The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 4 PlanCITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 PREPARED BY WINTER & COMPANY Mayor and City CounCil Ron Corbett | Mayor Susie Weinacht | At-Large Ann Poe | At-Large Ralph Russell | At Large Kris Gulick | District 1 Monica Vernon | District 2 Pat Shey | District 3 Scott Olson | District 4 Justin Shields | District 5 Cedar rapids City planning CoMMission Dominique Blank Samantha Dahlby James Halverson Bill Hunse Kim King Carletta Knox-Seymour Scott Overland Richard Pankey Virginia Wilts historiC preservation plan task forCe Pat Shey, City Council Ann Poe, City Council Carletta KnoxSeymour, City Planning Commission Amanda McKnight Grafton, Historic Preservation Commission Mark Stoffer Hunter, Historic Preservation Commission Richard Cooley, Medical SSMID Kevin Ciabatti, City of Cedar Rapids, Building Services Vern Zakostelecky, City of Cedar Rapids, Development Services City Manager's offiCe Jeff Pomeranz Sandi Fowler Emily Muhlbach City of Cedar rapids staff Jennifer Pratt, Director of Community Development Bill Micheel, Assistant Director of Community Development Kevin Ciabatti, Director of Building Services Vern Zakostelecky, Development Services Jeff Hintz, Community Development Anne Russett, Community Development Thomas Smith, Community Development Cedar rapids historiC preservation CoMMission Amanda McKnight Grafton, Chair Todd McNall, Vice Chair Bob Grafton, Secretary Samuel Bergus Patricia Cargin Caitlin Hartman BJ Hobart Ronald Mussman Tim Oberbroeckling Mark Stoffer Hunter Barbara Westercamp Consultant teaM Winter & Company Noré Winter Julie Husband This project was produced under the terms of a Memorandum of Agreement, pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, among the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency, the State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, and the City of Cedar Rapids, regarding the demolition of historic properties in Cedar Rapids, Linn County, Iowa. FEMA administered Federal disaster assistance through FEMA's Public Assistance Program pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act for the demolition of historic properties damaged as a result of flooding in July 2008 that resulted in declared disaster DR-1763-IA. Note that where a source is not indicated, the image was provided by Winter & Company. aCknoWledGements Figure 1: 1868 "Birds Eye" View of Cedar Rapids (above) and Kingston (below). Source: Web taBle of Contents part 1 - preservation in Cedar rapids 1 introduction 3 Cedar Rapids Preservation Program Overview 3 What is Historic Preservation? 4 Benefits of Preservation 4 What is a Historic Preservation Plan? 7 How to use the Historic Preservation Plan 7 Relationship to Other Plans and Policies 7 Community Outreach 8 Chronology of Historic Preservation Efforts in Cedar Rapids 8 a vision for preservation in Cedar rapids 10 Cedar rapids preservation program 15 Overview of Preservation Program Components 15 Goals, Policies & Incentives 16 Overall Goals, Policies and Initiatives 16 Administration 20 Identification 21 Management Tools 23 Incentives & Benefits 30 Education 32 Community Preservation Program Partners 36 implementation 38 part 2 - preservation BaCkGroUnd 45 historic preservation program Components 47 Administration 48 Identification 50 Management Tools 65 Incentives & Benefits 74 Education 76 part 3 - the City's CUltUral resoUrCes 81 Historic Survey Contexts 83 Existing Landmarks and Districts 92 A Description of Property Types 99 Community Preservation Program Partners 105 appendiCes 109 appendix 1 - Community outreach 111 appendix 2 - preservation ordinance review (Chapter 18) 129 appendix 3 - historic survey prioritization table 138 appendix 4 - glossary 140 appendix 5 - national register Criteria for evaluation 145 1 preservation in Cedar rapids Figure 2: "Scene on First Avenue" photo taken by WIlliam Baylis c. 1900. 200 block of First Avenue NE. Source: City of Cedar Rapids. 2 Preservation in cedar rapids Figure 3: Many of the officially listed historic properties are located on the east side of the Cedar River. The largest concentrations of these historic properties are in the 2nd & 3rd Avenue and Redmond Park-Grande Avenue Local Historic Districts and the B Avenue NE NRHP - listed district. Districts that are under the oversight of the Historic Preservation Commission include: 2nd & 3rd Avenue Local Historic District and Redmond Park- Grande Avenue Local Historic District. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. Cedar rapids local historic landmarks and districts and nrhp-listed districts and properties 2nd & 3rd Avenue Local Historic District 3rd. Ave SW Commercial NRHP-listed district B Avenue NE NRHP-listed district Bohemian Commercial NRHP-listed district May's Island NRHP-listed district Oak Hill Cemetery NRHP-listed cultural landscape Redmond Park - Grande Avenue Local Historic District NRHP-listed properties key 3 Cedar r apids preservation proGram overvieW Cedar Rapids has a well-established preservation program, which enjoys broad support by its citizens. It also is recognized as a key ingredient in community well-being and livability. Noteworthy National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) individual listings, such as the Veteran’s Memorial Coliseum and Linn County District Court, stand as signature reference points in the city and other places, including numerous churches and schools, symbolize the community’s heritage. Some parks, sites and other structures also are valued for their historic significance. Archaeological remains extend this sense of connection with the past. In many parts of the city, entire neighborhoods maintain their historic character and provide places to live today while retaining a sense of the past. Other older neighborhoods with traditional building patterns also contribute to the sense of place that is Cedar Rapids, even though they may not be officially designated. These areas, both residential and commercial, enhance the city’s quality of life. Many historic properties are formally listed in the NRHP and as contributing properties within Local Historic Districts. Others remain to be identified as having historic significance and still others, while known to be of historic value, have not been formally designated. While historic properties are valued, many factors challenge their preservation. Some properties may be altered in ways that diminish their integrity. Others may be under pressure for demolition, sometimes for redevelopment and sometimes because of extensive deterioration. These challenges exist in part because some people may not value their historic properties. Others are not aware of the significance of their properties, or lack the means to maintain them. In some cases, other objectives may appear to be in conflict with preservation. Responding to these factors in strategic ways is key to an effective preservation program. While challenges will continue, this is a particularly exciting time of opportunity for preservation in Cedar Rapids, as well as nationally. There is an increasing understanding of the roles that preservation and neighborhood conservation can play in sustainability and how they complement many other community development objectives. New partnerships are forming in which a variety of groups promote historic properties in their work programs. For example, health care providers are promoting “Healthy Heritage” walks as part of their preventive medicine strategies. introdUC tion Figure 4: Aerial view of Cedar Rapids. Source: City of Cedar Rapids Figure 5: View of Veteran's Memorial Building on May's Island. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 4 Preservation in cedar rapids What is historiC preservation Preservation means having properties and places of historic and cultural value in active use and accommodating appropriate improvements to sustain their viability while maintaining the key, character-defining features which contribute to their significance as cultural resources. In addition, preservation means keeping cultural resources intact for the benefit of future generations. Benefits of historiC preservation Cedar Rapids’ historic properties are essential components of the City’s identity. They enhance quality of life, economic vitality, and environmental sustainability. Investment in these assets ensures that the social, cultural, and economic attraction of the City is maintained and enhanced. livability and Quality of life The distinct character of Cedar Rapids contributes to the city’s identity and sense of community. When historic buildings occur together on a block, they create a street scene that is “pedestrian friendly,” which encourages walking and neighborly interaction. Decorative architectural features also contribute to a sense of identity that is distinct from newer areas of the city. This sense of place also reinforces desirable community social patterns and contributes to a sense of security. Construction Quality Early construction often was of high quality. Lumber came from mature trees, was properly seasoned and typically milled to “full dimensions,” providing stronger framing and construction. Buildings also were thoughtfully detailed and the finishes were generally well crafted—characteristics that owners today appreciate. The quality of construction in earlier buildings is therefore an asset. adaptability Owners also recognize that the floor plans of many historic properties easily accommodate changing needs. Rooms in historic homes and commercial buildings are frequently large, permitting a variety of uses while retaining their overall historic character. economic Benefits The economic benefits of investing in historic properties is well-documented. Because historic properties are finite and cannot be replaced, they can be precious commodities. Preservation therefore adds value to property. Other economic benefits come from jobs generated for rehabilitation projects and on the income generated by heritage tourism. Figure 6: Cedar Rapids' historic properties are essential components of the City's identity. They enhance quality of life, economic vitality, and environmental sustainability. Theatre Cedar Rapids building at 102 Third Street SE. Opened in June 1928 as the Iowa Theatre Building. Figure 7: Grant Wood, a prominent member of the Regionalist movement and one of the most famous painters of the 20th Century, lived and worked at #5 Turner Alley from 1924 - 1935. Today, the studio is open for tours and supports the City's heritage tourism program. 5 Historic Rehabilitation Projects Preservation projects are generally more labor intensive, with up to 70% of the total project budget being spent on labor, as opposed to 50% when compared to new construction. This means that more of the money invested in a project will stay in the local economy and not be used toward materials and other costs or sourced outside the community. Furthermore, a rehabilitation project can provide functional, distinctive, and affordable space for new and existing small businesses. This is especially relevant to the local economy where many local businesses operate in historic buildings. Heritage Tourism Heritage tourism is another benefit of investing in historic preservation, as people are attracted to the cultural heritage sites within an area. These resources provide visitors a link to Cedar Rapids’ history and an understanding of its contribution to state and national history. Cultural heritage tourism means traveling to experience the places that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present. It includes cultural, historic, and natural resources. Heritage tourists spend more dollars on travel than other tourists. Studies show that heritage tourism also stimulates employment in hotels, bed and breakfasts, motels, retail stores, restaurants, and other service businesses. The City has an opportunity to build this segment of the economy because many of its historic buildings and districts are of interest to visitors. However, it must make substantial improvements to the historic building stock and expand interpretive programs to do so. (See page 18 for more detail.) environmental Benefits Sustainable development and the conservation of resources also are central principles of historic preservation. Sensitive stewardship of the existing building stock reduces environmental impacts, because re-using a building preserves the energy and resources invested in its construction, and removes the need for producing new construction materials. Embodied Energy Embodied energy is defined as the amount of energy included to create a building and its components. Preserving a historic structure retains this energy investment. Wood, stone, brick, and glass all manifest the energy investment of their creation and the energy invested in building construction. If demolished, this investment in embodied energy is lost and significant new energy demands are required to erect a replacement. In addition, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, building debris constitutes around a third of all waste generated in the country. This can be reduced significantly if historic structures are retained rather than demolished. Figure 8: Heritage tourism is another benefit of investing in historic preservation, as people are attracted to the cultural heritage sites within an area. These resources provide visitors a link to Cedar Rapids' history and an understanding of its contribution to state and national history. Old Federal Building and Post Office built 1908-1909 at Second Avenue and Third Street SE. 6 Preservation in cedar rapids Sustainable Building Materials Many early builders used durable traditional materials of wood, stone, and brick and they were built for longevity, in a manner that allows for repairs to be conducted easily. The sustainable nature of historic construction is best illustrated by the design and construction of a window. Historic windows can be repaired through reglazing and the patching and splicing of wood elements. Contemporary windows are often difficult to repair, with replacement as the only option. For example, if a seal is disturbed in a vinyl window the best approach is to replace that particular window, rather than repair the part, as is the case for a historic wood window, and the damaged one then goes into the landfill. Older windows often were built with stronger, durable, weather resistant wood that will last for decades when maintained properly. Building Energy Savings Repair and weather-stripping or adding insulation usually is more energy efficient and much less expensive than replacing windows. Much of the energy lost from a house is from air infiltration through the attic, uninsulated walls, and around the windows and door cavities, and not through the glazing of windows and doors. Proper caulking and insulation around windows and doors, combined with adding insulation in attic space, will save energy at a higher rate than by replacing single paned wood windows with double or tripled paned alternatives. As cities across the country develop more focused sustainability programs, the environmental benefits of historic preservation will become even more important. It is essential that preservation advocates actively participate in policy development along these lines. 7 What is a historiC preservation plan? This Preservation Plan is the guiding document for the City of Cedar Rapids to use in cooperation with the City's Comprehensive Plan for maintaining historic properties and places while also planning for the future of the city. The historic setting of neighborhoods, such as Czech Village, and downtown are important to the identity of the community. However, the historic properties that contribute to the setting are under threat from improper treatment, insensitive development, and natural disasters. In order to protect these resources, but also continue to allow economic development, the City must gain a clear picture of the existing resources and seek the means to protect the community character that local residents seek to preserve. hoW to Use the historiC preservation plan The Historic Preservation Plan provides both the vision and the policy direction for historic preservation within the City through the identification of goals, policies, and initiatives. The plan will be used by the City and preservation groups to guide and monitor preservation efforts within the community. Businesses, property owners and members of the general public may also use the plan to learn about the preservation program and the status of the preservation initiatives. Historic preservation is a part of many community interests, including housing, sustainability, and economic development. Therefore, this plan seeks to balance broader community objectives while achieving its core mission of retaining cultural resources in the context of other City initiatives. relationship to other plans and poliCies The Historic Preservation Plan is a component of EnvisionCR, the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Other documents that relate closely to the Historic Preservation Plan include: • Guidelines for Cedar Rapids Historic Districts 2008 • Various Historical and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey Reports • Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Code of Ordinances, Chapter 18 Historic Preservation • Iowa Code, Chapter 303.20 • Certified Local Government Program and Agreement • The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation In addition to these documents and other community plans and policies, the plan works with the federal, state and local regulations that provide the legal basis for historic preservation efforts in Cedar Rapids. Local regulations include zoning standards that relate to all properties in the city as well as special overlays for local historic districts that enable the Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to review modifications to local landmarks and properties within local historic districts. Figure 9: The historic setting of downtown is important to the identify of the community; however, the historic properties that contribute to the setting are under threat from improper treatment, insensitive development and natural disasters. 300 block of Third Avenue SE. Right to left: Arco Building (c. 1930), Kubias Building (1902), Heritage Building (1893 & 1905). 8 Preservation in cedar rapids CommUnity oUtreaCh In the course of developing the Preservation Plan, the following meetings, focus groups, and public events helped to inform the development of the Historic Preservation Plan. • Focus group meeting with historic preservation interest groups (April 2014, September 2014) • Focus group meetings with health care representatives (September 2014) • Focus group meetings with business and development representatives (April 2014) • Public workshop (September 2014) • City departments (April 2014, September 2014) • Public open house (April 2015) Nearly 40 members of the public attended the public workshop held in September 2014. At this event participants initially responded to questions individually. Then they divided into groups where they consolidated their ideas. At the open house held in April 2015, approximately 30 members of the public provided input on the initiatives outlined in the Preservation Plan.. Please see Appendix 1 for the results of the input received. ChronoloGy of historiC preservation efforts in Cedar r apids The following chronology identifies key historic preservation efforts in Cedar Rapids from the early 1970s to 2015. 1970s – Early preservation awareness efforts commence 1976 – Early discussions regarding the development of a potential Historic Preservation Ordinance for Cedar Rapids Figure 10: Many community members attended the public Open House for the presentation of the Draft Plan in April 2015. 9 1976 – The first Historical and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey in Cedar Rapids takes place for structures proposed to be removed or demolished under the Community Development Program 1978 – May’s Island Historic District accepted to National Register of Historic Places 1980s – Historical surveys and reports of individual properties and small areas in the core of the community 1994 – Adoption of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance by the Cedar Rapids City Council 1994 – Establishment of the Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation Commission 1999 – The City establishes the Redmond Park-Grande Avenue and the 2nd and 3rd Avenue Local Historic Districts 2001 – Creation of a task force to develop recommendations to the Cedar Rapids City Council regarding design guidelines for buildings within the City’s Local Historic Districts 2002 – Adoption of the Guidelines for Cedar Rapids Historic Districts by the Cedar Rapids City Council 2002 – Establishment of the Bohemian Commercial Historic District, which was expanded in 2009 2008 – Devastating flood impacts multiple historic properties in the core of Cedar Rapids 2009/2010 – Architectural Reconnaissance Surveys undertaken for flood impacted neighborhoods in the core of the community to identify historical resources and assets 2011 – City enters into multiple memorandums of agreements with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other agencies to address the impacts on historic properties and begins implementation of these measures 2013 – Efforts to create historic districts continued with the successful establishment of the B Avenue NE NRHP-listed District and the Oak Hill Cemetery NRHP-listed Cultural Landscape 2014 – Completed the Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey, which focused on areas of the city not previously surveyed and developed prior to 1965 and established the 3rd Avenue SW Commercial NRHP-listed District 2015 – The City Council approves the City’s first Local Historic Landmark, the Ausadie Building 10 Preservation in cedar rapids As the Preservation Plan is implemented, results will be seen in a more vital city with an active downtown and well-kept older neighborhoods. The community vision for historic properties and the preservation program is described in this series of qualitative statements: 1. historiC properties are inteGral to life in Cedar r apids. In the future, historic preservation in Cedar Rapids is a vital part of broader community development policies and objectives. It serves as an important tool in economic development, public health, sustainability, housing and cultural enrichment. In this respect, it embraces a holistic approach to planning and development. a vision for preservation in Cedar rapids Figure 11: Figure 12: FIgure 11 Peter Pan Bakery building in the 300 block of Sixth Avenue SE. Figure 12: George Greene Square c. 1910. Photo by William Baylis. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 11 2. historiC properties Convey the hUmanity of the City. They provide links to heritage and enable people to feel a sense of connection with their past and with the community as a whole. Historic properties also provide opportunities to interpret the history of the community, to comment on events that have shaped it, and build a cultural understanding. 3. a net Work of individUals and orGanizations sUpport historiC preservation throUGhoUt the CommUnity. In the future, the preservation program remains community-based, inviting different organizations to share in its activities. It links official City preservation components with conservation-related activities of other groups and individuals. Figure 13: Figure 14: Figure 15: Figure 16: Figure 17: Figure 13: McKinley School at 610 Tenth Street SE. Built 1921-1922. FIgure 14: Atop the Veteran's Memorial Building on Mays Island. Opened in 1928. Figure 15: Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center at 2160 Linden Drive SE Figure 16: The History Center at 800 Second Avenue SE. Source: Web Figure 17: National Czech & Slovak Museum & Library at 1400 Inspiration Place SW. Source: Web 12 Preservation in cedar rapids 4. historiC preservation is solUtion oriented. The program helps owners find solutions for maintaining historic properties in active and appropriate uses. This includes the City permitting process. 5. historiC preservation looks forWard While valUinG the past. The program seeks ways in which historic properties help maintain the vitality of the city. It is forward looking, helping the community meet its aspirations for the future in ways that make best use of its older built resources. Figure 18: Figure 19: Figure 20: Figure 21: Figure 18: Bottleworks at 905 Third Street SE. Built in 1946 as Witwer Grocer Company. (NRHP) FIgure 19: Sokol Gymnasium building, at 415-417-419 Third Street SE. Opened in 1908. (NRHP) Figure 20: Bethel AME Church at 512 Sixth Street SE. Built in 1931. (NRHP) Source: Web Figure 21: Bohemian Commercial Historic District. Third Street SE from Tenth Avenue to Eleventh Avenue SE. 13 6. historiC preservation is inteGrated in planninG efforts. Many departments and agencies in the community recognize the value of historic properties and employ strategies which support historic preservation as they seek to achieve their individual missions. 7. the City’s historiC preservation proGram is readily aCCessiBle. Program components are easy to understand and lay people, as well as professionals, can participate in the system at a variety of levels. They can engage in researching and nominating resources for designation. They also can easily comment on City preservation activities and they can anticipate the potential outcomes of properties that are managed by preservation tools. Figure 22: Figure 23: Figure 22: Cover and report graphics from the City's Comprehensive Plan, 2015. Source: City of Cedar Rapids Figure 23: View of Mays Island c. 1915. Old City Hall at left on Third Avenue. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 1 A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA draft january 27, 2015 PREPARED BY RDG PLANNING & DESIGN HR GREEN, INC. strengthen 43 Map 4: Local and National Historic Districts Historic resources Historic resources are an important part of Cedar Rapids’ identity. They enhance quality of life, economic vitality, and environmental sustainability, which can lead to a community’s overall space well being. Investment in these assets is a priority of the City of Cedar Rapids, and therefore, future planning efforts should carefully consider the role of historic preservation. Map 4 outlines the City’s seven national historic districts. local and National districts 1. 2nd & 3rd Avenue Historic District 2. Redmond Park – Grande Avenue Historic District National districts only 1. 3rd Avenue SW Commercial National Historic District 2. B Avenue NE National Historic District 3. Bohemian Commercial National Historic District 4. May’s Island National Historic District 5. Oak Hill Cemetery National Historic District National Register of Historic Places Historic districtnorth SouRCE: CITY oF CEdAR RAPIdS GIS, RdG PlANNING & dESIGN (jANuARY 2015)guiding principles 19 GuIDING PRINCIPLES ACHIEVE A uNIFIED VISION LIVE HEALtHY StRENGtHEN NEIGHBORHOODS kEEP BuSINESS VIBRANt CONNECt tHE CItY StREAMLINE SERVICES EMBRACE tHE OutDOORS guiding principles 19 GuIDING PRINCIPLES ACHIEVE A uNIFIED VISION LIVE HEALtHY StRENGtHEN NEIGHBORHOODS kEEP BuSINESS VIBRANt CONNECt tHE CItY StREAMLINE SERVICES EMBRACE tHE OutDOORS 14 Preservation in cedar rapids 8. the preservation proGram provides GUidanCe for treatment of historiC properties. Historic properties are identified and described in a manner that helps people understand their significance and interpret their association with the community. They are then listed, or designated, as appropriate in a manner that helps facilitate informed management of the properties. A set of tools is then applied, including regulations, incentives and benefits, which are coordinated with this evaluation and designation system, providing the appropriate degree of benefits and restrictions. 9. historiC properties are key to the City’s sUstainaBility initiatives. Preserving historic properties is a fundamental part of a comprehensive approach to sustainability. Keeping historic properties in use conserves the energy embodied in their creation. Historic buildings also can operate in energy conserving ways, and compatible retrofits for energy conservation are encouraged. Figure 24: Figure 25: Figure 26: Figure 27: Figure 28: Figure 29: Figure 30: Figure 24: Historic rehabilitation FIgure 25: Buresh House restoration at 77 Sixteenth Avenue SW (in process). Figure 26: Buresh House restoration at 77 Sixteenth Avenue SW (after). FIgure 27: Restored Ferguson-Huston House at 1208 First Avenue NW . Built in 1886. Figure 28: Lustron prefabricated house at 2009 Williams Boulevard SW. Source: City of Rapid City FIgure 29: Borden Hutchinson Building at 200 Fifth Avenue SE. Built in 1919. Figure 30: Rehabilitation of 19th Century structures in the 200 block of Third Street SE occurred in 1986, 1997 and 2006. 15 Cedar rapids preservation proG ram overvieW of preservation proGram Components Many groups contribute to Cedar Rapids’ preservation program using a range of strategies and tools that work together to form its essential components. While many initiatives will be directed and led by the City, they will require collaboration with preservation partners and other stakeholders to be successful. The preservation program is organized around five strategic components: administration The framework for operating the preservation program. identification The survey and recognition of properties with cultural or historic significance. Management tools The specific mechanisms for protecting historic properties. incentives and Benefits Programs that assist property owners and support preservation. education The tools to build awareness and strengthen skills to support preservation. For each component, a series of goals, policies and initiatives are identified. goal An overarching statement of intent/objective to guide preservation-based decisions. policy A more specific intent/objective statement to guide preservation decisions and activities. initiative Initiatives identify the step required to achieve the policies in the plan. They are often prioritized. Figure 31: Cupola atop the Immaculate Conception Church (1914-1915) at Third Avenue and Tenth Street SE. 16 Preservation in cedar rapids Goals, poliCies and initiatives This section outlines the goals, policies and initiatives in an overall category and the five strategic preservation program components. overall Goals, poliCies and initiatives Historic preservation should be an integral part of planning for Cedar Rapids’ future. The overall goals, policies and initiatives described below will help foster a citywide commitment to historic preservation. Goal 1 A sustainable community supported by preservation efforts. Historic preservation can make a significant contribution to a vital local economy by conserving the community’s infrastructure investments, preserving livable neighborhoods and supporting heritage tourism, as well as, promoting environmental, cultural and social sustainability. 1.1 policy: promote economic sustainability through historic preservation. Historic preservation should make a significant contribution to a vital local economy by conserving the community’s infrastructure investments, preserving livable neighborhoods and supporting heritage tourism. Historic buildings represent millions of dollars of infrastructure investment. Keeping properties in service assures that they will contribute to City revenues that are used to protect the community’s investment in the infrastructure of older neighborhoods. 1.1.a initiative: explore the preparation of an adaptive reuse ordinance. Study the development of an adaptive reuse ordinance that focuses on keeping buildings in active service and in accommodating compatible alterations. Consider provisions that allow flexibility to facilitate adaptive reuse projects, such as the conversation of older, underutilized, and historically significant buildings, to new uses. Figure 32: Rehabilitated historic structures at 1000, 1006 and 1010 Third Street SE in the Bohemian Commercial Historic District. 17 1.2 policy: promote environmental sustainability through historic preservation. Historic preservation can make a significant contribution to a community’s environmental sustainability activities. Preservation maintains the energy invested in original construction and reduces demolition waste. 1.2.a initiative: Work with igreenCr and the environmental initiatives in envisionCr to include preservation in environment programs. 1.2.b initiative: tailor energy efficiency standards to fit historic properties. Explore opportunities to provide flexibility for historic properties in building and zoning codes related to energy efficiency, emphasizing overall energy savings of a well-managed historic property, rather than the performance of individual building elements. 1.3 policy: promote cultural and social sustainability through historic preservation. Preserving historic places and neighborhoods promotes cultural and social sustainability by supporting everyday connections between residents and Cedar Rapids’ rich heritage. These areas also make livable places, which contribute to the quality of life for the city’s citizens. Many of the goals, policies and Initiatives throughout this plan closely relate to cultural and social sustainability. 1.3.a initiative: develop and distribute educational materials (e.g. brochures, postcards, web-based materials) for property owners and the general public to enhance public awareness and understanding of the city’s cultural and social history. Continue to publish historic guides, and consider developing guided tours and mounting web-based information to help support this initiative as well. 1.3.b initiative: Work with the linn County health department to promote historic preservation. Explore ways to collaborate with the Linn County Health Department to promote the health benefits of historic or traditional neighborhoods. These include areas built before the dominance of the automobile which are pedestrian-friendly and include a mix of uses that promote walking and social interaction. Often, such neighborhoods also provide accessible services that facilitate aging in place. Figure 33: A recent past building is modified with solar panels to enhance its energy efficiency. Kouba building (1959) at 1016 Third Street SE in the Bohemian Commercial Historic District. 18 Preservation in cedar rapids Goal 2 Preservation principles are embedded in other community goals and policies. 2.1 policy: integrate historic preservation policies into citywide planning efforts. Preservation should be a core value of the community and integrated throughout the community. 2.1.a initiative: incorporate historic preservation into neighborhood action plans and Corridor action plans, planning study areas, and other City planning projects. As part of any City planning process, incorporate preservation principles, utilize historic survey data to provide a base line for understanding existing conditions, and explore the use of preservation and conservation tools, such as historic or conservation districts. 2.2 policy: promote “best practices” in historic preservation within civic buildings. The City of Cedar Rapids owns a number of important historic properties. Through its treatment of these resources, it sets an example for private property owners and encourages innovative preservation solutions. 2.2.a initiative: Continue to pursue landmark designation of eligible city-owned structures. To lead by example, explore local designation of the City’s eligible properties; begin with those properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). 2.2.b initiative: explore creating a program that coordinates public Works and Community development staff on infrastructure projects within historic districts. For example, coordinate improvements to historic brick streets. 2.2.c initiative: Continue to promote public access to historically significant civic resources. Continue to support public access to City-owned historically significant properties. For some of these resources, this involves public use of the facility as a part of its primary purpose. In other cases, it may involve making a property available only for a special event, or a guided tour. Figure 34: Linn County Courthouse (1923-1925) on Mays Island at Third Avenue. 19 Goal 3 A livable community with a strong sense of history. The history of the Cedar Rapids area and its residents serves as the foundation of the City’s identity in the 21st century. Innovative historic preservation and cultural resource management policies and procedures should build upon this identity by protecting cultural resources, providing economic development opportunities, promoting heritage tourism, encouraging citizen involvement in the city’s history, and fostering civic pride overall. 3.1 policy: preserve archaeological resources as part of Cedar rapids’ rich history. Cedar Rapids has numerous archaeological resources of cultural, ethno-historical and scientific importance. This record is conveyed in traces of the earliest native settlements. Material from early European settlement and the development of the river environs and the railroad system are also important parts of the community’s archaeological heritage. 3.1.a initiative: develop guidelines for the treatment of archaeological resources. Where feasible, document archaeological artifacts, features, and sites. Where new development does not allow for preservation of archaeological resources, carefully document according to federal, state and local standards and regulations. See the Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in Iowa (1999) www.aiarchaeologist.org/guidelines 3.1.b initiative: Maintain up-to-date information on potentially sensitive archaeological areas. Maintain a list of potentially sensitive archaeological areas. This information should be used when considering construction projects. Access to such information should, however, be controlled to reduce the risk of vandalism. The city should work in partnership with the Office of the Iowa State Archaeologist at the University of Iowa to locate these sensitive areas. Information regarding the nature and location of archaeological sites is considered private and confidential and not for public disclosure in accordance with Section 304 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. §470w-3); 36 CFR Part 800.6 (a)(5) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s rules implementing Sections 106 and 110 of the Act; Section 9(a) of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh(a-b) and, Chapter 22.7, subsection 20 of the Iowa Code. 3.1.c. initiative: develop a public information brochure on archaeological resources. Work with the state archaeologist to develop a concise archaeological public information brochure regarding resources relevant to the Cedar Rapids environs. It will identify what archaeological resources are and the types of resources that may be found and what to do if they encountered during construction. It should also reference State Laws regarding burials and human remains. See Iowa Code Chapter 263B.7 State Archaeologist <www.https://coolice.legis.iowa.gov/cool-ice/default.asp? category=billinfo&service=iowacode&input=263B> Figure 35: Historic view of Cedar Rapids streetcar at First Avenue and Twentieth Street East c. 1907. Photo by William Baylis. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 20 Preservation in cedar rapids administration A successful preservation program requires ongoing administrative support and commitment by the City. The overall administration of this plan will be through the City’s Community Development Department, but interdepartmental cooperation is essential to achieve the goals of the program. Goal 4 The City maintains a functional, integrated preservation program. Best practices for administering a preservation program include providing sufficient staff, maintaining a well-managed HPC and providing convenient access to information needed by property owners and other users. Review processes should be efficient as well, making best use of time for all participants. 4.1 policy: Monitor the performance of the preservation program on an on-going basis to assure that it maintains a high level of performance. 4.1.a initiative: implement an annual program review. Conduct an annual interdepartmental review of the preservation program, including the following: familiarizing staff from other departments with the preservation program and identifying how it can help to achieve some of their other objectives, and presenting a status report to City Council. A simple reporting form that helps to measure activity in the preservation program may be used to inform the annual review. This process is also an opportunity to track progress and identify challenges and opportunities on the implementation of the initiatives 4.1.b initiative: Maintain and enhance compliance regulations for Certified local government (Clg) status. Maintain regulations in the City’s historic preservation ordinance and other City codes to ensure Cedar Rapids’ continuing CLG status. Figure 36: Best practices for administering a preservation program include providing sufficient staff, maintaining a well-managed HPC and providing convenient access to information needed by property owners and other users. Boat launch at Ellis Park c. 1910. 21 identifiCation The identification component of the preservation program focuses on surveying historic properties and evaluating them for potential significance. Having a comprehensive, up-to-date survey provides property owners and public officials important information that informs their decisions about acquisition, designation, maintenance and stewardship of historic properties. Maintaining this survey also is a condition of the city’s CLG status. Using funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the City completed the Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey, which along with other survey and historic inventory data, are integrated into a GIS database. This system will be available to assist with other preservation planning efforts and also in any future disaster response and recovery programs. When survey information is entered into the GIS system, it can be combined with other property information to enable new, creative manipulation of data that can “predict” where historic properties may be located. It also can provide information that helps with broader sustainability and neighborhood planning work. Goal 5 A detailed understanding of Cedar Rapids' history that provides a base for preservation efforts. 5.1 policy: encourage and support the identification of historic properties throughout Cedar rapids. 5.1.a initiative: prioritize the list of areas that have been identified for intensive surveys in the Cedar rapids Citywide historic and architectural reconnaissance survey. (See Appendix for preliminary recommendations.) 5.1.b initiative: Move forward with the development of intensive surveys as prioritized, and incorporate a gis component that is compatible with the City’s comprehensive gis database of historic properties. Intensive surveys should also: • Provide sufficient information for use as a management tool, i.e. indicate a property’s level of significance, potential for designation, and aid in its management and treatment decisions. • Clearly define key, character-defining features of an individual property. • Indicate those parts of the property which are less sensitive, and where greater flexibility for alterations is appropriate. 5.1.c initiative: identify areas that have not been surveyed, but which are potentially eligible as places where additional surveys might be especially important. There are a host of properties that are coming up on 50+ years old to evaluate for potential eligibility to NRHP or local listing. This preliminary analysis will help in establishing priorities for additional survey work. Figure 37: YMCA Building (1918-1919) at 500 First Avenue NE. (Demolished 2004) Source: City of Cedar Rapids Figure 38: View of early airplane in Cedar Rapids. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 22 Preservation in cedar rapids Goal 6 Information is available regarding the history and potential significance of historic properties throughout Cedar Rapids. 6.1 policy: enhance the level of survey information that is available to the public digitally. Extensive digital information on the City’s historic properties should be readily accessible to the public. 6.1.a initiative: expand the use and content of the gis database of historic properties. Integrate the historic property inventory with the City’s GIS so that all information related to an individual property is easily accessible to City staff and the public. This information can also assist in decision-making when considering the feasibility of redeveloping or rehabilitating a property. Figure 39: Figure 39: 1898 Chicago and Northwestern Railroad bridge over the Cedar River. 23 manaGement tools Management tools are the mechanisms for protecting historic properties and providing technical assistance related to preservation. A diverse assortment of preservation tools should serve Cedar Rapids’ needs. These should be based on national standards of best practices, and at the same time should be tailored to the city. Cedar Rapids’ primary tools are the ordinances that guide historic preservation efforts as well as underlying zoning regulations that shape the character of new buildings in historic areas. The design review process and design guidelines that address treatment of the city’s historic properties are also management tools. These provide an effective framework for preservation. In some cases, however, individual tools presently lack sufficient clarity or they conflict with others. Goal 7 Clear and concise ordinances that guide the preservation program, protect historic properties and promote preservation goals. The City’s preservation ordinance and other related codes should be clear and easy to interpret. They should also reflect best practices in organization and content. 7.1 policy: ensure consistency between the City’s plan, ordinances, and guidelines. 7.2 policy: streamline project review and enforcement to promote preservation objectives, provide a positive experience for applicants, and to promote preservation goals. Figure 40: Old Fire Station #3 at 1300 B Avenue NE c. 1905. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 24 Preservation in cedar rapids 7.2.a initiative: update Chapter 18 historic preservation of the municipal code. (see appendix for preliminary recommendations.) Update the existing preservation code to ensure usability and consistency with preservation goals and policies. This includes requiring a certificate of appropriateness for work on historic properties, discouraging demolition of eligible or listed local, state or national historic register resources, and enforcing violations. The update should: • Explore modifications to the ordinance regarding demolitions (e.g. partial demolitions, denial of demolition permits), based on historic significance, while also addressing conditions of economic hardship. • Revise the ordinance to clarify how the requirements apply differently to contributing vs. non-contributing properties. • Streamline the permitting process for demolitions and certificates of appropriateness to allow for administrative reviews and approvals in certain circumstances. • Consider development of a stand-alone enforcement and penalty policy. • Use a Certificate of Occupancy compliance-tracking form to aid code enforcement staff in site inspections for preservation-related work. • Address the preservation of architectural detail and ornamentation. • Incorporate a review of the Guidelines for Cedar Rapids Historic Districts to identify guidelines that may be appropriate as regulations. • Refine processes and procedures for demolition review to address properties already identified as having historic significance and those that may have the potential to be considered historic properties. Also include a process for clearing those buildings that have been surveyed and identified as not having historic significance. A demolition review process for historic properties may be used to explore: • Options for reuse by the current owner • Options for addressing potential economic hardship • Options for sale of the property to another owner • The merits of considering landmark designation proceedings as a means of making other demolition prevention tools available • Other options including relocation or deconstruction • Identifying the threshold of building fabric decay that must exist for initiating a demolition by neglect Initiative, providing a clear time frame for the proceeding and developing options including donation of the structure, relocation or sale at auction • Other conditions to the delay provision, such as requiring that future development plans be approved prior to actual demolition • Identifying a clear process for identifying properties at risk of demolition by neglect • Partial and speculative demolition 25 7.2.b initiative: update the guidelines for Cedar rapids historic districts. Update the historic district design guidelines to ensure they are comprehensive, address new trends in historic preservation, and incorporate graphics in a user-friendly format . The update should address: • Established neighborhood contexts and character descriptions • Design issues related to newer properties (e.g. built between 1945-1965) that may differ from earlier neighborhoods • Style descriptions • Additions to historic buildings (e.g. design guidelines) • Accessory building (e.g. carriage houses and barns) • New construction within the local historic districts (e.g. design guidelines) • Allowing for new materials – or the evaluation of materials not yet invented • "Like for like” replacement issues • Site design • Sustainability • Energy efficiency issues, such as weatherization, solar panels, windows • Adaptive reuse • Maintenance and preservation of key historic architectural details and ornamentation 7.2.c initiative: identify a team leader to coordinate project review. A team leader should work with applicants to coordinate requirements made by multiple City departments (including the building official and preservation office.) This team leader would help resolve any conflicting requirements and help ensure that project strategies promote the City’s overall, and preservation- specific, goals. 7.2.d initiative: expand administrative permitting. As part of the update to Chapter 18 Historic Preservation identify ways to ensure the administrative review and approval of a wide range of projects using detailed criteria for administrative permitting. For example, staff could approve alterations to rear walls for contributing structures with clear guidelines to assure decisions are consistent with adopted policies. 26 Preservation in cedar rapids 7.3 policy: use zoning tools to promote historic preservation goals and support an overall heritage conservation system. Zoning tools should help maintain desired development patterns throughout the community. For example, they should assure that a new building would be located with a front setback that is similar to the established historic context. Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCD) are a zoning tool used to maintain traditional neighborhood character in areas where residents seek some form of protection but a historic district designation is not appropriate or is not desired. An NCD helps shape the character of new development and redevelopment by providing specific design standards and/or design guidelines that apply in addition to base zoning standards. An NCD may also enable specific incentives and benefits. 7.3.a initiative: update Chapter 32 Zoning of the municipal code to better support preservation and conservation of neighborhood character. As part of the City’s comprehensive update to Chapter 32 Zoning, review the code for impediments to preservation that may be removed. This may include, for example, outdated setback requirements that are out of step with established development patterns or limitations on permitted uses that inhibit adaptive reuse. Specific zoning code regulations to review include: • Permitted height in regard to compatibility with the context • Building setbacks • Transitions from high density to residential neighborhoods • Development patterns • Articulation standards • Permitted or prohibited uses • Parking requirements 7.3.b initiative: Consider developing a nCd program for neighborhoods that may not be eligible for historic district designation. Study the feasibility and the potential application of a NCD program. NCD designation may be appropriate for neighborhoods that seek to protect their traditional character but are not eligible, or do not desire local historic district status. NCD designation may also be appropriate for areas surrounding designated historic districts. District-specific design guidelines and/or standards should be developed that work in concert with other Cedar Rapids’ character management tools. NCD Design Guidelines should: • Clearly illustrate the character of the districts. • Include a description of specific goals for the areas. • Provide design guidelines tailored to the contexts. Conservation district a Conservation district is a geographically definable area that conveys a distinct character that demonstrates traditional development patterns. it may contain individual historic properties and components or groupings of historic properties. regulations focus on major alterations and new construction. applying design guidelines or standards to a conservation district serves to maintain its unique character. 27 7.4 policy: provide tools and funding to address preservation emergencies. Tools and funding should be available to protect historic properties that are threatened by neglect or have been damaged by natural disasters. 7.4.a initiative: develop an endangered property WatCh list. An endangered property WATCH list addresses a wide range of threats to cultural resources. This list raises the level of alert for historic properties that may be threatened with loss. Sites on the list may be those that are proposed for demolition, others that may be suffering deterioration due to neglect, those that may be under pressure for redevelopment which would destroy their significant features, and structures prone to impacts from natural disasters (e.g. structures within flood plains). The City should assist in providing data about such properties and their conditions to those who may respond to these threats. The WATCH list should be expanded to include: • Procedures for notifying building owners and City officials of a building’s deteriorating condition. • An education and advocacy function to provide technical assistance to owners of buildings on the WATCH list. Criteria to be eligible for a WATCH List may include: o There must be a degree of endangerment by owner neglect, proposed demolition, rezoning, or redevelopment, and/or other human or environmental factors. o The property must be listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP, or as a local landmark. o There must be evidence of local support (or the clear potential for building local support) for preservation of the property. o A member of a highly valued building type. o Located in an area that is particularly significant. 7.4.b initiative: Maintain the disaster-response program for endangered properties. An emergency response program for endangered properties is an important part of the community’s disaster planning. It defines procedures to ensure the preservation of historic properties in the event of an emergency such as flooding. The response includes a timely evaluation of impacted structures to determine the best treatment. Procedures should be included for the interim stabilization of salvageable buildings such that time can be used to consider viable preservation options. Figure 41: Hose Company #4 rehabilitation at 1111 Third Street SE in the Bohemian Commercial Historic District. Built in 1915. 28 Preservation in cedar rapids 7.4.c initiative: explore the development of an emergency preservation fund. Explore the creation of a revolving fund administered by the City, or other appropriate entity to address preservation emergencies. The fund may be used to acquire threatened properties for rehabilitation and/or transfer to a responsible buyer. Threatened properties may include those impacted by natural disaster. Proceeds from the re-sale of properties would be used to replenish the fund, but consideration should also be given to establishing a permanent funding source through grants and endowments. The fund could be limited to projects involving one or more of the following property types: • Only properties designated as local historic landmarks or districts, • Properties listed on the NRHP , and/or • Properties that may be eligible for NRHP, or local historic landmark or district designation. 7.5 policy: ensure continuing maintenance of historic properties. Historic properties should be maintained and protected from damage by inappropriate construction and/or maintenance techniques. 7.5.a initiative: explore a minimum maintenance code requirement. If feasible, a minimum maintenance clause in the preservation ordinance could encourage an owner to keep a property in a sufficient state of repair such that key features are preserved. • The clause could include provisions to notify the owner that the City is concerned about the condition of the property and indicate that the owner should take appropriate measures. • Also, the clause could empower the City to make repairs if the owner fails to do so and could include a mechanism for recovering City funds that may be spent in stabilizing the property. • The City should publicize existing incentives and benefit programs that may be available to assist those who do not have the financial ability to maintain their property. 7.6 policy: ensure that building contractors are properly trained for work with historic properties. 7.6.a initiative: study the feasibility of creating a certification program for contractors who work on historic properties. If feasible, such a program could allow contractors working on local historic landmarks and contributing properties in local historic districts to be certified. The City would publish a list of contractors who have obtained a certificate. Figure 42: Ensure continuing maintenance of historic properties. 29 Figure 43: This map highlights buildings over forty years old that could be impacted by future flood events. This map raises the level of alert for historic properties that may be threatened with loss. Source: City of Cedar Rapids GIS database. flood event Map for Buildings older than 40 years 100 Year Flood Zone- A 100 Year Flood Zone- AE 500 Year Flood Zone 2008 Inundation Area key 30 Preservation in cedar rapids inCentives and Benefits Effective preservation programs offer special benefits to stimulate investment in historic properties, encourage owners to follow appropriate rehabilitation procedures, and assist those with limited budgets. This includes: • Financial assistance: Property tax incentives and federal income tax credit programs are highly effective and their continued use should be a priority. Other programs could complement these incentives and should be featured as well. • Regulatory relief: Focus on avoiding unintentional obstacles to preservation in other City regulations, and also provide added flexibility in other regulations as they apply to historic properties and conservation areas. • Technical assistance: Technical assistance is especially valuable to homeowners and to small commercial properties, but also may be strongly appreciated by institutional property owners. Goal 8 Incentives and benefits for preserving historic properties should attract investment in historic properties. Incentives should support appropriate rehabilitation and continued use of historic properties. Incentives should also encourage owners to seek local designation of eligible historic properties and conservation areas. 8.1 policy: promote expanded use of existing incentive programs. 8.1.a initiative: link interested property owners to training and technical assistance programs on the use of tax credits. 8.2 policy: promote new incentives in a range of categories. 8.2.a initiative: incentives should be developed and maintained that include financial aid, regulatory flexibility and technical assistance to preserve historic properties. 8.2.b initiative: explore the establishment of grant and loan programs for owners of historic properties. Grant and loan programs should be available to promote projects that meet preservation objectives. For example, a revolving loan program could make low-interest loans for rehabilitation to property owners within historic districts from grants, donations and City allocations. Qualifying projects would receive loan assistance. The loans then would be repaid, thus replenishing the fund. 31 8.2.c initiative: explore a design assistance program. This could help fund an initial consultation with a design professional with experience in historic preservation. Consider using the State Historical Society of Iowa Technical Advisory Network (TAN) as a model. City economic development programs standard City incentives • Non-Housing – 10 year, 44% Tax Exemption or 10 year, 50% Tax Reimbursement or equivalent • Housing – 75%+ of building area dedicated for housing 10 year, 100% Tax Exemption or Tax Reimbursement or equivalent Core district reinvestment • For projects located in the Downtown, Kingston Village, Ellis Boulevard Area, Czech Village, New Bohemia, Uptown, and MedQuarter Districts historic preservation • Listed on NRHP, eligible for listing on the NRHP, designated as or eligible for local historic landmark or district Figure 44: Integration of rail lines in the streetscape highlights the history of the street, providing a Heritage Tourism amenity. 200 block Ninth Avenue SE. Adjacent to Water Tower Place at 900 Second Street SE. 32 Preservation in cedar rapids edUCation Helping property owners learn how to maintain their historic properties as active, viable assets is a key part of a successful preservation program. Many property owners willingly comply with appropriate rehabilitation procedures and develop compatible designs for new construction when they are well informed about preservation objectives. Workshops that provide helpful information about rehabilitation techniques and publications that build an understanding of historic significance are examples of effective education and outreach strategies. Well-written design guidelines that provide useful information can also serve an educational role. Education should take a more prominent role in Cedar Rapids’ preservation program. Education and outreach also are key functions of partner organizations and other non-profit groups that promote preservation and history. Education also builds awareness of the city’s heritage. The city should seek to expand visitor awareness of Cedar Rapids’ history and its historic properties through its education programs. Goal 9 Public appreciation of Cedar Rapids' diverse history and its historic resources. 9.1 policy: provide tools to educate the public regarding Cedar rapids’ history and resources. 9.1.a initiative: prepare educational publications on the City’s history and the benefits of historic preservation. Publications should be available in both hard copy and on the City’s web site. Exposure could also be increased through mainstream media, neighborhood associations, and trade and tourism organizations. Such publications should address: • The historic background of Cedar Rapids • The environmental benefits of historic preservation • The economic benefits of historic preservation • Case studies of successful preservation projects in Cedar Rapids • A welcome packet for new owners of historic properties 9.1.b initiative: develop a formal heritage tourism program. As Cedar Rapids initiates a heritage tourism industry in the city, it will need to closely coordinate physical improvements with planning for events that visitors will enjoy as part of a complete experience. This requires a clear understanding of the assets that are available and the needs for improvements that are required before a major heritage tourism initiative can succeed. It also will require careful development of venues, events and other cultural engagements that contribute to the visitor experience. Authenticity is paramount. The experience should be one that is honest in the story it tells. A plan should be developed to implement the heritage tourism program. 33 Basic Components of a heritage tourism program are: physical plan Component • An assessment of existing assets to highlight • A map of interpretive areas and routes (including short term and long term) • Strategies for improving assets and reusing them (incorporating some of the tools set forth in this Preservation Plan) • Strategies for accommodating visitors, including transportation, parking and accommodations Cultural experience Component • A precise description of the “story” to tell • A menu of cultural experiences that will be available, from historic tours to concerts, recreational opportunities, shopping, and dining • A description of the role of local residents, institutions and businesses in sharing the culture of the community • Training programs for interpreters and others engaged in tourism promotion Component • Marketing strategies • Identifying specific market segments to attract visitors • Developing marketing materials and executing them • An events calendar with promotional activities interpretation Component • Electronic/digital information (e.g., smartphone application) • Printed tour materials • On-site markers • Wayfinding signs and landmarks economic opportunity Component • A projection of the economic benefits to the City, as a return on investment in heritage tourism • Feasibility studies for adaptive reuse of prototype buildings • An overview of the different market segments that can be attracted to Cedar Rapids implementation strategy • Assignments to heritage tourism team members • Schedules for action • Funding mechanisms 34 Preservation in cedar rapids Goal 10 Practical education programs support historic preservation. While building a general appreciation of cultural resources is important, a special initiative to build practical skills among property owners, construction trades, realtors and City departments is essential. 10.1 policy: support preservation training programs. Training that helps program administrators, preservation partners and individuals be better stewards is critical. 10.1.a initiative: provide training programs for preservation partners and the general public. Workshops that provide helpful information about rehabilitation techniques and publications that build an understanding of historic significance are examples of education and outreach strategies. This may include: • Hands-on training for historic property owners • Workshops for construction and trade professionals to provide a better understanding of preservation such that they can advise clients on appropriate options. • Historic preservation training for local realtors. • Televised educational information. • Develop publications that provide specific information about existing incentives programs, for example property tax rebate program, the information may include a checklist and timeline. 10.1.b initiative: Maintain a training program for City staff. All planning staff and key staff in other departments should receive a basic orientation to the preservation system and the principles involved such that they can better understand the program and advise applicants on their options. Similarly, planners assigned to the preservation program should be engaged in an orientation program. Also, preservation staff should attend state and national education and training programs/conferences to assure their work continues to be in line with best practices in the field. 10.1.c initiative: provide training to the hpC. Maintain an on-going program to train the HPC. Topics should include the City’s preservation policies and review system as well as best practices in preservation planning. 35 10.2 policy: expand the use of web-based preservation tools. The primary education tool for property owners and contractors will be the internet. Relevant preservation information and policies should be available on the City’s web site. This should include on-line resources for basic building repair and maintenance. Hard copy material should also be available to the general public at the city’s library and preservation offices. 10.2.a initiative: establish a “self-test” tool for historic significance. Create a “self test” tool that property owners can use on line to determine if a building is potentially significant. Include a check-list of questions and a link to the GIS database that will provide relevant information. 10.2.b initiative: provide technical “how to” information to property owners. Identify programs and materials that highlight “best practices in preservation,” i.e., National Park Service (NPS) materials, Kirkwood Community College Historic Preservation program, and NTHP. A library of reference materials could also be provided in the City’s library. 36 Preservation in cedar rapids CommUnity preservation proGram partners Private citizens and non-profit organizations lead preservation advocacy in Cedar Rapids, not the City government. The programs they lead promote goals and initiatives that support historic preservation. Initiatives can include lobbying for zoning codes that are compatible with traditional development patterns in older neighborhoods and identifying, supporting and maintaining new incentives to maintain historic structures. Preservation program partners also work to expand the base of preservation players and engage in collaborative preservation programs. The following initiatives should be addressed by the community’s preservation partners. Goal 11 Community organizations are strong advocates for historic preservation. Community organizations should be the primary advocates for historic preservation in Cedar Rapids. SaveCR Heritage, Linn County Historic Preservation Commission, Czech Village/New Bohemia Main Street District and other interest groups should play advocacy roles. Sometimes, goals for historic preservation overlap with other groups. Where this occurs, the opportunity exists to create new partnerships. Preservation partners should convene once a year to improve coordination efforts in a “round table” setting. 11.1 policy: Collaborate with community organizations on programs that support historic preservation. 11.1.a initiative: identify outreach events with community organizations that may be interested in historic preservation. Identify community organizations whose goals coincide with those for historic preservation. Such organizations could become valuable advocacy partners if provided with appropriate education and support. 11.1.b initiative: Work with economic development partners to include historic properties in redevelopment policies and economic development plans. Collaborate with economic development partners to promote the use of historic properties within redevelopment projects and in neighborhood plans. Historic buildings have been shown to work as successful incubators for a wide range of development types, from places for entry-level rents to high prestige addresses in historic downtowns. 37 11.1.c initiative: Work with affordable housing organizations to use historic buildings in their projects. Collaborate with affordable housing partners, including the Cedar Rapids Community Development Department, to promote the benefits of historic preservation. Most older neighborhoods have a diversity of housing types and costs that are difficult to replicate because of the substantial cost of new construction. In many cases, such neighborhoods also provide opportunities for accessory dwelling units or carriage houses that provide additional options for market-rate affordable housing. 11.1.d initiative: Work to investigate partnerships with sustainability organizations and programs. Create relationships with sustainability organizations and programs to promote the benefits of historic preservation including conservation of embodied energy and reduction of construction waste. As sustainability programs develop, it will be important to emphasize the overlap with preservation objectives. 38 Preservation in cedar rapids implementation Initiatives associated with the Preservation Plan’s far-reaching goals and policies should be strategically phased. While many initiatives will be accomplished in the near term, others will take more time to achieve. This section presents a plan for implementing the initiatives that are recommended above. Priority is given to the most important initiatives and those that can be accomplished efficiently. The list of criteria that follows is used in determining priorities. Connection with other projects The initiative will help to complete a work item that is already well established. For example, conducting historic survey work in an area where a neighborhood plan is already underway would benefit both projects. Information gathered from stakeholders during the planning processes would benefit the survey and the survey would help to inform Neighborhood Action Plans and Corridor Action Plans, as well as other planning efforts. Cost effectiveness The initiative can be implemented for minimum cost, may be coordinated with other projects within the organization to share costs, or costs can be shared with other organizations and individuals. For example, if Public Works has scheduled street improvements in an area, then joining that work with repair of historic streetscape features or installing interpretive markers would be cost effective. Broad Benefits The initiative will serve a mix of user groups and will benefit the most people. For example, by better addressing compatible alterations to historic structures and streamlining the permitting process, updated design guidelines would benefit community advocates, elected officials, the HPC and owners of historic properties. exceptional project The initiative will provide an exceptional educational, aesthetic or cultural experience. Working to preserve a noteworthy building that is considered of special value to the community is an example. emergency response The initiative will prevent imminent loss of character or demolition of a cultural resource. Developing the tools to better respond to natural disasters is an example. This prioritization reflects the interests of the community, as well as consideration of the interaction of the actions with other potential work efforts. An implementation matrix indicating preferred timing and key players for each action follows. 39 goal 1: a sustainable community supported by preservation efforts poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 1.1 promote economic sustainability through historic preservation. 1.1.a Explore the preparation of an adaptive reuse ordinance.• 1.2 promote environmental sustainability through historic preservation. 1.2.a Work with iGreen CR and the environmental initiatives in EnvisionCR to include preservation in environment programs. • 1.2.b Tailor energy efficiency standards to fit historic resources.• 1.3 promote cultural and social sustainability through historic preservation 1.3.a Develop and distribute educational materials (e.g. brochures, postcards, web- based materials) for property owners and the general public to enhance public awareness and understanding of the city’s cultural and social history. • 1.3.b Work with the Linn County Health Department to promote historic preservation. • goal 2: preservation principles are embedded in other community goals and policies. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 2.1 integrate historic preservation policies into citywide planning efforts. 2.1.a Incorporate historic preservation into Neighborhood Action Plans and Corridor Action Plans, planning Study Areas, and other City planning projects. • 2.2 promote “best practices” in historic preservation within civic buildings. 2.2.a Continue to pursue landmark designation of eligible city-owned structures • 2.2.b Explore creating a program that coordinates Public Works and Community Development staff on infrastructure projects within historic districts. • 2.2.c Continue to promote public access to historically significant civic resources. • initiative Matrix The matrix on the following pages summarizes recommended implementation phasing for each of the key initiatives identified in the Preservation Plan. 40 Preservation in cedar rapids goal 3: a livable community with a strong sense of history poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 3.1 preserve archaeological resources as part of Cedar rapid’s rich history 3.1.a Develop guidelines for archaeological resources • 3.1.b Maintain up-to-date information on potentially sensitive archaeological areas • 3.1.c Develop a public information brochure on archaeological resources • goal 4: the City maintains a functional, integrated preservation program. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 4.1 Monitor the performance of the preservation program on an on-going basis to assure that it maintains a high level of performance. 4.1.a Implement an annual program review.• 4.1.b Maintain and enhance compliance regulations for Certified Local Government status.• goal 5: a detailed understanding of Cedar rapid’s history that provides a base for preservation efforts. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 5.1 encourage and support the identification of cultural resources throughout Cedar rapids. 5.1.a Prioritize the list of areas that have been identified for intensive surveys in the Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey. • 5.1.b Move forward with the development of intensive surveys as prioritized, and incorporate a GIS component that is compatible with the City’s comprehensive GIS database of historic properties. • 5.1.c Identify areas that presently are not designated, but which are potentially eligible as places where additional surveys might be especially important. • goal 6: information is available regarding the history and potential historic significance of properties and buildings throughout Cedar rapids. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 6.1 enhance the level of survey information that is available to the public digitally. Expand the use and content of the GIS database of historic properties.• 41 goal 7: Clear and complete ordinances that guide the preservation program, protect historic properties, and promote preservation goals. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 7.1 ensure consistency between the City’s plan, ordinances, and guidelines 7.2 streamline project review and enforcement to promote preservation objectives, provide a positive experience for applicants, and to promote preservation goals. 7.2.a Update Chapter 18 Historic Preservation of the municipal code. • 7.2.b Update the Guidelines for Cedar Rapids Historic Districts. • 7.2.c Identify a team leader to coordinate project review.• 7.2.d Expand administrative permitting.• 7.3 use zoning tools to promote historic preservation goals and support an overall heritage conservation system. 7.3.a Update Chapter 32 Zoning of the municipal code to better support preservation and conservation of neighborhood character. • 7.3.b Consider developing a Neighborhood Conservation District program for neighborhoods that may not be eligible for historic district designation. • 7.4 provide tools and funding to address preservation emergencies. 7.4.a Develop an endangered property WATCH list.• 7.4.b Maintain the disaster-response program for endangered properties.• 7.4.c Explore the development of an emergency preservation fund. • 7.5 ensure continuing maintenance of historic buildings. 7.5.a Explore a minimum maintenance code requirement.• 7.6 ensure that building contractors are properly trained for work with historic resources. 7.6 .a Study the feasibility of creating a certification program for contractors who work on historic resources.• 42 Preservation in cedar rapids goal 8: incentives and Benefits for preserving historic properties should attract investment in historic properties. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 8.1 promote expanded use of existing incentive programs. 8.1.a Link interested property owners to training and technical assistance programs on the use of tax credits..• 8.2 promote new incentives in a range of categories. 8.2.a Incentives should be developed and maintained that include financial aid, regulatory flexibility and technical assistance to preserve historic properties. 8.2.b Explore the establishment of grant and loan programs for owners of historic resources. • • 8.2.c Explore a design assistance program.• goal 9: public appreciation of Cedar rapid’s diverse history and its historic resources. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 9.1 provide tools to educate the public regarding Cedar rapid’s history and resources. 9.1.a Prepare educational publications on the City’s history and the benefits of historic preservation.• 9.1.b Develop a formal Heritage Tourism Program.• goal 10: practical education programs support historic preservation. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 10.1 support preservation training programs. 10.1.a Provide training programs for preservation partners and the general public • 10.1.b Maintain a training program for City staff.• 10.1.c Provide training to the Historic Preservation Commission.• 10.2 expand the use of web- based preservation tools. 10.2.a Establish a “Self-Test” tool for historic significance. • 10.2.b Provide technical “how to” information to property owners.• 43 goal 11: Community organizations are strong advocates for historic preservation. poliCy initiative Within 1 year 2 - 3 years 4 - 5 years Beyond 5 years 11.1 Collaborate with community organizations on programs that support historic preservation. 11.1.a Identify outreach events with community organizations that may be interested in historic preservation. • 11.1.b Work with economic development partners to include historic resources in redevelopment policies and economic development plans. • 11.1.c Work with affordable housing organizations to use historic resources in their projects. • 11.1.d Work to investigate partnerships with sustainability organizations and programs. • 44 Preservation in cedar rapids funding sources for City initiatives in historic preservation grants Grants generally should not be considered as the primary source for funding on-going programs, but they could kick-start a program, or fund individual projects with a specific objective and time line. Some grants to pursue are: • CLG grants for historical surveys, registration, education and planning • Corporate grants for publications (such as walking tours) • Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) • Urban Development Action Grant Loan Repayments (UDAG) other financial incentives Note that state and federal income tax credits are available to property owners who qualify. These are not listed here, because they relate directly to an individual property owner. • State Historical Society of Iowa Historic Resource Development Program (HRDP) • National Trust for Historic Preservation • Linn County Foundation Many of the initiatives described in the Preservation Plan will require funding. These are the primary sources of funding that should be considered: hotel/Motel tax A portion of receipts from the Hotel/Motel tax could be allocated to preservation programs, because this can contribute to tourism. Some of the programs that could be funded (at least in part) by this are: • Heritage tourism events general fund allocation in the City Budget General funds have not been allocated in the past to support historic preservation programs. With the City’s limited resources, establishing a line item for historic preservation would be considered in the context of the City’s competing priorities for infrastructure and services. To secure funding will require demonstration of community benefits, as well as ways to achieve a sustainable funding source. Some of the programs that could be funded (at least in part) by this are: • Rehabilitation grants/loans • Technical assistance grants/loans 45 preservation B a C kG ro U nd Figure 45: 300 block Second Avenue SE c. 1915. Isis Theatre at left, Palace Theatre at right. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 46 Preservation background 47 City government and many community groups use a range of strategies and tools that work together to form the essential components of the Preservation Program in Cedar Rapids. This section describes the existing state of each preservation program component and provides a discussion of key questions and issues related to them. In some cases, the best practices in Historic Preservation are identified. The preservation program components are: administration The framework for operating the preservation program. identification The survey and recognition of properties with cultural or historic significance. Management tools The specific mechanisms for protecting historic properties. incentives and Benefits Programs that assist property owners and support preservation. education The tools to build awareness and strengthen skills to support preservation. historiC preservation proG ram Components Figure 46: Component Chart. Source: Winter & Company 2015. Cedar rapids preservation program administration identification Management tools incentives and Benefits education 48 Preservation background administration The administrative component of the preservation program provides its operating framework, including the staff that manages daily activities and the HPC that administers adopted policies and standards. Cedar r apids hpC The HPC recommends designation of historic properties under local ordinance and is responsible for reviewing all requests for certificates of appropriateness, or project approval, for locally-designated individual historic landmarks and properties in two locally-designated historic districts. For some types of projects, the City Council has delegated approval authority to City staff. HPC members are appointed by the City Council and must include members from historic districts, an architect and an at-large member. Other members of the HPC are required to have a ”positive interest in historic preservation, possessing interest or expertise in architecture, architectural history, archeology, history, historic preservation, real estate or closely related disciplines.” Duties of the HPC include but are not limited to: • The HPC may, subject to City Council approval, conduct studies for the identification and designation of historic properties meeting the definitions established by this chapter. The HPC shall maintain records of all studies and inventories for public use, and routinely provide the City Council with the minutes of all HPC meetings and reports. • The HPC may make a recommendation to the City Council for the listing of a historic property in the NRHP. • The HPC may investigate and recommend to the City Council the adoption of ordinances designating local historic landmarks and local historic districts if they qualify as defined herein. • The HPC may appoint committees from its membership as necessary. • The HPC shall review and act upon all applications for certificates of appropriateness. • The HPC shall further the efforts of historic preservation in the city by making recommendations to the City Council and City commissions and boards on preservation issues when appropriate, by encouraging the protection and enhancement of structures with historical, architectural or cultural value, and by encouraging persons and organizations to become involved in preservation activities. • The HPC shall not obligate itself or the city in any financial undertaking unless authorized to do so by the City Council. 49 Cedar r apids preservation staff Currently, 2 members of the planning staff spend a portion of their time on historic preservation tasks. This includes processing applications for designations, processing certificates of appropriateness and no material effect, supporting the HPC, maintaining the CLG status, assisting the public and other government agencies with historic preservation issues, and implementing the mitigation measures identified in multiple Memorandums of Agreement with FEMA related to impacts on historic properties from the 2008 flood. Duties also include coordinating the City’s preservation activities with state and federal agencies and with local, state and national preservation organizations. administration issUes sUmmary • The preservation program and goals are not well defined and at times are not coordinated with other City departments. • More preservation staff time is needed to administer the program. Currently, it lacks sufficient resources to oversee a comprehensive preservation program such as that set forth in this plan. • Other City development and sustainability policies are insufficiently integrated. Certified local government (Clg) From the NPS web site: “Being a CLG demonstrates your community's commitment to saving what is important from the past for future generations. As a certified community it becomes easy to demonstrate a readiness to take on successful preservation projects, making your community able to compete for new opportunities!” Being a CLG opens the doors to funding, technical assistance and other preservation opportunities and successes. 50 Preservation background identifiCation How is it determined that a property has historic significance? Professionals in the fields of history, historic preservation and historical architecture work with City staff, commission members and advocates to evaluate properties, using adopted standards that are recognized nationally. They employ a variety of research tools to assist them in making those determinations. Research tools include summaries of historical patterns, defined as “contexts” and “themes,” along with descriptions of the typical property types and building styles associated with them. The City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) also is an important tool for identifying potentially significant resources. Additional data provided by the City Assessor also informs the physical condition of properties. For additional information please see the National Register Criteria for Evaluation in the Appendix. historiC themes and Contexts Historic contexts are used to group information that relates to existing historic properties based on a theme, specific time period or geographic area. The relative importance of specific historic properties can be better understood by determining how they relate to these contexts. An individual historic resource may relate to more than one of these areas. Several themes related to the development of Cedar Rapids are briefly summarized on pages 83-88. These illustrate how contexts may be described, but do not cover the full range of city’s history. These are: • Settlement • Cedar River • The Railroads • Streets Railway & Interurban • Utilities • The Automobile • Economic Trends • Ethnic Groups • Social and Cultural Life These contexts are used in education programs, survey efforts and in the evaluation of historic significance of individual properties. historiC properties A historic survey documents how historic properties relate to the city’s historic contexts, how it represents a property type and how it meets requirements for potential designation as a historic resource. Historic properties can be buildings, sites, districts, structures or objects. 51 resoUrCe identifiCation and the Gis The City’s GIS has emerged as an important tool in developing an understanding of where historic properties may be located and how they relate to other planning factors, including land use, transportation patterns and socioeconomics. The GIS database contains many “layers” of information linked to parcels in the city that can help place an individual property into a broader historic context. It is widely used in many departments and thus offers the capability of combining information from individual disciplines, including preservation, with other community programs. The City is currently working on an historic properties GIS database, which will result in a user-friendly, web-based system allowing easy access to information on historic properties identified from historic surveys. This project was identified as one of the mitigation measures in a memorandum of agreement among the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the State Historical Society of Iowa, the Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, and the City of Cedar Rapids. Figure 47: St. Patrick's Catholic Church (1891) at 500 First Avenue NW. FIgure 48: Harper McIntire Building (1922) at 411 Sixth Avenue SE. Figure 49: Friendly Service Station (1935) at 1401 Third Street SE. Figure 47: Figure 48: Figure 49: 52 Preservation background distribution of Buildings by age (1840-1977) The chart to the left groups all buildings in the city into general themes of development. Assessing this helps to anticipate buildings that may be considered for evaluation in the future. Some observations are summarized below. Figure 50: City Rapids building age distribution pie chart. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. key time frame B U ilt CommerCial residential CommerCial & residential perCentaGe 1840-1890 59 657 707 2.14% 1891-1910 211 3020 3231 9.77% 1911-1938 449 5937 6386 19.30% 1939-1944 112 912 1024 3.10% 1945-1955 409 5636 6045 18.27% 1956-1965 696 7027 7723 23.35% 1966-1977 1469 6495 7964 24.07% total 3396 29684 33080 53 early Buildings May have a high level of significance 707 buildings survive from the earliest periods of Cedar Rapids development. This is an extremely rare group of properties and their preservation should be a high priority. three-Quarters of existing Buildings are over 50 years old 75.90% of existing buildings are more than 50 years old. Although age itself does not convey historic significance, it does provide a preview of buildings that may be found to have historic significance. This suggests that a substantial portion of the city’s buildings could have historic significance and that future surveys may identify more of them as such. The city should be planning ways in which to evaluate the significance of this group of buildings as they “come of age.” In other cases, it may indicate that groups of buildings from these time periods would be in areas that could be appropriate for designation as conservation districts. A character-based analysis in those places may yield more information. Of the large number of buildings in Cedar Rapids that are over 50 years old, many were built with durable materials and in ways that are likely to be adaptable to energy conservation initiatives. Retaining these structures will be important to support sustainability goals and programs. Many Buildings May Be Considered as “recent past” resources 41.62% of existing buildings in the city date from 1945 to 1965. Many of these have already passed the 50-year threshold. Even the most recent buildings in this category will reach 50 years of age by 2015. This is a period of the “recent past” that may now be considered for potential historic significance. Despite meeting the age threshold, many of these buildings will not be considered to have historic significance, but they may, however, still contribute to the established neighborhood character and may merit being included in a conservation district. Design issues related to these newer buildings sometimes will be different from those of buildings from earlier periods. When the City’s preservation design guidelines are updated, this must be taken into consideration. Many Buildings Will not Be Considered for potential historic significance until the Mid 21st Century In the building age chart, the remaining number of the existing buildings (24%) date from 1966 to 1977. Few of these buildings are likely to be eligible for consideration as historic properties until the mid 21st Century, but nonetheless contribute to the character of established neighborhoods. Figure 51: First Presbyterian Church (1869) at 310 Fifth Street SE. Figure 52: Lustron prefabricated home at 2009 Williams Boulevard SW. (NRHP) Source: City of Cedar Rapids 54 Preservation background distribution of Buildings by age Map (2014) Figure 53: Distribution of Buildings by Age Map (2014). Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS Database KEY: 1966-1977 Planned Sub-Division Era 1956-1965 Mid-Centry Development 1945-1955 Post War Development 1939-1944 Pre War Development 1911-1938 Revival Era Development 1891-1910 Victorian Era Development 1840-1890 Early Years CITYWIDE DEVELOPMENT (commerical & residential) 1840-1977 1966-1977 Planned Sub-Division Era 1956-1965 Mid-Century Development 1945-1955 Post War Development 1939-1944 Pre War Development 1911-1938 Revival Era Development 1891-1910 Victorian Era Development 1840-1890 Early Years key 55 Figure 53 The Distribution of Buildings by Age Map locates the construction dates for the primary buildings on sites throughout the city. They are grouped into time segments that reflect general themes of development in Cedar Rapids. As can be expected, the older buildings tend to lie within the original core of the city. Later periods of development appear as corridors developed and outlying areas were platted. In general, many neighborhoods exhibit similarities in building age. This suggests that there is a consistency of neighborhood character for many of those areas. Visually, it appears many of the city’s buildings date from the Mid-Century period. In time, these areas may be determined to have historic significance, or to convey a character that is valued. Planning for the appropriate tools to facilitate conservation and preservation should be a priority. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. Figure 54: 1300 Third Avenue SE. Source: Web Figure 55: Cedar Rapids Savings Bank (Guaranty Bank) 1895 and 1909 at Third Avenue and Third Street SE. 56 Preservation background sUrveys Surveys identify which properties have historic or archeological significance, and those that do not. In conducting surveys, professionals use adopted criteria for determining significance. All surveys should meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, but also may include additional information that is not required by the NPS, as supplemental data. An intensive survey should include a listing of all of the properties researched, indicating the significance of each of the historic properties and, where applicable, should also include a description of the general character of the district. The survey process includes a field inspection, a period of collecting historic information about the physical and cultural history of the property and documenting it in photographs, drawings and maps. The survey should define the key characteristics of historic properties. The process of identifying and then designating historic properties typically consists of four steps. Note that the survey process may include only the identification steps and need not automatically proceed into the historic listing steps. Conduct survey Conduct the survey, using prescribed format and procedures. evaluate for eligible properties planning/ strategy designation individual designation Evaluate for significance and character value. Determine best designation strategy for local and/or NRHP listing; considering survey findings and other planning policies, goals and objectives for the area. Initiate the appropriate designation action. Step 1:Step 2:Step 3:Step 4: 4a: 4b: Identification Historic Property Listing historic district designation FIgure 56: Identification and Designation Steps. Source: Winter & Company 2015 57 step 1: Conduct the survey This is an intensive level survey, in which sufficient information is generated to determine historic significance. It may be preceded by a “Reconnaissance Survey,” which provides an initial indication of the potential for historic significance. step 2: evaluate for eligible properties Using the information collected in Step 1, objective criteria are applied to determine significance of historic properties. step 3: planning and strategy development If a historic property is identified as having significance, then decisions about how to address that fact may follow. This strategy step will determine which type (or types) of designation would be best. Some properties may only be listed in the NRHP by the Secretary of the Interior. Others may be listed “locally” under City ordinance, and some in both registers. Other areas may be identified that merit support as “conservation districts,” but not as formal “historic districts.” step 4: designation Once a strategy is established, then formal designation may occur. The diagram illustrates the two options for an individual property and for a district. This could apply to either a National Register or local register listing (or both). existinG historiC sUrveys Cedar Rapids’ existing surveys cover different areas within the city. The city uses the Iowa Site Inventory Form to document its findings. Some surveys date back as far as 1988. This means that a property built after 1938 would not have been 50 years old then and probably would not have been rated as a contributing property. Some surveys identify only those properties that are of historic significance and do not address more modest properties that may contribute to the overall historic character of an area. While this approach was sufficient at the time to identify a potential historic district, it is less useful today as a planning tool. This results in less predictability for property owners in historic districts because the status of their properties may be unclear, requiring a case-by-case determination of historic significance. Variations in the amount of information provided by older surveys also means that the most important features of historic properties are not always documented. This information is important to have available when a property owner is planning improvements, because it helps them identify those features that should be preserved. Cedar Rapids just completed a reconnaissance level survey of residential properties in the center city. This survey expands the National Register Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form Architectural and Historical Resources of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and its associated historic context, Architectural and Historical Resources of Residential Neighborhoods, 1870-1940 (MPDF 2000), in context and time period to 1965. The intent of the survey was to focus on areas of the city that had not been previously surveyed, extending beyond the older residential neighborhoods. 58 Preservation background Completed surveys • Historical Survey of 16th Avenue Bridge and Adjacent Czech Community (March, 1988) • Historical and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey Report for Community Development Block Grant Neighborhoods in Cedar Rapids (1994 & 1995 – Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Commercial and Industrial Development of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, c.1865 –c.1945 (November, 1997 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Early Settlement and Architectural Properties of Linn County (July, 2000 – Leah D. Rogers, Linn County Historic Preservation Commission) • Historic properties of Cedar Rapids, Iowa National Register of Historic Places Multiple Documentation Form (March, 2000 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Greene & College Addition Reconnaissance Survey and an Intensive Level Survey of 316-17th Street SE (2000 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Architectural History Survey and Update for the City of Cedar Rapids (June, 2006, update of five neighborhoods adjacent to city center to update HUD programs – The 106 Group Ltd.) • Young’s Hill /Kingston Neighborhood, Historical and Architectural Survey Report (June, 2008 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Architectural Reconnaissance Survey for Kingston in Cedar Rapids (July, 2009 – Camilla R. Deiber, The Louis Berger Group, Inc.) • Architectural Reconnaissance Survey for Hull’s 6th Addition to Cedar Rapids (May, 2009 - Camilla R. Deiber, The Louis Berger Group, Inc.) • Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey (November 2014 - Amendment of Historic Resources of Cedar Rapids, Iowa National Register of Historic Places Multiple Documentation Form, 2000 – Marjorie Pearson, Summit Envirosolutions, Inc.) • Second and Third Avenue Historic District National Register of Historic Places nomination form (2000 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Redmond Park – Grande Avenue Historic District National Register of Historic Places nomination form (2001 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Bohemian Commercial Historic District National Register of Historic Places nomination form (2001 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) Update (2006-2007 – The 106 Group Ltd.) • Survey Inventory Form for the Sinclair & Company plant for SHPO (2006 - Marlys A. Svendsen, Svendsen Tyler, Inc.) • Commercial and Industrial Development of Downtown Cedar Rapids, c. 1865-1965 (Anticipated completion 2015 - Marjorie Pearson, Summit Envirosolutions, Inc.) • Religious Properties of Cedar Rapids (Anticipated completion 2015 - Eric Barr and Camilla Deiber, The Louis Berger Group, Inc.) • Industrial Development of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, c. 1865-1965 (Anticipated completion 2015 - Marjorie Pearson, Summit Envirosolutions, Inc.) Figure 57 (see following page) shows specific areas which are listed on the NRHP or recommended for intensive survey. The areas not recommended for intensive survey from the 2014 Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey are also identified. Some initial fieldwork did take place to determine areas of potential significance and eligibility listing. As part of this process, properties outside these mapped areas were reviewed but are not shown on the map as they are neither listed nor deemed significant by survey authors. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2015 GIS database. 59 survey Map www.zanfel.com I380 NB1ST AVE E42ND ST NE J AVE NE HWY 100 C ST SW OTIS RD SE 16TH AVE SW L ST SW1ST AVE W E AVE NW F AVE NW 8TH AVE SW 5TH AVE SEWILSON AVE SW3RD ST SW6TH ST SWGLASS RD NE 2ND AVE SEO AVE NW E AVE NE29TH ST NE 3RD AVE SEWENIG RD NE4TH AVE SECENTER POINT RD NEELLIS BLVD NWOAKLAND RD NEJ ST SWCOLLINS RD NE 32ND ST NE BEVER AVE SEB AVE NEI380 SBA AVE NEMEMORIAL DR SE15TH AVE SW 1ST ST NW35TH ST NE 3 R D S T S E 9TH ST SWA S T S W B AVE NW 27TH ST NE 18TH ST SE7 T H S T S E K ST SW12TH AVE SE8TH ST NW3 R D A V E S W 6 T H S T S E 8 T H S T S EEDGEWOOD RD NEMOUNT VERNON RD SE 30TH ST SECOUNCIL ST NE2 N D S T S E9TH ST NW16TH ST NEPRAIRIE DR NE2 N D A V E S W 15TH ST SE30TH ST NE 11TH ST NWG AVE NW ROCKFORD RD SW8TH AVE SE10TH ST NW20TH ST NWGRANDE AVE SE 6 TH ST NW17TH ST NEK AVE NE 32ND ST SEI AVE NW 4TH ST SWZIKA AVE NW 21ST AVE SW 19TH AVE SW 20TH AVE SW BLAKE BLVD SE I 3 80 OFF RAMPD AVE NE18TH ST SW18TH AVE SW 12TH ST NEM ST SWBOWLING ST SWJ AVE NW S H A V E R R D N E 40TH ST NE O LD M ARIO N RD N EPARK AVE SESIERRA DR NEH AVE NW5TH ST NW2 0 T H S T N ENORTHWOOD DR NEMALLORY ST SW51ST ST NE 17TH ST SE33RD ST NE 4TH ST NWD ST SW CIR C L E D R N E WASHINGTON AVE SE 15TH ST SWJOHNSON AVE NW PARK PL NE BROOKLAND DR NE UNKNOWN RDC AVE NW 10TH ST SW38TH ST NE COTTAGE GROVE AVE SE 21 S T S T N E W ILLIAMS BLVD SW19TH ST NW27TH AVE SW GOLF ST NEELLIS RD NW MCCARTHY RD SE 1 5 T H S T N E 28TH ST SE1 9 T H S T N EDANIELS ST NECOE RD NE RICHMOND RD NE 25TH ST NE 12TH ST SW4 T H S T N E26TH ST NWCENTER ST NE 21ST ST NW31ST ST NE 24TH ST NE 18TH ST NW5TH AVE SW16TH ST NW29TH ST DR SE 39TH ST NE 8TH ST SW40TH ST D R SE 14TH ST SED AVE NW 25TH ST SW9 T H S T S EC AVE NESPRUCE AVE SEFRANKLIN AVE NEFOREST DR SELAUREN DR SWLIN M A R D R N E TERESA DR SW37TH ST NE 32ND ST DR SE 36TH ST NE O AVE NE T O W N E H O U S E D R N E 34TH ST NE 10TH ST NE2 3 R D S T D R S EG AVE NEHIGH DR SEB ST SW 2 N D S T N E 23RD ST NEREGAL AVE NE21ST ST SERIVER RIDGE DR NEBLAKELY BLVD SE1ST ST SW2ND ST SWLINDEN DR SE 34TH ST DR SE 35TH ST DR SE 7TH ST SWC O L L E G E D R N E 19TH ST SE8TH ST NE 33RD ST DR SE 31ST ST SEN AVE NW 14TH ST SWF AVE NEI 380 ON RAMP13TH ST NWKYRIE SE 23RD ST NW1 5 T H AV E S E HWY 100 OFF RAMP 30TH ST DR SE 26TH ST SEOTIS AVE SE 1 3 T H A V E S W11TH ST SWHERTZ DR SEOZARK ST NEGEORGIA AVE NESALLY DR NE HUGHES DR SWD O D G E R D N E H O U S EB O AT CT N W HINKLEY AVE NW 38TH ST DR SE PAWNEE DR NWSHERMAN ST NEADEL ST SE28TH ST DR SE LIBERTY DR SE BALSAM DR SWMIAMI DR NE 14TH ST NE4 T H A V E S W W Y N D H A M D R N E SHASTA CT NE29TH ST SE16TH AVE SE1 S T S T N E 17TH AVE SE 1 S T S T S E 3 R D S T N E C L A U D E T T E L N N E 7TH AVE SW 22ND AVE SW ROMPOT ST SESUMMIT AVE SW 23RD ST SE44TH ST NE MAPLE DR NW I ST SWTHOMPSON ST SE3RD ST NW6 T H A V E S W 1 0 T H S T S E 13TH AVE SE HAVEN CT SWA A V E N W 5 T H S T S E D U N R E A T H D R N E BURCH AVE NW EASTERN AVE NEC AVE NW 2ND AVE SE5TH AVE SE4TH ST NEI 380 OFF RAMP18TH ST SWC AVE NW H W Y 1 0 0 I380 SBUNKNOWN RD G AVE NE30TH ST NE 42ND ST NE 30TH ST SEUNKNOWN RD1 4 T H S T S E 40TH ST NE C AVE NE1ST ST SW8TH ST SWUNKNO WN RD I 3 8 0 OFF RAMPCENTER ST NE I3 8 0 S B16TH ST NWUNKNOWN RD 5 T H A V E S W I 380 ON RAMP13TH ST NW34TH ST NE 1ST ST SWFigure 57: Cedar Rapids Completed Intensive Survey Areas and Recommended Intensive Survey Areas. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS Database NRHP-listed District Area Recommended for Intensive Survey - 1994 Area Recommended for Intensive Survey - 2014 Intensive Survey Completed Area Not Recommended for Intensive Survey key 60 Preservation background potential nrhp historiC distriC ts and individUal listinGs This section identifies a list of those areas that may be eligible to be listed on the NRHP. The 2014 Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey (Citywide Survey) recommends several areas for intensive surveys (these are noted below) to further assess historic district potential, to evaluate significance, to define historic district boundaries and to further define contributing and noncontributing properties. northwest Quadrant areas with historic district potential • East Highlands – First Avenue – C Avenue NW (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • North Highlands – B Avenue NW – E Avenue NW (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Rapids Township - E Avenue NW (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Belmont Park (Increased boundary, recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Ellis Boulevard West • G Avenue NW (reduced boundary post 2008 flood) individual properties with potential for national register listing • Roosevelt Junior High School, 300 13th Street NW • Lustron House, 1500 C Avenue NW southwest Quadrant areas with historic district potential • 8th Street SW • Veterans Prospect Place • Kingston Residential individual properties with potential for national register listing • Cedar Rapids Police Department Building, 310 Second Avenue SW • Lustron House, 2004 Williams Boulevard 61 northeast Quadrant areas with historic district potential • Greene & College First Addition: including listed B Avenue NE Historic District (Recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries relative to listed B Avenue NE NRHP-listed district) • Northview First Addition (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Kenwood Park: Coon-McNeal Development (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Coe College Campus - west section (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • A Avenue NE (affected by Coe College expansion) • B Avenue NE (affected by Coe College expansion-overlaps with Greene and College First Addition) • C Avenue NE (affected by Coe College expansion) individual properties with potential for national register listing • Franklin Junior High School, 300 20th Street NE • Mount Mercy University Warde Hall, Warde Avenue • Mount Mercy University Grotto, Warde Court (nomination in process) • Lustron House, 2124 First Avenue NE • Lustron House, 433 Dunreath Drive NE • Lustron House, 645 35th Street NE southeast Quadrant areas with historic district potential • Vernon Heights (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Bever Park Additions and Bever Woods (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Midway Park Addition (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Ridgewood Addition (recommend Intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) • Country Club Heights Additions (recommend intensive survey) • Huston Park – Bever Ave • Wellington-Idlewild Avenue individual properties with potential for national register listing • Lustron House, 2080 Eastern Boulevard NE • Raymond D. Crites House, 4340 Eaglemere Court SE Figure 58: These homes in the 1900 block of 5th Avenue SE (top and middle photos) and the 500 block of 23rd Street (bottom photo) are found in Vernon Heights. An intensive survey for NRHP boundaries is recommended for this area. 62 Preservation background sUrvey statUs Update The 2014 Citywide Survey also identifies specific contexts or resource types that need additional surveying: “To further assess non-residential properties, we recommend intensive surveys and context studies relating to education in Cedar Rapids; civic architecture and public buildings of Cedar Rapids to include libraries, fire stations, police stations, post offices and similar structures; and the parks and landscapes of Cedar Rapids to also include cemeteries.” neW sUrvey teChniqUes New technologies now allow data gathering and evaluation to occur more efficiently than in the past. An important innovation is the ability to link survey data from the City’s GIS. Combining historic records and building permit information in the Geographic Information System improves access to a wide range of property information. Additional data may also be gathered by allowing property owners to upload information about their properties to a City web site. When combined, these new technologies can support ongoing survey efforts that ensure up-to-date documentation of a community’s historic properties. Some communities are also using a “tiered” survey system that indicates varying levels of integrity and significance for historic properties. This may also identify new buildings that are compatible with their context but which lack historic significance. A tiered survey can link to a variety of planning objectives and can be calibrated to tie in with differing benefits and incentives, and review and permitting processes. For example, properties with a high level of historic significance may be subject to review by the HPC, whereas those of a lesser level may be handled by staff. resoUrCe desiGnation Historic properties in Cedar Rapids may be officially listed in the NRHP and/ or as a local historic district or local historic landmark. Eligibility for historic designation is generally determined during a historic resource survey. However, it is important to note that not all eligible properties are officially designated and listed in a historic register. Those properties in the NRHP have a defined set of benefits. Locally designated historic properties also are protected using the management tools described in this chapter and may be eligible for other benefits. national register of historic places The NRHP is a listing of historic properties that meet criteria for significance established by the Secretary of the Interior. Nominations to the NRHP are reviewed by the State Nominations Review Committee. If the nomination is successful at the state level, a recommendation is forwarded for final review by the Secretary of the Interior for listing in the NRHP. These listings provide some benefits such as tax incentives. 63 Cedar rapids local historic districts and landmarks Those historic properties listed as a Cedar Rapids Local Historic District or Landmark are a key focus of local preservation efforts. These historic properties may be eligible for benefits such as the Exterior Paint Rebate Program. In many cases, alterations to these properties are also subject to design review by the HPC. To be eligible for listing as a locally designated historic landmark or district, properties must first meet a set of threshold criteria related to age and integrity. Threshold criteria are: • Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or • Is associated with events that have made significant contributions to the broad patterns of our local, state or national history; or • Possesses a coherent and distinctive visual character or integrity based upon similarity of scale, design, color, setting, workmanship, materials, or combinations thereof, which is deemed to add significantly to the value and attractiveness of properties within such area; • Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or • Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. To become a local historic district, owners of at least 51% of the total number of parcels need to agree to the designation. For individual local historic landmarks, an application must be submitted to the Cedar Rapids Community Development Department. Official consideration of listing a property requires a public meeting hosted by the HPC to hear the findings of research related to the criteria for significance. Based on the information presented, the HPC votes on whether or not an area or property should be designated a local historic district or landmark. After the public meeting, the HPC submits its report to the State Historical Society of Iowa / State Historic Preservation Office. After review by the State, the City Planning Commission reviews the proposed local historic district or landmark and previous reports and recommendations from HPC and SHPO and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews all the recommendations and makes the final decision on the local historic district or landmark. Figure 59: Ausadie Apartments at 845 First Avenue SE (1923). Named for Austin Palmer and wife Sadie. First local landmark. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 64 Preservation background identifiCation issUes sUmmary • The differences between national and local historic designations are not well understood among the general public. • Recent-past historic properties may be insufficiently identified. • Survey findings of historic significance (which are informational) are often assumed to lead directly to designation as an official historic property. • Many potentially eligible districts are not designated. • Priorities need to be identified for intensive surveys. • Priority should be given to surveying, with emphasis placed upon areas that are targeted for redevelopment, or where pressure for demolition is anticipated. 65 manaGement tools Management tools are the mechanisms for protecting historic properties and providing technical assistance. Cedar Rapids primary management tools are the ordinances that guide historic preservation efforts as well as underlying zoning regulations, the design review process and design guidelines that manage treatment of the city’s historic district resources. These provide an effective framework for preservation. As the preservation review process is refined, it will be important to consider how it interacts with other City, state and federal regulations. In some cases, modifying the underlying zoning in an established historic district to more closely reflect traditional development patterns will reduce potential conflicts later in design review. In other neighborhoods that are not designated as historic districts, applying an overlay or developing a conservation district tool may be a consideration. With the adoption of the City’s comprehensive plan, EnvisionCR, in January 2015, the City is moving forward with a comprehensive update to Chapter 32 Zoning of the municipal code. As part of this process, the City will consider form-based standards, as well as other approaches to address issues related to design, parking, use standards in the zoning code. These can also help protect neighborhood character, including places that are in historic and overlay districts. The extent to which the underlying zoning can be better synchronized with design objectives for an area, the more effective the system can be. mUniCipal Code Ordinances bundled into the Cedar Rapids Municipal Code establish the basic rules for construction related to historic properties and set forth the process for establishing protections for them. The following key sections apply to historic properties: Chapter 17A Revitalization Areas, Chapter 18 Historic Preservation, Chapter 32 Zoning and Chapter 33 Building. Chapter 17a The City Council of the City of Cedar Rapids may designate a revitalization area within the city if that area complies with the provisions of Chapter 404.1 of the State Code or successor provisions as follows: An area in which there is a predominance of buildings or improvements, which by reason of age, history, architecture or significance should be preserved or restored to productive use. This allows an exemption from taxation as provided for in Section 404.3 of the State Code and as stipulated in the urban revitalization area plan in effect for each qualifying real estate project. 66 Preservation background Chapter 18 historic preservation The preservation ordinance is the portion of the Cedar Rapids Municipal Code that outlines the basic regulations and processes for historic preservation. The original historic preservation ordinance was adopted in 1994. The City’s current ordinance dates to 2009. Topics addressed in the preservation ordinance include: • Powers of HPC • Designation and Register of Historic Districts and Historic Landmarks • Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness • Procedures for Demolition Review Chapter 32 Zoning The basic regulations that shape development throughout Cedar Rapids are provided in Chapter 32. The zoning code defines permitted uses and densities as well as dimensional limits, such as setbacks and building heights. These regulations apply to historic and non-historic properties. The zoning code includes base districts and overlay districts. Base zone districts provide the regulations that apply to all properties throughout the city while overlays provide additional context-specific regulations in certain areas. The code includes base zone districts for residential, commercial, industrial and other uses at varying densities and scales. Overlay districts such as Czech-Bohemia Overlay District and the Ellis Area Overlay District apply to specific areas and include some design standards intended to preserve the character of these areas. These districts have standards and guidelines that address new construction, additions to existing buildings and/or the rehabilitation of buildings, however; they do not apply to single-family and two-family dwellings. In addition, there are not any rehabilitation standards in these sections that could be used in review. In some cases, the requirements of an “underlying” zoning district may conflict with goals and objectives for historic preservation because they allow for development that is out of character with the historic pattern. In other cases, zoning regulations may be incompatible with preservation goals because they are too restrictive. For example, if a goal is to preserve the character of a neighborhood where houses were typically built very close together, zoning regulations that require a significant setback between properties could be incompatible. Chapter 33 Building Code Requirements for fire safety, emergency exiting, and other construction- related issues are part of the building code. The City uses the International Building Code 2012. Chapter 34 of the code includes a section that can be applied to historic structures. City staff can assist applicants in finding flexible design solutions that promote preservation objectives and meet the building code requirements. However, applicants must balance requirements made by other City departments without the benefit of a staff team leader to coordinate preservation-friendly solutions. 67 desiGn revieW Design review is a collaborative process used to examine public and private projects for their aesthetic, architectural, or urban design qualities, as well as the historic appropriateness and compatibility with surrounding context. A well-organized design review process helps protect a community’s historic character. It is a management tool that applies in addition to zoning regulations that may provide some context-sensitive standards. Cedar Rapids has the following design review authorities: • Cedar Rapids Development Services and Building Service Department and others review improvements to properties in Cedar Rapids to ensure compliance with the zoning code, the building code and other base regulations. • The Cedar Rapids HPC also reviews designated local landmarks and properties within local historic districts. In general, only exterior work that is visible from the public way must go through design review. In order to determine the appropriateness of a proposed improvement, the City uses these documents: • January 1979 edition of The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, or subsequent revisions thereof, • Guidelines for Cedar Rapids Historic Districts Adopted May 2002, reformatted 2008 While the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines provide valuable guidance, they are not specific to Cedar Rapids historic properties and may be difficult for the public to understand. The basic principles set forth in these documents are therefore adapted to local resources in the City’s own design guidelines. As a result Cedar Rapids local design guidelines provide some of the most critical review criteria. • Design Review Technical Advisory Committee reviews projects in the Czech Bohemia and Ellis Area Overlay Districts. (See Zoning above.) desiGn GUidelines Design guidelines provide objective criteria for determining the appropriateness of proposed work affecting historic properties. They inform a property owner in advance of how a proposal will be evaluated. Effective guidelines provide clear examples of appropriate and inappropriate design treatments. They also define the range of flexibility that may be available for alterations and additions to properties. They also can help owners identify which features are significant and should be preserved, and conversely, which features are less critical to the integrity of a historic property, thereby indicating where greater flexibility may be afforded. While addressing rehabilitation, design guidelines also should address sustainability, including energy conservation and generation. They should also provide help in resolving apparent conflicts between preservation and sustainability. For example, many people assume that replacing original single-pane windows with new double-paned windows to be a cost- 68 Preservation background effective measure, in terms of energy savings. Property owners may argue for replacement of the windows as a necessary trade-off, even though it means loss of historic building fabric. However, many studies nationwide prove that the pay-back period for replacing windows extends over decades, and that there are alternative, more cost-effective measures, such as adding more insulation into the roof and walls, that provide more savings, do not cause loss of historic building fabric and have a much shorter payback period. Cedar Rapids has published custom-tailored design guidelines for its two local historic districts. They guide the design review process for work in the two local historic districts. The existing guidelines generally provide a good base by which to consider treatment of a historic residential buildings, however many topics are missing. For example, they do not provide guidelines for non- contributing properties or new construction within the historic district. Many of the guidelines also lack sufficient detail to be helpful to property owners, or for the commission to use in making informal findings in its design review tasks. Updating these guidelines should be a high priority. There are several ways in which design guidelines for historic preservation may appear in city publications. The differences in part relate to how the guidelines are administered. There are these general categories: • Design guidelines for historic preservation under the purview of the HPC • Design guidelines for special overlays (such as Czech-Bohemia) • General Urban Design Guidelines for citywide use (either as an overlay or as an education device) Each of these is discussed briefly here: historic preservation guidelines An effective set of design guidelines for historic preservation should be written such that the document can apply citywide for any local landmark or historic district. It should include guidelines for treatment of historic properties, of course, but also for the design of additions and new buildings on historic sites and within historic districts. A good set of historic preservation design guidelines should include: • General principles for preservation of all historic properties (based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation) • Special guidance for sustainability related to historic properties (providing additional guidance for achieving energy efficiency and conservation of resources while maintaining preservation principles) • General principles for the design of additions to historic buildings • General guidelines for the design of new buildings in historic districts (these apply to all existing and future historic districts) Figure 60: Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation Guidelines should be updated to address additional preservation issues. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 69 • Context-specific guidelines for infill in historic districts (these add special guidance tailored to unique conditions within individual historic districts) • Guidelines for landscaping (including the public and private realms) The general preservation guidelines sections should draw upon the fundamental principles set forth in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation. These would apply to alterations and improvements to historic properties, wherever they exist in the city, either individually or as contributing to historic districts. design guidelines for special overlays Several overlays exist that have their own design guidelines. The Czech- Bohemia Overlay is an example. These often combine preservation principles with other design policies specifically related to the context. Where these overlays are applied to areas of historic significance, the guidelines for citywide preservation should be applied to the historic properties within the designated areas to the extent feasible. They may be repeated in the overlay guidelines, or there could simply be a reference to the city’s general preservation guidelines for treatment of these properties. Then, there should be more carefully crafted guidelines for new construction within these overlays that address the specific context. There also may be guidelines for the public realm that include street furniture, signage and other topics. general urban design guidelines Many cities use urban design guidelines to promote design excellence and compatibility with existing contexts. These focus on broader principles of providing a pedestrian-friendly experience, building neighborhoods by linking individual projects and establishing a distinct palette of materials (and even style) that reflects the community. Where these are used, there should be reference to historic properties and a connection should be made to the city’s historic preservation guidelines. demolition revieW Tools that prevent or discourage the demolition of historic properties are essential elements of a City’s preservation system. Each loss of a historic property raises questions about the effectiveness of the preservation system, and an effective system must have a process that discourages loss of historic properties through demolition. Sometimes a property is neglected until it must be demolished. These cases of “demolition by neglect” may be due to many causes including: • An owner cannot afford the necessary maintenance because of personal financial circumstances, or • An owner is unwilling to invest in the structure, or • An owner anticipates reuse opportunities for the site that seem to be greater without the historic structure being there, or • There is no apparent viable economic use for the property, or • An owner is disinterested or unaware of the condition of the property 70 Preservation background At a certain point, the decay may become so substantial that the City’s building official must cite the property as a hazard to public safety. Most local preservation ordinances acknowledge that, when this state is reached, the property may be demolished. The objective, however, is to avoid having a property reach this state. • Typically, by the time a building reaches a stage of being at risk, it has already passed a point at which many of the architectural details and building components that contribute to its significance have deteriorated to a point beyond repair. That is, when it reaches a public safety hazard stage, the building may have already lost its integrity as a historic resource. The challenge, therefore, is to interrupt the cycle before decay reaches this level. The primary demolition prevention tool is a requirement for a demolition permit. The HPC may deny a request for demolition of a locally designated historic property or delay demolition in order to seek other options. The applicant may appeal the HPC's decision to the City Council. For properties not locally designated, the HPC may invoke a 60-day delay, during which alternatives may be explored. Other strategies to protect historic properties from demolition include direct intervention, and incentives as well as working to create a climate that encourages good stewardship. Because the appropriate tools will vary with the circumstances of the case, the most effective preservation programs use these tools: • Property owner notices of need to repair • Publication of endangered property lists (often managed by preservation partners) • Emergency protection clauses in the ordinance • Minimum maintenance requirements • Forced sale or condemnation • Emergency preservation funds • Creating a supportive economic environment • Economic hardship When demolition is proposed, the question of economic viability typically arises. At present, there is not a clear set of criteria to evaluate the feasibility of preserving a structure. Figure 61: Pazdera Grocery building at 129 Seventh Avenue SW was moved c. 1990 to Usher's Ferry Historic Village in Cedar Rapids to preserve it. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 71 the different Categories of properties in demolition review There are essentially these types of properties that may be involved in demolition review: PROPERTIES KNOWN TO HAVE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE a locally designated historic resource This applies to a building that is designated under local ordinance as having historic significance. This may be an individual landmark, or a property considered to be a “contributing” to a local historic district. These properties have the highest level of protection, and the HPC should be involved in the review of any proposal to demolish a resource in this category, under the powers of the preservation ordinance. In some of the local historic districts in Cedar Rapids, the survey information does not go to the level of detail that classifies each property within the district as either “contributing” or “non-contributing.” In those cases the assumption should be that all properties within the district that date from the period of significance are “contributing,” until the HPC can make a determination using the criteria for designation in its ordinance. For those properties that are more recent than the period of significance, most are likely to lack historic significance, unless they would be eligible for individual listing as a local landmark. These would be treated as “non-contributing.” a property listed in the nrhp, but not locally listed This involves a building that is listed in the National Register as having historic significance, but that is not also listed locally. These are properties for which the demolition delay provision is especially important, because these resources should be preserved if feasible and this delay gives the community (and the HPC) time to consider alternatives. This may include moving to designate the property as a local landmark, or pursuing other alternatives as outline above. Note some of these properties may be eligible for income tax incentives, and this option could be explored during the delay period. a property that is identified as having historic significance in a historic resources survey, but that has not been listed either locally or in the national register. These are properties that should be protected as well, and the delay provides time to consider the options. By applying the criteria for significance in the ordinance, the HPC may determine if it should pursue local landmarking or otherwise seek alternatives to demolition. This may be particularly important for an area that could be designated as a local historic district, but the timing is such that local designation of the district will not occur in the near future. If these potential “contributing” properties are lost, it could affect the eligibility for the district as a whole in the future. 72 Preservation background PROPERTIES THAT MAY HAVE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE a property that is located within an area identified for an intensive level survey. The 2014 City Survey has identified several of these places. In these areas, many of the properties are likely to have historic significance, but the survey work has not been completed to make that determination. In these cases, the HPC may apply the criteria for significance in its ordinance in order to determine if a local historic landmark designation should proceed. The demolition delay provision provides time for this consideration, which may require some research. Finding alternatives to demolition for these properties may help preserve them until an intensive survey can be conducted. a property that is of an age, in an un-surveyed area that could have historic significance These are properties in areas that have not had a reconnaissance survey, but have reached an age threshold that serves as a minimum “filter” for identifying properties that may have taken on historic significance. This is a category that some properties of the “recent past” may be in. For properties in this category, finding an expeditious process for determining significance will be important. It may be possible for staff to review these properties, applying clearly defined criteria. Then, if they find some potential for significance, the property may be referred to the HPC; if staff finds a lack of significance, then it may be possible for them to make a finding of "no historic significance." PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT LIKELY TO HAVE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE a more recent property, not classified as historically significant This includes a property that dates from a more recent period that has not been identified as having historic significance. For many of these, the lack of historic significance should be relatively clear. Working with specifically defined criteria for significance, staff should be able to make a determination of “no historic significance” without referring the property to the HPC. For cases in which they may be uncertain about applying the criteria, they could seek the advice of the HPC. a classified “non-contributing” or surveyed property determined to have no historic significance These are properties that have been officially recorded as a “non-contributing” to a district or ineligible for the NRHP. This determination will have been made by a professional in the field, and the survey would have been accepted by the HPC. The survey may be for an established historic district at a local level or a National Register level, or it may be an intensive level survey that has been accepted by the HPC, but for which no official designation has occurred. In all of these situations, a process already has been followed by which a professional has evaluated the property and the HPC has endorsed the findings. For these properties, staff should be able to issue a finding of “no historic significance” without returning the question to the HPC. (This underscores the value of having intensive level surveys, because they expedite this demolition review process for properties that have already been rated as non-contributing.) 73 manaGement tools issUes sUmmary overall issues • Existing tools do not address new trends in preservation, such as sustainability, recent past resources, new construction in historic districts and integration with other planning objectives and policies. • Saying “no” in the face of a promise of new investment is difficult. That is, review authorities wishing to see investment occur, may approve a project in the interest of economic development, even when it may result in damage to historic properties. Sometimes, this decision may not take into account the long-term economic benefits that derive from preserving historic properties and incorporating them in the redevelopment schemes. Having more detailed design guidelines will help the staff and the HPC in saying “no.” • Some of the City’s design overlays are intended to encourage appropriate rehabilitation work and compatible infill, but do not actually have the tools to require compliance. • There are ongoing concerns with removal of flood-damaged buildings that increases confusion amongst the public about procedures and policies regarding demolition of buildings. ordinance issues (see the appendix for more details.) • The existing zoning code includes provisions that may conflict with preservation objectives. (The example of setback requirements potentially being out of sync with historic development patterns was introduced earlier.) • Technical cleanup of Chapter 18 of Historic Preservation is needed to address some existing issues, such as: o Issues with the enforcement and compliance with the preservation ordinance, including improvements to historic buildings and demolition of historic properties. o Speculative demolition can occur. That is, one can demolish without having a plan for replacement. This leaves vacant lots in the neighborhoods. o Existing tools are not sufficient to ensure maintenance of historic properties. design review issues • The design guidelines for historic preservation and for design in historic districts are not comprehensive. For example, design guidelines to address, the neighborhood design context, site features, non-contributing properties or new construction, etc. are missing. • Design guidelines also should be developed that can address historic properties citywide. That is, for the treatment of an individually listed historic landmark that is not in a historic district. • Design review for historic preservation is isolated, in a “silo.” Considering ways in which to more fully integrate historic design review, and preservation in general, into community development and planning is a key concern. Showing how preservation contributes to other community development initiatives is one way of doing this. 74 Preservation background inCentives and Benefits Effective preservation programs offer special benefits to stimulate investment in historic properties, encourage owners to follow appropriate rehabilitation procedures, and assist those with limited budgets. This may include: • Financial and technical assistance • Tax credits • Regulatory relief, such as streamlined review • Special flexibility in building codes tax incentives that are available: • Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives • Iowa Historic Preservation and Cultural and Entertainment District Rehabilitation Tax Credit • Low Income Housing Federal Tax Credit • Industrial Property Tax Exemption • Urban Revitalization Tax Exemption • City of Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation Economic Development Program • Historic Property Rehabilitation Tax Exemption • Temporary Historic Property Tax Exemptions • ADA Federal Tax Credit financial incentives that are available: • Cedar Rapids Downtown/MedQ Housing • Cedar Rapids Exterior Paint Rebate Program • City of Cedar Rapids Economic Development Program-Targeted Development Programs • CLG Grants • Commercial Reinvestment • Community Benefit Program • Czech Village/New Bohemia Main Street District Resources • Historic Resource Development Program (HRDP) • Historic Site Preservation Grants (HSPG, has not been funded for four years) • Iowa Economic Development Loan Program • Iowa Main Street Mortgage Loan Program • Iowa New Jobs Training Program • National Trust Preservation Fund • Self-supporting Municipal Improvement District • State Historical Society of Iowa Technical Advisory Network (TAN) • Urban Renewal Tax Increment • Wells Fargo Grants 75 regulatory incentives • There is some flexibility provided in the International Building Code 2012, however; this may not be invoked as often as it could be. Additional zoning code flexibility also may be allowed for historic properties to encourage preservation of historic properties. inCentives & Benefits issUes sUmmary • The City does not have a specific system to coordinate historic rehabilitation projects with City incentives and therefore some opportunities to use them may be missed. • Existing incentives are insufficient to promote designation of some historic properties. • The City can promote and enhance existing technical assistance programs. • Code flexibility for historic properties is not well defined. The potential to use the International Existing Building Code for historic building improvements is not readily apparent to property owners. • The City should develop a set of case studies with financial proformas to demonstrate historic redevelopment prototypes that would be considered feasible in Cedar Rapids. This analysis would consider appropriately rehabilitated historic properties, and incorporate available tax and loan incentives, to better understand how incentives could apply. Figure 62: Iowa Theatre Building at 102 Third Street SE. Opened June 1928. Figure 63: Third Avenue SE looking east from Second Street SE c. 1945. Right to left: Killian Department Store at 201 Third Avenue SE, Sanford's Store/Boyson Jewelry building at 213-217 Third Avenue SE (demolished 1988), Montrose Hotel at 221-227 Third Avenue SE (demolished 1988). Source: City of Cedar Rapids 76 Preservation background edUC ation The education component is made up of strategies to build awareness and strengthen skills to support preservation policies. Helping property owners learn how to maintain their historic properties as active, viable assets is a key part of a successful preservation program. Many property owners willingly comply with appropriate rehabilitation procedures and develop compatible designs for new construction when they are well informed about preservation objectives. Workshops that provide helpful information about rehabilitation techniques and publications that build an understanding of historic significance are examples of education and outreach strategies. Well-written design guidelines that provide useful solutions can also serve an educational role. Education and outreach efforts also help ensure that the importance of historic preservation is well understood within the community. They may also help property owners better understand the range of flexibility that is available for adaptive reuse of historic properties. Education of the general public can also help build a base of people who can work in the heritage tourism industry. The evolution of the city reflects its heritage in the richness of its architecture, and the character of its commercial areas and residential neighborhoods. Heritage tourism can build awareness of historic properties within the community by promoting these assets and their stories to attract tourists. Currently, preservation is an under-realized economic development resource for Cedar Rapids. Greater understanding, coordination and marketing of preservation is needed. City of Cedar r apids edUCation proGrams The City does administer some programs related to education and awareness. These include distributing historic markers, maintaining a property research database and posting information on the City’s web site. These are some programs: Cedar rapids Web site The City of Cedar Rapids identifies preservation related material through its link to the HPC. The primary information displayed identifies the HPC’s roles, membership and meeting schedule. Some information related to City preservation activities also is posted, however this is not extensive. There are also some preservation related links and related documents. Generally, the historic preservation portion of the site is not comprehensive but does provide the foundation for a better site. 77 historic properties inventory database The City is in the process of developing a comprehensive database for inventoried historic properties in Cedar Rapids. This database will include all previously completed surveys, as well as the industrial, religious building, and downtown surveys, which are scheduled to be completed by the end of 2015. The data will be mapped and available in an online GIS database, which will incorporate a color-coded system of identifying significant historic properties within the city. annual preservation showcase This one-day program is held annually and highlights historic preservation work throughout the city. The day celebrates achievements and identifies issues through events, lectures and identification of projects. The preservation showcase is funded through 2016. To maintain this annual event into the future, additional funding will need to be identified. other edUC ation proGrams Though the City itself has a limited role in other education and outreach programs, many of its preservation partners play key roles. The roles of several of the city’s most important preservation partners are summarized below. african american Museum of iowa The African American Museum has been carrying out its mission since 1994 and has since become one of the leading educational resources on African American history in the state. Its mission is “To preserve, exhibit, and teach the African American heritage of Iowa.” Offerings include: • Tours • Exhibits • Lectures • Collections • Museum Shop • Family and Youth Programs • Social events with historic themes • Oral Histories Figure 64: African American Museum of Iowa at 55 12th Avenue SE. Source: Web 78 Preservation background Brucemore historic site and Community Cultural Center Brucemore is a National Trust Site and a community cultural center. Its mission is “To engage the public in the history, traditions, resources, and on-going preservation of Brucemore for the enrichment of the community.” It is a model facility for preservation. Offerings include: • Interactive tours of the Mansion, its Landscape and the Neighborhood • Exhibits • Lectures • Collections • Flower Shop the history Center The History Center is dedicated to connecting the past to the present and the future of Linn County. The Center works to make history both accessible and enjoyable for everyone. Offerings include: • Linge Library • Historic Walking Tours • Exhibits • Lectures • Social events with historic themes • Demonstrations of historical items or crafts • Oral Histories Czech village/new Bohemia Main street district Main Street's mission is “To encourage economic growth and promote preservation by working together toward a shared vision through implementation of the Main Street Four-Point Approach to revitalization." Its vision is of a District that “…is a vibrant urban neighborhood and a model for historic preservation and economic development in the Midwest, a destination for both residents and visitors. Building on its unique history, the District is a dynamic arts and culture venue that provides interesting, authentic and enriching experiences that complement the downtown with a variety of shopping, dining, arts and cultural entertainment opportunities that can be found here.” Educational components of the Czech Village/New Bohemia Main Street District work includes: • Promotion of heritage tourism in historic arts & cultural district • Design, technical and financial resources for owners of property or businesses within the District • Strategic planning for economic and community development Figure 65: Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center at 2160 Linden Drive SE Figure 66: The historic Douglas Mansion at 800 Second Avenue SE serves as home to the History Center. Source: Web 79 indian Creek nature Center Operated within a historic agricultural facility the mission of the Indian Creek Nature Center is to, “promote a sustainable future by: nurturing individuals through environmental education providing leadership in land protection and restoration, and encouraging responsible interaction with nature.” For decades Indian Creek Nature Center has led the area in sustainable building and operations practices. In 1993, the first net-metered solar panel system in Iowa was installed on the maple sugar house. Relocated to the barn a few years later these panels have consistently produced 25% of the electricity for the center. Offerings include: • Leadership in Land Protection and Restoration • Preschool, Elementary and Middle school programs • Events • Gift Shop linn County historic preservation Commission The Linn County Historic Preservation Commission is comprised of nine County residents who work to identify, preserve, and protect historic properties. national Czech & slovak Museum & library (nCsMl) Its mission is to “inspire people from every background to connect with Czech and Slovak history and culture.” Its vision, “We are a museum that celebrates life. Through exhibitions and experiences, the facility tells stories of freedom and identity, family and community, human rights and dignity.” Offerings include: • Study Trips • Lectures • Bi-annual Journal • Events • Exhibits • Oral Histories • Library • Museum Shop Figure 67: Indian Creek Nature Center at 6665 Otis Road. Source: Web Figure 68: National Czech & Slovak Museum & Library at 1400 Inspiration Place. Source: Web 80 Preservation background save Cr heritage Save Cedar Rapids Heritage is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, in its infancy. It is moving forward to become the hub of preservation resources and programming in the community. As noted on their web site “intention is to use awareness, assistance and initiative to preserve historic treasures by developing preservation and reuse strategies." The organization will work with developers, property owners, city officials, cultural organizations, etc., to make preservation an integral part of progress.” edUCation issUes sUmmary The City provides limited educational services regarding the preservation of the city’s historic properties. The City does have robust partners in educating the community about the heritage of the city. However, these individual programs are not as well coordinated as they could be. • The school district lacks a formal program on the history of the community. • Existing educational resources do not provide a strong basis of awareness. • Current preservation education and outreach programs are not sufficient to raise awareness and provide support for the city’s preservation goals and objectives. • Many contractors and property owners lack an understanding of appropriate rehabilitation procedures. • Some commercial property owners do not see value in historic buildings on site. • Many property owners do not understand the role of historic buildings in sustainability. • No committee exists to provide an overall direction for preservation education efforts. • Existing and potential preservation partners are not always included in education program efforts. • Increased coordination with preservation partners is needed. • Few programs exist for heritage tourists. • A formal Heritage Tourism Plan is needed. • There are few developers who understand preservation projects. 81 the City 's CUltUral resoUrCes Figure 69: Air View of Cedar Rapids c. 1950. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 82 Preservation Plan throUGhoUt the City, older properties exist that residents valUe for their assoCiation With the CommUnity’s heritaGe. many of these have Been identified in CUltUral resoUrCe sUrveys and sUBseqUently some of those properties have Been offiCially desiGnated as historiC properties. as a means to make informed determinations of siGnifiCanCe, the City Uses adopted Criteria and also draWs Up historiCal BaCkGroUnd information WhiCh is pUBlished as a series of “Contexts.” this seC tion sUmmarizes some major Contexts and then desCriBes some of the formally listed historiC properties. folloWinG that material is a disCUssion of property aGe and Condition related to these identified resoUrCes. 83 historiC sUrvey Contexts The evaluation of properties for potential historic significance involves an assessment of the property in terms of the history of the relevant geographical area, themes or subjects, and within a specific time frame—this is considered its context. The relative importance of specific historic properties can be better understood by determining how they relate to these contexts. An individual historic property may relate to more than one of these areas. Several themes related to the development of Cedar Rapids are briefly summarized in the following pages. These illustrate how contexts may be described, but do not cover the full range of Cedar Rapids’ history. Historic contexts are used by communities to assist with education, guide survey efforts and inform evaluation of historic significance. The information provided below was obtained from the National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form: Historic Resources of Cedar Rapids, June 1991; Commercial and Industrial Development of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, c. 1865 – c. 1945; and the amended Historic Resource of Cedar Rapids, Iowa Multiple Property Submission Form, 2000, resulting in the Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey of 2014. physiC al & historiCal development settlement Soon after the land of east central Iowa opened to settlers in the late 1830s, a stretch along the Cedar River in Linn County known for its swift flowing rapids was identified by a few pioneer settlers and a handful of early land speculators as a prospective town site. They were attracted by the possibility of waterpower at the site for the operation of mills. The rich land in the nearby hills and prairies promised a steady supply of agricultural produce. The most farsighted observers anticipated that a steamboat landing could be developed here where the rapids would impede further movement upstream. The original town was laid out with streets perpendicular and parallel to the Cedar River's northwest-southeast course. The plat had just over sixty square blocks stretching along twelve blocks of riverfront and extending approximately eight blocks back. The normal course of city building observed in other Midwest communities was followed in Cedar Rapids with log and frame commercial establishments. A handful of residences originally intermixed with the commercial buildings were soon displaced by larger and more permanent commercial blocks of masonry materials. Cedar Rapids was initially platted as Rapids City in 1841 and then incorporated as a small settlement of some 300 people on the east bank of the Cedar River 84 Preservation Plan in 1849. Kingston, the settlement on the west bank of the river, was established in 1852. The two communities consolidated under the name of Cedar Rapids in 1870. The city boundaries were enlarged in 1884 and again in 1890, on both sides of the river. This last annexation established the city boundaries which were in force into the 1920s. In 1908 the people of Cedar Rapids adopted the commission form of government by popular vote. One of the first important Initiatives by the City Council was the acquisition of May's Island. Plans were begun for construction of a new city hall on May's Island and a new bridge across the island at Third Avenue. When the new Memorial Building and City Hall were finished a few years later, the City's plan for a civic center was completed. The difficult times experienced during the Great Depression years in other Iowa towns did not affect population growth in Cedar Rapids during the 1930s. By 1940, more than 62,000 persons called Cedar Rapids home and the local Chamber of Commerce boasted that the community had one of the highest homeownership rates in the country. The increase of more than 10,000 industrial jobs between 1939 and 1945 provided continued growth. Between 1970 and 1990 the population of the city was essentially stable at approximately 110,000. It then grew to approximately 128,000 by 2013. Cedar river The Cedar River has been the defining element of the city since its founding. The rapids were harnessed as early as 1842 as a source of waterpower through dam building efforts north of May’s Island. Industry located along the riverfront on both sides of the river to take advantage of the waterpower, and the Quaker Oats plant remains an important presence on the river front. Downtown Cedar Rapids was established on the east bank of the river opposite May’s Island, and a small commercial district extended across the island on the west side. May’s Island became the heart of Cedar Rapids civic government in the early twentieth century with the construction of the Veterans’ Memorial Building/ Coliseum home of City Hall, the Chamber of Commerce, and the National Guard armory; the Linn County Courthouse; and a landscaped plaza linking the two civic buildings. A third component of the new civic complex was the U.S. Post Office, Federal Building, and Courthouse. The City set up a park commission in 1894. Two of the city’s early parks (Ellis and Riverside park) are located along the river and provide major recreational areas for the community. Early dams on the river were constructed to provide water power and bridges that span the river were crucial to the development of Cedar Rapids on both sides of the river. The river was also a factor in the location of two significant infrastructure improvements: the city water treatment system and the sewage treatment system. Figure 70: Ellis Park c. 1909. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 85 The Cedar River has helped to define Cedar Rapids since its founding, for good and ill. It has been a source of waterpower and recreation, and it has also been the source of periodic flooding, which in turn has continually altered the city’s fabric. the railroads As stated in National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation (MPDF) Form 2000, by 1900 Cedar Rapids claimed the status of “railroad traffic pivot of the middle west.” Direct connections were available to all major cities in the region and nearly 1,750 stations in Iowa alone. In the city itself, railroad lines “crisscrossed Cedar Rapids’ west side, the downtown, and the riverfront. Their routes established extensive industrial corridors and warehouse districts and, in turn, attracted working class residential neighborhoods.” The first railroad came to Cedar Rapids in June 1859 and others followed during the 1860s and 1870s. Virtually every new or expanding industry of importance in Cedar Rapids from meat packing to oatmeal and grain processing to metal working companies located facilities along one of the four railroad routes or on readily accessible rail spurs. The river had been the impetus for a town site for Cedar Rapids, but the railroads gave physical structure to the town and the means for growth. Major lines continued from downtown to the northeast and southeast and helped to define neighborhood boundaries. Railroads continued to be one of the principal urban geographic factors defining Cedar Rapids after 1900. The access points, approaches and alignments remained the same. The railroad bridges continued in the same locations. Factory sites, warehouse districts, and residential neighborhoods continued along all rail corridors. When constructed, the rail lines carried both passenger and freight traffic. Passenger trains no longer go through Cedar Rapids, but rail freight is active on all the major lines. Prominent grade crossings downtown and in many residential neighborhoods reinforce the presence of the city’s railroad corridors. street railways and interurban The Cedar Rapids streetcar system served to link areas of the city and nearby communities. This electrified system replaced earlier horse-drawn streetcars and was installed in 1891. Over 13 miles of track were in operation by 1910, with streetcars running every 15 to 20 minutes along various routes. Residential districts were no longer confined to neighborhoods that surrounded factory sites or abutted manufacturing corridors. Land that was once considered too far from the city center for profitable development became suitable for residential suburbs. And in the case of the town of Kenwood Park, an entire community was built in the middle of the country along the ‘Boulevard’ [i.e. First Avenue]. The names and routes of streetcar lines were prominently featured in advertisements and promotions for many new residential additions, especially those on the east side, such as Vernon Heights, Bever Park, Ridgewood, and 86 Preservation Plan Midway Park. The city also used the routes of the electric transportation lines to guide the locations of public schools. The development of outlying recreational areas was another result of street railways. The pre-electrified streetcars had operated service to the fair ground on the west side in the 1880s when amusements or fairs were held. After 1900, streetcar lines brought town dwellers to Alamo Park to "Chute-the-Chutes" and Ellis Park on the city's west side. Ellis Park was a popular site above the dam for swimming along the river, regattas, baseball games, and picnics and to Bever Park on the far east side for nature walks, ball games and picnics. Good streetcar service was also available to the City's principal cemeteries - Oak Hill on the east side and Linwood on the west side. The streetcar tracks and overhead wires were eventually removed after service halted in 1937 and replaced by bus service. Today local bus lines run along some of these same routes. Electrification was not limited to streetcar lines, however; in 1904 the first electric powered interurban. These lines operated between Cedar Rapids and Iowa City, beginning in 1904 and ending in 1953. Most of the tracks through the city were either removed or converted to other uses. utilities The introduction of gas and electric power and the installation of telephone service had profound impacts on the way Cedar Rapids operated and ultimately the way buildings were built and neighborhoods developed. Change began with the development of an infrastructure to support these new utility services appeared both above and below ground. Streets and sidewalks were soon lined with power poles and wires to carry electric power into residential neighborhoods and telephone lines to anyone subscribing to the service. Electric streetcar lines required supply lines to crisscross downtown intersections. Each generation of new electric light standard in the business district added refinements in ornamentation, operational design, and lighting capacity. For a time, technological advancement could not keep up with demand. Power poles became burdened with a spider web of telephone wires and power lines before underground cable installations were adopted. Another essential utility service, was the city’s water and sewerage system, which was greatly expanded during the twentieth century. The city’s water was provided by a series of deep wells built in 1926-1929 that channeled the water into the Cedar Rapids Water Works Plant. The plant has been expanded over the years to meet the needs of city residents. Shortly after the completion of the plant, the City began to plan a new riverfront sewage treatment plant that was notable for processing both domestic sewage and industrial waste. City water and sewage lines were extended into the new suburban developments being constructed beyond the core residential neighborhoods in the first three decades of the twentieth century. Figure 71: "Third Avenue at Night" historic postcard c. 1925. Third Avenue at Second Street SE. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 87 the automobile Introduction of the automobile to Cedar Rapids after 1900 affected the city in the same ways that it influenced other American urban areas. Residential neighborhoods could be quickly developed beyond the reaches of streetcar lines. Garages were built along the alleys in these new neighborhoods and in older areas, carriage houses saw their wagon doors give way to doors sized and designed for automobiles. Paving was crucial to making streets usable for automobiles. Brick pavers were used on downtown streets and gradually spread out to the residential neighborhoods. Concrete was also a popular paving material and there were also experiments with various types of asphalt paving systems. The rise of the automobile was also accompanied by the creation of highways to carry motorists out into the country and from one city to another. economic trends Major industries that were established in Cedar Rapids in the nineteenth century and into the first decades of the twentieth century provided economic strength for the community. Most were located close to the river and along the railroad corridors. While the physical structures may survive, most of the industries themselves have moved elsewhere, and other industries have moved into these buildings. An exception is the Quaker Oats Company, which had its origins in Cedar Rapids in 1873. The company remains in its Northeast location on a 22-acre site north of downtown on the east side of the river. It has continued to provide employment to hundreds of Cedar Rapids residents who live throughout the city. Downtown Cedar Rapids had been largely redeveloped as a commercial business and shopping center with related entertainment functions by the 1920s. Banking and the related insurance industries also had a role in shaping downtown, as well as providing financing and mortgages for expanding residential neighborhoods. A variety of federal programs such as the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan program helped to shape new residential neighborhoods in the years after World War II, as well as new residential construction in older neighborhoods. The adoption of the Cedar Rapids Zoning Code in 1925 and subsequent revisions helped to reinforce the locations of industrial, commercial, and residential districts throughout the city. ethnic groups Many European immigrants made their homes in Cedar Rapids. Bohemians or Czech-Slovaks were the largest immigrant group and the only one to locate in concentrated geographical areas on both sides of the river. There, residents had easy access to local businesses and industries. These neighborhoods are now known as Czech Village on the west bank and New Bohemia on the east bank. Meanwhile, as members of the Bohemian-American community prospered, they moved out into the extended neighborhoods throughout the city. Figure 72: Second Avenue SE looking west from railroad tracks c . 1915. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 88 Preservation Plan Other immigrant groups were more dispersed geographically and established their identity through churches or other religious institutions and related social and cultural organizations. A modest Arab settlement led to the construction of Orthodox and Muslim churches and institutional buildings. The small African-American community of Cedar Rapids also expressed its identity through its churches. social and Cultural life Through its fifteen decades of existence, Cedar Rapids' social and cultural life has been knit together by a collection of institutions and organizations supported by wide range of individuals. These churches, schools, fraternal organizations, social and humanitarian groups, and cultural institutions grew as the city expanded. Historic Properties Groups of resources with common physical attributes or that share relationships with historic figures and events may be considered distinct historic properties. In many cases, historic properties are associated with particular historic context and theme. Historic properties can be buildings, sites, districts, structures or objects. The information provided below was obtained from the National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form (with the exception of the Archeological information): Historic Resources of Cedar Rapids, June 1991; Commercial and Industrial Development of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, c. 1865 – c. 1945; and the amended Historic Resource of Cedar Rapids, Iowa Multiple Property Submission Form, 2000, resulting in the Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey of 2014. archaeological Archaeological sites are places where people left material (i.e. physical) evidence of their presence. They range from the camps of the earliest Native Americans to the mills and homesteads of later Euroamerican settlers. A site could consist of only a few artifacts or dozens of features marking an entire settlement. While the very notion of archaeology conjures images of the most ancient, Federal historic preservation laws and Iowa State laws actually consider archaeological remains as recent in time as 1950. Site types could include short-term camps, earthen mounds, cemeteries, fish traps, building foundations, homesteads, privies, fortifications, old trails or roads, grist mills, steam boat wrecks, beer caves and ancient agricultural fields. Cedar Rapids environs include: Intact prehistoric and historic archaeological deposits, such as prehistoric flake and grinding stone fragments; historic structural remains; historic artifact scatter; historic roads and trails; and mill deposits. Bridges and dams Bridges that span the river were crucial to the development of Cedar Rapids on both sides of the river. Some accommodated both vehicular and pedestrian traffic while others were devoted to railroad traffic. Figure 73: Left: Churchill Drug Wholesale Building (1925) (Water Tower Place) at 900 Second Street SE. Right: Witwer Grocer Building (1946) (NRHP) (Bottleworks) at 905 Third Street SE. 89 A group of bridges served the downtown commercial and upstream industrial areas, these include the • First Avenue Bridge (circa 1920, rehab. 1964, also listed on the NRHP), • Second Avenue Bridge (circa 1906, reconstruct. 1965) • Third Avenue Bridge (circa 1911, rehab. 1966) Avenue Bridges. • 380 Bridge opened in 1979 replacing the F Avenue NE/B Avenue NW bridge. Another group of bridges downstream linked several industries and residential neighborhoods, these include the 8th (circa 1938, rehab. 1987) and 12th (circa 1974) Avenue Bridges. The Czech Village Bridge (circa 1989) replaced several earlier bridges. Two major railroad bridges crossed the Cedar River. The Burlington Cedar Rapids & Northern (BCR&N) bridge led from the Sinclair/Wilson meat packing plant on the east side to the city sewage treatment plant on the west side. The bridge was abandoned after the plant closed in 1990, and only part of the span survives. The still-active Chicago & Northwestern (CNW) bridge dates from 1898. It links the west bank and the Quaker Oats plant on the east side. Dams were built and rebuilt similar to the bridge construction in Cedar Rapids. The first dam was built in 1842, then several followed including ca. 1845, 1870, 1914 and finally in 1978. Commercial Three key commercial districts are found in Cedar Rapids. The Central Commercial District, West Side Commercial District and the Bohemian Commercial District. There are also several commercial corridors and small neighborhood commercial areas that are not mentioned here. The Central Commercial District underwent change through several generations of building types. The first-generation of buildings were of wood and log construction. Fires and prosperity replaced this first generation of buildings with larger and more substantial two and three-story brick and stone buildings. They housed merchants of hardware and tinware, livery operators and blacksmiths, drygoods and crockery merchants, bakers, butchers, hotel- keepers, restaurant owners, saloon keepers and bankers. As growth in the economy continued another generation of three to five story buildings replaced earlier structures and multi-story buildings were erected to house the city’s growing commercial district. These included a variety of commercial resources from modest to high-style commercial buildings. The buildings housed retail shops, hotels, offices, theaters and banks. Many of these buildings remain today and encourage the initiative for establishing a downtown historic district The West Side Commercial District extends two blocks away from the Cedar River, it was originally platted as part of the Kingston township. The area was annexed to Cedar Rapids in 1870. Similar to the Central Business District the Figure 74: 1898 Chicago and Northwestern Railroad (now Union Pacific) bridge over the Cedar River. Figure 75: First Avenue SE from Second Street to Third Street SE c. 1910. "The Bell" at 209 First Avenue SE. Photo by William Baylis. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 90 Preservation Plan original buildings were relocated with one, two and three-story brick veneered buildings. Upper levels of these shopfront buildings provided office space, medical offices and apartments. The West Side Commercial District reached full development by World War II. Though tenants changed through the years, it has continued to serve as a neighborhood shopping district. The Bohemian Commercial Historic District is located on the east side of the Cedar River and south of the Central Business District. Much of this area was impacted by the 2008 flood; however, several key buildings remain and provide the historic framework for the district. Civic & religious The political and cultural development in Cedar Rapids is reflected in its many historic civic and religious buildings. There was no single pattern followed for the building of churches and civic facilities in Cedar Rapids. The locations were the result of available land, the gifts of benefactors, and the individual needs of a building project. May’s Island became the heart of the Cedar Rapids civic government in the early twentieth century and remains today. The monumental stone civic buildings built between the World Wars are adorned with classical features. Other civic buildings included the YMCA and Libraries. Church buildings were first built along the edges of downtown. When the din of downtown became too much and property values became too expensive new churches were built in residential neighborhoods to be closer to their congregations, however; in some cases they stayed downtown and expanded to accommodate their growing congregations. residential neighborhoods and Buildings Through the years Cedar Rapids developed a series of residential neighborhoods that were defined by natural features or parks, proximity to churches or schools, or by the factories and employment centers of their residents. Sometimes neighborhoods developed organically over many years with houses filling in slowly and tastes in building form, materials, and size changing from one generation to the next. These neighborhoods continue to show the greatest variety in architectural character and may span as many as six decades. More often, Cedar Rapids' neighborhoods were developed intensely over a ten to thirty year period. The location of streetcar lines was an important factor in the success of residential neighborhoods beginning in the 1880s. Prior to 1900 and in the decades leading up to World War II, the house styles and forms in Cedar Rapids' fast growing residential neighborhoods were largely the products of the modest domestic architectural movement that focused on vernacular house forms. This movement adopted a series of basic forms and emphasized the mass production of millwork elements, structural members and systems, cladding, and finish materials. Building parts and eventually whole designs were introduced through catalogues to prospective suppliers. Pattern books and plan books were distributed by dozens of Figure 76: Hubbard Ice/Cold Storage Building at 1124 First Street NW. Figure 77: First Lutheran Church (1910) at 1000 Third Avenue SE. Figure 78: Through the years Cedar Rapids developed a series of residential neighborhoods that were defined by natural features or parks, proximity to churches or schools, or by the factories and employment centers of their residents. 91 companies including America's greatest mail order company, Sears, Roebuck and Co. Individual designs were spotlighted in magazines such as Western Architect, House Beautiful, Good Housekeeping, Architectural Record, Better Homes and Gardens, and Ladies' Home Journal. After 1900 advertisements in local newspapers highlighted the availability of plans from the Gordon- Van Tine Company of Davenport, Iowa. This company manufactured and sold pre-fabricated houses of the type commonly found in neighborhoods developed before and after World War II. Few examples of the Greek Revival, Italianate, Gothic Revival, or French Second Empire styles survive in Cedar Rapids. The Queen Anne Style, Stick Style, and Shingle Style are most evident in modest scale houses and the rich assortment of shingle claddings. Most surviving residences employed the Craftsman Style in one fashion or another. The Neoclassical styles including the Georgian Revival and Colonial Revival are frequently used as well. More rare examples include Prairie and Mission Styles.Figure 79: Many buildings such as this employed the Craftsman style in one fashion or another. Figure 80: Queen Anne style "storybook" house at 1310 Third Avenue SE designed by Cedar Rapids architect Charles Dieman. 92 Preservation Plan e xistinG l andmarks and distriC ts Many of Cedar Rapids’ historic properties are officially recognized on the NRHP and in the city’s local register. Other historic properties exist, but have not yet been identified or formally listed. Depending on the type of designation, a listing may provide opportunities for specific preservation incentives and may provide specific protection. The following types of official designation exist: local historic landmark: Any building, structure, object, archeological site, area of land or element of landscape architecture with significance, importance or value consistent with the criteria contained in the definition of historic district below and which has been designated as a historic landmark by the Cedar Rapids City Council. local historic landmarks in Cedar rapids are: • Ausadie Building local historic district: An area designated by the City which contains a significant portion of buildings, structures or other improvements which, considered as a whole, possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: • Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable en- tity whose components may lack individual distinction; or • Is associated with events that have made significant contributions to the broad patterns of our local, state or national history; or • Possesses a coherent and distinctive visual character or integrity based upon similarity of scale, design, color, setting, workmanship, materials, or combinations thereof, which is deemed to add significantly to the value and attractiveness of properties within such area; • Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or • Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. local historic districts in Cedar rapids are: • Second and Third Avenue Historic District (2000) • Redmond Park-Grand Avenue Historic District (2001) nrhp: The NRHP is the official list of the nation's historic places worthy of preservation. Authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the NPS NRHP is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect America's historic and archeological resources. The following lists identify the NRHP-listed properties and districts. 93 nrhp-listed properties (as of June 2015) within Cedar rapids are: • Armstrong, Robert and Esther, House (370 34th Street SE) • Ausadie Building (845 First Avenue SE) • Averill, A. T., House (1120 2nd Avenue SE) • Best Oil and Refining Company Service Station • Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church (512 6th Street SE) • Brewer, Luther A. and Elinore T., House (847 4th Avenue SE) • Brown Apartments (1234 4th Avenue SE) • C.S.P.S. Hall (1105 3rd Street SE) • Cedar Rapids Post Office and Public Building (305 2nd Avenue SE) • Calder Houses (1214 and 1216 2nd Avenue SE) • Cedar Rapids Central Fire Station (427 1st Street SE) • Cedar Rapids Pump Company Factory and Warehouse (605 G Avenue NW) • Consistory Building No. 2 (616 A Avenue NE) • Damour, William and Sue, House (1844 2nd Avenue SE) • Dewitt--Harman Archeological Site (address restricted) • Douglas, George B., House (800 2nd Avenue SE) • Evans Manufacturing Company Building (301 Sixth Avenue SE) • First Avenue Bridge (US 151 over Cedar River) • First Universalist Church of Cedar Rapids (demolished) (600 3rd Avenue SE) • Hamilton Brothers Building (401 First Street NE) • Highwater Rock (Cedar River near 1st Avenue and 1st Street NE) • Hotel Roosevelt (200 First Avenue NE) • IANR Railroad Underpass (Ely Road) • Indian Creek Bridge (Artesian Road over Indian Creek) • Iowa Building (221 4th Avenue SE) • Iowa Wind Mill and Pump Company Office and Warehouse (42 7th Avenue SW) • Lattner Auditorium Building (217 4th Avenue SE) • Lesinger Block (1317 3rd Street SE) • Lustron Home #02102 (2009 Williams Boulevard SW) • Moslem Temple (1335 9th Street NW) • Paramount Theatre Building (121-127 3rd Avenue SE) • People's Savings Bank (101 3rd Avenue SW) • Perkins, Charles W. and Nellie, House (1228 3rd Avenue SE) • Security Building (2nd Ave. and 2nd Street SE) • Seminole Valley Farmstead (outside city limits - west of Cedar Rapids) • Sinclair, T. M., Mansion (Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center) (2160 Linden Drive SE) • Sokol Gymnasium (415 3rd Street SE) • St. Paul Methodist Episcopal Church (1340 3rd Avenue SE) • Taylor-Van Note (outside city limits - 4600 Blairs Ferry Road) • Witwer Grocery Company Building (905 3rd Street SE) • Wolff, Philip A., House and Carriage House (1420 Seminole Avenue NW) 94 Preservation Plan nrhp-listed districts in Cedar rapids are: • May’s Island Historic District (1978) • Second and Third Avenue Historic District (2000) • Redmond Park-Grand Avenue Place Historic District (2001) • Bohemian Commercial Historic District (2002, expanded 2009) • Third Avenue SW Commercial District (2014) • Oakhill Cemetery National Historic District (2013) • B Avenue NE National Historic District (2013) national trust historic site • Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center nhls national historic landmarks National Historic Landmarks (NHLs) are nationally significant historic places designated by the Secretary of the Interior because they possess exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. Today, just over 2,500 historic places bear this national distinction. Working with citizens throughout the nation, the National Historic Landmarks Program draws upon the expertise of National Park Service staff who guide the nomination process for new Landmarks and provide assistance to existing Landmarks (source: National Park Service web site.) Currently there are not any NHLs designated in Cedar Rapids. 95 Cedar rapids local historic landmarks and districts and nrhp-listed districts and properties Figure 81: Many of the officially listed resources are located on the east side of the Cedar River. The largest concentrations of historic properties are in the 2nd & 3rd Avenue and Redmond Park-Grande Avenue Local Historic Districts and the B Avenue NE NRHP - listed district. Districts that are under the oversight of the Historic Preservation Commission include: 2nd & 3rd Avenue Local Historic District and Redmond Park-Grande Avenue Local Historic District. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. 2nd & 3rd Avenue Local Historic District 3rd. Ave SW Commercial NRHP-listed district B Avenue NE NRHP-listed district Bohemian Commercial NRHP-listed district May's Island NRHP-listed district Oak Hill Cemetery NRHP-listed cultural landscape Redmond Park - Grande Avenue Local Historic District NRHP-listed properties key 96 Preservation Plan Building periods of historic residential Buildings located within the City’s historic districts This chart illustrates the distribution of historic residential buildings that are located within the city’s historic districts. The building dates are grouped into general periods of development that relate to historical themes in the city. A substantial number of these properties date from 1891 – 1938. In fact, a total of 81.53% are from that time span. Since a historic district should have a considerable percentage of “contributing” it is not unusual to see many buildings of the appropriate age, but the converse is also interesting: Only 12.03% of the buildings are from a “middle” period, which includes properties from 1945-1977. Not all properties within these time brackets are necessarily classified as “contributing,” however. It is likely that some have been so substantially altered that they lack integrity as historic properties. This indicates that the residential districts generally have a high consistency in terms of building age and suggests that the city’s design guidelines should focus on providing criteria related to treatment of historic properties from these periods. Guidance related to “non-contributing” will also be useful, but the application will be to a smaller percentage of properties. Figure 82: Building Periods of Historic Residential Buildings Located within the City’s Historic Districts. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database key time frame BUilt CoUnt perCentaGe 1890 and older 30 5.23% 1891-1910 228 39.72% 1911-1938 240 41.81% 1939-1944 6 1.05% 1945-1955 63 10.98% 1956-1965 4 0.70% 1966-1977 2 0.35% 1978-1998 1 0.17% 97 physical Condition of historic residential Buildings located within the City’s historic districts The chart above indicates the condition of historic residential buildings located within the city’s historic districts. The rating categories are ones applied by the City Assessor. The classifications range from “Excellent” to “Very Poor.” A substantial number (50.52%) are rated as “Normal” and another significant portion (25%) are rated as “Above Normal.” When these are combined with those of even better condition ratings 81.53% are rated as “Normal” to “Excellent.” When those rated between “Below Normal” or “Very Poor” are grouped, they constitute 16.55% of the properties. This suggests that many property owners are engaged in maintaining their properties. On the other hand, those properties that are not well maintained are of concern. When allowed to deteriorate further, those in this category, which are considered to be “contributing,” could lose some of their key character-defining features. Rehabilitation assistance programs should be targeted at these properties. Figure 83: Physical Condition of Historic Residential Buildings Located within the City’s Historic Districts. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. key physiCal Condition CoUnt perCentaGe Excellent 2 0.35% Very Good 31 5.40% Above Normal 145 25.26% Normal 290 50.52% Below Normal 65 11.32% Poor 25 4.36% Very Poor 5 0.87% Observed 11 1.92% 98 Preservation Plan historic residential Building Materials found within the City’s historic districts The chart above indicates the types of materials found on the historic residential buildings located within the city’s historic districts. The apparent use of non-historic materials such as manufactured siding and steel may indicate the types of materials issues that may need to be addressed in design review. historic residential Building Materials found Citywide The chart above indicates the condition of residential buildings located citywide for the years 1955 and earlier. Similar to the chart on the previous page this chart also signifies that many property owners are engaged in maintaining their properties. Figure 84: Historic Residential Building Materials found within the City’s Historic Districts. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database. Figure 85: Physical Condition of Buildings citywide for the years 1955 and earlier. Source: City of Cedar Rapids 2014 GIS database key physiCal Condition CoUnt perCentaGe Excellent 63 0.42% Very Good 1469 9.75% Above Normal 4911 32.59% Normal 6593 43.75% Below Normal 1467 9.73% Poor 341 2.26% Very Poor 90 0.60% Observed 136 0.92% key BUildinG materials CoUnt perCentaGe Manufactured Siding 172 30.02% Brick 108 18.85% Concrete 4 0.70% Slate 1 0.17% Steel 14 2.44% Stucco 14 2.44% Wood 248 43.28% Wood & Manuf. Siding 12 2.09% 99 a desCription of BUildinG styles The following descriptions assist in understanding architectural styles for recognized historic residential buildings. It is important to understand that many buildings may exhibit more than one style. key features: • Typically two or three stories in height • Identified by horizontal divisions • Low pitched roof with overhang- ing eaves and brackets • Tall, narrow, double-hung win- dows, sometimes ganged in pairs or triplets • Windows are often arched and/ or have molded surrounds or crowns • Projecting cornices with modil- lions and dentils • Masonry construction Figure 86: Lesinger Block (1883) (Little Bohemia) at 1313-1315-1317 Third Street SE. renaissance revival (aka italian renaissance) (circa 1890 to circa 1920) Figure 87: Federal Building and Post Office (1908-1909) at 305 Second Avenue SE. 100 Preservation Plan late victorian: Queen anne (circa 1880 to circa 1910) key features: • Steeply pitched roof with an ir- regular shape and a dominant front-facing gable • Textured wall with a variety of surface treatments, including patterned shingles or brickwork • Cutaway bay windows • Asymmetrical facade • One-story porch, often extend- ing along one or both sides of the house • Second-story recessed porches may be present Figure 88: Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center at 2160 Linden Drive SE late 19th and 20th Century revivals: Classical (circa 1890 to circa 1920) Figure 89: Iowa State Savings Bank (1917) at 1201 Third Street SE. key features: • Large Ionic columns • Main entrance emphasized by pi- lasters, portico and pediment • Classical frieze at parapet with dentils 101 late 19th and 20th Century revivals: Colonial revival (circa 1880 to circa 1955) Figure 90: Colonial Revival key features: • Multi-pane, double-hung win- dows, sometimes in pairs • Main entrance emphasized by pilasters, portico, pediment, fan- lights or sidelights • Symmetrical façade or door to one side late 19th and 20th Century revivals: tudor revival (circa 1890 to circa 1940) Figure 91: Tudor Revival key features: • Steeply pitched roof (typically side-gabled) • Facade dominated by one or more prominent cross gables • Decorative (i.e., non-structural) half-timbering • Tall, narrow windows, in groups and with multi-pane glazing • Massive chimneys, often with decorative chimney pots 102 Preservation Plan key features: • Rusticated stone • Semicircular arches • Round masonry arches • Recessed entry • Contrasting colors • Transom windows in ribbon pat- tern • Short columns key features: • Steel frame with masonry clad- ding • Sparse ornamental detailing • Buildings contained three parts of a classical column; base, mid- dle and cap • Symmetrical design late 19th and 20th Century revivals: richardsonian romanesque (circa 1885 to circa 1910) late 19th and early 20th Century american Movements: Chicago school (circa 1890 to circa 1920) Figure 92: Cedar Rapids Savings Bank (Guaranty Bank) (1895-1909) at 302 Third Avenue SE. Designed by Cedar Rapids architects Henry Josselyn and Eugene Taylor. Figure 93: American Bank Building (1913-1914) at 101 Second Street SE. 103 late 19th and early 20th Century american Movements: prairie school (circa 1900 to circa 1920) key features: • Horizontal emphasis • Bands of windows, often case- ment and with geometric pane patterns or leaded glass • Low-pitched roof with projecting eaves • Massive square porch supports late 19th and early 20th Century american Movements: Bungalow/Craftsman (circa 1910 to circa 1940) key features: • Low-pitched, gabled roof, wide overhanging eaves with exposed rafters • Triangular knee braces under the gable ends • Incised porch (beneath main roof) • Tapered, square columns sup- porting roof • 4-over-1 or 6-over-1 sash win- dows, often with Frank Lloyd Wright design motifs • Hand-crafted stone or wood- work, often mixed materials throughout structure Figure 94: Peoples Savings Bank (Popoli's Restaurant) at 101 Third Avenue SW was designed by architect Louis Sullivan (1910-1912). Figure 95: Craftsman Style Bungalow 104 Preservation Plan late 19th and early 20th Century american Movements: art deco (circa 1920 to circa 1940) key features: • Linear composition • Polychromatic material • Broken cornice lines • Geometric motifs early 20th Century american Movements: prefabricated home (circa 1940 to circa 1950) key features: • One-story • Panelized metal plates • Simple forms Figure 96: Arco (Armstrong Company) Building (c. 1930), 300 block Third Street SE. Figure 97: Lustron Home, 2009 Williams Boulevard SW (NRHP). Source: City of Cedar Rapids 105 CommUnity preservation proGram partners Community-led preservation organizations promote policies and plans that support historic preservation in Cedar Rapids. This includes advocating for building and zoning regulations that are compatible with traditional development patterns in older neighborhoods and supporting adoption of new incentives to maintain historic properties. They also work to expand the base of preservation players and engage partners in collaborative preservation programs. Private citizens and non-profit organizations lead preservation advocacy in Cedar Rapids. Historic preservation in Cedar Rapids is supported by a number of groups and organizations. SaveCR Heritage is a new voice for historic preservation in Cedar Rapids; saving at-risk properties is the organization’s primary mandate. There are other organizations that focus on local history education, such as the History Center; African American Museum of Iowa, or history related activities, such as Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center; and others that are not directly related to preservation, but do have a secondary relationship, such as the Indian Creek Nature Center. Also see Education & Awareness for additional programs. Building a stronger, and more extensive, network of organizations which expand awareness of historic properties is an essential priority. Because historic properties can support other community programs, many affiliates make strong partners. For example, a downtown historic walking tour may be promoted by the downtown organizations, a health organization, schools, and the visitor center. This type of partnership reflects the recognition that touring historic sites contributes to health and that it is an asset for heritage tourism as an economic development tool. More of these partnerships are needed. key local preservation partners A variety of local groups and organizations have direct stakes in preservation and neighborhood conservation in Cedar Rapids. Some key groups and organizations are listed below along with their general roles related to preservation. • Cedar Rapids Museum of Art – Education and stewardship • Czech Village / New Bohemia Main Street District – Advocacy, education and stewardship • Historic District Neighborhoods - Education and stewardship • IGreenCR Team - Advocacy and education • Neighborhood Associations – Outreach • SaveCR Heritage - Advocacy and education • Linn County Historic Preservation Commission - Advocacy • School System – Education and stewardship 106 Preservation Plan • Brucemore Historic Site and Community Cultural Center - Education • The History Center – Education and advocacy • African American Museum of Iowa – Advocacy, education and steward- ship • Tax assessor - Special valuation • Kirkwood Community College – Rehabilitation Education • Business Districts – Education, Advocacy and Stewardship key state, regional and national preservation partners Beyond the local level, a variety of state, regional and national organizations provide support for historic preservation in Cedar Rapids. Some have on- going relationships with one another, while others may be engaged only for a specific project. Key organizations are: • State Historical Society of Iowa/State Historic Preservation Office • Preservation Iowa • Silos & Smokestacks National Heritage Area • The University of Iowa • Friends of Historic Preservation Advisory Council on Historic Preservation • Municipal Services Research Corporation (MRSC.org) • National Alliance of Preservation Commissions • National Park Service • National Register of Historic Places National Trust for Historic Preservation • National Trust for Historic Preservation / Green Lab – Education, Outreach • National Trust Main Street Program • Preservation Initiative! • Iowa State University potential preservation partners Other local groups and organizations may not be directly involved in preservation but have goals that could complement preservation awareness. The goals of business, health, economic development and environmental organizations coincide with those of historic preservation. Potential partners for historic preservation efforts include: • Affordable housing organizations • Agricultural Organizations • Banks 107 • Business organizations • Commercial related businesses • Chamber of Commerce • Religious institutions • Civic organizations • Colleges • Department of Health • Developers interested in preservation • Economic development organizations • Environmental protection and sustainability organizations • Faith based communities • Fire inspectors • Greater City Rapids Community Foundation • Health Organizations • Interested residents • Large corporations • Libraries / librarians • Local media • Local realtors • Main Street business program • Master Builders Association • Media • Museums – Education, outreach • Cemeteries and Parks Associations • Tax assessors preservation partners issues summary • Many preservation partners exist, but there is a need for a group that has this as a primary objective with a citywide interest. This could provide a formal mechanism for advocacy groups to communicate roles and col- laborate on programs to assist with historic preservation efforts. • The roles of various groups and organizations engaged in preservation activity are not sufficiently clarified. 108 Preservation Plan 109 appendiCes 110 Preservation Plan 111 appendix 1 - CommUnity o U treaC h In the course of developing the preservation plan, City staff and consultants met with the following representatives: • Focus group meeting with historic preservation interest groups (April 2014, September 2014) • Focus group meetings with health care representatives (September 2014) • Focus group meetings with business and development representatives (April 2014) • Public workshop (September 2014) • City departments (April 2014, September 2014) • Public open house (April 2015) Many of the issues and goals that were identified in these meetings are addressed in this plan. At the September 2014 Open House participants initially responded to questions individually. Then they divided into groups where they consolidated their ideas. The tables below chart the answers. Figure 98 provides the top five answers to the questions asked. 112 Preservation Plan top five ansWers to qUestions Chart Question 1 -‐ What types of resources exist? Top 5 answers Ethnic & Historic Neighborhoods (Czech Village, New Bohemia) Celebrations (Cultural, St. Joseph, Freedom Fest, Famers mkt) Museums (e.g. African American) Churches, Mosques, etc. (repurpose vacant) Parks & Landscapes (Cedar Lake, Ellis Park) Question 2 -‐ What are some key resources? Top 5 answers Czech Village Brucemore Newbo (concerned about the future loss of dilapidated bldgs) Wellington Heights/Vernon Heights Downtown/Central Business District Question 3 -‐ What role does preservation play today in Cedar Rapids? Top 5 answers "Babystage," but gaining momentum -‐ Opportunities to save and educate heritage $ still make the final decision; HP under funded Low priority, lack of community involvement/interest Not too significant by city-‐no incentives Organizations like Save CR Heritage & HPC -‐ saved bldgs in Kingston set for demolition by city Question 4-‐ In the future, what role should preservation play in Cedar Rapids? Top 5 answers Education-‐ emphasize historic preservation planners; to educate and engage next generation Preservation should be an ongoing priority Protect/Repurpose historic buildings and sites and make them sustainable More visibility and "buy in" from city leaders Walkable historic areas (clean, safe sidewalks, coffee shops, etc) Question 5 -‐ What are some examples of preservation successes in Cedar Rapids? Top 5 answers New Bo (culture, education, activities, event) Czech Village/NewBo District/Main Street (education, point of interest) Paramount theater -‐ continues to provide ongoing benefits Brucemore Averill & Brewer House relocation/rehab 113 Question 6 -‐ What concerns or issues do you have related to preservation in Cedar Rapids? Top 5 answers Funding City/City Manager needs a philosophical shift to preserve instead of tear down and value preservation; City forces demo instead of repair Lack of community involvement/education/interest Public apathy/Neighborhood cooperation/Community acceptance Medical District (less demo and surface parking -‐ more rehab please) Stiffer penalties for people who allow properties to fall into disrepair, poor stewardship-‐ need fines enforced Question 7 -‐Who are some of the key players in preservation? Top 5 answers HPC/Linn county preserv commissions Brucemore and Kirkwood Save CR Heritage Main Street (Newbo, Czech Village) Local activists like Mark Stouffer Hunter and Jon Jelinek Question 8 -‐ Are there other potential players who may not be as obvious, but could be valuable contributors to preservation? Top 5 answers City of Cedar Rapids; City council (need education & advocacy)/ HPC?Linn County HPC Hospitals, Mt. Mercy Realtors to have adequate information to reuse and rehab to modernized or retrofill Banks Coe College Questions 9 -‐ What should be the priorities for action related to preservation in Cedar Rapids? Top 5 answers Incentives and funding for existing building rehab like they do with vacant bldgs (special bank rates); Property tax incentives Encourage/identify new local landmarks/historic districts (Czech & Bohemia) and listing Community Education & Involvement Set guidelines, overhaul existing ordinances related to historic buildings. Moratorium on demolition until Comprehensive plan is approved Figure 98: Question 1. Summary Table: Source: Winter & Company COmmunity Workshop September 2014 114 Preservation Plan CUltUral resoUrCes in Cedar r apids 1. What types of resources exist? In general categories, what types of cultural resources exist in Cedar Rapids? (Ex. Monuments, Landscapes, Archaeological Artifacts, Ethnic Celebrations, Collections, etc.) Question 1. summary table Types of Resources Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Architecture/Buildings (open to public -‐ gov't/civic)xx x Art Museum xx x Brick Streets xxx xx x Brucemore (gardens home collections)xx x Cedar Lake -‐Cedar River -‐ River Edge xx x x x Celebrations (Cultural, St. Joseph, Freedom Fest, Famers mkt)xx x xxxx xxx x Cemetaries (Oak Hill)xx xxx xxx Cherry Building x Churches, Mosques, etc. (repurpose vacant)xxx xx xxxx x College buildings x x Downtown Banking xxx Ethnic & Historic Neighborhoods (Czech Village, New Bohemia)xxx xxx xxxx x xx Farmers Market x Five Seasons Monument x Geneology xx Grant Wood (Everything)xxx xx x Historic Theaters x History Center xx x x x Industrial areas/ Artifacts/Heritage/rail lines/power plant/factories x xx xx xxx Kingston Hill area x Libraries x xx Mansion Hill remaining homes x Masonic and Private Collections x Motler Mosque x Museums (eg African American)xxx xxx xxx xx Newly Annexed Properties (or soon to be annexed)x Parks & Landscapes (Cedar Lake, Ellis Park)xxx xx xx xx Public Buildings -‐ city hall, courthouse, old sherrif's bldg x School (neighborhood, continued role)xx x SHPO/Linn Co. HPC Commission x x Figure 99: Question 1. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 115 2. Which are some key resources? Name five places of historic significance you believe are important in Cedar Rapids’ history. (Specific sites, neighborhoods or districts.) Question 2. summary table Key Resources Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 1st Ave. W residential xx 1st St. to 15th St. residential x 3rd Ave. SW/SE x x Agricultural Businesses x Ambrose Center x Art Museum Giftshop-‐ formerly library x Auto Row x B Avenue xx Beaver Park neighborhood x x x Boat Harbor (Cedar River)x Brucemore x xx xxx xxx xxxxx xx Cedar Hills houses x Cedar Memorial x Cedar River x Cherry Building xx Churches x x x City Hall x Coe College and Coe House x x x Cottage neighborhoods x CSPS-‐culture/social halls x xxx Czech Village xxx xxxxxx xxxx xxx Douglas Mansion xxx Downtown/Central Business District x x x xx xxx East Post Road -‐ Woods x Elllis Park xx x Grant Wood Studio x xx xx Greene Square Park xx Guaranty Bank Bldg x Hall Bicycle x History Center x Historic Districtss -‐ 2nd/3rd Ave/Redmond Pk/Grand Ave.xx x x x Hubbard Ice and other 'retired" commercial bldg x x Industrial Factories x Irish Heritage Village Kenwood Park (1st shop center) & commericial district xx x Kingston Village (comm/res)xx xx x 116 Preservation Plan Main Street District x x Mays Island Govt.xx x Motler Mosque x x x Mourd Fram Area x Moundview Neighborhood x Mt. Mercy xxx Nat'l & Local Historic Districts x Newbo (concerned about the future loss of dilapidated bldgs)x xxxx xxxxx xxxx Oak Hill Cemetary xxx x Paramount Theater xxx x Peoples Bank x x Quaker Oats x x x Sinclair Home x Schools (Franklin, Wilson) Sullivan Bank (Popoli's)x St. Wencelas Church x Turner Alley x Victorian mansions x Wellington Heights/Vernon Heights xxxx x xxx xx Woods on each side of Indian Hills xx Figure 100: Question 2. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 117 the role of preservation in Cedar r apids: today & tomorroW 3. What role does preservation play today in Cedar rapids? (Describe how the Team sees it, not how they wish it to be.) Question 3. summary table Role of Preservation in Cedar Rapids Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 "Babystage," but gaining momentum -‐ Opportunities to save and educate heritage x x x xxx x x $ still make the final decision; HP under funded x xxx x Attutude: community doesn't have right to tell property owners what to do /Preservation vs. Property rights x x Concern that city planners "buy in" to the program x x CR lost a lot of valueable historic assets b/c of a lack of preservation efforts x x Currently is an "after-‐thought"x Disorganized and Disempowered x Empowers local residents x Future Downtown x Guides reuse and design x x Helps to identify & educate public x Increase significance since 2008 x x It is a struggle;x Kenwood area -‐first shopping center x Lack of education on economic benefits of education x Lack of unity between different preservation groups x Lack of resources to help property owners( e.g. historic property tax abatement/credits)x Low priority, lack of community involvement/interest xxx x Newbo Market is a good start to draw people in as a "central gathering place"x x Not too significant by city-‐no incentives xx x Organizations like Save CR Heritage & HPC -‐ saved bldgs in Kingston set for demolition by city xx x 118 Preservation Plan Preserve historic buildings and neighborhoods -‐finally being considered x x Protects the community from developers who would destroy the community character for profit x Revitalize Central Business District x Sense of pride in the community x x Setting foundation for changing demographic as city grows x The projects undertaken have been high quality xx To see and touch as well as interpret the past; Clarify CR's unique identity x x x Visibility -‐ increased awareness x xx Figure 101: Question 3. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 119 4. in the future, what role should preservation play in Cedar rapids (What is the preferred vision for preservation in the community?) Question 4. summary table Future role of preservation in CR Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Better organization and communication between groups xx Consider historic value of property before all future development xx Community involvement/education xx Comprehensive documentation x Designate more historic districts xx Diversity x Education-‐ emphasize historic preservation planners; to educate and engage next generation xx xx x xx Engage 20-‐30 yr. olds in the preservation process because we know they like the end result xx Facilitate investments -‐ public & private x Highlight economic benefits x Historic preservations should be permanent consideration as to development & demolition xx Identify more landmarks x x Integral to the entire decision-‐making process, not as an after thought x xx More skilled craftsmen x More visibility and "buy in" from city leaders xxx x x Preservation should be an ongoing priority x xx x x x Protect historic buildings and sites and make them sustainable x xx x xx Realtor "buy-‐in"x x Repurpose properties -‐ commercial & residential instead of bulding new xxxx Save current older homes xx x Save CR Heritage continues x Sustainabilty of Preservation xx x Incentives (tax and otherwise) for homeowner improvements of historic properties x x Walkable historic areas (clean, safe sidewalks, coffee shops, etc)xxx x Figure 102: Question 4. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 120 Preservation Plan sUCCess stories & issUes 5. What area some examples of preservation successes in Cedar rapids? (List three examples, and describe why they are successes. These may be specific projects and events, or general trends.) Question 5. summary table Examples of Presernvation Successes Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 16th Avenue x 1700 Grande Avenue -‐ House rehav x 2nd & 3rd Avenue districts saved from developer demolishing and building new x xx x x Airport/Kirkwood -‐ Terrestrial Globe x B Ave. District x Averill & Brewer House relocation/rehab xx x x xxx Brucemore x x xx xxx New City Hall -‐ formerly Federal courthouse x Commonwealth Apts x x CSPS Hall xx xx xx Czech Village/NewBo District/Main Street (education, point of interest)x x xx xx xx xxx Central Business District Buildings x Downtown warehouse to housing conversion x x Ellis Park Boat House xx Kingston (would not have been saved)x x xx xx Kirkwood preservation certificate x Kuric House x Library (including NCSML)x xx New Bo (culture, education, activities, event)xx xxx x x xxx Overly districts x Paramount theater -‐ continues to provide ongoing benefits xx xx xx xx Peoples Bank in Kingston Village xx xx Preserve Iowa Summit participation by HPC and CLG Grant x Repurposed buildings (Popoli, Wells Fargo, Lionsbridge)xxx x Rave District x Relocated historic homes ( Brewer house, etc)xx Roosevelt Hotel x Save CR -‐ greater online presence x 121 Soko Building x St. Wenceslas Church xx x St. Paul's Church x Terrestrial Globe x U S Bank,Sullivan Bank x xx Veterans memorial x Wellington Heights x x West of St. Paul's Church -‐ neighborhoold saved x Working w/affordable housing network AHNI xx White Star/Witwer Bldg, Kunic House xx x x Figure 103: Question 5. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 122 Preservation Plan 6. What concerns or issues do you have related to preservation in Cedar rapids? (List three issues. The rank them, with #1 being the highest.) Question 6. summary table Concerns & Issues related to preservation in CR Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 2nd/3rd Ave. areas and 10th to 19th Streets x "Running out of time"xx Assistance to Historic Districts x Bias-‐ news is better x x Better Press about historic preservation surveys & district applications x Business selling only vinyl siding & windows -‐ not giving customers other alternatives x City/City Manager needs a philosophical shift to preserve instead of tear down and value preservation; City forces demo instead of repair xx xx xx x City needs to step up financially x Condition of infrastructure (need good water lines, sidewalks, lack of resources to address issues x Demolition of structures leaving vacant lots x Diversity x Confusing "Old" places with "Historic" places, thus diluting the focus x Downtown x Find balance of reusing and adaption to reduce our carbon footprint x Funding xxxx xxx x xx x Higher standards on property upkeep x HPC -‐ limited powers xx Knowledgeable/ qualified contractors xx Lack of community involvement/education/interest xxxx x Lack of incentive programs x x List of qualified consultant & contractors in Linn County x Lack of leadership and support among CR officials x x Medical District (less demo and surface parking -‐ more rehab please)xx xx 123 Older persons who own historic homes can't keep up with cost of upkeep x Ongoing education (more of a priority)xxx Poor stewardship of reare resources -‐ won't realize what was lost until it is gone x Property owners-‐not caring x x Property owners doing work w/o permits x Properties allowed to decay through neglect x Preservations isn't main focus Public apathy/Neighborhood cooperation/Community acceptance xxxx x Railroad tracks of historic nature x Realtors & banks need better education about reuse xx Short memories x Stiffer penalties for people who allow properties to fall into disrepair, poor stewardship-‐ need fines enforced xxx x St. Wenc area x Stop allowing multi-‐family conversions for single family homes x Urban Sprawl x Viability going forward x Figure 104: Question 6. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 124 Preservation Plan the players in preservation 7. Who are some of the key players in preservation? (List three, indicate the roles they play. These may be organizations, individuals or interest groups.) Question 7. summary table Figure 105: Question 7. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. Key players in preservation Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 4 Oakes AHN1 x xx AHN1 x x Banks x xx Bottleworks x Brucemore xx x xx Developers/Construction companies x xx CR Community xx x Czech Museum x Educatiors x Hall Foundation xx Healthcare providers x Historians x x History Center x x x HPC/Linn county preserv commissions xxxx xxxxx xx xxxxx x x Kirkwood x xx xx Local activists like Mark Stoffer Hunter and Jon Jelinek x xxxxx Local government xx xx xx xx xx xx Main Street (Newbo, Czech Village)x x xxxxx News Media x Peoples Bank x Polititians x Private financial sector x Preservation Iowa x Property owners/developers x x x Realtor x Save CR Heritage x xxx xx xxxx xxx x SHPO/National Level xx x Van Jelinek -‐ local businessman and companies x 125 8. are there other potential players who may not be as obvious, but could be valuable contributors to preservation? Question 8. summary table Potential players or contributors to preservation Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Antiques & Hoarders xx Affordable Housing x Banks x x BSA x Churches xx x City of Cedar Rapids; City council (need education & advocacy)xxx xx xx x Coe College x xxx Construction Conpanies x CR Country Cl;ub x Educating our children x Farmers xx Friends of Iowa City Preservations x Former CR city residents xx x GSA x Habitat for Humanity x x Hall Foundation & Perrine Foundation x x Home Improvement Stores x Hospitals, Mt. Mercy xx xxx xx History Center/Historians x x x HPC/ Linn County HPC x x xx Kirkwood -‐ adult education x Large Corporations (Cargill, Quaker Oats)x xx Libraries xx Local banks xxx x Manufacturers x Mathew 25 x Medical District -‐ utilizing historic structures to meet their needs; not encroaching on historic neighbors x Neighborhood Associations xx Parks/Cemetary Associations xx Realtors to have adequate information to reuse and rehab to modernized or retrofill xx x x x Large companies Quaker Oats/Rockwell Collins/ CRST x Real Estate Agents/ Flippers x x Restore x 126 Preservation Plan Save CR x x School Districts x xx Sierra CLUB X SHPO x Trees Forever xx Unions xx Writers to do articles to keep in public eye x Figure 106: Question 8. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 127 priorities for aC tion 9. What should be the priorities for action related to preservation in Cedar rapids? (List five actions. These may be general in nature, or they may be very specific. After listing them, indicate their priority.) Question 9. summary table Priorities for Action Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Better press about hist. pres. Surveys and district applications x Consistent plan for all development x x Community Education & Involvement xx xx x xx Consider diversity;openmidedness xx Consideration of Preservation in place of new development -‐ commercial & residential x x Create property tax incentiveand financial assistance xx x Define plan to preserve resources x x Educate realtors x x Encourage new local landmarks/historic districts (Czech & Bohemia) and listing xxx xx x xx Encourage preserving existing resources x x Expand support for historic districts x Expand HPC powers x Hold property owner accountable x Identify additonal historic areas x x x x Identify ways to accelerate approval process x Incentives and funding for existing building rehab like they do with vacant bldgs (special bank rates)x xxxx xx x Inforceable policies x Limit demolition of existing historic structures xx List of good contractors & consultats who specialize on Reuse/rehab xx Moratorium on demolition until Comprehensive plan is approved x xx More strigent barrier to entry to own and lease for "use of" historic property x Neighborhood groups lobby for change x x 128 Preservation Plan Overhaul existing ordinances related to historic buildings x Penalties for demolition and leaving vacant land xx Responsible Development x Set Guidelines x Stringent guidelines for "property owners" of "historic" bldgs to maintain historic status -‐ can't lease to just anyone x Stronger fines and penalties x Stop single family to milti-‐family conversions x Trade resources -‐ identify knowledgeable & qualified xx Figure 107: Question 9. Summary Table. Source: Winter & Company Community Workshop September 2014. 129 appendix 2 - preservation ordinanCe revieW (Chapter 18) This review compares the existing City of Cedar Rapids Historic Preservation legislation (Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances) with a model ordinance that is a distillation of those used throughout the country and then recommends improvements to the Cedar Rapids code. Some of the recommendations are clearly needed, whereas others are optional. The format for this review presents a detailed description of each model ordinance component in bold letters. Following this description is the current status of this component for Cedar Rapids. Where a model component does not exist in the Cedar Rapids ordinance, recommendations are made. introdUCtory statements purpose and intent Establishes reasons for the preservation ordinance, focusing on the public purpose. • Section 18.01, Purpose and Intent, adequately covers this provision. definitions Establishes formal definitions for terms used in the ordinance. For example, it may define a “historic property” as one formally identified on an adopted survey. • Sixteen definitions exist in Section 18.02, but are insufficient. Many terms in the ordinance are not defined. • Terms that appear in the ordinance as it currently reads and which merit inclusion are: city, demolition, structure, substantial modification (to the proposal to designate a landmark or district), zoning map, regulated permit, significant architectural feature, Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, rehabilitation, NRHP, and historic survey. 130 Preservation Plan Commission Declares who will be responsible for carrying out the responsibilities described. Usually, this is the HPC. Sub-topics include: Creation and Membership Establishes the existence of a “HPC.” HPC members are typically appointed by the Mayor with City Council approval. Members usually have to meet certain qualifications requirements. Experience in fields related to design and preservation also may be required. • Section 18.03 creates the HPC, but only as an “advisory commission” to the City Council. The creation of the HPC should simply create it, period. The powers and duties of commission should be handled in the Powers of the HPC section. • Section 18.03(b) adequately lists the membership criteria for the HPC. removal from office Provides that, with just cause, the Mayor and/or City Council may remove members of the HPC • Does not exist. Inclusion is optional. • Appropriate language could be: “The Mayor may, with the approval of the Council, remove any member from the HPC for just cause.” vacancies Outlines procedures for filling vacancies on the HPC. • Section 18.03(d) and 18.03(f) adequately covers vacancies. operating procedures Establishes that the HPC shall adopt rules of operation and procedures for conducting its business. (The procedures themselves are typically a separate document. In some cases, these procedures apply to other City Commissions as well.) • Section 18.03(h) states that the HPC “shall adopt its own rules and procedures for the transaction of its business.” This is inadequate. • Consider language such as: “The HPC shall adopt by-laws for its organization and implementation of its powers and duties.” • Section 18.03(i) through 18.03(k) establishes operating procedures for the HPC, but are inadequate. • Consider additional provisions such as: “The HPC shall act by a majority vote of at least a quorum of its members.” 131 powers and duties Establishes the focus for the HPC. This may include what areas of review are governed by the HPC as well as what authorities the HPC may have (such as surveying, adopting guidelines, property acquisition, etc.). The education of the public at large and the promoting preservation ethic historic preservation are often key duties that the HPC should undertake, and should be included in this section (if not under its own heading). • Section 18.04 lists fourteen (14) such powers and duties, as well as one explicit restraint on the HPC’s power. These provisions are adequate, but additions could be made. • Consider additions to include powers such as review and recommendation of preservation easements, and creating more detailed design guidelines for the review of an application for a certificate of appropriateness. • Consider utilizing the HPC as a consulting body for proposed changes to land use policy or zoning within the local historic districts. district Boundaries/Jurisdiction Defines the jurisdiction of the proposed ordinance. All properties noted within these described boundaries are subject to review for a Certificate of Appropriateness and/or demolition. • •Section 18.09(a) provides for the review of designated resources but does not mention any specific area boundaries. This should be amended. hpC Meetings Establishes the minimum requirement for meetings. May indicate that the HPC will meet at least monthly, except when it has no business pending. Also outlines that meetings be open to the public (usually pursuant to state statute). • Section 18.03(j) provides that the HPC shall meet at least 3 times a year. This provision is adequate, but consider increasing the minimum meeting requirement. • Appropriate language could be “The HPC shall meet at least once each month, unless there is no new business scheduled.” annual reports Establishes that annual reports to the City Council should be presented. This is to ensure that the existence and operations of the HPC continue with the City’s oversight and general approval. These reports can be simple or very detailed (especially if meeting CLG requirements). • Currently this provision does not exist in the ordinance, but should be provided. • Appropriate language could be: “The HPC shall prepare a report to the City Council summarizing the past year’s activities of the HPC. This report should state the status of preservation in the city, and recommend any improvements which the HPC deems necessary.” 132 Preservation Plan hpC training Provides for the on-going training of the HPC. This usually defines that training from a professional consultant might be required. It is necessary for the longevity and quality of the HPC. • Currently does not exist, but should be included. • Appropriate language could be: “All members of the HPC shall participate in at least one training session annually. These may include special HPC study sessions, which shall not be a regularly scheduled meeting, or other training programs provided in the state or nation.” staff assistance Defines how staff may assist the HPC in administration of its duties. This may include ability to conduct administrative reviews of certain work as delegated by the HPC. • Currently does not exist, but should be provided. This section should assign specific personnel or City departments to act as staff to the HPC. It should provide the framework for staff review, although this concept can be discussed in a different chapter. historic resources Provides for the listing (in an official register) of individual landmarks, structures of merits, historic districts, or neighborhood conservation districts. Sub-topics include: designation Criteria This section provides that the City Council has the authority to designate cultural resources upon the recommendation of the HPC if it meets certain criteria. This objective criteria makes it easier for staff to defend any designations in a court of law. The designation criteria typically highlight what elements of buildings or districts merit designation. • Section 18.05(a) through (g) provides that the City Council may designate resources upon the HPC’s recommendation. While general guidelines for what constitutes a historic resource are provided in other sections of the ordinance, no explicit criteria or basis for the HPC’s designation recommendation exists. • Criteria should be included, and appropriate language could be: “A cultural resource may be listed in the City’s Historic properties Inventory by the HPC, subject to City Council approval, if the HPC finds it to be of historic, aesthetic, educational, cultural, or architectural importance.” 133 Cultural resources eligible for designation Provides that an on-going list of cultural resources eligible for designation can be maintained by the City. Having this survey allows that City to designate resources as the need arises, and not go through the sometimes lengthy investigation process. • Currently does not exist, but should be included. • Currently the code does provide that the Commission may conduct studies for the identification of historic districts and sites, but does not specifically provide for an on-going list of cultural resources that are eligible for designation. survey Methods Defines how a survey will be undertaken. This section further establishes criteria for the designation of historic properties. It also establishes whose role it is to undertake the survey- be it the HPC, staff, or an independent consultant. • Currently does not exist, but should be included. • Several of the tools available for identifying resources include placing buildings within a historical context, taking a reconnaissance survey, or performing an in-depth, property-by-property survey. designation initiation Defines who may request that a neighborhood, property, or structure be surveyed and officially designated. Usually the commission may request such establishment based on the official survey. Property owners can also nominate cultural resources for designation. • Section 18.05 (a) provides that the City Council can initiate designation on its own motion, or by the filing of a petition. • However, the ordinance doesn’t make clear who may file a petition. Appropriate language could be “The designation, repeal, or modification of a designation may be initiated by the HPC, the City Council, or by any person, organization, or entity.” designation hearing A public hearing should be conducted before the HPC. This hearing should be properly noticed, at a fixed time and place. • Section 18.05 (b) provides for the requirement of a public hearing preceding any recommendation by the HPC to the Council, and the process for notifying the public. This section is adequate. 134 Preservation Plan designation process Establishes the procedures to follow for the nomination and designation of cultural resources. Defines specific tasks for the HPC and staff, as well as procedures for filing applications and appropriate time periods. • Section 18.05 (b) through 18.05 (g) outlines some of the procedural criteria for designation. • The procedure is broken up among sub-sections that provide an adequate understanding of the order of steps within the process, but language could be more concise. For example, Section 18.05 (b) first states that upon submission of a petition, the HPC must make a recommendation to the Council. Later, Section (b) states that the HPC must first hold a public meeting. Thirdly, the same section states that the HPC must submit its report to the City Planning Commission. The language and organization of Section 18.05 (b) does not adequately explain the order of the above three Initiatives. • Consider nomination procedures and who has standing to initiate a nomination. designation ordinance Before a historic district is established, the map setting forth the district’s boundaries must be submitted to and approved by ordinance by the City Council. The ordinance defines what agency will be responsible for the official recording of the district(s). This is usually at the County Recorder’s Office. • Section 18.07 adequately provides for the recording of historic districts or landmarks, but designation by ordinance is buried within the section and should be concisely stated in its own section. designation notification Designation notification to other city agencies and departments is used by some communities so that after a resource is designated, any Initiatives pertaining to that resource shall have been made with the knowledge of the designation. • Does not exist, but could be included. designation appeal Provides the applicant with the right to appeal any designation made by the HPC. Appeals are usually made to the City Council. • Does not exist, but could be included. repeal of designation Provides that the City Council with the recommendation of the HPC may consider the repeal of a designation in the same manner provided for the inclusion. • Section 18.05 (g) adequately provides for the repeal of designations. 135 CertifiCate of appropriateness proCess Certificate of appropriateness required Provides the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness (CA) to protect designated properties, or those subject to review. This section describes who must obtain a CA, where to obtain an application, the basis for approval or denial, and the basic criteria for review. • Section 18.09 (a) through (e) adequately provide this information While the basic provisions for issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness exist in the Cedar Rapids ordinance, it should also include some basic criteria for determining appropriateness. They may be rather broad, such as: For alterations to a historic property that the proposed work will: • Maintain the integrity of the historic resource • Preserve key features, such as architectural detail and ornamentation, that contribute to the significance of the historic resource For new construction, including additions and new primary structures the work will: • Be compatible with the historic district • Will not impede one’s ability to interpret the historic significance of the district Furthermore, in making a determination of appropriateness, the City Council may adopt design guidelines, applied by the Commission, that provide more detailed direction for treatment of historic resources and new construction in historic districts. Also, inclusion of portions of the design guidelines into the ordinance may be explored. demolition prohibition A model ordinance prohibits demolition of a building that has been formally listed as a local landmark or as a contributor to a locally designated historic district. However, a process is included that provides a means of appealing this condition by considering economic hardship. This test for hardship uses specific criteria. The Cedar Rapids ordinance requires a Certificate of Appropriateness (CA) be obtained for demolition within the local historic districts and for local landmarks; this CA could be denied, thus preventing demolition. This section of the ordinance should be clarified and updated with different procedures for non-contributing properties within local historic districts. The 60 day demolition review period applies to all properties not locally designated. The review process works the same for properties listed on the NRHP and those that are not designated. These could be two different processes. The ordinance does provide an adequate test for economic hardship. It just isn’t clear how this applies to designated and non-designated properties. Conceptually, a delay does not create an economic hardship, since the owner need only wait out the delay period. 136 Preservation Plan demolition delay period A model ordinance provides a process for delaying demolition of a building that is NOT officially listed as a local landmark or as a contributor to a historic district, in order to determine if alternative actions should be pursued. The objective is to quickly determine if a property subject to demolition may in fact have historic significance. Typically, a threshold for triggering the delay is established (such as a 50-year age condition, or listing as a contributor in a historic survey). A model ordinance also includes a preliminary list of alternatives that may be pursued during the delay period, such as: 1. Consider initiating formal designation proceedings to list the property as a local landmark, or 2. Seek means to assist the current owner in finding an adaptive reuse strategy for the resource, or 3. Seek a new owner who will preserve the resource, or 4. Seek a means of relocating the resource such that it can be preserved, or 5. Documenting the resource prior to its demolition. The Cedar Rapids ordinance does contain a list of alternative actions if a property is deemed historically significant, which is sufficient. The Cedar Rapids ordinance contains some portions of a demolition delay process for properties deemed historic, but the procedures are not clear. Some improvements would include: 1. Indicate that the demolition delay period (which is set at 60 days) may be extended an additional 60 days if the commission is making progress toward seeking alternatives, but needs more time. 2. Indicate that the 60-day delay period may be terminated earlier if a resolution is achieved. appeals A model ordinance provides a process by which an applicant can appeal a decision of the commission. In some cases, the appeal may have two steps: First, to City Council, and second, to municipal or district court. The Cedar Rapids ordinance provides the two-step appeals process, which is adequate. 137 enforcement A model ordinance typically identifies a code enforcement official as being responsible to assure that work executed on a property complies with the Certificate of Appropriateness. It also identifies the procedures for notifying an owner if the work does not comply and prescribes the means for remedying the situation and for imposing fines. In many cases, these notification procedures and penalties are the same as for other code violations and may appear in a separate part of the city regulations. In that case they are only referenced in the preservation ordinance itself. The Cedar Rapids preservation ordinance does include language addressing the means of enforcement. It also includes language defining the rate of fines. This should be reviewed for consistency with other penalty clauses in city ordinances. Since fine rates may change more frequently than the preservation ordinance itself, it may be better to reference a schedule of fines, which may be amended separately. survey ratings A model ordinance defines classification categories for properties that lie within the boundaries of a historic district. These are typically defined as “contributors,” and “non-contributors.” When a district is designated, EACH property should receive one of these ratings. This facilitates the review process and notifies property owners about how their properties will be considered in the review for a Certificate of Appropriateness. The distinction is to separate those properties that will be reviewed using preservation criteria from those that lack historic significance and would be reviewed using criteria for new construction. These ratings are typically applied in current surveys for historic resources, and therefore adding this language to the ordinance will help link the survey to the protection process. For older districts that were designated without classifying each property, criteria for determining significance should be applied as a part of the review, prior to using guidelines to determine appropriateness. The Cedar Rapids ordinance does not create these definitions. This lack of definition creates confusion in the review process. Language should be drafted to establish these categories. 138 Preservation Plan appendix 3 - historiC sUrvey prioritization taBle The following chart identifies initial areas for intensive surveys. (See page 58 for a listing of completed surveys and those nearing completion.) The recommended intensive survey list is acquired from the 2014 Cedar Rapids Citywide Historic and Architectural Reconnaissance Survey Priorities for the surveys are ranked 1-4, with 1 being highest priority. Priorities will be finalized through the implementation of initiative 5.1.a. A variety of criteria applies, and the relationship to other planning programs and initiatives is considered. Criteria includes: • Areas likely to help support Heritage Tourism (that is a distinct place with a unique story to tell) • Those where other neighborhood programs and plans are in development • Those identified in the reconnaissance survey as being of special interest survey priority northwest Quadrant • East Highlands - First Avenue - C Avenue NW (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 1 • North Highlands - B Avenue NW - E Avenue NW (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 3 • Rapids Township - E Avenue NW (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 2 • Belmont Park (Increased boundary, recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 4 northeast Quadrant • Greene & College First Addition: including listed B Avenue NE Historic DIstrict (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries relative to listed B Avenue NE historic district) 3 • Northview First Addition (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 2 • Kenwood Park: Coon-McNeal Development (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 1 • Coe Campus College - west section (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 4 139 survey priority southeast Quadrant • Bever Park Additions and Bever Woods (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 2 • Midway Park and Country Club Heights (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 4 • Ridgewood Addition (recommend intensive survey for NRHP boundaries) 3 • Country Club Heights Additions (recommend intensive survey) 1 140 Preservation Plan appendix 4 - G lossary archeological resource: Any material remains or physical evidence of past human life or activities that are of archeological interest, including the record of the effects of human activities on the environment. An archeological resource is capable of revealing scientific or humanistic information through archeological research. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service Building: A building, such as a house, barn, church, hotel, or similar construction, is made to shelter any form of human activity. Examples of buildings include: administration building, house, dormitory, garage, library, office building, social hall, student union, classroom building, bookstore, etc. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service Contributing resources: Contributing resources are the buildings, objects, sites, and structures that played a role or, more simply, existed at the time the event(s) associated with a NHL, NRHP or Local Historic District. Cultural landscape: A geographic area, including both cultural and natural resources, associated with a historic event, activity, or person, or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values. There are four non-mutually exclusive types of cultural landscapes: historic sites, historic designed landscapes, historic vernacular landscapes, and ethnographic landscapes. The two primary types of cultural landscapes in Yosemite Valley are: historic designed landscapes, such as The Ahwahnee and the Yosemite Village Historic District; and ethnographic landscapes, such as the entirety of Yosemite Valley. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service Cultural resource: An aspect of a cultural system that is valued by or significantly representative of a culture, or that contains significant information about a culture. A cultural resource may be a tangible entity or a cultural practice and typically greater than 50 years of age. Tangible cultural resources are categorized as districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects for the National Register of Historic Places, and as archeological resources, cultural landscapes, structures, museum objects, and ethnographic resources for NPS management purposes. By their nature, cultural resources are non-renewable. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service district: A district possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district derives its importance form being a unified entity, even though it is often comprised of a wide variety of resources, The identity of a district results from the interrelationship of its resources, which can convey a visual sense of the overall historic environment or be an arrangement of historically or functionally related properties. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service 141 economic hardship: Historic preservation ordinances in effect around the country often include a process for administrative relief from preservation restrictions in situations of “economic hardship.” Under typical economic hardship procedures, an applicant may apply for a “certificate of economic hardship” after a preservation commission has denied his or her request to alter or demolish a historic property protected under a preservation ordinance. In support of an application for relief on economic hardship grounds, the applicant must submit evidence sufficient to enable the decision-making body to render a decision. The type of evidence required is generally spelled out in preservation ordinances or interpreting regulations. The burden of proof is on the applicant. The exact meaning of the term “economic hardship” depends on how the standard is defined in the ordinance. Under many preservation ordinances economic hardship is defined as consistent with the legal standard for an unconstitutional regulatory taking, which requires a property owner to establish that he or she has been denied all reasonable beneficial use or return on the property as a result of the commission’s denial of a permit for alteration or demolition. Requests for relief on economic hardship grounds are usually decided by historic preservation commissions, although some preservation ordinances allow the commission's decision to be appealed to the city council. In some jurisdictions, the commission may be assisted by a hearing officer. A few localities have established a special economic review panel, comprised of members representing both the development and preservation community. Source: National Trust for Historic Preservation ethnographic landscape: An area containing a variety of natural and cultural resources that traditionally associated people define as heritage resources. The area may include plant and animal communities, structures, and geographic features, each with their own special local names. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service ethnographic resources: Objects and places, including sites, structures, landscapes, and natural resources, with traditional cultural meaning and value to associated peoples. Research and consultation with associated people identifies and explains the places and things they find culturally meaningful. Ethnographic resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places are called traditional cultural properties. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service historic character: The sum of all visual aspects, features, materials, and spaces associated with a cultural landscape’s history, i.e. the original configuration together with losses and later changes. These qualities are often referred to as character-defining. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service historic property: A district, site, building, structure, or object significant in the history of American archeology, architecture, culture, engineering, or politics at the national, state, or local level. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service 142 Preservation Plan historically significant building: Typically, a principal building determined to be fifty (50) old or older, and; • The building is associated with any significant historic events; • The building is associated with any significant lives of persons; • The building signifies distinctive architectural character/era; • The building is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; • The building is archeologically significant. integrity: The authenticity of a property’s historic identity, evinced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property’s historic or prehistoric period. The seven qualities of integrity as defined by the National Register Program are location, setting, feeling, association, design, workmanship, and materials. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service local historic district: An area designated by the city which contains a significant portion of buildings, structures or other improvements which, considered as a whole, possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: • Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or • Is associated with events that have made significant contributions to the broad patterns of our local, state or national history; or • Possesses a coherent and distinctive visual character or integrity based upon similarity of scale, design, color, setting, workmanship, materials, or combinations thereof, which is deemed to add significantly to the value and attractiveness of properties within such area; • Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or • Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. local historic landmark: Any building, structure, object, archeological site, area of land or element of landscape architecture with significance, importance or value consistent with the Local Historic District criteria noted above. object: The term “object” is used to distinguish from buildings and structures those constructions that are primarily in artistic in nature or are relatively small in scale and simply constructed. Although it may be, by nature or design, movable, an object is associated with a specific setting or environment. Examples of objects include: boundary marker, fountain, milepost, monument, sculpture, statuary. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service national historic landmark (nhl): A district, site, building, structure, landscape, or object of national historical significance designated by the Secretary of the Interior under authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and entered in the National Register of Historic Places. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service 143 national register of historic places (nrhp): The comprehensive list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of national, regional, state, and local significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. This list is maintained by the National Park Service under authority of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service noncontributing resources: Noncontributing resources are the buildings, objects, sites, and structures that did not exist at the time the event(s) associated with a NHL, NRHP or Local Historic District or have lost integrity from that historic period. preservation: The act or process of applying measures to sustain the existing form, integrity, and material of a historic building, site, structure, or object. Work may include preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, but generally focuses on the ongoing preservation, maintenance, and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new work. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service rehabilitation: The act or process of making possible an efficient, compatible use for a historic property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving the portions or features which convey the historical, cultural, and architectural values. the secretary of the interior’s standards for the treatment of historic properties and the guidelines for the treatment of Cultural landscapes: The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing professional standards and providing advice on the preservation of historic properties and cultural resources listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. In partial fulfillment of this responsibility, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation Projects were developed in 1976. They consisted of seven sets of standards for the acquisition, protection, stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction of historic buildings. Since their publication in 1976, the Secretary’s Standards have been used by State Historic Preservation Officers and the National Park Service to ensure that projects receiving federal money or tax benefits were reviewed in a consistent manner nationwide. The principles embodied in the Standards have also been adopted by hundreds of preservation commissions across the country in local design guidelines. In 1992, the Standards were revised so that they could be applied to all historic resource types included in the National Register of Historic Places--buildings, structures, sites, objects, districts, and landscapes. The revised Standards were reduced to four sets by incorporating protection and stabilization into preservation, and by eliminating acquisition, which is no longer considered a treatment. Re-titled The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, this new, modified version addresses four treatments: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. The Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes illustrate how to apply these four treatments to cultural landscapes in a way that meets the Standards. 144 Preservation Plan Of the four, Preservation standards require retention of the greatest amount of historic fabric, including the landscape’s historic form, features, and details as they have evolved over time. Rehabilitation standards acknowledge the need to alter or add to a cultural landscape to meet continuing or new uses while retaining the landscape’s historic character. Restoration standards allow for the depiction of a landscape at a particular time in its history by preserving materials from the period of significance and removing materials from other periods. Reconstruction standards establish a framework for re- creating a vanished or non-surviving landscape with new materials, primarily for interpretive purposes. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service site: A site is the location of an important event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Examples of sites include: designed landscape, natural feature having cultural significance, ruins of a building or structure, trail, village or habitation site. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service state historic preservation office (shpo): These individuals play a critical role carrying out many responsibilities in historic preservation. Surveying, evaluating and nominating significant historic buildings, sites, structures, districts and objects to the National Register is one such key activity. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service structure: The term structure is used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made usually for purposes other than creating human shelter. Examples of structures include: bridges, canal, fence, street, tunnel, etc. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service. 145 appendix 5 - national reG ister Criteria for evalUation Criteria for evaluation The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: a. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or b. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or c. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Criteria Considerations Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: a. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or b. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or c. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or 146 Preservation Plan d. A cemetery that derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or e. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or f. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or g. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. Source: Secretary of the Interior National Park Service