Loading...
Request for Demolition of 1672 Central Ave_NeusesPlanning Services Department City Hall 50 West 13~ Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 (563) 589-4210 phone (563)589-4221 fax (563) 690-6678 TDD planning@cityofdubuque.org THE CITY OF DUB E Masterpiece orT the Mississippi The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Dubuque City Hall - 50 W. 13t" Street Dubuque, IA 52001 RE: Request for Demolition Permit Location: 1672 Central Avenue Applicant: Richard & Kathy Neuses Project: Demolish the existing building. District: Washington Street Neighborhood Conservation District Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Dubuque a ,'II~~ 2007 August 26, 2008 The City of Dubuque Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the above-cited request. The application, staff report and related materials are attached for your review. Discussion Richard Neuses, owner and applicant, cited reasons supporting the request to demolish the existing building at 1672 Central Avenue. Assistant Planner Wally Wernimont reviewed the staff analysis. He explained the role of the Commission is to provide advisory design review to the City Council for this request. The Historic Preservation Commission discussed the request and supporting documentation with the applicant, finding that the structure does have historical or architectural significance and that denial of a demolition permit would not prevent the owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. The draft minutes of the August 21, 2008 Commission meeting are attached to provide additional information on the case. Recommendation By a vote of 2 to 4 with 2 abstentions, the motion to recommend City Council approval of the request as submitted failed, thereby constituting a recommendation to deny the request to demolish the existing building at 1672 Central Avenue. Request for Demolition Permit 1672 Central Avenue Page 2 Action by the City Council Section 11-4 (f) of the City Code states the City Council shall consider the recommendation of the Commission, any information submitted to the Commission by the applicant, any information submitted to the City Council by the applicant. If the City Council finds that denial of the application would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property or that the building does not have any historical or architectural significance to the community, the City Council shall approve the application. If the City Council finds that denial of the application would not prevent the owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property and that the building has historical or architectural significance to the community, the City Council shall deny the application. A simply majority vote is needed for the City Council to approve the request for demolition, or to concur with the Commission's recommendation for denial. Respectfully submitted, ~/~t-- Christine Olson, Chairperson Historic Preservation Commission Attachments cc: Rich Russell, Building Services Manager THE CITY OF I~uB ,~ E Masterpiece on tTze Mississi~~i Dubuque I~~i. zoos PLANNING APPLICATION FORM ^Variance ^Conditional Use Permit ^Appeal Special Exception ^timited.Setback Waiver ^Rezoning ^Planned District ^Preliminary Plat ^Minor Final Plat ^Text Amendment ^Simple Site Plan ^Minor Site Plan Please tvpe or arint legibly in ink City of Dubuque Planning Services Department Dubuque, IA 52001-4864 Phone:563-589-4210 Fax: 563-589-4221 ^Major Site flan ^Certificate flf economic Non-Viability ^Major Final Plat ^Certificate of Appropriateness ^Simple Subdivision ^Historic Designatton / ,~ ^Annexation []Neighborhood Association ~iuPi~ ^Temporary Use Permit Other: ~~v-ra~~ r~~ ~r ~r<-- Property owner(s): ~ I e ~ cl -^ ~ c~ f'`.~ ~ ~ ~ V ~~ ~ ~ ~ Phone: .SL; 3 - ~`l6 - ~3 ~S S Address: J~D,S~ ~F'-•i~Y l Vo S 2 ~ City: ,~ `e State: ,~_ Zip: So~~Q / Fax Number:.~Ca ~ ' ,~ ~ a - ~3,5 O Cellular Number: E-mail Address: ~Qa Applicant/Agent: ~ r c ~ a rr~ ~~ u~S~ Phone: ~~ 3 - S 9a - ~~~ 5 Address: Sa~~Yi nn Va 5•P ~- City: U. u-'e State: ~ Zip: ~ goo I S~3- u~~-1350 ~G3-59o-~38~ ~-ehzhnehccl'v~eh.~"~' Fax Number: n Cellular Number: E-mail Address: ~~~, Cc, {~, Site location/address: ~~ 7c~ l.:e ~~''4.~ V~ Loa;. G./_:~arHbn-a Existing zoning: Proposed zoning: District: ~;Ct~'^ /V~IiO Landmark: ~_ ~~ Legal Description (Bidwell parcel ID# or lot number/block number/subdivision): ~.~~f ~ l.-~ ~r~ j f/l 4 o~ ~ a,CQ 6.qa I -1 % ~ `o~~+~hC~.a-SQ y y i ~ ~ ~~ef Q~ ~-or ~. /vl,'d~lle Total property (lot) area (square feet or acres): ~~ ~ ~~/ i.~ QI'e ~•e.•e T De1scribe proposal and•reason necessary (attach a letter of/~explanation,. if neednned): / o Reltitoy~e.. ~.)(C%~-f-% ~~ C1I ~ ~ ~.-~ I 1 n n. . ~~ o ~ r i i ~,-! ~ I n r.. % e -~6n 1, ^4-~ ~ ~ ~ )n n. r7i ~ n h ~- I/we, the undersigned, do h~Feby certify that: 1. It is the property owner's responsibility to locate property lines and to check your abstract for easements and restrictive covenants. 2. The information submitted herein is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and upon submittal becomes public ~' record; 4 ti~ 3. Fees are not refundable and payment does not guarantee approval; and 4. All additional required written and graphic materials are attached. ~' Property Owner(s): ~ Date: ~ ~ .~ 7 ~~ Applicant/Agent: ~ --_ Date: ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ Q FOR OFFICE USE ONLY -APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Fee: ~ Received by: Date: Docket: ^ Site/sketch plan^ Conceptual Development Plan ^Photo ^ Improvement plans ^ Design review project description ^ Floor plan ^ Plat ^ Other: "Established 1876" 1672 CENTRAL AVENUE DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001 Telephone 582-1350 June 2, 2008 1. To remove the excisting building at 1672 Cental Ave. The brick is decomosing brick. Roof structure and chimmey slowing coming apart. The building is falling in from the roof down. The back porch has fallen off. The inside leaks every where. 2. We have the rest of -the back porch being supported by 1 4x6 beam, so what is left does not fall on anyone. The only alternative is to remove the structure. 3. There is none. We would like to remove the building. 4. The project would be completed in 30 days. 5. We will be doing the work ourselves. I own my own construction Co. Neuses & Sons Construction Co. 6. I would like to comment that the building is literally falling apart. It would take thousands of dollars to restore it. I would invite you to come and look at it yourselves. My former employer who has passed away did not have the money to fix it. That you can ask his wife Mary Barbara Lenz. We would like to remove and make the property look better. Also we are looking at the safty of the people walking by. June 2, 2008 1. The cost would run $10,000.00 2 . The Durrant Co . - e.v ~ ( ( S c..~ ~ v-1 i -~- h ~ ?~ ~j- 4-i ~ t k 3. Luksetich Real Estate Apprisals - 4~ ~ 11 S~r-1~-~- neX"~ we-~ k 4 . Luksetich Real Estate Appraisals - wi ~ ~ S 1~-t~`'''" "~ heK + w ee l~ 5. $11,000.00 May 7, 2008 The estate of Edward J. Lenz - Mary Barbara Lenz Ext. Edward was our employer. 6. There is none 7. Taxes and Insurance expences ~'St5 yam" 8 . $1 1 , 0 0 0.0 0 ~ ~ ~z ;, ~ ~' ~ d'tiy r' 4,. ~ ~ ,.:~. )1- ~V c..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v i 4~ 70 -~S2 L a+a l~ R`t, ~aa , o0 9. American Trust & Savings Bank did a walk through 10. None 11. See corrected page 12. See corrected page 13. It is owned by R & K Rocks Inc. The building sits empty It is not used for anything. 1 4. t j e ~- ~~- ~ }~t~.- A. 15. See paper from American Trust & Savings Bank 16. We bought the property from the estate of Edward J. Lenz. Mr. Lenz never did anything to the property to repair it. He had applied for a permit in 2000 to have the building removed but never followed through with it. It was approved then by the city council. "Established 1876" 1672 CENTRAL AVENUE DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001 Telephone 582-1350 DURRANT ° July 22, 2008 400 Ice Harbor Drive Dubuque,lA 52001 T S63.S83.9131 Rick Neuses F 563.557.9078 Lenz Monument www.durrant.com 1672 Central Avenue Dubuque, IA 52001 Project: Lenz Monument Building Assessment Dear Mr. Neuses: At your request, Durrant performed a visual assessment of the brick residence on your property on July 17, 2008. The findings of this visual structural assessment are provided in this report. This assessment is limited to the visual observations that could be made without Architethlte deconstruction of any part of the building. Engineering Planning The building is a three story wood and brick structure, consisting of wood roof and floor framing and multi-wythe brick bearing walls. Project Delivery Financing The exterior of the building vas observed for signs of deterioration or distress. The east and Interior Design west sides of the building were readily observable, but the north side of the building is Graphic Oesiyn constructed against the adjacent building and the south side of the building is mostly covered in vines. The west side of the building is exhibiting signs of distress around the southwest window, in the form of a vertical crack extending from the floorline of the second floor to the roof of the third floor. The crack varied in width, but appeared to be greater than'/a" in some areas (Exhibits 1 and 2). Cracking in the brick could also be seen on the south wall, extending from above the Denver, CO southeast window on the first floor and continuing through the second floor window. Crack Des Moines, IA width appeared to be less than 1/8". Dubuque, IA Hilo, HI Observation of the east side of the building found minor cracking above the window and Honolulu, HI door frames, with crack widths being generally less than 1/8". There is a porch structure on Madison, WI the east side of the building that appears to be partially collapsed and is currently shored with Phoenix, AZ 4x4 posts (Exhibit 3). This porch is a serious safety concern and should be repaired or St. Louis, MO removed. Access should be prohibited on, below and around this portion of the building Tucson, AZ until such repairs or removal are complete. P:\Projects\\CP\GENE}U1L\BCSDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessmentdoc Rick Neuses ~ Lenz Monument Building Assessment -' " July 22, 2008 Page 2 of 7 The roof was observed from street level and appeared to be exhibiting signs of major deterioration in the soffits, sheathing and decking (Exhibits 4 and 5). It is apparent when inside the building that the roof is not watertight based on the significant amount of water damage to the plaster ceilings. Visual observation of the underside of the roof was limited to a small attic space where the roof decking appeared to be rotten and patched (Exhibit 6). The underside of the third level floor was visible in several areas because the infiltration of water into the building had removed portions of the plaster ceiling. The floor framing above the second floor kitchen appeared to be rotten and had extensive water damage (Exhibit 7). It is expected that the floor joists that were visible would require repair or replacement. Floor decking may also require repair or replacement in these areas. Although the first floor ceiling showed some signs of water damage to the plaster ceilings, the plaster was still in place and the framing could not be seen, except above the stairway to the basement. This portion of the floor is below the kitchen area on the second level. Although it does not appear that the framing is rotting, the floor decking appears to be showing signs of deterioration (Exhibit 8). The basement walls are constructed of limestone blocks. No major signs of cracking or settlement were observed in the basement walls. Conclusions: The porch structure on the east side of the building is currently a safety concern. As discussed in the report, access on, under or near this porch should be prohibited until the porch has been repaired or removed. Based on our professional opinion, it appears that the building foundation is not exhibiting signs of settlement and that cracking in the brick is most likely due to water infiltration. Repair of the cracks should be performed, since continued water infiltration and freeze/thaw action will continue to widen the cracks. The wood roof framing and sheathing and portions of the first and second floor framing are exhibiting signs of rotting and deterioration. It is expected that portions of the wood framing and decking will require replacement due to rotting and deterioration. To determine the full extent of rotting and water damage to the wood framing, partial demolition (i.e., removal of all ceilings) would be required. P:\Projects\\\P\GENERAL\BLSDEV\PROPOSt1TS\Lenz Building Assessmentdoc Rick Neuses ~ Lenz Monument Building Assessment 's` July 22, 2008 Page 3 of 7 We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Eric Helminiak Structural Engineer ag P:\Projects\\CP\GENER AL\BUSDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessmencdoc Rick Neuses Lenz Monument Building Assessment July22, Zoos Page 4 of 7 i :~j ~ ~ :tir,, ! . i ~~~ t ~ r ..= _,c~.~ Exhibit 1: West building face, southwest window- crack in brick ~, ,a Exhibit 2: West building face, southwest window -crack in brick extending out from right corner P:\Projecu\~KiP\GENERAL\BLISDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessment.doc Rick Neuses Lenz Monument Building Assessment July22, 2008 Page 5 of 7 Exhibit 3: East Porch Exhibit 4: West side of roof P:\Projecu\WP\GENERAL\BUSDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessmentdoc Rick Neuses Lenz Monument Building Assessment July 22, Zoos Page 6 of 7 Exhibit 5: Northwest corner -rotting soffit Exhibit 6: Looking at underside of roof sheathing. P:\Projecu\\~/P\GENERAL\BUSDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessmenc.doc Rick Neuses Lenz Monument Building Assessment July 22, Zoos Page 7 of 7 Exhibit 7: Looking up at third floor framing from second floor kitchen. Exhibit 8: Looking up at second floor framing from basement stairs. P:\Projeccs\\~UP\GENERAL\BLISDEV\PROPOSALS\Lenz Building Assessmenc.doc ~, :; ~, ~~~. -. -~ - - +- "; ~ °~.~= =' ~. _' ..7 .~;,. ~.. a t -- ta( i 1.~ ~~ ',t _ _ ' - 'r ,_, _ _; '~~ - ~'~ ~~ a -- '~ r--' 4•.=_ ~- ,' i ~, _~ P ~. I ~\ E \ _4 1 ~ < ~.;. ~- f . ~'. s `^ ,~ . C `\ ~+..~ =i ~~ 1: '~. 1 ~l .. , ~ ~ ~ ,. _ ,:~~ ~., ~f ~' ., ~'~ ' fir' ~y # ~ ) . - ,rx ~ ~. Y - ~ Fem. .._ ~~1L'ia~ _ A' .. ~ ~~~~ -. ~~ .. Q ~~~ ~._ `. ~_`_ 1 ~~ ,- ,~_. _ ~ ~ ,r i - =; _ , `5 _'` __ .~ .'Y~ .\' __ ~i:• -.. ~.7 r 4 -~. ~ -:-r ,~; ,.y= ~ 7i ±~ _ - :i ;~~. ~ _ .. (~ ~ r _ 7 , ~ _ _~l z- ~ ~`'~ ~~~ ~ £ ~_ .Y ~ 1. -~. ~- _ -._ l -- -~: ~i s~~,~ ti. ~'~ ~~ ,, ~', ~. i.. ~ ~_ -[ _. ~. ~ ~ I ~~. :mow. ~_T__ ~~ ~, -- i ~ ~ ~~ ~~ - -- _ i. I J -~.-~~- -- - r -. -- - 9 '?~ '~ ?' ~ .k . ¢. i. ,, '1 ~~'~ t,, ~ _" 4 'i; ,. ps ~'`.Yi~ ~ f a`~ os~"~~i- .~~ LUKSETICH APPRAISAL & REAL ESTATE, INC. 4840 Asbury Road DUBUQUE, IOWA 52002 PH: 563-556-8840 FAX: 563-556-0846 RESTRICTED APPRAISAL REPORT DATE OF REPORT: June 6, 2008. PROPERTY: Subject property is located at 1672 Central Avenue, Dubuque, Iowa 52001. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S. 41' - NM 1/5 of City Lot 441 Parcel # 10-24-266-002. ASSESSED VALUE: The land is assessed at $10,700. The building is assessed at $31,800. The total assessment is $42,500. GROSS TAXES: The gross taxes for the subject property are $1,462. - APPRAISAL PROBLEM: Purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Fee Simple interest of the Market Value of the subject property for market value. The owners are considering tearing the building down to expand their monument business. USER OF REPORT: Richard and Kathy Neuses Lenz Monument 1672 Central Avenue Dubuque, IA 52001 CLIENT: Richard and Kathy Neuses DEFINITION: Market Value is defined by The Appraisal Foundation in its Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice as ~~the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions, requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is consummation of a price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is consummation of a sale as of a specific date and passing the from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: -Buyer and seller are typically motivated; -Both parties are well informed or well advised and both acting in what he considers his own best interest; -A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market -Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and -The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale." EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL: Date of inspection: June 6, 2008 APPRAISAL PROCESS: Subject property is an old two-story commercial building that is in disrepair. It does not have heat, and it is in poor condition overall. The subject property was analyzed by the Sales Comparison Approach only. The Cost Approach, which includes estimating subject's land value as though vacant, was not utilized, as this is an old building in poor condition. The Income Approach was not utilized, as this is not an income producing property. GENERAL UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITION: The estimated Market Value herein is subject to the non-existence of any sub-soil contamination or any environmental hazards of any kind with respect to the subject site. SITE DESCRIPTION: Subject property is a rectangular parcel with a total of 4,100 sq.ft. This is according to the Dubuque City Assessor's records. Subject site is nearly level. No adverse easements or encroachments were observed. Drainage appears adequate to lot lines. HIGHEST AND BEST USE: Subject site as though vacant Highest and Best Use is for the development of a commercial type building or as a lot for the adjoining business. Highest and Best Use as Though Improved would be for the development of a commercial building or as additional land for the commercial property next door. The subject property is physically possible with regards to the development of a commercial building, and the maximal productive use of the subject site would be for the development of a commercial building or as additional space for the commercial property next to the subject property. RESTRICTED APPRISAL REPORT LIMITATION: This Restricted Appraisal Report has been prepared with an analysis of the subject property. It is the appraiser's understanding that the owner wished to demolish the building and use the land for their business, which is located next to the subject property. This Restricted Appraisal Report cannot be fully understood without any understanding of the analysis in the appraiser's file. SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE: The appraiser searched for similar sales for the subject property and was able to locate one sale that was similar to the subject property. Comparable #1: 2401 Windsor, Dubuque. This is the sale of a mixed retail and commercial building on the north end of Dubuque. There is a total of 2,664 sq.ft. At the time of sale it was owned by the bank, and it was sold in "As Is" condition. The sale price was $19,500. The subject property was sold for $11,000. with a total of 1,680 sq.ft. Both the comparable and the subject property are in need of a complete `gutting' and remodel to become income-producing properties. SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE - $11,000. FINAL VALUE ESTIMATE: Based on the analysis herein, with consideration given only to the Sales Comparison Approach, I estimate the present Market Value of the subject property as of June 6, 2008 to be $11,000. It is the appraiser's opinion that the subject would have the greatest value as a vacant lot for the business located next to the subject property. It would not be financially feasible for the owners to try to renovate the existing property. ELEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. Respectfully submitted, ~v; ~.. Mary E lark Iowa General Certified Real Estate Appraiser PR®P~SAL ,_ ,~_- _. r PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO: NAME 1i LYE. ,,V~ 4t~e~ ADDRESS 7 ~ i / i~ /~ '~ h ~ rct, r li ~~ 1.,1 PHONFNO _ WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT: PROPOSAL NO. SHEET NO. DATE ~/ ~ G) ADDRESS J -___ _I ~ ~ ~ ~ DATE OF PLANS ARCHITECT We hereby propose to,furnish,t~ie materials anf~i perform the lab~c ry fo tl[}ej completion of _ •C C :.l ~ - .-~ J r ~_~l~ 6~ ~f cam... ~~ ~% z /C ~, ~ .