Loading...
Minutes_Historic Preservation Commission 8 18 11Dubuque THE CITY OF ii: DUB E '1111.' 2007 Masterpiece on the Mississippi MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 5:30 p.m. Thursday, August 18, 2011 City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building TEN Commissioners Present: Chairperson David Klavitter; Commissioners Chris Olson, John Whalen, Mary Loney Bichell, Joseph Rapp, Chris Wand, Mitzi Krey and Bob McDonell. Commissioners Excused: Commissioner Michael Knight. Staff Members Present: Laura Carstens and David Johnson. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Klavitter 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 Commission noted corrections on Page 3 and Page 6 of the draft minutes. Motion by Olson, seconded by McDonell, to approve the minutes of the July 21, 2011 meeting as corrected. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Olson, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonell; Nay — None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Alfred Kopczyk for a Certificate of Appropriateness (tabled from July 21, 2011) to repair retaining wall located at 1375 Locust Street in the Jackson Park Historic Preservation District. Staff Member Johnson noted the application was tabled at the applicant's request at the July 21, 2011 meeting so he would have the opportunity to obtain bids from a stone company to help evaluate the cost of in -kind materials for repairing the retaining wall. He reviewed the project, the bid obtained as well as the applicant's request to allow cast concrete as an acceptable alternative as noted in the design guidelines. He also noted the applicant is again requesting consideration for an alternative to allow a brick column and ornate steel fence in place of the retaining wall in front of the Ryan House. Alfred Kopczyk, 1375 Locust Street, was present. Mr. Kopczyk distributed a letter from the neighboring Boys and Girls Club and updated the Commission on the position of his insurance company regarding the wall. He noted the Boys and Giris Club as well as his insurance company's preference is to remove the wall. He explained his insurance company would like to minimize the liability that the wall brings and the Boys and Giris Club would like the wall removed to reduce the amount of supervision children need Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 2 when leaving the club. He explained he has met with the Dubuque County Historical Society regarding the wall. He noted the Historical Society has deferred to the Historic Preservation Commission. Commissioner Wand distributed a cost analysis he prepared based on the bid from Becker & Sons Stone Company provided by the applicant, as well as estimated cost of repairing the wall with cast concrete materials or replacing the wall with the brick column and ornate steel fence alternative. The Commission reviewed the project description, alternative remedies and construction materials from the July 4, 2011 application. The Commission noted the Ryan House is one of the most historically significant properties in the city. The Commission explained that after reviewing the cost analysis, the cost to repair the retaining wall with in -kind stone materials is only slightly more than the cost to repair the retaining wall with cast concrete and therefore it would be economically viable to replace damaged pieces with stone. The Commission also noted the cost to replace the wall with a new brick and steel fence is comparable to the cost to repair the wall with in -kind materials. The Commission noted reconstructing the wall around a concrete footing and wall is an acceptable approach. The Commission and applicant discussed the height of the retaining wall and the current grade versus the historic grade. The applicant and Commission disagreed on the approximate historic grade of the retaining wall. The consensus of the Commission was that the finished wall height needs to be consistent with the neighboring property to the north, and that keeping the grade behind the wall as it currently exists or lowering the grade behind the wall are both acceptable alternatives. Motion by Wand, seconded by McDonell, to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to repair the retaining wall with the following conditions: 1. In lieu of using the high strength decorative concrete, similar Farley stone be used where needed; and 2. It is acceptable for the footings and backside of the wall to be concrete. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Olson, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonell; Nay — None. The Commission discussed the concerns of the Boys and Girls Club and the insurance company with Mr. Kopcyzk. The Commission noted it is not the role of the Commission or the applicant to consider the Boys and Girls Club concerns over having to supervise children leaving the building when considering an approach to repair the wall. The Commission noted the Boys and Girls Club should be supervising children leaving the building anyway. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 3 The Commission also explained they appreciated Mr. Kopcyzk's insurance concerns; however, the retaining wall poses no greater insurance risk. The Commission encouraged Mr. Kopcyzk to investigate with the Building Services Department whether a fence would be required to be located on top of the retaining wall. REVIEW OF PRESERVATION ALTERNATIVES: Application of Lynn Lampe for a review of preservation alternatives to demolish the building located at 346/348 W. Locust Street in the Jackson Park Historic Preservation District. Commissioner Olson excused herself from discussion due to the applicant previously offering to donate the property to the Four Mounds Foundation. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report. He explained the application is the second of three applications required to demolish a historically significant building in a historic district. He stated at the June 16th meeting, the Commission denied the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the building, noting that the demolition would have an adverse impact on the aesthetic historic or architectural significance and value of the historic district, and that the building is also historically and architecturally significant. Staff Member Johnson noted depending on the outcome of the request to review preservation alternatives, the third and final step in the process would be to file an application for a Certificate of Economic Non - Viability. He explained this step in the process is an opportunity for the property owner to discuss with the Historic Preservation Commission past attempts as well as current opportunities to obtain financing that would help earn a reasonable economic return on the property. He explained preservation alternatives are financial incentives and restoration alternatives sufficient for the property owner to earn a reasonable economic return. He reviewed various incentives and treatment approaches. He clarified that a reasonable economic return is the point at which a reasonable use or profit can be realized from the property. He explained this may mean just bringing the building up to code, and not necessarily its highest and best use, preferred use, or a complete restoration project. Staff Member Johnson noted the Commission must approve or deny the project. He explained if the Commission feels there are preservation alternatives available to assist the property owner with earning a reasonable economic return from the property regardless of the property owner's interest or attempts to obtain such financing, then the Commission should deny the application. He stated if the Commission feels such alternatives do not exist, the Commission can issue a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the structure. Staff Member Johnson directed the Commission to the various types of districts that have financial incentives that could potentially assist the property owner with repairing the building. Staff clarified that not all financial incentives will necessarily apply. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 4 Lynn Lampe, 11898 John F. Kennedy Road, was present. Mr. Lampe noted he understood there are other resources and questioned how much money would be available to rehab the building. Staff Member Johnson clarified that the staff report merely outlines the potential districts and corresponding incentives and that the applicant's project may or may not be eligible. Mr. Lampe reviewed his experience as a landlord and property maintenance costs. He stated he estimated the cost for doing the work himself and contracting it out, but has not compiled the costs in a written form. He noted the project would be more affordable for him if he weren't required to hire licensed contractors for much of the work. Mr. Lampe estimated a potential monthly rental income of $400 per unit or $1,600 per month would not be adequate to off -set the cost of needed repairs. Staff Member Johnson noted a more in -depth cost benefit analysis is required to be provided as part of the application for a Certificate of Economic Non - Viability. He reiterated the current application and review is simply an opportunity to discuss potential incentives to assist the property owner in fixing the property rather than having to demolish it. Staff Member Johnson noted a report from a licensed engineer or architect as to the condition of the structure is also required as part of the Certificate for Economic Non - Viability. Mr. Lampe again expressed his concerns about the shortage of off - street parking in the neighborhood. He suggested reconfiguring the streets in such as way that parking stalls can be added in front of buildings. Staff Member Johnson noted that the Historic Preservation Commission shared Mr. Lampe's concerns after they were initially expressed at the June Commission meeting and forwarded a letter to City Council requesting the Council consider parking opportunities in the area. Commissioner Whalen noted he has toured the building. He suggested a joint venture with other property owners and the City for off - street parking like in the Washington Street area. He stated he feels the building is a viable structure and can be rehabilitated, but reiterated the importance of a comprehensive planning and rehabilitation approach to promoting investment in the area. He noted the unique tent porches on the building. Commissioner Whalen explained the project may be more viable if the later additions were removed from the rear of the property. The Commission asked if Mr. Lampe has approached a realtor about selling the property. Mr. Lampe stated he has not because he would be tied into a contract and unable to sell it on his own. Commissioner McDonell noted that this is not the typical behavior of realtors in Dubuque and