Loading...
Minutes_Historic Preservation Commission 1 15 15 Dubuque O THE CITY UB E OF � D T � D ��i�� MnsterpiecealtlreMississipyi n,,.,,,,.,e„ MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 5:30 p.m. Thursday, January 15, 2015 City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building Commissioners Present: Chairperson Bob McDonell; Commissioners Joseph Rapp, Christine Monk, David Klavitter and Mary Loney-Bichell. Commissioners Excused: Commissioners Otto Krueger, Chris Olson and John Whalen. Staff Members Present: David Johnson and Eric Van Buskirk. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson McDonell at 5:32 p.m. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE: Staff presented an Affidavit of Compliance verifying the meeting was being held in compliance with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. MINUTES: Motion by Monk, seconded by Klavitter, to approve the minutes of the November 20, 2014 meeting as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Rapp, Monk, and McDonell; Nay— None; Abstain — Bichell and Klavitter. DESIGN REVIEW: Application of Andrew and Emily McCready for a Certificate of Appropriateness to rehab the front and side porches for property located at 1268 Locust Street in the Jackson Park District. Staff Member Johnson reviewed the Staff report. He explained the property owner will be restoring the original front porch and introducing a new wraparound porch and balcony on the southwest side of the home. He stated the new porch and balcony will be based on historic documentation provided in the application. He explained the original wraparound porch and balcony was altered to the form seen today. He referenced a chronology of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps which depicted the alterations over time as well as an undated historic image provided by the Loras College Center for Dubuque History. He indicated the existing front porch is constructed of wood and severely damaged due to neglect. He stated the front porch will be restored keeping its current design using wood and composite materials. He explained the porch will also be extended and wrap around the south side of the home as depicted in the 1891 Sanborn Map. He referenced scars on the building which also depict the location of columns that were removed some time ago. He noted the existing porch on the rear half of the south side of the building will be removed. He explained historic documentation shows Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 2 the porch is not original to the house. He stated it also does not appear in any building permit information or Sanborn maps. He stated the application explains the screened in wood porch is in disrepair, and a new smaller, more appropriately scaled and detailed wood porch with a second story balcony will be constructed in its place. Andrew McCready, property owner and applicant, presented the application. He explained he has little to add to the Staff report other than they are excited to begin the project and restore the exterior of the home. The Commission discussed the application and noted it will be an excellent project. The Commission expressed their gratitude for the effort and investment in the property. The Commission questioned whether any wood epoxy would be required in the project. The applicant responded that is an unknown at this time, and their focus is on removing the porches before they fall off. Commissioner Klavitter noted a product called Abitron which he found helpful in restoring and patching wood windows. The Commission thanked the applicant for undertaking such a large project. Motion by Klavitter, seconded by Bichell, to approve the application as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye: Rapp, Monk, Bichell, Klavitter, and McDonell; Nay— None. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: None. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION: Work Plan Update: Staff Member Johnson provided an update for the Historic Preservation Commission Work Plan items. Staff Member Johnson noted the survey and registration projects are progressing well. He stated the Old Main, Iowa Street, and Washington Neighborhood nominations are scheduled for initial SHPO review in February and on track for the June 2015 State Nominations Review Committee agenda. He noted the other nominations are almost fully documented with the exception of some additional pictures that need to be taken. The Commission and Staff discussed the work plan items that were being addressed by former Commissioner Julie Schlarman. The Commission asked Staff to communicate with Ms. Schlarman about her intentions for those work plan items. The Commission questioned whether the public is aware of opportunities for establishing the Residential Restricted Parking areas. Staff Member Johnson explained that is a matter of public record. The Commission stated they would like to work with the Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 3 Engineering Department on marketing the opportunity. The Commission suggested a small piece on the City of Dubuque website. Staff Member Van Buskirk reviewed updates for the Comparative Analysis of Historic Districts. He explained he is in the process of laying the document out. He explained he is still working with the City Assessor's Office on obtaining the property valuation data. He reviewed and outlined the report's contents. Commissioner Klavitter updated the Commission on the Education Plan. He asked whether Planning Services Staff received any comments or feedback on the two economic impact studies that were forwarded to Commissioners. Planning Services Staff stated they had not received any comments. Commissioner Klavitter suggested waiting another month to receive feedback from Commissioners. Resignation Election of Vice-Chairperson and Re-Assignment of Work Plan: Chairperson McDonell noted the Commission has received a resignation letter from Commissioner Schlarman. He noted she was the champion of two items on the Commission's work plan and also served as vice-chairperson for the Commission. Staff Member Johnson confirmed all Commission members received a copy of Ms. Schlarman's resignation