HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-14-2008 Historic Preservation CommissionIOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, February 14, 2008
City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street
Emma J. Harvat Hall
6:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda
3. Discussion of 2008 Work Plan
4. Consideration of the January 10, 2008 Meeting Minutes
5. Other
5. Adjournment
Historic Preservation Commission
( lit) l Tall, 4It( I( W',I IIII1�rrh Il Sher , Io,,va CItl'. IA1 3224 l
MEMO-R-ANDUM
Date: February 8, 2008
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: 2008 Historic Preservation Commission Work Plan
Generally, the Historic Preservation Commission holds an annual planning session to develop a
work plan for the upcoming calendar year. Due to the focus on updating and gathering public input
for the Historic Preservation Plan, a work plan has not been developed since 2005.
At the February le meeting, we will discuss the work plan for 2008. Attached are the Executive
Summary of the 2007 Historic Preservation Plan and 2005 Historic Preservation Work Plan.
Commission members are encouraged use the attached documents to prepare for a planning session
to prioritize goals and objectives for the 2008 calendar year.
Attachments
#1 - Executive Summary of the 2007 Historic Preservation Plan
#2 - 2005 Historic Preservation Commission Work Plan
L Introduction
The purpose of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan 2007 is to review and revise the first Iowa
City Historic Preservation Plan prepared and adopted in 1992. In the 15 years since, its goals and
objectives have served as a road map for a wide range of public and private historic preservation
activities. Recommendations in the original plan ranged from how and where to identify historic
properties and neighborhoods to legislative initiatives and economic methods for protecting
historic resources to ideas for stimulating preservation education programs and private support
for preservation undertakings. Under the direction of the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission, regular reviews of the plan's recommendations have been conducted and steady
progress has been made in achieving the plan's ten principal goals and more than 100 city-wide
and neighborhood -based objectives.
The overall purpose for the 1992 Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan stated in the introduction
was simply put, "to conserve old buildings makes a good community better." The validity
and importance of these few words still rings true in 2007. They were affirmed in neighborhood
meetings, group discussions, and dozens of individual interviews conducted during the spring
and summer of 2006. A review of annual preservation awards and an inspection of individual
neighborhoods throughout the community revealed dozens of successful private and public
historic preservation projects. An invigorated, private non-profit organization, Friends of Historic
Preservation (Friends), is now professionally staffed and responsible for a range of education and
financial incentive programs.
An expanded historic preservation ordinance covering individual landmarks as well as additional
historic and conservation districts offers protection to 1,100 properties with free technical
assistance provided to property owners through more than 100 design reviews undertaken
annually. More than 60 people have served on the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission
during its 25 years. Some went on to hold a position on the Planning and Zoning Commission, be
elected as a City Councilor, or direct major historic building preservation efforts.
The historic preservation goals and objectives recommended here are intended to be
comprehensive. They are built on a foundation of preservation success over more than three
decades. Although this plan was prepared for the City, its success will depend on leaders at
all levels of government, from the University of Iowa, and from private organizations such as
Friends and various neighborhood associations. Individual property owners will continue to be
at the center of preservation efforts, saving important buildings and historic neighborhoods one
building at a time. The diverse base of support for preservation in Iowa City's past suggests that it
will be an even more important community improvement strategy in the future.
This new edition of the Historic Preservation Plan will provide a road map for preservation
policies and activities for the next 10 to 15 years. Being intended for such a long time frame, the
plan contains a lengthy set of goals and objectives that may initially appear daunting. However,
the plan's policies and its interrelated goals and objectives can be stated in a few basic themes.
41
1. Tell the good news: Because
it involves applying rules
and regulations to property,
designation of historic and
conservation districts and local
landmarks sometimes becomes
controversial and creates
conflict within the community.
This should not be allowed to
overshadow the many positive
benefits that preservation has
brought to Iowa City. A good
example is the amazing recovery
of Iowa Avenue and nearby
historic neighborhoods from
the April 13, 2006 tornado. The
day after the storm much of the
eastern portion of Iowa Avenue
appeared to be so devastated
that it was thought that several
historic buildings were beyond
repair. There was uncertainty
as to what would replace them.
Property owners, the preservation
community, the City, and private
organizations such as Friends
rallied to address both the human
Iowa Avenue tornado damage, April 2006
Iowa Avenue recovers from the damage
and physical needs to achieve recovery. As a result, what could have been a scar across
the heart of the City has been restored to a condition better than before the storm. This
restoration effort shows the value of the preservation ethic and practice to all of Iowa City.
Through the many educational programs and initiatives detailed in this plan, the City and
preservation proponents such as Friends should strive to tell the good news about the
positive benefits that preservation brings to the community and local economy.
2. Streamline the process: Some of the conflict that arises around preservation matters comes
from the length of the design review process. The plan identifies a number of areas where
the review process can be streamlined and handled administratively, rather than requiring
that the Commission review every aspect of a project. Streamlining the process should not
only make the review process more user-friendly, but it should also free up Commission
and staff time to devote to preservation activities other than regulations, such as education
and promotional activities. Given budget constraints, the efficiencies advocated in the plan
will be necessary to achieve the plan 's other goals and objectives.
3. Neighborhood preservation: In some of the public meetings citizens were concerned
about issues like zoning violations, poor property maintenance, trash and litter, vandalism
and parking congestion, that negatively affect the quality of life in some neighborhoods.
In addition to historic preservation programs, this plan advocates the use of tools, such as
R
targeted code enforcement and home ownership programs to preserve the quality of life in
older neighborhoods. This multipronged approach may be necessary to maintain the value
and stability of older neighborhoods so that they remain a viable option in an expanding
housing market.
