a
C
=
O
U
U
m
O
>
O U
-O N
v
@
E
m
0—
N
'O
O >
O T O
O
O
.m
17;_
ON
bA O
bA
'
E r2
WE:
v
C
C
b0A
'' 6
.>
Q
w
O
0
:+-� T
C Q
O
—
M
U T O 'O
N U 7FDN
o EO
aO+
p
N >
E U
�'
N
Q
O
O
y
O
O
O O
`�-
�--'O
C U
0
'V)
O
N
N
>
T
_p
v}
O
> '>
E
O
E
m N
c>
CL
ca
o
O O
_N
M
O_ -6
O O
O O
o
-�--'
v
.- C
-
N +�+
O
0.
N O
+'
O
T O
0 -O
L
O
_
� �
`�'
m
fl-
O
N
.
O
''"'
_
O_
N
O
c6 E
C
o
0 0 'O
O
O
O O
N
@
V
4- 0
u>
a)ao
n
o
--
0
o
a
m
N 0
-C
O
min
c6
O
E
C
i N
bA
C
C:
N
p O
m—
ap
v
j
tU/7 i
o
`—'
(6
aA
@
E
an v
C
- V
O
v-
0
E_
OU
C
b-0
C
m O
C
0-m
._
.E -O
N (O
Ln
C C
'S
C.
C
O C
C
O
—0O
vU- m
+-+
O
ti
Attachments
1. Eagle Point Solar plan. On page 4, aerial view of optimal solar panel location on the upper south
roof from adrone.
2. Photo of house from the Brown St. sidewalk, north side of the street, showing the height of the
roof from the street level.
3. Photo ofhouse from the sidewalk onthe south side ofBrown St.
4. Photo of house from Brown St.
The project doesn't fit into the minor review category for the following reasons.
1. The only panel location suitable isthe one selected (attachment 1).
Z. There are no outbuildings, and putting panels on the north side of the roof would not allow for
optimal power generation.
However, the panels will behigh onthe roof upaslope, atanangle that issimilar tothe roof surface,
and the frame and brackets will not stand out incontrast tothe panels.
Thanks for your consideration!
Laura Stunz
Thomas Mittman
O10NJohnson
P o i n�11
Bringing you
Agricdtura,,,, Cornn iorcl,, A I U en t i r0
Tom & Laurie Mittman & Stunz
810 N Johnson St
Iowa City, IA 52245
(319) 325-9027
tommittman@gmaii.com
�ruurr,���1� R,,
MuniclpN (Yility Acad,�Mll(',
3
"TE","",�,"""TED VI'l 1" N
Post Assessment
Max Fit - 58% kWh Offset
Prepared By
Drew Wagenhoffer
Solar Energy Consultant
(563) 582-4044
dwagenhoffer@eaglepointsolar.com
Eag I e P,oi �,, ar. cc)rn
Office localions in lawa, Iffinois and Wisconsin
2/11/2022
—Offer expires 14 days from proposal date**
Pre -Solar Bill
Rate Schedule: MAE-IA - IRS.
Current Blended Cost of Electricity: $0.113/kWh
Time Periods
Energy Use (kWh)
Charges
Bill Ranges & Seasons
Total
Other
Energy
Total
1/1/2021 -2/1/2021 W
801
$9
$71
$79
2/1/2021 - 3/1/2021 W
638
$9
$56
$65
3/1/2021 -4/1/2021 W
429
$9
$38
$46
4/1/2021 -5/1/2021 W
371
$9
$33
$41
5/1/2021 -6/1/2021 W
343
$9
$30
$39
6/1/2021 -7/1/2021 S
1,350
$9
$153
$162
7/1/2021 -8/1/2021 S
1,261
$9
$143
$152
8/1/2021 -9/1/2021 S
1,336
$9
$152
$160
9/1/2021 - 10/1/2021 S
1,146
$9
$130
$139
10/1/2021 - 11/1/2021 W
517
$9
$46
$54
11/1/2021 - 12/1/2021 W
554
$9
$49
$57
12/1/2020 - 1/1/2021 W
654
$9
$58
$66
Total
9,400
$102
$959
$1,061
Post -Solar Bill
Rate Schedule: MAE-IA - IRS
Time Periods
Solar PV (kWh) Energy Use (kWh)
Charges
Bill Ranges & Seasons
Total
Total
Other Energy
Total
1/1/2021 -2/1/2021 W
318
483
$9
$43
$51
2/1/2021 - 3/1/2021 W
284
354
$9
$31
$40
3/1/2021-4/1/2021 W
405
24
$9
$2
$11
4/1/2021 -5/1/2021 W
592
-221
$9
$20
$11
5/1/2021 -6/1/2021 W
582
-239
$9
$21
$13
6/1/2021 -7/1/2021 S
599
751
$9
$85
$94
7/1/2021 -8/1/2021 S
639
622
$9
$71
$79
8/1/2021 -9/1/2021 S
562
774
$9
$88
$96
9/1/2021 - 10/1/2021 S
521
625
$9
$71
$80
10/1/2021 - 11/1/2021 W
342
175
$9
$15
$24
11/1/2021 - 12/1/2021 W
340
214
$9
$19
$27
12/1/2020 - 1/1/2021 W
235
419
$9
$37
$46
Total
5,419
3,981
$102
$422
$524
1st Year Estimated Electricity Savings: $537
EagIePointSa t ar. cc::)rn
Office loc alions In lanwxa, Illinois and Wisconsin
Financing
Payment Options
Total Project Cost
20 Year Loan
Total Project Costs
$14,252
-
Monthly Payment
-
$102
Interest Rate
5.99%
Loan Term
-
20 Years
Estimated Incentives
$3,706
-
Net Cost After Incentives
$10,546
-
Estimated 25-Year Electric Bill Savings
$20,272
-
Estimated 25-Year IRR
4.9%
-
Estimated Payback Period
15.4 Years
-
Estimated % of Bill Offset
50.6%
-
Loan calculations are estimates and based on best available terms and credit, and assume a 0.250% discount for automatic payments. Also based on loan issuance on date listed, with an optional
deferred payment and/or re -amortization. This matrix is intended as an informational tool and does not constitute a guarantee of approval nor a
guarantee of all terms for all applications. RATES AND
TERMS SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE.
>1
0io
1,500
1,000
0
Emazo=
N ti
Fnergy Use (kWh) Solar (--ieneratlon (kWh)
EaglePointSota r .(,,c)rn
Office locafiws in Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
PVSxsfeD1 Dofo'|s
General Information
Facility: Mittman &StunzResidence
Address: 810 N Johnson St Iowa City IA 52245
So|arPV System Description
kW DC: 4.44kN/DC
So|arPane|o: (12)VSUNVSUN370-120BPWH
Inverters: (6)Hoymi|maHPW-60UNT(240V)
Ti|t(a): 30
So|arPV SystemCostand|noentk/es
Solar PVSystem Cost $14.252
Federal Tax Credit -$3706
Net Solar PV System Cost $10,546
Incentives are estimates and are subject hoeligibility and funding.
Estimated 1st Year Production
Annua|ConoumpUon� 9.400kVVh
Shade Reduces Production: 4%
Eam|ePoimtSota r^(,,(,)0
macelo*alkw7s inIowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
Incentives
Incentives are estimates and are subject toeligibility and funding. Eagle Point Solar does not provide any
tax advice, please consult your tax professional to see how these incentives will affect you.
Federal Investment Tax Credit (UC)-°2GY6°
PV ayah*ma are eligible to receive o tax credit in the amount of2S% of the hda| PV oyah*m cost. Unlike tax
deductions, this tax credit can be used to directly offset your tax liability dollar for dollar. If your tax credit exceeds
your tax liability you can roll the credit into future tax periods for 20 years.
Total Incentive Value: $3,706
Eam|ePoimtSota r^(,,c)0
macelo*alkw7s inIowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
Environmental Impacts
Solar will greatly reduce your carbon footprint. Over the lifetime of your system, it is estimated that you will offset
102.7 tons of CO2. This is the equivalent of...
2,580.36 Trees planted.
11,297.1 Gallons of gas consumed.
359.45 Tons of waste recycled instead of land -filled
107,835.93 Pounds of coal burned.
11,575,673.84 Smart phones charged.
11
EaglePointSota r c,c)rn
Office localkw7s in Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
Total -j_- —_Assumptions and Key Financial Metrics
-
/nm renn
4.9m
Net Present Value
($175) Payback Period
15.4,oars
no|
s&z%
Energy Cost Escalation Rate
3.8% Total Project Costs
s14.252
Years
Project Costs
Electric Bill Savings
Federal Tax Effect Total Cash Flow
Cumulative Cash Flow
Upfront
-$14.252
'$14.252
-$14.252
1
$537
D3.706 $4.243
-$10.009
2
$555
- $555
-$9.454
3
$573
$573
-$8.881
4
$592
$592
-*8.289
5
$011
$611
-$7.877
0
-
$831
$031
-$7.046
7
$052
$852
'$8.394
O
$073
$073
-$5.721
9
$095
$695
45.025
18
$718
$718
-*4.507
11
$741
$741
'$3.568
12
-
$705
$765
-$2.801
13
$790
$790
-$2.010
14
$010
- S810
'$1.184
15
$842
$842
-$352
10
$xrO
$070
$518
17
$898
$898
$1,418
10
$927
- $927
$2.343
19
$957
$957
$3,300
20
$988
$988
$4,288
21
$1.020
*1,020
$5.307
22
-
$1,053
$1,053
$0,380
23
$1,087
$1,887
$7,447
24
$1.121
$1.121
80,508
25
$1.158
$1.158
$9J26
Eam|ePoimtSota r^(,,(,)0
macelo*aficw?s inIowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
�O.�o���|
^-° �O@[l
Assumptions and Key Financial Metrics
Energy Cost Escalation Rate
3.8%
Interest Rate
5.99% Total Project Cost
$1*.252
Upfront Payment
$o
Loan Term
zoYaam
Years Loon
Electric Bill Savings
Federal Tax Effect
Total Cash Flow
Cumulative Cash Flow
Upfront
1 '$1.224
$537
$3.700
$3.019
$3.019
2 -$1.224
8555
-
-$668
$2,349
3 41.224
%573
-$851
$1.698
4 -$1.224
$592
-
-$832
$1.000
5 -$1.224
%011
-$613
$453
8 '$1.224
%001
'$583
'$140
7 -$1,224
$652
-$572
-$712
8 '$1.224
$673
-$551
'$t263
9 -$1.224
$095
-$529
-$1.792
10 -$1,224
8718
-$506
-$2288
11 -$1.224
$741
-$483
-$2.781
12 '$1,224
$705
-$459
-$3240
13 -$1.224
$790
-$434
-$8.674
14 '$1.224
8818
-$408
-$4.002
15 -$1.224
$842
-$382
-$4.484
18 -.$1.224
S870
-$355
-$4.819
17 -$1.224
$898
-$328
-85.145
18 '$1.224
8927
-
'$287
-$5.442
13 41.224
%957
-%267
-$5.710
20 -$1.224
$908
-
-$238
'$5.846
21
$1.020
$1.020
-$4.926
22
$1.050
%1,055
'$3.874
23
$1.087
$1,087
-$2.787
24
$1.121
$1.121
'$1,008
25
$1.158
$1,158
-$508
Eam|ePoimtSota r^(,,(,)0
macelo*aficw?s inIowa, Illinois and Wisconsin
2 4w
UOUAft 4 ^70f
Module efficiency
25years
0% A%
05 Uyea rs
Linear power output warranty
ICV/O
98%
M
800/0
Additional
ftsi6�_.Irarjt,
Number dyears 101years 15 years 2,O years 25 years 30 years
a vsl.m ow, Staidard Wananty
MUnich RE
(PEAc, PERC Cell Technology
_9
Higher output power
Lower risk of micro -crack
Positive tolerance offer
Lumn I" rXII imilami- M#
M11 0 1:11.110 F411:111FA I w� MYNIIII 0 FIMIM
Lower risk of hot spot
Better shading tolerance
Certified for salt/ammonia
corrosion resistance
Load certificates: wind to
240OPa and snow to 540OPa
Lower LCOE
VSUN, a BNEF Tier-1 PV module manufacturer invested by Fuji Solar, has been committed
to providing greener, cleaner and more intelligent renewable energy solutions. VSUN is
dedicated to bringing reliable, customized and high -efficient products into various
markets and customers worldwide
Electrical Characteristics at Standard Test Conditions(STC)
Module Type V'SUN370-1206MH VSUN365-120BMH VSUN360-1!20BMH VSUN355-1208MH
Maximum Power- - Pmax (W)
370
365
360
355
Open Circuit Voltage - Voc (V)
414
41.1
40.8
40.4
Short Circuit Current - Isc (A)
11,26
11.19
11.12
11,06
Maximum Power, Voltage "Vnipp (V)i
X5
343
34
33,7
Maximum Power Current - Irripp (A)
1032
10.66
1059
10,53
Module Efficiency
20,0404)
19�,77%
19,50%
1922%
Standard Test Conditions (STQ irradiance 1,000
W/ml; AM 1,5, module temperature '25°C. Pmax Sorting:
0-5W, Measuring
Tolerance. ±3%.
Remark: Electrical data do not refer to, a single module and they are not part of the offer. They only serve
for comparison among different moduile types,
Electrical Characteristics with di'fferent rear side power gain(referenice to, 365 front)
Pmax (W) Voc (V)
Isc (A)
Vmpp (V)
lrnpp (A)
Pmax gain
388 41.40
11.82
34,50
1038
5%
407 41,40
12,39
34.50
10.88
10%
443 41.50
1151
3440
11A7
200A
461 41,50
14,08
34.40
12,36
25%
Temperature Characteristics Maximum Ratings
NOCT 45'C(i2'Q Maximum System Voltage JVJ 1500
Voltage Temperature Coefficient -0.26%/IC Series Fuse Rating [A] 20
Current Temperature Coefficient +0.0540/,.,/'C Bifaciality 70%±5%
Power Temperature, Coefficient -0.320Q'C
Material Characteristics
Dimensions
1762x1048x35mm (LxWxH)
Weight
19.6kg
Frame
Black anodized aluminum, profile
Front Glass
White toughened safety glass, 3.2 rnm
Cell Encapsulation
EVA (Ethylene -Vinyl -Acetate) or POE
Back Sheer
Transparent mesh backsheet
Cells
12x 10 pieces bifacial monocrystakine solar cells series strings
Junction Box
IP68, 3 diodes
Cable&Connector
Potrait:� 500 mm (cable length can be custornized), I x4 mm 2, MC4
Packaging System Design
Dimensions(I-xWxH)
1820xI 125xII81mm
Temperature Range
-40 'C to + 85 'C
Container 20'
186
Withstanding Hail
Maximum diameter of 25 mm with
Container4O'
403
impact speed of 23 m/5
Container 40'HC
806
Maximum Surface Load
5,40,0 Pa
Application class
class A
11 P" W M1111
Vob'Aahll
'o"
0 OF
,111,15142111111111111 URONRIDGE
1•
11� Jill ir�� I
I 1��
M JIM=
fO'T'
IronRidge builds the strongest mounting system for pitched roofs in solar. Our components have been tested to
the, limit and proven in, extreme environments, including Florida's high -velocity hurricane zones,
MM Mr. "A1111111 i:il 1 0
016 ,
16-1 a lill Ila 0J 1010 14 m 6-M I KZM If I I lill a I I I WORLaggL6 L7,K019111 I Is I r! I I I W III it 0 or-Maza wI Mi 11
Ilk f-=- � I
W
F, 1w ww1-1- - - Jil-R, a M a
l
Mill 94 to] IR ire 11111MINHIM MINN 111111 M—
Certified to maintain the fire resistance
rating of the existing roof.
UL 2703 Listed System
Entire system and components meet
newest effective UL 2703 standard.
W40CMAUJIMA
Pre -stamped engineering letters
available in most states.
Online software makes it simple to
create, share, and price projects.
Products guaranteed to be free
of impairing defects.
FT T#7711 i
,Sr#TMTTUr VITI
6'spanning capability
UFOTIO
I violate Nil 14191VIINUSIGN Irrol
I I 'EFT7,
P - - -— 11 as F1, & MTFit
- Single, universal size,
- Clear and black finish
FIrr4ITr#T@IW"
The ultimate residential
solar mounting rail.
• 8'spanning capability
• Heavy toad capability
• Clear and black finish
Stopper Sleeves
Snap onto the UFO to turn
into a bonded end clamp.
* Bonds modules to rails
* Sized to match modules
* Clear and black finish
FlashVuel"
Flash and mount XR Rails, Flash and mount conduit,
with superior waterproofing. strut, or junction, boxes.
Twist -on Cap eases install
Wind -driven rain tested
Mill and black finish
• Twist -on Cap eases install
• Wind -driven rain tested
• Secures 3/4" or V conduit
Design Assistant
Co from rough layout to fully
engineered system. For free.
n rJ'I I
..... . .. ... ..
A heavyweight mounting
rail for commercial projects.
* 12'spanning capability
* Extreme load capability
* Clear anodized finish
Bond modules to rails while
staying completely hidden.
- Universal end -cam clamp
- Tool -less installation
. Fully assembled
KnockoutTile
Replace tiles and ensure
superior waterproofingi.
• Flat, S, & W the profiles
• Form -fit compression seal
• Single -lag universal base
Nou=1 164no
LoInawl ".t.-now-011M
- integrated bonding
- No tools or hardware
- Self -centering stop tab
Bond and attach XR Rails
to roof attachments.
T & Square Bolt options
Nut uses 7/16"' socket
F-11"Afff W-04 sm.
Mount on tile roofs with a
simple, adjustable hook.
Works on flat�, S, & W tiles
Single -socket installation
Optional deck flashing
Ilk,,Endorsed by FL, Building Commission
f,
Flush, Mount is the first mounting system
$
E to receive Florida Product approval for
2017 Florida Building Code compliance.
I R 0 N RI D G E
FlashVue
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
QTY IN KIT
1
BOLT, LAG 5/16 X 4.25"
1
2
WASHER, EPDM BACKED
1
3
FM FLASHING, MILL OR BLACK
1
4
GRIP CAP, MILL OR BLACK
1
FLASHVUE
PART NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
FV-01-M1
FLASHING, FLASHFOOT, MILL
FV-01-B1
FLASHING, FLASHFOOT, BLACK
1) BOLT, LAG 5/16 x 4.25"
us
7/16"
Property
Value
Material
300 Series Stainless Steel
Finish
Clear
V1.0
2) Washer, EPDM Backed
0.35
Property
Value
+
Material
300 Series Stainless Steel
Finish
Clear
0.75
3) Grip Cap
.40
.36
11.00
00
+
2.74
Property
Value
Material
Aluminum
Finish
Mill/Black
4) FM Flashing
8.0
�1-
.32
.0
Property
Value
Material
Aluminum
Finish
Mill/Black
V1.0
\\\" \/}
<§ :
>
! > y\ i \ \\ \
��,<
��^��\\\�
. ,
m.
F
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMNNJ. HARVAT HALL
February 15.2O22
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
Margaret Beck, Sharon DeGraw.Kevin Larson, Jordan SgUerQnan.
Noah Stork, Deanna Thomann, Frank Wagner
Cecile Kuenzli, Carl Brown, Kevin Boyd
Jessica Bristow
Andy Martin
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: GeUgrgnan called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
rvODe.
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS:
HPC22-0004: 623 Oakland Avenue — Longfellow Historic District
Bristow said this property is 8 Foursquare with n@rn]vv |8p Siding that's mitered at the corners.
There's 8wide frieze band along the porch and upunder the main roof edge. There are bead
board soffits mitered at the corner, one over one double hung windows in singles and pairs.
Originally, the front porch was open, and the north portion was enclosed bythe 197O'S.There's
OO CO[n8[ bO@nd' there's 3 flat C@SiOg or flat t[iOO' and 3 projecting SiU' 8 little C[OwO along the
head Ofthe windows and doors. She points out that the head Ofthe windows DOthe upper floor
reaches the frieze board so there's not a separate piece of trim that goes across the head of the
windows. Then there's the horizontal window in the dormer. The house has a hip roof.
Bristow said that the back of this house had o bump out early on, heven shows upon
the Sanborn Fire insurance maps. This lower portion was an open porch at one time, and we
can tell because we have skirting around the corner. One can see faint outlines where there's
some butt joints in the siding. That's because there was a window at one time. On the south
side you can clearly see where the siding ends aligned with that pier. This would have been the
rear corner Ofthe house G1one point.
Bristow said Gfew things are goingU]happen with this project.Awindow has been deteriorated
from being in a bathroom, so right now the proposal is to change this to a shorter fixed sash
window so the head will align with all of the window heads, but the sill will be higher, and it will
be a different type of window.
