Loading...
Minutes_Historic Preservation Commission 06.18.26City of Dubuque City Council ITEM TITLE: SUMMARY: SUGGUESTED DISPOSITION: ATTACHMENTS: Copyrighted August 3, 2026 CONSENT ITEMS # 1. Minutes and Reports Submitted City Council Proceedings of July 20, 2026; Historic Preservation Commission of June 18, 2026; Zoning Board of Adjustment of June 25, 2026. Receive and File 1. 7 20 26 City Council Minutes 2. Minutes ZBA 06-25-26 Approved 3. Minutes 06-18-26 - Approved Page 81 of 1281 Dubuque QpPmW(@d THE CITY OFD All MenpC UB E 1111 V 2007-2012.2013 Masterpiece on the Mississippi 2017*2019 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 5:30 p.m. Thursday, June 18, 2026 City Council Chambers, Historic Federal Building Commissioners Present: Acting Chairperson Bill Doyle; Commissioners, Christina Monk, Janice Esser, Heidi Pettitt, Rick Stuter, Adam Schwendinger Commissioners Excused: Tim Gau, Chad Witthoeft Commissioners Unexcused : None Staff Members Present: Chris Happ Olson, Shena Moon CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairperson at 5:30 p.m. Chairperson Janice Esser joined the meeting at 5:33 pm. MINUTES: Motion by Schwendinger, seconded by Pettitt, to approve the minutes of May 27, 2026 meeting as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote- Aye — Janice Esser, Bill Doyle, Christina Monk, Heidi Pettitt, Rick Stuter, Adam Schwendinger Nay — none. ACTION ITEMS: DESIGN REVIEW Applicant- Jeff Morton, Architect (agent for Four Mounds Foundation, site lessee) Owner: City of Dubuque Address- Four Mounds Estate, Dubuque Landmark Site (4900 Peru Rd) Project: Construct new freestanding ADA accessible Visitor Station District: Four Mounds Estate National Register Historic District Staff Member Happ Olson presented the staff report noting the applicant is architect Jeff Morton for Four Mounds Foundation, a non-profit organization which leases the Four Mounds site from the City of Dubuque and manages the site for the community. The organization proposes a new outdoor restroom tucked in the tall pines at the south edge of the cultured grounds. Four Mounds is one of two Landmark Sites designated in Dubuque. It is also a National Register Historic District. The structure comes under review by the Commission under its Landmark Page 97 of 1281 Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission — June 18, 2026 Page 2 Site status. She spoke to the proximity of the restroom to the existing ropes course and the nearby newer parking areas that were developed. The project is a new structure with a new purpose to meet the use of a site as it is used today for those visiting the grounds for a walk, attendance at the camp, or participating in the challenge ropes course. In 2021 a new water pump was installed in the garden locale and new parking, both paved and overflow, was added in 2022. In 2023, the Commission reviewed a larger design for the visitor station. She instructed the Commission that the new proposed visitor station should be reviewed as a new intrusion on the original site. Its design should both complement the site and context, while playing a diminutive role to the historic structures on site. She stated the introduction of a new structure to meet the changed needs of the site is appropriate. The plans do not indicate any signage for the structure or the grounds. Any new signage is outside the scope of this project and is subject to permitting and historic review. Happ Olson stated the new structure intends to mimic materials (dark stained cedar shingles, green three -tab asphalt roofing) from an existing structure nearby and on -site. She noted the proposed structure in its location is unusual and many of the new construction guidelines from the City's Architectural Guidelines do not apply, relating to commercial structures and residential districts with sidewalks, traditional zoning and setbacks. An abridged version of the guidelines is attached relating to the design review. Jeff Morton, 165 Bradley Street, applicant serving as architect for Four Mounds Foundation, spoke to the Commission. He said the structure has been reviewed by the Commission in the past, but this has been pared down and simplified. Commissioner Stuter asked if the structure will meet the American with Disabilities Act. Mr. Morton said yes, the structure will be the only one on site to meet ADA and will have a concrete walk to meet it. Commissioner Schwendinger asked if the structure will be used seasonally, and why the applicant is using three tab shingles. Mr. Morton replied there will be space heaters, but it will be shut down for the winter months. Happ Olson noted that a number of other structures have used the green, three tab shingles, including the woodshop, and that it is actually traditional on the site. Commissioner Schwendinger noted that as he works for the project general contractor, Gronen, he would abstain from the vote. Page 98 of 1281 Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission — June 18, 2026 Page 3 Motion by Monk, seconded by Esser, to approve the application as submitted, noting that the structure meets the guidelines with an appropriate location and is designed consistently with other structures on -site. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye - Janice Esser, Bill Doyle, Tim Gau, Christina Monk, Heidi Pettitt, Rick Stuter, Chad Witthoeft; Nay — none; Abstain - Adam Schwendinger. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: Matt Kline, recently appointed at the June 15th City Council meeting as a new commissioner to the Historic Preservation Commission, introduced himself. The Commission and staff introduced themselves. Chairperson Esser performed the Oath of Office for Commissioner Kline and Staff Member Happ Olson noted the Oaths of Office for Commissioners Monk and Witthoeft will be forthcoming in July. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: None. ITEMS FROM STAFF: Directive from City Council to rewrite Demolition Section in UDC code (expedited) Staff Member Happ Olson directed attention to the memo provided to the Commission. She stated that at the June 1 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the Historic Preservation Commission's review for the request to remove 2327 Central Avenue from the Broadway Neighborhood Conservation District. After almost an hour of discussion, and frustration expressed about the process, the Council approved the applicant's request. The frustration was over the fact that there is a work -around in our code that allows any citizen to request removal, which can pave the way for demolition, without going through a request to the Historic Preservation Commission. Knowing that Planning Services is currently undertaking an update to our Unified Development Code (UDC) which includes zoning, subdivision, and historic preservation, they ask that this portion of the code be removed and that alterations to a Conservation District must go before the Commission prior to coming to Council. She outlined that there are two sections in the code, referred to in the memo, which address this issue. She informed the Commission that staff will be drafting an ordinance for your review at the next Commission meeting. Much discussion followed regarding the code change and the issues around it. Questions, answers, comments and clarification included: • whether we'll be removing the process to go directly to City Council prior to the general update of the UDC, to which Happ Olson affirmed; • is there a timeline for when the update to the UDC would be complete, to which staff could not confirm; Page 99 of 1281 Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission — June 18, 2026 Page 4 when the new updated section of the code would be in place, and Happ Olson confirmed after City Council approves it; general frustration as to why the City Council approved the request to remove the Schmid Brewery from the Conservation District, noting that it isn't good practice to cut holes in the district; that the Commission should have weighed in on whether it should be removed, or been asked to go look at the structure, including getting proper documentation to determine whether the structure is essentially economically viable. Happ Olson noted that City Council has the ability to weigh more than what the code states that the Commission can weigh in making a decision. She noted that in the mini -training scheduled for later in the meeting, this would be discussed. She noted there was no action at this time requested of the Commission. Update on past and future trainings Happ Olson gave a brief update on the Preserve Iowa Summit. The summit was well attended and only two days, with a different format where there was no "host" community. They announced that the summit will be a biennial event instead of annual, but that the State Historic Preservation Office will offer more regional and virtual options for training. This particular summit seemed to have a heavier focus on archaeological and cultural resources. 2. Happ Olson noted that Commissioner Doyle, Planning Director Wally Wernimont, and she will be attending the upcoming NAPC Forum in late July in Minneapolis. 3. Review of Demolition and Economic Non -Viability in UDC code — Commissioner Mini -Training Happ Olson stated that the current Economic Non -Viability process is a difficult process for owners to prepare and for the Commission to evaluate. It generally only comes before the Commission only when there's a clear indication that the structure in question is historic and that a request for demolition might be denied. Alternatively, when structures are clearly not historic, staff does not encourage applicants to put forth an economic non - viability application, due to the work involved. Some of the issues to explore as we update the Unified Development Code should include potential staff signoff for clearly non -historic structures, whether in part or in whole. For instance, the demolition of the 1970s garage at 240 King Street, located in a conservation district would be a clear example. Alternatively, other demolitions might be included in a Design Review, such as the replacement of a garage at 195 Alpine Street, in a historic district, where there was no formal request for demolition of this Page 100 of 1281 Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission — June 18, 2026 Page 5 original contributing garage separate from the request to replace it with a new garage. Happ Olson reviewed the Economic Non -Viability application, noting that we ask many questions of the applicant, but we don't have an evaluation process outlined. She stated that the process is focused on the building, not on the personal situation of the owner. She stated that the Commission has the right and responsibility to require that the applicant adequately answer all the questions. Commissioner Doyle stated that now with the roll back of State Historic Tax Credits available for single family homes, there are less options to point to that allow for making a project economically feasible. Happ Olson noted that we don't require that people restore structures, we just want to ensure there is some reasonable use, i.e. bringing it up to code for use. Happ Olson referred to an example of the State of Michigan's questions their Commissions use to guide decision making when evaluating an Economic Non -Viability, or in the case of Michigan, Economic Hardship request: 1) Is the information sufficient? The application is never complete unless all the required information has been submitted. 2) Is the information relevant? Commissions may receive more information than they need, or they may get information that is not germane to the application, such as how much money a project could make if the historic property is demolished. The property owner is not entitled to the highest and best use of the property. 3) Is the information competent? Commissions must make assessments as to whether submitted information demonstrates what it purports to show. 4) Is the information credible? Commissions must determine whether submitted information is believable. For example, commissions must ascertain whether the applicants' figures make sense. 5) Is the information consistent? Commissions must look for inconsistencies in the statements made or the information submitted. Frequently, commissions will seek explanations regarding inconsistencies. In general, the Commission agreed that the questions were reasonable and helpful. Commissioners discussed that as we consider updating the UDC, that we ensure that when the Commission is giving staff power to make more decisions regarding demolitions, that we set clear parameters about what is allowed and what needs to come back to the Commission. Page 101 of 1281 Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission — June 18, 2026 Page 6 Happ Olson noted there was no action requested, but that the discussion was helpful and that the Commission has more work to do around the UDC. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Monk, seconded by Doyle to adjourn the June 18. 2026 Historic Preservation Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Janice Esser, Bill Doyle, Tim Gau, Christina Monk, Heidi Pettitt, Chad Witthoeft and Adam Schwendinger; Nay — none. The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, %,,,-,A, e a Moon, Associate Planner July 16, 2026 Adopted Page 102 of 1281