4. Tap the economic development potential of the City's historic resources: The first
step is to measure the full economic impact of preservation and to identify impediments.
The plan recommends bolstering the marketing of Downtown by promoting its historic
resources; promoting the use of Federal and State tax incentives as a means of encouraging
rehabilitation projects, and developing local incentive programs to support preservation.
5. Learn from ourselves. The planning update process included a comprehensive review
of what had been accomplished since the 1992 plan was adopted. Our progress has been
substantial whether measured in the number of neighborhoods studied, buildings protected,
or citizens involved in the process. Creative solutions for problems in one area are likely
to work elsewhere or at a later date. Good communications between neighborhoods and
districts, training newcomers to preservation, educating the general public, and learning
from ourselves will be key to creating even greater success in the future. Both public entities
such as the Historic Preservation Commission and private organizations such as Friends of
Historic Preservation will play leadership roles.
Y. Process for Updating 1992 Iowa City Historic Preservation
Plan
The process for updating the 1992 Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan began with an assessment
of progress made during the past 15 years. Nearly every goal and most objectives set in 1992
have seen significant progress. To identify public attitudes and concerns, four public forums
were held in April and June 2006 in the North Side and Goosetown neighborhoods, the College
Hill and Longfellow neighborhoods, the Melrose and Manville Heights neighborhoods, and two
in the Downtown. The first two meetings were held just one week after the April 2006 tornado
struck and, as a result, the tone of the meetings reflected concerns arising out of the storm.
Approximately 40 residents attended each of the first three meetings with less than twenty people
at the two Downtown sessions.
Solicitation of opinions continued through a series of one-on-one interviews with representative
opinion holders and key decision makers. Consultants Matt Goebel and Bohdy Hedgecock with
Clarion Associates joined lead consultant Marlys Svendsen during three days of interviews in
late June 2006. Svendsen conducted additional interviews from January 2006-January 2007.
Interviews were held with representatives of the Iowa City HPC and Planning and Zoning
Commission; City planning, housing and legal staff; and the City manager and several City
Council members. Both proponents and opponents of preservation from the community were
also interviewed including representatives of Friends of Historic Preservation, neighborhood
organizations, realtors, downtown developers, bankers, Downtown retailers and Downtown
Association organizers, contractors, and architects. Interview subjects were encouraged to be
frank and specific knowing that their remarks might be shared during the report process but not
attributed.
7
lll. Mission Statement, Goals and Objectives
The review of local historic preservation efforts since 1992 shows major progress in both public
and private activities. Good communication has been at the center of the best cases while minimal
or ineffective communication has characterized preservation missteps or failures. As preservation
planning efforts grow increasingly more complex and affect a growing number of neighborhoods
and property owners, the single most important strategy will be to improve communication at all
levels. As a result, a common theme incorporated into the recommendations that appear below
is thoughtful, clear, and audience -appropriate communication. Whether this takes the form of
official reports, shared strategy sessions, targeted publications, web -based information gathering
and dispersal, or direct contact with historic property owners, good communication will be key to
advancing the comprehensive preservation agenda and diverse strategies recommended below.
MISSION: Iowa City and its citizens seek to identify, protect, and preserve the
community's historic resources in order to enhance the quality of life and
economic well-being of current and future generations.
Objective 1: Continue to research and evaluate
historic resources through
the systematic and prioritized
completion of neighborhood
and thematic -based historical
and architectural surveys. Adopt
the outline in the 2007 plan for
an updated "Iowa City Historic
Resources" Multiple Property
Documentation Form that
includes new historic contexts and
an extended time period through
ca. 1960.
Objective 2: Put new emphasis on enlisting
private sponsors and volunteers
to carryout survey work when
neighborhood support is available.
Oakes -Wood House, 1142 E. Court St., residence of Grant
Wood while he resided in Iowa City.
Objective 3: Set designation priorities for historic districts and landmarks that emphasize
threatened resources first. Use both reconnaissance and intensive level survey
formats in order to complete work more efficiently and with greater speed.
Objective 4: Extend the period for neighborhoods to study through ca. 1960.
Objective 5: The HPC should continue to play a leadership role in nominating individual
properties and historic districts to the National Register. Follow up National
Register listing with local designation as landmarks and districts.
Objective 6: Nominate properties of national level significance as National Historic Landmarks.
Objective 1: Adopt the Historic Preservation Plan 2007 as a part of the Iowa City
Comprehensive Plan.
Objective 2: Continue to update the City's historic preservation ordinance based on
comparisons with historic preservation ordinances from comparable cities and
national best -practices.
Objective 3: Review and revise zoning for new historic and conservation districts to
encourage preservation by coupling land use change with design review and other
neighborhood stabilization measures.
Objective 4: Revise building code requirements for historic districts. Consider adopting the
International Existing Building Code and the State of Iowa's new Historic Building
Code to provide for safe structures, preserve historic features, and assure the
highest economic impact from reusing existing historic buildings.
Objective 5: Amend the Zoning Code relating to Conservation District Overlay Zones by
reinforcing the distinction between historic and conservation districts with a
focus on mass, scale, and general compatibility in design reviews of conservation
district properties. Conduct periodic resurveys of conservation districts to affirm
boundaries and assess historic district eligibility.
Objective 6: Improve enforcement of the Historic Preservation Ordinance by establishing
remedies for noncompliance, maintenance and demolition by neglect standards,
and administration changes.
Objective 7: Make changes in the design review process to improve efficiency and add
predictability.
Objective 8: Revise the Historic Preservation Handbook by adding a new section that
summarizes the sections of Title 14: Iowa City Zoning Code that relate to historic
preservation.
Objective 9: Consider revising current design guidelines to address key issues (new
construction, garages, deteriorated materials, windows —new or replacement, and
paving) and presentation format improvements (illustrated design manual with
pre -approved designs). Eliminate inconsistencies between the Zoning Code update
and the Historic Preservation Handbook.
Objective 10: Advocate changes in State enabling legislation to allow Iowa City greater
flexibility in establishing the make-up of its HPC relating to a fixed size, district -
representative basis for appointments, and technical expertise.
Objective 11: Strengthen relationship between HPC and Planning and Zoning Commission.
Objective 12: Strengthen language of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance pertaining to protection of
archeological sites and Native American burial grounds.
Objective 13: Re-examine City policy regarding brick streets to assure protection and funding
are in place for conserving and restoring significant areas both inside and outside
of historic and conservation districts.
Objective 14: To improve historic building moving procedures, convene a group representing
various parties responsible for such actions (HPC, P&Z, ZBA, HIS, Traffic
Engineering, utility companies, moving companies, etc.) to determine if a new
ordinance or revised set of policies should be adopted.
Objective 1: Assess the economic impact of historic preservation on Iowa City by conducting
a study that examines the impact of historic rehabilitation expenditures, the roles
preservation and district designation play in property values, and the value of
heritage tourism.
Objective 2: Develop a comprehensive set of economic incentives aimed at resolving
impediments to redevelopment.
Objective 3: Establish and market tax incentives for historic buildings including local property
tax abatement, state-wide tax abatement, federal tax credits, state tax credits, and
local sales tax credits.
Objective 4: For the Downtown, promote the use of a Self -Supporting Municipal Improvement
District along with the Main Street -style downtown improvement program
and the tax incentives available for the Old Capitol Cultural and Entertainment
District.
Objective 5: Establish a private revolving grant/loan program for rehabilitating historic
buildings; target the program at other needs such as neighborhoods containing
affordable housing, properties transitioning from rental units to owner -occupied
space, buildings undergoing design review in historic or conservation districts,
buildings undertaking ADA improvements, etc.
10
Downtown, historic buildings along South Clinton Street.
Objective 6: Target a grant or loan program using federal funds or other municipal sources to
parallel a private revolving grant/loan program. Consider models for paint rebate
programs for historic and conservation district buildings.
Objective 7: Provide regulatory relief for conservation and historic districts.
Objective 8: Develop a more coordinated approach to preparation of grant applications;
establish leadership within City staff.
Objective 9: Encourage private. individuals and non-profit organizations to identify eligible
projects for the State Historical Society's grant programs and assist in grant writing.
Objective l: An initial step for dealing with the growing workload of the Commission should
be to encourage operational efficiencies recommended in Goal 2, Objective 7.
For the long term, consideration should be given to increasing the preservation
position from half-time to three-quarters or full-time depending on the availability
of funding.
Objective 2: Improve delivery of technical assistance through creation of a more "user-friendly"
update of the Historic Preservation Handbook or a separate "design handbook:'
Objective 3: Sponsor training sessions for topics designed to improve ability of property owners
to deal with design review process.
Objective 4: Continue and expand operation of the Salvage Barn as an undertaking of Friends
with support from the City of Iowa City.
Objective 5: Promote technical assistance for National Register nomination writing through
the State Historical Society.
11
Objective 1: Maintain a marketing approach for all education and promotion products and
activities.
Objective 2: Continue to create volunteer opportunities and special events.
Objective 3: Maintain preservation as an element in larger community improvement efforts.
Objective 4: Broaden and strengthen non-profit historic preservation groups such as Friends.
Objective 5: Develop new education efforts aimed at the general public, local officials, owners
of historic properties, and target audiences. Include an annual or semi-annual
"historic preservation report" that is both visual and statistical; identify audience
groups and develop targeted publications and training sessions; host a "district
forum" for leaders or representatives from historic and conservation districts.
Objective 6: Consider participation in the national "Preserve America' program.
Objective 7: Recognize the day-to-day administration of the design review process as an added
benefit for property owners rather than a burden for development.
Objective 1: Continue Iowa City's successful efforts as a Certified Local Government (CLG).
Objective 2: Continue the role of Planning and Community Development Department staff
and the HPC in the Section 106 Review Process for City projects involving federal
funding and historic resources.
Objective 3: Improve monitoring of state and federal legislation involving historic preservation.
Objective 1: Open communication lines between the State Historical Society, the University,
and the HPC.
Objective 2: Complete an inventory of University -related historic resources.
Objective 3: Identify University physical plant needs which could be met by acquisition and
reuse of historic resources; integrate a reuse objective into the University's master
plan.
12
Objective 4:
Expand heritage
tourism efforts for
University -related
historic resources
beyond Old Capitol;
include interpretation
of other campus
buildings of historic
and architectural
significance,
important University
contributions in
science and the
humanities, and
nearby historic districts.
University of Iowa historic building rehabilitations, old Zoology
Building, 100 Block of Iowa Avenue.
Objective 5: Establish a fraternity and sorority
house stewardship program.
Objective 6: Participate in a forum for discussing
neighborhood/University issues
related to historic preservation.
Objective 7: Investigate establishment of a
University housing subsidy program to
encourage faculty and administrators
to reside in neighborhoods near the
campus.
Anatomy Hall, Old Biology Sciences Library, 2002,
southwest corner Jefferson and Dubuque.
