The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHPC Agenda Packet 7.9.2020 Thursday July 9, 2020 5:30 p.m. Electronic Zoom Meeting Platform IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, July 9, 2020 Electronic Meeting – 5:30 p.m. Zoom Meeting Platform Agenda A) Call to Order B) Roll Call C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda D) Certificate of Appropriateness 1. North Half of 817 Dearborn Street – Dearborn Street Conservation District (new construction) 2. 13 S Linn Street (Hohenschuh Mortuary) – Local Historic Landmark (signage installation) 3. 810 North Johnson Street – Brown Street Historic District (demolition of non-historic addition and construction of new addition) E) Discussion of the 400 Block of North Clinton Street F) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff Certificate of No Material Effect –Chair and Staff review 1. 815 Ronalds Street – Brown Street Historic District (front step and railing and rear railing replacement) 2. 617 Brown Street – Brown Street Historic District (chimney repair or reconstruction) 3. 409 Ronalds Street – Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (storm windows and foundation braces) Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8) An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19. You can participate in the meeting and can comment on an agenda item by going to https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJUvcOmvrjwpHtx--vRFz23SlZbDpcrOIiJJ to visit the Zoom meeting’s registration page and submitting the required information. Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting or webinar ID, enter the ID number found in the email. If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer without a microphone, you can call in by phone by dialing (312) 626-6799 and entering the meeting ID 912 7070 7348 when prompted. Providing comment in person is not an option. Minor Review –Staff review 1. 1510 Sheridan Avenue – Longfellow Historic District (roof shingle replacement) 2. 1127 Maple Street – Longfellow Historic District (roof shingle replacement) 3. 1011 Woodlawn Avenue – Woodlawn Historic District (flat roof membrane replacement) 4. 1133 East Court Street – Longfellow Historic District (flat roof membrane replacement, rear second floor deck railing installation, synthetic siding removal from porch) 5. 503 Grant Street – Longfellow Historic District (aluminum siding removal and original trim and siding repair) 6. 430 Ronalds Street – Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (aluminum siding removal and original trim and siding repair) Intermediate Review –Chair and Staff review 513 Grant Street – Longfellow Historic District (minor changes to previous COA) G) Consideration of Minutes for June 11, 2020 H) Commission Information and Discussion 1. Chair memo re: Sharing the Stories of our Community’s Full History 2. Preserve Iowa Summit Notes 3. Election of Officers I) Adjournment If you will need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jessica Bristow, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5243 or at jessica-bristow@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. Staff Report July 6, 2020 Historic Review for Lot 20, Block 8 in the Rundell Addition, the north half of 817 Rundell District: Dearborn Street Conservation District Classification: Non-historic The applicant, Kent Ralston, is requesting approval for a proposed new construction project at Lot 20, Block 8 in the Rundell Addition, a non-historic property in the Dearborn Street Conservation District. The project consists of the construction of a new single-family home. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.1 Balustrades and Handrails 4.2 Chimneys 4.3 Doors 4.4 Energy Efficiency 4.5 Foundations 4.6 Gutters and Downspouts 4.7 Mass and Rooflines 4.8 Masonry 4.9 Paint and Color 4.10 Porches 4.11 Siding 4.12 Site and Landscaping 4.13 Windows 4.14 Wood 6.0 Guidelines for New Construction 6.1 New Primary Structures 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines 8.1 Longfellow Neighborhood Staff Comments Lots 19 and 20 of block 8 in the Rundell Addition seem to have been combined under one ownership until recently. The south half, lot 19 includes a gable-front bungalow built in 1918 and the north half, lot 20, includes a simple garage built soon after the construction of the house. In 2019, the owner sold the south half, and retained the north half, separating the two lots. The existing garage is not a part of the application and will remain. Any work on the garage would occur under a separate application. The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story home in a style that is similar to the Foursquares found in the neighborhood. The house will have smooth cement board lap siding, Azek trim, asphalt shingle roof, and metal clad windows with multi-paned upper sashes. The front of the house will have a half-width porch. The house and porch both have hipped roofs. New construction can be a complicated project and is rare in a Historic or Conservation District. The guidelines include new construction and neighborhood guidelines that should be followed. In addition, the individual sections provide guidance on specific details when the new construction guidelines do not provide guidance. Section 8.1 of the Neighborhood Guidelines for Longfellow recommend that the total surface area of the new building is 800 square feet or less. In the Dearborn Street Conservation District, a new building must reflect the Craftsman, Craftsman bungalow, American Foursquare, Vernacular or Eclectic Style. Section 6.0 New Construction, of the guidelines include points that are also found in the individual sections. This project includes several things that are only discussed in the individual sections so they will be listed here. One specific item includes an exception only for new construction and that is listed below. The guideline recommendations are as follows: • 4.1 Balustrades and handrails: square spindles 1 ½ inches or greater. Top and bottom rails at least 2 inches in thickness. • 4.2 Chimneys: new chimneys are masonry and full height. • 4.3 Doors: new doors are wood. • 4.5 Foundation: Smooth faced concrete is preferred and helps show it is a new house; Exposed foundation should be typically 12 to 30 inches. Window well material matches foundation • 4.6 gutters and downspouts: downspouts near corners • 4.7 Mass and roofline: drawings don’t show top of wall under roof overhang. Based on this design the wall should terminate with a frieze board and a small molding to transition to soffit. • 4.9 paint and color: Two-color scheme, trim and body. Black window sashes (dark green may be acceptable) Disallowed: all white or bright, obtrusive colors • 4.10 Porches: porch floor may be concrete if 18 or less inches above grade. Concrete steps for a masonry porch. Wood substitutes must be paintable. • 4.11 Siding: Wood siding and the trim details along with paint combine to make one of the most important defining characteristics of historic districts. This display of detail and color is essential to the character of the older neighborhoods. Cement board with a smooth finish is acceptable • 4.12 Site and Landscaping: site plan should be included and show the sidewalk connecting the entrance door/porch to the sidewalk and show parking in back. • 4.13 Windows: Windows may be aluminum-clad but not just aluminum. See sash color above. All windows should match size, type, sash width, trim, use of divided lites. Some smaller windows are acceptable but should be proportionally vertical not horizontal. Window pattern should be consistent and upper and lower windows align. Muntin bars are adhered to the inside and outside of the window- between the glass in addition to that is preferred but not required. Installing modern types of windows including sliders or other types not consistent with the architecture are disallowed. For instance, fixed windows are small and decorative. Egress windows must match the size, trim, use of divided lites and overall appearance of the other windows. • 4.14 Wood: wood substitutes should retain the appearance and function of wood and be paintable. They should be approved by the Commission. Metal would not be approved as a replacement for wood so metal soffits would not be appropriate. • 5.2 Decks and Ramps: a small elevation of a deck is shown on one drawing but not shown anywhere else. The deck should be shown on plans and set in 8 at least 8 inches from the side walls of the house. Deck railing must follow section 4.1. baluster and railing must be painted. Stairs have close risers. • 6.0 new construction: Porch can be concrete through use of exception. In Staff’s opinion, the use of a Foursquare design is appropriate for the neighborhood as there are several nearby. The drawings include several markups, many of which have to do with trim details to meet the siding guidelines. Several Small windows will change configuration as well. Staff had a conversation with the applicant who agreed to address many of the changes such as the small window types, the siding and trim details, the deck railing . There are several points worth noting. • Windows: the windows will generally all be double-hung with the exception of the basement egress windows which will likely be casement designed to look like a double-hung window. The windows will appear four-over-one double hung through the use of adhered muntin bars on both sides of the glass with the possible exception of the smaller kitchen and bathroom-type windows. The applicant has a solid aluminum window that he has used on other projects that he would like to use here. Staff has not reviewed this window product to see if it appears appropriate. The guidelines do not include an exception for the use of a metal window that is not metal-clad wood. Staff recommends that the use of metal-clad wood windows reviewed by Staff or Staff and Chair is included in the conditions for approval. Currently, the paired or ganged windows are shows attached directly instead of including the weight or stud-pocket that creates a place for exterior trim between the windows and is required on all grouped windows in historic regulated areas. • Chimney: the guidelines require that a chimney is full height and masonry if located on the exterior of the building. A chimney could also be interior with a thin-brick chimney obscuring most of the exterior above the roof. Staff feels that an exception for a siding-clad chimney could be approved on this project. The house at 1223 Seymour Avenue is a house of a similar style that has this cladding. • Porch: the current porch design includes a concrete porch floor, tall masonry piers and battered columns. Staff feels that the proportion of the columns is too narrow for this application. During a conversation, the applicant discussed the possibility of a wooden porch floor instead of concrete and the possibility of columns without the tall masonry piers. If the porch is constructed of wood, it would need to meet the guidelines and follow traditional porch construction with piers below the floor deck that match the foundation, a tongue and groove porch floor (including the possibility of Azek) and columns that sit above the floor with elements that align appropriately. Staff would recommend a simple square column, likely 12 inches wide because of the height of the porch roof. • Doors: Staff recommends either wood or fiberglass doors. The design of the front door in the drawing appears appropriate with this style of house. Staff would recommend the rear door is a half- lite door with horizontal panels below. An exception exists to approve a sliding door on the back of the house if it is trimmed to match the other openings. • Window patterning: Staff finds that the window patterning on the sides of the house is too sparse. While most of this condition is created by bathrooms and similar spaces, staff made notes about some locations where windows could be added. Historic buildings often had more windows than modern construction. Now, there is an interest in getting light into buildings, for this reason, staff suggests that some windows are added to the sides of the building as possible. With several changes made to the current drawings and conditions approved by Staff and Chair as recommended below, Staff recommends approval of this project. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at Lot 20 of Block 8 in the Rundell Addition as presented in the application with the following conditions, all to be approved in final drawings by Staff and Chair:  Siding and trim revisions are made according to the mark-ups on the drawing  Site revisions are made according to the mark-ups on the drawings  The windows are metal-clad wood four-over-one double hung that are separated with a weight pocket and appropriate trim and windows are added to the side elevation  The porch is revised according to the drawings and approved through an exception for new construction that is less than 18 inches above grade or revised to use traditional wood porch construction and thicker straight square columns of a dimension to be approved through drawings  The Chimney is full height and clad in siding and approved through an exception for new construction and the fact that an appropriate example is found in the same neighborhood.  The rear door is changed to a half-lite door  All soffits and porch ceiling are beadboard or beadboard plywood. Application for Historic Review Property Owner/ Applicant information (Please check primary contact person) Historic Designation (Maps are located at the following link: www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources) Proposed Project Information Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-3B. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the 1HLJKERUKRRGDQG'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHVRIÀFHDW&LW\+DOO or online at: www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the RIÀFHRI1HLJKERUKRRGDQG'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHVE\QRRQRQ:HGQHVGD\WKUHHZHHNVSULRUWRWKH meeting. See last page of this application for deadlines and meeting dates. For Staff Use: Date submitted: &HUWLÀFDWHRI1RPDWHULDO(IIHFW &HUWLÀFDWHRI$SSURSULDWHQHVV Major Review Intermediate Review Minor Review Property Owner Name: (PDLO Address: Phone Number: City: State: Zip Code: This Property is a local historic landmark. This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): Contractor/Consultant Name: (PDLO Address: Phone Number: City: State: Zip Code: Address: Use of Property: Date Constructed (if known): OR Brown St. Historic District College Green Historic District (DVW&ROOHJH6W+LVWRULF'LVWULFW Longfellow Historic District Northside Historic District Summit St. Historic District Woodlawn Historic District Clark St. Conservation District College Hill Conservation District Dearborn St. Conservation District Goosetown/ Horace Mann Conservation District Governor-Lucas St. Conservation District :LWKLQWKHGLVWULFWWKLV3URSHUW\LV&ODVVLÀHGDV Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric Jefferson St. Historic District 5/19/2020 Kent Ralston kentralston@hotmail.com 319.530.0809 16 Wildberry Ln Ne Iowa City IA 52240 John Glick - Glick Construction johnglick@southslope.net 319.936.2525 Iowa City Iowa North Half of 817 Dearborn - Parcel # 1014282022 Detached - Single Family Residence NA Application Requirements Application Requirements Addition %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. Product Information Floor Plans Site Plans Photographs Alteration %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor DOWHUDWLRQSKRWRJUDSKVDQGGUDZLQJVWRGHVFULEHWKHVFRSHRIWKHSURMHFWDUHVXIÀFLHQW Product Information Photographs Construction %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV of a new building Product Information Floor Plans Site Plans Photographs Demolition Photographs (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) (YLGHQFHRIGHWHULRUDWLRQ Proposal of Future Plans Repair or Restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. Other Please contact the Preservation Specialist at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with applications Project Description: Materials to be Used: Exterior Appearance Changes: Photographs Product Information To Submit Application:Download form, Fill it out and email it to jessica-bristow@iowa-city.org or mail to Historic 3UHVHUYDWLRQ&LW\RI,RZD&LW\(:DVKLQJWRQ6WUHHW,RZD&LW\,$ Construction of a new single family dwelling on an open lot. The design and size of the structure was selected to fit into the character of the existing neighborhood. Currently, there is an existing single car garage on the property that may have some historic value although is in very poor condition. If desired, the applicant will attempt to salvage the garage and rehab for future use. However, the garage is not part of this application. Fiber cement siding (HardiePlank or similar) and Composite trim (AZEK or similar). Aluminum clad wood windows or full aluminum windows. View of lot looking west from Dearborn St. View of lot looking north/west from Dearborn St. Approximate footprint and location of structure. Note existing single car garage to remain. Shift outer columnin so porch roofterminates at corner ofhouse not extend pastcenter doorbetweencolumnssiding same hereband board 8 inchesmaybe 10 if necessarysame sidingbottom of wall(above foundationends in 10"watertable withdrip cap aboveand this is alingedwiith the porhc floorand door treads no drip cap aboveband boardsame sidingno sliderscasement to looklike double hungin vertical orientationall ganged windows separated bystud and trim equivaltent to jamb trim(historically the weitght pocket)odd proportionCan his winowbe altered to be morenarrow if not taller?what is this winodw?two fixed windows??can they be doulbehungchimneys mustbe full heightand masonry accordingto the guidelines(section 4.2)we could possiblyuse siding like thehouse at 1223 Seymourare these thesame proportionas front? should bebut they appearwiderall double hung full size should matcheither one-over-one or four-over-one(divided lites are preferred)remove additionaldivided litecondition this pair(not 8-over-1)column proportion too narrowfor height.brick columns top of brick shouldbe lower and the battered wood columnlikely fatter to look correct at this heighttypicallyexterior doorsare not solidband board should align with bottomedge of porch roof (fascia) and bay roofmake sure all front facing surface including wall (chimney if exists and roof faceequal no more than 800 square feetsiding lap shouldbe smaller than trim widthif trim is 4 inches (then lap is 3 or 2 1/2.if trim is 6 (more common than 5)then siding could be 4window proportion should be consistentthroughout- this is thin compared to otherssame not as small left sideelevationCan sides be labeled north and south instead of left and right please?Side elevations are a bit too sparse in windowsmore windows needed to keep the regular windowpatternDoors sit jst above watertale with no other siding below.doors don't float. show window wells- same material as foundationedit drawing with correct egress window well size. Add window here unless chimneyis retained since it must be full heightadd window hereFrench door not sliderflipping the mud room would allow awindow in the exterior wall Deck should be shown on planmetal is not an appropriate subtitute for wood infascia and soffitdeck railing does not meet guidelines- posts should sit on top of floor- not attached to outsidespindles should be located between top and bottom rail. Several Images of the 800 Block of Dearborn Street 1223 Seymour Avenue Chimney (below) Potential column design Staff Report July 4, 2020 Historic Review for 13 S. Linn Street, Hohenschuh Mortuary District: Central Business District Classification: Local Historic Landmark The applicant, JTK Holdings LLC and CR Signs & Lighting, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 13 S. Linn Street, Hohenschuh Mortuary, a local historic landmark property in the Central Business District. The project consists of installation of new signage to east and south elevations. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 10 .0 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation Iowa City Downtown District Storefront and Signage Guidelines Staff Comments The Hohenschuh Mortuary is a two-story, brick building constructed in 1917. The building is divided into two sections: the public and the non-public. The front, public section, facing Linn street is an example of high style Georgian Revival and assumed to be architect designed. This section has a side-gabled roof with roof dormers, symmetrical façade, and classical details: denticulated eaves, returned cornice, classical pilasters and columns, and round headed windows with elaborate divided lites in the dormers. The curved portico is another Classical detail that is mimicked in the curved balconies on each side at the second floor. The windows in the dormer are assumed to be original. The windows on the second floor have been replaced with significantly smaller windows than the original arched-top multi-paned windows. The first floor windows Have been replaced with plate-glass windows. Original window boxes have also been removed. The rear portion, the non-public area, was built in concrete block with brick veneer. It has a flat roof with a tall parapet and cornice molding. This wing originally had multi-light casement windows with straight arches and a garage entrance door for the hearse/ambulance. A 2014 Project installed an overhead door, window and passage door in the opening on the south side of the building that was the original hearse entrance. In 2009, a ramp and accessible entrance door was added to the north side of the building in a tight corridor between the building and the Van Patten House that was a local landmark next door until it burned down. In 2005, the Commission failed to approve the installation of an ATM machine that was installed in the front of the building with the addition of a new opening in the front façade. The applicant is proposing to install a new flag-mounted sign to the front of the building. The sign will be constructed of aluminum cabinets with white acrylic faces and vinyl graphics. The cabinet will be lit with LEDs. Though it is not specified in the application, the sign would be attached to the building at the mortar joints, not through the brick. This sign will be installed just north of the SE corner of the building adjacent to the alley and below the level of the second floor balcony. A second sign will be installed above the doors on the south side of the building at the alley, that were from the 2014 project. The existing sign with white, rectangular background will be replaced with a new, slightly smaller sign formed to the logo graphic. This sign will also be a cabinet with a white acrylic face and vinyl graphics, lit with LEDs. This sign must also be mounted by attachment through the mortar joints or utilizing existing attachment points. The guidelines are limited in recommendations applicable to this project. In order to review projects that are not covered in individual sections, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are included in Section 10. Number Nine of the standards states that exterior alterations shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property and the new work shall be differentiated from the old and compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. For more guidance, the National Park Service has published Preservation Brief 25 which includes a section on new signs on the last page (included in the packet). This Brief states that signs should work with the building rather than against it. Often features or details of the building will suggest a motif for new signs. Signs should not obscure significant features of the historic building. Sign materials should be compatible with those of the historic building. Materials characteristic of the building’s period and style, used in contemporary designs, can form effective new signs. The Iowa City Downtown District has also published Storefront and Signage Guidelines (included in the packet). The signage guidelines encourage projecting signs, durable materials, dimensional letterforms, and a scale to fit the building. Sign placement should take into consideration the architectural features and proportions of the building and when a sign band exists fit signs into the original space of the sign band. Storefront projecting signs are located below the second-floor window sill, a minimum of 8 feet above the sidewalk and project a maximum of 4 feet. Plastic signs with painted letters where the entire face of the sign is illuminated is not allowed. In Staff’s opinion, new sign designs are a necessary and welcome part of a vibrant, active commercial district that require a blending of old and new materials and designs. As with many modern signs in brick commercial buildings, the materiality tends to not reflect the masonry construction but modern tastes. Since this building does not have a dedicated sign band, a projecting sign is preferred and is a type of sign seen on many buildings in the Central Business District. In addition, the sign on the front façade is located to point to the commercial entrance in the back portion of the building on the alley. Installing the sign into the mortar joints (or existing anchors) instead of adding new holes into the historic brick is one of the biggest concerns with sign installation on historic buildings. Sign installation of this type has also gained a consensus for approval from the Commission in recent years. Staff finds the new sign design appropriate for the historic building. Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 13 S. Linn Street as presented in the application. 13 South Linn Street, Hohenschuh Mortuary Application for Historic Review Property Owner/ Applicant information (Please check primary contact person) Historic Designation (Maps are located at the following link: www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources) Proposed Project Information Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-3B. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the 1HLJKERUKRRGDQG'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHVRIÀFHDW&LW\+DOO or online at: www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Meeting Schedule: The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the RIÀFHRI1HLJKERUKRRGDQG'HYHORSPHQW6HUYLFHVE\QRRQRQ:HGQHVGD\WKUHHZHHNVSULRUWRWKH meeting. See last page of this application for deadlines and meeting dates. For Staff Use: Date submitted: &HUWLÀFDWHRI1RPDWHULDO(IIHFW &HUWLÀFDWHRI$SSURSULDWHQHVV Major Review Intermediate Review Minor Review Property Owner Name: (PDLO Address: Phone Number: City: State: Zip Code: This Property is a local historic landmark. This Property is within a historic or conservation district (choose location): Contractor/Consultant Name: (PDLO Address: Phone Number: City: State: Zip Code: Address: Use of Property: Date Constructed (if known): OR Brown St. Historic District College Green Historic District (DVW&ROOHJH6W+LVWRULF'LVWULFW Longfellow Historic District Northside Historic District Summit St. Historic District Woodlawn Historic District Clark St. Conservation District College Hill Conservation District Dearborn St. Conservation District Goosetown/ Horace Mann Conservation District Governor-Lucas St. Conservation District :LWKLQWKHGLVWULFWWKLV3URSHUW\LV&ODVVLÀHGDV Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric Jefferson St. Historic District 6/4/2020 JTK Holdings LLC (319)430-0696 730 N Linn St Iowa City IA 52240 CR Signs & Lighting Inc Lee@CRSignsInc.com 319-826-3608 4701 1st Ave SE Ste 10 Cedar Rapids IA 52402 13 S Linn St Application Requirements Application Requirements Addition %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV (Typically projects entailing an addition to the building footprint such as a room, porch, deck, etc.) Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected. Product Information Floor Plans Site Plans Photographs Alteration %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV (Typically projects entailing work such as siding and window replacement, skylights, window opening alterations, deck or porch replacement/construction, baluster repair, or similar. If the project is a minor DOWHUDWLRQSKRWRJUDSKVDQGGUDZLQJVWRGHVFULEHWKHVFRSHRIWKHSURMHFWDUHVXIÀFLHQW Product Information Photographs Construction %XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQV of a new building Product Information Floor Plans Site Plans Photographs Demolition Photographs (Projects entailing the demolition of a primary structure or outbuilding, or any portion of a building, such as porch, chimney, decorative trim, baluster, etc.) (YLGHQFHRIGHWHULRUDWLRQ Proposal of Future Plans Repair or Restoration of an existing structure that will not change its appearance. Other Please contact the Preservation Specialist at 356-5243 for materials which need to be included with applications Project Description: Materials to be Used: Exterior Appearance Changes: Photographs Product Information To Submit Application:Download form, Fill it out and email it to jessica-bristow@iowa-city.org or mail to Historic 3UHVHUYDWLRQ&LW\RI,RZD&LW\(:DVKLQJWRQ6WUHHW,RZD&LW\,$ Install new signage to east and south elevations as per attached designs Aluminum, acrylic, vinyl Addition of signage to east and south elevations as shown in accompanying drawings 59 Iowa City Historic Preservatfon Handbook 10.0 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitatfon The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards) were originally written to determine the appropriateness of proposed project work on propertfes that were listed on the Natfonal Register of Historic Places. The Standards are accompanied by instructfons concerning methods, materials, historical character, and other consideratfons that relate to the historical significance of the partfcular property and its surroundings. The Standards have been widely accepted by state, county, and city governments. The Iowa City Historic Preservatfon Commission uses the Standards to determine the appropriateness of exterior changes to historic landmarks and propertfes located in historic and conservatfon districts. The Iowa City Guidelines are based on and comply with the Standards, and were written to provide more specific guidance for owners, contractors and consultants in Iowa City as well as the Historic Preservatfon Commission. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (1990) are listed below. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristfcs of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteratfon of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its tfme, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most propertfes change over tfme; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distfnctfve features, finishes, and constructfon techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioratfon requires replacement of a distfnctfve feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualitfes and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantfated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblastfng, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitfgatfon measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additfons, exterior alteratfons, or related new constructfon shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentfated from the old and shall be compatfble with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additfons and adjacent or related new constructfon shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essentfal form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 10.0 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 4.2 Iowa City Downtown District | Storefront & Signage Guidelines Well-designed signs help create successful storefronts. Comprised of letterforms and graphic elements, a sign conveys the personality of the business and creates a sense of excitement and vibrancy on the street. Signage should be designed by a design professional and fabricated by a sign company that understands various methods and materials that are appropriate to the District. The size of the sign should be appropriate for the storefront, building and neighboring buildings as well as the pedestrian experience. If signs are too large and bright, they may reduce visibility of the merchandise and affect the dining experience of neighboring sidewalk cafés. Pedestrian visibility, both from adjacent sidewalks and from across the street, is the primary consideration for the type of signage used as well as its size and location. Signs should not be scaled for vehicular visibility since the characteristics of the streetscape, narrow viewing angles and trees minimize the benefits of larger signs. Using a variety of well-designed and appropriately scaled sign types is the best approach. Best Practices - Encouraged •Use of projecting signs increases pedestrian visibility and creates a unique feel for the District. •Use quality, durable materials. •Plan lighting placement to best accentuate the signage. •Scale signs to fit the building and avoid obscuring architectural features. •Exposed neon is appropriate if used in a limited and tasteful manner. •Dimensional letterforms add more interest to signage than flat vinyl or painted signs. Non-illuminated, pin-mounted letters can be highly effective. Exposed neon is an appropriate method if used in a limited and tasteful manner. Hand-painted signage can feel both nostalgic and refined. Restore old signs when possible. A three-dimensional element can make your storefront more distinctive. Halo-lit letters are an elegant way to illuminate a sign. 4 | Signs 4.3 Iowa City Downtown District | Storefront & Signage Guidelines •Consider restoring historic signs. •Consider 3-dimensional elements to make signs more interesting. Best Practices - Avoid •Internally illuminated, plastic-faced letterforms or 'cloud' type backlit acrylic signs are not allowed. Instead use individual open-face, neon channel letters, halo-illuminated letters or push-through letters. •Back-lit, acrylic faced cabinet signs, where the entire face is illuminated, are prohibited except in the case of historic theater marquees. Benefits •Creative, well-designed signage draws attention, adds a layer of detail and interest to the storefront and creates a lasting impression with the customer. •Smaller, pedestrian-friendly, unique signs can be less expensive than traditional, vehicular-oriented signs. Back-lit, acrylic-faced cabinet signs, where the entire face is illuminated, are prohibited. Internally illuminated, plastic-faced letterforms are not allowed. Artistic elements add charm and elegance to a sign. Blade signs offer great visibility for pedestrians and offer an opportunity for creative solutions. Sometimes a very simple design solution can be very effective. Use creative shapes to make signs more appealing. 4 | Signs 8 9 Best Practices - Encouraged (continued) 4.6 Iowa City Downtown District | Storefront & Signage Guidelines Projecting Signs Projecting Signs project out from the face of the building over the sidewalk, are two-sided and contain the business name and/or logo. In some cases a three-dimensional object or shape related to the business may be used. These signs may or may not incorporate the business name or logo. Because it is not possible to define all the allowable or prohibited designs, Projecting Signs of this nature are subject to design review. There are three types of Projecting Signs allowed in the District: •Storefront Projecting Signs are located below the second floor window sill. •Upper Level Projecting Signs are located above the second floor window sill and below the bottom of cornice or roof line if no cornice exists. For any allowable Upper Level Projecting Sign, the tenant must obtain permission from the building owner. Upper Level Projecting Signs are only permitted when any of the following conditions exist: ͳ The retail tenant occupies the entire building, and the building frontage is greater than 60 feet. ͳ The tenant is a hotel, theater or bowling alley as permitted by the sign code. •Banner Projecting Signs are located above the second floor window sill and below the bottom of cornice or roof line if no cornice exists. Banner Projecting Signs are only permitted when any of the following conditions existing: ͳ The retail tenants are located in a large, multi- tenant building where access to individual tenants is through a common lobby from the street, and tenants do not have individual exterior storefronts. ͳ The retail tenant occupies a large, multi-story building with more than 200 feet of street frontage. Storefront Projecting Signs Upper Level Projecting Signs and Banners 4'-0" max projection 4'-0" max projection 4'-0" max projection 8'-0" min. above sidewalk 9 S.F. Max 9 S.F. Max 9 S.F. Max No lower than bottom of sill No higher than bottom of cornice 4 | Signs Mount at 45º on corner of building if located on corner of street When possible center between windows and consider best location on building Center in available space Consider architectural features when determining vertical location of signs on building 4.7 Iowa City Downtown District | Storefront & Signage Guidelines Decorative brackets add interest and enhance the design. Storefront Projecting Signs are highly visible for pedestrians. A three-dimensional object creates an eye-catching sign. Small light fixtures can me used to illuminate the sign effectively. Creative, artistic elements grab pedestrian attention. Storefront Projecting Signs Best Practices - Encouraged •Use high quality, durable, rigid materials that will not bow or bend. •Lightweight, swinging-type signs are an inexpensive but highly visible way to identify your storefront. •Use clear, memorable imagery and interesting shapes. •The bracket or support structure is part of the visual presentation and should be simple and clean, or thoughtfully incorporated into the design of the sign. •The bottom of the sign shall be no lower than 8 feet above the sidewalk, and the top shall be no higher than the bottom of the second floor window sill. •Consider adjacent projections (Projecting Sign, awnings, canopies) when determining the location of the sign. Do not obstruct pedestrian view of adjacent tenant Projecting Signs. •Locate signs no closer than 1 foot from the adjacent lease or property line and no closer than 12 feet from any adjacent tenant Storefront Projecting Sign. •The maximum size is 9 sq. ft. per side, messages are only allowed on two sides, and the maximum projection is 4 feet from the face of the building. Best Practices - Avoid •Internally illuminated, plastic-faced letters and cabinet signs are not allowed. Benefits •Projecting signs are highly visible to pedestrians walking along the sidewalk and provide an excellent opportunity for creative expression of retail brand identity. •Simple, inexpensive signs can be very effective. 4 | Signs Storefront Projecting Signs should not be oversized or require excessive structures or guy wires for support. Internally Illuminated, plastic-faced sign cabinets are not allowed. 12 22 Staff Report July 5, 2020 Historic Review for 810 N. Johnson Street District: Brown Street Historic District Classification: Contributing The applicants, Laura Stunz and Thomas Mittman, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 810 N. Johnson Street, a Contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project consists of the removal of the 18-foot by 9-foot glass and aluminum solarium on the south side of the 1960’s addition and its replacement with an 18-foot by 12-foot screen porch addition. Applicable Regulations and Guidelines: 4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations 4.5 Foundations 4.7 Mass and Rooflines 4.8 Masonry 4.14 Wood 5.0 Guidelines for Additions 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint 7.0 Guidelines for Demolition 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features Staff Comments This house was built in 1918 as a gable front house with a side facing crossing gable. The house has several Craftsman details such as the clipped gables, shingle siding, exposed rafter tails in the bottom of the eaves. Several details seem to be inspired by a Colonial Revival style such as the steep roof and full-length dormers which give the house a Dutch Colonial appearance. Many of the double-hung windows on the house have a multi-paned upper sash over a single-paned lower sash and are considered original. This house may have had multiple additions. One addition in the 1960s added a first-floor addition and a lower level greenhouse. In 1999, a remodel project for a kitchen and laundry room was approved by the Commission and changed some of the openings on the north and west side and is mentioned in the application. In 2016 the owners were approved to replace storm window sashes that were used in five second floor windows, with more appropriate metal-clad wood sashes. The applicant is proposing to remove the aluminum and glass solarium and replace it with a slightly wider, and more useable screen porch area. The width would change from 9 feet to 12 feet (aligning with the front of the house to the east. The new screen porch would have a low-slope membrane roof with exposed rafter tails, similar to those on the eave ends. The roof will be lower than the existing solarium roof to provide more room for the windows above. The porch roof would be supported with 6-inch by 6-inch cedar wrapped posts. This is a larger size than the 4 x 4 posts in the application. Currently, the bottom of the greenhouse is below grade. The screened porch will also be partially below grade, but since it is wider and the site slopes down away from the house, more of the screened porch wall will be visible. The low knee wall will be skim- coated to match the foundation on the house. The porch will have a concrete floor, since it is below grade, and a beadboard ceiling. The screened door will face east. An existing limestone retaining wall will be rebuilt with the project. Section 7.0 Demolition recommends removing alterations that are not historic and that significantly detract from the building’s historic character or that are structurally unsound and are a safety hazard. Section 5.1 of the guidelines, Expansion of the Building Footprint, recommends that the design of an addition does not diminish the character of the historic structure, is distinguishable from the original structure at the point they connect, and is placed at the rear of the building. New porches should be constructed so that they are consistent with the historic building. New porches less than 18 inches above grade may be constructed with a concrete floor. In addition, a palette of materials similar to the original structure should be used and the design should match key horizontal “lines” such as eave height, both in order to provide continuity between the two portions of the building. Additions should be placed at the rear of the building if possible. In Staff’s opinion, the existing aluminum and glass solarium is not an appropriate addition to a historic house and a past makeup of the Commission had suggested that it should be removed and rebuilt in a more appropriate style. This project will make that change while also enlarging the space so that it is more useful. The new roof line will not align with other horizontal elements because the porch is below grade but it will provide better space for the windows in the 1960s addition above Recommended Motion Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 810 N Johnson Street as presented in the application and described in the staff report. 810 North Johnson Street Application for Historic Review Application for alterations to the historic landmarks or properties located in a historic district or conservation district pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 14-3B. Guidelines for the Historic Review process, explanation of the process and regulations can be found in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, which is available in the Neighborhood and Development Services office at City Hall or online at:www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources The HPC does not review applications for compliance with building and zoning codes. Work must comply with all appropriate codes and be reviewed by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. Please save as draft every 10-15 minutes to avoid work being lost. Meeting Schedule : The HPC meets the second Thursday of each month. Applications are due in the office of Neighborhood and Development Services by noon on Wednesday three weeks prior to the meeting. See deadlines and meeting dates. Property Owner Contractor / Consultant Property Owner / Applicant Information Property Owner Name * Email * Phone * Address * Primary Contact * Laura Stunz and Thomas Mittman laura-stunz@uiowa.edu 319 530-0358 City Iowa City State / Province / Region IA Postal / Zip Code 52245 Country USA Street Address 810 N Johnson St. Address Line 2 Yes No Name * Email * Phone * Beth Rapson - Regarding Home elizabethrapson@gmail.com 319 25-7719 Address * Use of Property * Date constructed Maps are located at the following link: www.icgov.org/historicpreservationresources * Please select the district below:* Address Primary Contact * City Iowa City State / Province / Region IA Postal / Zip Code 52245 Country USA Street Address 715 N Johnson St. Address Line 2 Yes No Proposed Project Information City Iowa City State / Province / Region IA Postal / Zip Code 52245 Country USA Street Address 810 Johnson St Address Line 2 Residential if known 6/1/1928 Historic Designation This property is a local historic landmark This property is within a historic or conservation district Brown St. Historic District College Green Historic District East College St. Historic District Jefferson St. Historic District Longfellow Historic District Northside Historic District Summit St. Historic District Woodlawn Historic District Clark St. Conservation District College Hill Conservation District Dearborn St. Conservation District Goosetown/ Horace Mann Conservation District Governor-Lucas St. Conservation District Within the district, this property is classified as: Choose appropriate project type. In order to ensure application can be processed, please include all listed materials. Applications without necessary materials may be rejected.* Project Description:* Materials to be Used:* Exterior Appearance Changes:* Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric Application Requirements Addition Alteration Construction Demolition Repair or Restoration Other Remove Solarium on the south side of the 1960s addition and replace with a screen porch more appropriate to the historical architecture of the 1928 original house Additional Requirements Glass and aluminum 18’x9’ solarium attached to the south side of 1960 addition to this house will be removed and replaced with a 18’x12’ screen porch This home owner has had two other Historic Preservation project approvals/awards. 1999 & 2016. The 1999 Historic Review committee had expressed hope that this solarium and other aspects of the 1960 addition be reimagined at some point. (20 years later here I am on their behalf). Block knee wall skim coated to match other exterior this will mostly be below grade (as is the current 3’ high knee wall). Concrete slab porch floor with perimeter drainage system. 4x4 Cedar posts and rafters with exposed rafter tails to mirror original house details. Bead board ceiling. Low slope membrane roof. The screen porch roof and profile will be lowered to allow more architectural definition between the bottom of the LR windows and top of the roof. The current solarium 18’x9’, which has an entry door from the lower lever of the house has a 3’ knee wall below the grade - not visible from the street. The new screen porch 18’x12’will be 3’ wider and the knee wall will be lowered to 2’ high and Grade adjusted on the south lawn to present a more gradual fall away from the house down the hill. There are a couple of dead trees that will be removed. The existing limestone wall will be removed and then rebuilt after the new grade has been established. *None of the historic steps on this property will be impacted. Date: July 9, 2020 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: 400 Block of N. Clinton Street Background Information At the Historic Preservation Commission’s meeting on Thursday, January 9, the Commission discussed the 400 Block of N. Clinton Street. At the meeting, staff asked if the Commission was open to considering the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street in exchange for the local landmark designation of 410 -412 N. Clinton Street. A summary of the Commission’s thoughts on this item are as follows: • Expressed concern that historic properties are being held hostage and that the history of the community is being leveraged for private gain. • Ideally 400 N. Clinton Street would also be saved; however, the Commission wants to work with the developer to achieve an Iowa City Landmark Designation for 410-412 N. Clinton Street. • Stated that the proposed design is out of character with the existing neighborhood. There is an interest in exploring the recommendations regarding changes to the design proposed by Friends of Historic Preservation (see their comments below). • Expressed a need to explore the rehabilitation of the historic structure as part of the local landmark designation. • Recommended transparency in the process in terms of public benefits vs. private gains. Concerned that certain features of the built environment, such as height, are easily agreed to without much thought to the impacts on the community. • Expressed an interest in exploring a more comprehensive solution. The Commission would like to see a city-wide policy framework established (e.g. transfer of development rights) rather than negotiate these situations on case-by- case basis. In addition, a representative of Friends of Historic Preservation attended the meeting. Their comments are as follows: • The house at 410-412 N. Clinton Street is too important not to try to landmark. • Expressed concern that the height and scale of the building, as designed, is out of character with the neighborhood. Recommended removing the 6 th story, but allowing the 5th story to be built without a stepback. • Recommended that the gabled roof be replaced with a flat roof to help reduce the perceived scale of the building. Despite the many concerns raised by the Commission, the main takeaway from the discussion was an interest in exploring solutions that will result in the local landmark designation of 410-412 N. Clinton Street. July 1, 2020 Page 2 In February 2020, staff shared the input from the Commission and the Friends of Historic Preservation with the City Council. The City Council generally agreed with the design changes recommended by the Commission. Specifically, the reduction in height to 5 stories and the flat roof. The Council stated that they were not concerned with the increased density and reduced parking, but were concerned with the lack of open space identified on the plans. Revised Plans In May 2020, staff received a revised concept from the property owner. This concept incorporated many of the suggestions from the Commission and Council. It reduced the scale to 5 stories, incorporated a flat roof, and added open space. However, the revised concept also incorporated a portion of the new building wrapping around the historic structure (see Figure 1). Figure 1. May 2020 West Elevation Staff reviewed the revised concept from May 2020 and requested some changes, including the removal of the portion of the new building that wraps around the historic structure. After receiving this feedback, the property owner made some changes to the proposal, which are shown in Figure 2. The full plans are included in Attachment 1. The July submission still shows a portion of the new building wrapping around the historic structure, but the height has been reduced to 3 stories. The July plans also removed the protruding elevator shaft, which staff requested. Staff also requested that the wall surrounding the open space be removed due to concerns with having a wall connected to or near the historic structure. The revised plans still show the wall. July 1, 2020 Page 3 Figure 2. July 2020 West Elevation Summary of Existing v. Proposed Development Potential As was discussed at the Commission’s January meeting, the proposal does not meet current zoning standards. In order to develop the building as proposed both a rezoning map amendment and text amendment would be required. Table 1 provides a general comparison of existing conditions, redevelopment potential, and the proposed development. Table 1. Existing Conditions v. Redevelopment Potential 410-412 N. Clinton 400 N. Clinton & 112 E. Davenport 400 N. Clinton & 112 E. Davenport Existing Conditions Re- Development Existing Conditions Re- Development Re- Development Proposed Development Zoning RM-44 RM-44 RM-44 RM-44 Rezoning to PRM Rezoning to PRM # of Units 18 units Max 24 1- bedroom units 11 units Max 24 1- bedroom units Max 27 1- bedroom units 32 units 71 bedrooms Open Space Unknown 2,400 sq ft Unknown 2,400 sq ft 2,700 sq ft 1,768 sq ft Parking 9 spaces 24 spaces 7 spaces 24 spaces 27 spaces 21 spaces Height 2 stories 35’ 2.5 stories 1 story 35’ 35’ (up to 65’ with bonus) 5 stories Input From the Commission At the July 9 meeting, staff would like the Commission’s input on the revised plans submitted by the property owner (Attachment 1). Attachments: 1. Plans for the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street, July 2020 2. Memo to the Historic Preservation Commission, January 2020. Date: To: January 9, 2020 Historic Preservation Commission From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: 400 Block of N. Clinton Street Background Information In early 2019, the City Council considered an Iowa City Historic Landmark rezoning for the properties at 410-412 N. Clinton Street (Figure 1). This historic landmark designation was initiated by the Historic Preservation Commission after a sub-committee of the Commission studied and identified several of Iowa City’s early brick houses for local landmark designation. The property at 410 N. Clinton Street, the Cochrane-Sharpless-Dennis House, was identified as a priority property. Attached is the staff memo to the Historic Preservation from December 2017 that outlines the significance of the property. Prior to the City Council’s consideration of this rezoning, both the Historic Preservation Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval. While a majority of the City Council supported the designation, the vote ultimately failed as a supermajority was required, but not reached. Figure 1. 410-412 N. Clinton Street January 2, 2020 Page 2 After the failed vote at Council, City staff reached out to the property owner to explore possible scenarios that could result in a voluntary local historic landmark designation. Through discussions, the property owner of 410-412 N. Clinton Street mentioned the possibility of acquiring two properties immediately to the south – 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street (Figure 2). Assuming acquisition of these properties, the property owner was open to exploring a scenario in which the City would grant extra development potential on those lots in exchange for the local landmark designation of 410-412 N. Clinton Street. The additional development potential would include a rezoning of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street to the Planned High Density Multi-Family Residential (PRM) zone and potential text amendments to the PRM zone bonus provisions, which offer regulatory incentives for projects that provide public benefits. The properties are currently zoned High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44). Figure 2. 