Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 10/29/2019MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION October 29, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Michele Derr Christy Graham Jim Johnson Andy Lee Nadine McKown Cindy Ramirez Marcela Trice Tim Brewer Terry Floyd, Director of Development Services Karen Gagne, Planning Administrator Christal Ashcraft, Development Services Admin. Asst. ABSENT: John Dickinson Blake Haney Amy Gardner, Legal ■ Vice -Chairperson ■ Chairperson ■ Member ■ Member ■ Member ■ Member ■ Member ■ Council Liaison ■ City staff ■ City staff ■ City staff ■ Member ■ P&z Liaison ■ City staff I. Call to Order, Introductions and Swearing -in New Commission Member Chairperson Christy Graham called the meeting to order at 2:04, p.m. Ms. Graham had Commission members introduce themselves and introduced guests; Christine Heidebrecht, West Floral Heights Association President, Jan Phipps of 2908 10th Street, John Phillips of 1508 Hayes Street, Jim Cooper of 615 8 th Street, Michael Nix of 1515 Buchanan, Lance Marrs of 1515 Buchanan, Miranda Holster for 1515 Buchanan. Ms. Karen Gagne also introduced Christal Ashcraft, Development Services Administrative Assistant and Terry Floyd, Development Services Director. II. Review & Approval of Minutes from September 24, 2019 Chairperson Christy Graham called for review and approval of the September 24, 2019 Landmark Commission meeting minutes. Mr. Andy Lee made a motion to approve minutes, Ms. Michele Derr seconded the motion. Minutes were unanimously approved. III. Action Item: Design Review Application: 1515 Buchanan: West Floral Heights Historic District (Wichita Falls Designation) Rehabilitation & Replacement Fagade Elements (residential): o Replacement Garage Doors Ms. Gagne presented the case and stated the Commission may remember this property �( from the previous month's meeting on an approval of a ranch style rehabilitation of 1515 Buchanan. Shortly after the last meeting, Mr. Lance Marrs spoke with staff about replacing the garage doors at 1515 Buchanan, Ms. Gagne stated garage doors area major design feature on the front of the home especially this ranch style. Chairperson Graham and Vice- Landmark Commission 2 October 29, 2019 Chairperson Derr where contacted regarding their thoughts and opinions about the case coming back to the Commission. They both indicated it required commission review. Ms. Gagn6 stated the subject property is located on the corner of Ave F and Buchanan. Built in 1955, at the time of designation it did not meet the requirements of the minimum 50 years and was also considered non-contributing to the district. Inventory photos from 2004 the doors were up due to construction so there was no photographic record of what the doors looked like from that time period but Ms. Gagn6 stated she didn't believe they had changed. The owners are looking to purchase a sectional door with an overhead track. The opening would remain the same for this style as the existing "open -out door". Example photo was shown from brochure that would be in the same style as the home. Ms. Gagn6 stated this was the typical style for mid-century ranch style basically from the 1930's to the 1970's. Being that this is a non-contributing home any improvements/alterations are encouraged in an attempt to return the structure back closer to its original character. Ms. Gagn6 turned the floor over to Mr. Marrs who stated there wasn't much to add that Ms. Gagn6 had covered everything but was happy to answer any questions from the Commission. Ms. Derr asked if the door would be the same color to which Mr. Marrs responded a white door is what they had selected. Mr. Johnson stated being a non- contributing structure it would have no impact. Ms. Derr agreed and stated it was a ranch style that was selected. Mr. Johnson made a motion to approve the white ranch style garage door. Ms. Derr seconded, motion passed unanimously. IV. Action Item: Design Review Application: 615 8th Street —Wichita Falls Landmark #25 — Iron Horse Pub (ODonohoelAnderson Bean Building Site) Alterations to a Designated Commercial Building): • Window Installation on Alley Fagade • Fill-in Missing Brick Areas on Alley Fagade • New Signage- Alley & 81h Street Facades • Various Interior Renovations Chairman Graham advised the Commission Mr. Dickinson was not present at the meeting and had recused himself from voting in the event he was able to attend the meeting. Ms. Gagn6 presented the case and stated Mr. Dickinson had authorized Mr. Jim Cooper to speak on his behalf. Ms. Gagn6 stated Mr. Dickinson was requesting to make some improvements to a structure that was designated a historical landmark in 2003. On the alley side of the building he is requesting to install a window, fill in some areas on the alley fagade with brick and also adding signage along with interior improvements that are not subject to design review. Ms. Gagn6 displayed inventory photos for the Commission and commented on changes over time as well as Landmark nomination. Ms. Gagn6 stated the building was built circa 1892 and the landmark