Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19920722HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Minutes of July 22, 1992 Meeting was called to order by Roxanne Eflin with.Martha Madsen, Les Holst, Karen Day and Jake Vickery present. Absent from meeting were Don Erdman, Bill Poss, Joe Krabacher, Roger Moyer and Linda Smisek. 700 W. FRANCIS Roxanne: We are looking at a revision to the final approval of the outbuilding of Doug and Susan McPherson's property at 700 W. Francis. We have just had a worksession on the revisions that are being made and is there anymore discussion on this particular item? Karen: The footprint is not going to change and the only thing that would change is the dormers and we would have to work out the details of the dormers and window detail. The height will not change. Roxanne: I thought these changes were significant enough that they went beyond the project monitor. The monitor is Don Erdman. We can work with the applicant if the Board desires. I would recommend that the Board make a motion to direct Staff and the project monitor to work with the applicant on the changes to their final plan as submitted. MOTION: Jake made the motion to direct Staff and the project monitor to work with the applicant on the changes to their final plan as submitted; second by Martha. Ail in favor, motion carries. Jake: Relative to the treatment of the north and south elevation, (the dormers), it would be my preference unless there is some reason not to do this to join the windows together and simplify the treatment and take out the little one just so it reads like a little out building. That is a comment for monitor and staff. Don: The south elevation is the one that becomes very competitive with the house not the north. Doug McPhearson: Simplify both sides. Roxanne: We will look at the entire thing. I would recommend horizontal siding instead of vertical also. PROJECT MONITORING Roxanne: This is a review for an awning for the building where Aspen Grove is. They want to take an awning off and make a one pane window with a different awning. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 22, 1992 PIONEER PARK Roxanne: Pioneer Park gazebo was moved onto the east end of the lot and then it was subdivided up and the gazebo ended up on lot 2. One of the requirements that if ever lot 2 was developed the gazebo would come back over to lot 1. The Historic Trust is involved in a fund raiser to purchase out lot 2. They want to keep the gazebo there so it can serve as a feature in the park. They want to put a plaque on the gazebo with names of people who contributed to the purchase of the lot. I have no problem with the gazebo staying there as it is lovely and charming. There is not much room on lot one to put it anyway. I would like direction from the HPC regarding the gazebo. Martha: The option is to move it to lot one. Don: Lot 1 is busy already. Show of hands: Unaminous to keep gazebo on Lot 2. Roxanne: The concept was that the Historic Trust would become the facilitator to get the lot purchased and freeze development by buying it and using open space money of the city and County and a huge amount of private donations. The City and County put in $75,000 each and the rest is private up to $800,000 which is the purchase price. It looks like the trust might be the owner but I am against that because they do not need the liability and maintenance problems. The Parks Dept. does not want to maintain the park. Martha: The parks department is within the city and they don't want to maintain it? That is ill-logical. Don: It costs $50 a month in water alone. Jake: Has this gone to city Council? Roxanne: No but there was a worksession. Don: The city is always getting money that is earmarked for acquisition of open space yet now when they are given open space they don't want the responsibility. Jake: Roxanne, you need to argue that to Council. Don: Everytime you get a building permit you pay a park dedication fee. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 22, 1992 Martha: If taxpayers knew the Parks Dept. didn't want to take care of it I can't believe they would approve. Roxanne: The City wants to see the neighbors take care of the parcel themselves. Don: Just like the city wants to see people maintain all of the land which is the city's public right of way right up to the curb. Roxanne: I will forward your comments. Karen: They don't want the assets and liability. Jake: What is the planning department saying? Roxanne: I am saying that I feel the city should own the land. Amy supports City Council. Don: It is only logical that the Parks Dept. should take over and maintain it. 134 E. BLEEKER Roxanne: Jake needs some direction on the roof. Jake: The over framed roof. Roxanne: The existing roof is in bad shape and they would like to put a roof over it like a canopy which would raise the roof 18 inches. The applicant wants to come to the HPC for the height variance. Don: What does this do, save tearing the roof off? Jake: The main reason is that the client likes the inside of the existing carriage barn and wants to keep it intact and he wants to build this on top. Roxanne: The client doesn't want to remove the deteriorating member and structurally resupport, he just wants to build over. Jake: Structural plans to bring the roof up to grade call for putting some huge ridge members going down and doubling up all the roof joices etc. It would basically be tearing the entire old roof apart. Rather than do that they want to over frame it. Roxanne: They would also like to remove the building and reside it with totally new siding. to as close to the color of the house. siding off the out It will be stained Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 22, 1992 Don: Rough side out. Roxanne: That would be appropriate. Jake: We were proposing to power wash with a steel brush and then put new siding on with the rough side out and stain it to balance out. Roxanne: So you will have new siding, new windows and an over built roof. Do we then have historic preservation? Have we retained the character of the outbuilding? I feel the outbuilding is original but Jake has said it is severely deteriorating. I wanted them to try rehydrating the siding first and then staining or remove it, save it and on the two sides of the building that matter the most reside with that and do all the insulation and put back on the good boards. Jake: That is a good idea but I do not know if it would withstand that process. Siding on the east side is newer. Roxanne: Karen and Linda are the project monitors. Martha: My recollection from the original discussion was that the outbuilding was to remain an outbuilding, the character is gone. Roxanne: There is another issue as they are adding a gable end, deck and new roof. Don: What about an optional steel beam that does not extend as deep. Jake: That is the proposal. Martha: The owner is trying to preserve the inside and what we are trying to do is preserve the outside. Roxanne: The proposed deck that comes out also serves as a covered parking space. The Planning Dept. and Housing Authority are in favor of houses having as much outdoor living area and flexibility. I explained that Historic outbuildings did not have elevated decks but this is seen the least and the least important part of this building. It is also reversible and help make the quality of the living area nicer. On the other hand is it altering the character of this out building. Don: The space doesn't completely cover a car. Karen: It also brings life to the alley. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 22, 1992 Jake: If there was enough siding to do one side which would the Board choose? Roxanne: I would do the east surface that faces the church and then the north, alley side. Don: I would tend to use new wood on the south because it would ge the most sun. Roxanne: Karen and I talked about the overhang of the roof and it is appropriate. Roxanne: The new roof would have to come back and the deck the rest can be approved by the project monitor. Roxanne: There is concern about the french doors and the color of the addition to be white which would be too much of a character change. Karen: Possibly only the windows of the addition could be white. Roxanne: A more of a neutral pastel color would be more appropriate. Roxanne: To reiterate, the three things that will be coming back to the HPC for minor changes are the turret, hot tub green house on the back, deck and roof above the out building. MOTION: Martha made the motion to adjourn; second by Karen. All in favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk