HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Memo dated July 31, 1989 - review of Old Town Historic District pursuant to state law r
July 31 , 1989
To: Kathy
From: Ralph
Subject: Review of Old Town Historic District in Ames as
Local District Pursuant to State Law
I have completed my review of the application for designation of
the above referenced district, based on the report prepared by
the Historic Old Town Committee in November, 1988 and materials
in our files concerning this resource. It is my opinion that the
proposed Old Town Historic District meets the criteria for an
"Area of Historical Significance, as specified in Section 303 . 20
of the Code of Iowa. Specifically, the district possesses
sufficient integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
skill, feeling, and association to convey its significance in
terms of local architectural and historical development. Although
the application makes a reasonable argument for the district' s
association with the lives of persons important in the
development of Ames, the strongest and most compelling case for
the area is made in terms of local architectural development.
This neighborhood, viewed in a collective sense, contains the
best collection of the city' s popular residential architecture
from around 1870 to 1926 , and includes buildings representative
of most major styles, types and periods of construction in Ames
from that era.
As to the application/report itself, I found it to be somewhat
confusing in places. I realize that part of the problem revolved
around retrofitting their previous National Register work to fit
the confines of the local ordinance, but a conversion chart would
have been useful. For example, key buildings become contributing
and contributing become compatible. I finally figured this out,
but only after consulting the last submitted National Register
draft. As written, the definitions for compatible and non-
contributing (again due to language in the ordinance) are
confusing, and one might read into Compatible eligibility for any
structure despite its integrity and that loss of integrity has
nothing to do with a property being non-contributing. Based on
the lists included with the application, it appears the Old Town
Committee understands the integrity issue but the local ordinance
does not mirror this. We should strongly recommend clarification
of the definitions.
Also, I would like to have seen a definition of the term
-2-
"vernacular. " For the general public and probably most property
owners, this classificatory system is largely Greek , and twenty
years from now, unless something is added to the methodology
section, things are likely to become even foggier. More is
needed than simply referencing McAlester and Jennings and
Gottfried. It should be noted that Variation A, Type 1 of the
Hipped Cottage class is classified as Colonial Revival in
McAlester. There are other examples cited that might fit a
McAlester stylistic type as well. This problem might best be
cured by adopting another style guide, say Poppeliers, Blumenson,
or Whiffen. At any rate, there needs a be a better explanation of
how and when a property falls outside a stylistic classification
and into a vernacular category. The why and wherefore of the
typology should be clearly stated, and vernacular defined in a
clearcut fashion as it related to this particular district and
the community generally.
In final anaysis , I would recommend approval of the district and
would suggest that the application document be clarified and made
more consistent in accordance with the concerns noted above.