Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHistoric Preservation Commission November 18, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission MINUTES November 18, 2024 President Ed Siewert called to order the November 18,2024 Historic Preservation Commission meeting at 5:30 p.m. in the Building Commission Conference Room at City Hall, 500 Quartermaster Court. Roll Call Members present were Johnna Anderson, Jourdan Ford,Lisa Green, Maggie Moore,Jason Schlatter and Paul Torp. Also,present Laura Renwick,Historic Preservation staff advisor and Administrative Assistant Shane Shaughnessy. Approval of the Agenda Lisa Green made a motion to approve the agenda for the November 18, 2024 regular meeting, seconded by Johnna Anderson and approved unanimously, 7-0. Approval of Previous Minutes Jourdan Ford made a motion to approve the October 21, 2024 minutes, seconded by Paul Torp, and approved unanimously, 7-0. Certificates of Appropriateness 409 Spring Street A Certficate of Appropriateness application was filed for 409 Spring Street by Kevin Sperzel. Present at the meeting for this application was Kevin Sperzel. Ed Siewert introduced the case and invited the applicant to present their project to the Commission. Kevin stated that there is an apartment space on the second floor of the building that is only accessible by going through the first floor retail space. The applicant wishes to remove a portion of the storefront glass to create a second door that would provide a dedicated entrance to the second floor apartment. Paul Torp asked where the location of the door would be. Kevin stated the door would be on the opposite side of the storefront and would be placed in line with the storefront glass,not recessed like the existing entrance and not pulled forward to be in line with the brick column to its right. Lisa Green asked what material the door would be made of which Kevin stated would be fiberglass or metal that looks like wood but not actually wood,and is paintable. Paul Torp asked if the new door would look similar to the existing door. Kevin responded he was not sure of the owners' future plans in that regard. Jason Schlatter asked if the frame would be moved over and a new storefront put in when the glass work is done.Kevin stated that the one pane of glass would be removed and a shorter piece placed into the existing frame and the rest of the storefront would not be altered. 1 Laura Renwick,in response to Paul's question about the look of the new door, stated that traditionally a residential entrance would look different than the business's door to distinguish the two. Jason asked if a jamb would be placed between the new door and the storefront. Kevin stated that there would be a jamb placed as it would be the end of a new wall and a cap placed on it.The trim would match the existing trim,not bare aluminum that is around the existing windows. Paul Torp made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the additional entrance and storefront alteration. Lisa Green seconded the motion.The motion was approved unanimously, 7-0. 309 E.Riverside Drive A Certificate of Appropriateness application was filed for 309 E. Riverside Drive by D2 Builders, LLC. Present at the meeting for this application were Chris Harris, Dewayne Hutchens, and Paul Maynard. Ed Siewert introduced the case and invited the applicants to present their project to the Commission. Dewayne Hutchens stated the structure was recently damaged by fire and will have to remove and repair portions of the roof.As part of that process,they are requesting to add two observation decks, one on the backside of the structure and one on top of the building's tower with a set of stairs leading up to the tower deck. Railings will be added and made of glass and metal. Portions of the railings will be visible from the front and side of the house. Jason asked about the existing slope of roof and how the deck would be tied into the roof and what materials the deck would be made of. Dewayne stated that they would have to rebuild a slope with roofing and that the deck would be mounted on top of the roof and made of typical deck boards that wouldn't be visible from the ground as it would be about 2 feet below the existing brick ledge of the roof. The railing would be placed 2 feet from the edge of the roof for security purposes. Paul Torp and Jason spoke about the proposed staircase and stated they thought it would be visible from Locust Street which is not typical in the area. Paul Maynard stated there's a 6-7 foot wall on that side which will help to block the view of the stairs. Paul Torp said that the top of the stairs would still be visible from the back side. Jason asked about how the decks would be used, if they were just for residents or if it was likely that they would be an area for parties or gatherings which may inhibit egress from the decks. Paul Maynard said they looked at the potential for a second egress point,but it is not required by building codes. Paul Torp stated that in the Historic Guidelines,the one of the purposes of the Board is to maintain established residential neighborhoods that are in danger of having their distinctiveness destroyed and that qualities related to its history and structures be preserved. He felt that this was a valid reason for denial of the application.He stated that the guidelines say that the addition of new porches or balconies to primary elevations should be avoided if there were none present historically. He felt the deck on the tower would be against these guidelines and the deck on the tower would similarly be visible. 2 Jason stated he thought they have done a good job to hide the decks and make them blend in. Paul Torp agreed but felt that the decks are still running afoul of the guidelines and was worried about setting precedent. Maggie Moore asked how the decks were going to be accessed. Dewayne said there would be a small room with a door that would provide access. That room use to be attic space but it was destroyed by the fire and will be rebuilt. Ed asked Laura how the upper and lower decks interacted with the guidelines. Laura stated that if there were no tower deck,the request would be much more consistent with the guidelines but that they would still be regulated. Jason asked if there was ever a deck historically on the house. The applicants stated there was one as evidenced by the door that led to the roof. Laura stated that the historic photos of the house did not show any railings,just a parapet wall. Laura stated her concern is that such decks are not something that similar historic homes have on Riverside Drive and that granting this may set a precedent. She said she would be more comfortable with just granting the lower deck as it would be less intrusive and more consistent with the guidelines. Jason asked the applicants if they have checked the roof to see if there was any indication of previous railings which the applicants stated that they had not. Ed said that if there was indication of previous railings that the Board would consider that in their decision.Jason said that even if there was indication of railings on the upper tower,the stairs would still be an issue with the guidelines. Paul Torp said he was not in favor of approving the decks due to the portion of the guidelines that talks about changing the residential nature of the neighborhood and the distinctiveness of the residential area in addition that the guidelines state that the original roof pitch and shape should be maintained of the historic roof.Jason said the back of the house was likely an addition to the original house. Dewayne said that the way that the windows on the back of the house and the height of the parapet wall would indicate there was an observation deck on the back at one point. Laura said she does not remember the Sanborn maps showing a porch on the back of the house. Jason said that the Board has approved decks on the backs of buildings before and that the addition of a deck would not change the nature of the building especially since its on the back. Paul Torp said that he appreciates the effort to make it an attractive addition,but still feels that it would change the significance of the building. Laura showed a photo of Sanborn maps from 1898 which indicated the presence of a first floor porch on the back. The applicants said that porch was no longer there. Dewayne asked if all the buildings on the block were historic and if they knew that many of the buildings that had been redone also had rooftop decks. Paul Torp said that they were historic and that those houses do have decks. He said that he thinks that's part of the reason the Historic Board was established because people were doing things that were out of historic character when they rehabbed historic buildings and the Board is tasked to preserve the historic character of what was left in the District. Paul Maynard said that it has been his goal to maintain the historic nature of the house, not diminish it. Jason said that he did not want to eliminate their ability to put a deck on the tower if they can provide evidence that there was one historically. Paul stated that he felt there should not be one on 3 that tower. Ed said that it would be difficult for the Board to deny a deck on the top if they can provide evidence that there was a railing there historically. Jason made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the addition of the lower deck on the rear of the home and finishing the roof as described in the application. He said they are not eliminating the portion of the application for the observation deck on the tower to allow the applicants to investigate the tower roof for indications of a historic railing. Lisa Green seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-1,with Paul Torp dissenting. Other Business Ed introduced the item for the discussion of the window guidelines that was tabled from last month. Laura stated she had sent the commissioners examples of other window guidelines from around the state. She also sent an example of model design guidelines from the Indiana Landmarks Northern Regional Office that they could sell to communities who are looking to update or adopt local guidelines.These guidelines would likely cost around$5000 to purchase.This model could be tailored to the individual community and would have options for pre-approved and non- approved window treatments. Paul Torp said that there may be manufacturing techniques that the model may not address. He also said he wasn't very comfortable with aspects of the model that refer to percentages of windows being damaged as that felt subjective. Jourdan asked Laura if she had a list of companies who repair historic windows that they could recommend to applicants. Laura replied she knows of a few but there aren't many in the region which is part of the problem when the commission requires windows to be retained and repaired. Paul said the reason that they were looking at the guidelines was due to recent cases where the guidelines stated that new windows were"strongly discouraged"which made it difficult to protect historic features. He also added that there are buildings that are only 50 years old but are now considered historic despite not having many features that would normally be considered historic such as aluminum framing. Ed asked if there was a list of ratings for buildings in the District which Laura said there is in the Ordinance Jason said he noticed a typical process occurring when they received an application for windows where the Commission would say which windows were acceptable and encourage existing windows to be repaired. He felt that newer windows are well-made and could be appropriate in some cases. Ed said that these were solid guidelines and while repairing windows may not always be feasible,he would not want to take that aspect of historic preservation off the table. Paul said that the first choice should be repairing the windows and after that replacing the windows with similar materials that were there historically rather than using newer materials that may look historic. Paul asked what it would take to change the ordinance.Ed said they weren't looking at changing the ordinance,only potentially updating the guidelines which the Board could do without Council approval. Lisa asked if those who had better understanding of the details of historic windows should create a subcommittee to look into any changes to the guidelines. 4 Laura said the last update to the guidelines was in 2011 and that update was comprehensive with all sections being changed. Paul asked if they should look at the guidelines now or wait until a more comprehensive update could occur. Lisa said she thought they should at least start to look at the window guidelines and get those updated since designs and technology of windows has changed so much since the last update.Jason said he feels that they should give more options to owners as long as they mimic the guidelines and replicate the historic character of the windows. Paul said he feels the guidelines allow for windows to be updated in the manner Jason is saying as they are guidelines and do not insist on certain things. Paul said that building ratings should also play a role in the Board's decision making. Ed felt that there should also be a more distinct difference between commercial and residential treatments. Jason said that he tries to think about how to save buildings that may not have been saved by being too prescriptive. Ed asked if anyone was interested in creating a subcommittee or updating the window guidelines. He said that he didn't feel updating the guidelines was necessary now but rather would like to see a reassessment of the building ratings because those likely have now changed over the years. Jason asked who did the ratings in the ordinance which Laura replied that they were done by the State Preservation Office during a County survey at the time. Laura said that the ratings were probably outdated and that there were likely buildings that weren't 50 years old at the time of the survey which now would qualify as historic. Ed said that updating the ratings would be proactive and would benefit the community by rewarding those who are taking steps to preserve historic buildings. Laura said she could take a stab at updating the ratings. Jourdan said that when she first joined there was some talk about expanding the historic district and asked if there were any updates to that. Laura said she met with the neighborhood associations and there wasn't a huge demand for it. Shane Shaughnessy said that the Planning and Zoning Department was working on a Downtown Master Plan and that one of the recommendations is to explore the expansion of the historic district. Paul said that he thought that would be a good thing as there were likely a number of buildings downtown that could qualify as historic. Paul said he was going to take a stab at analyzing the guidelines and would bring something back to the Board. Laura said that the section on signs may also be one that could need updates because of new technology. Ed said he didn't see the need for a subcommittee but encouraged the board members to review the guidelines and take notes on items that could be changed or updated. Jason Schlatter made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Lisa Green. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40pm. Minutes Approved: Submitted by: 5