Historic Preservation panel approves composite siding for Beck Rental House after debate over cost and precedent

The Davenport Historic Preservation Commission on June 9 voted to allow a contractor to use Ascend composite cladding as a substitute siding material for the rehabilitation of the Beck Rental House at 708 West 7th, despite staff advice that the product did not meet the commission's earlier material condition.

Commission staff presented the revised request, explaining that the contractor had returned with a lower-cost option after obtaining bids: LP SmartSide was quoted at about $22,200 while the Ascend composite cladding bid was about $13,200. Staff told the commission it had reviewed the Ascend product and concluded "the product does not satisfy the intent of the commission's condition regarding acceptable replacement siding materials," and that the substitute therefore required commission review rather than administrative approval (staff, Matt).

The discussion centered on balancing affordability for an investor-led rehabilitation against the commission's standard to prefer materials that closely replicate historic wood profiles. Commissioners pressing the point called the project "price-sensitive" and noted the house's constrained resale prospects; one member said the labor component for LP SmartSide made the higher-cost options financially prohibitive for the project. The contractor's cost argument was that installation labor for higher-quality products drove the final price, and the Ascend system would reduce that burden.

Several commissioners raised concerns about setting a precedent that could encourage synthetic materials on other contributing structures; others argued the commission should be practical when an otherwise vacant or derelict property can be returned to the housing market. Commissioner Hasti, speaking earlier in the meeting about preservation strategies, framed the broader context: "preservation isn't just saving old houses," he said, urging a holistic, community-focused approach to keep buildings occupied.

After discussion and a roll-call vote, the commission approved the substitute siding for this specific property with the understanding that the decision was site-specific and not a blanket endorsement of the material. The approval included a request that the applicant and contractor present product samples and, where feasible, pursue higher-quality windows rather than white vinyl, which had been a prior condition on window replacements. The commission also noted it would document the decision in the meeting minutes to clarify that the approval applies to this unique situation.

The commission did not take action to change city nuisance policy during the meeting; that topic had been raised in an earlier commission report and may be considered separately.

The commission is expected to document any required material samples or follow-up in the building permit review process.