Objective 8: Encourage the University to establish a policy that supports efforts to preserve
historic residential neighborhoods adjacent to its campus.
Objective 1: Develop a heritage tourism plan as a cooperative effort between the Iowa City/
Coralville Convention and Visitors Bureau, Johnson County Historical Society,
Friends of Historic Preservation, University of Iowa, and Iowa City Historic
Preservation Commission.
Objective 2: Develop and promote heritage tourism packages for visitors to Iowa City.
Objective 3: Develop a heritage tour guide program.
Objective 4: Expand heritage tourism potential for Old Capitol and Plum Grove.
13
Objective 5: Continue to support and develop heritage festivals.
Objective 6: Develop the heritage dimension of visitor experiences such as dining, shopping
and housing.
Objective 7: Establish "heritage trails" in Johnson County. Identify and promote Iowa City sites
along such routes with interpretive signs. Work to identify funding sources and
provide technical assistance for key resources along these routes.
Objective 8: The HPC and local preservation organizations should actively participate in
the Iowa Cultural Corridor Alliance as a good tool for promoting historic
neighborhoods, historic retail districts, public historic sites, and other historic
preservation objectives.
Objective 1: Complete an annual review of historic preservation activity and confirm work plan
objectives for the year.
Objective 2: Prepare an annual "historic preservation report" for submittal to City Council and
other organizations as described in Goal 5: Objective 5, a) above.
Objective 3: Incorporate recommendations of the Historic Preservation Plan 2007 in other
neighborhood and community planning efforts.
The neighborhood strategies have been expanded to include 26 neighborhoods (from the 12
indicated in the 1992 plan). Four "packages" of recommendations have been compiled that
apply to more than one district or neighborhood: District Adoption Steps, Communication and
Neighborhood Stabilization Steps, Technical Assistance Steps, and a Home Ownership Incentive
Program. Each package of recommendations is outlined below.
District Adoption Steps:
1. Develop a clear understanding for why a historic or conservation district is being proposed;
carefully evaluate the boundaries for the district.
2. Stress education up front about what historic or conservation district designation means.
3. Identify major concerns/questions and prepare answers before the discussion process.
4. Stress good case studies of rehabilitation projects in other neighborhoods.
5. Develop more options for design review issues that are problems —windows and siding,
design for construction of new secondary buildings, what may be negotiable, etc.
14
6. Study real estate and economic impact of district designation on market values and tax
assessments in other previously designated districts.
7. Confirm record of design review cases that have been problems versus those that were
approved in other districts —cite specific numbers.
8. Stress good news about post -tornado stories as an example of the best and worst that can
come from a natural disaster pushing a design review process "to -the -max"; focus discussion
on large issues while also responding to narrower concerns.
Communication and Neighborhood Stabilization Steps:
I Promote heritage education efforts at local elementary schools (especially those in older
neighborhoods such as Horace Mann, Longfellow, Lincoln, etc.) by supporting establishment
of a local history education program that includes information, tours and events connected
to historic districts.
2. Recruit and train potential district residents to serve on the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission.
3. Participate in an annual or bi-annual "District Forum" for historic and conservation district
representatives hosted by the HPC. The District Forum's agenda could vary but would
regularly provide a setting for sharing information about regulatory changes, exchanging
successful ideas among districts, and offering suggestions for solving problems that cross
district boundaries.
4. Parking problems though not specifically a preservation concern, are important for the
overall stabilization of neighborhoods. To address these concerns it is recommended
that neighborhood associations and the City, explore alternative methods of managing
parking. This might include a residential parking permit program in some areas, the use
of angle parking to increase the supply of parking spaces where appropriate, and the use of
"environmentally friendly" paving techniques when parking is added to back yards. When
addressing parking solutions the conflicting issues of increasing supply while minimizing
paving in a residential setting must be considered.
5. The City should remain vigilant in addressing complaints regarding issues such as zoning
violations, removal of snow from sidewalks, weed removal and trash control that affect
neighborhood quality of life. In some locations, targeted code enforcement may be
appropriate to address perceived neighborhood decline.
6. In areas where housing conditions surveys show the need for reinvestment, promote
neighborhood stabilization through a Homeownership Incentive Program such as outlined
below.
7. Establish a "user-friendly" technical assistance effort for property owners by implementing
the Technical Assistance Steps also listed below.
8. Develop and fund a program to alleviate lead -based paint for residential landmarks and
buildings in historic and conservation districts that is sensitive to their architectural
character.
15
Technical Assistance Steps:
1. Develop a historic preservation technical assistance program as an on -going effort aimed at
developing and maintaining the capacity of historic district property owners to maintain or
restore their historic buildings.
2. Distribute an annual or semi-annual "historic preservation report" to property owners in
districts that includes information regarding design review efforts.
3. Add a "history corner" column in the neighborhood association newsletters received by
district residents with information on relevant subjects ranging from a do-it-yourself guide
for re -glazing windows to where the neighborhood ghosts reside to why moisture trapped
in exterior walls leads to peeling paint and dry rot. These columns could be collected at the
City website, indexed, and/or printed annually for retention at the public library.
4. Develop special topic publications in response to resident suggestions and needs identified
by the design review process.
5. Deliver technical assistance and public awareness information through neighborhood
newsletters and website(s), and direct communications with district residents, including
email.
A neighborhood strategy that crosses district and neighborhood boundaries involves the creation
of a program to encourage owner -occupancy as a stabilizing measure. Potential funding sources
for such a program might include Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and major
employers. The basic components are outlined below.