~ ~ G .,.._ - I _ I - I - - i All material is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordan, wit ~he drawi,n~gs anc~eciti- cations s omitted for above-work end completed in a substantial workma like ma er f the sum of ~~ ~ "'~~_ Q ~~~ iii Dollars ($ ) ~Ith payments to be made as follows. ~~ 7 Respectfully submitted Any alteration' or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs ~ " will be executed only upon written order, and will become an extra charge Per ~~'''`~' C L-t'~ " over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, ac- cidents, or delays beyond our control. Note-This proposal may be withdrawn G~~ - - ~`"" 5 by us if not accepted within days. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payments will be made as outlined above. Signature Date Signature ~ NC 3818-50 ~ ®~ ®~~ ~K/ Page No. of Pages , ,~I j T L P. ®. Pox 354 • Phone 563.556.5790 • Dubuque, Iowa 52004.0354 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO Lenz Mounment Co. RATS Roc';s Inc PHONE 553-5°2--1350 DATE 6-11-03 STREET J08 NAME 1672_ CentraJ_ Same CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Dubuque Ia. 52001 JOB LOCATION 1672; Central Ave. Dubuque Ion=~a ARCHlTEC7 DATE OF PLANS JOB PHONE We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: • Wire building complete `with 2-200 Amp ~r0 circuit panels,-and- required- number circuit bra?~ers. First .floor ~~~ill be f_or CommericaJ_ use. Second floor ~~ill be for residential use. Third. floor E~~ill, be for storage. a.ll the above wired per City electric code. P rD1p~q~P hereby to furnish material and labor -complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of: Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred. T~,~enty Eight ~ 00/100- doliars($ 1-x,325.00 ~ Payment to be made as follows: Fift P - ~ ~ ~~ All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a eorkmanlike / y ~ `r / =~ pj manner according to standard practices. Any alterations or deviations from the aboce ~~ , /~ ~/ specifications involving extra cost wilt be performed only by written agreement and will be Authorized , ~ ~ ~ ' j,' ~ an ectm charge over and above the proposal amrnmt. The costa of materials in thin pm_ •"•'„"f °"!~ Signature ~ posai are based bn COata to the contractor as of the date of this propocat, any increases w ~- in cost of materials to the contractor after date of proposal kilt be additional costs over and shore the pmuosed smouut and will be borne by the party accepting the Proposah all Note: This proposal may be 3 ~ ' agree~uents contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control Owner is to Withdrawn by us if not accepted within days. carry fire, tornado and other necessary iuanrnnce. 'Our employees are fully covered by ~lxt~erir~ ~~ i r~~l~~~ -The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized Signature to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Date of Acceptance: Signature American Twust '""`"`°` Simply better banking.' "~`"' 4730 Asbury Road P.O. Box 938 Dubuque, Iowa 52004-0938 563.589.0868 Fax 563.582.5276 ppfohl@americantrust.com www. americantrust. com Paul A. Pfohl Vice President Commercial Banking President's Club Member June 26, 2008 Rich Neuses Lenz Monument (R & K Rocks, Inc.) 1672 Central Avenue Dubuque, IA 52001 CC: Dubuque Historical Society Dear Mr. Neuses, Per our analysis of your request to renovate and refurbish the three-story structure adjacent to your business at 1672 ~/z Central Avenue, we believe it is not economically feasible. Our opinion is based upon the following information and proposals: Davis Construction -Renovation proposal $182,070.00. Uhlrich Electric Co. -Wiring proposal $17,328. Total $199,398.00 In addition, you would need to budget for HVAC and plumbing work that we estimate in the $30,000.00 to $40,000.00 range, bringing the total cost in excess of $225,000.00. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve a positive cash flow from the property if the majority of those funds are borrowed. Furthermore, the purchase and rental market have seen some contraction in recent months, leading to potential vacancies. To further illustrate our point, we reference the letter that you received from the Iowa Department of Revenue stating that as of May 29t" of this year, they are reducing the assessed value of this property from $42,500.00 to $17,500.00. It would appear that the lot would have a similar value and therefore they are acknowledging that the building has very little value, if any. Please call or stop by if you have any questions. Best garde, ,~ aul A. Pfohl Vice President -Comm rcial Banking Iowa Department of Revenue www.state.ia.us/tax TO: Richard & Kathy Neuses Notice to Property Owner as to Assessment by Board of Review Section 44I.3S - 441.39, Code of Iowa You are hereby notified that the Board of Review of Dubuque County/City, State of Iowa, on the 29~' day of May, 2008 authorized the following changes in the assessed value of your property described below: Parcel Number: 1024266002 Property Address: 1672 Central Avenue Original Class: C New Class: C Original Assessed Value 42,500 New Assessed Value 17,500 _ Value of above described property to remain unchanged for the reason stated below. xx Value of above described property reduced for the reason stated below. _ The Board of Review has increased the value of your above described property for the reason stated below. The Board will hold an adjourned meeting on the -day of - , 2008, at - m. at the following meeting place: -- at which time and place you may appear and state your objection to such increase if you have any. (Section 441.36, Code of Iowa) Reason for Action of Board of Review: THE DUBUQUE CITY BOARD OF REVIEW ACTING ON THEIR OWN INITITATIVE REDUCED THE PROPERTY VALUE BASED ON THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF CURRENT MARi~T CONDITIONS. The Board of Review has taken final action on your above described property, and will adjourn May 29, 2008. Appeals to the Property Assessment Appeal Board may be taken from the Board of Review action within 20 days after the postmark of this notice or you may bypass the Property Assessment Appeal Board and appeal to District Court. (Sec 441.37A, 441.39 Code of Iowa) Appeals to District Court may be ±aken from the Board of Review action z~s~ithin 20 days after adjournment or May 31, whichever date is later. (Sec 441.38, 441.39 Code of Iowa) Signed: Clerk of said Board of Re iew NOTICE: In odd number years the following assessments aze subject to equalization pursuant to an order issued by the director of revenue. The county auditor shall give notice on or before October 15 by publication in an official newspaper of general circulation of any class of property affected by an equalization order. The Board of Review shall be in session from October 15 to November 15 to hear protests of affected property owners or taxpayers whose valuations have been increased by an equalization order. You may file a protest from October 16 to October 25 if your property valuations have been adjusted by the equalization order. 56-066 (02/16/07) Dubuque County, IA ~beaconTM Date Created: 8/7/2008 Summary ParcellD 1024266002 --_ _ '~ Alternate ID 4-1-31-2 -" _ - ,~ r,_y i ' Property Address 1672 Central Ave ~ d ,-r~ Sec/Twp/Rng :~•-~' Brief Tax Description S 41'- NM 1/5 OF CITY LOT 441 (Note: Not to be used on legal documents) Deed Book/Page 08-06463 (05072008) ~ ~` • Contract Book/Page N/A Iowa Land Records Gross Acres 0.00 Net Acres 0.00 Class C -Commercial Taxing District DUBA -DUBUQUE CITY/DBQ COMM SCH Click to Enlarge School District DUBUQUE COMM SCH Owners Deed Holder Contract Holder Mailing Address Neuses, Richard C & Kathy J 1672 Central Avenue Dubuque IA 52001 Land Neighborhood # 710 Land Data -Card 1 Square Footage: Tvpe Sa.Feet Primary Site 4100 Commercial Buildings Commercial Building -Card 1 Building Number 1 Structure Type Downtown Row Type Year Buiit 1876 Identical Buildings 1 Number of Units 0 Quality Grade 4 Levels Use Area (SF) Heating A C Ext Wall Int Finish Construction 01 to 01 83 840 Unit Heat None Brk/Stone 100 Wood Joist 02 to 02 81 840 Unit Heat None Brk/Stone 100 Wood Joist Bi to Bl 86 840 None None None 100 Wood Joist Building Other Features Structure Code Measurement-i Measurement-2 Identical Units SF1 21 1 1 1 Commercial Outbuildings Commercial Outbuildings -Card 1 )escrintion Size uanti Year Built Phvs. Cond. Func. Util. Grade ValuE 'Ci 1000 SF 1 1920 2 3 ~4 $1,20( Outbuilding Total $1,200 Sales Sales -Card 1 )ate Tvne Price ~ Validi )5/07/2008 2 $11,000.00 I S 0 Valuation 2008 2007 2006 f + Assessed Building Value $6,800 $31,800 $31,800 + Assessed Dwelling Value $0 $0~ $0 Assessed Land Value $10,700 $10,700 $10,700 ~+ Exempt Value ~ Gross Assessed Value $ 17,500 $42,500 $42,500 _ - Exempt Value _ ~= Net Assessed Value ~ $17,500 $42,500 $42,500 Taxation ~- ~--- ~_ _ - ~ 2007 2006 ~+ Taxable Building Value ~ $31, 715 $31,800 Taxable Dwelling Value _ _ $0 _ $0 ~+ Taxable Land Value $10,671 $10,700 Gross Taxable Value $42,386 $42,500 Military Credit $0 $0 ~~ NetTaxableValue $42,386 $42,500 Levy Rate (per $1000 of value) 34.44675 _ 34.39741 I~ Gross Taxes Due $1,460.06 $1,461.89 ~, Ag Land Credit $0.00 $0.00 _ __ _ Family Farm Credit $0.00 $0.00 ~- __ _ _ __ _ Homestead Credit $0.00 $0.00 DSC Credit _ $0.00 $0.00 Net Taxes Due $1,460.00 $1,462.00 Pay Property Taxes Click here to enter the County Treasurer's web site. Special Assessments Tax History fear Due Date Amount Paid Date Paid Receipt ?007 March 2009 ~ $730 No 32915( _ September 2008 $730 No ?006 March 2008 $731 Yes 03/27/2008 27196; September 2007 $731 Yes 09/25/2007 Photos D~SCfiptu ~'~~ ; qft ~~ 2sBRlBFULL ~0 Show Deed/Contract Show Deed/Contract View Map View Mau No data available for the following modules: Residential Dwellings, Residential Outbuildings. Click here for help. Disclaimer; The information in this web site represents current data from a working file which is updated regularly. Information is believed re/iab/e, but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. No warranty, expressed or implied, is provided for the data herein or its use. Last Data Upload: 8/5/2008 3:46:55 AM ~~ developed by The Schneider Corporation Schneider www•schneidercorp.com Indexing Name Search Indexed Instrument Display i _ -- ~~~ ~'~~ Dubuque County, /owa ~~,~ _ ~ Kethy F/ynr~ Thur/ow, Recorder ~~o~ Page 1 of 1 Indexing File Number Search -Indexed Instrument Display Print Page Search criteria: File Number 200800006463 For GENERAL For All Party Types on Thursday, August 07, 2008 4:41:49 PM GENERAL Valid From 01/01/1988 Thru 08/06/2008 Index Type: GENERAL Date Filed: 05/08/2008 Time: 03:40:18 PM Document Date: 05/07/2008 Doc Number: 2008-00006463 Kind: COURT OFFICER Scan Pages: 3 Amount: $1 DEED Parcel Num: 1024266002 City: DUBUQUE Subdivision: OUT LOT Unit: Block: Lot: 441 Comment: S41' NM1/5 SUB OUT LT 441 Description Not Warranted: GRANTOR -Record(s) 2 LENZ, EDWARD J ESTATE LENZ, MARY BARBARA ADMINISTRATOR GRANTEE -Record(s) 2 NEUSES, RICHARD C NEUSES, KATHY J View Image 1 Document(s) Found Document 1 of 1 Use of this site means that you have read and agree with the following Disclaimer. Copyright 2001 ©Cott Systems. Inc. All rights reserved. Site developed and maintained by Cott Systems, Inc.. For questions or comments on this website send email to . http://www.dbeco.org/resolution/indexing/idx instrument display.asp?IDRecord=0&Ind... 08/07/2008 IplJUN. 2.21~08g y11 ~ 33RM:~6~D13Q COUNTY TREASURER Iltclude fJa~ ~'~'~' w~h 11I~N0.618tid,V~~.1~~1 ' Dubuque Caunc~~'l'i°~snrer 20Q6 CT Ilubu ue Cou11Ey Tre:i~urer Zt)trb t."1 720 Central Avrnve 720 C,enlrel Av@nUg I7uGuque IA 5$001 Dubuque IA 52oD1 t?tsaw~ (SCs31~5$g-443fs Phone f,36S~S$9.44~G Tag due: I+ittl Year ~er 2007 or ~ep>teml Tnx i~>ue: lYlarch ~,OOS ~3,~6'~.t?t~ ~ ~ 32..C?t1 ~a20 pQ I~i4eres#: ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ . fl Q Trlterest: , d 0 a Costs $a . Qfl f'alrj: $1t 462.00 4. ~0 ~os~s: $'731.0(:} b~/2~P2t7t17y'~tld; . ~`~31.44 43f2'3f2~4~ t~fl~: $ a . o ~ $ a . a o I~ue. ~ o . ~ 0 5..5?1r6~, ~~ibdAR.'~ 3 1672 VENTRAL AVL flUIiLJQtlE IA ~2flfl1 >Z,13D~tA~ I 11}72 CENTRAL AVE DTJBIJQ[IE IA. 52U01 ltecei. t: 271963 Dies: DUBA Falcel: 1t12426GflQ2 iteceipE:271963 I1igt: T,3IJ13tt P1Ir+:eL' 1(124266()(12 Year:~t]i76 Yei~t: 2flQ6 Dubuque luounty TAX S for S~~''7~PIi, 2007 laid N~[A~C~, 200. It;ee~ a sraf~~Eac~ Send (tie aortae( 9T1i6B ai.ong rviih your eIlt; ck fog paFm~ai_ If youz 1s~s paid 1~~ your Banl~ in Bsrr+iw, this is felt dour illfi'irliott only. . a.. ~....~ .._ ._.- .v __`--'--_n,nnsy ..J.s xrt„~..6 ~1,nrY4Y P T~i~itFarcel T~tI'DA 1024Z66t)02 ~ ~1TY OF )]UDUQU~ A Recaipt# 271963 T,ypa: 2904 CT Lpedion; 1872 CENTRAI. AVB [: Daecl: L rlfiT~, BDWARIa J E I. [..again 3 41'• NM 1JS CF CITY I.C3T Aft! `t AJLUA`IY[}N5 AIdD TAB: ~(}[j~ .~'~'lygg ~`~'~ e~rUUS ~eaS~ YQ;aP~ A A~S~dd T 1a AE~ew$ed Taxahlo t, t.wrl:. lni7na 1.04700 LI BuYtdu~: 31,844 3x,800 ZnFormation abaui: lent A I7walhn~; 4 - year is net available Y' T®'If~iL VALi711;~: der 3Qtr 6~',_8W fns t~E~e P~ra~i _ - [ I.~ess MiliNnY c4~dit ~ D C,} Otlner Bxomptian: IV riTL~r T`A~AilLE VALUE: 4!a sac ~ ,~ao u b ,I Vaiua'lfm~ LnVy ~si6 oA 34 , 3473600 D. D---00- B~UALB tl1iQ9B TA7C OF $1 ~ 451.8 9 $- • 110 T Less rtndits nF HnmaWid @-.-o $-.D0 A L,nv-IneoeuelSldert5' Crttlit 94.04 60.00 AgL~dCntdit: 9a,4a ~-.aU E Fetusly Fsna ~eniit: ~ 4, Dn 9U.4A ~ Piegr:id Tax• 90. a4 Muir LIiNZ, ED~t1It13 ! IldI?: N D 13 t N G o Dom; LENZ, EDWARI)1 N D11HlJt~[1F? IA 5201)1 IE ~ f'~lleP~': 5'lute TeX Relief acre deducted frrnn Tex: ~ 4 ri , ~ r, DtsirltzuHon of YOURtainrentyeerbnaeF: TOTAL properly eaxon Mini ny insien;avthor(tyn TaYlog Auihariiy: e/a of iptsi K'e1~ year '2004 Last yoar 2t10~ Th6 ysmr Laet year I•~nl+/. UU13Uf,~UT3CUMM.SCHCIUT. 47,7p48 697.d5 i7t699~1.i.i :fL,4ls,4)5 f~..~~.' srITYOFI)LI$U{1UE 20.8@3& 438.50 17tg$3r6fiH 1t',,4tn't,iititS h.l'ti CC>LiIVTlrLEVY 18.6~At 273.16 21E511~9H2 ,'tl,:'8tE4h! h, Ea 41 1dIC:CABL+A1 1.7i33~ 26.0E QE$44r'!7', E~QlN,'ti i 's.hti: ' CITY ASSSSSDR . 9t:n18 13. ~3U 553 ~ il'! 4 ~! 1 r h9 t ! 1 1 . 1 N C:{iUN7'YHO~RP12'AT. .7~91f 71-17 77~J~12'1 7E9,7E;'t _,'I~Jfj A[3FXIC)NtyFF3f;L .115 1.65 112,6GH 11:, i7ti .::~sd 'I'.13. dt 73RUCELLt)SL5 E . 0.08 .15 1 U, "67 I 1 . 4. f, i t1. 14 4 T`~?T•~~': 1 4'E~. tt~ t?. dQ 82. SQ1'= 1.~7 _ 77.88.753 d'. X33• _ Y+tJU MAY FAY QNLII+IE AT: 'I~t~w i~>xtr~et~crtrer"~ org Your Tax Remelt Nunib~' is: 20Ut~ 271 ~~~ l3u6uque Cotmtg Tt'~9uceY Due my ficl:iatther xR07 $731.011 Duo In March 200$ $tl.llil Rric Stiormmt 7Zilt.'rntrulrivemaa aMC- ~~~~~f~~~ --- a~~+ps: ~~~~~~t~r~' _._.._. _. I7ubuquolA ~2UIY1 !'hone (563)589-8436 eneete+7 ~necua ~et44ilt fills (ewer Eioition Ivr pour rcaolvts. tenter ~e elnie prefel n1tTi yunr cltet4r l>'.luntnerior yotttr!ltYornlagnan. 1€eeli ]le n steY~` ~t ttc+:. `~ / {r'JUN. ~. ~Q08'°' 11 ~ 33AM~"'"C'DBQ COUNTY TREASURER JHl4~1 aVUV w ~ TT4 i . trEr:curat< uccs u i uaa vvtdsn .et1trrsNQ. 618if "~'~`t', 2/~4 , Dilbug ue ar'ounty Trertst7rt~r 2tIQb t•`~ -•v tltll.J A ldNM t{jHV ~rtc StietYn~n Eric ~i~iexwan P~'Y1 GtYrG~L r4u7rutr 'TZKT CotsAid e~lvartua Llubuquo IA 52001 j3ubutltte IA 52Q01 I'ItonQ (563)SR~-44.3b Phano (563)585-4436 Tag I~ue: T+uli Year pr ,~~p~em~er ~Q07 'I'mo II~i~I tl~arch 20Q~ $778.00 x$$9.00 ~~$9.t)0 Interest: $ 0 . ~ 0 $ t7.0 Q Interest: $ 0.0 0 L'osts: $ 0.00 ~ 4.0 Q G'oftg: ~ 0.0 t) Piesd: S~'~'lt;1,44~ $36.9.Ct~1 Q9(25/244'I>Q $3£39.4Q Ck31~1<24tzB Dtte: $ a. o o ~ o, o t~ ~Iae: ~ o. o 0 LENZ, NiO1VUMEI~tT ~C1 INC LLB, MONtJMFN't' CO 11VC 11372 CENTRAL AVE 1G72 ~CBNTItPs]-• AVL~ DU)~Ut,~UL !A 52001 pLTBtTQT~ IA 5201) I It~treipt: 271965 Dist: DUBA ~arael: 1(17~425~i~01 Rerei t: 271965 lliat:l~UBA Puruel: it1242664t1t ' ~ Yewr: 2005 ~06 Ytar: c~m~'r~x ~~'v ~~;~~, ~~. ~, ~~as. s~~ ~= t? ~~~ ~,~nt~. s~Ilt~ the ~ ~>n>3s ityUll~ with. ycttlr e11 fir ~aysntsatt. If your are plaid by your Eas11s iIl Escrow, thi8 is for your information only, 1~ Est ]an 120f1G 1• h ltiily ~ 2007. )~a able ienzb r 2 U'7 and March 2tlil~ P i)ist/('rt~l L~ia}3A I DZ$266901 GTTY OF DIIBLTQ[7S Q Rcecipt~/ 27Ig6S Type: 2aa~ CT L.naatian: 16'72 ~1 Tit~L A~ eta: c C I9and: LL~N2., MUNUNtENT Cia INC Mail: L13NG, Mt3NUNII;N'1' C:t) INi_` R ~ l.cgsr: S 4l'- NM 11S t}F ~[TY I~}T q41. k3LI7Cr (lN L.>3A~FJ] LAND ~ AL't7A'°I1iJ1~3 A]3bTA'~S: ZQ11iC ~s Y@AY'~ ~IIO~ ~~S1f Y~dL'~ A Assessed Tnxrabio A~ns~ed ,Taxable L i.md: 4 n U Buddu.gs: 22,6Q~ 22,600 information about last Ihvell~tkl;: year is not ava11ab7.«~ 'S'C~4'lsi,yls3.1i31ES5: 22."at'IS 2S~~t'3 S~ar c~r.4~ ~gtwt.- Luaa Miliksy Crodii n 0 t]iher Rxemp4c+n: t] 1~' ~~ 3 ~lalue Titncs LGVy Raw at': t3c~uAZS t;ACSSS TAX nF ~+ i.GtaL'TOdnanP 1'~omcTa~rt' p Lew-IncamrlElderly L'radtt~ Ag Lsnd tir«lu: ~ I+~nily 1~arm t:7Cdi1, s ~e s d •r ~ P tt x ~ } ~ y ~ ~ Yl'L8 Y TI~VI'~lY 1F31111.'1• IlHI1l~iNG': N D i3 !L P~'r6klC ¢ 8 .34736CS0 n. nnnnnon O Dffi~: ~777_~e ~n.an ~tl.au ~n.on ~ ~U.00 2rt.40 N $n.nn eG.Un Yfii en.ntl ~ y'79~3 . tA4! ~S'+...~ L~i2, N1U1'V[JM1~..N'I' Ctl lNi: 46'32 Ci.R3'TflF~i~ F~'3'E. L~UBUQtTl; IA 52001 . ~ Sin1a Tax Relief adtendy dedutaWsi from Tnx: ~ _ a . a t UiPtrf6ulinn oPYtUUl7acrrent}metnx~: TOTAL+RrpP~Y ~:a IcYled by inshig uattmrity: Ta=tag AutltoNf~: e.Sa aP ytlal Titlr gate 20D6 trnpiyesr X008 Tht- y~+P i,nst year 1•nt +~ IaUBUQTJECOMttq.5CE1(lOL d7.708tf 371.15 37,Bd8,'I33 i:s,43i.dt'r h.,'4. ~ITYt)F1]U13UQU13 29.484 233.36 17~923,ti51t lE,,gtlt,ttt~tl f~,l~l COLINTYI.EYY 1B.fB4~ 145.36 21f611r9E12 !tt~:!6'T~at~'! h.t~.i~ NSGC AREA j 1.781$ 1.86 flr569r 775 9, d1H,. 11.3 ~_ b3i_ CITY A$SBSSt~Ft . 9~G$r 7.34 553, .il 7 q ~) ! , hq ! 1 1 .1 n , 4`UUNTYHC)fiPTCAL .763# b.99 770,7?7 ~a~.t,7h'1 .~. t~tr AGL}CFEIwiBLOPIOFFIL'Li .11.2h _0Z ~ tL2T664t t i. ~, t7kc !4k T,fl•&HRt7~ELLU5I3E .altJer .08 ln,yr~! 11,4:t~ 1~~.14? '£~'f1+;~: '1'T8 l1D O.DO S2 8DI 127 77.88,753___ 6_2Q3 '!'~t7 MAY PAS' €~l~l'L,1NE AT: ~ut~ui~wca~t`~r~rers-vrg Your Tax Receipt Numhcr is_ 20U6 27 t ~~,5 Ila6ngge ~.bttuty Ttc;isarmr Duels itey+tainha 2007 $3719.00 llue in i~at ~h 2UU8 $it.0t1 Btic ~t Y~iS{.''etfn311i~i'd1U0 ~9m8818: t',93'~~,~S~i 7 1la4sP~dt _ Q~.LiLG~.-----.•- •-- 1]ubuque IA 52041 Pltone(3S3)5S9.-A436 ched~d _,...___ cnecutt---- .. ._.. -- Retrtftt tihtislu~or poy#I+an tatryuur rurmc+i8. TShfeP471g date prtfd ahel,yanr cltet~t IiWltlbCi SOY pOfirltuform:ati4a. I{eep in n stafe ~4aer. !'JUN 2.204~8r~ 11 ~ ~4AM'~D13Q CQUNTY TREASllRER ) ~ ~ ' Lr~cuaree cr€E~s• ~ ~ u~ ~f~ara ~Ea~~,(Q. 618tgy~zP.3r4 _ ~ 2t111~ ~~1 ' I uuualuc+..uwt+,y E curoalla:l 1liUa Lra I~tjb11 ttt~ ~ 0lllit~ T ratsl uric StieTtn4T1 Erie ~R~eraa~tn t'emYat Avenue TZQ CeuTrat AvBS1lIB Du6uquelA 52a0t BUGpgil®L4 5200! Plmne (56~}589-4436 Pho~ (563}589.4436 Tax l~ts~: I'arlI Yeas yr ptEmhEr 2006 T~.t I~t~E; . l~'[areh 2007 ~741~.D0 ~373.DD $373,00 Interest: $ D. D D $ a. D 0 IntES~st: ~ a. D O hosts: $ to . to o $ D . D D hosts: - $ D . a o i~~d: ~~~6.t3~ $3`33.353 4~f~~f~ 44~'$`tli~3: ~3'I3.{!4 43~2.8~244'1 I~ltsee: $ Q. t7 Q $ D. 0 0 IDtte= $ fl. 0 0 LEAt~* MOI~f[TivlENT ~tl Il}IC 1672 CENTRAL AVE i]UBUQUB IA 524()1 tteceipt: 220fs29 I~i~,t: DUBA Pagel: 102426901 Ycar: 2005 LI3N2,1111C11tiitJNlEIVT CCi INS 1672 GBNTRAi.~ AVM DitBTJQUE IA Sgt}OI RECet t; 22U629 t~tE;i; t?1J'~A F'mrcel: [UZ4Zb69t)I Y~ar:~Qt)~ ~r~~~at1~e ~~tttl~ "~1~,~ ~3 i't}~ ~~1~~~~~~~h a1d~ 1'V#.A~t.CI~., zl)!b?. 3Ce~ i~ a .ea~'~]7tar~ ~entti the correct stttl~s tilon~ iih yr~t,3T ~h~1C ~i33` ~yltt~.t L~'your mixes are paid I:+y yaur Balls Sri. Ir.4CTC1W, this i5 ~'pt• yolxt i~1.f;Qrmaliar~ r~rlly. - - - - - .- -. - A Roaeipt#t 22ti62'~ T~s: 2g45 Iy7,` d` L L I~o3>a©n: 1G72 ~F.t~1'I~AE A~13 >5~d: I~13N2, MONUA41rN1' CO TNC Gtr: C Msii:1.~1V:'~r Mt)NUMI:tV'1' Ct31Nt: [.e8o1: 8 4t'° NM 11S qF CTTY LO1' 447 - I~LDG taN I..EASED LAND Y-ALUATit~iVS AND TA7a'l~,: 2d0~ {Tliut3 YES!'} 2004 ~a5t Year) A rLCg~.95at# Tsxdbio As~sosaod 'Taxnblo L Land: Q 0 0 8 t1 Buddmgs: ?$rSht3 $rlr4U8 2U„?UO 3ar500 A llwnllur5: h h b U ~~ "C4,Y1'ii,'13'P.S: R7:,s4~ 23,99 24,599 29r5~9 I Last NfiGtary crestir n 0 t) CSIha•Bmaagtian: IV tYL~'I'Z'E1T-ABL.L~F'RLUR; 82r60Q 82r4QH F6rbQQ $OrbQU ,y' Valua'T1masLevyRakou$ 33.30428bb 3F.UB764U0 EttilALp GRt7S~ TAX tyF: X746.28 9557.8U T LcasCt~,uni' tt4mosrma: sh.ha ~a,na ~ Law-lnusmrllSld~ly f,'rocjit: $a.4h s~0.t1t! ~~ AgL~,ar.,~11, kn.ua $o.oQ R Family Fetm l;l~tC Sh, hh $U. UO I're~aid't'sx 8U.0U t§~' 1*a'tit~ii~AL'f~i"45.3: $7 $S . a~ X55'6 . flo 1Nl~t~(Nt=: N D IL !~ 7t N 4 U 19 1.,HI+T~, M47NUI~NT Eta II~I~ 'W 76'2 ~E l~L A~ N I3UBLTt~iJ~ Ili 52001 ~ ~~~: S14LoTax~iicfalroadydcdu~~tedlinnaTax: M ".'1'r DlaiNbutlon of YbTIR cnls~eniycaP mxt~. TQTAL pi`tlpcltl' ulnas! Bc~let4 by Iu~lnS 4wtllorilyl T~xlns Authos9ty: % of tnlnl Thla yoaa~ 24105 Lnstya$r x004 TttEl yassr 1.•rat }veer [`a•rpsat•F, Dtit~~Jit~LtS CDMM. 8CHQQI. 47.519 396.73 303.59 394 fl33, 475 3_' i ~? L f,'_t~iz kf _h~1 G1'iYt7F1?j11~tIQtJE 24,9569 223.55 198.84 i6, 414,6;ia irs,l'r!1,lulta 1,4;~c f:{3TJNTY 1,[;Vy 18.53A4 138.41 129.7E 2Ur280, l t4 ^(1,116, (111 .l11 E D1ICC AREA ! 1. E3a@• 13.851 ~ a, .pl 4 ~ 42 8, /Z ~ ~ , ~'l.b, 12 to ~. lb! CITY A3Sfi53t)R .9041$ 5.77 6.65 497, 8''it1 fi+91 r ~~a4 H . t r' cUUlvT~t;nsPi'TAL .7(3t38 s.eK 4.79 75D,1G5 ~i7'l,'ald 1 1.41r ~i ~T~E~~~ ~~`. . }.linu~ . ~~, . ~.~. ~i12, r ~$ .39 } ~4-, ~ S ~tr4S S , S'St T.B. St BRi7CBLLCtSt~ 13 . ai2@ . (19 . 4H it r 4.:G 11 r''. a.' . •!! '~t~TA31S: 7~~.0o tilis.ao ~~.~~~ 88~. 7~1.5~~.5a4 4.541 _ T.J~AYPA~ t~NI~II~tEAT: w~v.~taw~rr~~arer~nrg Your Tex Receipt Ntunbar is: x,005 220fi29 Retadp this ianver ~toe#1on Por yonr t5cortls, bh$nr the (hate itl iltld your alaea~ mm~Tc~r fot yo5a' Enioc~nmt$nn. l~ep tIl w sltfo ~~ca:. UN 2. ~~08`y 11' 3SAM`...,,"bBQ COUNTY TREASURER Tr_..~~._. ..v _ ,.. ~, ; `••""~`°` `"•~' " ""•• • •". N0.61$~` '°`P. 4~4 ~(a{i5 l)'I' ~-ubugae County Trensar~r , ... .._ Eric Stierm~n I~rft Stlo~sn ago t~~2 ~!} ?2t) t~ttrdt ~iovntra Uubuquc IA 52001 1]uhuquo IA. 52001 Phone (S63)S$9-4436 Phone (Sb3)584.~~6 Tax duo: Fu11 Fear or ~~ptt~ber 2006 'Tax l~ue: IO~arch 2007 $a.,~~4.oa ~~o~.oo $7o2.oa Interest: ~ Q . Qo ~ O . o o Interost: $ 4 . Q o Costs: ~ 4 . ~ ~ ~"~d: ~l t 4a4 , oo ~ o . Q 0 Costs: ~70~. oo a~/zs/2ao6p~t: ~ 0.O ~ $702. oo a~/2a/2ao~ Due. ~t~.~Q ~©.oo i~ue, ~o.oo LENZ, EDWARP~ d 1 G72 CENTRAL AVE L~UEUt~uE lA 52Q01 I~cei t; 22~b~7 Disc: DUI-IA Parcel: 1t124266Ut}2 Ycar:~0U5 LENS, EDWARD ~ 1C'12 CEN'T'RAL AVE DIIEU~UE IA ~2{1tli ~ecei ~: 22~Ca27 Dist: pT;]I~,S P~n:C1; I{I~4~~S6tli)~ Ycar;~005 D~br~r~ Ca~et~2!•y ~'A~Y ~IL1~.•!'aar ~~`~~ ~l1~ ~n€~ ~4t~tv'~', ,~~}7. IL~e,~r r~ ~,~,~'~: ~~ ~h~ ~r~~t ~t~~s ~~r~a~; with your cht~lt For paylnen~ Ifpour t sre g$id Irk ytlT,~ Est ~ _ R tiTi~ Fs for yo~i° ~`~~~~~ o€~Iy- _ _ _ ~.....y ~ en n. __. _.-,__~_ netetr _._.s A6a R..f fas,[y^T A 1~eceigt# 22t1fi27 Typ®: 2409 T}T I.acstiui7: IG'J2 CEI~Tn,AJ~ AVT< Cla~.a; C R C U~d: I.ENZ, ED11tJA1tD J Mail; I.I;NZ. TsI3WAltLi J B L.. I,dgAI: S 41'- NM Its UN C{TY 1AT q41 9J~3i,tfr32ff1}l1L9~#Ait"i' 5': ~ ~~$iS ~P,.BY~ ~•1~~ ~A~~ ~B~I'~ lND.1VG. A Aae Ta~mble ABaes Table N L Land: tn.7pd 1{1,6Q9 9,7pp e,7an Il , lVl 13ult~tngs: 31 r 8A11 31,53p ZB, 900 20, Sop IL' A t]wolimg: p p n 9 x °C '['CSTALY~LU~'k. 8Zr5a0 82,599 38,600 38,509 J i LoscMi~lnryC4edtt• a p N p othssBxmtpstett: I(; ~ ~$,'~"4'.iStditl aA,. ~4.tt,~~: +t2,5.~4 $4. ,'L3$ $6 ,644 86 ,4.44 +~ Vniuc'Ijtttp~LeYyRsttuf: 93.3p48A0p 32.08754pD U BSS J?T~~ARl~aJ BN~ ~ $i,7IJAL5 cRosS TAIL taF ' $i, d03. di $1,23A.50 }~' , . ~~~2 +~E~ Rc4L a4~ t~kra vP Flrasea.4s~ ~ ~.a~a ~ ;e tt. rm ¢t7, t7tt I+I I~TJFJCI(ZlJ[i IA S~{I{I1 A i,ow.InonmtlBldsglX Ceodtt~ YQ.t}p $O,Oh X Ay,L9edCred,e $p.40 $t).o0 t; lZ 1*M,~Zyn~rmrredrn• s~.t,s, ~O.UU ~ COI~'1: a Pseltaid Tex Span S I*iL+'f A1NPIUAL TA7s'E4: $1~40s.Qt) $j~2~9_aD Stu4e Tact ltetief'elceadlr dedu &t~tt Tax. 59 i . ''~ I I]Intribntlan of Y8I7iteutsut~tyenrtstxrx; 'L'4TJ1L propm4Y taxt~ let4~ by LsxdiB aulhurily: ~'n91aaR Av$Itn,~y; °Ja s~ i31in1 Thla ~mtr ~~AS I~rtztycttr 2{TII4 Tltie yanr l,aa11 yrrr t'~~imt t, T3U~iiQl,1B~";'1114Ad.~i~Iit3f)I, 97,E117~ 671.3E a{i2.9'1 35, 433,A75 .S:,K.'I,:h', H.t~,•1 CITYtIFI~BUQIIG 2~.46'i$ A24.79 :74.21 1fi,A16,639 16, 17h~15oH 1.4'~t *rOUI~tTY LEVY 18. SS4$ 264.94 2:i9 ,'!4 24, 284r 1"19 Stt,115, tI7I . N t ~ Ritt~At~EA! 1.835$ 2`~<77 43,35 9.918.'i[.i q~,~ry.l[ct t. s~,~ CITYA53L+SSOIi. .907@ ]2.79 12.51 4y1,H!sU 541,1}uq tt.l_r lvULINTY Ii08PTTAL .7889 11.4E 9. t11 7fi0, lfi`t v7 t, s! 4 11. d1 < AG F.3GTBT~tiUN OFFICE, .118'b 1 . U6 l . 56 111, 9.i ~~ 7 7 i.: i')tl t. s_+t! T.T3.~.BItUCELLOSISF, .0126 ,17 .15 I1,4?~ [I,~>:i' .:11! ~'~Z'A£~S: Y.:~d~ #ti I.23B.00 77 918.BSI 7~,~3&~,~94r__._ 4.~~1 YQLT MAYPAY ONLINE AT: 1rwT9~B~-wel~t'~r~sur~'s.~r~ YoarTsx Re.~aipt Nt1lt~b~ i~: ZOUS 22U~i27 il~bu~t[~ Ovttnty Tmaagt`e# Duo to ~ettteanfitr X0{!6 S7{l2,i1lI I3urln Murcb 2009 ~U.Iitt ;~t4e ~raartntt Sao ~ ram ~4~?~~~ ~~ ~ . ---~.~i2~? I)ubuqu-.IA 52pt)I Phone 15t~)S$4-tI436 cdtnte ~ , t."hae$ ~ __ _.......... 4w~t~, eTnialvavr:r~trrt4utt 5wr ytxt~ rscortts. STanaor t3te t9uPs l~ti9 ondl ~t?uY check nraanht:r Par your f`rtiitr~tta~.on. IC~rp iu n snfi PI ace. 14. We want the commission to know that we just purchased this property on May 7, 2008. We where under the understanding that the. permit was there when Edward lent died, in Dec. The building is a mess. Mr. Lenz did not have the fiances to fix the problems. Now the problems in the building are huge. The cost facture would be huge. The building would take so much money to fix that we are not able to do so. We just took on this business and are trying to make it work. We have aloan and w®~~d not be able to take on a second or third. We do not feel that renting one apartment would make any income. We have worked here at Lenz Monument and just make enough to survive. We have not taken a. raise since 1998 and hake not taken one yet. We are very hard working people just trying to live. If you do not let us take this building down it would just sit there and rot. We do not want that, We want to make the area nice. This building is a eye sore. If you do not believe. me I invite you to come see for yourself. Edward Lenz's family even agrees. What really bothers me the most is we had the permit, so why would you not issue another. The building has just gotten worse. DEMOLITION PERMIT STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 21, 2008 Property Address: 1672 Central Avenue Property Owner: Richard & Kathy Neuses Applicant: Richard & Kathy Neuses Project: To demolish the building Conservation District: Washington Street Neighborhood Conservation District Landmark: No Funding: No Date Built: Circa 1880 Present Land Use: Vacant Existing Zoning: C-4 Downtown Commercial District Level of Significance: ^ Supportive (Kriviskey 1979) ^ Contributing -Jacobsen 2003) Property History: This is a two-story brick, side gable two-part commercial type plan with stepped sidewalls (21x40, rear porches 21x7, floor elevations seven feet in basement, 13 feet ground, ten feet second). According to Jacobsen, it retains a very early storefront and round cast iron columns and -the storefront lintel is of solid limestone, usually an indicator of a very early (post-Civil War) construction date (Assessor dates to 1876+/-). A patch on the front roof might mark the site of either a dormer or skylight. The upper windows have slightly rounded stone lintels and straight sills. Frank Lenz, marble dealer, first appears across the street, opposite this address in directories in 1875 (as 1655 Central). The Sanborn Map of 1884 places that type of firm here. At that time the building had asingle-story rear porch and there was an octagon frame dwelling on the alley at the back of the lot. The same buildings, along with additional rear sheds along the north property line, are shown in 1891. The 1909/36 map shows a rectangular monument shop in place of the octagon, as does the 1962 map. There is a vaulted roof shop on that site, on a new concrete foundation that is likely the same shop. The other sheds are gone, having been replaced with a raised concrete storage deck. A monument shop is indicated on the 1891-1962 maps. Fred Kinniker, marble dealer, was here in 1880, but F. Lenz was back as of 1883-92, being addressed as 1692 Central. The firm remains in operation today. Mary Enzler ran a grocery along with the firm in 1913. John W. Frohs had a barber shop here in 1925-52. This is a contributing property and includes two buildings, assuming the rear shed is a historical building (the latter is however not noted on the Assessors data). Frank Lenz owned the lot when the block was sewered in 1902. Staff Analysis: The applicant is seeking a recommendation for approval to demolish the building at 1672 Central Avenue. The application explains the brick is decomposing and the roof structure and chimney are coming apart. The applicants explain the building is "falling in" from the roof down and the back porch has fallen off. The application states the building leaks everywhere. The building has not been connected to utilities for approximately 8 years. On June 19, 2000, City Council approved a demolition permit to remove the building at 1672 Central Avenue. Mr. Lentz never acted on the permit and the City of Dubuque Legal Services Department has determined that is no longer valid. At the time when the permit was originally approved, the City Council reviewed demolition requests in Conservation Districts. Since that time, city code has changed and the HPC now serves in an advisory role for demolition requests in conservation districts. The Phase III Architectural and Historical Survey Report identifies the building as being contributing to the potential North Central Avenue Historic District. The applicant has submitted the required supporting documentation for the demolition review process. The applicant has also provided photographs for the Commissions consideration. The following is a summary of the supporting documentation submitted with the application: 1. Estimate of the cost the proposed demolition: The estimated cost to remove the building is $10,000. 2. A report from a licensed engineer, architect or contractor with experience in rehabilitation as to the structural integrity of any structure that the applicant proposes to demolish: Eric Helminiak, Structural Engineer for Durrant has submitted a report as to the structural integrity of the building. Mr. Helminiak's report concludes that, "The porch structure on the east side of the building is a safety concern. Access on, under or near this porch should be prohibited until the porch has been repaired or removed. Based on our professional opinion, it appears that the building foundation is not exhibiting signs of settlement and that cracking in the brick is most likely due to water infiltration. Repair of the cracks should be performed, since continued water infiltration and freeze/thaw action will continue to widen the cracks. The wood roof framing and sheathing and portions of the first and second floor framing are exhibiting signs of rotting and deterioration. It is expected that portions of the wood framing and decking will require replacement due to rotting and deterioration. To determine the full extent of rotting and water damage to the wood framing, partial demolition (i.e. removal of all ceilings would be required". The report in its entirety provides photo documentation and greater detail of the buildings condition. 3. An opinion of the market value and the appraised value of the property by a realtor or appraiser in it's a) current condition, b) after completion of the proposed demolition, c) after renovation of the existing property for continued use, and d) all appraisals obtained in the last five years: a) $11,000 b) $10,700 c) The appraiser has stated to the applicant that similar buildings in the vicinity have been valued at $160,000 and under. d) The only appraisal obtained in the last 5 years is the attached appraisal prepared by Luksetich Appraisal & Real Estate Inc. for the purposes of this request. 4. An estimate from an architect, developer, real estate consultant, appraiser or other real estate professional experienced in rehabilitation, as to the cost to rehabilitate the structure for its continued use: Davis Construction, Uhlrich Electric, and American Trust estimated the total cost to rehabilitate the structure for its continued use to exceed $225,000. In a letter from Paul A. Pfohl, American Trust Vice-President of Commercial Banking, he states that "It would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve a positive cash flow from the property if the majority of the funds are borrowed. Furthermore, the purchase and rental market have seen some contradiction in recent months, leading to potential vacancies." Mr. Pfohl notes that the Iowa Department of Revenue has recently reduced the assessed value of the property from $42,500 to $17,500. Mr. Pfohl states that the "lot would have a similar value and therefore they are acknowledging that the building has very little value, if any. Also enclosed is the Dubuque County Assessor's page which reflects the new $17,500 assessed value for the building and land. The Dubuque County Assessor values the land at $10,700 and the building at $6,800. 5. The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase and the person from whom the property was purchased: On May 7, 2008 the property was purchased from the estate of Edward J. Lentz-Mary Barbara Lentz, administrator for $11,000. 6. If the property is income-producing, the annual gross income from the property for the previous two years: The application states that the property does not produce any income. 7. Itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous two years, and the depreciation deduction and annual cash flow before and after the debt service, if any, during the same period: The application states the only expenses for the previous two years has been taxes and insurance expenses. Net annual property taxes for the previous two years has been $1,460 in 2006 and $1,462 in 2007. Insurance expenses are $825 annually. 8. The remaining balance on any mortgage or other financing secured by the property and annual, and annual debt service for the previous two years: $11,000 was borrowed to purchase the property and an additional loan of $99,000 was made for the business which include the subject property. 9. All appraisals obtained with the previous two years by the owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, financing or ownership of the property: An estimated assessment of the property was completed by American Trust & Savings. 10. Any listing of the property for sale or rent, the price asked and offers received, if any, within the previous two years: The property has not been listed for sale or rent within the previous two years. 11.The assessed value of the property according to the two most recent assessments: The net assessed value of the building in 2007 was $42,500 and in 2008 it was $17,500. 12. The amount of real estate taxes for the previous two years and whether or not they have been paid: Real estate taxes have been paid for the last two years in the amount of $154 and $156. 13. The form of ownership or operation of the property, whether sole proprietorship, for-profit or not-for-profit corporation, limited partnership, joint venture or other: The property is owned by R & K Rocks Inc. 14.Any other information considered necessary by the Commission to make a determination as to whether the property does or does or may yield a reasonable economic return from the property in its current condition, and after renovation of the existing property for continued use: Please refer to the enclosed response. 15. Proof of the applicants efforts to obtain financing, tax incentives, preservation grants, and other incentives sufficient to allow the applicant to earn a reasonable economic return from the property in its current condition, and after renovation of the existing property for continued use: The applicant references the enclosed letter from American Trust. 16.A showing of the applicant's efforts in ongoing maintenance and repair: The application states the property owners purchased the property from the estate of Edward J. Lentz. It states Mr. Lentz "never did anything to the property to repair it. He had applied for a permit in 2000 to have the building removed but never followed through with it. It was approved then by the City Council." The City Code provides for the Historic Preservation Commission to review the demolition request, and then to make a determination as to: (1) Whether the building has historic or architectural significance to the community, and (2) Whether denial of the proposed demolition would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. If the commission finds that denial of the application would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property, or that the building does not have any historical or architectural significance to the community, the commission shall recommend approval of the application. If the commission finds that denial of the application would not prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property, and that the building has historical or architectural significance to the community, the commission shall recommend denial of the permit application. The Commission's recommendation goes on to the City Council for a hearing and final action. Prepared by: ~ ~ eviewed: G'~Q.~ ate: s z o Re.gu[arSession, June 19, 2000'^ ~' 239 Markham moved ~ that the requirementthat a.prapasedOrdinance be .considered and voted on for passage at two Council Meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended .and_ further moved final consideration and passage of the Ordinance. Seconded by Nicholson. Motion carried 7-0. City Manager tecammending approval of.an agreement to purchase approximately 19 acres from Robert D. and Liwja Klauer in Riprow Valley, contingent upon the City .receiving persona! guarantees for any remaining financial obligations toward the purchase of the property; Communication of Jerry Enzler, Dubuque County Historical Society, expressing their support of the Riprow Valley Park Development Project; Communication of Margreet J. Ryan, President of the Dubuque Audubon Society, endorsing development of Riprow Valley; Communica#ioNpetition from the Dubuque Girls Independen# Softball League expressing support for the Riprow Valley Park Development, presented and read. Buol moved that the communications be received and filed and concurred with the recommendation. Seconded by Michalski. Motion carried 7-0. City Manager recommending that a ..request for a demolition permit at iI~Y~ Central be referred to the Historic Preservation Commission and that the permit be withheld for up to ninety days, presented and read, Michalski .moved that the communication be received and filed and concurred with the request, Seconded by Nicholson, No vote taken on the motion. Michalski withdrew the motion, with the concurrence of Nicholson, Michalski then moved to approve the request for demolition immediately. Seconded by Nicholson, Motion carried 7-0, At 7;58 P,M. Mayor Duggan tamed control of the Meeting to Mayor Pra- Tem Nicholson due to potential conflict of interest and left the Chambers. Corporation Counsel .recommending that the fair market value of certain real property owned by Plastic Center, Inc., In the ice Harbor Urban Renewal District, be established, at $1,191,500, presented and read. Buol moved that the communication be received and filed, Seconded by Michalski. Motion carried 7-0: RESOLUTION N0.284-00 ESTABLISHING FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY P)..ASTIC CENTER INC. WHEREAS, the City 'of Dubuque (City) intends tc acquire certain real property owed by Plastic Center Inc. (Plastic Center} shown on Exhibit A attached hereto (the Property); AND WHEREAS, Iowa Cade Chapter 8B, as amended in 2000 by House File 2528, requires that City must make a 'good faith effort tc negotiate with Plastic. Center to purchase the Property before proceeding wrth condemnation; AND WHEREAS, Chapter 66. requires that Cily may not make an offer to purchase the Property which is less than the fair market value City has estabGshedforthe Property; AND WHEREAS, City has caused an appraisal of the Property to be made and the appraised value of the Property is $1,191,500.00. AND WHEREAS, City now desires to establish the fair market value of the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA AS FOLLOWS: 1. The fair market value of the Property is hereby established to be $1,191,500.00. 2. The City Manager and the Corporation Counsel are hereby directed to submit a copy of the appraisal to Plastic Center inc. as required by Iowa Code Chapter 6B and to commence negotiations with Plastic Centerforthe purchase of the Property for a purchase price which is not less than the fair market value established by this Resolution. Passed, approved ahd adopted this 19th day of June, 2000. Terrance M. Duggan, Mayor Attest: Jeanne F, Schneider, City Clerk Buol moved adoption of the resolution. Seconded by Michalski. Motion carried 7-0. At 7:57 P.M. Mayor Duggan then returned to the Chambers and took control of the meeting. City Manager recommending approval of a Development Agreement with Platinum Hospitality Group, LLC, the attached land lease, Minimum Assessment Agreement, and the ~; ;; .: ~} kr ~ ~' t ..j -(. ?~ j ': ~` ~:. ..4,-. ~~ t; ~,•, ,4; '~ ~t F ~~ ,~ a ,~ ' ~' f. __.. ~, ~~ .~4. X. ,~ L'ryj;Y"~ _7 ,~ a 1 j ' ~ ~ i ,, R , .., .~L . ~ ~sr~ri~~eM~~i '; {1 s ~ .: - } ~.. '~ ~ r-: , ~~.=- ~. ~~.`_ f `j",!':' ~ ~ _,,.~~ ~ l,l , _ I ~s y ~ ~~~ 1 ~ ~ S~: .~y F ~ ::~ ~~" ~ 3 ~- f ~ y r~ ~~ ~! a W: 3 i~ ~' l - ~ .- .. r- _ t _- •~ ~ -',7 .i ,~ j~ ~~ l PRESENT: Chairperson Christine Olson; Commission Members John Whalen, Pamela Cleek, Michael Knight, Joseph Rapp, Chris Wand, Matthew Lundh and Bob McDonell; Staff Members Wally Wernimont, Laura Carstens and Rich Russell. ABSENT: Commissioner Mary Loney Bichell. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Olson at 5:32 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. Chairperson Olson introduced and welcomed new Commissioners Pamela Cleek and Michael Knight. MINUTES: Motion by Wand, seconded by Lundh, to approve the minutes of the July 17, 2008 meeting as presented. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Olson, Wand, Rapp, Lundh, Cleek and Knight; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of the Richard and Kathy Neuses to demolish the existing building at 1672 Central Avenue in the Washington Street Neighborhood Conservation District. NOTE: Commissioner McDonell arrived at 5:37 p.m. Commissioner Wand excused himself because his employer, Durrant Group, provided the building assessment. Commissioner Rapp noted he has visited the property and spoke with the owner today. Staff Member Carstens clarified that Commissioner Rapp should state the observation made and information discussed with the applicant during the site visit, so that all Commissioners would have this information prior to making a decision. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 2 NOTE: Commissioner Whalen arrived at 5:40 p.m. Staff Member Wernimont presented the staff report. He reviewed the staff analysis, noting the applicant has submitted all the required information. Fie then reviewed that the role of the Commission is advisory. He explained that the applicant is seeking a recommendation for approval to demolish the building at 1672 Central Avenue. He said that the application notes that the brick is decomposing and the roof structure and chimney are coming apart. He noted that the applicant has explained that the building is "falling in"from the roof down and the back porch has fallen off. He added that the application states the building is leaking everywhere, and the building has not been connected to utilities for approximately eight years. Staff Member Wernimont stated that on June 19, 2000, City Council approved a demolition permit to remove the building at 1672 Central Avenue. He noted that Mr. Lenz never acted on the permit, and the City of Dubuque Legal Services Department has determined that it is no longer valid. He explained that at the time when the permit was originally approved, the City Council reviewed demolition requests in Conservation Districts. He added that since that time, City Code has changed and the HPC now serves in an advisory role for demolition requests in conservation districts. Staff Member Wernimont explained that the Phase III Architectural and Historical Survey Report identified the building as being contributing to the potential North Central Avenue Historic District. He said the applicant has submitted the required supporting documentation for the demolition review process. He said the applicant has also provided photographs for the Commission's consideration. He added that the staff report provided a summary of the supporting documentation submitted with the application. Staff Member Wernimont stated that the City Code provides for the Historic Preservation Commission to review the demolition request, and then to make a determination as to: (1) Whether the building has historic or architectural significance to the community, and (2) Whether denial of the proposed demolition would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. He noted that if the Commission finds that denial of the application would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property, or that the building does not have any historical or architectural significance to the community, the Commission shall recommend approval of the application. He added that if the Commission finds that denial of the application would not prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property, and that the building has Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 3 historical or architectural significance to the community, the commission shall recommend denial of the permit application. He said the Commission's recommendation goes on to the City Council for a hearing and final action. Richard Neuses, 505 Primrose Court, explained his-business is located at 1672 Central Avenue. He is requesting demolition of 1672 ~/ Central Avenue adjacent to Lenz Monument's display yard. He felt the building is structurally unsound. He explained there are braces in the basement. He noted that Commissioner Rapp toured the building today. Mr. Neuses noted the structural defects of the brick, which are obscured by the vegetation in the photos. He noted additional structural issues that Commissioner Rapp pointed out during his tour. He explained demolition will allow him to open up the exhibit space for the business. He noted the front facade will have to be taken down piece by piece.. He will obtain a permit with adequate time for salvaging the facade. He noted a common wall with an adjacent building. He felt the work could be done in 60 days by his crew, who would be bonded. He offered to salvage the historic elements of the facade and reconstruct at 90 degrees. He added that they plan to recycle about 90% of the materials. He noted which elements were of no value, and which elements were of value. He noted his estimate is $200,000 to repair. He noted his new monument sign. Chairperson Olson asked Commissioner Rapp to share the observations of his tour today. Commissioner Rapp noted the cracks are more visible in person and there is a staircase leading upstairs that is sagging. He noted the floor on the third floor is uneven and rolling near the weight bearing wall. He noted additional structural problems with the building. He explained he shared the history of the area with the applicant. He stated he did not see the basement. Commissioner Knight asked about the length of ownership. Mr. Neuses said he has been associated with the building and business for 28 years. He purchased the building in May 2008 after the owner passed away in 2007. Commissioner Knight asked if there was any repair after the original demolition application in 2000. Mr. Neuses explained that the utilities were cut off in 2000 in anticipation of demolition, and there has not been any maintenance. Commissioner Knight asked what has been the use in the past year. Mr. Neuses said the building has been used for minimal storage. Commissioner Knight asked about maintenance of the roof. Mr. Neuses said the costs for rehabilitation of the structure would be quite large. Commissioner Rapp noted the main floor is largely open. Mr. Neuses agreed. He noted that there are problems with the chimney and walls. Chairperson Olson noted the purchase price was $11,000. She noted one option to improve the building is to sell it. She noted that Mr. Neuses had wanted to demolish the building to improve visibility for the Lenz Monument business. She noted ordinarily this is not a valid reason to demolish a historic building. She was not in favor of Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 4 salvaging the fagade and rotating it 90 degrees because it creates a false sense of history. She said the Historic Preservation Commission and City encourage the salvaging of the materials. She noted that Mr. Neuses did not have ownership until recently, so the maintenance was not his responsibility over the past eight years. She added that it is his burden as a property owner to know that the building is in a conservation district with demolition review. She felt this is an unusual circumstance with past demolition permit approval and Mr. Neuses' working relationship with Mr. Lenz. Mr. Neuses said selling the building is not an option because it cuts down on the visibility, and the business needs to survive. He reiterated his desire to salvage the fagade. Commissioner Knight noted he conducted a site visit. He noted there is no sagging evident in the foundation. He said the cost estimate for $125/square foot is the cost of new construction. He noted several local, state and federal grants and tax credits would cover nearly 50% of the construction cost. He felt that with the incentives we can preserve the building which is the only surviving one of this style. He said routine maintenance has been deferred for so long the wood elements are deteriorating. He felt the engineer's report indicates the foundation is sound, and the brick and tuck pointing have been protected somewhat by the paint. He stated in his opinion, there are incentives that would make this a good rehab project. He felt that the reasonable return is different when it's an owner-occupied building with the business supporting the building. He noted keeping this storefront is important to the streetscape. Commissioner Whalen asked Mr. Neuses if the building could be used, noting it could be very attractive. Mr. Neuses said it could be very attractive. He noted the missing buildings on Central Avenue. Commissioner Whalen asked if Mr. Neuses could use this space. Mr. Neuses felt the estimate of $125/square foot is low, and that $175- $200/square foot is more likely. Commissioner Whalen noted this is a small building, and the cost would be lower. Mr. Neuses reiterated the problems the building has. Chairperson Olson noted the importance of maintaining a streetscape of buildings, and the significance of the building in a historic district. Mr. Neuses noted the fagade of the existing Lenz Monument building. He said he would like to reuse the fagade in a newly constructed building. Chairperson Olson asked for any other comments. Commissioner Lundh asked if Mr. Neuses plans to come back with something similar to the existing fagade. Mr. Neuses said he would re-use the fagade above the windows. He also reviewed the concept of turning the wall 90 degrees. Commissioner Lundh said he was. looking at the compromise of re-using the fagade, including the storefront. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 5 Chairperson Olson reiterated having the consistency of storefronts. Mr. Neuses said what's behind the facade is not good. Chairperson Olson said she was in favor of retaining the storefront. Commissioner Lundh agreed. Chairperson Olson noted the storefront could be retained with the building reconstructed behind it. Commissioner Knight stated that based on the construction budget, it is less expensive to fix it than to build new because it comes out to $132/square foot. Mr. Neuses said American Trust will not lend money for the rehab. Commissioner Knight said the incentives take time. Commissioner Lundh noted timing is very important when phasing tax credit projects. Commissioner McDonell reviewed the $10-$12/square foot lease rate for commercial space at this location. He questioned if this was sufficient for a reasonable return. The Commission and Mr. Neuses discussed the purchase price, the assessed value and the appraised value. Motion by Whalen, seconded by McDonell, to recommend City Council approval of the request as submitted. Motion failed by the following vote: Aye -McDonell and Cleek; Nay - Knight, Whalen, Olson, Lundh; Abstain -Rapp and Wand. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of the City of Dubuque for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a new roof on the City Hall building, a landmark located at 50 W. 13"Street. Staff Member Wernimont presented the staff report, noting the types of roof materials being considered are Sunslates, solar electric roofing tiles and EcoStar slate replicas. He noted the original roof materials have not been determined. Building Services Manager Rich Russell explained the process used for selecting the proposed alternatives.. He provided samples of the two roof tiles. Commissioner Wand asked whether EcoStar would be installed on the north side in either case and the Sunslates would be installed only the south side. Staff Member Russell stated this was the proposal The Commission reviewed the samples. Chairperson Olson said nationally, preservationists have turned down the Sunslates tile. She felt however, that it is a sustainable measure, and in the lifetime of the building, roof the is short term and replaced periodically. She noted the asphalt roof is not historic, and Sunslates is a sustainable option. Commissioner Whalen asked about the product history. Staff Member Russell said the company is fairly new, and the technology continues to evolve. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 6 Commissioner Wand noted that the three-story height of the building makes the roof difficult to see. He agreed with Chairperson Olson that this non-historic roof would replace another non-historic roof. He also agreed with Chairperson Olson that this is a sustainable option. Commission Lundh asked about the economic return. Staff Member Russell reported he has not calculated the economic return based on Planning staff's direction that this information was not needed. He noted the EcoStar the will be used if the Sunslates file is not cost-effective. Commissioner Lundh was concerned about setting a precedent. Commissioner Knight discussed that the Secretary of Interior's Standards are more relevant for views from pedestrian-level than the bluffs. Staff Member Carstens clarified that the Commission's decisions are not precedent-setting per the Ordinance. Commissioner Wand noted the Commission has approved pilot projects. Chairperson Olson suggested an educational campaign. Staff Member Russell noted that several views in the packet show it is difficult to see the roof from the street level. Commissioner Lundh asked how visibility from the public way is determined. Staff Member Wernimont explained this was determined from any public right-of-way, including disregarding fences and vegetation. Commissioner Lundh asked about the schedule for roof replacement. Staff Member Russell explained it is pretty immediate, but because of budget concerns, it has been pushed back to October 2009. The Commission discussed with Staff Member Russell the cost benefit analysis of the Sunslates product. Staff Member Russell noted the Sunslates Company deals with residential, and has not been able to .provide answers for this commercial building. Commissioner Cleek asked if there are other companies and can they be contacted. Staff Member Russell said there are and they can be. Commissioners discussed sustainability and appearance of the roof the options, Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to approve roof replacement with the following conditions: 1) The EcoStar imitation slate roof the be used for the north side and Sunslates solar roof file be used for the entire south side (without patchwork appearance). 2) If the City determines the Sunslates is not cost effective, approve the EcoStar tiles for the entire roof. 3) If there is new technology available before the Sunslates product is used, that the City bring back this new technology for HPC review unless the Planning Services Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 7 Department staff determines the new technology is better looking, then staff can sign off. Motion was approved by the following vote: Aye - Cleek, Whalen, Knight, Wand, Olson, Rapp and McDonell; Nay -Lundh. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: Staff Member Wernimont stated that Julie Loft has asked the Commission for direction on changing the improvements from the previous Certificate of Appropriateness for 609-617 Arlington. The Commission directed staff to inform Ms. Lott to submit the necessary application materials for a design review. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Final Revisions to the Historic Preservation Ordinance: Staff Member Carstens reviewed the final draft of the Historic Preservation Ordinance includes additional definitions, reorganization of the ordinance, streamlining of the nomination process by bringing Chapter 11 into Chapter 25 regarding conservation districts, streamline the demolition process, and adding conservation planning areas. Motion by Whalen, seconded by Wand to approve the final revisions to the Historic Preservation Ordinance and recommend approval to the City Council as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Whalen, Cleek, Knight, Wand, Olson, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. Approved Work Order Notice: The Commission reviewed the proposed Approved Work Order Notice draft submitted by staff. Discussion followed on size of the Notice, and whether to use a yard sign or a window sign. Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to approve the Notice of Approved Work Order Notice with the following changes: 1) Change font size and center the text, 2) Add the Certificate of Appropriateness number to the Work Order Notice, and 3) Change the paper color of the Notice each year. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Cleek, Knight, Wand, Whalen, Olson, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. HPC Design Review Drawings: The Commission discussed the options presented and the benefits of establishing a design grant program of up to $500 per grant, using $5,000 from the Historic Preservation Housing Grant Program for income-eligible applicants. Motion by Wand, seconded by Cleek, to approve the HPC drawing design proposed as submitted, using $5,000 from the existing Historic Preservation Housing Grant Program to Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission August 21, 2008 Page 8 fund up to $500 per grant for grant applicants, and ask for $5,000 additional in FY10 CDBG budget. Motion by, seconded by, to approve the request as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Whalen, Cleek, Knight, Wand, Olson, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Building Services Dept. -Status Report on Historic Preservation Enforcement: - 1017 Bluff: Chairperson Olson updated the Commission on the August 12, 2008 work session for 1017 Bluff. She noted the Commission approved the design at the work session. Discussion followed. - 1163 Highland: Discussion was held concerning the status of the. sale of the home. Historic Preservation Commission Bylaws: The Commission reviewed the updated bylaws submitted by staff. Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen to approve the Historic Preservation Commission Bylaws as presented. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Cleek, Knight, Whalen, Wand, Olson, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. Four Mounds Archeological Survey (final): The Commission reviewed the report. Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to approve the Four Mounds Archeological Survey as submitted and forward it to City Council. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Cleek, Knight, Whalen, Wand, Olson, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by, seconded by, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried by the . following vote: Aye -Whalen, Olson, Wand, Knight, Cleek, Rapp, Lundh and McDonell; Nay -None. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted F:\USERS\Kmunson\WP\Boards-Commissions\HPC\Minutes\HPC Minutes 2008\HPC min 08 21 08.doc Aug 27 08 08:33p :~niv.,w........ ® BURY RQD DUBU U, TO 520(}2 A ust 27, 2DO To: Kathy ~ Rich u Market r for 1672 ntrat Avenue 1572 I® 0 SF fl fl ( il) S a r (1 apt) Typical rents for one room apartments in this general rental area range from $300. to X425. per month. Th that are renting in the $425. range are in renavated Cplldition, occasionally have a garage, and usually have most, if not alt, of the utilities included. This in a " n was der'nred t tisti s a sales Dub ue Multiple Listi 'ce and is m ,thou h guaran , to b curate.