letter. The Commission discussed nominating a vice-chairperson to fill out the unexpired term of Commissioner Schlarman. The consensus of the Commission was to postpone nominating a vice chairperson to the February regular Commission meeting when more members will be in attendance. New Construction & Site Plan Review: Staff Member Johnson reviewed the Commission requested Staff investigate regulations in similar cities in order to potentially modify the Historic Preservation Code to require site plan review for all new construction within historic districts. He stated Planning Staff has contacted the Legal Services Department requesting they assist with researching those issues as time allows. He noted the results of the research will be provided to the Commission when it becomes available. The Commission questioned whether the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions could assist with the research. Staff Member Johnson noted they may be a resource the Legal Services Department contacts, noting they were a resource when updating the demolition code language. The Commission questioned whether the Legal Services Department gave any indication as to their timeframe for finishing the research. Staff Member Johnson stated no time frame was given. Chairperson McDonell reiterated the importance of the issue to him, noting the impacts of new construction and the Commission's role in protecting the historic nature of neighborhoods. He noted the current Code limits the amount of Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 4 input the Commission has on new construction. Commissioner Klavitter noted he and his neighbors are interested in learning more about this as well as opportunities for providing input for new construction projects. The Commission asked whether it would be reasonable to ask Legal Counsel for a time frame for completing the research. The Commission suggested if Legal Counsel does not feel there is sufficient time for City Staff to devote to the issue, the Commission could explore other alternatives to getting the information and move forward with amended Code language. Staff Member Johnson noted it would be reasonable to ask the Legal Services Department if there was an estimated timeframe for researching the matter. Historic Preservation Program: The Commission expressed disappointment in Commissioner Schlarman's resignation and the article written by the Telegraph Herald. The Commission explained they have worked hard to establish credibility and their reputation. The Commission noted the article made the Commission seem arbitrary, capricious, judgmental and contradictory of the law. The Commission noted the article was written in response to design review of new construction in a historic district. Chairperson McDonell noted the Commission operated under the assumption there were certain things the Commission could do with regard to reviewing new construction in historic districts at the October 2014 meeting. He noted when clarification was provided at the subsequent meeting, the Commission approved the project, allowing it to move forward, none of which was communicated in the article. Commissioner McDonell stated he felt the tone of the article was taken from a memorandum written to the Commission from Planning Services Manager Laura Carstens on November 10th. He stated the memorandum was more negative and derogatory than it needed to be. Staff Member Johnson clarified Commissioner Schlarman's concerns and reasons for resignation were not because of the memo prepared by Planning Services Staff; it was a result of having read the draft minutes of the October Commission meeting. He stated the issue has nothing to do with the Telegraph Herald, and has everything to do with the conduct of the Commission at the October meeting. He explained the Commission did operate under assumptions at the October meeting and although Planning Staff repeatedly attempted to provide direction as to what the Commission's scope and authority was in reviewing the design review case, the Commission disregarded it. He noted the Commission continued to discuss issues irrelevant to the design review case and their role. He noted the record of the meeting reflected the Commission's comments about the applicant, the applicant's credibility, and some of the Commissioner's personal feelings about the applicant. He reiterated the issue has nothing to do with the Telegraph Herald article, Planning Services Manager Laura Carstens, or Planning Services Staff, and has everything to do with what was said by Commissioners at the October meeting. Staff Member Johnson Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 5 explained the memo prepared by Planning Staff was in response to a meeting with the Legal Services Department regarding concerns of the conduct of the Commission at the October meeting. He stated the City of Dubuque Legal Services Department shared Planning Services Staff's concerns with what was said by Commissioners. Commissioner Bichell supported Chairperson McDonell's concerns, noting the memo publicly criticized the Commission. Commissioner Bichell noted Commissioners are volunteers. She explained they are all passionate about preservation, the city, and their neighborhoods. She noted commissioners are not lawyers and should not be expected to be. Chairperson McDonell stated he addressed several questions to Planning Services Staff at the October meeting regarding their role and noted the purpose of the Commission is to maintain the historic integrity of the neighborhood. He stated it was not until prior to the November meeting that it became clear that regulating the site and setting of new construction was not allowed. Staff Member Johnson stated there should have been no confusion. He explained the role of the Commission in reviewing the design of the building was clearly stated in the Staff report, and Staff reiterated that point numerous times throughout the October meeting. He clarified that Planning Services Staffs November 10th memo was not published or released to the media. He explained the story was picked up as a result of the draft minutes which are forwarded every month to City Council. He noted the Telegraph Herald