400 N. Clinton Street & 112 E. Davenport Street Prior to exploring this option with the property owner, staff presented this option at a City Council work session in March 2019. During this work session the City Council expressed a willingness to consider a rezoning and text amendments to allow a 4-story structure similar in height to Currier Hall, which is located across the street, with a high level of design review and historic preservation review to ensure compatible infill development. Friends of Historic Preservation also reached out to staff regarding the item on the Council’s work session. Staff’s understanding of the Friends of Historic Preservation position is as follows: January 2, 2020 Page 3 • They are displeased with the prospect of demolishing 400 N. Clinton Street; however, it is a tradeoff they are willing to consider to preserve 410 N. Clinton Street if an agreement includes some provisions for: o Ensuring that the rehabilitation/restoration of 410 N. Clinton Street is part of any agreement. o Ensuring that the rehabilitation/restoration of 410 N. Clinton Street is done in compliance with the Secretary of Interior Standards on the exterior. o Ensuring that the new use is a compatible use. o There is design review from City preservation staff and the Historic Preservation Commission of the 410 N. Clinton Street restoration work. o There is some discussion of listing in the National Register of Historic Places and historic preservation tax credits. o There is design review of the new building, which may include input from the Historic Preservation Commission. o Salvage is considered as part of any demolition. One item that staff would like to add to this list of suggestions is photo documentation of 400 N. Clinton Street should it be demolished. After the City Council work session and the Council’s willingness to consider a proposal, staff reached out to the property owner. Attached are the most recent plans received for the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street. The plans show a 6-story, block-scale building with a total of 30 dwelling units. Twenty-one underground parking spaces are shown on the plans, which are accessed via a drive behind 410-412 N. Clinton Street off of the east-west alley. Input From the Commission At the Commission’s January 9 meeting, staff would like the Commission’s input. Specifically, staff would like the Commission to discuss the following questions: 1. Would the Commission be open to considering the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street in exchange for the local landmark designation of 410-412 N. Clinton Street? Why or why not? 2. If the Commission is open to pursuing this, what aspects of the landmark rezoning or the redevelopment should be considered? Next Steps After receiving input from the Historic Preservation Commission, staff will share the comments received and the plans for the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street with the City Council for their discussion and input. Attachments: 1. Memo to the Historic Preservation Commission on 410 N. Clinton Street, December 7, 2017 2. Plans for the redevelopment of 400 N. Clinton Street and 112 E. Davenport Street, November 2019 Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240 MEMORANDUM Date: July 1, 2020 To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Kevin Boyd, Chair, Historic Preservation Commission Re: Sharing the Stories of our Community’s Full History Much of our Commission's work is the preservation of the physical heritage of our community. And that work is important and must continue. But what remains of our physical heritage isn’t a complete picture of who we are or who we were as a community. For example, much of the physical presence of the historically Black neighborhood along South Capitol Street is gone. But that cannot mean that we do not preserve those stories and that history. I believe we are called now more than ever to tell the full story of our history. I believe we must expand the work we do by both preserving the physical heritage but also seek, learn, and share stories that were often under-represented in our history. Those stories are part of our shared heritage as well. An effort to preserve the stories of historically underrepresented communities is not meant to undermine our important work to preserve the physical heritage, only to add to our work. The work of previous Historic Preservation Commissions to preserve physical heritage has left some of that underrepresented history preserved and intact. The College Hill Conservation District meant the Iowa Federation Home on Iowa Avenue remains preserved. Our Commission was a leader in working to save the Tate-Arms Building. The Woodlawn Historic District means the home of Suffragist Zella Stewart White remains at 1010 Woodlawn Ave. The basement at the Unitarian Church on Iowa and Gilbert was the home of a Gay Pride Dance in 1973 that was raided by 17 members of law enforcement including Highway Patrol, Sheriff’s Office, ICPD, and two men were charged on bootlegging charges - later dropped. The work to preserve that church, incidentally, preserved a key piece of the early LGBTQ community history as well. The work of preserving the physical heritage also leads to preserving our community’s stories. But that physical preservation alone isn’t enough. We must do more. My suggestions for action. 1. We amend our work plan to include the work of Telling the Full Story. 2. We form a subcommittee that works to preserve historically underrepresented communities' stories and consider how to share and preserve those stories. 3. We ask the Council for some City Staff time devoted to support these efforts. We amend our work plan to include the work of Telling the Full Story. We add to the Commission's Work Plan the phrase “Create a subcommittee to explore untold history or under-told aspects of our community’s heritage, particularly those who are historically underrepresented. Consider how to best preserve and share those stories.” We form a subcommittee that works to preserve historically underrepresented communities' stories and consider how to share and preserve those stories. The membership should include some commissioners but also include others who are interested in preserving these stories. The work of the Subcommittee should first research, compile, and engage communities to discover stories that are underrepresented in our shared history. The work should consider how to share these stories even if the physical part of those stories isn’t included. Historic plaques and signage are fine, but perhaps art might be a better way to tell those stories. A key location for the early Mexican immigrants to Iowa City is Oak Grove Park - there may be a creative way to tell that story as a community gathering place. Finally, if physical places are discovered through these efforts, the subcommittee should recommend potential landmark designation locations to this commission for consideration. We ask the Council for some City Staff time devoted to support these efforts. I envision this being largely volunteer driven, but having someone provide expertise on preservation, helping to coordinate, seek engagement with other city departments, and nudge the volunteers forward are types of support this subcommittee would need. Ideally, it’s the Preservation Planner, due the expertise in this area. Thanks for your thoughtful consideration. Look forward to discussing with you all next week. MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL June 11, 2020 MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Gosia Clore, Sharon DeGraw, Lyndi Kiple, Cecile Kuenzli, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren, Austin Wu MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: G.T. Karr, Brenda Nations, Ginalie Swaim, RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. utilizing Zoom. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: Gosia Clore spoke as a member of the public. She said she was grateful to have had the opportunity to serve on the Historic Preservation Commission for the last six years. This is her last meeting. She said she had learned a great deal from current and previous commission members. Clore believes the mission of historic preservation should be to promote preservation of the character and the livelihood of the neighborhoods and to help homeowners take care of their properties in an equitable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly fashion. She believes preserving the character of the entire neighborhood and sustainable development should go hand in hand. She recommended the Commission focus on making communities more inclusive and allowing them to maintain their character, but also to allow for flexibility in the use of materials and technologies that have proven more safe, energy efficient, and easier to maintain. She wants Historic Preservation Staff to act as a bridge and not as an obstacle in the quest to make neighborhoods better. Electronic Meeting (Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8) An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and the public presented by COVID-19. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 2 of 10 Pitzen joined the meeting at this time. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1118 East College Street – East College Historic District (skylights and west-facing window on rear addition, new window added to the front elevation). Bristow explained some of the property images are from 2005. They are being used to better see a corner of the property where there is a tree currently. Bristow said the project has three parts. The first part is adding two skylights to the roof of the one-story addition behind the house. The proposal is adding one to each slope of that roof. The product information would be submitted after-the-fact. The recommendation includes approving the material by Staff or Staff and Chair once the material is determined. Something with a dark frame is always suggested so it blends in with the roof. The second part involves an addition from 1973. A 2005 project that removed the synthetic siding also altered this addition. It did have a bay-projecting casement window configuration. The project right now is to get more light into the house. The proposal is to add other windows. The Staff Report showed one or two, but nothing had been decided. In speaking with the applicant since that time, Bristow said the applicant is interested in doing three windows instead. Since this house has two sets of a group of three, or three-ganged windows, Staff felt that was appropriate. She said it would not be possible to have the head height align exactly because of the height of the addition. She said it would be appropriate to have that sill align with an adjacent window. The third part of this project concerns the front of the house. Commission guidelines are very clear that it is disallowed to change the front of an historic property in an historic district by adding new windows or doors. Bristow said one reason an exception may be granted is if it had previously changed. She noted the current window configuration of the house is more unusual than what is normally seen in an historic district. She said it appears to have fewer windows. Bristow consulted with another historian to investigate why that could be. It is not known exactly when the house was built, but likely about 1900 in some