HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 07/13/2026MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Council Chambers
515 Clark Avenue
July 13, 2026
Call to Order
Chair Melissa Goodwin called the meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to
order at 6:00PM. In attendance were Ethan Atwell, Madison Hall, James McCormick,
and Assistant Planner Parker Walsh. Kate Gregory, Michael Murphy, and Dévon Lewis
were absent.
Approval of Agenda
Moved by Atwell, seconded by Hall, to approve the July 13, 2026, agenda. Vote on
Motion: 4-0. Motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Minutes
Moved by Atwell, seconded by McCormick, to approve May 11, 2026, minutes. Vote on
Motion: 4-0. Motion carried unanimously.
Public Forum: There were no public comments.
Chapter 31 Text Amendment Discussion
Parker Walsh, Assistant Planner, presented the item. The 2025 Work Plan contained
items related to improving energy efficiency as well as identifying areas in Chapter 31
that could be improved. A sub-committee was formed and after reviewing the chapter,
they concluded there were three areas that lacked guidance pertaining to energy
efficiency. The areas noted are permitting double pane windows, window removal, and
window infill. The text amendments for Chapter 31 were proposed to make the code
clearer to assist staff and the Commission with making decisions on Certificate of
Appropriateness applications. The Commission decided to draft a memo to City Council
asking that the text amendment process be allowed to proceed.
In February 2026, City Council instructed staff to conduct research and prepare a draft
ordinance for public hearings related to text amendments for Chapter 31. This was
requested with the intent of adopting regulations for double pane windows, window
removal, and window infill.
Tonight, Mr. Walsh will inform the Commission what the research conducted says and
what potential language may look like.
No specific communities were identified as explicitly permitting or prohibiting the
proposed changes to double pane windows; instead, the review focused on historic
integrity. In general, closing windows was not permitted, although one community did
allow it under certain conditions. Where such changes were allowed, they were typically
limited to the side or rear of the property.
The recommendation is to proceed with drafting a text amendment to address double -
pane windows and window infill, contingent on Commission approval. The group also
felt that contributing properties should be notified, giving residents an opportunity to
review the proposal and provide input. Tonight’s discussion is intended to gather
feedback from the Commission.
Mr. McCormick noted that, while many communities had not discussed double-pane
windows, they also had not addressed energy efficiency. Mr. Walsh added that other
communities prioritized weatherization measures before replacing historic windows. Mr.
McCormick then asked for clarification on what “vents” referred to, and Mr. Walsh
explained that vents could include bathroom or kitchen exhaust vents.
Ms. Goodwin agreed with Mr. Walsh that the code provides no specific guidance on
vents, but she found the summary language somewhat vague. She asked for
clarification on whether the reference pertains to soffit vents, vented exhaust pipes, or
other types. She recommended that the vent section be further developed and
potentially integrated into the upcoming discussions on mini-splits and larger systems.
Mr. Walsh noted that the text amendment concerning mini-splits is scheduled for
discussion next month. Ms. Goodwin added that the Commission has not yet discussed
this topic in depth and wants to ensure more members have the opportunity to weigh in
at the next meeting.
Ms. Goodwin noted that, as a member of the subcommittee, she is comfortable with the
proposed language on double-pane windows. She asked whether newer Commission
members would like additional time to consider it.
Mr. Atwell asked whether the sub-committee had also discussed infill. Ms. Goodwin
responded that the sub-committee focused on energy-efficient options and ways to
promote them. Infill and removal arose in discussion because two or three Certificate of
Appropriateness applications had been submitted last year. The Commission noted that
some of the existing guidance was insufficient.
Ms. Hall asked if those circumstances were for energy efficiency. Ms. Goodwin
explained the double panes were the only energy efficient part and they could address
infill at the same time.
Mr. Atwell noted that the double-pane window language is more thoroughly developed
than the infill provision. He suggested deferring further action until additional
Commission members who were absent tonight can provide their input
Ms. Goodwin expressed approval of the proposed text on double -pane windows, stating
that the wording appropriately indicates that double-pane windows are an allowable
option, not a requirement or a prohibited feature. Mr. Walsh clarified that the
understanding is that all current guidelines continue to apply, and this language
provides an additional option within those guidelines.
Mr. McCormick asked whether, on page 3 under the infill section, the proposed
language refers to the portion containing the five bullet points. Mr. Walsh responded that
the bullet points represent an early draft of criteria that staff believes are appropri ate,
but the Commission may modify them. If the Commission proceeds with a text
amendment, the language presented tonight would constitute the proposed code
language.
Ms. Goodwin noted that double-pane windows could be addressed as a sub-bullet, but
window infill may warrant a more substantial section. Mr. Walsh added that staff has
been reviewing the code to determine the most appropriate location for these provisions
and will provide guidance accordingly.
Ms. Hall said she approves the draft but recommended waiting until the August
Commission meeting to make a final decision. Mr. Atwell expressed hesitation about
allowing window infill, noting that Iowa City appears to be the only community that
permits it and that the prevailing practice is to prohibit it.
Ms. Goodwin asked whether Mr. Walsh anticipated a similar discussion regarding the
mini-split text amendment language. Mr. Walsh confirmed that he did. Ms. Goodwin
noted that the Commission has been considering this matter for about a year and, while
she does not wish to prolong the process, she believes there is value in a more
thorough discussion. She suggested that the Commission revisit this item at the August
meeting and asked Mr. Walsh to use the same format for the window infill section as he
did for the other sections.
With respect to a public mailing, Mr. Atwell expressed the view that the text
amendments should be finalized for each point before inviting public comment. Mr.
Walsh agreed to refine the language and bring the revised text back to the next
meeting.
Commission Comments
Ms. Goodwin said she, along with Ms. Gregory and Ms. Lewis, attended the Preserve
Iowa Summit. It was a good experience and she recommended the other commission
members attend in the future.
Staff Comments
Mr. Walsh commented that in the meeting packet that was sent out, a memo was
included regarding an update on staff approved Certificate of Appropriateness
applications. An application for a 6’ slat wood fence at 412 9th Street was approved. An
application was also approved for a 5 inch by 6 inch vent to be installed at the rear of
the property located at 700 Kellogg Ave.
Code enforcement is on going for a fence that was installed at 706 Clark Avenue. The
fence was installed along the alley and exceeded the maximum height limit of 6 feet.
The fence was installed with an approved Certificate of Appropriateness.
At the meeting on May 11, 2026, the Commission conditionally approved a mini split
that was installed at 904 Kellogg Avenue. The exposed and unpainted supply lines were
installed without approval. The conditions for the approval included:
• All PVC pipes are painted to match the house.
• A portion of the pipes on the north side are exposed. Modify the exposed pipes
so they are encased, discreet, and blend in with the structure in color.
• All conditions are met within four months of approval. A thirty day extension may
be granted by staff due to unforeseen circumstances.
Mr. Walsh stated the applicant is appealing the conditions to City Council at their July
28th, 2026 meeting. The Commission will be updated on the appeal status after the
meeting. Council could impose their own conditions or could refer the appeal back to
Commission. Regardless of City Council’s determination, Mr. Walsh will provide an
update at the next meeting. The Appellant is mainly appealing encasing the supply line
but did appeal all the conditions.
Mr. Walsh also said the Chautauqua Park & Ridgewood Historic District was approved
for the National Register of Historic Places. The City does not designate it locally so
they don’t fall under the Chapter 31 ordinance.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:34PM.
_________________________________ __________________________________
Melissa Goodwin, Chairperson Laura Colebrooke, Recording Secretary
Historic Preservation Commission Department of Planning & Housing