Home Ownership Incentive Program
1. Consider the primary goal for such program as neighborhood stabilization by encouraging
an increase in owner -occupied properties where housing conditions indicate a need for
reinvestment.
2. Establish the program through the cooperation of one or more lenders. Consider CDBG/
HOME and funding from major employers to establish program.
3. Target the program to neighborhoods where housing conditions indicate a need for re-
investment, for areas where the percentage of owner -occupied dwellings are less than
50% and for areas that contain small affordable dwellings that are suitable for first time
homebuyers.
4. Incentives could include interest rate reductions, free initial consultations from architects or
engineers skilled in working with historic properties, cost savings at local retailers, etc.
5. This program could complement the University -sponsored program (Goal 7: Objective 8).
6. Support this program through code enforcement and educational programs, designed to
stabilize neighborhoods making them more attractive for residents.
Downtown:
1. Encourage fagade improvements through local incentive programs and promote state and
federal tax credit programs.
2. Market downtown as a historic shopping district and explore the possibility of establishing a
Self -Supporting Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) or Main Street program.
16
3. In order to establish eligibility for federal and state investment tax credits for property own-
ers completing historic rehabilitation projects, cooperate with property owners to nominate
key individual buildings and a small Downtown historic district to the National Register of
Historic Places based on the "Architectural and Historical Resources of Iowa City Central
Business District, 1855—ca. 1960" MPD.
4. Designate a larger area of the Downtown as a conservation district and designate individu-
ally significant buildings as historic landmarks. Boundaries for the Downtown district
would be roughly defined by Iowa Avenue and the alley south of Iowa Avenue between
Linn and Gilbert streets on the north, Clinton Street on the west and Gilbert Street on the
east. The southern boundary includes the alley south of College Street between Clinton and
Linn Street and then east to Gilbert Street to include the old Iowa City Public Library and
Trinity Episcopal Church.
5. Integrate the programs and incentives of local district/shopping district/SSMID/Main Street
with the Old Capitol Cultural and Entertainment District.
Summary: A summary is provided in the table on the following page of many, but not all, of
the neighborhood strategies suggested for the 26 neighborhoods discussed under Goal 10.
Substantially completed Neighborhood Strategy objectives are represented by the solid . symbol
and future objectives shown with an open ® symbol. Priorities for some efforts have been ranked
as High to Low with A -level efforts given highest priority, B and C-level efforts ranked of high
to moderate priority, and D-level efforts given lower priority. Unranked efforts will be assigned
priorities based on the findings of completed surveys or are of uniform importance across
neighborhoods.
17
Summary of Common Neighborhood Strategies • Completed Objectives HD — Historic District (local)
High to Low Priority: A to D o Future Objectives CD - Conservation District (local)
HD-NR — Historic District (Nat'l Register onl )
Neighborhood
Survey
District
Adoption
Steps
Communication &
Neighborhood
Stabilization Steps
Technical
Assistance
Ste s
a E
s
E d
O C
x
e
s
O a p
>�J
v
•
C L
�n
y
d o
O 'L
is
x
FtL
V 'O
` E
�' O
R O. O
L
F
3
W y
Z
Downtown Planning District:
1. Downtown
••
o
o
B
o B
o B
o B
o B
o
2. South Side
o
o
A
o B
o C
o
Central Planning District:
3. Brown Street HD
••
•
•
o A
o A
° A
o B
«o A
o B
• o
C
4. Clark Street CD
••
•
o
C
o A
o A
o C
• o A
o B
• o
5. College Green HD
••
•
•
o A
o A
o B
o A
o B
o
6. College Hill CD
••
•
«
o A
o A
o B
o B
o A
c A
o
7. East College Street HD
••
•
«
o A
o A
o B
•c A
o B
o
8. Dearborn Street CD
••
•
o A
o A
o C
• o A
o B
• o
9. Dubuque Street Corridor
••
o
o B
o A
o C
o B
o C
o C
o
o B
10. Gilbert -Linn Street HD-NR
•
•
•
I o
B
o A
o A
o A
o B
•o A
o B
• o
c C
11. Goosetown
•
•
o
o
A
o A
o A
o B
o B
•o A
o A
00
12. Governor -Lucas St. CD
•
•
•
o A
o A
o C
• o A
o A
o
13. Jefferson Street HD-NR
••
o
B
o A
o A
o C
o B
•o A
o C
o
oA
14.Longfellow HD
•
•
•
•
o A
oA
o C
oB
•oA
oB
•o
15. Muscatine Avenue Moffitt
Cottages HD in Longfellow)
•
•
•
•
16. Oak Grove - Kirkwood
Avenue Corridor
o
o
B
o
o
C
o B
o B
o C
o B
o C
o
17. Lucas Farms - Ginter,
Friendly, Highland,
Pickard, & Yewell Streets
o
o
B
o
o
C
o B
o B
o C
o B
c B
o B
o
18. Morningside-City High
o
o
C
o
o
D
c C
o B
o C
o B
o C
o B
o
19. Rochester Avenue
o
o
C
I
I
o C
o B
o C
o B
o C
o C
o
20. Summit Street HD
•
•
•
«
o A
o A
° C
o B
• o A
c C
o
21. Woodlawn HD
•
•
•
«
o A
o C
o B
o A
o C
o
North Plannin District:
22. North Dubuque Street/
Mont omer -Butler House
oo
A23.
rA
TankTown
•oD
o B
o B
o B
o C
o B
o
24. Dubuque Road
•
o
D
o C
o C
o D
o B
o D
o D
o
Northwest Planning District.
25. Manville Heights
o
o
A
o
o
B
o B
o A
o C
o B
o B
o C
o
o B
Southwest Planning District:
26. Melrose HD-NR
o
A
o A
o A
o B
o B
• o A
o B
• o
o A l
Other Plannin Districts
0
o
D
oC
°C
oD
oD
o D
18
The list of historic areas and neighborhoods, summary of strategies, and map follow:
Iowa City Historic Areas and Neighborhoods
Downtown Planning District: Central Planning District (continued):
1. Downtown 16. Oak Grove -Kirkwood Avenue
2. Near South Side Corridor
Central Planning District.
3. Brown Street HD
4. Clark Street CD
5. College Green HD
6. College Hill CD
7. East College Street HD
8. Dearborn Street CD
9. Dubuque Street Corridor
10, Gilbert -Linn Street HD-NR
11. Goosetown
12. Governor -Lucas St. CD
13. Jefferson Street HD-NR
14. Longfellow HD
15. Muscatine Avenue Moffitt
17. Lucas Farms -Ginter, Friendly,
Highland, Pickard, & Yewell Streets
18. Morningside-City High
19. Rochester Avenue
20. Summit Street HD
21. Woodlawn HD
North Planning District:
22. North Dubuque Street/
Montgomery -Butler House
23. Tank Town
24. Dubuque Road
Northwest Planning District:
25. Manville Heights
Cottages HD (Longfellow) Southwest Planning District:
26. Melrose HD
19
Z a
w
O
tl'N u
U� 1JIJH
n� S[l�3
> S/
Y
_
3nVi NOSNIHJ111H (Q �^^ll
a
W — I
J t p''/
° � s efjf l
y
21
Iowa Historic Preservation Commission
2005 Work Plan
Approved
The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission held its annual planning session Thursday, November
18, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the lobby conference room at 410 E. Washington Street, at which time it
discussed and prioritized. its activities and projects for the 2005 calendar year. The following members
were present: Michael Maharry, Chair; Michael Gunn; Mark McCallum; Jim Ponto; Amy Smothers; and
Tim Weitzel, Vice -chair. Each year the Commission holds a planning session to review its progress in
implementing the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan, and to set objectives for the
upcoming year. This report details the results of that planning session, and is intended to serve as a
guide for the Commission's activities for the upcoming calendar year.
Projects for 2006
The Commission plans to focus on establishing financial incentives to encourage the rehabilitation of
historic homes and commercial buildings, and preservation awareness and education. Having completed
most of the suvey and designation recommendation from the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan, the
Commission also identified the need to update the Preservation Plan to provide guidance for the next 10
years.
Historic Preservation Planning
Historic Preservation Plan
Apply for HRDP or CLG grant to update the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan.
Central District Plan
Participate in the Central District planning process.
Historic Preservation Ordinance
Continue to review and comment on the rewrite of the Uniform Development Code.
Financial Incentives
The Commission will pursue the establishment of local financial incentives for historic preservation.
Potential financial incentives programs identified are:
• Establish local tax abatement program for the improvement and rehabilitation of historic
properties.
• Promote use of existing funding programs such as .TARP and State of Iowa Historical Property
Tax Exemption Program. .
• Partner with private organizations, such as Friends of Historic Preservation and local banks, to
establish a grant program.
• Establish a revolving loan fund for historic preservation.
• Establish conservation easement program to reduce property taxes for historic buildings.
The Commission will consider applying for either a CLG or HRDP grant to hire a consultant to assist
with establishing incentive programs.
Urban Revitalization
Work with the City and downtown property owners to encourage fagade improvements through the
use of the Central Business District Urban Revitalization Plan. Provide specific design guidelines and
assistance for fagade improvements that would support the downtown character.
Education/Public Awareness
Neighborhood Brochures
For 2005, the Commission intends to make education and public awareness one of two primary
goals. As such, more focused efforts will be made to complete the design and publication of new
neighborhood brochures, which has been on on -going. project of the Commission.
Website
Create a more comprehensive and user-friendly historic preservation website. Provide information
regarding historic preservation regulations, technical assistance, National Register nomination and
survey documents, historic neighborhood and landmark information, and useful links and
publications.
Notification Letters
The Commission plans to continue their efforts to notify contractors, property owners, and realtors of
the location of historic and conservation districts, and the applicable regulations.
District Signs
Install signs demarcating existing conservation districts and new local and National Register historic
districts.
Historic Preservation Week Celebration
Friends of Historic Preservation and the Historic Preservation Commission will host their 21 st Historic
Preservation Recognition. Local historic property owners and contractors who have completed
historically sensitive painting, rehabilitating and maintenance will be recognized. The Commission
and Friends are also planning to potentially expand the Historic Preservation Week festivities.
District and Landmark Designation
Downtown Historic District
The Survey and Evaluation of the Central Business District was completed in 2001 and it was
determined that a portion of the downtown is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places. At this time, the Commission does not intend to nominate a downtown historic district, but will
work with the downtown community if they decide to pursue historic designation.
Goosetown Conservation District
The Historic Preservation Commission has received a petition from residents in the Goosetown
neighborhood requesting the designation of the neighborhood as a historic or conservation district.
Based on one neighborhood meeting, it does not appear that at this time there is sufficient support to
designate a conservation district.
Ongoing Issuse
University Relations
Work with the University of Iowa as necessary regarding preservation issues in
Iowa City. Provide educational and technical expertise to the University.
Landmark Identification and Designation
Designate all National Register Properties that are not Iowa City Landmarks for
local landmark status. Identify additional properties that are historically
significant.
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
TH U RSDAY, JAN UARY 10, 2008
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Michael Brennan, William Downing, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto,
Ginalie Swaim, Tim Toomey, Alicia Trimble
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lindsay Eubanks, Tim Weitzel
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT: Austin Chamberlain, Ron Cohen, Charles Eastham, Cecile Kuenzli, Alan
Swanson
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairperson Brennan called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT gN THE AGENDA:
Kuenzli stated that she is a member of the Board of Friends of Historic Preservation. She invited
members of the Commission to the Friends of Historic Preservation annual meeting to be held on January
20th at-1:00 p.m. in the Public Library. Kuenzlii said that Aaron and Jeannie Olson from Chicago, who own
and manage Houseblogs.net, and who renovated their own house have established a blog regarding the
process and will be speaking at the meeting.
Kuenzli said that Friends of Historic Preservation shares some of the Commission's goals and would like
to ask the Commission to look at four things this year in the interest of furthering historic preservation.
She said those four things consist of: 1) revisiting the regulations for the waiting period for a demolition
permit and seeing how Iowa City compares with other cities, 2) working with the Parks and Recreation
Commission to establish guidelines for putting historic structures on public property, 3) taking a look at
regulations involving house moving and how those regulations might be adapted slightly for historic
structures, and 4) possibly establishing a (list of notable people who have worked in, lived in, or
contributed to the history of Iowa City and determining where they resided and whether the residence
would be worthy of some kind of public signage. Miklo said that it would be appropriate to discuss these
proposals at the Commissions annual planning session when they set priorities for the coming year.
ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION:
Certificate of Appropriateness:
821 Dearborn Street. Swanson said that he is a friend of the owner of the house at 821 Dearborn, Ron
Cohen, and has been trying to help coordinate this project. Swanson said that the Commission approved
an earlier version of the plans for this outbuilding in October. He said that the plans were later modified
Y
so that the building would work better as a combined carriage house/garage but to especially work better
as a studio as well.
Swanson said that in December he met with the Commission and presented new drawings of the
proposal, and the Commission asked him to refine the drawings and come back. Swanson said that in
the meantime, he worked with Sunil Terdalkar, who helped a great deal and redid some of the drawings
himself. Swanson said he is now presenting a revised plan that includes some of the recommendations
from Terdalkar to address some of the concerns. He said that the main concern is to get as much light as
possible from the north.
Cohen said that he is a painter and hopes to have a kind of studio/carriage house that will be filled with
light. He said that he needs natural light to paint, especially light from the north, as that light is even and
indirect. Swanson said the Commission should look at the drawing that Terdalkar produced that
represents the size and the three by six windows that the owner would like to have.
Historic Preservation Commission
January 10, 2008
Page 2
Miklo said that Terdalkar had suggested a frieze board on the building to match the house, given the
increased height of the building. Miklo said that staff also suggested that there be some sort of base for
the building and Terdalkar had suggested a different finish of stucco for this, and it could certainly be
concrete. Miklo said that up to a foot of concrete exposed here would not be unusual.
Miklo said the one concern that Terdalkar had was the dimensions of the windows, as they are quite large
for an outbuilding or garage. He said that the overall form of the building is similar to other garages one
would find with a foursquare style house. Miklo said the other suggestion Terdalkar had was the
possibility of installing a skylight in lieu of some of the windows. He said the Commission's decision then
is whether the windows should be smaller and there should be a skylight in lieu of this size window or if
the Commission is comfortable with the proposal.
Swanson said the owner would like to have the option of installing skylights if needed in the future.
Chamberlain stated that is because there is really no way to know how the lighting will be until the
structure is actually built. Miklo said that a skylight on the north elevation would certainly not be counter
to the guidelines.
Chamberlain said the owner had originally asked for four six by three windows on the side. He said that
Terdalkar recommended that the windows be cut back to three windows. Cohen said that Terdalkar
seems to like a squat look. Cohen said that the house has a tall look and is kind of Italianate. He said
that he was hopeful that longer, tall windows would give the longer, tall look and would also facilitate more
light in the studio.
Chamberlain said that the windows on the back of the house are three by six. Cohen said that the
windows on the south side of the house are even wider. He said that his main concern is light. Toomey
asked about the glass doors. Cohen stated that they would face east.
Swaim said that the proposed building does not seem squat to her, especially when one considers the
two-story house compared to the one-story structure.. Toomey said the proposal show in Terdalkar's
drawing looks very balanced to him.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for an
outbuilding at 821 Dearborn Street, as proposed, with an option for one or more skylights on the
north. Toomey seconded the motion.
Cohen said that at some point there was a drawing with only one off centered garage door, and he felt
that looked strange. He asked if he could take that garage door and, instead of two garage doors, simply
have one garage door in the middle. Chamberlain said that it would be a custom built door and would be
a 9'3" wide door that would be in the middle.
Miklo said that staff has not had a chance to evaluate that idea, so he would be concerned about doing it
at the last minute without seeing the dimensions and how it would look in context. Chamberlain said that
it would be a single door centered in the exact middle of the wall of the structure. Miklo said that would
not be a typical pattern for an outbuilding like this.
Toomey said that structurally, if the owner went with a bigger door centered in the middle of the wall, it
would pick up a lot of strength. He said that with wider areas on the two sides, it would pick up some
structural strength.
Miklo said that the door is already built, so it wouldn't be wider than a one -car garage door. He asked if it
would be possible to have another panel added to the door so that it would look more traditional than
what would be a fairly narrow door for that fagade. Miklo said that would look better proportionally. Ponto
said he would consider amending the motion to allow for a door plus a fixed panel that would look like
part of the door.
Historic Preservation Commission
January 10, 2008
Page 3
Swaim asked if the owner had considered, if he wants only one door, having it shifted to one side with
one double hung window on the other half of the wall. She said that to be true to the building for future
purposes, one would want to do what will be most true to the house style. Swaim said that one door in
the center with nothing on the sides is not visually in keeping with the house or a typical garage. She
stated that the Commission has to look at the building from the exterior point of view.
Miklo said that building -code wise the garage with two doors as shown in the drawing could be done and
it has to meet Code, so structural issues should not'be a concern. He added that the next owner may
want to use this as a garage, and the owner would be putting. in difficulties for using it as a garage by not
putting in the possibility for two doors.
Chamberlain stated that there are quite a few older garages with one garage door in the center of a wall.
Ponto said that those are not 24-foot wide garages with one single door in the center. He said that he
personally is not in favor of one center door.
Chamberlain asked if there could be one center door with a pedestrian access door next to it. Cohen said
that he wants to have symmetry on the building and would prefer a central door with a window on each
side. Ponto said that he has never seen a 24-foot garage with only one door. Toomey agreed that if
there were a larger door in the center, that would be okay, but this single door would be out of balance.
Ponto said that it would have to be a 15-foot door, if it was going to be centered. Miklo said that since the
door is already built, adding one more panel would make a twelve -foot opening.
AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Panto moved to amend the motion to give the owner the
additional option of leaving one garage door as indicated in the drawings, with the other garage
door to be replaced with a like sized window or a pedestrian door.
Ponto said he does not like the idea of one small garage door centered on the wall. He said that a
double -car wide door would be okay with him, but he felt it should be at least 15 if not 16 feet wide.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Chamberlain said that the door is nine feet six inches tall and nine feet three inches wide. He asked
about the option of having one center door with a side door. Chamberlain asked if he made the whole
door 15 feet if that could include the trim.
Ponto isaid he feels that this would need to be a functional, two -car garage door so that in the future
someone could use it as such. He said that the opening should be at least 15 feet. Miklo said that if
there is a consensus on the Commission that one 15-foot door would be acceptable, the Commission
could approve that as an alternative.
AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Ponto moved to amend the motion to include an alternative
for a double -wide garage door centered on the west face with an opening at least 15 feet wide, to
be approved by staff. Toomey seconded the amendment.
Ponto said that he understands the interior concerns, but he is concerned that from the alley side not only
look like a garage but in the future can function like a garage. Toomey said that he actually likes this just
the way it is drawn with two garage doors; it looks very balanced and functional for the future. He said
that without drawings for a centered garage door, he did not believe, the Commission should even be
discussing that option.
The amendment failed on a vote of 4A, with Baker, Brennan, Downing, and Toomey voting
a ainst.
The main motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE PROPOSED DRAFT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN:
Historic Preservation Commission
January 10, 2008
Page 4
Miklo stated that there were concerns about the Plan raised at a recent Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting, particularly regarding the neighborhood stabilization language in the Plan and the strong
language on owner occupancy. He said that he and Weitzel drafted some wording to address that
concern that makes it a little broader and removes the language about converting duplexes and multi-
family to single-family owner occupancy. Miklo said that it includes language about a home ownership
incentive program. He said that at least one member of the Planning and Zoning Commission said he
would be more comfortable voting on the Plan after the Commission reviewed potential amendments.
Swaim said that on page 66, under number three, the. division doesn't discuss historic or conservation
districts and asked if that means they would not be the first priority. Miklo responded that because the
Plan is talking about historic districts and conservation districts generally, that should be understood.
Downing asked why item four on page 66 is proposed for deletion. Miklo replied that that is covered
under all the others. He added that number four is very specific about converting buildings from rental
units to owner occupied units, and that sort of specificity may not be necessary. Swaim agreed that it is
.covered in point one.
MOTION: Toomey moved to approve the revisions to the Preservation Plan as suggested in
Terdalkar's January 10, 2008 draft memorandum to the Commission. Trimble seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
Miklo said another issue is that the Plan itself and neighborhood strategies discuss downtown and a
smaller downtown historic district and then a conservation district, but the executive summary doesn't
mention that. He said that one of the Planning and Zoning Commission members felt that should be cited
in the executive summary as well, because a lot of people will read only that portion of the Plan. Miklo
said that same language could be included in the executive summary to stress the potential for a historic
district downtown. He said that would not change the context of the Plan but would repeat information
included elsewhere.
MOTION: Swaim moved to include the potential for a downtown district in the executive
summary. Toomey seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 2007.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the minutes of the Commission's December 13, 2007 meeting.
Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carved on a vote of 8-0.
OTHER:
Kuenzli thanked Commission members for the work done on the Preservation Plan.
Miklo distributed a booklet regarding the Iowa City Municipal Airport. He said that a requirement of the
Airport Commission for removing the historic hangar building was that the history of that structure be
properly documented, resulting in this history of the local airport.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
s/pcd/mins/hpc/2008/1-10-08.doc
0
a BOOM
Q)
._
E
0
V
0
MENEM
L
0
■■
ui
O
O
N
L
H W
O
T\T
N
M
00
T\T
N
M
O
\TT
N
M
00
T\T
N
m
O
\TT
N
co
I`
T\T
N
M
O
\
N
M
O
\TT
N
M
O
T\T
N
M
w
\
I
M
E
zmmow
as
C
•c
9�
s
.°
av)
-Q
E!