BhSiOVV said the eXSdOQ pair of windows OD the SOUih Side will be split Up. She pOiOLS out the
dormer window that the original proposal was to match. The staff recommendation is basically
that 8horizontal window could potentially bHused there but the proportions should bemore like
some Ofthe windows you see 8L8first-floor landing ODhouses Ofthis age.
Bristow showed @Oimage Ofthe existing plan. She said you can see the open and closed part Of
The original bump Out on the [e8[ of the house is set in from the north Side' but it extends to the
south side because this isthe corner that used tobeunopen porch.
Bristow showed an image of the new proposed plan and pointed out previously detailed
changes. They have an almost 11 -foot by 14-foot screen porch that will have a hipped roof. The
roof overhangs in an approved new addition typically match the original house. This house has
a really wide overhang. Even though the front porch also has that wide overhang, staff
recommends a shorter overhang partly to differentiate between existing house and new porch.
Staff recommends a traditional screen door instead of a solid door. Each column would have a
pier and straight skirting U]match house. The original piers submitted OOthe application were
24^x24^ Staff recommends 1O^x18^ The columns will bewider capital and base. The railing
should span between the columns not onthe outside.
Bristow showed an image from north Side and rear view. It will be 8tong Ue-8nd-gn]Ove porch
OOO[. For the bathroom, staff recommends something that iSmore proportionally similar tDsome
ofthe other windows. Bristow showed some examples images ofwindows onother houses.
Bristow said the plans were originally submitted with G[DU|Up3Ogdnew rear door. She showed
image of the existing side door. Staff recommends that the rear door either match the side door
0riSR simple full light.
Beck moved hmapprove a certificate of appropriateness fmr623 Oakland Ave as
presented in the staff report with the fm88oVvim0 conditions: the new bathroom vvimdonV is
the same width as existing windows and slightly shorter than one sash height with three
orfour simulated divided Kights' The west door matches the existing south door or is a
full mrhalf-light door with mo divided lights and that the column piers are reduced tm1G"
for am@" column and that there ima central column imeach run. Wagner seconded.
Thomann asked if they know where the window that was on the side of the house will be moved
toosthere are no pictures.
Stork said he would like to see images of the window as it is now and how it will be changed.
Andy Martin said he believes that it is an awning window now that was put in within the last 25-
30 years. It is in the bathroom. Bristow once again showed images [oclarify.
The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
REVIEW OF CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL REPORT
Bristow said she would go through the annual report. First for section 2, last year they looked at
Kirkwood Ave, Keokuk St, Clark St, Walnut St, Webster St. An intern did some research on the
area but because they were not technically a qualified professional and they did not do state
paperwork, it is not included in the annual report but is a good basis for moving forward with an
official study Ofthe area.
Bristow said the State requires us to make account for any properties listed in the National
Register that were altered moved or demolished. We only keep track of ones that are under our
jurisdiction. But for instance, 21 8 Linn was considered contributing to our downtown district
which is listed in the National Register now and it has come down. Because it is not in a local
district staff doesn't track that type Of project, but this one has been included in the report simply
because staff was aware of it.
New local designations: 41O'412Clinton, the strip Ofbuildings ODCollege St, 109-123'and the
Highlander Supper Club.
Altered locally designated properties: Bristow said we only include those which are in our
conservation districts or local landmarks without a National landmark component. For example,
20 N Dodge was approved for addition of screen porch.
Historic Preservation Fund: Bristow showed an image and said this is a before and after project.
We started with a window repair that became a window replacement and went on to removing
all synthetic siding. This will be a good example of things we can do with our historic
preservation fund.
Public outreach and education: Examples of work include the Historic Preservation Awards.
Bristow said staff presented to the association of realtors and the homebuilders association,
worked with Friends on videos that won an award, and presented at Preservation Summit.
For challenges and successes: Our downtown was listed in the National Register of Historic
Places. Sanxay-Gilmore house was saved but now we are not sure what will happen. It is
owned by the University and they do not have an existing plan for it.
Bristow said the report lists what websites and social media we have, the dates of all meetings,
budget details, commissioner training information. There are a couple city ordinances that affect
historic districts that are included but not commented on in the report.
