ADA Compliance: The City of Rapid City fully subscribes to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you desire to attend this public meeting and are in need of special accommodations, please notify Community Planning and Development Services 24 hours prior to the meeting so that appropriate auxiliary aids and services are available.
RAPID CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Friday, November 21, 2014 7:30 A.M. – 9:00 A.M.
Rapid City Council Chambers
City/School Administration Complex
300 Sixth Street
Call To Order
Accept ‘Speaker Request Forms’ from members of the public who are not on the agenda
Approval of Meeting Agenda
11.1 Reviews -
1. 1115 Saint Joseph (14RS021)Note:This is additional information following the partial project approval at the 10/3/2014 HPC meeting. The approved work associated with the previous request has been completed.
Applicant: Brian Sykora
District: West Boulevard Historic District - Contributing
Request: Replace (2) picture windows and (2) double hung windows with pine insert windows by Marvin or combination of Marvin and Pella (aluminum clad). The divided light pattern will be simulated; the exterior trim will be preserved.
Approval of Minutes
1. Approval of the November 7, 2014 meeting minutes
1. Budget Information – September 30, 2014
1. Motion requested by Chair Krull to obtain Commissioner Bio’s – 1 to 2 sentences.
2. Design Guidelines Subcommittee Monroe
3. Founders Park Kingsbury
SHPO Summary Report – SHPO concurred with the findings from the 11/7/2014 11.1 Reviews. In response to a question from a Commission member regarding the Commission’s finding of No Adverse Effect for 1216 Quincy Street, Kate Nelson responded:
“We looked at the information presented in the application, which said that there were substantial changes to the home during a 1999 remodel, including all new windows and doors; moved or enlarged openings; removed interior hallways; added exterior exits; a large deck added to upper floor; all interiors remodeled and modernized; and significant structural work. All of that work, which apparently didn’t trigger the 11.1 review process, already damaged the integrity of the home. With that as our starting point, we determined that the replacement of existing siding of various styles and sizes with new fiber cement siding would not have an adverse effect, given the home’s compromised integrity to start with.
As you know, the Standards must be applied on a case-by-case basis since no two buildings or projects are the same. In this case, we determined that the previous changes had compromised the integrity of the building to the point that further changes to the siding would not adversely affect the house or the district as a whole.”