HomeMy WebLinkAboutA015 - Letter dated February 13, 1989 from Leland Poague Leland Poague
109 Ninth St.
Ames, Iowa 50010
10 February 1989
Historic Preservation Commission
City of Ames
Ames, Iowa 50010
Dear Friends:
I have been involved in the process of researching and promoting the
preservation of the Old Town area of Ames for well over 5 years now. But the
weariness resulting from such a lengthy process is more than offset by the
excitement of seeing the Preservation Commission begin the official consideration
of our request.
Your decision is both an historic and a political decision. At a certain
level the historic determination is the easier of the two. If Old Town is not
worth preserving, then nothing in Ames is: Old Town is nearly all that remains of
the earliest "Ames, Iowa. " The likely retort will be that, old or not, nothing of
national historical importance happened within the precincts of Old
Town--Washington never slept here. As I aria sure you are aware, our claim is not
based on national and/or political history, but (rather) on local/regional and
architectural history. Old Town has one of the highest concentrations of older
homes in the city, and is the last remaining link: to the visual social environment
of the city's earliest period.
Keep in mind, as well, that time marches on; what is not (yet) precious may
well become precious--if it is preserved. This question is more pointed in the
Old Town area than in some others at present because it is the "oldest" of the old
neighborhoods, and is under the greatest pressure for redevelopment. As bath the
hospital district and the downtown develop, the pressure increases on both sides
of the neighborhood. Given the relatively small area defined in our application
(the proposed district is only two-blocks wide) , there is not much room left for
squeezing; any squeeze will effectively threaten the whole area, especially the
houses on Duff and Douglas which were the two "grand avenues" of the original
Ames. Keep in mind that historic houses and neighborhoods are irreplaceable once
they are demolished.
The political question finally involves the social wisdom of enforcing some
additional restrictions on the few--current home owners and other property
interests--for the sake of the now and future many. Surely the most pointed
opposition you are likely to hear will come from, or be stage-managed by, local
real estate interests--a fact perfectly and happily in keeping, I might point out,
with local history: Cynthia Duff is still with us. Whether individual opponents
of the proposed district care very much about the particular fate of these few
blocks on the basis of immediate self-interest is an open question. Surely some
will . My guess is that the most important opposition, however, will stand on
principle (the old home as castle bromide) and will have as its long term concern
the precedent that approval of our application will represent. If neighborhood
do-gooders get their way here, what development project is safe''
I think the local development community has something of a legitimate gripe
here; it is no easy matter to -juggle all the regulations and regulators and get on
with the business of building homes and businesses. I certainly hope the City
Council attends to this problem (much in the news of late) and finds a more
effective way to deal with building permits and applications. But I think it
would be a gross mistake to let long-standing grievances about the difficulties of
development--which obviously exist completely apart from historic preservation
questions--become a legitimate grounds for opposing the Old Town application.
Indeed, I am strongly of the view, as a member of the original study group which
wrote the ordinance, that the current preservation law does allow considerable
room for redevelopment--but for a controlled redevelopment in keeping with the
architectural character of given areas. By contrast with many such ordinances,
curs is remarkably generous on these accounts, in part because members of the
local real estate community had a direct (if lately disavowed) hand in the
drafting of it. And because the ordinance requires specific design guidelines, it
might well make some kinds of development much the easier instead of more
difficult.
The goal in proposing a preservation ordinance, after all , is to make sure
that, when development takes place, as it should and shall, the resulting pattern
of commercial pressures will be offset by other, equally valid, civic and civil
criteria. A preservation ordinance does not preserve the whole town, does not
cast a city in amber; rather, it preserves for the town some small portion of
its heritage which makes life for all city residents more informed and more
satisfying.
Another fact I wish you to keep uppermost in mind is the track: record of
other such districts. People who fear that a preservation district will make
property less valuable or harder to sell simply have not studied the available
data. If experience serves as a guide, if probablities matter in the slightest,
the fear of decreased property values ought to play little role in your decision.
So the precedent question, in my view, boils down to whether or not approval
of the Old Town application will lead to a rash of similar proposals. Given the
time and trouble we've gone to, it hardly seems likely, nor is it likely that any
significant proportion of the city will come under the protection of the historic
preservation ordinance. If I am right about that, then the only real question
before you is whether or not Ames will be significantly better off by preserving
the Old Town area. I urge you to say, and vote, Yes.
Sincerely yours
Lee Po ague
E_a
ED
F E L, 1
C1TY OF AR FS IOWA
DEPT OF PL�1��'!'��G' Y�_ _ t HUi1SIrJG