Loading...
Minutes Historic Preservation 4 19 07ti~rowc' MINUTES G~~'Rt~ `~0~ ~O~I~II~~IOI~ ~ ~ REGULAR SESSION Thursday, April 19, 2007 5:30 p.m. Auditorium, Carnegie Stout Library 360 W. 11th Street, Dubuque, Iowa ~a f.. ~i " t I~ ~~ . F,tb~ Psn 4.~ ,: ~ PRESENT: Chairperson Christine Olson; Commission Members John Whalen, Keisha Wainwright, Chris Wand, Matthew Lundh and David Stuart; Staff Members Laura Carstens and David Johnson. ABSENT: Commission Members Mary Loney Bichell and Michael Coty. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Olson at 5:30 p.m. MINUTES: Motion by Stuart, seconded by Wainwright, to approve the minutes of the March 15, 2007 meeting as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Robert and Sandra Smith for a Demolition Permit to demolish the building located at 1051 White Street in the Downtown Neighborhood Conservation District. Robert Smith, 2735 Cottonwood Drive, explained he owns the property at 1051 White Street. He reviewed his application and explained he wishes to demolish the structure. He explained he has owned the structure for 16 years and the building has never been habitable. He explained that the building is not serviced by any utilities and the building is in very bad. condition. He stated the building has been used for the storage of motorcycles and ATVs. Commissioner Stuart questioned what precipitated the request to demolish the building. Mr. Smith explained he has been sent notice from the City to demolish or repair the structure. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report, noting that the building is currently in violation of Chapter 26 Housing Codes and is also cited for demolish by neglect. He explained the Housing and Community Development Department's required repairs are outlined in the letter attached to the staff report. He reiterated the applicant is seeking a recommendation for approval of a demolition permit for the building at 1051 White Street. He explained that the applicant has submitted all of the required supporting documentation for review of a demolition permit, and noted those questions and answers are outlined in the staff report. He explained City Code provides for the Historic Preservation Commission to review the demolition request and make a Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 2 determination as to whether the building has historic or architectural significance to the community and whether denial of the proposed demolition would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. He explained 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 demolition request. He explained the Commission's recommendation goes to the City Council for final action. The Commission discussed the process for review and approval of a demolition permit in a conservation district. Staff Member Carstens explained that the building was determined as having local historical interest per the Phase 3 Architectural and Historical Survey/Evaluation Report. Consequently, the applicant is required to submit documentation to aid in making a determination as to whether denial of the proposed demolition would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. Commissioner Whalen arrived at the meeting at 5:39 p.m. The Commission noted the appraised value of the building in its current condition is $5,000, and the appraised value of the building after renovation of the existing property for continued use would be $77,000. The Commission also noted that the property was purchased in the amount of $52,000 in 1990, and in the provided estimate, the contractor explains the cost to rehabilitate the structure for its continued use would be $163,000. Mr. Smith again reiterated the building is in disrepair. He explained the roof, ceiling and floor system have failed and the building is no longer safe to be in. Chairperson Olson questioned whether the lack of investment over the past 16 years is the reason the building is in such poor condition. Mr. Smith responded that the building was in poor condition when he originally purchased it. He reiterated the building is adjacent to his business, Smith Cyclery, and he purchased the building with the intent to demolish the building or just use the lot for storage. Upon questions from the Commission, Mr. Smith clarified that he has not been denied a demolition permit for the building in the past. Commissioners discussed the application, noting the poor condition of the property and the financial information provided by the applicant supporting demolition of the building. Motion by Stuart, seconded by Wand, to recommend demolition of 1051 White Street to City Council noting that the building does have historical and architectural significance; however, denial of the application would prevent the property owner from earning a reasonable economic return on the property. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Whalen, Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 3 DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Jim Quayle requesting that the Commission recommend demolition of a one-car garage located at 1599 Central Avenue. Staff Member Johnson explained that the property owner and applicant, James Quayle, originally submitted an application requesting the demolition of a detached garage fronting the alley at 1599 Central Avenue because it was hit by a car. He explained that initial reports and estimates to the property owner from contractors indicated the building was damaged beyond repair and needed to be demolished. He stated that the applicant has since received a report from a contractor that indicates the garage can be salvaged and repaired. Consequently, the applicant has verbally requested that the Commission table the application to allow him the opportunity to prepare a letter formally withdrawing the application, so that he can pursue repair instead of demolition. Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to table the demolition permit application for the detached garage at 1599 Central Avenue. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Whalen, Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Richard Haberkorn requesting that the Commission recommend demolition of a portion of the building located at 598 Central Avenue in the Downtown Neighborhood Conservation District. Richard Haberkorn, 816 Lincoln, introduced himself and explained that he would like to demolish the northwest portion of the service station which he owns and operates. He explained he has leased the property for his automotive business; however, he did not come into ownership of the property until approximately one year ago. He explained the previous owner failed to make a number of necessary repairs to the building. He explained the previous property owner did pave the parking area on the corner of 6t" and Central Avenue. He explained that unfortunately, when the parking lot was paved, the slope of the lot drained towards the foundation of the portion of the building subject to demolition. Mr. Haberkorn stated that as a result of the poor drainage, the foundation has failed, only worsening the situation. He explained that the wall has been in need of repair for some time. He stated that contractors he has consulted with have indicated that the portion of the building subject to demolition could not be repointed or repaired. Rather the structure would need to be removed and rebuilt. Mr. Haberkorn explained that because of the historic nature of the building, he wishes to demolish as little as possible in order to remedy the situation. He added his business could use the space as well. Mr. Haberkorn explained that he wishes to demolish the subject portion of the building and use that space to regrade and repave that portion of the lot to protect the building from future water damage. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report, noting that the service station was constructed circa 1900. He stated the station does not appear until the 1909-1936 Sanborn maps. He explained that staff inspections of the property indicate extensive modifications to the portion of the building to be demolished; however, no evidence can be found through building permits. He explained the portion of the building to be Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 4 demolished is constructed of textured brick and larger masonry whereas the original portion of the service station is constructed of soft red brick typical of early 1900 construction. He explained that staff is of the opinion that the subject portion of the building has been modified and is not acharacter-defining feature or architecturally significant. He noted that a map has been prepared and attached to the staff report indicating the portion of the building subject to demolition. He directed the Commission's attention to photographs attached to the staff report, which support staffs claim that the portion of the building subject to demolition is constructed of recent materials. He specifically identified the texture brick, inconsistent masonry, and the photo of the exposed modern brick. The Commission discussed the building's condition, the location of the original interior wall and what the building would look like after the demolition. Chairperson Olson suggested that the newly exposed portion of the building as a result of a demolition, be reconstructed with similar brick and painted to match the original portion of the service station. Commissioner Stuart explained he visited the property and felt the portion of the building to be demolished is a later addition. Mr. Haberkorn stated there is an interior wall which bisects the middle of the later addition perpendicular to 6t" Street. He stated he is unaware of the bisecting wall material. Commissioner Stuart noted that it would be desirable to salvage the original wall if possible and if the materials are historic. However, because the building is in a conservation district, Commissioner Stuart stated the Commission cannot conduct a design review on how the wall is rebuilt or how the other walls are repaired. Motion by Whalen, seconded by Stuart, to recommend to the City Council demolition of the portion of the addition to 598 Central Avenue, noting that the portion of the addition subject to demolition does not have architectural or historical significance; and because the entire addition does not have architectural or historical significance, the existing three outside walls and roof of the entire addition can be demolished; however, any original wall in the back should be maintained because it may have architectural significance. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Whalen, Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of John Gronen/German Bank Building LLLP for a Certificate of Appropriateness and a Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund of $25,000 to rehabilitate the exterior of the German Bank Building located at 342 Main Street in the Old Main Historic District. Chairperson Olson explained that she will abstain from discussion and voting on the request due to a conflict of interest. Vice Chairperson Dave Stuart chaired discussion of this item. Staff Member Johnson explained that John Gronen, the applicant on behalf of German Bank Building, LLLP, was unable to attend the meeting. He explained the applicant is Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 5 seeking $25,000 in Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund money for the exterior rehabilitation to the German Bank building as part of the estimated $1.4 million total rehabilitation cost. He explained the applicant has submitted two bids from licensed contractors outlining the exterior rehabilitation costs associated with the Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund dollars. Staff Member Johnson stated the bid received from Gronen Restoration indicates the west facade restoration to be $85,000 and the east facade restoration to by $16,000, and the cost to clean and repair the terra cotta to be $7,500. He explained the Denny Droessler bid is $90,000 for the west facade restoration and $20,000 for the east facade restoration and $8,500 to clean and repair the terra cotta. He explained the Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund Committee has reviewed the application and found the proposed work is an eligible project and meets the requirements of the grant. He stated the Committee recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the allocation of $25,000 for the exterior rehabilitation of the German Bank Building. Commissioner Stuart reviewed the request and noted the walk-thru he and staff took of the German Bank with respect with stabilization and repair of the building on April 19, 2007. Motion by Wand, seconded by Whalen, to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness and to recommend approval of $25,000 in Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund money for the exterior rehabilitation of the German Bank building. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Whalen, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None; Abstain -Olson. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Jeff Jansen & Megan Miller for a Certificate of Appropriateness and a Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund of $14,919.20 to paint and repair stucco on property located at 195 Alpine Street in the Langworthy Historic District. Jeff Jansen, owner and applicant, introduced himself and Megan Miller, and reviewed the project. He explained that they moved into the house last March. He explained that there is cracked stucco that needs to be repaired and the house needs to be painted. Staff Member Johnson explained that the property owner received three bids for the requested repairs to the home. He explained that Simon Painting and Construction proposed to paint and repair the stucco at a cost of $14,919.20. He explained that Dick Welu Painting and Decorating bid $8,300 for painting the residence and Richard Haverland Plastering proposed $6,400 for the stucco repair. The applicant clarified that the Welu and Haverland bids are a bid package and are only approximately $200 less than the Simon Painting and Construction bid to paint and repair the stucco. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 6 Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report, noting that it is unknown the exact date stucco was applied over the siding of the residence; however, building permits indicate the porch of the single-family dwelling was recoated in 1946. He stated the Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund Committee has reviewed the application and found the proposed work is an eligible project and meets the requirements of the fund. He stated the Committee recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve allocation of $14,919.20 to paint and repair the stucco at 195 Alpine Street. The Commission discussed the application and questioned the materials underneath the stucco. Staff Member Johnson explained that based on the Iowa Site Inventory Form the material is most likely clapboard siding. The Commission discussed their concern that the applicant may encounter additional expenses associated with stucco repair and painting of the property. The Commission discussed with Mr. Jansen approving an additional amount, such as a 10% contingency, for any costs not foreseen. Motion by Stuart, seconded by Whalen, to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness and up to $17,000 in Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund money to paint and repair the stucco at 195 Alpine Street. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye -Whalen, Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Don & Lisa Leik for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remodel 535 Chestnut and demolish 533 Chestnut and replace it with a new addition in the W. 11th Street District. The applicant and property owner, Don Leik, introduced himself, and described the proposed project. He explained he and his wife recently acquired the property at 533 & 535 Chestnut Street. He explained the properties are attached and function as a two- family dwelling. He explained that the residence has been neglected for many years and 533 Chestnut is in particularly poor condition. Mr. Leik explained that the floors are failing, indicating larger structural issues. As a result, he wishes to demolish 533 Chestnut and rebuild it in essentially the same footprint. He explained that 533 Chestnut will be demolished and a new attached garage, master bathroom and master bedroom will be constructed in its place. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report, adding that the applicant proposes to remove the siding and asphalt shingles on both 533 and 535 Chestnut. The asphalt shingles will be replaced in-kind and the condition of the wood siding underneath the aluminum siding will be evaluated on 535 Chestnut. The clapboard siding on 535 Chestnut will be salvaged where possible, otherwise it will be replaced with fiber cement board siding with the same profile as the clapboard siding. He stated the new addition at 533 Chestnut will have fiber cement board siding throughout. He explained the existing windows on the front of 535 Chestnut will remain; however, new wood windows with aluminum storms will be added, where needed. He explained the two enclosed porches and the open deck will be removed from the rear of the properties and a new Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 7 deck will be constructed. He stated the footprint of 533 Chestnut will substantially remain the same with the exception of the proposed two-car garage that will replace and expand upon the footprint of the previous enclosed front porch. Staff Member Johnson stated the proposed garage will be 24' by 25' and incorporate carriage-style doors. He directed the Commission's attention to a map and site plan which outlines the components of the project and stated photographs have been enclosed for their review. The Commission discussed the procedures for demolition of 533 Chestnut. Staff Member Carstens explained because the building subject to demolition is located in a historic district, the procedure for demolition is different than that of a building in a conservation district. She explained for demolition permits in historic districts, the applicant needs to request a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission to demolish the building or portion of a building. She explained the applicant has requested a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish 533 Chestnut, as well as a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed new addition. The Commission expressed hesitation for allowing atwo-car garage in the front of the property. Commissioner Whalen explained that a garage this size located in the front of the residence detracts from the historical facade and changes the look of the building as well as character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Stuart explained that atwo- cargarage in the front of the residence would be inappropriate, and the Architectural Guidelines for Historic Structures explain that garages should be sited at the rear of the property away from the primary facades or near an alley. He explained the proposed two-car garage at the front of the property would have significant prominence in relation to the residence and other properties on Chestnut Street. Chairperson Olson explained that when introducing a new garage, it should be located to the side or rear of the property. If a garage has to be located in the front of a residence, it should be setback enough so as to not detract from the primary facade. She noted the proposed garage extends in front of the residence. Bethany Golembeski, 399 Sinsinawa Avenue, East Dubuque, introduced herself as the project architect. She explained the proposed garage location was chosen to utilize the existing foundation and minimize the amount of infill required. She also explained the site presents many topographical difficulties. Mr. Leik explained that the rear of the property slopes and would not allow for a garage to be placed in the rear of the property. Ms. Golembeski explained that Mr. Leik has met with realtors who have encouraged him to build at least a one car garage on the property. She explained Mr. Leik's intention is to convert the two-family residence into a single-family home with a garage. She stated that the proposed layout of the new addition as well as incorporation of a new two-car garage is largely based on site topography and market conditions as well as the wishes of prospective buyers. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 8 Commissioner Whalen again reiterated that allowing a garage on the front of the residence would alter the character of the historic home and neighborhood. He explained this is the reason why you don't often see garages in historic neighborhoods unless along an alley. He explained garages are sited at the rear of the properties so they are not visible and they do not detract from the front facades of historic buildings. He also explained that because of topographical issues in historic neighborhoods in Dubuque, many properties don't have garages at all. Commissioner Stuart questioned whether the site would allow for cone-car garage under a common roof to enhance the residential fagade and reduce the visual impact of a garage in the front yard. Chairperson Olson again stressed that the Secretary of Interior's Standards would require that the garage be set further back so it is clearly incidental to the residence. The Commission discussed design alternatives with Ms. Golembeski. The Commission specifically discussed a design option which would allow for aone-car garage that appears to be detached. Motion by Wand, seconded by Stuart, to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for 535 Chestnut Street as proposed, provided the reveal of the cement board siding matches the profile of the existing wood siding, and allow deconstruction of 533 Chestnut, as necessary, to allow the future addition, with the design to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Whalen, Olson, Wainwright, Wand, Lundh and Stuart; Nay -None. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: None. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: None. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Building Services Department Status Report on Historic Preservation Enforcement: Staff Member Johnson reviewed new information and changes to the Historic Preservation Enforcement Report. 950 Spruce Street: Staff Member Johnson reported that Mr. Brown, property owner at 950 Spruce Street, requested to attend the April Commission meeting to address the Commission regarding the necessary repairs to the limestone wall. He explained that Mr. Brown is not in attendance; however, his intention was to poll the Commission for suggested masonry contractors. The Commission suggested Mr. Brown contact Dave Reno, Larry Droessler, and Mark Breitsprecker as possible contractors. 342 Main Street: Staff Member Johnson explained that much of the recent activity was updated during the Certificate of Appropriateness and Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Fund request for the German Bank building. He added Gronen Restoration is anticipating project completion in approximately six months. Minutes -Historic Preservation Commission April 19, 2007 Page 9 Brewery Buildinq: Commissioner Stuart explained that he provided photographic evidence of the deteriorated walls of the former Brewery Building at 30th & Jackson Street to Building Services Manager Rich Russell. He has requested that Mr. Russell follow-up on enforcement of demolition by neglect. 1163 Highland: The Commission next discussed the progress at 1163 Highland. The Commission questioned whether the initiation date listed is correct. Staff Member Carstens confirmed the date listed on the Historic Preservation Enforcement Report is incorrect. Temporary HPC District Representation: Staff Member Carstens explained Planning staff forwarded the proposed ordinance amendment to the City Council, who in turn forwarded the proposed amendment to the State. She explained the State contacted her and was concerned that the proposed ordinance amendment would not be allowed under current state law. She explained the State Historic Preservation Office requested that the Dubuque City Attorney again review the proposed ordinance amendment in light of state law. Staff Member Carstens explained City Legal staff has reviewed the proposed amendment again and believes the language needs to be slightly modified to clarify that the temporary Historic Preservation Commission position would be an additional position instead of occupying a vacant position of a potential district representative. Staff confirmed that the quorum would remain the same. The Commission and staff discussed current and future issues with Commission representation. Tour of the German Bank Buildinq: The Commission stated the tour of the German Bank building was addressed previously. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David Johnson, Assistant Planner Adopted