Historic Pres Comm 1 17 02 MINUTES
REGULAR SESSION
Thursday, ~anuary 17, 2002
5:00 p~m.
Auditorium, Gamegie stout Library
360 W. 11th Street, Dubuque, iowa
DRAFT
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Chairperson Terry Mozena; Commission Members Suzanne Guinn, Jim
Gibbs, Chris Wand and Audrey Henson; Staff Members Laura Carstans
and Wally Wemimont.
Commission Members Pam Bradford and Ken Kdngle.
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mozena called the meeting to order at 5:03 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.
PU~_ La~_. WORKSHOP/STR--m~'St?~d~E _nl=-__q!GN REVIEW GUIDELINES FOR HL.eTORlC
DISTRICTS: Chairperson Mozena introduced the streetscape design reviewguidelines fo~
historic districts. He stated that they am intended to be a user-friendly reference for
properties and streetscapes located in historic districts. He emphasized that they are only
guidelines and they are not ordinance changes or requirements. ~ Member Carstens
explained that the streetscape design review guidelines are only a draft at this point. She
emphasized that the guidelines are only to be used as a how-to manual, and that they are
specifically tailored to Dubuque historic districts.
Kevin Eippefie, Bajrrant Architects, presented the streetscape design guidelines to the
attendees through a PowerPoint presentation. He explained that the guidelines are based
on the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. He explained that the t-Pastoric
Preservation Conm~ission is required to use these standards when doing design reviews.
Mr. Eipperie reviewed the intent and p~, the vision and long-range goals of the
Dubuque H~tofic Preservation Districts. He then proceeded to explain the Secretary of
the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. He described the methodology for defining bhe
districts and noted that the guidelines have a list of alt the properties located in the historic
districts.
Mr. Eipperle described the format for the layout of the design review guidelines, and noted
that the format is very similar to the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
He explained the sections of the guidelines are setup with a portion that describes the
topic and a section where there are recommended, acceptable and not recommended
MinUtes- Historic Preservation Commission
January 17, 2002
Page 2
Mr. Eipperte then proceeded to desc~be each topic. The topics he described were setting
and site, driveways, parking, paving for residential, driveways, parking and paving for
commercial, sidewalks, waikways and curbs, grade changes and retaining walls, fer~ces
and gates, amenities - residential, amenities - commercial, signs and graphics, way-
finding-features, street r~ghting, yard and park features, landscaping and utilities.
Mr. Eipperle noted that there are several photos in the document that show historically
correct and incorrect ways for treatment of these topics. Mr. Eipperie then explained there
is a resource section located at the back of the book, which includes a glossary of histodc
presentation terms, resource handouts that are available Eom the Carnegie Stout Library,
and a list of City of Dubuque contacts.
The Historic Preset, ration Commission and cor, sultants from Durrant and City staff then
fielded questions from the citizens altending the public workshop. A citizen had a question
about whether or not fences would be regulated by the Historic Presentation Corr~nissi(m.
Chairperson Mozena stated that the Historic Preservation Commission currently has no
review authority over fences unless they excccd the height ref~ui~ He explained that
the section about fences and guidelines would hopefully be used es a resource for
property owners. He ex~plained that the guidelines are only guidelines, and that they are
not ordinance changes or requirements. The citizen hoped that in the future, the Histodc
Chairperson Mozena asked if the guide is in a format that is user-friendly. The citizens
responded that they would like to see mere pictures in the document.
Another citizen had questions regarding the deterioration of a limestone retaining wall, and
whether or not the Historic Preservation Commission would require replacement with a
limestone retaining wall. The HPC, Durrant and City staff explained that these are only
guidelines and not requirements, and that the guidelines would recommend that the
limesfl:me retaining wall be replaced with limestone, or the use of an acceptable
alternative, like colored concrete, before plain concrete.
A citizen made the suggestion that these manuals be given to new buyers of properties
located in historic dist~cts.
Several citizens discussed the possibility of expanding the resource section to include
contractors and manufacturers of historic building materials. Commissioner Wand
explained that the City couldn't endorse contrac~m and manufacturers of historic building
materials because of the potential of a lawsuit if a contractor or building material st,,pplier
City direct people to organizations that may be able to help.
Mina"las - Historic Preservation Commission
Janua~ 17, 2C~32
Page 3
Cir.~la Wetu, member of the Old House Enthusiasts, explained that they are currently
looking at making a list of contractors and manufacturers of histodc building materials that
could be used by owr~ers of historic properties.
The Historic Preservation Commission thanked all of the attendees of the public workshop
for their input, and explained that there will be another public workshop held for guidelines
that deal with historic structures at a later date.
I~iINUTES: Motion by Gibbs, seconded by Wand, to approve the minutes ofthe December
20, 2001 meeting as subrnil~. Motion carried by the following vote: Aye-Gibbs, Wand,
Guinn, Henson and Mozena; Nay - None.
~ FRO~ STAFF: Staff Member Carstens gave an updal~ on Phase II of the
Architectural Survey/Evaluation. She explained that the Planning Services
Department received a majority of the required information that needs to be submitted to
the State. The P~anning Services Department requested an exbsnsion until March 1,2002
to submit the required information. She also explained that the City has received an
$18,000 gm~ for Phase !11 of the Architectural/Historical Survey/Evaluation, which will
cover ~e downtown and w~rehouse sections of the city.
Staff Member Wemimont reported on the Iowa's Most Endangered Properties 2002
nominations. He explained that staff has prepared a nomination for an old stone barn
located behind 503 Southern Avenue after consulting with the property owner. The
Commission and staff discussed other properties that were nominated to the iowa's Most
Endangered Properties list last year. Staffexpla~nedtheta#thosep~h~n~ebeen
purchased and are no longer endangered.
Staff Member Carstens reported on an archeological survey that will be conducted for the
Brewery and Shot Tower area. The Commission discussed whether o~ not Peavey was
going to move out of the building located next to the Shot Tower. Staff Member Carstens
_reported that the City has come to an agreement with Peavey about relocating the outside
grain storage pad south of the railroad to a new location on the 12~ Street Peninsula~
Staff Member Carstens reported on a letter of support to the National Trust for Historic
Preservation for the Grand Opera House's application for the Johenna Favrot Funcl for
interior restoration.
The ~n commented on the project staff reports that have been inctuded in their
packet. Staff Mercd~er Carstens explained that it is a list of projects that the Planning
Se~'~ces Depa~b(~rtt is currently working on, and that the list will be supplied to the
Commission each month.
~ Guinn wanted to address signage for residential properties, and the
possibility of h~ving a standard plaque that listed the house address, name of the house
Minutes - H~dc Preservation
January 17, 2002
Page 4
and the year i~ was built_ The C~ion decided that this topic should be discussed at
the meeting of the Steering Committee for design review gutael~nes
Staff Member Carstens addressed some issues that the City Manager had regarding the
streetscape guidelines. She explained that the C~ Manager wouid like to have the
g~ exp~[c-fl~ s~a~ that they are not regulatory and they are only guide~Lqea~ She
also explained that some of the guidelines Mi! need to be reworded because they are
cma§ng expectations that are not economically f~asible. She also requested that
underneath the driveway, parking and paving sections for residential and commercial,
under the 'acceptable" catego~, the addition of standard plain concrete. She no{~l under
the sidewalks, watkways and curbs section, that the guidelines setup an unreasonable
expectation that the City cannot financially meet. She referred to the fact that the City
currently has 350 milas of roadways, but that only two miles are reconstructed each year
and 10 miles am resuffaced each year. She also explained that
million from the State for street improvements.
NOTE: Co~.u-~issioner Wand left the meeting at 6:50 p.m.
She then asked the Commission whether or not they want to continue with the City Cour~Jt
work session and send the guidelines to the Council as ~s, or reword them and send them
to the Council or send them bac~ to the project steering committee to reword. The
Commission agreed to reword the streetscape guJdeJines and send them to City CounciJ
for the upcoming wor~ session.
k~on by Guinn, seconded by Mozena, to reword the streetscape guidelines and send
them to the CounciJ work session on January 21, 2002. Motion carried by the foJJowing
vot~: Aye - Guinn, Henson, Gibbs and Mozena; Nay - None.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Gibbs, seconded by Guinn to adjourn the meeting. ~o~
carded by the fo'ii'wing vote: Aye - Guinn, Henson, Gibbs and Mozena; Nay- No~. The
meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Wally Wemimont, Assistant Planner Adopted