kind of vernacular form. There are elements of the earlier Queen Anne style. There is a slightly unusual bay window incorporated in the corner. The windows in the upper sash are leaded glass. The window next to the door is also leaded glass. Those are all pretty clear elements of the Queen Anne style. Around 1900-1905 that style morphed into a Free Classic style. It is a bit simpler and more affordable style. Windows like the one in the front and the one in the side where you have a larger window with two sidelights appear very similar to a Palladian window, which would be one element of a Free Classic style, except the Palladian window would have had an arch above the central sash. Another element of the Free Classic style is Doric classical columns, just basically the more simplified nature. Whether the house had been altered to lose the arch above the window was considered, but the ceiling line inside would not have made that possible. It was likely installed originally as a less expensive version of a Palladian window. While discussing this with the other historian, Bristow HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 3 of 10 said they thought maybe this was a builder’s home. The owner put the extra money into the leaded glass window on the front and went less expensive with some other things. Another unusual thing is the size of the window in the gable that is out of scale. The dormer over on the east side has been altered. Bristow said there is not a lot of evidence that the front was altered. She noted in the recommendation that there are some unusual things going on here, so maybe it was altered. She showed a mock-up, just adding in one window. One window is recommended because the large, cottage-style window that you would sometimes see would not typically be here, especially with this type of Palladian-like window above. If there were two, it would get cramped with this bay, and a window would not have been placed right behind a column in this kind of configuration. Staff feels one individual window, just a one-over-one, no leaded glass, in the noted location, would be the more appropriate way to go. Bristow shared examples of configurations from other houses. One example had a turret and a door, and the empty space is filled with something. Another example had a similar Palladian window, but it did not have a lot of empty wall space. All examples have more windows and a more regular window pattern. Bristow again said the guidelines are clear that it is disallowed to change the front of the house unless there is an exception, and typically the exception would be granted because the structure had previously changed. At the same time, it does not appear that adding a window, at least an individual window, would greatly impact the historic character of this house or its neighborhood, and that is the recommendation. Boyd asked if anyone had clarifying questions, opened and closed the public hearing. Kuenzli thought it looked as though the house has been significantly altered and that the changes proposed, as presented, would be acceptable. She agreed that it would be desirable to get more light into an old house. Wu concurred with Kuenzli. MOTION: Kiple moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 1118 East College Street as presented in the Staff report through an exception to the guidelines allowing the addition of a new window opening because it will not negatively impact the existing window pattern or the historic character of the neighborhood due to the unique conditions presented by the existing architecture with the following conditions: Double-hung windows as a single, pair, or group of three are installed in the west wall; the final window pattern is approved by Staff and Chair; all window product information is approved by Staff and Chair. Agran seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0. CLIMATE ACTION AND PRESERVATION PRESENTATION FROM CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE: Boyd noted that Iowa City has declared a climate crisis. He thought there was great overlap in terms of work the Historic Preservation Commission does on sustainability, as well as opportunities for learning. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 4 of 10 G.T. Karr spoke. Karr served on the Historic Preservation Commission for a couple years and stepped down to serve on the Climate Action Commission. He is also a contractor and remodeler by trade. On September 18, 2018, the City of Iowa City officially adopted the Climate Action Plan. There were 35 action items to reduce the carbon emissions and some goals set for 25% reduction in 2025 and 80% in 2050. A year later more aggressive goals were set. Karr said he wants the two commissions to collaborate for progress toward these goals. He noted all the Climate Action information is available on the City’s website. Sections that comprise action items include buildings, transportation, waste, adaptation, and sustainable lifestyle. Karr believes there are simple opportunities in buildings and waste. One of the items that was identified in the study and one of the targets was to retrofit 10% of all existing buildings by 2025 and 90% by 2050. He noted that projects coming before Historic Preservation are from existing housing stock. He believes there are co-benefits between goals of climate action and historic preservation. Karr said another one of the goals is renewable energy, transitioning 3% of the buildings from natural gas to high-efficiency electrical heat. He said with retrofitting – trying to put electric heat in an historic home – there are some issues with how efficient the house is, with windows, insulation, etc. He said he is not saying windows need to be replaced. Karr said about 56% of the City’s consumption-based emissions are from the existing building stock. This is a huge segment. He said it will be challenging and expensive to change. Karr said he narrowed down three action items that he would like the Historic Preservation Commission to look at, do some research, and see how those items partner with Historic Preservation goals. Action 1.1 under the Buildings Section is to increase energy efficiency in residences. He said it sounds great and is an awesome thing to do, but there will be challenges. Action 1.4 under the Buildings Section - Increasing onsite renewable energy systems and electrifications. He wondered what that would mean if trying to do geothermal in existing areas with trees or putting solar panels on historic buildings. Action 3.4 under Waste – Establishing partnerships to divert construction waste from the landfill. Karr said the Historic Preservation Commission and Friends of Historic Preservation are already doing a fantastic job. He said the Salvage Barn was the first idea that came to mind to help preserve some items from going to the landfill. Karr said he wanted to reach out and either have a regular meeting or invite interested HPC members into working groups. He thought the Buildings working group was the place to start the conversation. He wanted to find a way to be proactive and create some efficiencies beyond putting LEDs inside and using low-flow aerators. Kiple noted the keynote speaker at the Preserve Iowa Summit, held this past weekend, talked about sustainability in historic preservation and how they can go hand-in-hand and how we HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 5 of 10 need to work together on those things. She thought it was a great initiative and great to see in Iowa City. Boyd said he went through the Climate Plan and had also marked those three action items. He said he was interested in building energy efficiency and noted the measurability of it is all in operating energy. None of it in the embodied energy that exists in the buildings. He said embodied energy, particularly in Europe and Australia, is a key component of measuring a building’s energy efficiency. He was curious if the Climate Action Commission had looked at embodied energy. Karr said within the Buildings working group there are two architects. One concentrates primarily on LEED certification. He said they have had conversations about that, but it boils down to a consistent way to gauge that and how it would be reported. He agreed that every aspect of the process should be looked at. Brenda Nations, Sustainability Coordinator for the City and contact for the Climate Action Commission, spoke. She said for a consumption-based inventory, which includes looking at embodied energy, the average age of Iowa City houses would be needed, but they did not have that information. They also needed to know what houses were made of and what percentage of houses were made of the materials. She said there are not really accepted protocols for a consumption-based inventory, and it is harder to see change. Kuenzli said she liked the idea of this project very much. With older houses, she thought it was important to find out where energy needs to be conserved to make a difference. She thought a blower door test would be a good measure of energy loss and wondered if the cost of the test could be subsidized for those who wanted to make improvements. Nations noted the City currently has a group of Green Iowa AmeriCorps. They do free blower door tests. She said every year the City has a group and they do free blower door tests for about 100 houses per year. Karr said there were programs in the works trying to partner with local nonprofits to increase the access to that and to increase the energy audits. He noted that there are challenges and limitations to what can be done on an historic house to improve energy efficiency. He said it is still important to do basic small things on the interior such as using LEDs and low-flow aerators. Regarding electrification of buildings, Nations said some cities, especially in California, are starting to have policies where they do not allow natural gas to go to new buildings. She said the City is trying to move toward that, but it would take a long time - decades. She noted MidAmerican is producing more and more renewable electricity, at 61% renewable electricity. Nations said systems need to be equitable, because sometimes it may cost more for the electricity to heat your home versus natural gas. Karr said heat pump technology has drastically improved, but a 1918 house is going to perform a lot differently than a 2020 house. There are some limitations. He said the City should be realistic and try to inform the public of those goals, but it is not a one size fits all. Some things make more sense for an older home and other things make more sense in a newer home, and that information should be shared. Ginalie Swaim asked where rehabbing windows would fit in the Climate Action Plan. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 6 of 10 Karr noted that glass is extremely inefficient, so as a payback for energy savings it is one of the least fruitful things a person could do. He said he had no problem encouraging people to reglaze, but thought things like weather stripping and storm windows, which are allowed in historic preservation, might be easier and more efficient from a cost standpoint. Kuenzli left the meeting at this time. Clore asked about insulating walls on the outside. Karr said that would be a siding issue but gets complicated with what is allowed and not allowed. He said if the goal is to make the house more efficient, it makes a lot of sense to insulate the walls, but he was not sure how that would play into preserving siding. Wu wondered where infill development might fit in the Climate Action Plan, with an example being construction on empty lots inside historic districts, and making sure development fits in with the character of those neighborhoods. Karr said that had not been discussed in the Climate Action Plan but thought the Historic Preservation Commission would have input on materials used and architectural details. Sellergren asked if there could be a public initiative to encourage people not to air condition. She thought it would be good to remind people they could get by with a ceiling fan and closing the house up in the morning. Nations understood the point but was hesitant because the climate is expected to get hotter and hotter and some people need air conditioning for their health conditions. She said they would think about it. Agran said he fell in the middle on the air conditioning subject. He said he lives in an historic house that does have central air, but it does not work very well because the house was not built for it. He said all his double-hung windows that ought to be able to drop down from the top and let hot air out, do not. When people install new storm windows, that also prohibits that kind of ventilation. He said he has a whole house fan that allows him to extend the season under which he is not using the air conditioner. He believed people need air conditioning for the conditions described by Nations but pointed out the old fashion things that help mitigate temperature change in a house are also still relevant and will reduce those bills. DeGraw said she was interested in the geothermal part. She thought it would be good if people could apply for historic preservation grants under a category of geothermal or green energy. She wondered about a program working with banks. Burford thought if people make the decision to spend the money to make changes for climate change, it would be terrible if the tax assessor increased people’s property taxes because they are participating in the community’s goals. Karr said everything brought up was being talked about within either the Climate Action Commission or their subcommittees. He said there have been discussions with banks about trying to roll out programs to help incentivize this. He also again encouraged the Historic Preservation Commission to join the meetings or any of the working groups to give insight. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 7 of 10 Boyd said there are a couple places for engagement. One is through joining working groups. The other is keeping each other in the loop about the work of each commission and where the other’s expertise may be needed. He thought the Historic Preservation Guidelines should also be reviewed and updated while thinking about climate change. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Certificate of No Material Effect – Chair and Staff Review. 407 Brown Street – Brown Street Historic District (deteriorated siding, trim, and soffit replacement). Bristow said 407 Brown Street is in the middle of a larger siding and trim repair and painting project. They have a Certificate of No Material Effect to replace a few key pieces of siding and trim and the soffit on the house. 608 1/2 Dearborn Street – Dearborn Street Conservation District (overhead door replacement). Bristow explained 608 1/2 Dearborn Street is a little building behind the house. It is noncontributing. On the map, it is two different properties, one on an alley and one on the street. The back property has a garage. It has an overhead door. They are replacing it to match the existing. It was hit by a car. Minor Review – Staff Review. 720 North Van Buren Street – Brown Street Historic District (2nd floor rear deck floor and railing replacement). Bristow said 720 North Van Buren Street on the alley has a rear porch that has a deck. It is not very visible. They are going to put a low-profile deck floor up here, maybe one of those that lays in panels. They will have a new railing that meets code, simple square spindles with posts. 409 Oakland Avenue – Longfellow Historic District (roof shingle replacement). 409 Oakland Avenue is in the Longfellow Historic District. It is a roof shingle replacement from flat shingle to an architectural shingle. 230 East Jefferson Street, St Mary’s Catholic Church - Jefferson Street Historic District (louver replacement, wood trim repair). Bristow explained in the steeple of St. Mary’s Catholic Church there are these large wooden panels with a lot of molding detail. They want to replace the louvers only. The original application was to replace all of this with metal. What they will be doing now is just replacing the louvers, with new metal louvers that will sit behind the original trim that will just be painted and stained. All that will change is the louvers. 1415 Davenport Street – Local Historic Landmark (kitchen and porch roof shingle replacement, kitchen window infill panel reconstruction, west basement window well/window replacement). 1415 Davenport Street is the Rose Hill house between Davenport and Bloomington. Bristow said neither she nor the Assessor have a good photo of this house. It is the one with the very long front yard going down to Bloomington Street. It used to be a part of the old Irish farm. It has HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 8 of 10 a few projects. The basement window with vents coming out of the window will be replaced with a newly created wood basement window with a panel in that location so that the venting does not go out through a broken glass panel. Bristow said the window well is very leaky. The house is brick. It has a limestone foundation and original brick window well. It was up to the owner to either make it out of brick or limestone. These two lower roofs on the Davenport Street side, technically the back, are for a porch and kitchen addition. The roof shingles will be replaced to match architectural shingles on the main roof. The kitchen windows were replaced with shorter windows at one point in time with an infill panel below. Those will all be replaced, as well, because there is a significant amount of rot. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR MAY 14, 2020 MOTION: Agran moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission’s May 14, 2020 meeting. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Historic Preservation and Sustainability References. A shortened version of the Study: The Greenest Building: Quantifying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse by Preservation Green Lab was included in the packet as background information to begin a sustainability discussion. Bristow said she did not have time to read the larger study. As the memo says, there is a link to more information. It is 100 pages and more about the methodology for the studies. It is a very recent study with information on technology related to green design, climate action, and sustainability. Commissioner Retirements. Boyd noted that both Agran and Clore are retiring from the Historic Preservation Commission. They both served six years. He thanked them for their service and said he appreciated their perspectives, which he will think about when considering future issues. Agran spoke about his time on the Commission. He said he learned about the history of specific properties in the City and the broader history of the City itself. He also learned a lot about the language and strategy, and ups and downs of public process. He said those lessons have benefited him in other ways, on other issues, while advocating for those in the community. He said he has been inspired watching the thoughtful, rational, and measured but passionate leadership of Swaim and Boyd. Agran believes the Historic Preservation Commission is at its best when it restrains itself from aesthetic judgment and nimbyism and instead focuses on being flexible in ways that dovetail with other critical missions of the City and supporting those initiatives of sustainability and social justice and, moreover, embraces the flexibility to support the broadest ideas of what it is we are trying to preserve in these historic neighborhoods. That is the structure, form, and functioning of the neighborhood itself. He urged remaining Commission members to look to the broadest interpretations of the Secretary of Interior Standards to allow the neighborhoods to live and breathe and evolve as a way to maintain their relevancy and preserve their history, while also allowing that history to HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 9 of 10 continue to be written. He said it had been a real pleasure to serve with the Commission members. Boyd recalled that a few months ago the Commission used this agenda period to take action and issued a statement to the City Council on an item that had not been individually listed in the agenda. He said the Commission needs to be cautious with how this period is used. He said it was described to him as discussion among the Commission, and information is one of us sharing something, and sharing it with everyone. He thought there were opportunities to talk about potential future agenda items, but not really to discuss those future agenda items unless they were part of the published agenda. Boyd said there would be ongoing conversations about climate change, and Burford emailed about some ways the Commission could be reflective or think about how the Commission’s work also fits in with the Black Lives Matter Movement. He said he has some ideas on that for the next agenda. He believed the Commission should be mindful of being very responsive to things that are happening in the community and it is important to make sure we tell the full history of the community. He asked Commission members to email him and Bristow if they have agenda items they want to bring forward, specifically noting what they would like to discuss. He said a Commissioner may need to write a memo for background on the topic. ADJOURNMENT: Agran moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Clore. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION June 11, 2020 Page 10 of 10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2019-2020 NAME TERM EXP. 6/13 8/08 8/19 9/12 10/10 11/14 12/12 1/09 2/13 3/12 4/09 5//14 6/11 AGRAN, THOMAS 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- BURFORD, HELEN 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X CLORE, GOSIA 6/30/20 O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X DEGRAW, SHARON 6/30/19 O/E X X O/E O/E X O/E X X O/E X X X KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- KUENZLI, CECILE 6/30/19 O/E X X O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 -- X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X PITZEN, QUENTIN 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X SELLERGREN, JORDAN 6/30/22 -- X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 O/E -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- WU, AUSTIN 6/30/20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- O/E X X O/E X X