Beck asked why there are properties within city limits that are a national landmark but not within
our jurisdiction. Bristow said we only have regulatory approval on things that are locally
designated. Most cities do not locally designate. Therefore, we can only regulate (plan review,
etc.) those that are locally designated. We also can't regulate county or University buildings.
MOTION: Larson moved to approve the Certified Local Government Annual Report as
finalized by staff and chair. DeGraw seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND WORK PLAN
Bristow said there was a study of a barrio that existed in the Oak Park area where Mexican
immigrant workers had housing provided by the railroad and it was boxcars. She shows an
image from the Sanborn maps to show where this was. One of the items in their work plan is to
include this story when this park goes through its master planning or upgrade process.
Bristow said they have talked a lot about reducing waste in demolition. In some communities
they are doing this through deconstruction so that the material is reused and not wasted.
Another option is to increase the fee for demolition permits.
Bristow said under Invest in Public Infrastructure includes coming up with a plan for the
Montgomery -Butler house.
Bristow said under Preserving Our Heritage we have the house at 2040 Waterfront Dr. We had
a grant to study this house that originally thought to be the house of Cyrus Sanders. It was
actually his brother Richard's house. We did learn that this house could be eligible for the
National Register and would be a goal to make it a local landmark as well. We also have some
mid-century modern housing stock. An example is up on Knollwood Lane. This neighborhood
was studied as a part of the flood mitigation and a potential National Register district is
indicated. There's a good mid-century modern neighborhood near City High as well. There are
always areas that have potential for the future.
MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Work Plan of Historic Preservation for the year
2022. Beck seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Minor Review —Staff Review
HPC22-0001: 803 Roosevelt Street — Longfellow Historic District
Bristow said this house is getting a new front stoop and step. They did this work before they had
a permit, and they will have to change the railing.
HPC22-0002: 121 and 123 East College Street — Local Historic Landmark
Bristow said there will be some signs in the sign band. They will also be projecting signs.
HPC22-0003: 706 Clark Street — Clark Street Conservation District
Bristow showed an image of the house. The second -floor windows are being replaced. They are
now vinyl and will be replaced with metal -clad wood. The first floor has original windows.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 13 2022
DeGraw said that she was not listed as present in the minutes. Bristow said she will update.
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a Minutes for January 13, 2022 as amended. DeGraw
seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0.
COMMISSION INFORMATION:
Bristow said she included an email from Anne Russett in the packet. It included the notice about
demolition of 724 Ronalds St. Boyd wanted it included in the agenda in case anyone from the
public wanted to make a comment. The commission had reviewed its status a few years ago
and changed it to non-contributing because of the alterations, making it able to be approved for
demolition without being considered structurally unsound and irretrievable.
Wagner asked if the owners are tearing it down. Bristow said it is owned by the City. Larson
asked if it will be sold or go to the University. Bristow said the goal is to have it redeveloped,
possibly into two lots to increase the density. The new design would come through the
commission for approval. The city would not retain ownership.
DeGraw asked if the commission would have requirements for the new construction. Bristow
said that they would, because, while it is new, it is still in a national register -listed and local
historic district. The house would be required to fit in with the neighborhood. The normal
process would've been to approve the demolition and new construction at the same time.
Thomann asked if the house was from the early 1900's. Bristow said she does not remember
but it was researched before changing it to non-contributing was approved. Wagner said there
were so many additions and alterations it's hard to know.
ADJOURNMENT:
Wagner moved to adjourn the meeting. Thomann seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 6:29
pm.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
TERM
04/08
05/13
06/10
7/08
7/21
8/12
9/09
10/14
11/18
12/9
01/13
2/15
NAME
EXP.
BECK,
6/30/24
--
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MARGARET
BOYD, KEVIN
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
BROWN, CARL
6/30/23
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
BURFORD,
6/30/21
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
HELEN
DEGRAW,
6/30/22
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
SHARON
KUENZLI,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
CECILE
KIPLE, LYNDI
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
LARSON,
6/30/24
__
__
__
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O
X
KEVIN
PITZEN,
6/30/21
O/E
X
X
--
QUENTIN
SELLERGREN,
6/30/22
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
JORDAN
STORK, NOAH
6/30/24
--
--
--
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
THOMANN,
6/30/23
--
--
--
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
DEANNA
WAGNER,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
FRANK
WU, AUSTIN
6/30/23
O/E
X
X
--
--
--
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member