Loading...
Minutes_Historic Preservation Commission 12 19 13THE CITY OF Dui Dubuque E 11. am •mv•vu Masterpiece on the Mississippi MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION 5:30 p.m. Thursday, December 19, 2013 City Council Chamber, Historic Federal Building REIM Commissioners Present: Chairperson Bob McDonell; Commissioners Mary Loney Bichell, John Whalen, Julie Schlarman, Christina Monk, David Klavitter, Chris Olson, Otto Kreger and Joseph Rapp. Commissioners Excused: None. Staff Members Present: Laura Carstens and David Johnson. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson McDonell at 5:30 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 Krueger, seconded by Schlarman to approve the minutes of the October 17, 2013 meeting as submitted. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye: Krueger, McDonell, Monk, Rapp, Schlarman, and Whalen; Nay— None. ADVISORY DESIGN REVIEW: Application of the City of Dubuque for Advisory Design Review of the Dubuque Intermodal Facility located at 351 E. 9th Street in the Historic Millwork District. Staff Member Johnson introduced Tim Schroeder, Vice President of Neumann Monson Architects. He explained Neumann Monson is the architectural firm designing the Intermodal Facility. Staff Member Johnson provided an overview the project. He reviewed the Staff report, noting the project location, design and materials. He explained the intermodal facility was initially reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission on January 19, 2012, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on January 11, 2012. He stated both the Commission and SHPO supported the concept and noted little has changed with the design of the intermodal facility since the initial reviews. He stated SHPO continues to be involved in the design review process. He noted the components of the Dubuque Millwork District Master Plan, Downtown Design Guidelines and Historic Millwork District PUD which apply to the project. Tim Schroeder provided samples of the construction materials and described their qualities. He distributed three terracotta baguettes, Ipe wood, perforated metal cladding and metal trim samples to the Commission. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 2 Commissioners Klavitter, Bichell and Olson entered at 5:35 p.m. Mr. Schroeder reviewed a PowerPoint presentation of the project's site context, elevations, aerial views and street views. He reviewed the components and materials of the Intermodal Facility's parking ramp, pedestrian bridge, and terminal building. The Commission questioned accessibility and elevator locations for the project. Mr. Schroeder explained the facility is fully accessible and an elevator is provided at the end of the skywalk. The Commission discussed the open sidewalk concept. They noted potential maintenance concerns as well as safety concerns for the surface of the skywalk during inclement weather. Mr. Schroeder explained the skywalk concept is the result of value engineering. He noted much of the rain and snow will be blocked by the mesh screening. However, maintenance will be required by the City to make sure the surface is kept clean and not a safety hazard. The Commission reviewed the Ipe wood and its durability. Mr. Schroeder noted it is a very dense Brazilian wood that has an attractive appearance and is long lasting. Motion by Olson, seconded by Schlarman, to recommend approval of the City of Dubuque Intermodal Facility as presented. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye: Klavitter, Krueger, Bichell, McDonell, Monk, Olson, Rapp, Schlarman and Whalen ; Nay - None. Education Task Force: Update of Public Outreach and Education Programs: Chairperson McDonell reviewed the current efforts of the Historic Preservation Education Task Force. He noted the Task Force has revisited the importance of transitioning the Commission from the role of regulator to educator. Role of the Commission — Regulator to Educator: Chairperson McDonell reviewed the past accomplishments of the Education Task Force. He explained the Task Force has been very active while there has been fewer opportunities for the Commission at -large to meet. He expressed concern that this separation of duties has resulted in a lesser role for the Commission and has created a disconnect between the Task Force and Commission. Chairperson McDonell reviewed the extensive work in creating strong regulations and thorough design guidelines. He explained those guidelines give direction to property owners to make appropriate improvements to their properties. He explained they also serve as a tool to allow Staff to review and approve projects which are compliant with those guidelines. He stated there is opportunity for the Historic Preservation Program Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 3 to be more customer - service friendly while also allowing the Historic Preservation Commission to focus more of their time and attention on education and outreach. Commissioners noted the Education Task Force was intended to be temporary. Commissioners stated the work undertaken by the Task Force should involve the whole Commission. Chairperson McDonell explained by assuming the role of the Education Task Force, the Historic Preservation Commission is in a better position to tackle important issues and affect positive change. He noted it is the opinion of the Education Task Force that the Historic Preservation Commission should move forward with a greater role in advocacy. Commissioner Schlarman discussed phasing out the Education Task Force as the Historic Preservation Commission takes on the duties of the Task Force. Commissioner Klavitter stated it is the role of the Commission to propagate the preservation program, and adopting an education and marketing role positions the Commission to change the hearts and minds of people within the community. He explained it would allow the Commission to make the biggest impact for change. The Commission noted allowing Staff to sign -off on compliant projects would make the preservation program less onerous for property owners. Staff Member Carstens noted the change in focus would not remove the Commission entirely from the design review process. She explained the Historic Preservation Commission would serve as an appeal body to applicants with projects that Staff determines do not comply with the guidelines. She also noted the Historic Preservation Commission would continue to review demolition permits and applications for Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Funds. She noted new construction, such as in -fill projects, would also be projects forwarded to the Commission for design review. The Commission noted the efforts previously spent on the regulatory aspects of the preservation program could be refocused on education and outreach. The Commission noted this change in focus was a recommendation from a previous NAPC CAMP. Commissioner Olson applauded the work of the Education Task Force. She noted the efforts are of great interest and meaningful. She stated it gets people involved in preservation, but questioned whether the Commission can and should perform both duties. She reviewed the benefits of discussing design review with other Commissioners. She welcomed input from other Commission members. Staff Member Johnson explained the different dynamics in reviewing projects at the Staff level versus projects reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. He noted design review at the Staff level allows enables him to work with property owners on preferred treatment approaches such as repair and maintenance. The Commission questioned whether there have been fewer design review projects over the last year. Staff Member Johnson stated there have not been fewer projects; Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 4 however, there have been more repair and in -kind replacement projects, which do not require HPC review. Commissioner Bichell expressed concern that foregoing design review may create a disconnect with the community and historic districts. She stated she did not want the Commission to serve an advisory role. Commissioner Olson stated they have not been involved in many design review cases of late and has felt disengaged. Staff Member Carstens stated the Commission will remain connected with the community. Staff Member Carstens explained the Planning Services Department routinely reviews many projects in historic districts and neighborhoods every month through the Section 106 process and the Historic Preservation program. She explained Planning Services Staff has the mechanisms, experience, and knowledge to perform design review. She reviewed Section 106 training that the Planning Services Staff has attended. She noted Planning Services Staff's focus is not simply on the handful of buildings in historic districts; rather, Staff is involved in design review city -wide. She explained the average resident wants to make an investment in their property and get a project approved quickly. She stated if a project meets adopted standards and guidelines, the project should be approved. The Commission questioned what effects design review at the Staff level will have on historic districts. Staff Member Carstens explained the attention and focus given to historic districts will not change. She explained the regulations, process and expectations for compliance will remain the same. She clarified the only difference is there is an opportunity for projects to be approved by Planning Services Staff. Commissioner Whalen expressed support for changing the role of the Historic Preservation Commission. He noted in doing so, the Commission might be able to focus more effort on approaches to promoting property improvements and maintenance in historic neighborhoods. The Commission discussed the new role. Staff Member Carstens stated the Historic Preservation Commission would still have oversight of the program and will become advisory. She noted the process would allow an opportunity for Staff to review some projects and offer a more expanded role for the Commission. Commissioner Klavitter explained that the Commission would continue to have oversight of the program but Staff would be entrusted with design review. Staff Member Carstens explained the types of improvements to historic neighborhoods the Commission desires for property maintenance and improvements is not going to be accomplished through HPC design review. She explained HPC design review reaches only a few people and does not motivate change. She noted there are many historic resources within the community and it makes sense to focus on education and Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 5 outreach, which can motivate positive change rather than a few dozen design review cases. The Commission discussed the benefits of addressing issues and opportunities on a neighborhood level. Commissioner Whalen noted these are things best addressed by neighborhood associations; however, the reality is they are rarely proactive and instead react to crisis. Commissioner Olson reviewed past actions of the Commission on neighborhood levels. She noted the boarded -up window ordinance and doors policy and the window policy were developed by the Historic Preservation Commission out of need that had positive impacts throughout the community. Staff Member Carstens explained the Commission will still have a presence in neighborhoods. She noted it will be more in an education and marketing role rather than dictating design. The Commission and Staff discussed the process for design review. Staff Member Johnson reiterated the process, standards and expectations for compliance will not change. Commissioner Olson left the meeting at 6:25 P.M Commissioner Rapp asked whether building permits are published in the newspaper as they once were. He noted this could be an issue the Commission tackles which would help raise awareness of approved work happening in historic neighborhoods. He explained this is public record and perhaps they can be listed on the city's website. He stated the information can raise awareness of neighborhood investment and work. The Commission stated this is an example of an initiative that may make people more excited about the value of preservation and become more invested in the neighborhood. Commissioner Rapp questioned if permit cards are still provided to property owners for work in Historic Districts. Staff Member Johnson stated permit cards are provided to applicants with their notice of decision. Chairperson McDonell reviewed the importance of awareness in neighborhoods, rather than just the Commission. He reviewed the positive change in the built environment as well as perception in the Washington Neighborhood. He noted the work that needs to continue in educating people about the value and opportunity in neighborhoods like the Washington Neighborhood. Commissioner Bichell noted the importance of personal and financial investment in neighborhoods. Staff Member Carstens stated these are exactly the types of issues the Historic Preservation Commission should be tackling. Staff explained initiatives to revitalize neighborhoods and educate residents about the importance of preservation will affect positive change. Staff member Carstens stated such policies and education opportunities can be shared throughout the City organization since those issues are likely happening in other areas of the city. Chairperson McDonell noted the importance of targeting groups that have an impact on historic neighborhoods. He stated he is personally working on an educational Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 6 opportunity for realtors. He noted the common misconceptions about crime in some neighborhoods. He explained through education, people can become better informed about the opportunities in downtown neighborhoods, which in turn can promote personal and financial investment. Commissioner Schlarman noted that design review is listed as only one of many duties of the Commission. Staff stated the time and attention of the Historic Preservation Commission and City Staff could turn more towards the other duties. The consensus of the Commission was to allow Planning Services Staff to transition the Commission from a regulatory role focused on design review to a role focused on all the duties and responsibilities granted to the Commission. The Commission and Planning Services Staff discussed the next steps. Staff stated an annual work plan will help organize the Commission. Chairperson McDonell requested prior to the next Historic Preservation Commission agenda and packet going out, that the Commissioners provide Staff with the three most critical issues for the Historic Preservation Commission to work on in 2014. Staff will prepare a memorandum summarizing the identified issues for an annual work plan to be developed at the January 2014 meeting. Motion by Whalen, seconded by Schlarman, to develop an annual work plan at the January 16th meeting and have Commissioners provide Staff with their three most important initiatives to work on in 2014 prior to the meeting so that information can be provided in Commissioner's packets. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye — Klavitter, Krueger, Bichell, McDonell, Monk, Rapp, Schlarman and Whalen; Nay — None. ITEMS FROM PUBLIC: None. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Bishop Block, 90 Main Street: Staff Member Johnson noted a request has recently been submitted by a resident to ask the property owners for the Bishop Block building located at 90 Main Street to replace the turret. He noted on July 27, 2011, lightning struck the turret on the building and destroyed it. He explained Jeffrey Morton Architects, P.C. was hired to prepare drawings documenting the original design, dimensions and construction methods before the remnants of the turret were taken down. He explained those drawings are proprietary and could be made available through their office. He reviewed the building history, and noted the current property owner in under no obligation to replace the turret. He stated the project may be eligible for Historic Preservation Revolving Loan Funds, a facade grant and state historic tax credits. The Commission reviewed the request. By consensus, the Commission agreed to forward a letter to the property owner informing them of the building's history and Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 7 financial incentives that might be available to replace the turret. The Commission also requested an invitation be made to attend a future Historic Preservation Commission meeting to discuss additional options or assistance. Demolition Ordinance Amendments: The Commission questioned the status of the amendments to the demolition section of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Staff Member Carstens clarified that Legal Services Staff continues to research the definition of reasonable economic return as well as other concerns. She stated an amended ordinance should be provided to the Commission based on those findings in the near future. ITEMS FROM STAFF Building Services Historic Preservation Enforcement Report Update: Commissioners discussed how to address violations that remain for years on the Building Services Historic Preservation Enforcement Report. Staff suggested this item be placed on the list for the annual work plan. Commissioners asked about open windows and whether anything can be done to secure the property. Staff Member Johnson clarified little more can be done as the property in question is already in the enforcement process for this and a variety of other reasons. Update on Design Guidelines Project: Staff Member Carstens reviewed the progress on the Design Guidelines Update. She noted there will be an open house on January 9th for the public to comment on the second draft of the Design Guidelines Update. She stated there will be a work session with City Council on January 21st, and the guidelines will be considered for adoption by City Council at the February 3, 2014 meeting. She reviewed the Downtown Design Guidelines and Historic District guidelines have been combined into one user - friendly manual. She then reviewed the level of design review the Planning Services Staff conducts city -wide. She reviewed that the Commission will continue to review waivers, appeals of Planning Services Staff decisions, requests to demolish structures in Historic and Conservation Districts, requests for new construction in historic districts, and requests for financial assistance from the Historic Preservation funding programs. She noted the updated design guidelines include a stoplight concept: A green light is indicated for projects which comply with the design guidelines and would allow Staff approval; a yellow light indicates projects which comply with the design guidelines but might warrant close consultation with Staff throughout the project; and a red light corresponds to those projects that do not comply with the design guidelines and Staff will not approve. She explained Planning Services Staff will always reserve the right to refer any project or project component to the Commission for review. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Minutes — Historic Preservation Commission December 19, 2013 Page 8 Respectfully submitted, Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Adopted