Loading...
Minutes Historic Preservation Commission 3 20 08 THE CITY OF DUbU(~U@ .~--~ Dui ~~ ~ Masterpiece on the Mississippi (I I' MINUTES REGULAR SESSION Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:30 p.m. City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building 350 W. 6th Street, Dubuque, Iowa PRESENT: Chairperson Christine Olson; Commission Members Keisha Wainwright, Mary Loney-Bichell, Matthew Lundh, Bob McDonelll and Chris Wand; Staff Members Laura Carstens and Dave Johnson. ABSENT: Commission Member John Whalen. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Olson at 5:30 p.m. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. MINUTES: The minutes of the February 21, 2008 meeting were approved unanimously, as submitted. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Douglas Schlarman/Joseph & Madeline Schlarman for a Certificate of Appropriateness to repair the roof, install a round window, fix the front built-in gutters, and replace damaged bricks for property located at 1020 Bluff Street in the Jackson Park Historic District. The applicants, Joseph & Madeline Schlarman were present on behalf of their son, Douglas Schlarman, to present the case. Madeline Schlarman noted that her son, Doug, was able to obtain a reclaimed historically appropriate round window which is identical to the historic round window in neighboring properties. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report. He noted that the applicant would like to install a rubber ice dam under the first four feet of shingles because water is backing up into the center of all three rowhouses and destroying the brick. The existing asphalt shingles will be replaced with asphalt shingles. He stated that the applicant also is requesting to replace the existing square window above the gablet cap with a more historically appropriate round window to replicate what originally was on the house and that which is on the neighboring property. He stated the window will have a 33 inch diameter, be constructed with wood and Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 2 painted. The siding surrounding the window will be the same as what currently is on the gablet cap. The application states that the existing built-in gutters on the front of the house will be repaired due to water damage and all wood soffits will be the same size as originally on the house. The applicant also would like to repair and replace, where needed, the damaged bricks and mortar. The mortar will be replaced with red mortar to match the existing mortar. Staff Member Johnson referred to the applicant's supporting photographs. The Commission felt the application was appropriate. Motion by Bichell, seconded by McDonell, to approve the request as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Olson, Wainwright, Bichel, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Michael & Angela Friederick for a Certificate of Appropriateness to enclose the first and second story porches for property located at 515 Arlington Street in the W. 11th Street District. Michael Friederick presented the case. Mr. Friederick explained he recently acquired the property and the previous property owner had begun the process of enclosing the first and second story porches. The Commission noted that the project was started without a building permit or Historic Preservation Commission approval. Mr. Friederick explained he was unaware that Commission approval was acquired while attempting to complete the previous owner's work. Mr. Friederick explained that it is his desire to enclose the first and second story porches because snow, rain and other elements are getting inside the porches and rotting the floors. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report. He noted that the applicant would like to use adutch-lap vinyl siding to match the existing vinyl siding on the residence. Staff Member Johnson explained one 30 inch by 36 inch and four 36 inch by 48 inch vinyl slider-style windows are proposed for the porches. He stated the applicant is proposing decorative grids on the windows. He referred the Commission to drawings and photographs provided for the Commission's consideration. The Commission explained to the applicant, that the slider-style of window installed in the porch enclosures are inappropriate. They explained existing windows on the residence are more slender and vertical in appearance. The Commission explained the windows in the enclosure should compliment the other windows in the house. The Commission noted many of the windows are one over one double-hung windows. The Commission discussed options for locating windows within the enclosure. The Commission and the applicant discussed an alternative where windows similar in shape, size and style of the double-hung windows in the house would be installed in the current openings of the first and second story porches. The Commission emphasized the importance of those windows being vertically aligned and maintaining a rhythm similar to the windows installed on the addition to 1250 W. 12t" Street. The next option discussed by the Commission and applicant was to use windows to entirely fill Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 3 in the first and second story porch openings. The Commission and applicant explained the intent would be to give the impression it is one continuous window. The applicant and Commission discussed a third option which would allow the applicant to remove all of the recently completed work and return the first and second story porches back to their previous form and design. The applicant reiterated that he does not want an open porch because rain and snow will continue to deteriorate