also requested the audio transcripts of the meeting. The Commission reviewed their past and current commitment to preservation and the city of Dubuque, noting they are very dedicated and deserving of more respect. Commissioner Bichell explained she understands Commissioner Schlarman's concerns and reasons for resigning from the Commission; however, it serves no one to denigrate fellow Commissioners. The Commission noted they recognize the importance of preservation to the city of Dubuque in all of its facets, and all members have been tremendously committed. Staff Member Johnson agreed all Commissioners are incredibly dedicated to preservation; however, to blame Staff for the conduct of the Commission at the October meeting and the Telegraph Herald article is wrong. He noted the memorandum provided by Planning Services Staff was written notice of everything that was verbally communicated to the Commission during the October meeting. He explained the Planning Services Department cannot control what the Telegraph Herald writes, nor can they control a Commissioner's reasons for resigning or what they write in their resignation letter. Commissioner Klavitter acknowledged he understood the position of the Commission and Staff, and stated although he was unable to attend the October meeting, better Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 6 communication would have been beneficial. He stated through the dedication of the Commission and professionalism from Staff, there is an opportunity to learn and improve the preservation program. Chairperson McDonell stated he is concerned the City does not share the Commission's priorities, referencing the request to research site plans. He noted when the Commission updated the Demolition Code language in the Unified Development Code it had to be Supreme Court approved, which was constricting. Staff Member Johnson noted it is important to the City that its Codes can stand up in court. Commissioner McDonell noted nothing is absolute, and the process for updating the Demolition Code language was longer than it needed to be. Staff Member Johnson clarified the Legal Services Department as well as all City Departments have a lot of things they work on. He stated a top priority for the Historic Preservation Commission may not be a top priority for City Council or City Departments. He explained this does not mean the City is dismissing the goals of the Commission; rather these goals may not happen in the time frame the Commission wants. Staff Member Johnson reiterated he will communicate with the Legal Services Department about an estimated time frame for completing the research. The Commission asked if the Legal Services Department does not have time to undertake the research whether they can conduct the research. Staff Member Johnson stated that is an option. The Commission noted they are unaware of many of the details of the Preservation Program which is a source of frustration. Chairperson McDonell cited the Building Services Department Historic Preservation Enforcement Report as an example. Commissioner Bichell noted the Arlington Street project is an opportunity to learn, and asked whether the Commission is free to learn from past design reviews. She noted when the first duplex on Arlington Street was built, there were numerous issues that were revisited a few years later with the second duplex proposal. She noted the scale of the proposed duplex is much larger and inconsistent with the smaller home west of the property. She questioned whether precedent is set in design review. Staff Member Johnson clarified projects are reviewed using the City of Dubuque Architectural Guidelines. He stated Planning Services staff provided a line-by-line review of applicable Architectural Guidelines for the Arlington Street project to help the Commission with their design review task. He stated after calculating the heights of every building along the block, the proposed duplex was in keeping with the average height of buildings. He clarified the proposed duplex is not the tallest building along the block. He explained the historic brick building in the center of the block is actually the tallest building from grade. He explained when the project was reviewed a second time in November, in light of that information, the Commission approved the project. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 7 Commissioner McDonell noted the reason he approved the project in November was because City Code restricted the Commission's ability to review the site and setting. Staff Member Johnson agreed, noting the Commission's role was to evaluate the design and materials of the building. He noted when the staff report itemized each design standard, the Commission found the project to comply with those standards. He explained the Commission has the ability to review the design and materials of buildings in historic districts against the design standards. Commissioner Bichell suggested the height of proposed buildings should be more in keeping with adjacent buildings. Commissioner McDonell stated height is irrelevant in terms of their authority under City Code. Staff Member Johnson clarified it is not irrelevant; building height and building scale are all guidelines and under their purview since its part of the building form. He clarified what was irrelevant in the October discussion was comments regarding parking, zoning, density, changes the applicant made to the interior of the 2011 duplex, and the credibility of the applicant. Commissioner Bichell clarified she's interested in knowing whether design standards can be applied differently for different circumstances. Staff Member Johnson stated they can if the Architectural Guidelines support that. Staff Member Johnson noted the Architectural Guidelines address mass and scale on a block level and do not specifically state a tall building cannot be located next to a smaller building. He noted when you look at a historic neighborhood, not every building is a similar height. Commissioner Klavitter stated he is still unclear on the scope of authority given to the Commission under City Code. Commissioner McDonell explained sections of City Code supersede others in terms of scope and