HomeMy WebLinkAboutHPC Agenda packet 3.11.2021
Thursday
March 11, 2021
5:30 p.m.
Electronic
Zoom Meeting Platform
IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, March 11, 2021
Electronic Meeting – 5:30 p.m.
Zoom Meeting Platform
Agenda
A) Call to Order
B) Roll Call
C) Public discussion of anything not on the agenda
D) Certificate of Appropriateness
1. 404 Brown Street – Brown Street Historic District (rear porch addition)
2. 445 Clark Street – Clark Street Conservation District (window and door alterations)
3. 711 Fairchild Street – Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (rear dormer)
E) Review of draft exception for Siding Guidelines per City Council request
F) Report on Certificates issued by Chair and Staff
Certificate of No Material Effect –Chair and Staff review
529 Brown Street- Brown Street Historic District (screens for side porch)
Minor Review –Staff review
430 South Summit Street – Summit Street Historic District (Radon mitigation system
installation)
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible or
impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members,
staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
You can participate in the meeting and can comment on an agenda item by going
to https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJcvdO-orTMpHdfQPvtd9rNafdT78XCXCHF1
to visit the Zoom meeting’s registration page and submitting the required
information. Once approved, you will receive an email message with a link to join
the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting or webinar ID, enter the ID number
found in the email. If you have no computer or smartphone, or a computer
without a microphone, you can call in by phone by dialing (312) 626-6799 and
entering the meeting ID 932 3603 8373 when prompted. Providing comment in
person is not an option.
G) Consideration of Minutes for January 28, 2021
H) Consideration of Minutes for February 11, 2021
I) Commission Discussion
Train Memorial Project
J) Commission Information
K) Adjournment
If you will need disability-related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jessica
Bristow, Urban Planning, at 319-356-5243 or at jessica-bristow@iowa-city.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged
to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
Staff Report March 3, 2021
Historic Review for 404 Brown Street
District: Brown Street Historic District
Classification: Contributing
The applicant, Gregory Cilek, is requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 404 Brown Street, a
contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. The project consists of a rear porch addition,
second floor deck, and bump out for a sauna.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations
4.1 Balustrades and Handrails
4.3 Doors
4.5 Foundations
4.7 Mass and Rooflines
4.10 Porches
4.11 Siding
4.13 Windows
4.14 Wood
5.0 Guidelines for Additions
5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint
Staff Comments
This house, built in 1916, is and American Foursquare form with Georgian or Colonial Revival Style detailing.
The balanced front façade has a central entry door with sidelights and an open porch with an enclosed porch
on the other side of the entry. The front porch is supported by heavy square columns with panel inserts in the
balustrade. A spindled balustrade once enclosed the center bay of the porch. The decorative trim is classical
in detail. The hip roof has a flared or bell-cast profile. The windows tend to be ganged in threes. Both one-
over-one double hung windows and multi-paned casement windows exist on the house.
In 1996 the Commission approved a multi-story rear addition, a west side screened porch addition and
revisions to the porch roof. In 2004 the west-side screened porch addition was redesigned and approved by
the Commission. In 2018, the Commission approved a breezeway and garage addition on condition that the
product information was submitted for review. The project was indefinitely postponed. Also, in 2018 staff
approved the replacement of second floor rear windows in area of the 2004 addition.
The applicant is proposing to replace the rear deck with an open porch that matches the front porch and the
west side addition. The porch will have a second-floor deck. An additional second floor deck wraps around
the east side of the existing rear addition. The project will include a shed roof bump out on the second floor
with roof skylights, housing a sauna. The project will be constructed of wood with all details matching the
house. The windows will be wood or metal clad wood also matching similar windows on the house. The new
door accessing the second-floor deck will also match other doors on the house. A new second floor window
is proposed in the new addition and in the west end of the north wall of the original house. Both will be small
fixed sashes allow additional light inside.
Section 5.1 of the guidelines recommend designing additions to match key horizontal lines on the existing
building, use a palette of materials similar to that used on the historic structure, placed at the rear of the
property and that preserve significant historic materials and features. New porches should be consistent with
the historic building.
Staff finds that the new porch design matches both the front porch and an earlier side porch addition. The
current project will attach to a modern addition on the house and will not impact historic materials. While the
bump out created to enclose the sauna is an unusual addition for a historic house, its negative impact is
minimized by its location and the incorporation of window and door openings on the north and west sides.
The shed roof does help differentiate it from the rest of the house and the earlier addition. On the back of
the property it has little impact on the historic house, especially since this area has remained hard to view for
many years. Appropriate materials that match the existing materials on the house are proposed. Staff
recommends that the small second floor windows be revised as double hung windows similar to the front-
facing attic windows.
Recommended Motion
Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 404 Brown Street as presented in the
application with the following conditions:
Rear single-sash windows are revised to match the front attic windows or other windows on the
property.
Door and window product information, including skylights, is approved by Staff
13'-2"7'-2"8"3'-0"1012"6"3'-1"1'-712"1'-512"7'-612"LINE OF INTERIOR
FINISHED SAUNA 7'-2" CEILING
6'-8"1'-9 7/8"8'-6"1'-9 1/8"3'-7"3'-3 1/2"
3'-0 3/8"1'-412"6'-8"2'-3"R10 5/8"7'-2"
LINE OF FINISHED DECK
LINE OF EXISTING FINISHED DECK2'-112"6"2'-5"10'-0"
9'-7 1/2"
2'-5 1/2"
1 1/2"
7'-1118"
1'-4"1'-11"8"412"8'-518"
2'-1"
IOWA SPORTS MANAGEMENT
121 West 27th Street
Suite 1001, New York, NY 10001
212 695-1337
SPORTSIOWA
Scale:
Drawn By:
Date:
Drawing Title:
EAST EXTERIOR
ELEVATION
3/8" = 1'-0"
LK
CILEK RESIDENCE
404 BROWN STREET IOWA CITY
IOWA 52245
02.17.2021
7'-2"3'-0"6'-11"LINE OF INTERIOR
FINISHED SAUNA 7'-2" CEILING
9'-012"UNDERSIDE OF EXISTING ROOF
LINE OF KITCHEN BEYOND
115 8"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"1'-0"6"
LINE OF FINISHED
DECK BEYOND
2'-5"9'-1012"
10'-0"
112"
1"
2'-512"8'-5"2'-4"1'-0"
LINE OF FINISHED DECK412"6"2'-112"8'-518"
2'-1"
7'-1118"
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
DOOR
IOWA SPORTS MANAGEMENT
121 West 27th Street
Suite 1001, New York, NY 10001
212 695-1337
SPORTSIOWA
Scale:
Drawn By:
Date:
Drawing Title:
WEST EXTERIOR
ELEVATION
3/8" = 1'-0"
LK
CILEK RESIDENCE
404 BROWN STREET IOWA CITY
IOWA 52245
02.17.2021
2'-51 "12'-10"2'-51 "6'-51 "
2'-0"
1'-312"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"1'-0"612"
18'-312"
612"1'-0"612"1'-0"
LINE OF FINISHED
DECK BEYOND
UNDERSIDE OF ROOF
SAUNA ROOF
5'-03 8"
1'-0"1'-312"
1 1/2"
18'-7"
1 1/2"
6"
7"
2'-17 8"1'-2"
1'-718"
SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
WINDOW
LINE OF FINISHED
INTERIOR CEILING
NEW
WINDOW
3'-812"35 8"
IOWA SPORTS MANAGEMENT
121 West 27th Street
Suite 1001, New York, NY 10001
212 695-1337
SPORTSIOWA
Scale:
Drawn By:
Date:
Drawing Title:
NORTH EXTERIOR
ELEVATION
3/8" = 1'-0"
LK
02.22.2021
CILEK RESIDENCE
404 BROWN STREET IOWA CITY
IOWA 52245
NEW SAUNA EDITION FLAT ROOF EXISTING KITCHEN ROOF
PROPOSED NEW
SECOND FLOOR DECK
PROPOSED
NEW
SECOND
FLOOR DECK
EXISTING MAIN ROOF
NEW
SKYLIGHT NEW
SKYLIGHT
12'-9 3/4"
1'-6"
1'-6"6"6"
11'-9 3/4"5'-11 1/4"5"
EQ
18'-7"
EQ EQ B EQ B
IOWA SPORTS MANAGEMENT
121 West 27th Street
Suite 1001, New York, NY 10001
212 695-1337
SPORTSIOWA
Scale:
Drawn By:
Date:
Drawing Title:
ROOF PLAN
Sauna Roof
3/8" = 1'-0"
LK
02.22.2021
CILEK RESIDENCE
404 BROWN STREET IOWA CITY
IOWA 52245
Staff Report March 4, 2021
Historic Review for 445 Clark Street
District: Clark Street Conservation District
Classification: Contributing
The applicant, Steadfast Investment, is requesting approval for a proposed alteration project at 445 Clark
Street, a Contributing property in the Clark Street Conservation District. The project consists of alterations to
the rear addition, the removal of the side stairs, door and entry canopy and the replacement of the south-
facing pair of windows with new windows with raised sills to incorporate a kitchen remodel inside. The house
is being converted from a duplex back to a single-family home.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations
4.3 Doors
4.13 Windows
7.0 Guidelines for Demolition
7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features
Staff Comments
This house was built between 1920 and 1926 and is a mix of popular revival styles and Craftsman design. The
steep roof and wall dormers could be elements of Tudor and Colonial Revival styles. The shingled siding and
three-over-one double hung windows are Craftsman details found on other properties in the neighborhood.
The ganged windows could also point to some Prairie School influences. While the house was built by 1926,
the entry portico may have been an addition built before 1933. The garage was built in 1930. A one-story rear
addition was built in 1946 and the adjacent screened porch was added before 1973.
In 2014, staff approved the replacement of the basement windows with metal-clad wood windows matching
the existing windows.
The applicant is proposing to return the house to single-family occupancy. This change includes interior
kitchen remodel among other interior work. Several exterior elements would also change. On the 1946 rear
addition, the rear, west-facing windows would be removed, and the wall patched with shingle siding to match
the existing siding. A new French Door would be added to the center of the rear wall. The window on the
south wall of the of the addition near the back corner would be replaced with a new three-over-one double
hung window matching other windows on the house. The other window on the south wall of the addition
would be removed. The window on the north side of the addition, a small fixed window, would be replaced
with a taller three-over-one double hung window to match the others. The door on the north side of the
addition would be removed and the wall patched.
In the new kitchen area, the original proposal for the existing pair of south-facing windows is to replace the
glass in the lower sash with black glass and leave the windows in place. Currently there is a plan to replace
those windows with two new windows with higher sills to allow the new kitchen counter to pass under the
windows inside of in front of them.
The applicant also proposes to remove the side entry door, canopy and stairs and patch the wall to match the
existing wall.
In the guidelines, Section 4.3 Doors, recommends that new door openings are trimmed to match other doors
and windows.
Section 4.13 Windows recommends adding new windows that match the type, size sash width, trim, use of
divided lights, and overall appearance of the historic windows. New windows should be added in a location
that is consistent with the window pattern of the historic building. If an opening is to be relocated, it should
not detract from the overall fenestration pattern.
Section 7.1 Demolition of Whole Structures or Significant Features states that it is disallowed to remove any
historic architectural feature such as a porch, chimney, bay window, dormer, brackets, or decorative trim, that
is significant to the architectural character and style of the building.
Staff finds that much of the proposed work is appropriate for the building. The removed and replaced
windows on the rear addition are a mixture of modern double-hung windows and small fixed multi-pane
windows. While the side windows on the rear addition are not located in a place that matches the window
patterning on the house, staff finds that it is appropriate to replace them with double-hung windows
matching the original windows in their current location will improve the current configuration. Replacing the
south-facing kitchen windows with new windows matching the existing, except for height, so that they can
accommodate a kitchen counter is appropriate. Staff finds the French Door, especially in a full-lite without
grills, appropriate for the rear of the addition.
This house currently has a front door, a side door, and two rear doors. One of the rear doors in the addition
is proposed to be removed and staff finds that appropriate. The second rear door is proposed to remain. It is
unknown whether this door is original or an addition. The side door includes a door and entry canopy that
matches the style of the house, trim that matches the original trim on the house and a modern pre-cast stair.
While the stair is not original and could be replaced, staff finds that the door and entry canopy appear to be
original to the house. As a highly visible architectural feature that is common to houses of similar age and
style, staff finds this to be a significant feature that should be retained regardless of whether or not it is used.
If removed, this area, in combination with the previous window alterations to the NW corner of the house,
will leave the house with a significant amount of uninterrupted wall space and impact its historic character.
Staff recommends that the side door and entry canopy remain with the stairs remaining or being replaced
with stairs that meet the guidelines.
Recommended Motion
Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 445 Clark Street as presented in the
application with the following conditions:
The side door remains
Door and window product information is approved by staff
445 Clark Street
Side door with more recently altered window opening to right and around the corner. Door is proposed
to be removed. Windows to remain.
Rear addition to right (both windows to be removed).Screened porch area in the middle
SW corner of addition. The windows with x’s all in the rear addition proposed to be removed. the
windows with arrows would be replaced.
Doors onto the screened porch. The door to the right is in the addition and will be removed. the door on
the left may or may not be original and will remain
DN
VSB2D42T
Guest Room/Study
Remove Existing
DH Window
New 6/0x6/8
French Doors
(Andersen FWHI6068)
(New Kitchen)BS36New Mudroom
New Guest Bathroom
W3024
(Built-in
Range Hood)
32"20 1/2"
139"186 1/4"60 3/4"45 1/2"54 1/2"23 1/8"
39 1/8"
38 1/4"60 7/8"44 7/8"
30 3/8"24"DW35 1/2"2/8x6/8
Door
Close Off
Existing Door
114 3/4"
37 1/8"
72"30"52 3/8"
114 3/4"
2/6x6/8 PD
6"
Tall Filler
60"
Tub/
Show er
Refrig.
Panel
151"RCA21ATDSCW2436 W1236 W1536
B3D15
W1236
B3D30PDW33366" Filler
(Cut-to-Size)
Stone Return
Panels (2)Open Below63"BSCLS36
55"
Range CL
35 1/2"37 1/8"2x4
Full Height
Wall
2x4
42"T
Knee Wall
24"2x4
Full Height
Wall
30" Range
30"21"36"5"WF3x48
(Cut-To-Size)3 1/2"4"12"12"
43"
22 1/4"
Toilet CL
32"40 1/4"
Sink CL75 7/8"42"1/2"
BF3
(Filler
Cut-to-size)24"Replace Existing
with Andersen Window
54"AFF
(AAN2028)
Replace Existing
with Andersen Window
54"AFF
(AAN2028)74 7/8"36"Sink CLWindows 29"AFF(black out lower sash)6"New 2x6
Full Height
Wall12"6"12"24"Scale
Date
Drawn by
614 Clark Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
PH: 319-430-0038
EMAIL: markrussoic@gmail.com Approved by 1/4" = 1'-0"
A6
1st Floor Remodel -Plan BKevin Hanick
2/16/21
E.K.
445 Clark St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
M. Russo
TOILET ROOM
EXISTING
CEILING SLOPE
60"
15"
96"
CEILING
41"
19 7/16"40 9/16"
New 2x4
Knee Wall
(41"T)
68 3/8"33 1/4"46 1/2"
43 3/4"40 3/4"30 9/16"
30"
21 3/4"21 3/4"
38 9/16"
2X4
Knee Wall
(42"T)
2/8x6/8
Walk-in
Shower
Countertop
31"
Scale
Date
Drawn by
Checked by
614 Clark St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-430-0038 / markrussoic@gmail.com 1/4" = 1'-0"
A5
2nd Level Bathroom -Plan AKevin Hanick
2/11/21
E.K.
M. Russo
445 Clark St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Down
4 1/2"3 1/2"148 1/2"186 1/4"139"
30"
35"9 1/2"114 3/4"111 3/8"157 3/8"
151"
60 7/8"44 7/8"remove windows,fill the opening with wall constructionand side over the arearemove door,fill the opening with wall constructionand side over the area12"Windows 29"AFFScale
Date
Drawn by
Reviewed by
614 Clark St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
PH: 319-430-0038
EMAIL: markrussoic@gmail.com 1/4" = 1'-0"
A7
First Floor As-builtKevin Hanick
2/16/21
E.K.
M. Russo
445 Clark St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Staff Report March 4, 2021
Historic Review for 711 Fairchild Street
District: Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District
Classification: Contributing
The applicants, Sean Adams-Hiett and Molly Buhrow, are requesting approval for a proposed alteration
project at 711 Fairchild Street, a Contributing property in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation
District. The project consists of construction of a dormer addition on the rear slope of the side gable on the
house.
Applicable Regulations and Guidelines:
4.0 Iowa City Historic Preservation Guidelines for Alterations
4.7 Mass and Rooflines
4.11 Siding
4.13 Windows
4.14 Wood
5.0 Guidelines for Additions
5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint
Staff Comments
This 1 ½ story vernacular house was built about 1900. The house is T-shaped with a front-facing gable and a
side-facing gable. The house originally had a porch on both the front and back of the side wing. A full-width
porch under the front facing gable connected to the smaller front porch on the west half of the house. The
two porches on the side gable were enclosed and incorporated into the house. The assessor notes that the
house had drywall installed in the entire first floor in 1958. It is possible that the asbestos siding was installed
at the same time.
The applicant is proposing to add a shed roof dormer across the back (south) of the side-facing gable. The
dormer will have a shed roof with a low 2/12 pitch. The exterior walls will be clad in wood siding with a 3-4"
reveal. Corner boards are planned for exterior corners, and Marvin double-hung (wood interior with white
metal-clad exterior) windows are planned for the project.
Section 5.1 Expansion of the Building Footprint includes guidelines for additions that are referenced here:
• Apply siding to a new addition that appears similar in size, shape, texture, and material to the existing
siding on historic building
• Use windows that are of a similar type, proportion and divided light pattern as those in the original
structure.
• Construct the roof overhang, soffits, and eaves of the addition so that they math the roof overhang,
soffits and the eaves of the existing building…. The trim details of a new eave should match the eave
details of the existing building.
Section 4.7 Mass and Rooflines of the guidelines recommend
• Designing new dormers to be of a size, scale and proportion that is consistent with the architectural
style.
• Designing new dormers such that the face of the dormer is primarily composed of window area.
• Adding dormers to an existing roof in a manner that does not significantly alter the character of the
historic building.
• Adding dormers that are in proportion to the roof’s overall size. The width of the dormers in
proportion to the roof on which they are located should be consistent with the architectural style.
• Adding dormers that are no closer than 3 feet to an existing gable end or hip. The intent is to avoid
significantly altering the original roof lines.
Section 4.11 Siding allows for wood and approved wood substitutes to be used to match siding.
Section 4.12 Windows allows for metal-clad wood windows that match the existing to be used.
This house currently has asbestos siding which obscures some of the trim on the main house and a wide lap
siding of an unknown material on a rear addition. The house is small and close to the neighboring property
line. The building code requires that the dormer addition meets the 5-foot side setback even though the main
house does not.
Staff worked with the applicants’ designer to present a dormer addition where the wall consists mostly of
windows which are centered in the wall and provides the maximum amount of usable space. The dormer is
closer than the 3 foot distance from the roof edge recommended by the guidelines. Given the tight site,
location on the rear slope of the roof and the small size of the house, staff finds the dormer addition
appropriate for the house.
Staff finds the proposed one-over-one metal-clad wood windows appropriate for this project. The proposed
wood siding in a 3-4 inch lap with corner boards does not match the existing siding but would be considered
an appropriate match for most houses of this age and style. Without removing the asbestos siding, which is
beyond the scope of the project, the original siding design is not known. The roof material would match the
existing house. Staff proposes that the new windows include a standard 4-inch flat casing for trim and the
eave condition on the addition match that of the house.
Recommended Motion
Move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 711 Fairchild Street as presented in the
application with the following conditions:
Standard 4” flat casing is used to trim the new windows
Eave detail of the new dormer matches the existing house.
711 Fairchild Street (front above and rear below)
View
NORTH (CURRENT)
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
WEST (CURRENT)
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
SOUTH (CURRENT)
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
WEST (DORMER)
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
SOUTH (DORMER)
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
SOUTH DIMENSIONS
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
View
WEST DIMENSIONS
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
View
Setback
Address:
711 Fairchild St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Prepared by:
Frontier Carpentry & Woodworking
email: Mark@fcwia.com
ph. 319.721.9142
Date: March 4, 2021
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Re: Proposed Amendment to the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook
Introduction
On February 16, 2021 the City Council concluded consideration of a Historic Preservation
Commission appeal from the owners of 1133 East Court Street. The appeal spanned two City
Council meetings and included considerable testimony from the property owners and their
contractor and architect, as well as Commission Chairperson Boyd and City staff. Generally
speaking, the City Council’s standard of review was limited to the reasonableness of the
Commission’s decision, which should be noted was fully supported by City staff. The City
Council unanimously concluded the Commission decision was soundly based on the existing
guidelines and should be upheld. However, the City Council simultaneously expressed
sympathy for the homeowner’s position and a desire to consider more flexibility in the local
guidelines related to the replacement of existing synthetic siding. The City Manager’s Office was
charged with pursuing such an amendment. This memo aims to lay out additional background
information and concludes with a recommended amendment. We are seeking comments from
the Historic Preservation Commission and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) before
presenting the amendment to the City Council for final consideration.
Background
On December 10, 2020, the Historic Preservation Commission denied an application to replace
or cover the original siding at 1133 East Court Street, which was already covered with synthetic
aluminum siding. The application requested replacement of the original siding without an
assessment of the condition of the original wood siding . 1133 East Court Street is located in the
local Longfellow Historic District and the National Register listed Longfellow Historic District and
is classified as contributing to the historic character of the neighborhood. At this meeting, the
Commission also approved a Certificate of Appropriateness that allows for the removal of the
aluminum siding and repair of the original siding and trim or replacement of deteriorated siding
and trim following review and documentation by staff and the Commission Chair.
The applicants appealed the Commission’s denial to the City Council. The applicants and their
contractor and architect expressed concerns related to damage to the original siding and
potential moisture issues due to previously installed modern insulation and the application of the
existing synthetic aluminum siding. The homeowners also expressed health concerns related to
lead paint that is present on the original siding. They further indicated a strong desire to install
new home exterior wall insulation to improve energy efficiency in alignment with the City’s
Climate Action goals.
Finally, the applicants also expressed frustration with the lengthy historic review process. They
originally submitted their application in April 2020 and expressed concerns with what they
understood was the City’s requirement to remove all of the aluminum siding to assess the
condition of the original wood siding with an inability to have assurance they could reinstall the
aluminum siding after the assessment.
On February 16, 2021 the City Council affirmed the decision of the Historic Preservation
Commission, but also expressed concerns with the historic review process with this case and
March 5, 2021
Page 2
lack of flexibility given some of the seemingly valid points raised by the homeowners and their
professional representatives. The City Council was concerned with what appeared to be an
onerous historic review process and directed staff to propose a modification to the Iowa City
Historic Preservation Handbook that increases flexibility for property owners to replace non-
original siding (e.g. aluminum, vinyl, etc.) with an approved wood substitute material that would
honor the historic character of the neighborhood and that may provide one or more of the
following benefits; energy efficiency, home safety and short or long-term affordability.
City Council Appeal
The City Council heard the initial appeal of the Commission’s denial on February 2, 2021. At
that meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to February 16 and requested staff
to coordinate with the property owner on the temporary removal of some of the aluminum siding
to evaluate the condition of the original wood siding underneath. The homeowners welcomed
this opportunity as they previously understood the City’s requirement to remove all of the
synthetic siding for the assessment.
After the Council meeting staff 1) developed a plan that outlined targeted areas where the
aluminum siding should be removed; 2) shared this plan with the homeowners and their
contractor; 3) met the homeowner and contractor onsite to discuss and finalize the areas of
removal; and 4) after the contractor removed portions of the aluminum, visually inspected the
condition of the original wood siding with the homeowner and contractor.
Members of the City’s planning staff and housing rehab staff assessed the condition of the
siding. All staff agreed that the original wood siding was in good condition. Signs of moisture
damage caused by insulation and covering the original siding with aluminum were not apparent.
Staff used a moisture meter to determine the moisture content of the wood. The readings were
very low. Any reading above 15% would indicate that the wood may not be able to salvaged and
re-painted. The readings were well below that at around 6-7%. The readings were also taken on
a very cold day, which is not the best time to test and could have resulted in an artificially low
reading. A reading in the Spring may register higher. If requested by the applicant, staff has
indicated a willingness to conduct another reading in warmer weather. If a Spring reading
registered higher, staff’s recommendation regarding the condition of the siding could change.
Based on the condition of the siding, staff recommended that the original wood siding be
retained as contemplated in the Certificate of Appropriateness issued by the Historic
Preservation Commission. Portions of the siding that are splintered or deteriorated may be
removed through this process. The rear of the home has no original siding. Replacement siding
may consist of wood, smooth cement board or smooth LP Smartside matching the original. The
trim was not uncovered. If the trim is damaged it may be replaced. If it is not damaged it can be
repaired. The trim should match the original trim and there are examples of the original trim in
the porch, which can be copied to create any new trim. Details related to trim and the
assessment of the condition of original materials would be coordinated with City staff.
