Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design review board approves parapet rebuild and repaint at 400 Main Street
Summary
The Davenport City Design Review Board voted to approve Case DR26-03, allowing reconstruction of the east parapet and repainting of the north façade of the three‑story building at 400 Main Street; staff recommended approval and the board approved the proposal by roll call.
The Davenport City Design Review Board on April 27 approved design case DR26-03, clearing State Masonry Incorporated to rebuild the east parapet and repaint the north façade of the three‑story masonry building at 400 Main Street in the Davenport Commercial Historic District.
Staff described two components of the project: rebuilding the parapet from the top of the upper‑floor window line to the roof line using CMU as backup faced with brick veneer to match the existing masonry, and repainting the north elevation in a tested "cobble brown" finish. "Staff is recommending the case be approved in accordance with the submitted work write up and material," the staff member told the board.
The staff presentation said coping stones will be salvaged and reinstalled and that a historically larger cornice will not be reinstated because staff could not locate a historic photo and the owner favored a more uniform, cost‑effective solution. The applicant reported the work began after rusted lintels and water behind the facade were discovered; the top six feet of tuckpointing required by the city has already been completed and further tuckpointing and limestone window‑sill replacements were addressed in the courtyard and alley walls.
During questions, a board member asked, "How close is that proposed brick to the existing brick?" The applicant and staff said the selected brick "looks close," noting that different facades on the building use different brick types and that painting is limited to the older, less attractive north wall. The applicant also said the painted "Executive Square" sign on a high portion of the building will be removed and the wall painted behind it rather than preserved as signage.
Staff cautioned that exterior masonry must use appropriate specialty paint to avoid trapping moisture and causing further damage; the staff member said newer masonry paints intended for exterior use should provide better longevity if the applicant uses the correct product. The applicant confirmed the side wall will be sandblasted before work and that awnings will be replaced and window vinyl updated at the southeast entrance; any permanent wall or projecting signage would return to the board for separate review.
A board member moved to approve staff recommendations for Case DR26-03; the motion was seconded and passed on a roll‑call vote. Members voted in favor; Rasheed had been excused earlier in the meeting.