the floor and support system. Commissioner Lundh noted that if the porches are opened, drainage should be provided at the bottom of the porch to prevent moisture from accumulating. Commissioner Wand arrived at 6:20 p.m. The Commission next discussed the door on the first story porch. The applicant explained because of structural elements to the porch the door could not be relocated. The Commission felt that the existing location was appropriate; however, a transom similar to the transom above the door at the unit east of the enclosed porches should be used. Motion by McDonell, seconded by Bichel, to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1) All materials are to be removed that were installed without a building permit and have open fenestration on both levels and a building permit is to be obtained; 2) the bottom porch and west side of the upper porch should have four one-over-one or four four-over-four double-hung windows of size to fit the open spaces and the south side should have six one-over-one orfour-over-four windows in a continuous span or an approximate thereof, with no siding; 3) painted wood windows or vinyl or aluminum clad windows are acceptable and recommended to match the color of the siding; and 4) reuse of the existing door in its existing location is allowed with a transom installed above it, and existing vinyl siding next to the door can remain. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Olson, Wainwright, Bichel, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None; Abstain -Wand. Commissioner Bichell left at 6:30 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Brad Bierman/Lenore Nesler for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a new surround and brackets for property located at 1108 Locust Street in the Jackson Park Historic District. Brad Bierman, Epic Construction, explained the property owner's request to install a new surround and brackets. Mr. Bierman explained he didn't have much to add in addition to the packet of information provided to the Commission. He explained they have provided documentation which shows that the surround that was removed from the building was not original. Mr. Bierman pointed out the March 4, 2008 letter from David Bisenius which certifies Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 4 that he owned by the building at 1108 Locust Street during the 1970s and early 1980s. The letter explained that during those years he owned it numerous changes were made to the door surround using materials from several different buildings that he owned at that time. Mr. Bierman directed the Commission's attention to photographs provided by the applicant from 1913. These photographs depict a little girl and a woman in front of the subject property. He explained they are the same photograph; however, one is an enlargement of the surrounding area. Mr. Bierman stated that based on his evaluation of the photographs, the surround depicted in the applicant's 1913 photograph is different than the surround that was removed by the property owner. He explained that it is his belief that the surround that was removed that was not original and, therefore, is considered a missing historical element as per the Secretary of Interior's Standards. Mr. Bierman summarized a March 10, 2008 letter which explained the property owner's logic for the style and material that the property owner has chosen for the door surround at 1108 Locust Street. Mr. Bierman introduced David Stuart, 1439 Locust Street, as the preservation consultant hired by the property owner, Lenore Nesler. The Commission requested the staff report. Staff Member Johnson began by explaining the Notices of Decision from the February 15, 2007 and February 21, 2008 Historic Preservation Commission meetings for the subject property. He stated the applicant currently is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a new surround and end brackets. He stated the proposed surround will have fluted sides as depicted in the drawings in the staff report; however, an acorn pediment will replace the previously proposed Georgian-style pediment in the drawing. He stated the end bracket on the south end of the building will replicate the existing bracket on the north end of the building. He stated both the proposed surround and the proposed brackets will be constructed of Fypon. He stated photographs and minutes from the February 15, 2007 meeting and draft minutes from the February 21, 2008 meeting were provided for the Commission's review. He noted that photos have been provided for the Commission to compare the historical documentation to the surround that was removed by the property owner. The Commission noted the applicant's 1913 photograph was from a publication by the Telegraph Herald entitled "Dubuque the Birthplace of Iowa, Volume 5". The Commission noted that in that same publication another, more clear, photo was provided of the front of 1108 Locust Street and the historical door surround. Chairperson Olson noted that examination of the photographs indicate the photographs were taken the same time of day and the same time of year, because both photographs show the same girls in the same dresses and the same hats. Chairperson Olson stated that because the photograph provided by the applicant obscures the details of the surround, discussion should be centered on the photograph on page 42 which more clearly shows the details of the surround. Chairperson Olson explained that she has a background in historical photography and historical architecture. She stated she worked as a printer and historical archivist for Hedrich Blessing, awell-respected, worldwide photographic firm. Chairperson Olson stated that based Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 5 on her examinations of the photos, the surround depicted in the 1913 photographs is the same as the surround that was removed by the property owner, with the exception of a few minor details. Mr. Bierman agreed but noted the bigger item of evidence is the letter provided by Mr. Bisenius which explained that the surround was placed together from other buildings in the late 1970s or early 1980s. Chairperson Olson stated that if that is indeed the case, he did a very good restoration of the historical surround. Mr. Stuart interjected and stated that he is the historic consultant hired by Lenore Nesler and if the Commission would like to have a discussion about historical photographs, he is the person to have that discussion with. Chairperson Olson reiterated that the 1913 photographs of 1108 Locust Street clearly indicate that the surround in the 1913 photographs is identical to the surround that was illegally removed without a permit and without permission, with the exception of a couple of minor details. Mr. Stuart referenced the 1913 photographs on page 42 and page 44 of the "Dubuque the Birthplace of Iowa, Volume 5" publication. Mr. Stuart asserted that the photograph provided by the applicant from page 44 depicts obscured details of the surround as well as the photograph on page 42. Mr. Stuart stated that the enlargement of the surround area within the photograph provided by the applicant shows a much different pediment from the one that was removed. Discussion followed regarding the true form of the pediment versus the images that may be created by branches and shadows from trees in front of the building. Chairperson Olson argued that the form of the pediment in the 1913 photographs is the same as the pediment that was removed and Mr. Stuart is seeing a branch that actually continues beyond the rake of the pediment. Chairperson Olson reminded the Commission and applicant that the issue is that there was an intact and salvageable surround, historically documented in a 1913 photograph, which was removed without proper approval and permits. Mr. Stuart next cited sections from the Secretary of Interior's Standards. He stated for a piece that is missing, it no longer plays a role in physically defining the historical character of the building unless it can be accurately recovered in form and detail. Chairperson Olson responded that the surround could be recovered in form and detail because it existed approximately two months ago before the property owner illegally removed it. Mr. Stuart stated that the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines also state that if adequate, pictorial and physical documentation exists so that the feature may be accurately reproduced, and if it is desirable to reestablish the feature as part of the building's historical appearance, then designing and constructing a new feature based on such information is appropriate; however, a second acceptable option for the replacement feature is a new design that is compatible with the remaining character-defining features of the historic building. The new design should always take into account the size, scale and materials of the historic building itself and most importantly, should be clearly differentiated so that a false historical appearance is not created. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 6 Mr. Stuart again reiterated his opinion that the surround that was removed was not the original piece and that he can find historical evidence to that affect. He said that in any event, the original pieces are long gone and it was not the original piece. Chairperson Olson reiterated the surround is not long gone, rather it was improperly removed a couple of months ago. Mr. Stuart said that the property owner has a choice to select a design that is compatible with the size, scale and materials of the building. Chairperson Olson explained that there is an option to look at the very similar historic photographs of 1913, and to look at the photographs of the surround from a couple of months ago before it was removed, and use that as a guide for replication. Commissioner Lundh asked the applicants what historical evidence they have to justify the proposed acorn pediment with Fypon materials for the surround. Mr. Stuart explained that Fypon is a polyurethane material that is an acceptable alternate to wood, when painted. Mr. Stuart explained Fypon was chosen because it can replicate wood in shape and form, but lasts longer than wood. Mr. Stuart again cited the Secretary of Interior's Standards to explain that Fypon is an acceptable alternative material. Commissioner Lundh pointed out that the Secretary of Interior's Standards also do not support the ability to pick and choose different styles from buildings. He reiterated Chairperson Olson's point that historical documentation exists, which supports a pediment design as depicted in the 1913 photographs or the pediment that was removed from the building. Staff Member Carstens reminded the applicants that the issue at hand is that there is a Code violation from when the property owner removed the surround. She also noted that in addition to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, the Commission should also consider the architectural guidelines for review of the proposed project. Commissioner Wand reviewed the past approvals and the contradiction to the Commission's direction not to remove the door surround. He stated his opinion is that the surround, as proposed, is acceptable with the exception of the pediment. Commissioner Wand stated he would like to see a pediment more in keeping with the form of the historic pediment. He elaborated he would like to see a pediment that was simple and has a shallow peak. He stated he would not object to using Fypon, provided it is painted. He explained he would object to using the acorn pediment since there is no evidence that would support an acorn pediment. He explained the photographs clearly show a pediment with a peak. Mr. Stuart responded that it is his opinion, and that in some communities, they require starkly modern and differentiated features to be installed when adequate historical evidence is not available. Motion by Wand, seconded by Wainwright, to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the surround to be constructed of Fypon, with the exception that the pediment not be an acorn Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 7 pediment, but instead be a pediment with a simplified peak. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Wainwright, Wand and Lundh; Nay -Olson and McDonelll. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Mark Wahlert for a Certificate of Appropriateness to rebuild chimney located at 490 Alpine Street in the Langworthy Historic District. Mark Wahlert, 490 Alpine Street, presented the application for the Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Wahlert stated that his application went before the Commission last August for a brick to use to repair his chimney. He explained that his chimney is in disrepair and since that time, portions of the chimney have collapsed. He stated the previous brick that he requested was not approved because it was not of a similar size or texture as the brick on the residence. He explained that since that time, he has continued to look for brick that is the same size, color and texture, per the direction of the Commission. He explained that he has searched numerous salvage yards throughout the Midwest and it wasn't until a couple of weeks ago that he located suitable brick on a farm in Galena. Mr. Wahlert provided samples of the proposed brick and the brick that had fallen off of his chimney for the Commissioners to compare. He explained that there are 1,500 units of the proposed brick available and the chimney specialist estimates 1,000 units will be needed to repair the chimney. Mr. Wahlert explained that after the chimney specialist had an opportunity to assess the chimney, he felt there might be a need to take the chimney all the way down to the roofline. Mr. Wahlert explained that, even if that is the case, enough brick is available to rebuild the chimney. The Commission stated that it is their preference that the applicant use one style of brick for the entire chimney repair and any leftover brick or salvaged brick be used towards the back of the house. Mr. Wahlert agreed. Motion by Wand, seconded by Wainwright, to approve the brick as submitted for the reconstruction of the chimney from the roofline to the top of the chimney and maintain the original detail and, if needed, use one type of brick if the entire chimney needs to be replaced and save any leftover and salvaged brick for future needs of the house. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and McDonnell; Nay -None. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Planning Based Historic Preservation Criteria Staff Member Carstens introduced Larry Sommer and explained that Mr. Sommer is at the meeting as a follow-up from a discussion at a previous meeting regarding the Historic Preservation Ordinance update which is being done as part of the Unified Development Code. Mr. Sommer referenced the letter prepared for the Commission which explains Planning Based Historic Preservation Criteria. He reviewed conservation area concepts as a valuable preservation planning tool compared to traditional historic districts and regulations. He explained Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 8 that the conservation area concept isnon-regulatory and more about preservation, maintenance, and creating livable, desirable communities. Mr. Sommer stated that given the current energy issues the country is facing, studies have shown that many people are returning back to the city's core, which will have a potentially large impact on historic buildings and neighborhoods. He explained the conservation area concept is an opportunity to proactively address some of these issues. Staff Member Carstens noted that the conservation area concept is consistent with many of the sustainable and preservation initiatives already undertaken by the City. She noted it is also consistent with many urban renewal initiatives. The Commission explained that they felt the conservation area concept is a good thing; however, the City may have to replace the term conservation district to avoid confusion. The Commission noted demolition districts were renamed conservation districts to remove the negative connotation. The Commission discussed the possibility of renaming existing conservation districts and establishing conservation areas. Chairperson Olson stated she felt an important component of the conservation area concept is that it incorporates massing and rhythm of buildings as they relate to each other, as well as their setbacks and sidewalks. Mr. Sommer agreed to add this language. Chairperson Olson referenced the Washington Neighborhood as an example. Mr. Sommer explained that aplanning-based preservation approach does not tie you to the strict interpretation of the National Park Service guidelines and standards, but it encourages preservation at a different level and approach. Mr. Sommer explained the conservation area concept is a much broader planning-based approach which considers sustainability, creating positive neighborhoods, visual enhancement of the city, and livable communities. The Commission discussed creating conservation areas as being separate and distinct from conservation districts or what was formerly known as demolition districts. Staff Member Carstens stated making conservation areas non- regulatory would be a good idea. Staff Member Johnson recommended applying conservation area concepts to existing conservation districts and to expand upon those districts. He explained a core of surveyed historical buildings are already identified and in place and the only regulatory function within those areas could be limited to demolition permits as is currently in place. Staff Member Carstens suggested using the conservation area concept and the current update of the Unified Development Code as an opportunity to place the responsibility of review and approval of demolition permits with the Commission with the opportunity to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council, similar to historic districts. She explained this would make the process easier and quicker. The Commission discussed property values in historic districts compared to property values outside of historic districts. Chairperson Olson stated that a nation- wide study conducted by the National Park Service indicated that properties located in historic districts have either stabilized or increased compared to other properties. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 9 Commissioner Lundh suggested the City conduct a similar study for property values within the city of Dubuque. He suggested comparing the rate of increase for properties located in historic districts between the time the district was created and now, and then comparing that to the rate of increase for properties outside of Dubuque's historic districts during the same time period. The Commission discussed the difficulty in making such a comparison because of the different stock and uses for differing areas of the city. The Commission suggested a comparison of the W. 11tH Street Historic Preservation District and Fenelon Place Conservation District would be a good comparison. The Commission suggested this as a possible internship project. For commercial land uses the Commission suggested a comparison of the Old Main Historic Preservation District versus a similar section on Central Avenue. Staff Member Carstens explained that staff will work with Mr. Sommer to update the planning based historic preservation criteria and conservation area concepts to be renamed conservation districts and clearly differentiate between what will be regulatory and what will not be. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Building Services Status Report on Historic Preservation Enforcement Staff Member Johnson reviewed the updates to the Historic Preservation Enforcement Report. Mines of Spain Exhibit and Education Program Staff Member Carstens explained that the City has received a Preserve America Grant for the Mines of Spain Exhibit and Education Program at the E.B. Lyons Interpretive Center on behalf of the Friends of the Mines of Spain. She explained that the State Historic Preservation Office would like the Historic Preservation Commission involved in preparing the RFP, identifying potential consultants, setting a project schedule, consultant selection, and review of the draft and final projects for the Mines of Spain Exhibit and Education Program. She requested that the Commission designate one or more members to serve on the project steering committee for this project. Commissioners indicated no one be able to serve on the project steering committee; however, they will be available for the State Historic Preservation Office requirements. Architecture Days Staff Member Johnson reviewed the tentative schedule for the 2008 Architecture Days. He explained that some of the times are subject to change, noting that his and Staff Member Carstens discussion of historic preservation programs in Dubuque program will be presented on April 8, rather than April 7. He also stated that Dubuque Main Street is seeking volunteers for the student architecture art show on April 8, if anyone would like to volunteer. Staff Member Johnson encouraged the Commissioners to attend events, if possible. Archeoloay Workshop Staff Member Carstens reviewed the prehistoric burial sites and cemeteries property workshop to take place on April 23. She encouraged Commissioners interested in attending the workshop to notify staff so they can be registered for the program. Staff noted that 28 of the available 30 registration spots are still available. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission March 20, 2008 Page 10 Four Mounds Phase 1 Archeological Investigation Report The Commission reviewed the Phase 1 Archeological Investigation Report of the Four Mounds Estate Historic District draft report. The Commission recommended the report be forwarded to Kristin Anderson Bricker at Loras College for her review, in addition to the Commission's review. Motion by Wainwright, seconded by Wand, to support and approve the Phase 1 Archeological Investigation of the Four Mounds Estate Historic District draft report as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. Ken Kringle Awards The Commission discussed nominating properties for the Ken Kringle Historic Preservation Award. Motion by Wand, seconded by McDonell, to nominate the Star Brewery, 970 Grove Terrace, Washington Court Apartments and the Historic Federal Building for the 2008 Ken Kringle Awards. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and McDonnell; Nay -None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted F:\USERS\KmunsonlWP\Boards-Commissions\HPCWlinutes\HPC Minutes 20081HPC min 03 20 08.doc