purpose. Staff Member Johnson clarified City Code allows the Commission to review the design and materials of buildings that require a building permit and are visible from a public right-of-way. Staff Approval: The Commission noted Planning Services has the ability to sign-off on many more projects, but the Commission is not knowledgeable of the projects. The Commission asked whether a report could be prepared, noting it doesn't have to be detailed. The Commission noted they would like to be aware of work that is happening in historic neighborhoods. Staff Member Johnson noted this can be done. ITEMS FROM STAFF: St. Mary's Catholic Church National Register of Historic Places Historic District: Staff Member Johnson stated the State Nominations Review Committee plans to consider the St. Mary's Catholic Church Historic District during their February 13, 2015 meeting. He explained as a participant in the Certified Local Government Program, the City of Dubuque is required to review and comment on National Register nominations within its jurisdiction. He explained the State is requesting the Commission review the nomination, comment on its National Register eligibility and whether the St. Mary's Catholic Church Historic District is significant under Criteria A, B, C or D for listing on Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 8 the National Register. He noted the nomination indicates that the property is significant under Criteria A, B and C. He explained Criterion A is property associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history, Criterion B is property associated with the lives of persons significant in our past, and Criterion C is property that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses higher artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. Duane Hagerty, Hagerty Heritage Planning, presented the nomination to the Commission. He noted he is a historic preservation consultant who has been working with the Friends of the St. Mary's group, who is redeveloping the St. Mary's campus as well as with the property owners. He noted he was asked to prepare a nomination for the St. Mary's Catholic Church Historic District. He stated the district includes the block of buildings bound by White, Jackson, 15th and 16th Streets. He noted he believes the nomination is eligible for listing on the National Register under Criteria A, B and C. Mr. Hagerty reviewed those associations in greater detail. He stated it is eligible under Criteria A for its connection to the German immigrant population in Dubuque, and Criterion B for its connection to Chaplain Schmitt, who was the assistant pastor there from 1937 — 1939 before joining the military. He noted Chaplain Schmitt died during the attack on Pearl Harbor. He stated it is eligible under Criterion C for its outstanding architecture. He explained the district is a cohesive collection of architectural revival styles and buildings. He noted his research indicates that St. Mary's Church served as a model for German Church buildings in the 1800s. He stated after St. Mary's was built, many German parishes emulated that style. He noted he has worked closely with the State Historic Preservation Office who has commented on the nomination, and they would appreciate any comments from the Commission. The Commission expressed their appreciation for the work and effort that goes into maintaining that area. They noted it is a defining characteristic of the neighborhood and city of Dubuque. Commissioner McDonell stated the St. Mary's Casino Building is an excellent example of why it is important to preserve buildings. The Commission again thanked the property owners, developers and consultant for all the work they have done. Commissioner Klavitter commended the community for the resources that are supporting the project. Commissioner Bichell expressed how happy she is the buildings are being repurposed. Mr. Haggerty stated the Commission might be interested in knowing through his research, he found the Archdiocese archives contains three of four volumes of building committee minutes from when the building was built between 1863 and 1888. He noted there is between 400 and 450 pages of written material in German script. He stated he Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission January 15, 2015 Page 9 is working with a retired professor from Loras College who is starting to go through the building minutes and translate the more important parts to get a better understanding of the details of the construction and those involved. Commissioner Rapp commended the consultant for all the detail provided in the nomination. He encouraged Mr. Hagerty reconsider how Germans are generally addressed in the nomination. He noted a more accurate description would be to state German speaking or German-speaking immigrants since people from Luxemburg, Lichtenstein, Austria, Bavaria and other German-speaking countries are oftentimes generally referenced as German. Commissioner Rapp noted by being more detailed or accurate in describing the German-speaking people, that may open up additional funding sources for preservation of the property. Commissioner Rapp also informed Mr. Hagerty that Martin Heer had returned to Germany, where he died in the 1920s. He noted he would forward the information to Mr. Hagerty. Mr. Hagerty thanked Mr. Rapp for his information and the Commission for their support, noting the issue of identifying German-speaking people is one that he has been learning and would agree with the comments from Commissioner Rapp, noting German can imply many things. Commissioner Bichell noted it also adds to the richness of the immigrant history of Dubuque. Motion by Klavitter, seconded by Rapp, to recommend to the State Nominations Review Committee that the St. Mary's Catholic Church Historic District is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places based on significance criteria A, B and C. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Rapp, Monk, Klavitter, Bichell and McDonell; Nay— none. Building Services Historic Preservation Enforcement Report: Staff Member Johnson provided an update for the properties on the report. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted