Loading...
Minutes_Historic Preservation Commission 11 20 14 Dubuque balk"_ DUB E 11111 ,N,nterpiace on are Mississippi �.H.m. DRAFT MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 5'.30 p.m. Thursday, November 20, 2014 Room 223, Historic Federal Building Commissioners Present Chairperson Bob MCDonell, Commissioners Otto Krueger, Christina Monk, Chris Olson, and Joseph Rapp. Commissioners Excused: Commissioners David Klavitter, Mary Loney-Bichell,Julie Schlarman, and John Whalen. Staff Members Present Laura Carstens, David Johnson, and Eric Van Buskirk. CALL TO ORDER:The meeting was called to order by Chairperson MCDonell at 5'.30 pm. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. MINUTES: Motion by Monk, seconded by Olson to approve the minutes of the October 16, 2014 in eetin g a s stand itted. Motion ca tried by th e fol lowing vote'. Aye—Krueger, M CDonell, M on k, Olson, and Rapp, Nay—none, Abstain—none. DESIGN REVIEW CERTIFICATE OF APP ROPRIATEN ESS. Application of HE Investments LLC/Greg Poetic for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct two new duplexes at 639 and 640 Arlington Street, located in the West Eleventh Street Historic District. (Tabled) Motion by Olson, second by Krueger, to re open the application of HE Investments LLC/Greg Poetic for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct two new duplexes at 639 and 640 Arlington Street, located in the West Eleventh Street Historic District. Motion carried bythe following vote'. Aye—Krueger, MCDonell, Monk, Olson, and Rapp, Nay—none, Abstain —none. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the staff report, notingthe alternative design options submitted since the previous meeting. He stated that the submitted designs were developed to compliment the architectural features of the West Eleventh District and provide variation from the existing duplexes next door. Staff highlighted the changes made to each design option, noting the dormers, revised window styles, exterior lighting options and front porches. Staff indicated that a detailed analysis of the project and how it relates Lathe City of Dubuque Architectural Guidelines was included in the Staff Analysis Lathe Commission. Staff Member Carstens also noted they had received written comments from David Klavitter, a resident ofthe Langworthy Historic District, regardingthe application, and that a responseto those comments had been completed by Staff. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Page 2 November 20, 2014 Motion by Olson, seconded by Monk,to receive and file the comments and the staff memo. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye—Krueger, McDonell, Monk, Olson, and Rapp; Nay—none; Abstain— none. Brandon Hrubish, North Liberty, Iowa,was present to represent the application. He did not have anything additional to add to the staff analysis. The Commission asked for clarification on Article 10 of the Unified Development Code with regard to the application and written comments submitted. Staff provided information regarding the definitions of construction and reconstruction to the Commission. The Commission thanked the applicant for taking the time to provide additional drawings to the Commission for review and expressed appreciation for taking their comments from the previous meeting into consideration. The Commission reviewed the designs and determined the original design submitted by the applicant was most in keeping with the design character of the District. The Commission highlighted the fenestration pattern of the original as being in character. The Commission suggested using Anamosa Stone veneer rather than the proposed random ashlar limestone Veneer, and provided some examples of the suggested type. The Commission also expressed a desire to use a traditional course stone style for the masonry pattern. The Commission also stated they liked the even- spaced window pattern of the original application and that the sidelights not be included unless sidelights were included on both sides of the doors. Planning Staff asked the Commission to clarify whether the Commission preferred the 4/4 or 3/4 window pattern. The Commission felt that the 4/4 pattern was more in keeping with the neighborhood. They noted that the 3/4 pattern was more traditional in Prairie Style. The Commission stated that they preferred the design submitted on October 16`h with a course style veneer of Anamosa rough hewd limestone,and that the veneer follow the whole foundation visible from the street. The applicant questioned the dormers and porch on the original application. Staff clarified that the only discussed modification from the original design was regarding the stone used in the foundation and that veneer modifications be applied to all areas visible from the public right of way. Motion by Olson, seconded by Monk,to approve the original design submitted on October 16, 2014 using a traditional course rough hewn limestone veneer instead of an ashlar design in all areas above grade and visible from the public right of way. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye—Krueger, McDonell, Monk, Olson, and Rapp; Nay—none; Abstain—none. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC:There were no items from the public. ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION Work Plan Update: Staff Member Johnson reviewed progress on the survey and registration projects. He noted that National Register nominations are supposed to be finalized in July of 2016. Staff Member Van Buskirk reviewed progress on the comparative analysis of historic districts. Staff Member Johnson provided an overview of the Education work plan item and stated Commissioner Klavitter is interested in pursuing an economic impact study. Staff noted the hope that these studies could highlight the economic and sustainable benefits of historic preservation. In response to Commission requests, Staff Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Page 3 November 20, 2014 Member Johnson indicated that he could forward case study information found on Columbia, Missouri and Raleigh, North Carolina. Ordinance Review:The Commission discussed the definition of significant alterations with Staff. The Commission expressed concern that new construction is not a material change,and that they feel limited in reviewing applications. Staff indicated that the Commission would need to change the ordinance and utilize a similar process as when the Commission changed the ordinance regarding demolitions. Staff and the Commission discussed examples of new construction within other neighborhoods like Fenelon and the Washington Neighborhood. The Commission asked how many cases they had for new construction; Staff recalled one project in 2011 in a local historic district. Motion by Olson, seconded by Rapp,to investigate regulations in similar cities to Dubuque in order to potentially modify the Historic Preservation Code to requiring a site plan for all new construction within historic districts. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye—Krueger, McDonell, Monk, Olson, and Rapp; Nay—none; Abstain—none. ITEMS FROM STAFF Commission Meetings: Staff noted the memo addressing concerns with the Commissioner's conduct at the last meeting,which could be construed as exceeding authority, arbitrary, slanderous, personal opinions and discriminatory statements be made part of the record. Building Enforcement Report: Staff highlighted the updates within the report and asked for questions from the Commission. The Commission and staff discussed the items within the report. ADJOURNMENT:The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted