Davenport commission tables decision on Credit Island warming house after debate over maintenance, flooding and ownership

The Historic Preservation Commission on Tuesday voted to table a demolition request for the warming house on Credit Island to the July meeting after extended discussion about flooding, city maintenance priorities and the building’s historic value.

City staff presented the application — filed by the City of Davenport — and recommended demolition, citing repeated flood damage and code concerns. Staff noted the structure sits in the Mississippi River floodway and that, per the Iowa Flood Center data presented, the warming house has flooded in 17 of the past 20 years and has a 50% annual chance of flooding in any given year.

Staff described the approximately 33-by-43-foot shelter as having brick columns and chimneys, wood framing, a concrete foundation and a severely deteriorated asphalt shingle roof. Photos in the packet show graffiti, missing brick on chimneys and evidence of repeated inundation. The city’s 2011 Credit Island master plan discussed options to “improve the experience at the lagoon through renovation or demolition of the existing pavilion and adjust the first floor elevation to reduce impacts of minor flooding,” the staff report said.

Senior park operations manager Billy Fisher told the commission the warming house had been funded for rehabilitation in 2017 but flood damage forced the city to defer the work and funding was never reallocated. Fisher said the city has invested in other island amenities that flood less frequently and that recent weather patterns mean the lagoon rarely freezes for skating.

Fisher also said, “At this point, we feel that it's unsafe,” and described loose masonry that visitors can pull from the structure. Commissioners and public speakers raised concerns that the city allowed the structure to deteriorate through deferred maintenance, with one commissioner noting the city is the property owner and that the issue may be “bigger” than the commission’s purview and should involve city council and Parks & Recreation’s master plan.

Commissioners debated whether to treat the structure like other privately neglected properties or to expect the city to provide long-term stewardship. After discussion, a motion to table the request to the July meeting passed on roll call. Those recorded voting in favor included McGivern, Testedi/Esteti, Kretz, Hoth, Adams and Gomez; one commissioner’s connection appeared to drop during roll call.

Commissioners asked staff to coordinate with Parks and Recreation, to obtain more history on the 2017 rehabilitation attempt and funding status, and to return with more detail on potential alternatives, including whether relocation, phased repair or council-level direction would be appropriate.

Provenance: staff presentation, Park & Rec testimony and multiple commissioner comments in the meeting transcript.