HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-13 Public Hearing NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the City Council of Iowa City,
Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 13th day of June,
2000, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or
if said meeting is cancelled, at the next
meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider: An application to rezone
approximately 200 acres from Interim Development
Residential (ID-RS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay (OSA-
5) (approximately 85 acres) to allow the development
of the Peninsula Neighborhood, a planned
development of up to 400 dwelling units and limited
commercial uses and Public (P) (approximately 115
acres) located west of Foster Road.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
glossan//nph.doc
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 8, 2000
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Kugler, Assoc. Planner
Re: Agenda Item #4c.
The Peninsula Neighborhood Plan referred to in Section II. Variations, of the ordinance
was previously approved by City Council on July 28, 1998, and is on LaserFiche, 1998
volume 2, page 72.
Please contact me with any questions you may have.
Prepared by: Scott Kugler, Assoc. Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5:~43
ORDINANCE NO. ,,':
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CHAPTER BY CHANGING THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF
APPROXIMATELY 190 ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (ID-
RS) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY (OSA-5; 82.1 ACRES) AND PUBLIC (P~ 107.9 ACRES), AND
APPROVING THE PENINSULA PLAN AS A PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREASDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR UP TO 400 DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF FOSTER ROAD.
WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City is owner and legal title holder of approximately 190 acres of property
located at the west end of Foster Road; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Peninsula Neighborhood Plan, a detailed concept plan for the
development of a portion of the parcel for residential uses, and the balance of the property for a natural
areas park; and
WHEREAS, the City has requested the rezoning of the 82.1 acre residential development parcel to
Sensitive Areas Overlay (OSA-5), with the Peninsula Neighborhood Plan serving as the preliminary
sensitive areas development plan for the subject property; and
WHEREAS, the 107.9 acre natural areas park parcel will remain in City ownership and as such should
be zoned Public (P); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that the proposed rezoning is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, and that, with the exception of the variations noted below, the
proposed preliminary sensitive areas development plan is in technical compliance with all applicable
provisions of the City Code.
SECTION I. APPROVAL. The property described below is hereby rezoned as follows:
a. The following described property is hereby reclassified from its current' designation of ID-RS to OSA-
5:
That part of Auditor's Parcel No. 95080 and all of Auditor's Parcel No. 97099, Iowa City, Johnson
County, Iowa described as follows: Commencing as a point of reference at the South quarter-corner of
Section 4, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th P.M,; thence Nodh 1°39'04" West 1317.54 feet
along the East line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 4 (assumed bearing for this description only);
thence South 89°43'51" West 563.04 feet along the South line of Government Lot 5 of said Section 4, to a
Northeasterly corner of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099 and the point of beginning; thence South 0°16'09''
East 159.36 feet along an Easterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 45°57'40" West
191.63 feet along a Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 85°52'55" West
170.28 feet along a Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 42°17'10" West
607.44 feet along a Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 81 °42'52" West
978.15 feet along a Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence North 49044'00" West
704.00 feet; thence North 15°34'30" West 615.50 feet; thence North 1°14'00" West 372.58 feet; Thence
North 8°12'00" East 329.35 feet to a point of intersection with the Easterly bank of the Iowa River and a
Westerly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 95080; thence North 57°04'00" East 772.76 along a
Northwesterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 95080;
thence South 65°32'14" East 972.25 feet along a Northeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 95080;
thence North 76°18'18" East 468.47 feet along a Northerly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 95080; thence
South 1 °39'04" East 981.65 feet along an Easterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 95080 and an Easterly
line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence North 89°43'51" East 330.00 feet along a Northerly line of
said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099 to the point of beginning and containing an area of 82.1 acres more or
less.
b. The following described property is hereby reclassified from its current designation of ID-RS to P:
Auditor's Parcel No. 95080, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa. EXCEPT: that part of Auditor's
Parcel No. 950.80 and all of Auditor's Parcel No. 97099, Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa described as
follows: Comm, encing as a point of reference at the South quarter-corner of Section 4, Township 79 North,
Range 6 We~t of the 51, P.M.; thence North 1°39'04" West 1317.54' feet along the East line of the
Southwest ..C~'uarter of said Section 4 (assumed bearing for this description only); thence South 89°43'51"
West 563.04 feet along the South line of Government Lot 5 of said Section 4, to a Northeasterly corner of
said Audi{or's Parcel No. 97099 and the point of beginning; thence South 0°16'09" East 159.36 feet along
Ordinance No.
Page 2
an Easterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 45°57'40'' West 191.63 feet along a
Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 85°52'55'' West 170.28 feet along a
Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 42°17'10" West 607.44 feet along a
Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence South 81 °42'52" West 978.15 feet along a
Southeasterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence North 49°44'00'' West 704.00 feet; thence
Nodh 15034'30'' West 615.50 feet; thence North 1°14'00" West 372.58 feet; thence North 8°12'00" East
,~2u~i~o5r ~' ' t of intersection with the Easterly bank of the Iowa River and a Westerly line of said
Auditor's Parcel ~h~., 95080; thence South 65°32'14" East 972.25 feet along a Northeasterly line of said
Auditor's Parcel No.'~=9~5080; thence North 76°18'18'' East 468.47 feet along a Northerly line of said
Auditor's Parcel No. 95080; thence South 1 °39'04" East 981.65 feet along an Easterly line of said Auditor's
Parcel No. 95080 and an Easterly line of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099; thence North 89°43'51" East
330.00 feet along a Northerly tne of said Auditor's Parcel No. 97099 to the point of beginning. The total
area is 107.9 acres more or
SECTION II. VARIATIONS. The~,.followng variations from the requirements of the RS-5 zone are
approved, as detailed in the Peninsula,Neighborhood Plan.
a. Modifications of the typical street '~tandards of 28-foot wide paving within a 50-foot right-of-way, to
allow a variety of street types as detailed ~ithin the plan;
b. A reduction the minimum lot size of 8,0~0 square feet to allow for a more compact development with
a variety of lot sizes, while holding the overall density to no more than 5 units per acre;
c. The provision of a mix of dwelling types, including detached and attached single family, row houses,
apartment buildings, and live/work units, rather than exclusively single-family detached dwellings;
d. Provisions for potential retail and institutional uses in strategic locations within the development, as
noted in the plan, as well as live/work units containing retail, office, or studio space on the ground level
with residential uses on upper levels;
e. The use of a "build-to line" range of 5 feet to 25 feet for houses, 0 feet to 10 feet for row houses, 5
feet to 20 feet for apartment buildings, and 0 feet for retail or live/work buildings, in lieu of the required 20-
foot setback requirement;
f. Permitting the use of accessory apartments on owner-oCCupied properties, without the current
requirements that the accessory unit be located within the primary 'structure on the lot, or that one of the
units be occupied by an eider or a person with a disability. "~.~
SECTION III. ZONING MAP. The Building Inspector is hereby autl~orized and directed to change the
zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to confbrm to this amendmeni upon the final passage, approval
and publication of this ordinance as provided byiaw.
SECTION IV. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. Upon passage and al~proval of the Ordinance, the
the office of the County Recorder of JohnSon County, Iowa, at the
law.
SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict With the provision of this
ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION VI. SEVERABILITY. !.~ any section, provision or part of this ordinance shall be adjudged to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such a"djudication shall not affect the validity o~ ~he ordinance as a whole or any
section, provision or part there,~f not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE~/DATE. This ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and
publication, as required by law.
Passed and approved,~his ~ day of ,20
MAYOR
ATTEST: ~
CITY CLF/~
~b ~ ~
ppdadmin/ord/courLst3.doc
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Scott Kugler
Item: REZ00-0016. Peninsula Neighborhood Date: May 18, 2000
Preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant: City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Phone: 356-5230
Requested action: Approval of a preliminary Sensitive
Areas Development Plan based on the
Peninsula Neighborhood Plan and
rezoning from ID-RS to OSA-5
(approximately 85 acres) and P
(approximately 115 acres)
Purpose: To establish a zoning classification on
the property that is consistent with the
City's intentions for its development.
Location: At the west end of Foster Road
Size: Approximately 200 acres
Existing land use and zoning: Undeveloped, ID-RS
Surrounding land use and zoning: North: Undeveloped, ID-RS;
East: Golf Course, ID-RS;
South: Residential, RS-5;
West: Mix of Commercial, Industrial,
and residential within the City
of Coralville.
Comprehensive Plan: Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre
Applicable Code requirements: 14-6K-1, Sensitive Areas Ordinance
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City of Iowa City is requesting approval of the Peninsula neighborhood plan as a
preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan, and a rezoning from Interim Development -
Single Family Residential (ID-RS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay (OSA-5). Approving the plan will
establish zoning on the property that reflects the City's intentions for the development of
the property and will also grant vested rights upon which financing and investment can be
based. The property is not currently zoned to allow residential development other than
detached single-family homes on lots of five acres or more. Approval of this application will
establish a developable zoning designation and a maximum density of five units per acre for
the property, and grant preliminary approval for the development of the neighborhood as
illustrated in the existing plan. Construction details, lot configurations, and exact street
layout will be reviewed with later subdivision and final plan submittals. If this application is
approved, any major changes requested to the plan by the developer would need to be
reviewed as amendments to the approved preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan.
The zoning area needed to establish the Peninsula Neighborhood contains about 85 acres.
The City has selected a developer to purchase the property and develop a neighborhood
similar to that illustrated in the plan. The balance of the property is planned to remain in City
ownership and is to serve as both a natural areas park and as a well field for the new water
treatment facility being constructed to the north of Interstate 80. Also included in this
application is a request to establish Public (P) zoning on this remaining portion of the
property, containing about 115 acres.
ANALYSIS:
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan indicates that this area is appropriate for
residential development at a density of 2-8 dwelling units per acre. As discussed below,
due to the limited street access, the actual density will be limited to 5 units per acre. The
Comprehensive Plan also contains policies which encourage the creation of compact village-
like neighborhoods with housing for a diverse population, a mix of land uses, public spaces,
civic and commercial centers, accessible opens space, and streets which are pleasant for
both motorists and pedestrians. The Peninsula Plan was designed based on these principles.
Preliminary OSA Plan: The Peninsula Plan calls for the development of about 85 acres of a
200 acre parcel as a traditional neighborhood, making use of a modified grid street system,
alleys, a mix of residential densities, opportunities for small-scale commercial and live-work
buildings, and neighborhood open spaces. A copy of the plan is included in each
Commission member packet. The plan was prepared by Dover-Kohl & Partners, at the
direction of the City, and involved extensive public participation and review. The plan is
essentially a detailed concept plan from which to work toward creating a traditional
neighborhood on this site. The plan illustrates a general street layout and conceptual
building designs, but does not contain locations or designs for specific building types,
parking associated with each use, grading necessary for the development of the
neighborhood, or details regarding utilities and storm water management. However, given
that additional reviews will be needed for subdivision of the property and the approval of
final development plans, and the fact that the City has not yet transferred the property to
the selected developer, staff is comfortable that these details will receive adequate review
prior to final approval. The plan that has been prepared has been accepted as the desired
goal for the development of the property. Any substantial changes would need to go
through the same process as the current application in order to amend the approved
development plan. In addition to future subdivision and final development plan approvals
that will be necessary, a regulating plan and code book which will control the development
of the individual lots will be developed and submitted for approval.
3
The Peninsula plan illustrates reduced setbacks and a mix of detached single-family
dwellings, attached dwellings and multi-family buildings rather than limiting development to
single-family lots of 8000 square feet normally required in the proposed underlying RS-5
zone. The plan also illustrates that the property will be platted into 8' wide increments.
These increments can be assembled to form a variety of lot sizes depending on the size and
types of dwellings to be built. As with a planned development, waivers from typical code
requirements can be approved along with the approval of the preliminary planned
development plan. When preliminary plats are approved for each phase of development,
more details regarding lot configurations and dimensional requirements will be reviewed.
One set of development standards that the plan suggests be modified for the Peninsula
neighborhood are the City's typical street design standards. The plan calls for a number of
different street types of varying right-of-way and pavement widths, as illustrated on pages
17 through 20 in the plan. Tightening the curb radii at intersections is also recommended in
the plan to help slow traffic at the intersections and make pedestrian crossings slightly
shorter. Approval of this application will allow the use of these alternatives in the future
development of the property. The specifics of the street layout and design will also be
reviewed when a preliminary plat is submitted for the property.
Sensitive Areas: Because the development site is lined with areas of wooded steep, critical,
and protected slopes, a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and Sensitive Areas Overlay
rezoning are required, rather than a typical Planned Development Housing Overlay plan and
rezoning. The Peninsula Plan was prepared with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance in mind, so
major encroachments into these areas are not planned. No areas of protected slopes will be
disturbed, but a few areas containing steep slopes will need to be graded. There are also a
few areas of critical slopes that may be affected depending on the grading necessary to
establish the streets. Small portions of the existing woodlands on the site will be disturbed
as well, but well under the 50% encroachment permitted by the Sensitive Areas Ordinance.
Staff will have an illustration available at the Commission's May 15 informal meeting that
shows the relationship of the development illustrated in the plan and these sensitive site
features.
Transportation: Foster Road provides the only vehicular access to this property. When
considering the development of the larger neighborhood that has access to Foster Road, the
City studied potential development sites and appropriate densities given the limited street
access. It was determined that the area located generally west of Laura Drive should be
limited to a gross density of 5 units per acre. The approximate 85 acre parcel under
consideration includes the property to be developed, as well as the wooded hillsides
surrounding the property on the north, west and south, and property occupied by two golf
holes recently constructed for the Elks Club on land that is being leased from the City.
Density will be transferred from these open space areas to the development portion of the
site. Although an actual number of units cannot be determined at this time, the development
will not exceed 5 units per acre or approximately 400 dwelling units.
Storm Water Management: Storm water runoff will need to be conveyed to the Iowa River,
but because of the proximity of the river, on-site storm water storage will not be required.
The preliminary plat will contain details showing how filtration techniques will be used to
protect the well sites and parkland from storm water run off.
Neighborhood Open Space: Approximately 1.8 acres of open space will be required per
the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance. The plan illustrates a town square type of open
space near the center of the development and smaller open spaces on the edge of the
neighborhood. In addition to these formal open spaces, portions of the wood ravines may
also be dedicated as public open space. The exact sizes, locations and configuration of
the open spaces will be determined at the time of preliminary plat review.
Public Zone: The balance of the 200 acre site, located below the wooded ridge upon which
the Peninsula Neighborhood is to be developed, is planned as a large natural areas park, and
will also serve as a well field protection area. The City will retain ownership of this area,
much of which is located within the flood plain. Two wells have been established in this
area in association with the new water treatment facility being constructed to the north of
Interstate 80. It is staff's recommendation that this site be rezoned to Public (P) as part of
this application to reflect its intended use as a natural areas park. This will eliminate the
need for a separate application in the future to establish this area as a Public zone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZO0-O016, a city-initiated request for approval of the Peninsula
plan as a preliminary Sensitive Areas Development Plan and rezoning of approximately 85
acres from ID-RS to OSA-5, and approximately 115 acres from ID-RS to P, for property
located at the west end of Foster Road, be approved.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location map.
2. Peninsula plan (Commission member packets only).
Approved by: .~~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
Pcd/peninsula osa
i = ~ [ --' i~ (.0
.., .
,...,
...
,..~. - .,
..~..~--~ ,
~ ']] 7 ,: ~ .,
~ '~ '.
.,,,
u.: =L.Z.;71'~'ZZ:_I:TZ
, ,
~ ~ :'.':; ', '~..;.'...'~.. :' 'r:'.i~
........... ~z~ 0
0
0
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 26, 2000 (for June I meeting)
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Re: REZ00-0016. Peninsula Neighborhood Sensitive Areas Overlay Rezoning
At the May 18 meeting, a few questions were asked about the proposed street standards
included in the Peninsula Plan. The plan provides a greater range of options for street types
than the current City street standards. This is an important component of the plan, which is
aimed at providing more attractive streetscapes and a more pedestrian oriented neighborhood
than a typical new development. The alternative street standards are included in the plan in
order to reduce the costs and the land area consumed by the provision of infrastructure to
support the development, to help improve the aesthetics of the neighborhood streets by
reducing the amount of paving, and to help control traffic speeds within this residential
neighborhood.
Many communities across the country are beginning to question the idea that wider streets
make for safer streets, particularly in a residential setting. The appearance and character of
residential streets make up a big part of our perceptions of neighborhood quality. Residential
streets are the main public spaces within residential neighborhoods, providing opportunities for
residents to interact, walk, play, ride bicycles, etc. Most residential blocks experience very little
traffic at any one time, and use by more than one vehicle at a time is not common outside of
peak morning and evening occurrences. For collector streets that are expected to carry higher
levels of traffic, it is important to be able to have two lanes of traffic moving freely past one
another without being impeded due to narrow lanes or parked cars. However, on a typical
residential street, where quick moving traffic is considered by residents to be a serious safety
issue, it is acceptable, if not desired, for vehicles to have to slow down a bit or yield to other
vehicles due to narrow travel lanes or parked cars. The alternative standards contained within
the Peninsula Plan place more emphasis on the creation of a quality neighborhood and public
realm, and less emphasis on allowing for unimpeded traffic flow through the neighborhood.
Attached please find a few articles that further explain the logic of providing more flexibility in
residential street standards, as well as a map illustrating existing 25-foot wide streets within
Iowa City. As one can see, a large portion of the City contains 25-foot wide streets. Some
neighborhoods, like Manville Heights and many east-side neighborhoods, contain almost
exclusively 25-foot wide streets. With the exception of a few streets that carry collector levels
of traffic, there have not been traffic safety problems in these neighborhoods. The consultant
who prepared the plan did discuss street width and curb radii issues with the Public Works
Department and the Fire Department when preparing the plan, and adjustments were made to
the plan to address their concerns.
The acreages listed in the agenda item for this application have been changed based on a
property survey recently completed at the direction of the City. The total acreage of the
property is 190.02 acres rather than 200 acres. Of that, 82.1 acres is included in the
development area, with the remaining 107.92 acres to be zoned Public (P) and retained for the
natural areas park.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Articles regarding street widths in residential areas.
2. City street-width map.
Article I http://web7,infotrac.galegroup.com/it~v/in..._AI5492074&dyn=4!ar_t'mt?sw aep-uiowa_main
University of Iowa
Expanded Academic ASAP
Planning, June 1994 v60 n6 p21 (6)
Boulder brings back the neighborhood street; a complete revamp of residential
street standards is under way in this Colorado college town. John M. Fernandez.
Abstract: The planning department of Boulder, CO,'s successful intervention in an urban
development project called Four Mile Creek was the first step in what has become a general
city-directed urban design and community planning project. The city hired urban designer Peter
Brown to develop a neighborhood-friendly design that included narrow streets as well as boulevards,
traffic circles, and bicycle and pedestrian paths. Boulder is considering many building codes for
models, including those used in Victoria, Australia.
Full Text: COPYRIGHT American Planning Association 1994
Boulder, Colorado, has a problem shared by cities across the country. Too many of its streets divide
rather than integrate. They are single-purpose arteries, emphasizing cars over people. They despoil the
environment with their expansive impervious surfaces. They encourage speeding. And they support
faceless suburban development patterns guaranteed to worsen traffic congestion.
'j~iill:;~ Residential streets are key determinants of neighborhood
quality. They offer a place to walk, to play - and of course
to park. Yet ever since the start of the post-world War II
.... housing boom, residential streets have become increasingly
devoted to traffic movement. The wide lanes required by
today's codes lead to higher speeds, more accidents, and
greater urban fragmentation.
:
~i~?~'r:. :.' .'- ~ engineers - have begun to question whether wider streets
~ . are as ~nctional as their advocates claim. Increasingly,
~ ~ .... ;,~;~ ..................:~":': :'~designers, public officials, and developers - o~en spumed by
~: ' "---~-~....x, .~. neighborhood activists- are considering the viaues of a
~." ' ......~" .....hierarchical street classification that would provide for a
""'C~ variety of residential street types, each reflecting different
~e~r ............, .....r,~ .' ......~.. ,,~ ~,-.~.~,traffic conditions.
Local histo~
Like many western cities, Boulder was laid out, in 1859, on a grid based on a 400-foot block and
25-foot lots, a pattern admirably suited to speculation. It should be noted, however, that the Boulder
City Town Company set high rates for town lots, up to $1,000 for a 50-by-140-foot building site.
Even then, it appears, Boulder favored slower growth.
The post-world War II subdivisions disrupted the grid pattern, with larger lots and blocks set along
I of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
//w
Article l hrtp: eb7.infotrac.galegroup.com/irw/in... A15492074&d3m=4!ar_fmt?sw_aep=uiowa main
curvilinear streets, and no alleys. In the 1960s and 1970s, more cul-de-sacs appeared, with fewer
connections to adjacent development. Today, the city is characterized by a high rate of car ownership
(two vehicles for every three people) and a significant jobs-to-housing imbalance. Boulder's
employment-to-population ratio is 0.83, more than 40 percent higher than the figure for the
eight-county Denver metropolitan region. If current trends continue, total employment will exceed
population by 2010.
Boulder also has several recent examples of more sensitive residential planning. In 1983, a local
developer built the Cottages, a 37-unit affordable housing project, on a wooneff-style street. The
5.3-acre site abuts city-owned open space on the north side. And in 1990, another local developer,
William Coburn, built Walnut Hollow, a high-end in~ll project consisting of nine Victorian-style
houses - with detached garages - arrayed along an 18-foot-wide street just east of down-town.
But these projects, both planned unit developments, resulted largely from individual initiatives and not
from a communitywide vision of what constitutes better urban development. Moreover, neither would
be allowed under the current regulations. In the past, the city's planning department used the PUD
ordinance to vary street standards. But as concerns grew over liability, policy makers were unwilling
to grant individual waivers in the absence of new citywide street standards.
For the most part, recent new subdivisions have complied absolutely with the letter of the Boulder
rules, laid down in the zoning code and subdivision regulations adopted in 1971. The result: three-car
garagescape uniformity, the "loops and lollipops" pattern exhibited so well in the city's expanding
northeast quadrant.
~;~-~-,~,,~:~0 ~-~" In 1992, the planning
department, aware of the community's growing unhappiness with the look and operation of the new
subdivisions, decided to take a more aggressive role in neighborhood design. The staff noted that the
city's 1989 transportation master plan called for new residential street guidelines to enhance
neighborhood safety and livability.
2 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article I htt~://~veb7~inf~rac~ga~egr~u~c~m/itw/in~.~A~5492~74&dyn=4!ar-fmt?sw-aep=ui~wa-main
As it happened, a large new project had just been proposed for the northeast edge of the city - the
140-acre Four Mile Creek. The planning department hired Peter Brown, AICP, an urban designer in
Houston, to conduct a design charette before the project entered the development review phase.
Brown toured the site and interviewed the developers, a consortium of local builders. Then, working
with other team members, he compared construction costs for both a conventional subdivision and a
neotraditional design, complete with narrow streets and pedestrian paths, and drew sketch plan
alternatives.
The plan that resulted was then presented to the developers, and they used many of the neotraditional
design elements in their annexation application. (The annexation ordinance was the legal device used
to vary the city's street standards.) The 309-unit project is now under construction. Its gridded street
plan includes both boulevards and narrow streets. It also features short blocks; motor courts (oblong
cul-de-sacs with central landscaping and parking); a raised intersection (road surface matches
elevation of crosswalk); traffic circles; and an alley. There is also an extensive bicycle and pedestrian
path network.
. ~'~" ~.'
~ ~ ~ The Four ~le Creek exercise was
considered a success in that it convinced the city to move beyond simply responding to proposals to
assuming a leadership role in defining a vision for development. Under the leadership of its new
planning director, Will Fleissig, Boulder is now attempting to relate its street design standards to an
overall community plan~ng and urban design program.
Complete overhaul
The vehicle for this new approach is the Residential Access Project (~), w~ch was initiated jointly
in the spring of 1992 by the city's planning and public works departments. The impetus was the
increasing restiveness of neighborhood residents concerned about tra~c congestion. At that point, the
planning staff proposed to broaden the residential street guidelines to include the entire movement
network in residential areas and to create urban design guidelines.
3 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article 1 htlp://web7.infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/in... A15492074&dyn-4!ar_fmt?sw_aep=uiowa_main
The entire project is being carried out in house, with no special funding except for a small graphics
budget. Both the public works staff member-a transportation planner - and I devote about a fifth of
our time to RAP. We report to an interdepartmental steering committee.
~i.. :- " aimed at devising a statement of purpose and
~iU~. ~ a richer menu of street standards. The
...2 . '.. t ., . ...~:t~. . project staff has spent the last two years
involving residents in a collaborative
planning process. A spinoff effo~, the
neighborhood traffic mitigation program, will
-'- of
~ t1 ~' measures.
:~T~~,..; ..~ ~L...d ::: .. In March of this year, the planning board
t ~ ~ ~ ~ i~: endorsed the staffs recommendation that the
~' "'~ '~"):'}~' · :~ ~' ".' 'Z~i city's one-size-fits-all street standard be
-" 12-Bot travel lanes, six-Bot parking lanes,
... . : . ,~
· : ~.. ~: ,.- ,,., ~ right-of-way. The new standards would offer
).' ':; .-'
:. '..r.--. - .....~ the cu~ent requirement.
The two lowest classifications would be low-speed (15-20 m.p.h.) "queuing" streets. They could be as
na~ow as 20 feet, and they would allow on-street p~ng. To molli~ fire offici~s, the standards
provide Br fire set-up areas (pads long and wide enough to accommodate fire tracks and close
enough together so fire hoses can reach the back of all dwellings).
The standards would also allow alleys, which are officially discouraged in the current
subdivision regulations. The planners noted that Boulder residents consistently rate
traditional neighborhoods with alleys as most livable.
The planning board also endorsed the staffs recommended street purposes statement.
A clear definition of intent is expected to guide all those involved in administering the
new regulations.
The final proposal for phase one is to be presented to the planning board this month. The next step is
to translate the proposal into an ordinance for consideration by the city council. That's expected to be
done this summer.
Phase two of RAP will address the broader topic of residential-area design, including the
building-street relationship, network standards, and "shared" streets (such as the Dutch woonerf). A
set of performance_based standards will parallel the new prescriptive standards.
4 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article I
httP://web7.infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/in,,, A15492074&dyn=4!ar_fmt?sw_aep=uiowa_mam
The planning department is putting the draft standards to the test in a subcommunity plan
now being prepared for north Boulder. With 9,200 residents spread over 2,300 acres,
"NoBo" is the least developed of the city's nine subcommunities. It was annexed four years
ago, and its many vacant and underutilized parcels are considered ripe for redevelopment.
At a five-day public charette held the first week of May in the National Guard Armory,
more than 300 citizens suggested ways of intensifying the movement grid and reconnecting
streets. Their recommendations included both boulevards and skinny streets. A
Miami-based urban design consulting firm, Dover, Kohl & Partners, is incorporating their
recommendations and many of the RAP concepts into the plan being prepared for city
council consideration in July.
Searching out models
There seemed to be few models when Boulder started this project two summers ago. Most
jurisdictions still use some variation of the highway-oriented street standards that arose in
the late 1930s with the creation of the Federal Highway Administration and the "Green
Book" published by AASHTO, the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials.
Recently, designers associated with the movement coming to be known as "the new urbanism" -
Andres Duany, Anton Nelessen, AICP, Peter Calthorpe, and others - have received considerable
media attention. But most of their work has been on large tracts of raw land not the infill projects
that are typical of places like Boulder. '
There are other models with broader applicability to the situations in which most planners find
themselves: infill, redevelopment, and fringe-area development.
One such example is an early one, the "performance streets" standard adopted by Bucks County,
Pennsylvania, in 1980. It provides a model ordinance that includes a rich hierarchy of street types,
although its use as a model is limited by the emphasis on cul-de-sacs and loop streets, and its lack of
attention to alternative modes of travel.
5 of 10
5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article 1 http://web7.infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/in..._A15492074&dyn=4!ar fmt?sw aep=uiowa main
The performance streets concept is also the basis
~~. ~~!~ . of a new set of supplemental standards for
! j~' 7. ~ residential neighborhoods now being considered
':.':.".~ ;-"-:ff.a~;;-;~.' ill °,...'[i~~T-' by the city of Houston and surrounding Harris
County. The city currently has only two types of
.t.~"_~' residential streets: a 28-foot pavement section with
.... a 50-foot or 60-foot right-of-way. The new
standards would create eight street types and
.....
allow narrower streets in new subdivisions, with
traffic) and flare-outs. The standards were
5~ prepared by Peter Brown in collaboration with
Patricia D. Knudson & Associates and Terra
Associates, both of Houston.
-.~
19
"skinny streets" ordinance applies to residential
blocks where lots are over 5,000 square feet. It
allows 20-Bot-wide streets with parking on one side, or 26-Bot-~de streets with parking on both
sides - thus oveaurning the long-entrenched idea that all streets must provide at least two through
lanes of traffic. City engineer Ter~ Bray repoas that 30 blocks of skinny streets were built in the first
two construction seasons.
~h,.,:~e,... ......r.r,'...,.,..~, ,'. ,~,. Olympia, Was~n~on's state capital, has
t:~., ~-,. ,. ......~..~,a,,:.,~,:.~ approved transpoaation policies that
.... · '-' "~4' "~c :' "~-.~ prohibit new cul-de-sacs. The policies,
. ' ..... .. 2; .... .: ~ adopted in 1992, are an outgro~h of a
i- ' ':~-. . . :""':-:-:~ ~:..- ....:?visual preference su~ey and urban design
~' ,;L,j;.: . ( *'. ," *.""::*'~"':)~::..~:' '* ""~ ' plan undeaaken ~th the help of New Jersey
~ ;':~? '~ .~ "" ~,* *:".. "' consultant ~ton Nelessen.
R "' .- .
--...;~New Mexico. The ~idelines offer 16
· .. i" ', distinct land-use and circulation prototypes.
, ... Widths range downward to 18 feet,
'~ sometimes with no building setback
reqmrement, ~d curb radiuses as tight as
:,:z(X~e~:,..:..: Bur feet. Fra~ Diluzio, the city's newly
appointed fire chie[ says he suppo~s the
standards provided that new streets "pretty much keep a 20-Bot clear zone," meaning that no parking
roles must be strictly enBrced.
In Squim, Washin~on, a retirement co~unity on the Olympic Peninsula, a "block st~dard" includes
a 12-Bot alley in a 20-Bot easement. Public works director ~chard Parker says the alleys work well
Br utility placement and the city's automated garbage collection system.
~other model is the west end of Vancouver, British Columbia, where traffic calming measures have
6 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article I http://web7 infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/in A15492074&dyn:4tar fmr?sw aep=uiowa main
proven to be an important adjunct to street standards. Street closures and diverters have created a
pleasant walking environment in a high-rise district flanked by busy shopping streets.
rod., b mm~d .m 4,,,~wlwc~' a
But the
most pro~sing model is an Australian one: the code for residential development prepared in 1992 by
the planning and housing depaament in the state of Victoria. This exempla~ document covers the
entire residential environment, from lot orientation to regional street networks, and it defines a broad
hierarchy of local streets.
The Victoria code includes both performance-based and prescriptive standards, and is specific about
details like deflection angles (for speed control). It also requires that all dwellings be located no more
than 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) and three "junctions," or intersections, from a major street to
balance the amount of time motorists are forced to spend in low-speed environments.
lil<~la~,~r $tTeet Standards Matrix Most important, the code
requires development planners
$t~if ~m. ~q$~ ~ght. ~et ~ Cu~ ~d 51d~alk
~ :,--,,, ~d o~y ~h ~r to plot out pedestrian and
A~. ,~ ~ ,~ 2s n 2e h ~,o~a .... , bicycle lanes as well as the usual
Jan. hGth ,,~ ,o~,,,~ environmental constraints and
U~mS 3Se 20 m[~ 3~ re PO R ....S;d{ none reQ~ina fO,oppo~u~ties - before the street
~.~ aa e, 22 ~ ~,.. ~,~ .....,.,,ea~o,e-.~.system is laid out. In this. the
4a ?: Z~ ;~ beth s~ts.~u-ted ~0 u-.~:~
~al 5O~1.aOO 25 .n~. aS f~ 2Q rq none ,~,,ir~d req';inq, Australian planners echo the
5~ 26 fl ur:e Md~ do%qrhrd
u ~ m,, ,,.~. , .....,,,,,,advice of California architect
~.~n~.r ~.~.~.~ ~s ~. so h u ~ .~ ,~.,,~a ,.~.~,,~. Christopher ~ex~der, who
~llodar ~8 ~I ooe ~i~e detached
~ ,~ h~.. ,i~ .o- c~, ~ says that in urban design,
~.~ ~- ,a. .~.. pedestrian spaces should be
f~5 It ulihry
eese,~e~[:, designed first, then the
buildings, then the roads.
Wendy Morris, the senior urban designer in the department's Melbourne offices, described the code in
Alexandria, Virginia, last October at the first Congress on the New Urbanism. She said a key to
making it effective has been interdisciplinary workshops: "We found that to make real change in
building patterns, those who make design, permitting, and development decisions must be involved
and retrained."
Readyfor change
Back in the U.S., the Florida Department of Community Affairs has undertaken an ambitious project
to develop "community design guidelines" for everything from energy conservation to affordable
housing to streets. The project's principal researcher, Reid Ewing, of the joint Center for
Environmental and Urban Problems at Florida Atlantic University/Florida International University in
Fort Lauderdale, says the "overriding rationale is to make the street more livable, less
energy-consumptive, and environmentally sound." His team has proposed a 20-foot wide standard for
all local streets.
7 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article I http://web7.infotrac.galegroup.com/'ilw/in... A15492074&dyn=4!ar~fmt?sw~aep=uiowa_main
Ben Starrett, the director of strategic planning and policy coordination for the community affairs
department, says he expects' the guidelines to be published soon·
Even the Institute for Transportation Engineers, long a holdout against alternative street standards, is
becoming part of the solution. In February, the institute's technical committee on neotraditional town
design issued an "informational report" entitled Traffic Engineering for Neotraditional
Neighborhoods. Frank Spielberg, a traffic engineering consultant in Annandale, Virginia, who chairs
the committee, says members hope that ITE will endorse the "recommended practices," which include
narrower streets in some cases, within the next year.
As to liability, the bugaboo of city officials, one member of the ITE committee, Walter Kulash - a
traffic engineer in Orlando - contends that "legal obstacles to narrow streets are a red herring." He
notes that a 1993 study he co-authored for the National Conference on Tort Liability and Risk
Management for Surface Transportation concluded that tort cases "invariably have to do with high
speed," not street width·
Finally, for those ready to change, a few basic reminders:
The public interest requires safe, livable, and attractive streets that contribute to the urban fabric.
Streets should be designed to suit
:' 2~"'.~~. "~'~ '*t[[ their function. Many streets,
__71[~ .._ especially local ones, have
' ] 'r V""' purposes other than vehicular
: ' traffic. Some local residential
" "~'~ "~' *' ;~X_ streets should be designed for
[~ lb~ fr~ 't t' l ..' :
- ,~*o.*,- " '~ · speeds of less than 20 mp.h.
: "~""'~° " ~.~_ Remember that the general
~. - population is aging, with the
/ ' ~'~' cohort over 85 growing fastest of
~,,~,,, all.
1~_,.~1~ ,
A hierarchical street network
should have a rich variety of
types, including bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit routes.
Reid Ewing believes the "overall
Aeev~s sma-r system design has fallen into the
.t~ ~ / ~~, cracks between the planning and
~, ~,,~X~,, engineering professions." The
~2~~ entire movement network should
"~'~. :: c.,,~.,,-.~ be considered, with connectivity
· 0,, 7- r.s~ given prominence·
, Al.m,,,.': ~Jm,- m,h~.m,,v~t nrt~ .:,rk. 5t.h>~,: ~,~ ..,._'..
_ _,~,n-~-"~...~ ':.
· . .:,~ (- ':...? --. -.
et~n . '~-..'2~ ~.;':.~'.:2~ ..a.,---7,._
, .... . ................... --.
8 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Article I http://web7 .infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/in... _A 15492074&dyn=4 !ar~fmt?sw aep=uiowa__main
between houses should be no more than 80 to 100 feet), landscaping, parking, set-backs, lot width to
depth ratios, block length and perimeter maximums, materials, street furniture, and signs.
A useful guide might be the "performance street" concept, which matches street types with adjacent
land uses. Creating a street plan based on this model might seem a daunting task, but be assured that
controlling scale (what's called "morphological zoning") can go a long way to ensuring the proper mix
of urban elements.
Make the new standards available for in~ll and redevelopment, not just fomew development. Where
densi~cation is a concern, maintain existing rights-of-way but narrow roadway width.
Streets should be designed in a collaborative, interdisciplinary process. Do a visual preference survey.
Try workshops and charettes. Include your legal counsel. After construction, set up what Kulash calls
a "robust, simple, and executable monitoring system."
Don't let cost stop you. We estimate that it will take $1.3 million to reconfigure Norwood Avenue, a
6,000-foot-long residential subcollector in north Boulder, as a 20-foot-wide street incorporating such
traffic-calming measures as raised intersections, berms, a multipurpose path, and neckdowns (flared
curbs constricting a street entrance). It would take $2.3 million to build a typical 32-foot-wide street.
The reconfiguration design has been approved by the city council and is now going through the capital
improvements programming process.
Ideally, putting these ideas into effect will lead to a revival of street-centered small communities.
Vaclav Havel, president of the Czech Republic, put it best in his 1992 book, Summer Meditations.
"Villages and towns," he wrote, "will once again begin to have their own distinctive appearance,... and
the environment will become a source of quiet everyday pleasure for us all."
By planning our residential areas at a human scale, considering the needs of the most vulnerable
among us, and relegating the automobile to its proper role, we can regain what we have lost.
9 of 10 5/26/00 9:19 AM
Integration of Transportation and Land Use
Planning through Residential Street Design
THEEUGENE, OREGON LIKE MANY OTHER CITIES, planncdincrementallv, city staffare con-
Eugene, Oregon, USA is faced with tinually [~ced with making design and
LOCAL STREET PLAN increasingly overburdened streets, a location decisions with each request for
development form and transportation approval of a new development. In the
FOCUSES ON CHANGING system oriented primarily to automo- past, staff was forced to make those deci-
bile use, rising costs for street construe- sions without a complete understanding
DEVELOPMENT CODE tion and maintenance and environ- about how new streets should connect to
mental degradation brought about by future streets or to existing streets. There
AND CONSTRUCTION increased automobile use. In response, were no defensible agreements about
the city has begun to revise its land use how the system should work and little to
STANDARDS THAT CARRY codes and development policies to guidedecision-making.
address these and other problems. This The LSP proposed a set of 16 plan-
TNE FORCE OF LAW. paper describes the results of recent ning principles that provide a founda-
efforts to restructure Eugene's residen- tion for all recommendations in the
tial development and street design plan. The principles were ultimately
standards. adopted as "purpose and intent" state-
The Eugene Local Street Plan (LSP) ments in the development code to help
was initiated, in part, to address long- city staff make street planning deci-
standing problems with speeding traffic, sions when reviewing development
poorly-designed private streets, frag- proposals.
mentation of the street system, street-
related storm water runoff, utility lay-
outs, emergency vehicle access and other CHANGING THE CODE
functional considerations. The plan was The LSP rejects the notion that poll-
also intended to better integrate land use cies and guidelines are sufficient for con-
and transportation planning in future trolling the design and layout of local
development areas. In Eugene, more streets. LSP recommendations focus on
than two-thirds of the land within the changing development code and con-
urban growth boundary is designated struction standards that carry the force of
for residential development, about law. Some of those changes are outlined
9,000 acres of which is targeted for below.
future development. At its heart, the Hierarchy of Streets. In the past, the
LSP is really focused on improving the City's residential street standards pro-
quality of the residential environment. vided for three local street types with
The plan, and code changes that paving widths ranging from 28 to 36 feet
resulted from it, recognize that the pat- (ft) and right-of-way widths ranging
tern and design of streets, particularly from 50 to 60 ft. The standards allowed
local streets, determine the form and for no design flexibility and resulted in
shape the character of monotonous and repetitive street lay-
BY JIM WEST AND ALLEN LOWE our city and its outs. The code required the same mini-
neighborhoods. mum pavement width (28 ft) for a
through-street serving 70 homes as for a
cul-de-sac serving only 7 homes. Figure 1
PLANNING PRINCIPLES shows a typical local street. There was no
Street layout and design decisions are flexibility provided for dealing with the
always subject to the iudgements of city variety of conditions found in small and
engineering and planning staff. Because large-scale development and infill
the complete network of local streets is projects.
48 lIE JOURNAL / AUGUST 1997
New standards adopted in the LSP t'
provide tbr four street .types (alleys. access / -... - .... ~ -; ..-..,
lanes. low-volume, and mcdium-vnh,nc ~ Z : . ;-. - ,.~ ~ ~, _%.. :i',~
rcsidcntial streets) ~vith allowances for
pa,'ing ia,h : ',, :
tbr one-way alleys and 20 ~ for other x -. , [~ - - ';
streets) and options f~>r streets with no
on-street parking, parking on one side
local street configuration options are :"
now available. Figure ~ illustrates a low-
volume Access Lane design standard. '~ __~ ·
Right-of-way requirements have been
reduced bv as much as 20 percent on
access lanes and low-volume streets and ""~ ~ :'~ ''
16 percent on medium-volume streets.
motcd in the zoning code for the positive
effects they have on residential street Figure 1.
character and increases in residential
densities that they permit. Barriers to the s~on designs as illustrated in Figure 3 that forces people to drive to most
construction of ~leys, such ~ excessive have restricted through travel by con- destinations.
paving widths and requirements Br con- structing a minimum number of perline- Recommendations in the LSP gener-
crete paving to a depth of 7 inches (in) ter intersections, providing relatively few ated code changes that will create a more
were removed from the code. Land use interconnected streets, and mgimizing interconnected street system than has
regulations are currently being revised to the use of cul-de-sacs. The street layout recently been built. The Gundation of
simpliQ regulations and promote the h~ Grced concentrations of loc~ tr~c these changes is a reduction in permissi-
construction of Mley access housing and onto the collector and arteriM street sys- ble block lengths from 1200 to 600
"granny flat" uni~ that can be accessed tern causing greater use of those streets, and a redefinition of "block lengh"
from Mleys. and necessitating longer, less direct auto- the distance "...be~een ~o intersecting
S~eet Onnecaons. In some puts of mobile travel because fewer route options through streets, including 7' intersec-
Eugene, c~-de-sac ~d dead end streets are available. P~t practices have Mso ere- tions but excluding cul-de-sa~." Bile
re dominant street 7pes. In these ~e~, ated street patterns that ignore possible cul-de-sac streets are not prohibited, ~is
utili7 distribution and personM travel connections to schools, commercial single change will dramati~ly limit their
options are limited, and emergency areas, parB and other acriviw centers. use in new subdivisions. O~er ch~ges
access can be a problem. TypicM subdivi- The result is a fragmented street system that will improve street connectivi7
include requirements for stubbing streets
to sere adjacent undeveloped properties,
requirements Br street connections to be
~'AC~SS~NE made to nearbv activi~ centers and
8[ell$~ - ~ seat[ requirements for connections to existing
<~~& or approved public streets abutting the
· ' ' - '~ .. development.
} ~ .. An interconnected street system has
the potenti~ disadvantage of increasing
'- ' imperious surface area. However, a trial
~ .' '-~ --~ existing subdivision showed an actual
. %~l ~.~[ linear feet of street increased, both street
e~I' ~ll[l[[I t ~' sm~p 8~.~.o m~ w~t~ paving and sidewalk paving decreased,
· -~.~.~ sin. resulting in an overall decrease in imper-
~ i0' RIGHT-OF-WAT t DIMENS$ON INCLUDES
e' curs vious surface oF ]G p~rccn[.
PrWaz~ ~tm~u. In ~hc pas~, &vclop~rs
reacted m chc inficxi~ili~ oF ~hc ci~'s
Figure 2. rcsidcnfiM s~rcct standards by conscruc[-
IT/JOURNAL / AUGUST 1~7 4~
than the nati, mal average. 'l;,~tal years. their applications were generally
.~F~d~~k__~li~l~__~lk transit ridership is approaching 'imited,oestablishcdneighh,,rhoods
--'-' ' , 6 million passengcrs per year. whcrc tra[}ic speeds and volumes had
'['hc pedestrian system. how- beeonto a problem. These applications
ever, is not its well-developed as wcrc generally successful and well-
-.-e it could be. received bv residents.
expand the use of alternative calming devices was expanded to allow
· modes in residential areas their use with new street construction.
relics, to a large degree, on site Developers and contractors now have
q~ planning decisions made by marc flexibility to incorporate devices
developers and private proper.ty such as traffic circles, raised crosswal~,
owners. Even though the code curb extensions and medians in their
Figur, 3. has required the construction designs. With all traffic calming devices,
off sidcwal'ks on public streets maintaining access fbr bio'clcs, pedestri-
ing private streets. The Ci.ty had limited for years, developers have typically ans and transit is a priorit)'.
authority to require public streets in new resisted attempts to provide for through On-Street Parking. Agreement to pur-
developments, had few standards for connections between streets or blocks to sue flexible street designs and narrower
their design and construction and lacked reduce trip lengths for bicycles and roadway widths prompted concerns
the authority to inspect them. The lack pedestrians. XVhere subdivisions are laid about the adequacy of on-street parking
of standards and inspection authority out with numerous cul-de-sacs and few and the potential for conflicts with
created problems related to fire and or no connections to adjacent property, emergency service vehicles. Cul-de-sacs
emergency access, storm drainage, walking, transit and bicycle use is dis- were of particular concern because of the
pedestrian and bicycle access and safety courage& To address this problem, the potential of having a blocked lane on
and street maintenance. Some private development code has been amended to streets with a single outlet.
streets were too steep; others lacked side- require bicycle/pedestrian accessways to Dispatch practices of emergency ser-
walks or lacked curbs on the downhill be provided between existing residential vice vehicles typically determine the
side of steep slopes, lacked adequate areas, activity centers (schools, parks, order in which vehicles arrive at an
drainage provisions or prevented the log- shopping areas) and new developments. emergency. If there is only a single out-
ical extension of the public street system. Figure 4 shows a typical bicycle and let, some vehicles in the front of the line
Private streets were typically not well- pedestrian connection between neigh- may be unable to turn around to trans-
maintained. Property owners along barhoods. The code also grants the city port victims to a hospital because of
those streets, not understanding their authority to require accessways at the end other emergency vehicles or parked cars.
maintenance responsibilities, came to ofcul-de-sacs. Although the width of some of the
expect the City to resolve problems. ~a~/qc Calming· Although Eugene has largest fire trucks has remained at about
Through the LSP, the zoning code been using traffic calming devices for 8.5 ft for some time, trucks have been
now requires that private streets be
It '
allowed only if a developer can demon- .
strate that a public street is not necessary '
for compliance with the code, including :'
street connectivity standards. Where pri- 7-,- ~' '
fate streets are allowed, developers are
required to meet standards similar to
those required for public streets. ~\,.
Bicycle, Pedestrian and 7~ansit Connec- i · ~" ;' ' * ..... " "
i "- ' :,t .., i :all . .
Hans. The Eugene City Council and the ~ ,,. ~ '."~i ........ ' " .,
general community strongly'support
effort~ to in~re~e the use of alternative.I!!-'i.,:-~_)'-, ;., ~_ i .......
modes of transportalia.. Eugene has ' .":' ."'- '
excellent bicycle and transit svstems.
There are more than 100 miles gf dedi- ~: "'T~'-" 7.,f'''i'''~:''''''~''' '~'7. ' ' .- .: - "-
cared bike lanes. off-street bike paths,
and signed bike routes in the city; bicycle
·
parking is required for virtually all land
uses. As a result the use of bikes Gr com-
muting in Eugene is 15 times higher Figure4.
50 lIE JOURNAL / AUGUST 1997
changing t,, allow more and more equip- As part of the LSP, the use of traffic calming devices was expanded to
mcn~ r. hc carried. t:.quipmcnt dc~ors,
,,,'i,~g-d,,wn ladder racks and otl~cr 0110w their use wilh new sireel construction. Developers 0nd contractors
woddng areas require a minimum of
,d~,,ut '~ fi on each sitIt', hence the t?'picalnow have mare fiexihilily 10 incorp0r0le devices such us traffic circles,
firc requirement of 20 ft of clear space
tot a vehicle. raised cr0sswalks, curb extensions and medians in their designs.
'1~ undcrst.md how on-street parking
~,,uld ;,ft~:ct the oper;~tion and move- With all traffic calming devices, maintaining access for bicycles,
mcnt of fire trucks, an on-street parking
qurvcy of ~5 local streets with varying pedestrians and transit is a priority.
~idths and lot sizes was conducted.
'I'berc was an assumption that streets
serving small lot developments would and street furniture, thus reducing the important planning principles and
generate bigher on-street parking usable sidewalk width. design standards. Ultimately, theirdevel-
demand: however, no correlation was Setback sidewalks encourage pedes- opment did not serve the proiect well.
found bet~veen the demand for on-street trian use. The setback [andscape buffer The LSP process confirmed the need
parking, lot size and street width. The essentially eliminates pedestrian lateral to include more than engineers and
survev did reveal that homes with only displacement on the sidewalk, thus planners in the design discussions; oth-
two on-site spaces will almost always reducing the need for wider sidewalks. ers, including emergency service
need parking on one side of the street, The buffer can provide an area for traffic providers, utilities and transit providers
and sometimes on both sides of the signs, utilities, low level landscaping and must also be involved. Public safety
street. As a result, most of the residential trees, which also offer increased protee- needs for rapid response and accessibil-
street designs retained on-street par'king Lion from tire spray during wet weather. ity sometimes conflict with the objec-
on at least one side of the roadway The Setback wal'ks also allow for easier con- rives of traffic management and livable
survey also provided a basis for reducing struction of curb ramps arid driveway neighborhoods. Involvement by the
parking lane widths from 8 ft to 7 ft. aprons that meet the requirements of the appropriate people is essential to a suc-
The code now requires that cul-de-sacs Americans with Disabilities Act. Conse- cessful project. ·
constructed with 20 ft of paving must quently, most street designs adopted
provide a 12 ft emergency vehicle, bicy- through the LSP require setback side-
cle and pedestrian accessway from the walks; only low volume access lanes ....................................................
bulb to an adjacent street. allow both curbside and setback walks.
Sidewalks. Sidewalks are an integral
part of a larger transportation system JAMES I. WEST,
designed to safely move people, goods WHAT WE LEARNED P.E., isaProject
and services. As future traffic congestion The rules for local street design and Manager with tGmley-
and its related side effects increase, the layout are embedded in Eugene's devel- Horn andAssociates,
commitment to encourage walking as an opment codes; parts of the code are Inc. in Portlana~
alternative to driving is essential. With revised periodically to address specific Oregon. He current~
this in mind, all streets except alleys and problems. Over time, piecemeal code works on a variety of
access lanes are now required to be built amendments can create confused and projects including ITS,
with sidewalks on both sides of the sometimes contradictory regulations. corridor studies and local street planning. He
street: access lanes can be constructed The broad scope of the LSP allowed a holds B.S. and~f.S. degrees in civilengineering
with sidewalks on only one side. comprehensive review of the develop- j%m Brigham l~ung University and is an
The LSP recognizes that sidewalks ment code that exposed dozens of Associate Member oflTE.
should be designed as a "safe haven" from inconsistent and unclear regulations
fast moving vehicular traffic. Unless they that a more limited scope would not ALLEN LOWE
arc designed to "feel" safe, sidewalks will have revealed. is a Senior Planner
receive limited use and do little to pro- One of the LSP objectives was to with the City of Eugene
mote foot traffic. Sidewalk widths and map the general layout of "important Planning and Develop-
setbacks can strongly influence pedes- future street connections." Example merit Department. He
trian coml~rt and safety. XYvrhere traffic future street maps were developed and has worked,ua com-
moves close to the sidewalks and obstruc- were shown to the public during review ?rehensive, long-range
Lions such as traffic control signs and fire of the draf~ plan. Those maps tended to planner~r thepast 13
hydrants exist, pedestrians displace be a "lightning rod" tbr discussion that years with ,neniHpal governments in Oregonand
thcnlsclvcs laterally away from the traffic diverted attention from the much more C~di/brm'a.
ITE JOURNAL / AUGUST 1997
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council
of Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the
13th of June, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers of the City of Iowa City,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or
if said meeting is cancelled, at the next
meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a Resolution of Intent to
Approve a Purchase Agreement for
Condominium Unit 1-B(2) in Tower Place and
Parking a/k/a Iowa Avenue Multi-Use Parking
Facility.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the City Council of Iowa City,
Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 13th day of June,
2000, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or
if said meeting is cancelled, at the next
meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a resolution adopting
revised procedures and design guidelines for
review of applications for certificates of
appropriateness within historic and
conservation districts and for historic
landmarks.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
ppdadm/nph6-13-00.doc
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 13, 2000
To: City Council
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Re: Proposed Revisions to the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook
Attached please find an updated copy of page 20 of the proposed Iowa City Design Handbook,
which contains new design guidelines for review of proposed alterations to properties within
historic and conservation districts and for historic landmark properties. The proposed change
involves the addition of a clause at the beginning of the first sentence of the first bullet under
"Demolition." It has not yet been determined whether or not demolition of properties will be
subject to review within conservation districts. Since the City has not yet designated any
conservation districts, this change will have no immediate effect on any existing properties or
districts, and will allow the issue of demolition within conservation districts to be decided when
designation of a specific area is proposed.
HANDICAP ACCESSIBILITY '
../
The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission will approve certsfiCates of appropriateness for
modifications that accommodate reasonable access and use by ::disabled occupants provided
those modifications do not sign~ificantly alter the historic character of the building. The Historic
Preservation Commission will v~rk with applicants to find designs that will accommodate their
needs consistent with the :haracter of the building.
DEMOLITION
· A certificate of appropriateness for the of any primary contributing structure will be
denied unless the applicant can demor :rate that the building is structurally unsound and
/
irretrievable. A certificate of a for the demolition of a contributing outbuilding
will be determined on a case by case basi?~'
· Before a certificate of appropriateness ,lition will be approved for a particular site, the
Iowa City Historic Preservation Commi ~n mu approve a certificate of appropriateness for
the structure that will replace the one .
de ' is true for both contributing and
noncontributing structures.
\
\
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 20
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 6, 2000
To: City Council
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Re: Proposed Revisions to the Historic Preservation Commission's Procedures and
Design Guidelines
The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission is proposing new design guidelines that will
apply to construction projects in historic and conservation districts and to historic landmark
properties. In addition, the Commission would like to amend its procedures for reviewing
applications for Certificates of Appropriateness to be more consistent with its current practice of
conducting these reviews. Both of the proposed documents are included in the Council's
packet. In addition, a copy of the existing procedures and guidelines, adopted by the Council in
1990, is also included for review and comparison.
In revising these documents, the Commission's intent was to clarify the responsibilities of all
parties involved in the certificate review process. The revised procedures more clearly explain
how to file an application to have plans reviewed, and how the review process will occur. The
revised guidelines provide much more specificity to help guide property owners in preparing
their plans for alterations to their historic properties, and to help guide the Commission in its
decision making regarding these applications. In reviewing potential changes to both
documents, the Commission did provide notice to historic district property owners and provided
opportunities for their input.
Public Input: Public input on these items was solicited a number of times prior to the
Commission's decision to forward the proposal on to the City Council. Consideration of revising
the procedures and guidelines was initiated in 1998, when two controversial project reviews
revealed some basic problems with the Commission's process for reviewing Certificates of
Appropriateness and the standards in place upon which to base these reviews. By summer of
1999, the Commission had drafted a revised set of procedures and solicited input from historic
district property owners. Property owners were specifically invited to comment on whether or
not neighboring property owners should have the right to appeal a decision made by the
Commission. Input from the public regarding this inquiry was mixed, but only a few of the 250+
property owners who received notice provided input. Ultimately, the Commission decided
against recommending this change to the ordinance and procedures, as noted in its November
8, 1999 memo to the Council (attached).
The Commission began drafting revisions to its design guidelines in 1999, and completed a
working draft by the spring of 2000. A public hearing on the guidelines was held on Thursday,
April 13, 2000 at the Commission's regular monthly meeting. Again, all potentially affected
property owners were notified of the public hearing and informed that copies of the proposed
guidelines were available to view at the Public Library, the Planning and Community
Development Department, the City Clerk's Office, and on the City's web site. A few written
comments were submitted (attached), and two individuals appeared at the public hearing to ask
questions and learn more about the guidelines. A final review of the procedures was also
conducted by the Commission at that meeting. At the completion of that meeting, the
Commission voted to send these documents on to the City Council for consideration.
Procedures: Other than the decision to not include appeal rights for neighboring property
owners, the most notable change to the procedures is the establishment of a second regular
monthly meeting, to be held as needed specifically to review Certificate of Appropriateness
applications. The current procedures actually require that the Commission be prepared to hold
a meeting every week to review applications, which has never been the practice of the
Commission. However, given the increase in the number of special meetings that have been
required over the last few years, the Commission feels that it is time to establish more than one
regular monthly meeting. This will help expedite the review process for individuals seeking
approval of a project, and help free up agenda time at the regular monthly meetings to allow
discussion of other preservation related topics. Other changes being proposed by the
Commission include changing the application deadline to 8 working days prior to a scheduled
meeting rather than 12 working days, clarifying staff's role in the process by noting that
recommendations shall be provided when requested by the Commission, and a number of other
revisions clarifying how to file an application for review and how the review process is to
proceed.
Guidelines: Since its creation in 1982, the Historic Preservation Commission has relied
primarily on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards) in approving
certificates of appropriateness for construction projects. The Standards are comprised of ten
rather general statements regarding recommended approaches to dealing with alterations to
historic buildings. The Standards were written to be adaptable to many different situations and,
therefore, are general in nature. With six different historic districts in place, and with more
historic and conservation districts being considered, the Commission feels that more detailed
guidelines would be useful to property owners, builders, and the Commission. The State
statute regarding the establishment of historic districts, as well as the City's Historic
Preservation Ordinance, still specify that the Standards are to be used to evaluate proposed
alterations to properties within historic districts, but that local guidelines may be adopted to
assist in implementing the Standards. The proposed guidelines would serve that purpose.
The Commission wrote the proposed guidelines with the following objectives in mind:
· To inform property owners and builders of the design criteria that will be used in approving
certificates of appropriateness.
· To give flexibility for projects being done on non-historic property.
· To respect the architectural differences between individual historic districts.
· To define the differences between historic and conservation districts.
· To provide consistency in approving certificates of appropriateness.
The proposed guidelines do not deviate substantially from the Commission's pattern of decision
making over the last several years. They are based heavily on the federal guidelines that are
associated with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the Iowa City Neighborhood Design
Book (a 1990 publication by the Commission with recommendations and guidelines for
alterations to old homes), and past decisions made by the Commission.
The proposed guidelines are to be included within a document called the "Iowa City Historic
Preservation Handbook." The Handbook will ultimately contain much more than the guidelines
currently being proposed. The guidelines being proposed at this time would apply only to
building alterations and additions to existing buildings within historic districts. The Commission
intends to prepare guidelines for new buildings and additional guidelines for building additions
for each historic district individually, reflecting the characteristics of the properties contained
within those specific districts. The Handbook will provide a framework for the organization of
each of these sets of guidelines, and organize them in a manner that is understandable and
useful to property owners.
The individual district guidelines have not yet been written. They will be developed with the
input of district residents and property owners following the adoption of the general guidelines
being proposed at this time. They will likely cover issues such as building height, mass and
scale, building styles, rooflines, setbacks, and building materials. The Commission intends to
seek Council approval of the individual district guidelines as they are developed.
If you have questions about the proposed procedures and guidelines, feel free to call me at
356-5243 or email me at scott_kuglcr@iowa-cit,j.org. I will be in attendance at your June 13
meeting along with Mike Gunn, the Commission's Chair, to answer any questions that may be
brought up at the public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 59
RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES
FOR REVIEW OF PROJECTS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
WHEREAS, Historic Districts have been established in order to protect and preserve the City's
architectural and historic heritage; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation CommissiOn has drafted Procedures and Guidelines for
Review of Projects in Historic Districts, a copy of which is attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, said Procedures and Guidelines are intended to establish policies, procedures and
guidelines which shall apply to the Commission's review of exterior construction and renovation
projects in Histodc Districts; and
WHEREAS, said Procedures and Guidelines are intended to further design policies which will
encourage compatibility with existing and future Historic Districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY that the
Procedu. res and Guidelines for Historic Districts, attached hereto, are approved as to form and
content, and are hereby adopted.
It was moved by Ambrisco and seconded by Kubbv the Resolution be
adopted, and upon roll cell there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
x Ambrisco
x Courtney
x Horowitz
x Kubby
x Larson
x McDonald
x Novick
Passed and approved this 17th day of April , 1990.
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF PROJECTS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS
SECTION A: PROCEDURES
I. APPUCABILITY
In an officially designated historic district, any exterior alterations or new construction which
require a City permit must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Examples
of alterations or construction that may require approval include, but are not limited to, an
addition to a house, construction of a porch, construction of a garage, or demolition of a
building. Examples of exterior work that do not require historic preservation review include
house painting, reroofing when no structural members are involved, and construction of a
fence not exceeding six feet in height.
II. INITIATING REVIEW
When a person applies for a permit to demolish a building, to alter an existing structure, or to
construct a new building in a historic district, the project will require a Certificate of No Material
Effect or a Certificate of Appropriateness. These Certificates will be part of the building or
demolition permit. No project may begin until both the historic preservation and building
inspection review processes have been completed.
III. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
In reviewing applications, the standards enumerated in the Secretary of Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation in Section 27-87 of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances and locally adopted
guidelines, if any, shall be applied.
IV. APPLYING FOR A CERTIFICATE
Application for a Certificate of No Material Effect or a Certificate of Appropriateness is obtained
from the Iowa City Building Division of the Housing and Inspection Services Department. This
Application must be filed as part of the building or demolition permit application process. The
applicant must submit the application form, a site plan and elevation drawings, both drawn to
scale. The plan and drawings need not be professionally prepared. The applicant may submit
additional materials, such as photographs or materials to be used. The application will be
made to the Building Division of the Department of Housing and Inspection Services, located
in the Civic Center at 41 0 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa.
V. CERTIFICATE OF NO MATERIAL EFFECT
A. When to Apply.
A Certificate of No Material Effect shall be applied for when, in the opinion of the
Building Inspector, the proposed alteration or construction is minor, will not affect the
appearance of the building, and will not compromise the character of the neighborhood.
Examples of such minor effects include installation or improvement of fire escapes
which are unobtrusive and not visible from the street, and minor alterations to
outbuildings such as installing ventilation equipment or widening garage doors to
accommodate modern vehicles.
B. Review Process.
Upon the filing of an application for a Certificate of No Material Effect, the Building
Division shall forward the Application to the Department of Planning and Program
Development ("PPD"). Within two (2) working days after PPD receives the completed
application, the Chairperson, or his/her designee, together with another member of the
Historic Preservation Commission shall meet to determine if a Certificate of No Material
Effect should be issued. if, after review, the application does not trigger the Certificate
of Appropriateness standards set in Sec. 27-87 of the Iowa City Code of Ordinances,
the Chairperson and the Commission member shall issue a Certificate of No Material
Effect, and shall notify both the applicant and the Building Inspector within two (2)
working days thereafter. The Permit may then be issued if the project complies with
all other applicable City codes.
ff the Certificate of No Material Effect is denied, the applicant shall' be notified in writing
within two (2) working days of such denial, and the application shall be forwarded to
the Historic Preservation Commission for review for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
VI. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
A. When to Apply.
A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be applied for when, in the opinion of the Building
Inspector, the proposed alteration or construction will affect the appearance of the
building or the district; when a Certificate of No Material Effect is denied; or when
demolition is requested. Application shall be made to the Building Division of the
Department of Housing and Inspection Services located in the Civic Center at 41 0 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa.
B. Review process.
Standard Review: The Historic Preservation Commission shall designate a regular time
and place each week when and where it will have special meetings to review
applications for Certificates of Appropriateness. The Commission will meet at that time
only to review such applications. If no such applications have been made, the
Commission need not meet. Public notice of the meetings shall be given to news
media and posted in the lobby of the Civic Center, located at 41 0 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa. The meetings shall be open to the public.
In order to expedite the review process, an application for a Certificate of Appropriate-
ness must be received in the Department of Planning and Program Development 'at
least two (2) working days before the time for a scheduled review meeting of the
Historic Preservation Commission.
Applications will be reviewed by the staff only to determine that the proposed
construction is in compliance with Zoning and Building Code requirements. If the
Commission, after review, determines the application requires major changes or
additions, the Commission shall defer the application for consideration at a regular
monthly meeting. In such event,' the Applicant shall be informed in writing of the time
and place of such regular meeting.
Monthly Meeting Review: In order to be placed on the regular monthly agenda, an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness must be received in the Department of
Planning and Program Development no less than 12 working days prior to the
scheduled monthly meeting.
VII. COMMISSION MEETING FORMAT
A quorum of a majority of the voting members of the Commission is required for a meeting.
At the meeting, the Commission will hear first from staff to gain background information about
the application. The Commission will then hear from the applicant or his/her designated
representative. All site plans, elevation drawings, photographs, and other materials shall be
made available to the Commission at this time. The Commission members will then have the
opportunity to question both staff and the applicant. Members of the public will be invited to
present their views; persons in support of the Application shall be heard first, then persons
opposing such application. Every effort will be made to work with the applicant to achieve a
project design which will meet the standards of the Commission and the needs of the
applicant. The Commission may approve, modify, or disapprove the application. An affirmative
vote of a majority of those members present is needed to approve or modify an application.
The Commission's findings on each application shall be set forth in a written resolution, to be
filed in the City Clerk's office as a public record.
VIII. APPEAL
If an application for either a Certificate of Appropriateness or C~rtificate of No Material Effect
is approved, then the applicant may continue with the permit process. If the application is
denied, the applicant has ten (10) working days after the Commission's resolution is filed in
the City Clerk's office to file a written appeal to the City Council. The appeal may be made
by letter to the City Council. The letter may be accompanied by any materials submitted to
the Historic Preservation Commission.
- ,/, A.PPI:~ AS TO FO ~
L-/~r~LLEGAL DEpA~'~EFO~''
SECTION B: GUIDEUNE$
The following are guidelines intended to guide property owners in the construction of new
buildings and extedor alterations in Iowa City's designated historic districts. In addition, these
guidelines shall be used by the Historic Preservation Commission in determining whether to
issue Certificates of Appropriateness and for the review of demolition permits. In no case may
these guidelines be used to attempt to replace or override the requirements of the Iowa
City Zoning Ordinance.
I. GENERAL
A. The design of new structures need not mimic historical styles. The intent of
these guidelines is to encourage creatMty in design, including contemporary
styles. However, such designs must be harmonious with surrounding structures,
and must not compromise the historic character of the district.
B. Compatibility and harmony will be measured as those attributes relate to the
historic structures which contribute to the historic character in a district, and not
as they relate to buildings which do not contribute to said character.
C. These guidelines may be amended from time to time as deemed appropriate by
the Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council.
II. BUILDING HEIGHT
A. The number of stories of new buildings should be, to the nearest half-story, the
average of the number of stodes of adjacent buildings characteristic of the
district, not to exceed the maximum height allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
III. ROOF FORM
A. Roof pitch and roof shape should be similar to existing architecturally significant
structures located in the district.
B. The roof volumes and number of roof faces of new construction should be
similar to that of buildings of architectural significance within the immediate area.
C. Roofing materials should be consistent with the style of the building on which
the roof is being placed, and should also be consistent with the predominant
materials used on surrounding buildings.
IV. VERTICAL EMPHASIS
A. When vertical emphasis is a dominant characteristic in the historic district, it
should be reinforced by overall building height, vertical windows, doors with
transoms, grouping of windows and/or window bays, and floor-to-floor heights.
2
B. The exterior floor-to-floor heights of new construction should match those of
adjacent historic buildings or other buildings of architectural signfficance which
exist in the same district.
V. STREETSCAPE
A. Setbacks should be similar to surrounding buildings.
B. Spacing between buildings on a block and the size of building fronts should be
similar to the existing spacing and size that is already established on a block
face.
C. Blank facades which break the pattern on the street should not be used in
histodc districts.
VI. THE FRONT
A. Entry levels of new buildings should match the height of entn/levels of adjacent
architecturally significant buildings unless the topography of the site makes this
inappropriate.
B. Emphasis should be given to the entry so that the entry is visible from the street.
Front porches and steps, emphasis at door areas, and other decorative features
can be used if such is a. lready established as a neighborhood pattern.
C. Porches should have a connection to the interior by the use of windows and
doors.
VII. DETAILS
A. The windows of new construction should repeat the lines, size and shape of
window openings used on surrounding buildings.
B. Large areas of solid blank wall should not be created on any highly visible
elevations.
VIII. OUTBUILDINGS AND GARAGES
A. Garages and other outbuildings should be located in positions relative to the
main building which are similar to other garages and outbuildings in the histodc
district, to the extent such placement is possible under the Zoning Ordinance.
OB. Double-wide garage door openings are discouraged if visible from the public
right-of-way.
C. Additional curb cuts should not be created where an existing alley is being used
/ for the sole means of access by at least ,50% of the lots on the block. A curb
3
cut may be created when there is no other reasonably functional alternative for
access to garages and outbuildings.
rj' D. New outbuildings should be subordinate to and compatible with the main
building.
~}' E. The roof form of any new outbuilding should be similar to the main building.
F. Prefabdcated metal outbuildings are strongly discouraged.
IX. OTHER CONSTRUCTION
A. Garages built into new residential structures should not visually dominate the
from of the building, nor be set closer to the street than the main part of the
building.
B. The amount of exposed foundation should be similar to other architecturally
significant buildings in the district.
C. To the extent possible, required parking should be placed behind the principal
building, and be hidden from street view.
X. DEMOLITION
Based upon National Register Criteria for Evaluation established by the National Park
Service, a structure's classffication as key, contributing or intrusion will govern the review
of any request for demolition.
A. A Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of any key structure will be
denied unless the applicant can demonstrate that the building is structurally
unsound and irretrievable and/or the denial of a demolition permit would create
a signfficant economic hardship for the applicanL
B. A Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of any contributing structure
may be approved, after a 60-day period from date of application, during which
the applicant and the Commission may endeavor to find an alternative means
Of developing the site.
C. Any structure which is not a key or contributing structure in the historic district
shall be considered an intrusion and will be approved for demolition upon
request.
PPRO AS TO
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
"~/--/d- ~'~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Iowa City Council
FROM: Historic Preservation Commission
DATE: 11/8/99
RE: Right of Appeal from Commission Decisions
I. ISSUE
Whether the right to appeal Commission decisions conceming certificates of
appropriateness should be extended to other property owners within a historic district
beyond the applicant.
II. DISCUSSION
A. Background
In the summer of 1998, several property owners within the Summit Street historic
district were dissatisfied with the Commission's grant of a certificate of appropriateness
for 621 S. Summit Street. Currently, Iowa City Code Section 14-4C-7-E provides in part
that "[a]ny applicant aggrieved by any decision of the Commission regarding a certificate
of appropriateness in an historic district or for an historic landmark, may appeal the action
to the City Council." (emphasis added). In reviewing the concerns of the property
owners, several Council members suggested that the Commission explore extending the
right to appeal Commission decisions with respect to certificates of appropriateness to
other property owners besides the applicant.
B. Commission Action
In response to the concerns raised by some Summit Street property owners and the
request of several Council members, the Commission has thoroughly investigated the
possible extension of appeal rights. First, the Commission gathered data on how other
communities having historic preservation ordinances, within the State of Iowa, handled
the right to appeal. We were not able to able to positively identify any other Iowa
community which had extended the right to appeal beyond the applicant. Nationwide, we
were able to identify several communities granting other property owners besides the
applicant with right to appeal. These communities appeared to have ordinances that were
more comprehensive than our current ordinance. (The Appendices to the Iowa City
Historic Preservation Plan contain a review of our ordinance by Brad White of Clarion
and Associates which discusses the progression of historic preservation ordinances from
what he terms first generation to third generation. Currently, we have a second
generation ordinance.)
The Commission then discussed altematives associated with expanding the right
to appeal, such as to whom the right should be expanded and what would constitute
appropriate notice. This discussion led to a draft ordinance revision incorporating the
right of appeal. After reviewing the draft, the Commission decided to obtain public input
on the right of appeal. A letter was sent to all property owners within Iowa City Historic
Districts regarding the extension of the right of appeal, a copy of which is attached.
At our August 12, 1999 meeting, the Commission reviewed the responses
received to the July letter. Overall, there was little response to the July letter and those
received were fairly evenly split between those in favor and those against extending the
right of appeal. Due to the absence of several Commission members, discussion of the
appeal issue was postponed until our September meeting.
C. Current Status
At the Commission' s September meeting an informal poll was taken on whether
the Commission should proceed with the process of extending the right of appeal. After
reviewing the associated pros and cons, a majority of Commission members felt that
further efforts to extend the right of appeal should be suspended for the present time.
The Commission has decided that our efforts are best spent in revising and expanding the
current guidelines to eliminate ambiguities and provide direction to property owners and
the Commission on a district by district basis. This process will hopefully result in the
elimination of many of the concerns raised by the certificate of appropriateness grant for
621 S. Summit Street by providing clarification as to when and under what circumstances
a certificate of appropriateness will be granted.
III. SUMMARY
In response to concerns raised by several property owners within the Summit
Street Historic District as well as several Council members, the Historic Preservation
Commission has explored extending the right to appeal Commission decisions
concerning certificates of appropriateness to others within a historic district besides the
applicant. At the present time, a majority of Commission members are against
proceeding further with efforts to extend the right of appeal. If the Council has any
questions or concerns regarding the appeal issue, the Commission would be happy to try
and address them.
Scott Kugler
From: Marty Christensen [christen@ia.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 2:35 PM
To: scott_kugler@iowa-city.org
Subject: Historic Preseration Guidelines comments
Mr. Kugler,
I am very pleased about the Preservation efforts in Iowa City. Though
so much damage has been done, at least it will be curtailed in the
future. I lived in Iowa City most of my life and have been so incensed
about the tearing down of historic homes, that I first purchased rentals
to keep them from being razed, then finally moved away in 1997 to Mount
Vernon where historic preservation has been a civic priority for a long
time. I currently own 3 rental houses in Iowa City that are in historic
districts, and one of them was completely restored since 1993. I believe
that the historic central residential areas of Iowa City can be
preserved and revitalized since premium rents can be charged for high
quality historic rentals that are close to the city center. Through
mandated preservation district guidelines and grant assistance, the city
can encourage this revitalization and still allow landlords to earn a
reasonable return on their investments.
I have 2 comments about guidelines:
1) There must be some restriction on razing historic buildings for new
construction. I know that such a restriction has been in place in
Washington DC for some time. I suggest a date, such as 1945, be decided
upon, and any building built before that time may not be razed, but can
only be restored. As I have said, there is precedent for such a thing,
and ultimately it will result in more vital historic core district in
Iowa City.
2) The federal guidelines for historic restoration are very particular
about materials that can be used. I think the Iowa City guidelines must
allow for the use of contemporary materials as long as the aesthetic
values are maintained.
Thank you for your time,
Marty Christensen
413 2nd St. SW
Mount Vernon, IA
52314
christen@ia.net
From: paula brandt [paula-brandt@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 7:34 AM
To: Scott Kugler
Subject: standards
Hi, Scott--I read the standards last night on the 'net, and thought they looked really good. Since
there is a statement early on about flexibility and the reasons for flexibility, I think my concerns
have been addressed. The only question I have is the one relating to color, and the statement
that all white houses are not recommended. Does that mean white bodies and white windows
and sashes, or does that include white houses with black storms/screens, too? Since the
historical color of many houses (including ours) was white, and since white houses are perfectly
beautiful, I'm assuming that what is meant is a totally monochromatic look. If that's the case, I
would suggest that any house where every inch of it is painted one color should be discouraged,
and that "picking on" the color white isn't the way to go, but rather discouraging all blue or all
brown or all any one color. I think one of the most charming blocks in our neighborhood is the
west side of the 400 block of N. Gilbed (with the exception of the monstrosity on the corner)--
white houses, all. Green shrubs, etc., look absolutely smashing against white, and white cape
cods with green shutters is about as good as it gets!
Let me know if I misread! Anyway, I don't see any reason to attend the meeting tonight.
BTW, our railing is now (mostly) done. Needs a tiny repair job (one of the post caps has
mysteriously been broken-our neighbors across the street suspect neighborhood children), a
final coat of paint, path lighting, and the landscaping needs to get finished and a few years of
growth, but I hope you agree that the railing will draw visitors to using the steps rather than the
driveway, and that it leads the eye to the house. Come by and walk up the steps--I don't think
there's a more solid railing in town!
paula
APR 11 '~0 0~:1~F/1"1DLHI Uf UKULUbT
To: Historic Preservation Commission: Iowa City
Attention: Scott Kugler, Staff Coordinator
Civic Center, Iowa City
Fax: 9-356-5009
From: C. E. Hawtrey, M. D. and Jo Ann Hawtrey
Residents: Historic Preservation Zone
'/15 South Summit, Iowa City, 52240
Regarding: Historic Preservation Efforts
Dear Mr. Kugler and Commission Members,
We write to inform you of our progress in historic preservation of
our home, which you authorized last year. We want ,~o thank you
for your support in your 2/4 vote allowing progress in the
restoration project and to reflect upon the process. We feel that the
letter is important as you embark on your public comment period
Thursday 13 April 2000.
We want to support Mr. John Roffman who has done the
reconstruction work making the house warm and inviting compared
to its previous drafty cold state. The installed Marvin Windows
fro. m Iowa City Window and Door have provided significant
insulation advantage as has the glass wool and R-board which were
not available in 1900 when the house was built.
Esthetically, the Marvin windows do provide the accent color on the
window frames, which was present in 1907. Now We embark on
another step, which is to replace the railings to mimic the
appearance in 1907. Please note that in the enclosed photograph of
the house in 1907 that no trees are present nor shrubbery, which
we believe, should remain part of the house's charm. Our tree
Surgeon intentionally removed tree limbs from the Norwegian
Spruce to allow the view of the woodwork on the second and third
floor, which will be replaced this Spring. We believe that this
waterproof material will add decorative restoration toward the 190'/
appearance not available in the present rot iron rails present.
This reconstruction can not be entirely "pure" since we want to
maintain the rot iron ladder 3rd floor secondary "escape"
taJaR ll '~ W~:i~HM Uf-I~l Ur UKULU~i
:':.':-.':' . e ' · .
".-' ' :3 .'
- _,~,_ , ~_ ,,. =_
; "': "' ""' ~~!: 7:. ""~'
....,;-- .. ':: C . ~- ..
-- ,...
·.
:"'~ ':' ' ~":'"-,,,:"'~:: .:i'~.' ...,. '.
'- ' :
.. - .. · - -.' _ . -:.... . ·
.. · . . . . .. ..-." · .-...+.
· .-. - +.. ....
;-. :7'-':.:3'.'~ ::. · ....., . .... .:
· " ;'." -" 'L.::-~ .'"
mechanism xn case of fire. We are 'also pleased that Mr: ' Roffman
installed fire alarms in the house for our protection under the code,
which also wasn't present in 1907. We believe that these additions
and reconstruction do make the house closer to its oril~inal design
but not perfectly so. We do not envision putting an outside door
back in the middle parlor as is present in the photo.
We appreciate your sensitivity in allowing appropriate change,
which enhances the property and restores some of hhe outward
appearance of h"le house. We appreciate the opportunity to have
this dialogue and the effort to maintain a sense of the historic
appearance of the community and our home. We 'b~lieve as you do
that this is money well spent to have durable and valuable change
in our home.
Sincerely,
Prepared by: Scott Kugler, Assoc. Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5243
RESOLUTION NO,
RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED PROCEDURES AND DESIGN
GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF PROJECTS IN HISTORIC AND
CONSERVATION DISTRICTS AND FOR HISTORIC LANDMARKS
WHEREAS, the City Code provides for the designation of historic and conservation districts and
historic landmarks in order to protect and preserve the City's architectural and historic resources;
and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has recommended approval of revised
procedures, contained within a document entitled "Procedures for Review of Projects in Historic or
Conservation Overlay Zones," and revised design guidelines, contained within a document entitled
"Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook," copies of which are attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, said revised procedures and design guidelines are intended to establish policies,
procedures and guidelines which shall apply to the Commission's review of new construction and
exterior alterations to properties located within historic and conservation districts or designated as
historic landmarks; and
WHEREAS, said procedures and design guidelines were drafted with the intent of clarifying
Commission and applicant responsibilities associated with the Certificate of Appropriateness
review process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, THAT: the Procedures for Review of Projects in Historic or Conservation Overlay
Zones and the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook, both attached hereto, are approved as
to form and content, and are hereby adopted.
Passed and approved this day of ,20
MAYOR
~ -
A'I'rEST: Gityr~ ~ney~O
GITY GLERK _
PpdadminVes~qpc. doc
Procedures for Review of Projects
in Historic or Conservation Overlay Zones
I. APPLICABILITY
In a city designated historic or conservation district or for any city designated historic
landmarks, any exterior alterations or new construction which require a City permit must
be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Examples of alterations or
construction that may require approval include, but are not limited to, an addition to a
building, construction of a porch, construction of a garage, or demolition of a building.
Examples of exterior work that do not require historic preservation review include house
painting and reroofing of a single-family or duplex residence when no structural members
are involved. The installation of replacement windows or new siding does require review
within a historic district or for a historic landmark.
II. INITIATING REVIEW
Prior to or upon application for a permit to move or demolish a building, to alter an existing
structure, or to construct a new building in a historic or conservation district or on a historic
landmark property, the project will require a Certificate of No Material Effect or a
Certificate of Appropriateness. These Certificates will be pad of the building, house
moving or demolition permit approval process. No project may begin until both the historic
preservation and building inspection review processes have been completed.
III. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
In reviewing applications, the standards enumerated in the Secretary of Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and
locally adopted guidelines, if any, shall be applied.
IV. APPLYING FOR A CERTIFICATE
Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness is obtained from the Iowa City Building
Division of the Housing and Inspection Services Department or from the Department of
Planning and Community Development. This Application must be filed prior to or as part of
the building, house moving or demolition permit application process. The applicant must
submit the application form, a site plan, elevation drawings, and photographs of the
property to be altered or demolished. The plan and drawings need not be professionally
prepared, but must clearly indicate the extent and type of alteration being requested. The
applicant may submit additional materials as desired or as may be requested by the
Secretary of the Commission. The application will be submitted to the Department of
Planning and Community Development, located in the Civic Center at 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa.
V. CERTIFICATE OF NO MATERIAL EFFECT
Upon receiving application for a certificate of appropriateness the Secretary of the
Commission shall review the application to assess its potential impact on the appearance
of the exterior of the property. If, in the opinion of the Secretary, the work will have no
effect on any significant architectural features of a building within a historic district or a
landmark, the Secretary shall contact the Chair of the Commission, or designee to discuss
whether or not a Certificate of No Material Effect should be issued. If a Certificate of No
Material Effect is issued, the project may proceed upon the issuance of all other required
permits by the Building Inspection Division of the Department of Housing and Inspection
Services. If a Certificate of No Material Effect is not issued, a Certificate of
Appropriateness is required before any work can be undertaken toward completion of the
proposed alterations, demolition, or construction. Review of applications for Certificates of
Appropriateness within conservation districts shall follow the above procedure, subject to
the levels of review specified within each individual conservation district report.
VI. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
A. Regular Monthly Meeting: The Historic Preservation Commission shall designate a
time and place where it will hold a regular monthly meeting for the purposes of
considering applications for Certificates of Appropriateness and for discussing and
conducting other Commission business. Public Notice of the meetings shall be given
to news media and posted in the lobby of the Civic Center, located at 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa. The meetings shall be open to the public.
B. Certificate Review Meeting: In addition to its regular monthly meeting, the Historic
Preservation Commission shall designate a time and place each month when and
where it will hold a certificate review meeting to review applications for Certificates of
Appropriateness. The Commission will meet at that time to only review such
applications. If no such applications have been made, the Commission need not
meet. Public notice of the meetings shall be given to news media and posted in the
lobby of the Civic Center, located at 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa. The
meetings shall be open to the public.
C. Application Deadline: In order to facilitate the review process, an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness must be received in the Department of Planning and
Community Development at least eight (8) working days before the date of a
scheduled regular or certificate review meeting.
D. Commission Decision: If the Commission, after review, determines the application
can be approved as submitted or with minor revisions, it shall approve a Certificate
of Appropriateness and issue its findings as specified in City Code Section 14-
4C-7D. If the Commission determines the application requires major changes or
additional information is needed, the Commission may defer consideration of the
application to a future regular or certificate review meeting. In such event, the
Applicant shall be informed in writing of the time and place of such meeting. If, after
working with the applicant to attempt to resolve inconsistencies or conflicts between
the work proposed in the application and the above referenced standards, the
Commission determines that the application is still in conflict with the standards (see
Section III), it shall deny the application and issue its findings as specified in City
Code Section 14-4C-7D.
VII. COMMISSION MEETING FORMAT
A quorum of a majority of the voting members of the Commission is required for any
meeting. At the meeting, the Commission will hear first from staff to gain background
information about the application and receive a recommendation, if requested. The
Commission will then hear from the applicant or his/her designated representative. All site
plans, elevation drawings, photographs, and other materials shall be made available to the
Commission at this time. The Commission members will then have the opportunity to
question both staff and the applicant. Members of the public will be invited to present their
views. Every effort will be made to work with the applicant to achieve a project design
which will meet the standards of the Commission and the needs of the applicant. The
Commission may approve, modify, or disapprove the application. An affirmative vote of a
majority of those members present is needed to approve or modify an application. The
ppdadmin/hist-gdl2.doc 2
Commission's findings on each application shall be set forth in a written resolution, to be
filed in the City Clerk's office as a public record.
VIII. APPEAL
If an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness is approved, then the applicant may
continue with the permit process. If the application is denied, the applicant has ten (10)
working days after the Commission's resolution is filed in the City Clerk's office to file a
written appeal to the City Council. The appeal may be made by letter to the City Council.
ppdadmin/hist-gdl2.doc 3
Iowa City Historic
Preservation Handbook
-Draft-
June 1, 2000
(contains proposed design guidelines for review of app~cations for Certificates of
Appropriateness within historic and conservation districts and for historic landmarks.)
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Prepared for the Thursday, April 13, 2000 public hearing before the Iowa City Historic
Preservation Commission, 5:30 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers, 410 E Washington.
Revised on May 23, 2000 to incorporate changes recommended by the Commission on April t3.
A public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for June 13, 2000 at 7 p.m. in the Civic
Center Council Chambers.
A FEW WORDS ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN IOWA CITY
· The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission was created by local ordinance in December
1982. Its mission statement as described in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan is "...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." Its members are
citizen volunteers appointed by the City Council. Many of the members reside in historic
districts and have expertise in fields related to historic preservation.
· The Historic Preservation Commission, the City Council, and individual property owners are
in the process of implementing the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan that was adopted in
December of 1992. Respecting the unique character of each neighborhood in Iowa City,
the plan calls for the study of twelve separate neighborhoods to determine if sufficient
historic resources exist to allow the establishment of historic or conservation districts. The
purpose of these districts is to preserve historic architectural resources by discouraging
alterations that either destroy the unique characteristics of a building or alter the character of
historic neighborhoods.
· Within historic and conservation districts, the Historic Preservation Commission reviews any
exterior changes that require a regulated building permit. Changes requiring the
Commission's approval include alterations, additions, new construction, and demolition. In
making its decisions, the Commission considers the appropriateness of design features such
as mass and scale, architectural details, type of building materials, and the relationship of the
building to others along the street.
· Designation as a historic or conservation district can help to stabilize and improve
neighborhoods. The commitment of a neighborhood to historic preservation can lead to the
improvement of existing buildings and prevent development that is inconsistent with the
historic character of the neighborhood.
· Several neighborhoods identified in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan have already
been established as historic districts, and more will be considered in the near future. In all,
these districts contain hundreds of historic properties that line the streets and create the
pedestrian urban spaces that define our neighborhoods. The Commission believes that the
implementation of the Historic Preservation Plan is vital to protecting and preserving our
city's rich architectural heritage, and we urge your support and cooperation as this process
moves forward.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook .........................................................................................3
Purpose of the Handbook .........................................................................................................................3
Where The Iowa City Guidelines Apply ....................................................................................................3
Building Code and Zoning Ordinances .....................................................................................................3
Historic Landmarks ..................................................................................: ................................................3
Alternative Designs ..................................................................................................................................3
Definitions of Key Terms ...........................................................................................................................4
Categories of Compliance .........................................................................................................................5
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation ...........................................................................7
Iowa City Guidelines ......................................................................................................................................8
Foundations ...............................................................................................................................................9
Masonry ....................................................................................................................................................10
Wood ........................................................................................................................................................11
Mass and Roof Lines ...............................................................................................................................12
Siding ........................................................................................................................................................13
Paint and Color .........................................................................................................................................14
Windows ...................................................................................................................................................15
Doors ........................................................................................................................................................16
Gutters and Downspouts, Chimneys .......................................................................................................17
Porches ....................................................................................................................................................18
Balustrades and Handrails .......................................................................................................................19
Handicap Accessibility .............................................................................................................................20
Demolition .................................................................................................................................................20
Multi-Family Construction Guidelines .......................................................................................................21
Architectural Styles in Iowa City .................................................................................................................__
Individual Historic District Guidelines Individual Conservation District Guidelines
Summit Street (1983) __ __
Woodlawn (1983) __ __
Brown Street (1994) __ __
Moffitt Cottage (1995) __ __
East College (1997) __ __
College Green (1997) ~ ~
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 2
THE IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION HANDBOOK
Purpose of the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook
The purpose of the handbook is to:
· Identify the defining characteristics of each individual historic or conservation district.
· Provide comprehensive design guidelines for construction projects within each district.
· Provide property owners with design criteria that will be the basis for approving or denying
certificates of appropriateness for their construction drawings.
Where the Iowa City Guidelines Apply
These guidelines apply to all buildings within historic districts and conservation districts as well as
to historic landmarks. All construction projects that change the exterior features of a building and
require a regulated permit must comply with these guidelines. For the construction of new
buildings that contain three or more dwelling units, the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission uses the section of this book entitled Multi-Family Construction Guidelines as a basis
for approving or denying certificates of appropriateness.
Building Code and Zoning Ordinances
The requirements of the building code and the zoning chapter must be met in addition to the
requirements of the historic preservation guidelines. For certain criteria such as mass, scale, size,
siting considerations, and setback from the street, the historic preservation guidelines may be
more stringent than the building code or the zoning chapter.
Historic Landmarks
Alterations and additions to Historic Landmarks must comply with the Iowa City Guidelines.
Alternative Designs
Alternative design solutions or exceptions to the Iowa City Guidelines, the Multi-FamilV
Construction Guidelines, or the individual district guidelines may be considered by the Iowa City
Historic Preservation Commission. The intent in considering alternative designs is to allow
architectural flexibility in exceptional circumstances. The intent is not to reduce the scope or
quality of work required by these guidelines.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk, doc 3
Definitions of Key Terms
Historic District: An area that contains contiguous properties under diverse ownership that:
A. Are significant to American history, architecture, archaeology and culture, or Iowa City's
history, architecture, archaeology and culture; or
B. Possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workership; or
C. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of our history; or
D. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
E. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, method of construction; represent
the work of a master; possess high artistic values; represent a significant and
distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
F. Have yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.
Conservation District: An area that contains contiguous pieces of property under diverse
ownership in which the majority of the structures are at least fifty (50) years old and in which no
more than sixty percent (60%) of the structures are of a quality, integrity, and condition that would
qualify for historic district designation. The area must also:
A. Represent the traditional character of Iowa City neighborhoods through architectural
characteristics, building scale, building setback, and streetscape design; or
B. Exemplify a pattern of neighborhood settlement of development significant to the cultural
history or tradition of Iowa City; or
C. Represent unique or unusual physical character that creates distinctiveness.
Contributin.cl Structure: A structure that is an integral part of the historic theme in a historic or
conservation district. The Historic Preservation Commission determines which structures are
contributing and lists them in the individual district guidelines.
Noncontributing Structure: Structures not listed as contributing structures.
Priman/Structure: The inhabited building on a lot that is normally the largest and faces the street.
Most often a house is the primary structure in historic districts.
Street Elevation: All roof and wall surfaces that face the street. These would be depicted in an
architectural drawing called a street "elevation".
Alteration: A modification to the exterior of a building that does not increase its size.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 4
Setback Addition: An addition built behind the existing structure, opposite the street facade, that
has a setback of eight or more inches on the sides and a roof that is no higher than the existing
roof. When viewed from the street, the addition must be narrower and no taller than the existing
structure. No part of the setback addition is visible on the street elevation.
Categories of Compliance
The architectural character of each historic and conservation district in Iowa City is unique. Not all
of the properties within each district are historic. In order to address the individual nature of the
districts and also to be as flexible as possible with non-historic properties, the Historic
Preservation Commission has developed four different categories of compliance. This makes it
possible for owners and contractors to identify those guidelines that are applicable to a particular
project. The chart on the next page shows the type of project in the first column and the
guidelines that apply in the last four columns. These are the guidelines the Commission uses
when considering certificates of appropriateness. The four categories of compliance are listed
below.
· Iowa City Guidelines (Category I): This category provides guidelines for maintenance,
alterations, and additions to historic landmarks and contributing structures in historic districts.
The guidelines for this category were written by the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission and are based upon the SecretaN of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation,
· Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions (Category II): This category provides guidelines for
alterations and additions to noncontributing structures in historic districts, for properties that lie
within conservation districts, and for setback additions to historic properties that meet the
setback addition requirements (page 5) to visually distinguish the addition from the historic
property.
· Architecture Compatible to Individual District (Category III): This category provides guidelines
for new structures within historic or conservation districts. The guidelines establish
architectural design criteria based upon the defining characteristics of each individual district.
To locate the individual district guidelines, refer to the Table of Contents.
· Site and Scale Compatible to Individual District (Category IV): This category provides
guidelines for additions and new buildings within historic or conservation districts and is written
to accommodate any architectural style or age. The guidelines establish scale and site
considerations based upon the defining characteristics of each individual district. To locate the
individual district guidelines, refer to the Table of Contents.
Note: If the guidelines for an individual district (Category III & IV) have not yet been approved,
then the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation will serve in their place.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 5
Categories of Compliance (continued)
To use the table below, locate the appropriate type of project in the first column and move across
the row to determine the categories that apply depending on whether the structure is located in a
historic district or in a conservation district. The project need conform to only those categories
indicated. Within each district's individual guidelines, one can find a listing of all contributing
structures. To locate the individual district guidelines, refer to the Table of Contents. Example: an
alteration to a primary structure, i.e., a main house, considered a contributing structure would
need to comply with the Iowa City Guidelines in a historic district and with the Iowa City Guidelines
with Exceptions in a conservation district.
I II III IV
Type of Project Iowa City Guidelines Iowa City Architecture Site and Scale
Guidelines with Compatible to Compatible to
Exceptions Individual District Individual District
Alteration: Primary Structure Historic Conservation
(contributing structure) District District
Alteration: Primary Structure Conservation and
(noncontributing structure) Historic District
Addition: Street Elevation Historic Conservation Conservation and
(contributing structure) District District Historic Distdct
Addition: Street Elevation Conservation and Conservation and
(noncontributing structure) Historic District Historic District
Setback Addition Conservation and Conservation and
(contributing structure) Histodc District Historic District
Setback Addition Conservation and Conservation and
(noncontributing structure) Historic District Historic District
Alteration or Addition: Historic Conservation Conservation and
Outbuilding (contributing) District District Historic District
Alteration or Addition: Conservation and Conservation and
Outbuilding (noncontributing) Historic District Historic District
New Primary Structure Conservation and Conservation and
Historic District Historic District
New Outbuilding behind Conservation and Conservation and
Contributing Structure Historic District Historic District
New Outbuilding behind Conservation and Conservation and
Noncontributing Structure Historic District Historic District
Note: New structures of three or more dwelling units should comply with Multi-Family Construction
Guidelines that begin on page 21.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk doc 6
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
· The SecretaN of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards) were originally written
to determine the appropriateness of proposed project work on properties that were listed on
the National Register of Historic Places. The Standards are accompanied by instructions
concerning methods, materials, historical character, and other considerations that relate to the
historical significance of the particular property and its surroundings. The Standards have
been widely accepted by state, county, and city governments.
· The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission uses the Standards to determine the
appropriateness of exterior changes to Historic Landmarks and properties that are designated
as contributing structures in historic districts. The Standards apply to all maintenance,
alteration, and additions to contributing structures in historic districts except for setback
additions as defined on page 5.
· The Standards served as a starting point for writing the Iowa City Guidelines.
· The Standards are listed below.
(1) A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires
minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.
(2) The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic
materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
(3) Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes
that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or
architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.
(4) Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in
their own right shall be retained and preserved.
(5) Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that
characterizes a historic property shall be preserved.
(6) Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of
deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old
design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement
of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
ppdadnVhpc-handbk.doc 7
(7) Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic
materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be
undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
(8) Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If
such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.
(9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic
materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and
shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the
historic integrity of the property and its environment.
(10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a
manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property
and its environment would be unimpaired.
IOWA CITY GUIDELINES
· The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission relied upon the Standards while writing the
guidelines that comprise the category Iowa City Guidelines. These guidelines were written to
provide more detailed guidance to property owners and builders as they design their
construction projects. The Commission believes that the Iowa City Guidelines will be
complete enough to address most projects; however, there may be occasions when the
Commission refers to portions of the Standards and their accompanying instructions in
determining certain issues.
· Most sections of Iowa City Guidelines include provisions that apply only to those projects that
fit into the category Iowa CitV Guidelines with Exceptions. Those projects are: additions and
alterations to noncontributing structures in historic districts, setback additions to contributing
structures in historic districts that meet the setback addition requirements (page 5), and
projects in conservation districts. These exceptions are intended to make it easier and less
expensive to undertake projects that do not directly affect the appearance of contributing
structures. However, since the exceptions define only the minimum requirements, property
owners are encouraged to follow the Iowa City Guidelines whenever possible. The exceptions
are listed within each section to which they apply.
· The Iowa City Guidelines are organized into fourteen sections that follow.
ppdadmlhpc-handbk.doc 8
FOUNDATIONS
Foundations provide a base for a building and make a transition from the walls above ground to
the walls or supports below ground. The amount of exposed foundation varies with historic
structures but is typically 12 to 30 inches. On brick or stone structures the foundation material
may be different in color and texture than the wall material, and the two are often separated by a
belt course of yet another material.
Recommended: D isallowed:
· Retaining the size and shape of original door · Covering exposed brick, stone, and rusticated
openings, window openings, and storm cellar masonry foundations with a cement plaster or
entrances in the foundation. If new window wells stucco.
are required, they should match the existing
foundation material. Not Recommended
· Removing all non-original materials. · Raising the adjacent grade at the foundation to
· Repairing foundations to match the original cover whatwasoriginallyexposed.
materials in size, color, texture, composition, and · Painting masonry or concrete foundations that
joint profile. were originally unpainted.
· Repairing stucco with a mixture that matches the
original in texture, color, and composition.
· Maintaining a slope away from the foundation to
prevent standing water or drainage toward the
foundation. The following apply to Category II,
· Constructing additions that match the original
Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions
foundations in color, texture, unit size, and joint
profile.
· For additions to foundations, concrete or rusticated
concrete block may be used in place of the original
masonry units.
· For additions to foundations, it is acceptable to
match the color of the original foundation by using
paint or masonry stain rather than matching the
matedal and appearance of the odginal foundation
material.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 9
MASONRY
Masonry is designed to resist weathering without paint or any other protective coating while
retaining an appealing appearance. As such, it is a relatively maintenance-free material. When
there is deterioration of masonry, the single most important step is to locate and repair the cause
of the problem before going to the expense and trouble to repair the masonry. When repairing
masonry, three important properties should be considered: hardness, dimension, and color.
Recommended: Disal Iowed:
· Removing all vines. Vines cause the masonry to · Sandblasting, waterblasting, or any other abrasive
retain moisture. Their root-like holdfasts can cleaning method. Blasting can cause very serious
cause damagetomortarjoints. damage by destroying the protective exterior
· Removing deteriorated mortar by hand. Raking surface and exposing the softer interior to rapid
the joints with hand tools will not damage the brick. deterioration. This damage cannot be repaired,
· Replacing deteriorated masonry units with ones · Removing mortar with electric grinders or
that match the color, texture, size, and hardness of hammers. Use of such tools leads to chipping and
the original. breaking of masonry.
· Using mortar that is similar in hardness to the · Pointing with a strong Portland cement mix or
original. A recommended mix for old masonry synthetic caulking compound.
contains 1 part white Portland cement, 3 parts · Painting or sealing historic masonry that has not
lime, and 9 parts sand. If necessary, color may be been painted.
added to match the original mortar. This mix is
suitable for both laying and pointing masonry
walls.
· Making mortar joints that match the dimensions of
the original. Old mortar joints are often narrower The following apply to Category II,
than those commonly used today. Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions
· Cleaning new mortar smears from the masonry
face with a mild acid designed for that purpose.
· Additions to masonry structures may be sided with
· Cleaning old masonry using a natural bristle brush
wood. The siding type must be appropriate to the
and mild, water-based detergent. Sometimes a
age of the original building. The trim should be
gentle chemical method may be appropriate, but
appropriate to both the siding type and the original
only if it does not damage the masonry.
building. Any substitute materials must be
· Constructing additions to match the color, texture,
durable, accept paint, and be approved by the
unit size, and joint profile of the original masonry.
Historic Preservation Commission.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 10
WOOD
Most of the structures in Iowa City's historic districts are of wood frame construction and have
wood siding. Many dwellings have wood elements such as trim, windows, doors, porches,
cornices, decorative elements, and pediments. While wood is relatively inexpensive, durable, and
easy to work with, it must be maintained properly to have a long life.
Recommended:
Disallowed:
· Repairing wood elements rather than replacing
them. · Covering original wood siding with another
· Duplicating and replacing original wood elements material such as vinyl or aluminum siding.
when they cannot be repaired. · Using destructive and dangerous paint removal
· Replacing damaged wood siding with new or methods such as sandblasting, waterblasting, or
salvaged wood siding that matches the original. burning with a propane or butane torch.
· Monitoring wood surfaces for signs of excessive · Removal of wood elements such as trim, porches,
water damage, rot, or pest infestation. Keeping all cornices, and decorative elements.
surfaces caulked, primed, and painted in order to · Substituting a material in place of wood that does
prevent wood deterioration. not retain the appearance, function, and
· Eliminating excessive moisture problems such as paintability of the original wood.
leaky roofs, gutters, and downspouts. The
improper venting of baths, kitchens, basements,
and dryers may cause moisture problems.
· Removing vegetation that is growing against the The following apply to Category II,
wood elements or siding. Iowa City Guidelines with Excel~tions
· Constructing additions with materials that match
the siding, trim, moldings, and other details of the
· The window trim, door trim, skirt and frieze boards,
original building, and corner boards on additions must be similar to
· Substituting a material in place of wood only if the
those on the existing building. However, other
substitute material retains the appearance and
details of the original building may be omitted,
function of the original wood. The substitute
simplified, or enhanced on additions as long as
material must be durable, accept paint, and be
they are compatible with the existing structure.
approved by the Historic Preservation
Commission.
ppdadrn/hpc-handbk.doc 11
MASS AND ROOF LINES
Mass and roof pitch are essential in defining historic styles. Most of the roofs in historic
neighborhoods were originally sawn cedar shingles. The texture of the wood shingles on the
steep-pitched roofs was a prominent feature of historic neighborhoods early in the last century. A
building permit is not required for replacing shingles and therefore the color of shingles is not
enforced by city ordinance.
Recommended: Disallowed:
· Preserving the original roof pitches and spans. · Reducing the pitch on one or both sides of a roof
· Preserving the original walls and vertical corners to gain headroom below the rafters.
that define the massing of the original building. · Adding dormers that are wider than ones
· Constructing additions that reflect the massing of commonly found in the neighborhood.
the original structure. This requires that the wall · Adding dormers that extend above the existing
areas and vertical corners as well as the roof peak of the roof.
pitches and spans all be consistent with the · Adding dormers that are closer than 3 feet to an
existing structure. existing gable end or hip. The intent here is to
· Matching the roof overhang of the existing building avoid interrupting the original roof lines.
when constructing additions. When the eave of an
addition intersects the eave of an existing NotRecommended:
structure, care should be taken to assure that the
· Installing antennas, vents, solar collectors,
two eaves align properly. The trim details of a new
skylights, or other mechanical devices on
overhang should match those of the existing prominent streetelevations.
structure.
· Preserving original trim such as crown mold, skirt
and frieze boards. and decorative metal. When
adding to an existing building, the original trim
The following apply to Category II,
should be matched on the sides and roof of the
new addition. Iowa City Guidelines with Excel~tions
· Adding dormers in a manner that does not
significantly alter the character of the existing · Dormers may be larger than those commonly
building. found in the neighborhood provided that the
· Replacing a special shingle style with a similar dormer does not seriously alter the character of
style when the old shingles need replacing. the building.
· Using asphalt shingles that resemble the texture
and color of weathered wood shingles for roofs
that had wood shingles originally.
· Painting metal roofs dark colors, usually dull red or
green.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 12
SIDING
Wood siding is prevalent throughout the historic neighborhoods in Iowa City. Most often it is plain
bevel type with an exposure between 3 and 5 inches; however, it is sometimes tongue and
groove, shiplap, or shingle type. This wood siding along with the trim details and a multitude of
paint colors combine to make one of the most important defining characteristics of the historic
districts. This display of detail and color is essential to the character of the old neighborhoods,
and therefore must be protected by the design guidelines.
The primary threat to the traditional appearance of the old neighborhoods has come with the
application of synthetic siding. This has been installed in an effort to avoid periodic painting.
While synthetic siding will last longer than a paint job, it does deteriorate over time and does need
to be replaced when it fades, cracks, dents, or deteriorates. The application of synthetic siding
covers many architectural details of a building, damages the original siding and trim, and in some
cases, necessitates the removal of historic elements altogether. For all of the reasons stated
above, the covering of historic properties with synthetic siding is not allowed.
Recommended: Disal Iowed:
· Repairing existing wood siding and trim. · Applying synthetic siding such as aluminum, vinyl,
or false masonry siding.
· Replacing deteriorated sections of wood siding
· Removing trim pieces such as door and window
with new wood siding that matches the original.
trim, skid and frieze boards, and corner boards.
· Removing synthetic siding and repairing original
· Covering trim such as door and window trim, skid
wood siding and trim.
and frieze boards, and corner boards.
· Applying siding to a new addition that matches the
· Using synthetic siding on additions instead of the
size, shape, texture, and material of the original original siding or a substitute material approved by
siding. the Historic Preservation commission.
· Substituting a material in place of wood siding only
if the substitute material retains the appearance Synthetic Siding Exception
and function of the original wood. The substitute
· Synthetic siding may be used on new structures
material must be durable, accept paint, and be
and on noncontributing structures within
approved by the Historic Preservation
Commission. conservation districts.
· Matching synthetic siding may be used in repairing
damage to existing synthetic siding.
ppdadmlhpc-handbk,doc 13
PAINT AND COLOR
Paint schemes should be simple. One color for the body of the house, one for the trim, and one
for accent is usually enough. Colors should be selected to complement the style and period of the
building. The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission has literature that recommends
historically appropriate paint colors. For information please contact the planning office. A building
permit is not required for painting and these recommendations are not enforced by city
ordinances.
Recommended: Not Recommended:
· Removing loose and peeling paint and cleaning · Dry sanding, dry scraping, sandblasting or using
the surfaces to be painted in accordance with high-pressure sprayers to remove paint from
pertinent State and Federal guidelines. Practices masonry or wood.
that help reduce the potential for the creation of · Using high heat or open flames for paint removal.
lead dust, such as misting surfaces with water · Using paint strippers containing methylene
when scraping, are encouraged. Old paint that is chloride.
sound and reasonably smooth should be left in ,, Other practices that involve a high potential to
place as a foundation for the new paint. create lead dust are discouraged by State and
· Using a proper respirator to avoid breathing the Federal guidelines.
fumes or dust from lead-based paint. · Choosing bright, obtrusive colors.
· Collecting and properly disposing of paint chips · Painting a building entirely white.
and other waste.
· Pdming, caulking, and finishing with high-quality
products.
· Choosing a scheme of 2 or 3 colors that is
appropriate to both the building and to the
immediate neighborhood.
· Painting additions to match the original building.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 14
WINDOWS
The type, proportion, and trim of windows create one of the most important defining
characteristics of the buildings in historic neighborhoods. Most often these windows are double-
hung, but the trim varies depending on the architectural style and materials of the building.
Generally these windows are considerably taller than wide, and they are aligned vertically between
floors.
Recommended: Disallowed:
· Preserving the existing windows by repairing · Installing modern types of windows including
sashes and frames. sliding, awning, casement, and bay windows when
· Retaining original window frames by replacing they were not original to the building.
badly deteriorated sashes with new sashes. · Installing metal or vinyl windows when they were
· Replacing badly deteriorated windows with new not original to the building.
ones that match the size, trim, use of divided · Installing metal or vinyl storm windows.
lights, and overall appearance of the original · Using snap-in muntin bars to achieve divided
windows. The replacements for wood windows lights.
must be made of wood. The use of metal-clad, · Installing shutters on windows that did not
solid-wood windows is acceptable. Replacement originally have shutters.
windows and trim must accept paint. Divided · Leaving large expanses of wall surface
lights may be created with muntins that are uninterrupted by windows.
adhered to both sides of the glass, but not with
snap-in muntin bars. The following apply to Category II,
· Adding windows that match the proportions, trim,
Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions
and appearance of the original windows.
· Aligning vertically the windows on different floors
of a building where appropriate. Often historic · Modern window types may be used in additions
buildings had windows of the same width "stacked" provided that they have overall proportions
one above the other. comparable to those found in the existing building.
The windows must be trimmed to match the
· Installing traditional wood storm windows and
screens on older buildings. original ones in the building. The windows may be
installed side by side, but they must have trim
· Installing wood-frame combination storm windows
between them if that was the method used on the
with screens that resemble traditional wood storm
windows. The use of metal-clad, wood-frame existing building. Transom-like or half-round fixed
combination storm windows is acceptable. Storm glass units may be used if they create a traditional-
windows must accept paint. looking window arrangement consistent with the
original building style.
· Replacing deteriorated or missing shutters with
ones that match the odginal in appearance and
size. They must be installed in a position to look
as if they were hinged and operable.
15
DOORS
The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained. Many older entrance doors
are of panel-type construction or solid frames with glass lights in the upper part of the door. Old
storm doom are often wood doors with removable sashes. These old door styles should be used
when it is necessary to replace original doors. Old garage doors often possess distinctive design
features and should be retained wherever possible.
Recommended: Disal Iowed:
· Repairing original doors rather than replacing · Installing flush entrance doom or other modern
them. door styles.
· Replacing badly deteriorated doors with new ones · Installing sliding patio doors when they were not
that are similar in size, material, style, and original tothebuilding.
appearance. · Installing natural aluminum storm doors.
· Installing doors in additions that match the · Blocking down door openings to accommodate
material, style, and appearance of original doors in standard door sizes.
the building. · Installing a double garage door where two single
· Installing French doors (or doom of a similar style) doom are possible.
in additions where a large opening is desired.
· Installing a wood screen door that accepts sashes
with glass or screen. The following apply to Category II,
· Substituting a matedal in place of wood for doors
Iowa City Guidelines with Excel3tions
and screen doors only if the substitute material
retains the style and appearance of the original
doors and screen doors. The substitute material · Installing sliding patio doom provided that the
must be durable, accept paint, and be approved openings are trimmed to match the existing doors
and provided that they are not installed on the
by the Historic Preservation Commission.
street elevation.
· Retaining and repairing original garage doors
where practical.
· Installing new garage doors that mimic the styles
of traditional ones.
· Installing new garage doors that are simple in
design. Smooth or simple panel-type doors may
be used. Openings should be trimmed to match
other doors and windows in the building. Two
single doors are preferred to one double door.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 16
GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS
Original built-in gutters are important design features of historic buildings. Removing these
requires a building permit that must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. A
building permit is not required for replacing external gutters.
Recommended: Disallowed:
· Repairing original built-in gutters. EPDM rubber · Altering the roof slope near the gutter when
sheet is an economical replacement material for covering old built-in gutters.
the original tin flashing.
· Constructing built-in gutters in additions to existing
buildings that have built-in gutters. The following apply to Category II,
· Covering original built-in gutters and applying Iowa City Guidelineswith Exceptions
exterior gutters only if the roof slope at the gutter is
not altered. This can be accomplished with · Additions need not have built-in gutters unless the
horizontal blocking and flashing above the old new gutters align with the built-in gutters of the
gutter. existing building. For instance, a one-story addition
· Installing metal downspouts to run vertically near need not have built-in gutters if it is attached to a
the corners. They should be painted to match the two-story wall.
background color.
CHIMNEYS
Chimneys are subject to severe weathering conditions and generally need more frequent
maintenance than other masonry on a building. The methods for preserving masonry chimneys
are the same ones used for other masonry.
Recommended:
Disallowed:
· Adding a flue liner for safety reasons.
· Keeping flue caps as inconspicuous as possible. · Removing prominent chimneys that are important
· Following the recommendations for masonry to the historical character of the building.
repair in the section on masonry. · Plastering over masonry in place of proper repair.
· Constructing new chimneys in masonry that are · Pointing with pre-mixes that are too hard for old,
consistent with chimneys that were built in the soft brick.
neighborhood originally.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 17
PORCHES
Porches are the focus of many historic buildings and help define their overall character. In historic
residential neighborhoods, porches help to establish a sense of community. Porches should be
preserved for both their architectural and social value.
Recommended: Disallowed:
· Repairing existing porches and conserving as · Removing a historic front porch.
much of the original material as possible. · Changing the original roof pitch. Newer materials
· Replacing badly deteriorated pieces with new ones including EPDM rubber sheet and heat-sealed
that match the originals in design and material. asphalt products make the maintenance of low-
Custom fabrication of columns, brackets, pitched roofs easier than in years past.
pedestals, and moldings may be necessary, but · Using wrought iron elements unless they were pad
many porch components can be ordered through of the original design.
lumber yards. · Using unpainted treated wood for elements that
· Vertical-grained fir porch flooring should be used would have been painted in their original
for its resistance to weathering. applications.
· Reconstructing missing balustrades and handrails · Using pre-cast concrete steps.
using old photographs or in a style that is · Substituting a material in place of wood that does
appropriate to both the building and neighbor-hood not retain the appearance, function, and
(the next section has more details). paintability of the original wood.
· Using wood steps for a wood porch and tile, brick,
or concrete steps for a masonry porch.
· Showing the lower support pillars below the porch
columns. Lattice or skirting should be positioned
between pillars. The following apply to Category II,
· Enclosing only a portion of a front porch with Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions
screen to provide a sitting area that is away from
the steps and front entrance of the home. The
· Porch floors may be concrete if the floor is no
screening should be set behind the columns and
more than 18 inches above grade. Porch floors
balustrades to preserve the original appearance of
that are more than 18 inches above grade must be
the porch.
built in a traditional way with wood joists and wood
· Constructing new porches that are compatible with
flooring.
the existing building or similar to those original
porches in the neighborhood.
· Substituting a material in place of wood only if the
substitute material retains the appearance and
function of the original wood. The substitute must
be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the
Historic Preservation Commission.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk. doc 18
BALUSTRADES AND HANDRAILS
Balustrades and handrails serve as both decorative and functional elements on porches,
balconies, and steps. For historic properties, the design should reflect historic styles, but not at
the expense of safety.
Recommended: Disal Iowed:
· Repairing existing balustrades and railings. · Removing original balustrades or railings.
· Replacing badly deteriorated pieces with ones that · Covering the original balustrades or railings with
match the originals in design and material. materials such as siding.
· Reconstructing missing balustrades by using old · Using unpainted treated wood for elements that
photographs or by choosing a style that is would have been painted in the historic
appropriate to both the building and neighborhood. application.
· Installing turned spindles in balustrades that have · Using wrought iron elements unless they were part
an actual diameter of 2" or greater or square ofthe original design.
spindles that are 2" or greater in width.
· Installing handrails and footrails that are at least 2"
in thickness. These can be made with % -inch and
5/4-inch stock added together. The following apply to Category II,
· Spacing spindles so that no point between the Iowa City Guidelines with Exceptions
spindles exceeds 4 inches. This is for child safety.
· Providing handrails on porch steps as required by
· Square spindles may be installed in place of
code. Handrails should match the balustrade
turned spindles in balustrades. These must be 2"
height on the porch unless otherwise specified by
or greater in width.
the Building Code. The handrail must have a
continuous member that can be easily gripped.
The handrail should either match the porch
balustrade or be made of round iron pipe.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk. doc 19
HANDICAP ACCESSIBILITY
The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission will approve certificates of appropriateness for
modifications that accommodate reasonable access and use by disabled occupants provided
those modifications do not significantly alter the historic character of the building. The Historic
Preservation Commission will work with applicants to find designs that will accommodate their
needs consistent with the historic character of the building.
DEMOLITION
· Unless otherwise provided in individual conservation district guidelines, a certificate of
appropriateness for the demolition of any primary contributing structure will be denied unless
the applicant can demonstrate that the building is structurally unsound and irretrievable. A
certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of a contributing outbuilding will be determined
on a case by case basis.
· Before a certificate of appropriateness for demolition will be approved for a particular site, the
Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission must approve a certificate of appropriateness for
the structure that will replace the one being demolished. This is true for both contributing and
noncontributing structures.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 20
Proposed Design Standards for Multi-Family Buildings Proposed Within Historic and
Conservation Districts
Draft: March 28, 2000
A. Mandatory Compliance Items: Compliance with the following design standards must
be demonstrated prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Setback, Front: The front yard setback shall comply with the setback requirements
established within the appropriate individual district guidelines. If no setback requirement
is established within the district guidelines, the following standard shall apply. The
building setback shall not deviate from the average setback of existing structures on its
street frontage by more than 5 feet, and in no case shall a new building be located closer
to the street than the existing principle building on its frontage with the shallowest
setback. The setbacks of existing buildings shall be measured at the first floor wall of the
main living area or commercial floor area of the building, excluding a covered or enclosed
porch. If front porches are prevalent on existing structures, the new building may contain
a covered front porch that extends into the front yard, provided it is located no closer to
the street than any of the other porches on its block.
Lighting: All exterior lighting, including balcony and porch lighting, shall be carefully
placed, downcast and shielded so that entrances, sidewalks and stairways are well lit, but
the lighting is non-obtrusive to neighboring properties. No exterior light source should be
located on poles more than 15 feet high. When lights mounted on buildings are intended
to provide site lighting rather than corridor or exit lighting, they shall be mounted no higher
than 15 feet. Lights intended to architecturally highlight a building or its features shall use
a limited pattern of light that does not extend beyond the wall of the building.
Parking: Parking lots, including detached garages and carports, shall not be located
between the principle building and the street. Parking shall be located behind a building,
below grade, or under a building. On corner lots parking may be located alongside the
building, but not within a required front or side yard and no closer than 20 feet to the
sidewalk. Landscaped screening consisting of densely planted evergreen shrubs, a hedge,
a combination of evergreen and deciduous shrubs, or a decorative masonry wall in
combination with landscaping shall be used to screen the parking from the street and
adjacent properties.
Parking Below Buildings: Where parking is located below a building, any exposed portions
of the exterior walls of the parking area visible from a street and extending more than
three feet above the ground shall appear to be a component of the facade of the building.
The use of similar building materials, window openings, and providing facade detailing
similar to the upper levels are examples of how this can be achieved. In no case shall a
building have the appearance from the street of being elevated above a parking level, or
"on stilts."
Garages: When parking is provided within the primary structure, garage doors should not
be located on any side of a building facing a street. When located on a side wall or on a
rear wall on a corner lot, landscaping, masonry walls, or elements of the building should
be used to help screen the garage doors from view from the street.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 2 1
Building Orientation: Orientation of the "front" of the building shall be to the street in a
manner similar to existing buildings in the neighborhood, including an entrance with some
architectural emphasis provided on the front of the building. Architectural treatments which
emphasize the entrance include, but are not limited to, front porches, transom and sidelight
windows, decorative trim and moldings, and/or arches.
Pedestrian Access: A sidewalk shall be provided that connects the entrance door or porch
to the public sidewalk.
Balconies/Decks: Balconies and decks should be designed so that they are integrated into
the overall design of the building. Methods of integrating balconies into the building design
may include, but are not limited to, fully or partially recessing them into the fa.cade of the
building, placing them under a roof that is integrated into the overall roof plan, utilizing
supports that are compatible with the rest of the building in terms of materials and design,
and utilizing supports that reach to the ground rather than append on the exterior of the
building. When designed in such a manner, balconies and decks may encroach into the
required front yard, provided they are located no closer to the street than any porches on
the street frontage. Balconies and decks shall be placed adjacent to the front or rear yard
rather than the side yard.
Mechanical Equipment/Utility Meters: Outdoor dumpsters, mechanical equipment and
meters shall be placed at the rear of the property whenever possible. If this cannot be
achieved, they may be located along the side of the building provided that extensive
landscaping, a decorative masonry wall, a combination of the two, or another approved
material is used to screen these items. In no case shall these items be located along the
street side of a building.
Building Height/Mass: Measures should be incorporated into the design of a new building
that help to reduce its "visual mass" and overall height. Examples include 1) holding the
height of the eave line down by making the upper floor of a building a "half" story and
utilizing dormers to accommodate the use of floor area; 2) stepping the height of a taller
building down to two stories at ends adjacent to existing buildings that are two-stories or
lower in height; and 3) providing significant variations in the roofline and front building
plane which help to reduce the scale of the building along the streetscape.
Roofline: Rooflines should reflect the predominant roof type, orientation, scale and pitch
of existing buildings within the neighborhood.
Building Modulation: The street elevation setback should be varied such that no
continuous wall plane or surface exceeds 35 feet in length, and such that variations
between wall planes or surfaces are at least 18 inches in depth. Variations in wall planes
should be accompanied by corresponding changes in the roofline and other architectural
elements of the building.
Windows/Fenestration: The placement of windows and doors on street elevations should be
consistent with the window and door patterns found on other properties in the surrounding
neighborhood, and of a similar size, scale and proportion to the windows of other buildings
in the neighborhood. The use of trim and moldings shall be similar in width and character to
surrounding buildings.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 22
Building Styles: Design elements from existing architectural styles found on contributing
structures within the district, such as building form, rooflines, window patterns, building
materials, entranceways, and architectural detailing, shall be incorporated into the design
of new buildings to help them fit within the context of the district.
B. Design Point Items: A total of 20 points from the following design options must be
obtained prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Vehicular Access: The use of alley access to the parking area, thus minimizing paving
within front yards. This may necessitate the improvement of the public alley in order to
provide a suitable access to the site. (3 points)
Paving Materials: The use of textured paving, such as stamped and colored concrete,
exposed aggregate, brick, or cobblestone patterns, to improve the appearance of paved
areas and to designate pedestrian walkways. (0-3 points)
Setback, Side: The provision of a side yard of 10 feet or more from both side lot lines, or
an interior side lot line on a corner lot. (5 points)
Porches: The incorporation of a covered front porch (or porches, where appropriate) of an
appropriate size and scale in areas where porches are prevalent on existing structures
within the surrounding neighborhood. A front porch helps provide a transition between
the public street and the private residential use of the interior of the building, and can help
a building fit within an existing neighborhood by adding detail and interest to the facade of
the building. Front porches must be covered by a roof that is compatible with the roof
over the rest of the structure. The evaluation of a proposed porch shall take into
consideration its compatibility with the design of the proposed structure, its "usability",
and its compatibility with other porches in the surrounding neighborhood. (0-10 points)
Building Height: The provision of a building height along the street elevation of 27 feet or
less. (5 points)
Architectural Details: The provision of architectural details to add interest to building
elevations visible from the public street, including but not limited to the following:
Quoins, dentils, cornice moldings, brackets, arches, corner boards, keystones, decorative
lintels and sills, double-hung windows, soldier courses, belt courses, bay windows,
decorative site lighting and other decorative features as appropriate for the design of the
overall building and materials being used. In awarding points under this guideline, the use
of these elements shall be reviewed in the context of the overall building design and the
character of the historic district, and not simply based on the provision of these
architectural details. (0-10 points)
Building Base/Exposed Foundation: Incorporating a raised foundation or a "base" into the
design of a new building. The utilization of a material that differs from the primary
exterior building material at the base of the building, such as stone, brick of a different
color or size than that used for the overall building, or other durable masonry material, can
be used to give the appearance of a raised foundation. (0-2 points)
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 23
Building Materials: The use of quality exterior building materials historically used within
Iowa City's older neighborhoods is preferred.
1) Building materials will be evaluated as follows.
ALL MASONRY: The use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as the exterior
finish material for the entire building, with the exception of trim and decorative
elements that may consist of alternative but compatible materials. The term masonry
shall not include concrete block or poured concrete materials, except when rusticated
concrete block or decorative concrete is used as a base or exposed foundation
material. (7-10 points)
PREDOMINANTLY MASONRY WITH STUCCO OR WOOD: The use of brick, stone, or
other masonry product(s) as the primary exterior building material in combination with
the less substantial use of stucco, wood, or fiber cement siding. (5-10 points)
PREDOMINANTLY STUCCO OR WOOD WITH MASONRY: The use of brick, stone, or
other masonry product(s) as a secondary exterior building material in combination
with primary materials consisting of stucco, wood, or fiber cement materials as
discussed below. (3-8 points)
ALL STUCCO OR WOOD: The use of stucco or other similar material(s) that conveys a
stucco appearance, or wood or fiber-cement products that are wood-like in
appearance, as the exterior finish material for the entire building. Acceptable wood
or fiber-cement products include shakes, shingles, or painted horizontal clapboard
siding composed of three (3) to eight (8) inch wide boards. (3-7 points)
PREDOMINANTLY MASONRY WITH VINYL OR METAL: Vinyl or metal siding is not
permitted on new buildings within historic districts. Within conservation districts, the
use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as the primary exterior building
material in combination with the less substantial use of vinyl or metal lap siding. (3-5
points)
PREDOMINANTLY VINYL OR METAL WITH MASONRY: Vinyl or metal siding is not
permitted on new buildings within historic districts. Within conservation districts, the
use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as a secondary exterior building
material in combination with primary materials consisting of vinyl or metal lap siding
in a clapboard pattern. (0-2 points)
2) Materials or material combinations not listed above may be approved, provided that it is
determined that the material will add interest to the facade of the building and that it is
compatible with or similar in appearance to materials found on other buildings within the
neighborhood. (0-5)
3) The following guidelines shall be used to evaluate building designs that incorporate
more than one exterior finish material:
ppdadm/hpc-handbk.doc 24
Material changes to the vertical plane of the building should be separated by a belt
course, soldier course, or some other trim to provide a transition from one material to
the other.
Material changes to the horizontal plane of the building should not occur along flat
planes of any street fa,cade of the building, but rather at interior corners or at major
reveals.
Where a material change from masonry to a different material is proposed at a front
corner of the building, the masonry shall be extended onto the secondary fa,cade at
least 2 feet.
C- Alternative Designs: Alternative design solutions or exceptions to the mandatory
standards will be considered if it is demonstrated by the applicant that strict compliance
with a specific standard is not practical, and/or the alternative being proposed will help in
achieving a development that is compatible with the district or would provide some
environmental benefit.
ppdadm/hpc-handbk, cioc 25
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM
OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATED COST FOR REMOVAL AND
REPLACEMENT OF A PORTION OF THE ROOF AND INSULATION
ON THE CIVIC CENTER IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER PERSONS
INTERESTED:
Public notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will conduct a
public heating on plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost for the removal and
replacement of a portion of the roof and insulation on the Civic Center in said City at 7:00 p.m.
on the 13th day of June, 2000, said meeting to be held in the Council Chambers in the Civic
Center in said City.
Said plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated cost are now on file in the office of the
City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any persons
interested.
Any persons interested may appear at said meeting of the City Council for the purpose of making
objections to said plans, specifications, contract or the cost of making said improvement.
This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 13th
day of June, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
of the City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at
the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a Resolution of Intent to
Convey 1512 Dickenson Lane to a qualifying
family under the Affordable Dream Home
Program. Copies of the proposed resolution are
on file for public examination in the office of the
City Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARlAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
Annen\forms~ADHOP Notice PH.doc
Publish the following 5 notices on bonds on May 30. Extra proofs ASAP.
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
$12,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR AN ESSENTIAL
CORPORATE PURPOSE) OF SAID CITY, AND THE HEARING ON
THE ISSUANCE THEREOF
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa,
will hold a public hearing on the 13th day of June, 2000, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., in the
Council Chambers, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes
to take additional action for the issuance of $12,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for an
essential corporate purpose of said City, in order to provide funds to pay costs of the
construction, reconstruction, and repairing of improvements to streets, sidewalks and
public ways and of facilities useful for the collection and disposal of surface waters and
streams; the rehabilitation, improvement and equipping of existing city parks; the
reconstruction, extension and improvement of the Municipal Airport; the improvement
of real estate for cemeteries and the construction and reconstruction of other cemetery
facilities and the equipping of the Fire Department.
At the above meeting the Council shall receive oral or written objections from any
resident or property owner of said City, to the above action. After all objections have
been received and considered, the Council will at this meeting or at any adjournment
thereof, take additional action for the issuance of said bonds or will abandon the proposal
to issue said bonds.
This notice is given by order of the Council of Iowa City, Iowa, as provided by
Section 384.25 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated this 30th day of May, 2000.
s/Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
NOT TO EXCEED $700,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR A GENERAL CORPORATE PURPOSE),
AND HEARING ON ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS
Public Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will
hold a public hearing on the 13th day of June, 2000, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., in the Council
Chambers, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes to take
action for the issuance of not to exceed $700,000 of General Obligation Bonds, bearing
interest at the rate of not to exceed 9 per centum per annum, said bonds to be issued for
the purpose of providing funds to pay costs of the acquisition, enlargement,
improvement and equipping of a Public Works Complex.
This Notice is given by order of the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
At any time before the date of said meeting, a petition, asking that the question of
issuing such bonds be submitted to the legal voters of said City, may be filed with the
Clerk of said City in the manner provided by Section 362.4 of the City Code of Iowa,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 30th day of May, 2000.
s/Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
NOT TO EXCEED $330,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR A GENERAL CORPORATE PURPOSE),
AND HEARING ON ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS
Public Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will
hold a public hearing on the 13th day of June, 2000, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., in the Council
Chambers, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes to take
action for the issuance of not to exceed $330,000 of General Obligation Bonds, beating
interest at the rate of not to exceed 9 per centum per annum, said bonds to be issued for
the purpose of providing funds to pay costs of the enlargement, improvement and
equipping of a Parks Maintenance Facility.
This Notice is given by order of the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
At any time before the date of said meeting, a petition, asking that the question of
issuing such bonds be submitted to the legal voters of said City, may be filed with the
Clerk of said City in the manner provided by Section 362.4 of the City Code of Iowa,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 30th day of May, 2000.
s/Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
NOT TO EXCEED $580,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR A GENERAL CORPORATE PURPOSE),
AND HEARING ON ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS
Public Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will
hold a public hearing on the 13th day of June, 2000, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., in the Council
Chambers, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes to take
action for the issuance of not to exceed $580,000 of General Obligation Bonds, bearing
interest at the rate of not to exceed 9 per centum per annum, said bonds to be issued for
the purpose of providing funds to pay costs of the development, construction,
improvement and equipping of new or undeveloped city parks; roof repair,
improvements to the Civic Center; the purchase of computer equipment for City
buildings; the acquisition of art for public buildings.
This Notice is given by order of the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
At any time before the date of said meeting, a petition, asking that the question of
issuing such bonds be submitted to the legal voters of said City, may be filed with the
Clerk of said City in the manner provided by Section 362.4 of the City Code of Iowa,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 30th day of May, 2000.
s/Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
NOT TO EXCEED $700,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR A GENERAL CORPORATE PURPOSE),
AND HEARING ON ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS
Public Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will
hold a public hearing on the 13th day of June, 2000, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., in the Council
Chambers, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes to take
action for the issuance of not to exceed $700,000 of General Obligation Bonds, bearing
interest at the rate of not to exceed 9 per centum per annum, said bonds to be issued for
the purpose of providing funds to pay costs of the construction of an addition to the
Civic Center and renovation of existing portions thereof.
This Notice is given by order of the Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as
provided by Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
At any time before the date of said meeting, a petition, asking that the question of
issuing such bonds be submitted to the legal voters of said City, may be filed with the
Clerk of said City in the manner provided by Section 362.4 of the City Code of Iowa,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 30th day of May, 2000.
s/Marian K. Karr, City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa