West 32nd Detention Basin MOATHE CITY OF
DuB E
MEMORANDUM
April 11, 2007
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: West 32nd Street Detention Basin -Memorandum of Agreement between
the City of Dubuque, USACE, and the State Historical Preservation Office
City Engineer Gus Psihoyos is recommending that the City negotiate a Memorandum of
Agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of En~ineers and the Iowa State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the West 32n Street Detention Basin Project. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers requires the Memorandum of Agreement prior to the issuance
of a Section 404 permit for the West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project. A federal
Section 404 permit is required for the construction of the West 32"d Street Detention
Basin Project. Because the issuance of the federal permit by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers constitutes a federal action, it requires the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
ensure that the City's West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project complies with the 36
CFR Part 800, Section 106 Process. The purpose of the Section 106 Process is to
assure that no unnecessary harm comes to historic properties.
I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council
approval.
Mi hael C. Van Milligen
MCVM/jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer
THE CITY OF
DuB E MEMORANDUM
~°~-~-~
April 6, 2007
TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
FROM: Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer ~ ,
SUBJECT: West 32"d Street Detention Basin -Memorandum of Agreement
between the City of Dubuque, USACE, and the State Historical
Preservation Office
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to request City Council authorization to enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the
West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project. The USACE requires the MOA as
precedence to the issuance of a Section 404 permit for the West 32"d Street
Detention Basin Project.
BACKGROUND
A federal Section 404 permit is required for the construction of the West 32"d
Street Detention Basin Project. Because the issuance of the federal permit by the
USACE constitutes a federal action, it requires the USACE to ensure that the
City's West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project complies with 36 CFR Part 800,
Section 106 (Section 106 Process). The purpose of the Section 106 Process is to
assure that no unnecessary harm comes to historic properties.
The West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project requires the purchase and
demolition of sixteen (16) homes. One of the homes, 655 Gillespie Street, is
owned by Gary Anderson.
Since first submitting the Section 404 permit application in February of 2006, the
USACE has required the City to commission:
^ A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation which determined that Gary
Anderson's house at 655 Gillespie Street may be considered potentially
eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places based on
the age of the structure (1880), the strong architectural design elements,
and its historic integrity;
^ An Intensive Architectural Survey of the Gary A. Anderson house which
recommended that SHPO determine the property be eligible for inclusion in
the National Register; and
^ A Historic Property Disposition Study which argued against relocation and
in favor of demolition. It concluded that while the quality of the historic
resource is acceptable, it is not exceptional and relocation of the house
would take exceptional effort and resources to accomplish with at best
questionable benefit.
DISCUSSION
Based on the recommendation presented in the Historic Property Disposition
Study, the USACE directed the City of Dubuque to draft an MOA. The attached
draft version has been sent to the USACE for their review. The Corps will
coordinate this MOA with the appropriate consulting parties prior to routing it for
signature.
As stated in the draft MOA, the City of Dubuque will be responsible for
implementing the Mitigation Plan which consists of recordation and the salvaging
of historic building elements to the standards established by the SHPO for
recordation of historic residential properties.
Photos of Anderson House at 655 Gillespie Street.
Once the MOA is fully executed, the USACE can issue the Section 404 permit for
the West 32"d Street Detention Basin Project with special conditions outlined in the
MOA.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the City negotiate with the USACE and SHPO as to the final
form of the MOA and enter into the agreement required by the USACE as
precedence to the issuance of a Section 404 permit for the West 32"d Street
Detention Basin Project.
ACTION TO BE TAKEN
I respectfully request that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate
and execute an MOA with the USACE and SHPO required by the USACE as
precedence to the issuance of a Section 404 permit for the West 32"d Street
Detention Basin Project.
Prepared by Deron Muehring
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Teri Goodman, Assistant City Manager
Deron Muehring, Civil Engineer II
Attachments (Historic Disposition Study and Draft MOA)
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS I N C .
r
~~ I 103 SOUTH THIRD STREET FAIRFIELD, IA 52556
EMAIL CWNORMAN@PRAIRIE-ARCHITECTS.COM
FAX 866 322-6671
CWN MOBILE 228 369-9444
IOWA OFFICE 641 472-1697
MS OFFICE 228 818-8776
COOPER WHITESIDE NORMAN, NCARB, AIA
ARCHITECTURE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
10 December 2006
Patrick R. Ready, PE
MSA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC.