contracts can be made with realtors to allow reduced or waived fees if the property owner finds a buyer for the property. The Commission discussed the Washington Neighborhood partnerships and forming a similar partnership and financial incentives for the West Locust and Bluff Street neighborhood area. Mr. Lampe discussed his concerns with liability and property damage while the building sits vacant. The Commission agreed the area as a whole is Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 5 in dire need of a comprehensive planning and investment approach similar to that of the Washington Neighborhood. They noted that it would require numerous partnerships and a strong commitment to revitalizing the area. Mr. Lampe also noted this process is taking place in the West 11th Street Neighborhood, but the West Locust Street area does not have as many people who are conscientious about their properties. Joseph Noll, 315 W. Locust Street, stated he lives across the street from the property and sympathizes with Mr. Lampe. Mr. Noll explained there are good landlords and there are bad landlords in the neighborhood. He stated that the bad landlords are the source of many neighborhood problems. Mr. Noll asked for the Commission's support for an ordinance which establishes consequences for landlords that fail in their responsibilities. He noted that Chicago has recently enacted such an ordinance. The Commission discussed with Mr. Noll the involvement of the neighborhood association and Safe Community Task Force as well as the recommendations for dealing with bad landlords. Mr. Lampe stated he is vice president of the Dubuque Landlord Association, and noted there are mandatory background checks for tenants. The Commission discussed with Mr. Lampe that there is no requirement on who they rent to nor are there any consequences for bad tenants and general disinvestment in the area. The Commission again discussed a comprehensive planning and reinvestment approach similar to the efforts undertaken with the Washington Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative. The Commission noted investment in the neighborhood would also be consistent with the recommendations of the Safe Community Task Force as well as current priorities of the City. The Commission discussed the preservation alternatives. The consensus of the Commission was that there are preservation alternatives and incentives available and should be explored by the applicant prior to a demolition permit being considered. Motion by Wand, seconded by Bichell, to approve the Demolition Permit. Motion failed by the following vote: Aye — None; Nay — Klavitter, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonell; Abstain — Olson. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Joseph Robertson / Jeffrey Manternach for a Certificate of Appropriateness to add a service door and stairway on the side of the garage and construct an open stairway off of the patio located at 995 Grove Terrace in the W. 11th Street Historic Preservation District. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the application and the previously approved Certificate of Appropriateness for the property. He explained the new service door and stairway is proposed on the south side of the garage, and the service door is needed to provide access to and from the garage without having to go through the home. He explained the application requests enclosing the area beneath the stairway with wood hinged doors so yard equipment can be stored underneath. He explained the applicants are also requesting to change the previously approved railing and stairs located off the Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 6 breezeway. He noted the railing and stairs would be replaced with an open stairway with no handrail. He explained the new stairway will have three steps and will be constructed of wood and painted or opaque stained. He noted the stairway off the garage will also be wood and painted or opaque stained. Joseph Robertson and Jeffrey Manternach, 995 Grove Terrace, noted the omission of a service door and stairway off the garage was an oversight in the drawings. They explained the garage would only walk out to the alley behind the property. The applicants explained as the project progressed, the need for the stairway became apparent. The Commission discussed the design for the service door. Mr. Robertston explained they are looking at a panel door with glass at the top. The Commission suggested mimicking the front door, which has divided lights and panels below. The Commission recommended checking with the Building Services Department to see whether there are any code requirements for stairs, riser heights and railings. Motion by Whalen, seconded by Wand, to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Olson, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonell; Nay — None. EDUCATION TASK FORCE: Update on Public Outreach and Education Program: The Commission received and filed the information. There was no discussion. Minutes from Previous Meeting(s): The minutes were received and filed. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: None. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Carnegie Stout Public Library Signs Update: Staff Member Carstens updated the Commission regarding the status of the Carnegie Stout Public Library signs. She reviewed the background of the signs. She noted the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the "after the fact" signs at the February 17, 2011 Commission meeting. She explained the signs were installed without obtaining the proper permits. She referenced the February 8, 2011 memorandum from Assistant Planner Guy Hemenway, which summarized the history of the signs as well as the February 17, 2011 application. She also referenced the communication from Library Director Susan Henricks regarding the current position of the Carnegie Stout Public Library Board regarding the signs. Staff Member Carstens explained the Commission's principal concerns with the sign were the yellowish color and the design and materials of the sign base. She noted the Commission felt that the sign needed to be repainted a color that better matched the building. She explained the Commission also did not support the plastic columns that serve as the base of the sign and recommended a stone or concrete base raised no more than 12 inches above the ground. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 7 She stated the Library Board had met and discussed the signs. She stated that she and Lange Sign representatives attended the meeting and reviewed the project with the Board. She noted the Board is willing to repaint the signs with a color that more closely matches the building since Lange Sign has agreed to do that at no charge; however, the Board does not want to remove the columns. She explained the Library Board feels the columns provide a desired height for the signs and they also like the design of the columns. Staff Member Carstens noted Lange Sign's and the Library Board's concerns regarding the timeliness and efficiency of the review process. She noted procedural concerns regarding the permitting process for the signs. She noted Planning Services staff has met and developed new procedures for sign permit reviews to improve the efficiency and timeliness of the process. She referenced a letter dated August 8, 2011 prepared by Assistant Planner Guy Hemenway which outlines improved procedures for reviewing signs. She explained the Commission is advisory to the City Council for the review of public projects. She explained both the recommendation of the Commission and position of the Library Board will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The Commission discussed their options, noting the ability to stand by their original recommendation that the sign be repainted and columns removed and replaced with a more appropriate base. The Commission discussed the signs. The Commission noted that the color of the sign and proportion of the columns depicted in the sign plans provided to the Carnegie Stout Public Library are not what was produced and therefore the Library did not get what they were shown. Commissioner Whalen noted that Lange Sign did not do anything they were supposed to do in the process. Staff Member Carstens noted the process for review did not go as it normally does and ideally the signs would have been reviewed in a timelier manner. The Commission reiterated that regardless of the timeframe for review, the signs were installed without obtaining a permit. The Commission stated the process did not fail because of the Planning Services Department or the process for reviewing the permit. The Commission noted that the permit application required research, which understandably took some time. The Commission referenced the timeline of events from the February 8, 2011 memorandum prepared by Guy Hemenway. The Commission noted on August 9, 2010, Lange Sign submitted an application to the Building Services Department for the two freestanding signs and 35 days later, the signs were already in place. The Commission questioned how much time Planning Services staff has to review permits. Staff Member Carstens responded Planning Services staff is given 20 days to review and respond to sign permit applications. The Commission noted Planning Services staff was two weeks overdue in responding to the permit application. The Commission noted that neither Lange Sign nor the Carnegie Stout Public Library ever checked on the status of the permit application. The Commission also noted that the design and materials of those signs were being fabricated long before a permit was ever applied for. The Commission noted that Lange Sign is a company that has done work in historic districts before and was well aware of Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 8 the regulations and were also aware that installing the signs without an approved permit was wrong. The consensus of the Commission was that responsibility for the inappropriate process falls with Lange Sign. They explained regardless of the conversations between Library Director Susan Henricks, the Library Board and Lange Sign, it is the contractor's responsibility to obtain the necessary permits, and therefore, they are the ones that are responsible. The Commission felt that Lange Sign did not get the proper authorization to install the signs, and therefore they should be the ones responsible for fixing it regardless of what changes are required. The Commission noted this is not the first instance where the City has had difficulty when working with a sign contractor on permits and process. The Commission noted it is not unusual for sign contractors to install signs prior to obtaining an approved permit. The Commission noted if a contractor is to do business in the city, they should know the rules that they are required to adhere to. The Commission expressed gratitude for all that the Library and Library Board does for the community. They noted the Board's contention that the signs need to be at the height they are is not necessary, especially for an institution like the Library. The Commission explained that given the location of those signs, the added height does nothing for advertising the building. They felt a sign placed lower to the ground similar to the Historic Federal Building sign serves its purpose and does not need to be placed on stilts. The Commission stated that allowing the signs would establish a bad precedence for the City not following its own rules. The Commission explained they hope City Council looks to commissions such as the Historic Preservation Commission as a resource and safeguards for the community. They explained that the Historic Preservation Commission is the mechanism which assures that improvements happen according to the ordinances and architectural guidelines adopted by the City Council. The Commission discussed that the Library is individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is also a contributing building to a National Register Historic District. The Commission explained the building is also a City Landmark which sets the standard above other buildings. The Commission also expressed frustration with having spent a million dollars on a first class renovation of a building, and then not installing appropriate signs in front of the building. The Commission discussed the timeline of events. The Commission stated it is quite telling that a substantial amount of research was required in reviewing the permit and the signs were installed 35 days after the permit was applied for. The Commission reiterated that these signs were long into the fabrication process prior to the permit application having been submitted to the Building Services Department. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 9 Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to uphold their recommendation to approve the sign design without the columns and use a stone or concrete base raised no more than 12 inches above the ground, and change the color of the painted parts of the sign to match the color of the building for all the reasons discussed at the February 17, 2011 and August 18, 2011 HPC meetings. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Olson, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonell; Nay — None. W. Locust & Bluff Street Neighborhoods The Commission discussed the issues facing the W. Locust & Bluff Street Neighborhood area. The Commission discussed financial incentives that may benefit not only Mr. Lampe, but other people in that area that may find themselves in his position. The Commission expressed concern that, over time, the neighborhood will lose more and more buildings, and eventually the neighborhood will be lost. The Commission noted that even if Mr. Lampe's building were torn down, nothing good can come of it. The vacant lot could not even be used for parking. Commissioners asked what is the quickest way to bring this situation to the City Council's attention. Staff Member Carstens noted that the City Council will be meeting on August 24 -25 for their annual Goal Setting. The Commission discussed the broader issues facing the neighborhood, and noted an effort similar to the Washington Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative is needed to revitalize the neighborhood. The Commission recognized that the Washington Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative is not complete; however, the initiative has momentum and the next logical downtown area in dire need of investment and attention is the West Locust & Bluff Street Neighborhood. The Commission agreed to incorporate the 60 recommendations of the Safe Community Task Force with a letter to City Council noting that a revitalization initiative in the West Locust and Bluff Street neighborhood would be consistent with many of those recommendations and objectives of the Safe Community Task Force. Motion by Wand, seconded by Olson, to draft a letter to the City Council requesting that the Council place the West Locust & Bluff Street Neighborhood area on this year's Goal Setting agenda and make it a top priority during this year's goal setting session. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Olson, Whalen, Bichell, Rapp, Wand, Krey and McDonnell; Nay — None. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Building Services Historic Preservation Enforcement Report Update: Staff Member Johnson explained he has not had an opportunity to meet with Building Services officials or the Assistant City Attorney on updates to the enforcement report, and a report will be provided at the next meeting. Capital Improvement Program Budget: Staff Member Carstens asked that the Commission consider capital improvements or other budget improvement programs related to historic preservation prior to the next meeting. She noted that the Historic Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission August 18, 2011 Page 10 District Public Improvement Program, Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund Program, and the Historic Preservation Housing Grant Program are in the CIP budget. She requested that the Historic Preservation Commission be prepared to discuss and provide input on next year's budget at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted