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