1605 Associates Drive -Suite 102
Dubuque, IA 52002
RE: WEST 32na STREET DETENTION FACILITY
DUBUQUE COUNTY -CITY OF DUBUQUE
CEMVR-OD-P-2005-1826 SEC. 14, T89N-R2E
HISTORIC PROPERTY DISPOSITION STUDY
Gary A. Anderson House
655 Gillespie Street
Dubuque, Iowa
Dear Sir:
At your request, we have examined the Gary A. Anderson House to assess the practicality of
moving the structure to a location outside the proposed floodway being developed as a feature of
the West 32"d Street Detention Facility. This report will conclude that it is technically and
economically infeasible to move the structure and will recommend demolition as a reasonable
alternative. Since the property has been determined by SHPO to be eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places, we have suggested specific mitigation strategies to
compensate for the inevitable adverse effect demolition will have on the property's continued
eligibility for listing on the National Register. Pending instructions from the consulting parties,
we are prepared to assemble the recordation documents that are typically attached to the
Memorandum of Agreement that will conclude the Section 106 consultation process.
SITUATION
The request by MSA Professional Services was in response to comments made in
correspondence dated October 6, 2006 by Daniel K. Higgenbottom, Archeologist with the Iowa
State Historic Preservation Office of the State Historical Society of Iowa in his review of reports
submitted by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) entitled Intensive Survey of the
Anderson House 655 Gillespie Street, Dubuque, Iowa prepared by Mr. Robert C. Vogel of
Pathfinder CRM and Phase I Cultural Resources Investigations for Proposed West 32nd Street
Detention Facility in the Community of Dubuque, Dubuque County, Iowa, Section 14, T89N,
R2E [BCA #1345) prepared by Mr. Joe B. Thompson of Bear Creek Archeology, Cresco, Iowa.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 2
These latter reports make the case, among other points, that the subject building appears to be
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and that that eligibility will be
affected by the proposed construction of the West 32"d Street Detention Facility. Mr.
Higgenbottom agreed with the eligibility assessment, concluding that the Anderson House is
locally significant and eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C.
As a federally permitted project, USAGE and, by extension, the City of Dubuque are legally
bound to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
§§ 470 et seq.) and its implementing regulations 36 CFR Part 800 (revised, effective August 5,
2004]. The undertaking in its various dimensions must be reviewed to determine whether it will
affect any historic resources -objects, buildings, structures, archeological remains -and if it
will, a determination must be made concerning the nature of that effect. These determinations
must be subjected to review and comment by the State Historic Preservation Office and other
interested parties before they can be finalized by USAGE.
The consultation process must be satisfactorily completed before the City can proceed with the
undertaking. Any demolition or other work at this house prior to completion of the consultation
will result in a determination of Anticipatory Demolition and jeopardize the permit for the
project.
Mr. Higgenbottom's letter, referenced above, draws attention to several deficiencies in how the
consultation has proceeded to date and offers suggestions how to bring it to successful completion:
SHPO was not convinced of the conclusion drawn by Pathfinders CRM that the house can not
be relocated, suggesting that there have been no studies conducted by persons experienced in
moving historic structures or proving that the house is "too fragile to move."
2. Should an agreement be reached among the consulting parties that under even the best
alternative the house can not be saved and this results in a demolition proposal -which by
definition will result in an Adverse Effect on the continued eligibility of the property for
listing on the National Register -- USAGE must submit its formal Adverse Effect
determination for comment by SHPO.
Under these circumstances, SHPO has no alternative but to concur with an Adverse
Effect determination when made by USAGE. However, as a condition for completing
the consultation, SHPO will require USAGE to identify strategies to mitigate or
compensate for the resulting loss to the state's historic inventory before USAGE
finalizes that determination and the undertaking is permitted to proceed.
4. When it is concluded to the satisfaction of the consulting parties that the Adverse
Effect is unavoidable, an consensus must be reached and recorded in a Memorandum
of Agreement among the parties defining specific treatments that will be performed to
mitigate that effect, pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.6.
~ Dubuque Historic Preservation Commission has been identified as an interested party to this Consultation, and has
right of comment on any proposals entertained in its proceedings.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa
10 December 2006
Page 3
SHPO has indicated a favorable view of treatments that include salvage of historic
building materials and elements, making them available to others for incorporation in
the repair/rehabilitation of other historic properties; and recordation of the building as
defined in standards established by SHPO.
OBSERVATIONS
Prairie Architects, Inc. was asked to address these issues and to assist with bringing the Section
106 consultation to successful closure by collecting the needed field observations and forming
reasoned recommendations for consideration by interested parties and otherwise participating in
the unfolding Section 106 consultation. Our observations and recommendations are as follows:
Property Description
The Anderson House is atwo-and-one-half story brick Folk Victorian style residence with a
modified rectangular plan, a hipped roof with cross-gables, atwo-story front entrance porch and
a two-and-one-half story cutaway bay. The house faces south, overlooking Bee Branch Creek,
and is built into the slope at the base of a high, wooded hillside. There is a small, frame shed-
roofed appendage built into the hill-slope on the west elevation and a small utility shed is sited
on the northwest corner of the property.2
'` Pathfinders CRM
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 4
The building appears to be structurally stable and solidly founded. It is set into the hillside with
the rear wall of the first level fully backfilled with earth against the one story high limestone
foundation wall, providing grade access to the second level rear entry. The east and west
foundation/lower level walls retain the steeply placed fill earth, alternating between limestone
below and at grade, with brick masonry above.
A long narrow (5 ft. x 17 ft.) interior room encloses the interior space along the rear foundation
wall, presumably as a strategy for dealing with interior moisture issues. This room opens up at
the west end into a larger space (11 ft. x 15 ft.) with some suggestion in this space that the
foundation structure may be founded on and integrated into a natural limestone outcropping at
this end of the building.
Existing Conditions
Holly Butler, Historic Preservation Specialist with Prairie Architects, Inc. visited the site on
December 1, 2006 to collect field observations, diagram the structure, and photograph the
building. She met with Mrs. Gary Anderson, the building owner and occupant for the past
twenty years, who permitted limited access and observation of areas of the lower level interior
only.
Mrs. Anderson reported that the building had been extensively renovated by the previous
owners, circa 1975, and that at the time the Andersons purchased the property, alterations had
been so pervasive as to obscure the original plan layout. Interior walls had been moved and most
interior finishes were lost in these renovations.
Since taking possession of the property, the Andersons initiated renovations of their own and
removed the original one story front porch and roof at the south facade. This structure was
replaced by a new two story porch with a second level sleeping porch and roof. The new porch
was elaborately trimmed in a Victorian motif, but is of wholly modern construction. Eaves and
soffit finishes around the perimeter of the building have been enclosed in aluminum, and the
original roofing has been replaced by asphalt shingles. French doors were added at a former
upper level window opening to gain access to the new upper level sleeping porch. A one story
out-of-character framed addition was added to the west end of the house (perhaps over a former
root cellar or areaway) and a free standing factory assembled storage shed was installed at the
rear yard on top of what appears to be an older fieldstone foundation retaining wall. Site
development included paving and layout modifications to the driveway and parking area.
While we do not take exception to the stated basis for the determination that the property is
eligible for listing on the National Register, that eligibility is marginal at best, given the degree
of interior and exterior modification inflicted on the building in recent years, seriously
compromising it as a marker of historic events and as a representative of its period of
architectural significance.
The remaining historic fabric in this building consists of the rough framed interior set into the
two-and-one-half story brick masonry perimeter shell, its walls carried on limestone foundations;
the steeply pitched gable roof with its eyebrow window feature retains its original form, but the
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa
10 December 2006
Page 5
roofing finish and accessories have been modernized. Original wood framed windows, mostly
double hung or fixed sash type, and exterior wood with glass paneled doors remain in most
openings. Storm doors and windows have been applied over the original fenestration.
Among the most striking remaining original features are the oversized corner eave brackets and
the eyebrow window on the roof. The east end of the building includes an original wood framed
applied window bay fitted with double hung windows and a small shed roof.
(Right) East Facade -Attached wood window bay.
(Left) Ornamental corner eave brackets.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
(Above) Eyebrow window above front porch, trimmed
with faux Victorian features of modern origin. Eave bracket
at left is original to building.
Historic Property Disposition Study
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa
NATURE OF THE CONFLICT
10 December 2006
Page 6
The City of Dubuque's design engineers for the West 32nd Street Detention Basin, MSA
Professional Services, Inc., have proposed alterations to the slope of the natural drainage basin,
which in turn require the removal or disabling of segments of the affected utility infrastructure
and road system. These alterations are inconsistent with preserving occupancy of the Anderson
House in its current location.
From our discussions with the designers, we understand that the proposed side-slope could be
reconfigured in ways that would permit the house to remain in place, but this would be achieved
at the cost of over one acre-ft of facility water storage capacity, or about 325,000 gallons of
storm water capacity. The designers suggested that it might be possible to overcome this loss
through modifications to yet other aspects of the design, but that still leave the critical issue of
how to provide access to the now stranded house and how to provide a functioning infrastructure
to support occupancy of the house. Only through major modifications to the design could future
access to the house be provided. Design revisions would have to include development of new
water, sewer and other basic utilities, plus a new roadway to route vehicles to the site. These
items of development would add significant costs to the project.
If left in place, physical access to the Anderson house site could be provided by purchasing all or
part of the property to the west of the detention basin at a cost of $250,000 and constructing a
new driveway extending from the home to a point north of the basin, at a cost of $50,000. In
addition to the cost of land purchase and driveway extension, extensive engineering redesign of
the detention basin would be required, at an estimated cost of $15,000.
Providing municipal water and sanitary sewer services would add additional development costs.
Sanitary sewer can be provided via installation of an "E-One" grinder pump station and small
diameter force main costing approximately $10,000. Extending a water service lateral along the
new driveway to the house would cost in excess of $10,000.
The estimated total cost of $335,000 required to preserve the Anderson house in situ and to
provide for its continued occupancy as a private dwelling was considered, but has been evaluated
by the City of Dubuque and their engineering consultants as placing an unreasonable burden of
cost on the project. Consequently, a decision to leave the house in this location would be
unacceptable. We have considered the two remaining treatment alternatives: relocation versus
demolition as strategies to deal with the situation.
RELOCATION
Relocation of this building would entail management of a number of technical and logistical
issues, including: 1) disengaging the building from its present site; 2) stabilizing the structure
during the moving operations; 3) transporting the structure to its new location; 4) traversing the
narrow bridge across Bee Creek; 5) clearing the path of obstacles to reach the new location; 6)
identifying a recipient and receiver site; and 7) preparing the site to receive the building.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 7
Disengaging the building from its present site will require the mover to excavate three sides of
the building where buried into the hillside. The building's structural dependency on the
limestone foundation walls under three sides suggests that either these foundation walls must be
moved with the upper story of the building, or an elaborate supporting structure must be
substituted for them during the move - a strategy that would be enormously difficult to execute.
Excavation to the degree required for full perimeter access would be hampered by the steep slope
at the rear of the building and the natural limestone formations that are believed to extend
underground to the face of the building foundations, at least on the west end of the building.
Further, there is reason to believe that the west end of the built foundation may rest partially on
and be stitched into the natural outcropping of limestone, which of course could not be moved
with the structure.
Stabilizing the structure during the moving operations would present no abnormal challenges,
except that there has been a suggestion that the circa 1975 building modifications may have
strained the capacity of some structural framing elements. Temporary bracing would be required
in the course of any move, and since bracing operations typically provide much higher levels of
strength than needed by static buildings, we are of the opinion that even minor instability
traceable to the 1975 modifications would be addressed by normal bracing operations. The only
reservation to this assessment would be if the limestone foundations could not be moved largely
intact with the upper building walls bearing on them, in which case an elaborate and structurally
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
East Fay~ade -Note steep slope from front to back of house, embedding lower level of building into hillside.
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 8
significant bracing and support system would have to be fabricated and inserted in their place to
support the upper building elements and permit relocation of the lower level brick masonry
facade with them.
Transporting the structure to its new location would require equipment that is significantly
larger than any presently operated commercially in the State of Iowa. This issue is driven by the
footprint size and gross weight of the subject two-and-one-half story masonry structure.
At our request, Doug Alysworth of Alysworth Brothers House Movers3 visited the site and
shared his observations with us. He suggested that high capacity transport equipment might be
available from either Chicago or Minneapolis 4 and that preparation for the move and other
logistical issues would probably benefit from a joint venture with a locally based firm to
efficiently affect the move.
Traversing the narrow bridge on Fink Street across Bee Creek could be accomplished by
temporarily removing the metal side railings and adding heavy timber bracing to the bridge's
free span to support the weight of the house and transport equipment. The bridge measures
twenty (20) ft. wide x twenty (20) ft. span. Permission from the City of Dubuque, Public
Utilities Department would be required before attempting to transport the building across this
City owned bridge.
3 Aylsworth Brothers House Movers has moved many of the buildings affected by the proposed West 32°d Street
Detention Facility. Contact: Doug Aylsworth - 106 North Street, Fayette, IA 52142; (563) 774-2385
a Stubbs Building & House Movers relocated the Minneapolis Shubert Theater, believed to be the largest rubber
tired move in history; contact Larry Stubbs - 185 N Old Crystal Bay Road; Long Lake, Minnesota 55356-9784;
telephone 763-479-3184; email stubbsls@stubbsmovers.com
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 9
Clearing the path of obstacles to reach the new location would entail removing and reinstalling
street signs, telephone poles, and utility wiring along the narrow streets, making way for the
building. The move along 250 ft. of Fink Street to the next major intersection with West 32nd
Street would entail removal of utilities along one side, while moving either direction along West
32nd Street would involve utility poles, power lines, street signs, fire hydrants, and other items on
both sides of the street to provide clearance for the 37 ft. x 35 ft. building. Roads are nominally
thirty (30) feet wide and the move would have to negotiate multiple turns along the twisting path.
Identifying a recipient and receiver site -While we have only assessed a hypothetical move,
for the sake of practicality a target site would have to be found within a few blocks of the present
site. Heavy urban development will be encountered within less than half of a mile to the east of
the Fink Street and West 32nd Street intersection. Movement west along West 32nd Street would
bring the house progressively deeper into the drainage area and would require movement up one
of the adjacent ridges to find a location out of harm's way.
No one has been identified to receive the building or to take responsibility for providing a
suitable site on which the building can be installed. Given the original configuration of the
building, we assume that an acceptable placement of the building would require a steeply sloping
site into which the building mass could be inserted to replicate its original installation.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa
10 December 2006
Page 10
Preparing the site to receive the building -Assessment of this aspect of a relocation operation
would have to be performed once an actual site was identified.
Cost of Implementation for this hypothetical moving operation would probably approach One-
Hundred-Thousand ($100,000.00) Dollars, per an estimate derived from conversations with a
local movers Land costs, including site preparation and utilities would be in addition to this.
DEMOLITION
Demolition solves the problem of the house's position in the new floodway by completely
removing the building to a landfill, but there is the obvious loss of an entire historic resource.
Demolition of the subject building will probably cost $10-15,000.00, depending on the distance
to landfill and local tipping charges. The building does not appear to contain large amounts of
asbestos materials, although the possible presence of lead based paints may present an issue
under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and abatement may impact
handling and disposal costs.
SHPO has suggestedb that one reasonable mitigation strategy would be to reallocate the
allowance budgeted for demolition of the building and apply it to the cost of relocation. As we
have seen, the relative costs of relocation and demolition are an order of magnitude apart.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Reviewing the alternative courses of action, we recommend adopting the demolition alternative.
While the quality of the historic resource is acceptable, it is not exceptional. Relocation of this
building would take exceptional effort and resources to accomplish, at best with questionable
benefit. Considering the relative costs and efforts required, we are of the opinion that the
Prudent Man Rule would argue against relocation and in favor of demolition in this instance.
DETERMINATION OF EFFECT
A particular undertaking must be chosen and defined in reasonable detail by the City of Dubuque
and its Engineer as a proposal before USACE can review that undertaking and arrive at a formal
Determination of Effect, which in turn must be submitted to SHPO for review and comment
before it can be finalized. In order to expedite this process, we have attempted to anticipate the
course of events that will ensue from these consultations and, depending on the undertaking that
is under consideration, to fathom how the review process might play out.
5 Aylsworth Brothers House Movers, Doug Aylsworth
6 Daniel K. Higgenbottom, correspondence dated October 6, 2006.
~ The fundamental principle for professional money management, stated by Judge Samuel Putnum in 1830: "Those
with responsibility to invest money for others should act with prudence, discretion, intelligence, and regard for the
safety of capital as well as income."
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 11
Above, we have suggested that one of two mutually exclusive alternatives should be under
consideration: relocation versus demolition of the subject building. We recommend reviewers
and interested parties consider the following points:
While relocation would save the building and seemingly thereby constitute a more
acceptable alternative for the parties interested in preserving this building, either
treatment under consideration will logically result in an Adverse Effect determination
by USAGE under the provisions of the Secretary of Interiors Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties.
2. Relocation would result in a massive loss of integrity by altering the site placement
and contextual feeling and, at best, result in only a close approximation of the original
historic site - a circumstance that is frequently cited as the basis for the decision to
disqualify properties for listing on the National Register.
Demolition, on the other hand, would destroy any ability of the property to function
as a marker for historic events or the character of the period of construction embodied
by the house.
MITIGATION
We have attempted to identify meaningful mitigation strategies that might be considered by the
interested parties in their assessment of the recommended treatment. Relocation is, in itself, a
mitigation strategy offering an alternative to outright demolition of the property, but as we have
seen, relocation in this instance does not appear to be a reasonable course of action when
weighted against the potential benefits gained.
SHPO/Higgenbottom suggested in his letter of October 6, 2006 that selective salvage of historic
elements for use by others in the repair and rehabilitation of other historic buildings might
reasonably accompany demolition operations. Assessing the building condition, we would have
to conclude that prior gutting of the interior of this building and extensive modification of the
exterior elements has reduced the numbers and types of historic elements that could legitimately
serve this purpose.g
Applied elements that could be feasibly extracted from the building include the three (3) large
ornamental wood wall and eave brackets, the eyebrow window and dormer, one small divided
light window, and the applied bay with (3) integrated windows at the east facade of the building.
Of less interest are three (3) large fixed pane windows, twelve (12) double-hung windows and
three (3) exterior doors, being rather utilitarian in design and very susceptible to damage when
$ In our experience, salvage and redistribution of building components on federally funded projects is problematic.
Salvaged materials usually become the property of the demolition contractor. And while the State of Iowa may
have worked out strategies to accomplish the proposed transfer of assets to private parties, USAGE as a federal
agency has no ability to accept ownership of these salvaged items, even temporarily, nor does it have the authority
under federal law to divest or to distribute them to other parties.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa
10 December 2006
Page 12
removing the frames from their masonry surrounds. Beyond these items, only the remaining
brick and stone masonry units offer significant salvage value, and the cost of handling and
cleaning these units in preparation for reinstallation at another site greatly diminish their
economic value.
Other items ofnon-historic value may have a residual economic value, particularly the storage
shed and the recent vintage two-story front porch and roof. Disposition of these items is beyond
the scope of this study.
INTERIM CONSULTATION WITH SHPO
Having developed these points, we discussed our observations and recommendations by
telephone with Ralph Christian, Historian with the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office. Mr.
Christian agreed, in principle, that leaving the house in place would be unworkable and that
relocation of the building as described might be seen as unreasonable by SHPO reviewers as
well; and that it appears inevitable that a decision will be made by the City of Dubuque to pursue
demolition of the building.
If this scenario plays out, Mr. Christian further suggested that demolition would require the
formulation of an acceptable mitigation strategy, probably taking the form of recordation of the
property in drawings and photographs consistent with standards for house recordation set by the
State Historical Society of Iowa.
To that end, we have gathered field data and other recordation materials per his instructions and
are prepared to assemble a recordation package for the Anderson House that will be formatted
for use as an attachment to a Memorandum of Agreement between the interested parties. This
document can not be completed until the terms of the MOA have been defined and set to
signature by the consulting parties.
Additionally, Mr. Higgenbottom in his letter of October 6, 2006, suggested salvage of historic
building elements for use by others in the rehabilitation and repair of other historic properties.
We have catalogued those elements above and suggest that in discussions among the consulting
parties that consideration be given to their incorporation into the Memorandum of Agreement.
CONCLUSION
We have attempted to address the issues raised by Mr. Higgenbottom in his letter of October 6,
2006 in his capacity as Section 106 reviewer for the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office, and
have provided information and critical guidance with regard to the relocation or demolition of
the historic Gary A. Anderson House. We have also provided discussion points and materials
intended to assist the interested parties in their deliberations so that closure can be brought to the
consultation process.
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
Historic Property Disposition Study 10 December 2006
Gary A. Anderson House -Dubuque, Iowa Page 13
The City of Dubuque has indicated its intent to proceed to the next phase of implementation of
the plans for the West 32°d Street Detention Facility, pending the resolution of issues
surrounding the treatment of the Anderson House. The most direct path to that resolution
appears to follow these steps:
City of Dubuque, through its design Engineer, adopts the demolition proposal and
communicates that intent to USAGE.
2. USAGE determines that the proposed demolition will result in an Adverse Effect and
submits their determination to SHPO for comment.
3. SHPO concurs with the USAGE determination of Adverse Effect and requires
development of a Memorandum of Agreement that embodies a record of the
completed consultation process and defines specific mitigation strategies and
treatments as acceptable in compensation for the Adverse Effect.
4. USAGE on behalf of the consulting parties drafts the Memorandum of Agreement
and circulates the draft for comment and revision, resulting in a document that
satisfies the various interests. Presumably, recordation will be identified as a required
condition and is communicated to our office.
5. Prairie Architects prepares recordation attachments reflecting the terms of the draft
Memorandum of Agreement and in compliance with standards set by the State
Historic Society of Iowa, including narrative, photographs, diagrams, and other
materials.
6. The fully assembled Memorandum of Agreement with Attachments is circulated for
signatures by the consulting parties.
7. Work is authorized and proceeds in the field in accord with the Agreement.
If there is anything more that we can do at this point to assist with this process, please let me
know.
Sincerely,
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS, INC.
C~ uJ..c l~,.k«_.-
Cooper W. Norman, AIA
Architect
~ ~t1ES1p~~
0
~v, 9,y
c4°, IOWA
~ ~~ ~
~~~jlfR~a A~~~\`~,
PRAIRIE ARCHITECTS
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
IOWA SHPO R&C # 060931107
Subject Historic Property
GARY A. ANDERSON RESIDENCE
655 Gillespie Street -Dubuque, Iowa
Undertaking
WEST 32"d STREET DETENTION FACILITY
DUBUQUE COUNTY -CITY OF DUBUQUE
C E MVR-OD-P-2005-1826
SEC. 14, T89N-R2E
Lead Federal Agency
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
USAGE -ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT
Clock Tower Building P.O. Box 2004
Rock Island, IL 61204-2004
Point of Contact
Mr. Ron Pulcher, Archaeologist
Economic and Environmental Analysis Branch
Telephone (309) 794-5472
State Historic Preservation Officer
..:STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF IOWA
600 East Locust Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50319
Point of Contact
Lowell Soike, Deputy SHPO
Lowell. Soike@ lowa.gov
Telephone (515) 281-8800
Permit Applicant
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
CITY ENGINEER'S OFFICE
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
Point of Contact
Deron L. Muehring, Civil Engineer
City of Dubuque -City Engineer's Office
DMuehrin@CityOfDubuque.org
Telephone (563) 589-4276
March 28, 2007
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
AND
THE IOWA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
SUBMITTED TO THE
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PURSUANT TO 36 C.F.R. 800.6(b)(iv)
REGARDING
THE WEST 32nd STREET DETENTION FACILITY
PROJECT LOCATED IN
THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, DUBUQUE COUNTY, IOWA
CEMVR-OD-P-2005-1826 SEC. 14, T89N-R2E
WHEREAS the United. States Army Corps of Engineers ("USACOE") proposes to issue a
permit for the construction of the West 32"d Street Detention Facility project in the City of
Dubuque, Dubuque County, Iowa; and
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa State Historic Preservation Officer
("SHPO"), has defined the proposed West 32"d Street Detention Facility's area of potential
effects, as the term defined in 36 C.F.R. 800.16(d), to be the area along Bee Branch Creek in
Section 14, Township 89 North, Range 2 East, in Dubuque, Dubuque County Iowa. UTM NAD-
83 Zone. 15, Northing 4710915, Fasting 690100; and
Page 2
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has found that the Gary A.
Anderson House (the "Historic Residence") located at 655 Gillespie Street in Dubuque, Iowa, is
within the area of potential effects; and
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has determined, pursuant to 36
C.F.R. 800.4(c), that the Historic Residence is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places; and
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has determined pursuant to 36
C.F.R. 800.5(a) that the West 32nd Street Detention Facility will have adverse effects on the
continued eligibility of the Historic Residence for inclusion on the National Register of Historic
Places; and
WHEREAS the USACOE has consulted with the Iowa SHPO in accordance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) and its implementing_regulations (36
C.F.R. Part 800) to resolve the adverse effect on the Historic Residence; and
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has determined that the
Undertaking's adverse effects cannot be avoided, and that the Historic Residence must be
demolished in its entirety in order to accommodate the work of the project; and
WHEREAS implementation of the treatments set forth in Stipulation I of this Memorandum of
Agreement will satisfactorily take into account the Undertaking's adverse effects on the Historic
Residence; and
WHEREAS the public was given. an opportunity to comment on the undertaking's potential adverse
effect on Historic Properties in a Public Notice issued on March 23, 2006; and
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has invited the City of
Dubuque as Permit Applicant to participate in this consultation and to become a signatory to this
Memorandum of Agreement; and
~~~ci~i3~<.'.
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has invited ~~~~(a~~~~~~~; r~~-
n<a~~e~~ ~" to participate in the consultation and to become asignatory/signatories to this
memorandum,of agreement; and
()piii~~~~il:
WHEREAS the USACOE, in consultation with the Iowa SHPO, has invited :~.~tt~~~~~~~ c?,° ~~<~a~~~,~)'K
to participate in the consultation and concur in this memorandum of agreement; and
WHEREAS the USACOE on October 11, 2006 invited the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma
to participate in the consultation, and in turn received a written response on December 20, 2006
stating that the Peoria Tribe does not object to the proposed Undertaking, providing that in the
event any items falling under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
(NAGPRA) are discovered, the Peoria Tribe requests notification and further consultation; and
Page 3
WHEREAS the USACOE on October 11, 2006 invited the Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri in
Kansas and Nebraska to participate in the consultation, and in turn received a written response on
October 24, 2006 stating that the Sac and Fox Nation does not object to the Undertaking,
providing that in the event human skeletal remains and/or any objects falling under NAGPRA
are uncovered during construction, construction must be stopped immediately; and
WHEREAS the USACOE on October 11, 2006 invited the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of
South Dakota to participate in the consultation, and in turn received a written response on
December 21, 2006 stating that the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe hasno objections to the
Undertaking; and
WHEREAS the USACOE has consulted with the Iowa SHPO~-in`accordance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) and its implementing regulations (36
C.F.R. Part 800) concerning the scope of work as presented in the materials and plans dated
January 14, 2007 and has agreed to proceed with issuance of the subject permitfor the project
as proposed, subject to satisfactory completion. of the consultation; and
WHEREAS the USACOE ensures that issuance of Permit # CWMVR-OD-P-2005-1826 to the
City of Dubuque for the construction of the West 32"d Street Detention Facility shall be withheld
until this MOA has been signed by all signatories; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Signatories agree that, if the Undertaking is permitted to proceed, the
Undertaking shall be implemented in accordance: with the following Stipulations in order to take
into account the effects of the Undertaking on historic properties, and further agree that these
Stipulations shall govern the Undertaking and all of its parts until this MOA expires or is
terminated.
Page 4
STIPULATIONS
I. MITIGATION PLAN
USACOE delegates responsibility to the City of Dubuque for implementing the
Mitigation Plan in concert with the balance of this Undertaking:
A. Recordation
B. Salvage of Historic Building Elements
IL DEFINITIONS
The definitions provided at 36 CFR § 800.16 are applicable throughout this MOA.
III. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS
A. Professional Qualifications
B. Documentation Standards shall comply with standards established by the SHPO for
recordation of historic residential properties
C. Salvage Standards
IV. RESOLVING OBJECTIONS
Disagreement and misunderstanding about how this memorandum of agreement is or is
not being implemented shall be resolved in the following manner:
A. If the Iowa SHPO or any invited signatory to this memorandum of agreement
should object in writing to the USACOE regarding any action carried out or
proposed with respect to the West 32nd Street Detention Facility or
implementation of this memorandum of agreement, then the USACOE shall
consult with the objecting party to resolve this objection.
B. If after such consultation the USACOE determines that the objection cannot be
resolved through consultation, then the USACOE shall forward all documentation
relevant to the objection to the Council, including the USACOE's proposed
response to the objection.
Page 5
C. Within 45 days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, the Council shall
exercise one of the following options:
Provide the USACOE with astaff--level recommendation, which the
USACOE shall take into account in reaching a final decision regarding its
response to the objection; or
ii. Notify the USACOE that the objection will be referred for formal
comment pursuant to 36 C.F.R. 800.7(c), and proceed to refer the
objection and comment. The USACOE shall take into account the
Council's comments in reaching a final decision regarding its response to
the objection.
D. If comments or recommendations from the Council are provided in accordance
with this stipulation, then the USACOE-shall take into account any Council
comment or recommendations provided isi accordance with this stipulation with
reference only to the subject of the objection.
E. The USACOE's responsibility to carry out all actions under the memorandum of
agreement that are not the subjects of the objection shall remain unchanged.
V. DISCOVERIES AND UNANTICIPATED EFFECTS
In the event that one or more historic properties--other than the Gary A. Anderson House
-- are discovered or that unanticipated .effects on historic properties are found during the
implementation of this memorandum of agreement, the USACOE shall follow the
procedure specified in 36 C.F.R. 800.13
VI. AMENDMENTS
Any signatory to this memorandum of agreement may request that it be amended,
whereupon the parties shall consult to consider the proposed amendment. 36 C.F.R.
800.6(c)(7) shall govern the execution of any such amendment.
VII. DURATION OF THIS AGREEMENT
If the terms of this memorandum of agreement have not been implemented within two
years of the date of this memorandum of agreement, then this memorandum of agreement
shall be considered null and void. In such an event, the USACOE shall so notify the
parties to this memorandum of agreement and, if it chooses to continue with the West
32"d Street Detention Facility, then it shall reinitiate review of the West 32°d Street
Detention Facility in accordance with 36 C.F.R. 800.3 through 800.7.
Page 6
VIII. TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT
A. Any signatory to the memorandum of agreement may terminate it by providing
thirty (30) days notice to the other parties, provided that the parties shall consult
during the period prior to termination to seek agreement on amendments or other
actions that would avoid termination.
B. In the event of termination, the USACOE shall comply with 36 C.F.R. 800.3
through 800.7 with regard to the review of the West 32nd Street Detention
Facility.
C. In the event that the USACOE does not carry out the terms of this memorandum
of agreement, the USACOE shall comply with 36 C.F.R. 800.3 through 800.7
with regard to the review of the West 32nd Street Detention Facility.
IX. EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT
This MOA will take effect on the date that it is executed`by the USACOE and the SHPO.
Page 7
AGREEMENT
Execution of this MOA by the USACOE and the SHPO, its transmittal to the Council in
accordance with 36 CFR §800.6(b)(1)(iv), and subsequent implementation of its terms, shall
evidence, pursuant to 36 CFR §800.6(c), that this MOA is an agreement with the Council for
purposes of Section 110(1) of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and shall further
evidence that the USACOE has afforded the Council an opportunity to comment on the
Undertaking and its effects on historic properties, and that the USACOE has taken into account
the effects of the Undertaking on historic properties.
SIGNATORY PARTIES
UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, ROCK ISLAND',DISTRICT
Signature Date
Robert A. Sinkler
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Rock Island District
IOWA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
Signature Date
Lowell: Soike
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
State Historic Preservation'Office
600 East Locust Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50319
CITY OF DUBUQUE (IA)
Signature
Michael C. Van Milligen
City Manager
City of Dubuque
50 West Thirteenth Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
Date
Page 8