At the February 16 City Council meeting, staff presented the recom mendation outlined above.
The applicants also presented information and provided visual evidence of holes in the wood
from insulation and application of synthetic siding, missing trim details, and evidence of moisture
damage in the house. It was clear the homeowners did not agree with staff’s assessment and
they and their architect effectively outlined the basis for their position. Other Local Jurisdictions
After receiving direction from the City Council to explore potential amendments to the City’s
Historic Preservation Handbook, staff reached out to the cities of Des Moines, Cedar Rapids,
March 5, 2021
Page 3
and Dubuque to see how similar applications would be treated in these jurisdictions. The
following is a brief summary of those conversations.
City of Des Moines
City of Des Moines staff stated that in similar reviews where synthetic siding exists over original
wood siding, they require the removal of the synthetic siding and an assessment of the condition
of the original wood siding. If the original wood siding is in good condition, it must be repaired. If
the condition of the wood is poor, it can be replaced with wood, fiber cement board, or LP
Smartside. Des Moines staff, and on occasion Commission members, conduct the inspections
and stated that they aim for incremental changes that slowly bring the property into
conformance with design standards.
City of Cedar Rapids
Although Cedar Rapids does not have any recent examples of a historic review application
requesting to replace synthetic siding, similar to Iowa City and Des Moines Cedar Rapids would
require the removal of portions of the synthetic siding and an assessment of the condition of the
original wood siding. If the original siding is in good condition it would need to be repaired. The
City of Cedar Rapids does not allow alternative materials and would require that any
replacement siding be wood.
In the assessment of original materials, Cedar Rapids staff relies on contractors to assess the
condition and report back to staff. This differs from Des Moines and Iowa City, which both rely
on their staff’s assessment of the original wood siding.
City of Dubuque
The City of Dubuque approaches properties with synthetic siding differently. Building s are
reviewed based on their existing conditions. If synthetic siding covers original wood siding and
original siding is not visible, there is no assessment of the condition of the original wood siding.
The owner could restore the original wood siding, replace it with wood, or replace it with an
alternative approved material. More specifically, if no original wood siding is visible, due to the
application of synthetic siding, staff would determine that guidelines related to maintaining and
repairing original materials are not relevant since no original material is evident.
Staff’s conversations with these other cities demonstrate that there are other local jurisdictions
in the State that approach this type of situation a bit differently. Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and
Iowa City each require removal of the synthetic siding and an assessment of the condition of the
original wood siding. Des Moines and Iowa City have staff who assess the condition while
Cedar Rapids relies on the homeowner’s contractors for such assessment. There is a notable
variation with Dubuque’s approach, which does not require an assessment of original materials
when they are not already visible. Certified Local Government Status
In 1966, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) established a nationwide program to
encourage preservation. The NHPA established national historic preservation policy, the
National Register of Historic Places, and State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs). In 1980,
the Act was amended to create the Certified Local Government program. This program added
local governments as another partner in preservation efforts.
The National Park Service, Department of the Interior, administers the federal government’s
historic preservation program. Iowa’s State Historic Preservation program is administered
through the State Historic Preservation Office of Iowa. The local partner is the certified city or
county government. The cities of Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Dubuque, and Iowa City are
Certified Local Governments. Being a CLG means that the City is eligible for grants and
technical assistance.
March 5, 2021
Page 4
City staff works to maintain our status as a CLG, which means that we work to encourage
historic preservation at the local level and follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards &
Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation in developing and administering our
preservation program. More specifically, this means that any proposed amendments to the
City’s Historic Preservation Handbook must align with the Secretary of Interior Standards. The
following amendment aims to align with such standards, as well as the more general
neighborhood and community intent of preserving and enhancing the historic character of our
cherished districts and individual properties within.
Draft Amendment
The following exception aims at responding to the City Council’s interest in amending the Iowa
City Historic Preservation Handbook in order to increase flexibility for property owners to replace
non-original siding (e.g. aluminum, vinyl, etc.) with an approved wood substitute material that
may provide one or more of the following benefits; energy efficiency, home safety and short or
long-term affordability. It is important to re-emphasize that the City Council wishes to do so in a
manner that honors and respects the historic character of our many districts.
The narrow focus of this exception is limited to situations where synthetic siding is covering
original wood siding. The focus is also narrowed to non-historic, noncontributing and
contributing properties. Importantly, it does not apply to key contributing properties or historic
landmarks.
Recommended Amendment 4.11 Siding - Exception
The following exception provides flexibility to owners of eligible buildings with existing synthetic
siding installed over original wood siding. The City recommends repair of original wood siding
over replacement whenever feasible. Removal of the synthetic siding and repair of the original
wood siding and trim is often the most sustainable and affordable solution. However, some
property owners may have legitimate economic or technical concerns due to the deteriorated
condition of the original wood siding or the impact rehabilitation may have on building
performance, health or safety such as the potential for moisture damage due to the presence of
modern insulation. Therefore, this exception encourages City staff and the Commission to
consult with homeowners and/or their professional agents to assess applications involving the
presence of synthetic siding and provide flexibility to situations where property owners wish to
avoid economical and technical challenges such as moisture damage, remove the synthetic
siding and the original siding, and replace it with an appropriate material as described in this
handbook that matches in exposure, texture, and design.
Applies to: Non-historic, noncontributing, and contributing properties, both primary structures
and outbuildings, in historic and conservation districts
Local historic landmarks and key contributing properties in historic and conservation districts are
not eligible for this exception. This exception only applies to buildings with wood siding and not
stucco, stone, or brick.
Synthetic siding may be removed, and if original wood siding exists underneath it may be
repaired or removed and replaced with wood or an approved alternative material, provided the
following conditions:
• Synthetic siding covers the original wood siding,
• Evidence of technical or economic challenges is noted related to the deteriorated
condition of the original wood siding or the impact that rehabilitation may have on
building performance, health or safety, and
• If original wood siding is removed, it must be replaced with an appropriate material that
matches in exposure, texture, and design.
March 5, 2021
Page 5
Improvements to the Preservation Program
We recognize that the owners of 1133 E. Court Street did not have a good experience with the
City’s historic review process. We are committed to making improvements in the process and
offering simple solutions that provide flexibility, when warranted. Recently, we have made
changes to our processes and are exploring others that will help to improve the historic
preservation program:
• Neighborhood and Development Services staff are working to create a team
environment within the preservation program. This involves planning staff more closely
collaborating with housing rehabilitation staff on site visits with property owners and
contractors to collaboratively assess conditions of materials and discuss possible
solutions. All staff will give strong consideration to professional opinions of local
contractors and architects.
• Additionally, it has been recommended that staff administer a survey to property owners
and contractors within the historic districts to better assess our current process. A survey
may also help identify potential amendments to the handbook that aim to be win/win
solutions for everyone involved. Staff is also considering focus group discussions prior to
issuing a survey to help inform the survey questions. We would like the Commission’s
input on this greater survey effort.
• Planning staff and the Chairperson Boyd have also scheduled a lunch and learn with
local realtors in April. The focus on this meeting will be to inform realtors of the City’s
historic preservation program and the location of local historic and conservation districts.
Next Steps
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommends that proposed amendments to local
guidelines be forwarded to them for their review. The City enjoys a great working relationship
with SHPO and believes we should seek their comment on this narrow exception.
SHPO typically requests 45 days to review and comment. Staff will forward this exception to
SHPO after the Commission comments are received and prior to review by the City Council.
Staff plans to present Council with the amendment in April assuming comments have been
received by SHPO. Final Thoughts
Iowa City has a rich history of historic preservation and remarkable progress has been made in
recent years with numerous new landmark property designations, the downtown historic district
study and pending National Register listing, creative partnerships to move historic homes,
enhanced density bonuses to help preserve structures and millions of dollars of public
investment and collaborative public/private partnerships to ensure that more buildings are
locally landmarked and many of our community’s most beloved historic properties receive much
needed investment in a historically appropriate manner. I am extremely proud of this work and
credit the Commission and City staff for these many great successes here in Iowa City.
It is in this collaborative spirit that we should take the opportunity to step back from the recent
appeal case and consider how we can continue to build upon the enhancement of our
community’s historic character while simultaneously providing some more flexibility for our
residents to achieve varying goals they may have for their homes. I believe this amendment,
while only applicable in very narrow situations, will not only help build goodwill and additional
support and interest for future preservation efforts, but will also help us build upon the great
progress we have made in enhancing the character and appeal of our historic neighborhoods.
Thank you for your service to the Iowa City community and for your consideration of this
amendment.
1
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
January 28, 2021
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carl Brown, Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile
Kuenzli, Lyndi Kiple, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren, Austin Wu
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (becomes effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. utilizing
Zoom.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK
PLAN
The Commission discussed the draft work plan included in the packet.
Under short term goals in the first section, Burford said that she suggested creating a social
heritage map of Iowa City to show where the different ethnic groups settled. Boyd said that he
thought it was important to also include the location of other sites important to racial equity.
Boyd asked if the City Council has responded to the Commission’s request. Russett said that
they received the minutes but have not had any discussion on it. Bristow said that a more well-
developed proposal might work better at eliciting a response.
In the section on climate action, Bristow said the interest in the topic of demolitions had come up
because Staff was trying to calculate and quantify the waste generated from the demolition of
325 East Washington Street. Burford said that she had two ideas: that the Commission get
permission to take the National Preservation briefs and categorize them on how they can
contribute to climate action, and to consider sponsoring a housing building evaluation of energy
efficiency for landmarks and National Register/Local Historic Districts in order to promote
window and structural conservation (tuck pointing, siding, insulation, gutters) as well as
adaptations (solar panels). Bristow said they were thinking of updating some of their sections in
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and the public
presented by COVID-19.
2
the handbook with similar points of information on sustainability. Boyd said that it would be
helpful to put a link on the Preservation Commission’s page or the City’s website that provided
resources to help guide folks if they are considering renovations or repairs. Kuenzli asked if it
would be possible to make conference programs and talks on preservation available to the
community at large. Boyd said that providing and directing the community to these types of
resources could be a short-term goal.
Sellergren said that it would be a good idea to include itemized information for all of the
guidelines for alterations in the handbook, as well as turn that into a website with resources
(tabs and links) for each guideline. Bristow said that updating the handbook generally takes
more than one year, depending on the level of updates needed, but having a webpage about
historic preservation and sustainability would be a good start. DeGraw asked if this is something
that they would want to make a post on Facebook about.
Boyd said that Wu, per his notes, referenced the city of Cedar Rapids’ standard 60 day hold on
demolitions if a lot is over 50 years old. Boyd said that the Commission should figure out how
they want to weigh in and add to those discussions in regard to climate action and what they
value as a Community. Boyd said that Wu asked about ideas to help prevent demolition by
neglect.
Bristow said that some of this discussion started because she had found articles about a
community in Oregon that has reduced their landfill waste by requiring the deconstruction and
salvaging of valuable materials in places built before 1920 prior to demolition. She said that
there is a similar practice in a neighborhood in St. Louis which has led to a reduction in landfills,
saving more buildings and materials, and teaching skilled labor. Kuenzli said that these articles
would be a good addition to their website. Sellergren said that this is also a very good economic
opportunity and asked if it would be a city run program and city employed. Bristow said that she
didn’t know for sure, and Boyd mentioned that they could work with the Climate Action
Commission. Burford said this would be a great opportunity to reach out to Friends of Historic
Preservation.
Boyd said that Wu mentioned in his notes about their guidebook and its relation to solar panels,
and Boyd said that they could include that under their short-term goals as they think about
sustainability as a whole.
In the section on strengthening community engagement and intergovernmental relations,
Burford asked if there was any way to restore the university housing program. Bristow said she
thinks the budget for this fiscal year was different from past years and is not sure of their status
at this moment. Kuenzli asked if the Commission is notified when someone takes out a
demolition permit that might be in an area worth preserving. Bristow said that she wasn’t sure if
that communication still happens and Kuenzli recommended that that could be another one of
their short-term goals.
Burford said that she came up with a long-term goal for community engagement and
government, which was to establish an emergency plan for natural disasters and climate
change. Boyd said he thinks that is a good goal to have. Russett asked if this is a plan more for
the Commission and Staff or for property owners. Boyd said that it would be more for
Commission and Staff on how to help the property owners in dealing with the disaster.
Kuenzli asked about recruiting for the three new Commission positions. She suggested finding
someone who is an architect, a real estate attorney, or someone has some professional
experience, and mentioned Kevin and Pat Hannick. Bristow said Pitzen and Burford’s terms are
almost up, but since it is their first term they could apply to be on the Commission again. She
3
said that it is important to fill the empty positions they have now because it is a bit difficult to get
a quorum. Kiple said that she will be leaving this summer, but that it might be worthwhile to work
with the apartment companies to let their tenants know about the opportunity to apply. Brown
asked how often they reach out to districts that they don’t have a representative for. Bristow said
that they have done a big mailing in the past on top of their annual letter to property owners, but
not much else. Boyd said that part of their goal should be to think about and reach out to other
audiences.
In terms of mobility, Burford said that they should bring forward walkable neighborhoods and
preserving the revitalization of Longfellow and Horace Mann Schools. She said that this is
extremely important for families as well as historic preservation. To add to the walkability factor,
DeGraw said that she thinks there is around an average of $6,000 savings a year for people
who can avoid having a car.
The Poor Farm was mentioned and Bristow said that a potential transit route in that direction
was discussed in March, but she is not sure what the result of that meeting was. Russett said
that they are still in the middle of that study, so nothing has been finalized yet.
Sellergren said that the changing of Dodge and Governor Street, south of Burlington, to two-way
streets has led to a greater appreciation of the houses and ambience to the neighborhood.
Kuenzli asked if the Historic Preservation fund is going to be reduced or completely eliminated
from the city budget. Bristow said that there were some concerns that their budget might be
reduced by $10,00, but that is not the case and they are still moving forward with a budget of
$40,000 for the next fiscal year, beginning on July 1st. She said that there has been some
question about whether funds can continue to be carried over if they are already earmarked for
a project and under contract, but she does not know the result yet. Kuenzli asked how people
find out about that fund, and Bristow said that information about it is included in the annual letter
and Bristow also mentions it to all owners when discussing eligible projects on eligible
properties.
Kuenzli asked how eminent the Lucas Farms Kirkwood Historic or Conservation District project
is. Boyd said nothing has happened yet and they just need to be ready to partner with
neighborhoods who are ready to do it. Bristow said that it would be a huge project.
On the topic of fostering healthy neighborhoods and affordable housing, Burford said that she is
a big proponent of form-based zoning, and that this would be a tremendous accomplishment for
the Commission to promote and accomplish. Russett said that this is already on the planning
staffs’ work program and that they are working on some smaller updates at this point, but it is a
long-term goal for the department. Boyd said that the Commission is interested in helping to
expedite the project. Brown asked for a summary on what a form-based code is, and Russett
said that form-based codes focus less on building use and more on the interaction between the
building and the street. Burford said that the City of Cincinnati follows form-based zoning, so
that is a good visual to look at. Wu said that a discussion could be had about a form-based code
being paired with the elimination of parking minimums or increased leniency of land use.
Russett agreed with Wu’s points and said that they want to totally open up their parking
standards and take another look at them.
For the discussion on an inclusive and resilient economy throughout the city, Boyd said that the
local landmarks on College Street have successfully passed. Bristow said that they have a
strong need for more preservation contractors and craftspeople and wondered if there is a way
for contractors to also function as teachers so that they can have apprentices who can provide
labor and learn along the way. She said that this could potentially be subsidized through some
4
kind of city program, and have wide-ranging benefits. Pitzen said that it is quite a responsibility
to apprentice somebody and that pulling it off might be difficult, but it would be a good thing.
Kuenzli said that there is a similar structured program in Dubuque (the Heart Program). Boyd
said he thinks this is a good idea and they could put it down as a long-term goal.
Boyd said that the Cochrane-Sharpless-Dennis house at 410/412 North Clinton Street is now a
landmark.
COMMISSION INFORMATION
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Brown moved to adjourn the meeting. Kuenzli seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Lauren Ralls.
5
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
NAME
TERM
EXP. 3/12 4/09 5//14 6/11 7/09 8/13 9/10 10/08 11/12 12/10 01/14 01/28
AGRAN,
THOMAS 6/30/20 X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/23 X X X X X X X X X X X X
BROWN,
CARL
6/30/23 -- -- -- -- X O/E X X X O/E X X
BURFORD,
HELEN 6/30/21 O/E X X X X X X X X O/E X X
CLORE,
GOSIA 6/30/20 X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
DEGRAW,
SHARON 6/30/22 O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X X
KUENZLI,
CECILE 6/30/22 O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X
KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 X X X X X X O/E X X O/E X X
PITZEN,
QUENTIN 6/30/21 O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X
SELLERGREN,
JORDAN 6/30/22 X X X X X X X X X X X X
WU, AUSTIN 6/30/23 X O/E X X X X X X X X X X
1
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
February 11, 2021
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Carl Brown, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile
Kuenzli, Lyndi Kiple, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren
MEMBERS ABSENT: Austin Wu
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow
OTHERS PRESENT: Maeve Clark
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (becomes effective only after separate Council action)
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the electronic meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. utilizing
Zoom.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
DISCUSSION OF REVISED HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL
WORK PLAN:
Boyd asked if anyone wanted to make any edits to the plan. Kuenzli asked who would be
reviewing the plan and if it would be helpful to specify what the Tate Arms and the Iowa
Federation Home were (and what they represented) for those not from the Iowa City area. Boyd
said that they could add a dependent clause stating that these two sites are important to Iowa
City’s civil rights heritage.
Kuenzli said that she did not see the revival of the University Project included under short term
goals in the revised plan. Bristow said she was not sure that the Historic Preservation
Commission would be involved in that discussion. Kuenzli said that it would fit into their purview
because these types of homes are often in neighborhoods greater than 50 years old. Bristow
said she could add in promoting the continuation or growth of the University Program as a short-
term goal.
MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the Annual Work Plan as revised. DeGraw seconded.
The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting was held because a meeting in person was impossible or impractical
due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission members, staff, and the public
presented by COVID-19.
2
REVIEW DRAFT CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL REPORT:
Bristow said she hopes that the motion made will include the ability to be revised by Chair and
Staff. She said that this is a state form that identifies the work that the City has done such as the
31 National Register properties that were altered, properties that were reviewed for local
landmark status, local landmarks and properties in conservation districts that were changed,
etc. She said that they did not really pass any ordinances through City Council this year (2020)
that impacted historic preservation. She said that the Commission had created an ambitious
work plan for 2020, but did not make much progress over the years, and she included their
future work plan as well.
Bristow said that they have seen a decrease in Neighborhood and Developmental Services
reviews as well as a decrease in building permits in 2020. She said that there has been an
increase in historic preservation inquiries about specific projects and properties, especially in
the first half of the year, most likely due to people being stuck in their homes during the
pandemic. She said that they also talked about the applications and their Preservation Fund,
how many projects they approved, what Staff and the Commission does for the community, etc.
Bristow also said that they like to talk about the Historic Preservation Awards, video and
slideshow presentations they did, and the particular issues, challenges, and successes that the
Commission encounters. Boyd asked if there were other key sections the Commission needs to
pay special attention to. Bristow said that the State also allows them to submit a portfolio of
images if the Commission desires.
MOTION: Brown moved to approve the Certified Local Government Annual Report as
finalized by Staff and Chair. Burford seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect – Chair and Staff Review
1029 Bowery – Clark Street Conservation District
Bristow said that 1029 Bowery is a key property in this conservation district. She said that they
built a breezeway addition back in 2007, have a garage, a fence, and they are going to put a
pool in behind the fence. She said that a pool requires a fence permit, so the owners must
submit a fence application, which comes to the Historic Preservation Commission. She said that
they did not have to build a new fence since they will be using the existing metal fence.
Kuenzli asked if the pool would be visible from Bowery Street. Bristow said they have
landscaping in their plan that will make it not as visible. Kuenzli asked about the dimensions of
the pool. Bristow said that it will be a 13’ x 33’ in-ground pool, but reviewing the pool does not
fall under the purview of the Historic Preservation Commission (just the fencing application).
Minor Review – Staff Review
737 Grant Street – Longfellow Historic District
Bristow said that this property has a new owner who has done a lot of nice work on the house
such as repairing all of the stucco, repairing the attic window, and replacing a modern
greenhouse window with a double-hung window. She said that this project is simple roof
replacement.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 14, 2021:
MOTION: Pitzen moved to approve the minutes from the January 14, 2021 meeting.
Sellergren seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0.
3
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Annual Historic Preservation Awards Sub-Committee
Bristow said that they need a sub-committee to figure out what the awards are and what they
will do. She said the committee will meet to pick the winners, potentially present the awards,
help write scripts, take photographs, assist with publicity, etc. Boyd, Kuenzli, DeGraw, and
Sellergren volunteered. Boyd said that they might also reach out to the Friends of Historic
Preservation for help, and Maeve Clark, a representative of Friends, said that she will report that
to their board. Kuenzli said that she would also be willing to help Sellergren with the
photography if needed.
Boyd encouraged the Commission to reach out with suggestions about potential nominees.
Bristow said that often have a lot of painting projects, which is something nice to award.
Sellergren asked if there would be any value in giving out a cheeky award for the worst
demolition, just to draw attention to the losses. Boyd said that he has thought about that before
but thinks they should have more discussion about how that could be perceived by the
community.
COMMISSION INFORMATION:
Boyd said the State Hearing for the Iowa City Downtown District nomination will be help the
morning of February 12th. He said that the nomination will then have to move to the National
Parks Service before it becomes official. Bristow said that the State might have edits before it
can be submitted to the National Parks Service.
ADJOURNMENT:
DeGraw moved to adjourn the meeting. Brown seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Lauren Ralls.
4
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2020-2021
NAME
TERM
EXP. 4/09 5//14 6/11 7/09 8/13 9/10 10/08 11/12 12/10 01/14 01/28 02/11
AGRAN,
THOMAS 6/30/20 X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/23 X X X X X X X X X X X X
BROWN,
CARL
6/30/23 -- -- -- X O/E X X X O/E X X X
BURFORD,
HELEN 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X
CLORE,
GOSIA 6/30/20 X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
DEGRAW,
SHARON 6/30/22 X X X X X X O/E X X X X X
KUENZLI,
CECILE 6/30/22 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X
KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 X X X X X O/E X X O/E X X X
PITZEN,
QUENTIN 6/30/21 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X
SELLERGREN,
JORDAN 6/30/22 X X X X X X X X X X X X
WU, AUSTIN 6/30/23 O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E
Iowa City
Historic Preservation Commission
City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240
1
Memorandum
Date: March 4, 2021
To: Historic Preservation Commission
From: Jessica Bristow, Historic Preservation Planner
Re: Proposed Memorial on the old Plug line
Background:
A Railroad branch between Elmira, IA and Iowa City called “The Plug” ran through Iowa City from the
NE corner west to the area near City hall and then turned south. Some of the train line is still evident
from aerial photos and property lines even though the track no longer remains.
Thomas Schuppert, a former Iowa-Citian, is proposing a memorial for installation and City Staff seeks
the opinion of the Historic Preservation Commission on the proposal.
Proposal: (copied from emails)
My name is Tom Schuppert. I was born in Iowa City in 1954. I'm an amateur historian of our area,
particularly the business and industrial aspect of our history.
I was a locomotive Engineer most of my working life, and am retired now. With that said, I hope you can
appreciate my motives for presenting you with my intentions I have been thinking about for a few
decades.
There was a railroad that came into Iowa City from the northeast corner of town. It connected Iowa City
with Elmira. The Iowa City depot was where the Rec Center parking lot is today. The line basically
followed Ralston Creek for the most part.
On Nov. 29, 1925, Train number 815 was coming into Iowa City. Thomas Murphy was a veteran
Engineer and was operating the third of three locomotives on a long train. For reasons unknown, the
third locomotive, number 1275, jumped the track. Conductor Charles Smith leaped from the cab as
soon as 1275 began bouncing along the ties. Murphy did not jump. The engine rolled over into Ralston
Creek at the intersection of Jefferson and Clapp Streets. Thomas Murphy was killed.
I am seeking permission from the city of Iowa City to place a monument at or near that location.
The plaque would be an 8 x 10 aluminum plate. I was thinking of mounting the plaque on heavy steel
plate, on top of a heavy steel pole. Something similar to a street sign, like a typical no parking sign.
Iowa City
Historic Preservation Commission
City Hall, 410 E Washington Street, Iowa City. IA. 52240
2
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Elmira
Stone bridge
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Chadek Green Park
Detail of 2011 aerial map with track partially marked
Burlington Street Depot
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Stone bridge
1930s aerial map with track partially marked
Burlington Street Depot
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Stone bridge
2011 aerial map with track partially marked
Burlington Street Depot
Railroad branch line between Elmira, Iowa and Iowa City called “the plug”
Burlington Street Station from Irving Weber article