Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Davenport City panel approves rear-stair removal, 8x16 deck and dining-room window at 418 W. Seventh; 12-foot sliding door tabled

Davenport City Historic Preservation Commission · December 10, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Davenport City Historic Preservation Commission approved removing a rear exterior stair, constructing an 8-by-16-foot deck and installing a dining-room window at the Paul and Mina Jansen house (418 W. Seventh St.) but tabled a decision on a proposed 12-by-7-foot sliding glass door, asking the petitioner for visual mockups and smaller-door alternatives.

The Davenport City Historic Preservation Commission on Dec. 10 approved several rear-yard alterations at 418 West Seventh Street but postponed a final decision on the home’s proposed 12-foot sliding glass door.

Commissioners voted to permit removal of the rear exterior staircase, construction of an 8-foot-by-16-foot first-floor deck and installation of a proposed dining-room window after staff said those changes are on the north (rear) elevation that abuts an alley and have limited public visibility. The action was taken after staff briefed the commission on the property and the petition, designated COA 24-20, and recommended approval of the staircase removal and the dining-room window while noting reservations about the large sliding opening.

The matter matters because the Paul and Mina Jansen house sits inside the Hamburg local landmark historic district and is a contributing Queen Anne structure. Staff told the commission the house was built in 1902, was converted into four apartments in 1938 and was recently returned to single-family use; changes to form, scale or conspicuous fenestration on a contributing structure can affect the district’s character.

Staff described the five-part petition as: removing a rear exterior stair; building a new 8-by-16-foot deck using composite decking and black-coated aluminum railing; removing a nonoriginal first-floor door and window; installing a 12-by-7-foot Marvin Elevate sliding glass unit with wood interior and fiberglass-clad exterior; and installing a roughly 7-by-3-foot wood dining-room window. Staff recommended approval of the stair removal and the dining-room window but said it "cannot technically recommend approval" of the composite deck and the sliding glass doors under the preservation ordinance’s compatibility standards (size, massing, scale, materials and character).

The discussion focused on scale and style. Several commissioners said a 12-foot-wide sliding unit reads as "suburban" and out of proportion with the house’s Victorian fenestration; some suggested a 6- to 8-foot French-door alternative or other options such as flanking windows to maintain a traditional rhythm of openings. Contractor Andy Swan, who introduced himself at the podium, said the proposed Marvin unit has a wood interior and a clad exterior and that exterior trim would be installed to match the house’s other windows; he described the product as "not so modern" in appearance.

After discussion the commission split the petition into two decisions. By motion and roll call the commission approved removal of the rear stair, construction of the 8' x 16' deck and installation of the dining-room window. The commission then tabled the proposed removal of the first-floor door and the proposed 12-by-7-foot sliding unit pending additional materials and visual mockups showing the house’s north elevation with (a) the 12-foot opening as proposed and (b) one or more narrower-door alternatives (for example, a 6- or 8-foot French-door option). Staff and the petitioner were asked to provide measured drawings and mockups, including the full width of the house and front-elevation dimensions for comparison; staff offered to accept materials and, if feasible, schedule a special meeting before the next regular session.

The vote on the approval motion was recorded by roll call; commissioners present voted in favor. The motion to table the sliding-door question also passed by roll call. The commission’s requested deliverables included scaled drawings and visual renderings so members could evaluate proportion and trim details before acting on the sliding glass proposal.

Next steps: the petitioner and the contractor will supply the requested drawings and mockups to staff; the commission asked that those materials include dimensions, scale and a depiction of the proposed trim so the members can better visualize how the opening would integrate with the house. The door decision remains pending at the commission until those materials are submitted and reviewed.