was for the site and not the building as it as under gone numerous periods of alterations since the late 1890's when originally constructed. The alley has elevated visibility, is very wide and has remained much the same over the years. In 2015 an outdoor patio canopy awning was approved and installed when City Council approved the Outdoor Patio Dining Ordinance. Landmark commission Ms. Gagne stated one of the items proposed was to fill in a former window that had been barricaded for many years. Staff contacted John Dickinson to get additional information when he advised his intent was to build a wooden arch frame with a sill filled plate glass for this upper window over the exit door. There are seven openings along this same alley side that have been covered with plywood and iron bars on the outside that had been in existence for many decades, long before Mr. Dickinson had taken over ownership. These are the same areas the owner is requesting to brick in rather than replace with glass due to them being located in the alley and also for security purposes. The additional signage is due to patrons having a hard time finding the location. After adding the awning in 2015 the current signage is difficult to see so Mr. Dickinson is proposing to have additional signage in the alley and below the awning for better visibility to pedestrians. Ms. Gagne displayed conceptual renderings from The Burn Shop showing designs that match the character and period of the downtown area while still keeping the unique flare of The Iron Horse. The signage will be raised and attached in limited points of contact to the fagade and they are aware, as we have worked with them before on installations that it should attach to the mortar and not through the brick. Ms. Gagne turned the floor over to Mr. Cooper for any additional details. Mr.Cooperstated originally the windows in the alleyway were to provide lighting to the interior. It is not clear who put the bars on the windows or the plywood behind them however, from a security standpoint they need to be enclosed. Mr. Cooper stated he was open to answer any questions the Commission may have. Ms. Trice asked if the intent was to put the iron bars back up once the brick was filled i. Mr. Cooper stated they did not have the intension of placing the bars back once the brick was filled i. He stated where the boarded up windows are located on the inside of the structure was the back of the stage. Those walls are covered floor to ceiling in an acoustic padding and carpet for sound purposes. There is also approximately $40,000 worth of digital sound equipment and the windows present a security concern. Ms. Graham stated the building had been significantly changed to be able to bring in live bands and asked Mr. Lee to give a little history on the building. Mr. Lee stated originally, what is currently the Iron Horse was two different buildings, and one faced Indiana with the rear fagade along the alley. The roof was removed and used as a patio for The Beer Garden. On the alley side the structure was the original Power and Light building. Mr. Lee stated it was not really an office building, but more of a mechanical office. Mr. Lee stated bricking up the windows will help with acoustics and by leaving them open it will affect the sound and creates security issues. Ms. Graham stated when they have a louder band playing, especially the heavy metal bands, they can be heard down to ¢ & Ohio and the Holt, so bricking in is a very good idea. Ms. Trice and Ms. Ramirez expressed their understanding of why bricking in was needed but their concern was the brick not matching, if sills would be removed and if they would be recessed to still maintain the aspect of the original openings. Mr. Cooper stated they were just going to fill them in flush with the brick. Ms. Derr asked when the original Landmark was designated was it to the entire structure or just the front of the building. Ms. Gagn6 stated it was the site, not the structure due to alterations. It is historically significant due to the history on the site and not the buildings. Ms. Graham stated the brick used to fill-in would need to be as close as possible to the original brick. Ms. Ramirez asked if this was a local or national designation. Ms. Gagne Landmark Commission 4 October 29, 2019 advised it was a local designated landmark. Ms. Derr clarified the landmark was for the site and not the structure. Ms. Derr made a motion to split the requests up for signage, window addition and window fill-ins. Mr. Lee seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously. 1. Window — Brick Fill-in Ms. Derr stated in one of the photos you could see a window farther down the alley on another structure that had a window filled in with brick. Ms. Trice asked about the gutter system. Ms. Ramirez asked about steel pieces in front of the windows. Ms. Graham advised those were not original to the structure, those were put in to stabilize the structure. Ms. Derr stated they most likely were put in when the roof was replaced. Ms. Ramirez stated she knew it was in an alley and understood the argument of not being highly visible, however, for certain events that street is closed off and a heavy pedestrian flow comes through that area. Ms. Ramirez advised she does not like the idea of having them filled in she liked the character it created. She stated if it did come down to filling them in she would like to see them recessed and seals left to which Ms. Trice agreed stated you would not be able to find brick that would match due to age of structure. Mr. Lee made a motion to approve the fill-in brick, keeping the iron work if possible. Seals and header to remain to keep appearance on the bottom 3 windows. Ms. Ramirez stated historically alleys sometimes were 2nd shops with alley frontage and if in -fill is approved she would like the brick recessed Mr. Lee stated there are two grease traps in the alley producing a foul smell. Ms. Graham repeated the motion on the table to allow alley window openings to be filled with similar brick, recessed an inch and keeping the seals and headers, remove iron work. Ms. Ramirez and Ms. Trice stated they both liked the iron work. She stated it added character and can be welded in to new brick, that is was a shame to remove and discard. Ms. Graham clarified the previous motion, Ms. Derr seconded. Ms. Ramirez and Ms. Trice stated they were both still undecided about the iron work. Ms. Graham clarified the motion had been changed. Mr. Lee stated he had already made a motion would like to stick with it and that needed to be voted on first and Ms. Derr advised she would stick with her seconding the original motion. Ms. Gagn& requested clarification and stated the metal structural bars that are metal on the top and bottom row window openings are to be retained. It is the individual iron bars on the 7 openings to be removed. Mr. Lee confirmed that was correct in his original motion. Ms. Graham advised Ms. Derr has seconded that motion and would take a vote. Ms. Derr, Mr. Lee, Mr. Johnson and Ms. Graham voted to approve (4) with Ms. Trice, Ms. Ramirez and Ms. McKown (3) voting against the motion. Note: Without 5 affirmative votes; motion failed to pass. 2. Signage The signage to be installed is permanent on the alley side and above the 8th Street front door made by The Burn Shop, The signs will be attached to mortar joints and not the brick with a gap between the sign and the structure. Ms. Trice asked if it was all done by The Burn Shop or just the wording. Ms. Graham advised it was all made by The Burn shop. Ms. Derr clarified both the signage. Ms. Derr made a motion to approve the signage and Mr. Johnson seconded. Ms. Ramirez stated there was already signage on the building and questioned if it was coming down and stated businesses were limited to one sign per fagade per design guidelines. Mr. Cooper stated they are leaving it for pedestrian traffic and the new signage would be more visible to motorist. Mr. Lee stated we had multiple signs on Hook & Ladder. Ms. Ramirez stated item IF on page 61 of the design review guidelines stated there shall be only one sign allowed on each fagade unless multiple signs were previously there historically. Ms. Graham stated she was ok with multiple signs. Ms. Ramirez asked if this would set a precedent for other shops. Ms. Trice asked if Hook & Ladder signage was all attached. Mr. Lee advised they were all attached. Ms. Gagn6 advised staff was trying to be customer friendly and work with them on their signage to comply with both zoning and landmark requirements; Commission makes final determination. Chairman Graham stated Ms. Derr had made a motion to approve the signage. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion, motion passed unanimously. 3. Oval Window Wooden framed window above the alley door with a single glass sheet, handmade to design review standards. Mr. Lee made a motion to approve, Ms. Ramirez asked if any of the iron pieces that are being removed from the other window openings would fit. Ms. Graham said she would not recommend that since there was no iron on that window previously. Ms. Ramirez stated that would prevent someone knocking out the glass and entering the premises. Mr. Cooper stated the replacement glass will enhance the natural lighting inside the building and because it is up above the door so high owners did not feel this was a security risk. Ms. Derr asked if it would be double pane glass to which Mr. Cooper advised yes. Mr. Lee made a motion to approve the handmade replacement window. Mr. Johnson seconded, motion passed unanimously. V. Discussion Item: Design Guidelines Amendment: Window Research Ms. Gagn6 provided an update on continued window research and stated staff has only scratched the surface. Staff reached out to Lorelei Willett the Certified Local Government Program Coordinator with THC and has included her email in the Landmark book. It includes some recommendations to our current design review guidelines when visiting with citizens. One option suggested was potentially consider looking at a tiered requirement system for widows depending on if you had a property that was national, state and/or local designations. If it were a property that had state significance, THC, then you would consider what would be an appropriate standard for the replacement windows. Obviously you would look to preserve, repair and the last option would be to replace. When it comes to a local district that does not have an individual recognition as a landmark the Commission may want to consider a lesser standard. Ms. Gagn6 stated it was really about what the commission felt was appropriate moving forward. Staff looked at national standards first, as far as recommended/not recommended and included some information in the packet for the commission. This is really just a starting point and staff will continue to research, however, Ms. Gagn6 wanted the thoughts and opinions of the Commission moving forward what level/degree and detail did they want staff to go to. There is very little discussed on the muntins and what is listed is geared towards maintaining the original configuration. When pertaining to the Gomillion's case that was tabled last month for further research, their windows do have muntins. If the Commission was to follow this standard closely, original configuration has them on the exterior and you can tell they are in poor condition. So the question is: 1) is repair completely out of the question? 2) To maintain that same configuration lite style with those exterior muntins something you want to move away from? Ms. Gagn6 stated staff will continue research, however, feedback would be appreciated. Mr. Phillips of 1508 Hayes Street, stated to the Commission that he was a home owner in the historical district and has an attic window that needs attention. He stated the guidelines state to restore, repair then replace. When looking to restore and repair his window he found an organization called Window Preservation Alliance. On their website there is a list of contractors that do historic window restorations and repairs. Mr. Phillips stated he pulled from that list names of contractors from Oklahoma City, Abilene, Dallas/Fort Worth and down into Austin and San Antonio. Mr. Phillips stated the problem when talking with these companies range from being booked out 12 months to one window not being a big enough job to travel to Wichita Falls. Mr. Phillips is aware city staff cannot recommend anyone for repairs/restorations, however, he read an article in our local paper about a commercial building downtown that was looking to be renovated. Mr. Phillips stated one of the things the city could do to help is to provide a means for citizens to post about restorations and repairs needed to their historical structures and send information with pictures to the Window Preservation Alliance to see if anyone is interested in doing the repairs. Mr. Phillips continued discussion on repairs to windows and replacements that are no longer made. He stated local window businesses will only quote what they carry or can order and none of them meet design standards. Mr. Lee thanked Mr. Phillips for his comments and stated that he mainly does commercial work but has restored and repaired lots of windows for about 50 years and has had a lot of the same issues. Mr. Lee and Mr. Phillips continued the discussion of finding a means to help citizens in the historic district find a means to help with window repairs and restorations. Mr. Phillips suggested a link on the city's website to the Window Preservation Alliance. Ms. Gagn6 stated she believed this was something that could be done. Ms. Jan Phipps of 2908 1 oth Street asked who would be deciding which windows would need to be repaired or replaced. Ms. Gagn6 stated staff and the Commission mirrored the national standard which replacement is a last option. Ms. Phipps asked if energy efficiency was not something the historic guidelines cared about. Ms. Gagn6 stated energy efficiency is an issue that plays into the national standards keeping up with newer developments in energy code, Mr. Johnson voiced his concerns on replacing windows not always being the best option. Chairman Graham stated her opinion was for staff to continue the research, that guidelines were needed and to possibly make a check list to help home owners decide what needs to be done. Ms. Graham asked Commission if all were in agreement to continue with further research. Mr. Floyd petitioned the Commission to make this a longer term project than was originally considered due to the planning department being short staffed as well as staff being pressed with multiple deadlines in the remaining calendar year. Mr. Floyd asked that the Commission consider making this a project to resume at the first of the new year so that staff could have time to do more in depth research. Ms. Ramirez and Mr. Lee stated they have pending cases that are awaiting a decision. Mr. Lee commended Ms. Gagne on the research that had been done and that she will continue to do. Ms. Ramirez stated an answer couldn't be given since each structure was different and would need another approach. Ms. Derr stated she was sure we were not the only city dealing with the same CLG issues. Mr. Lee made a motion to give a March 31 st 2020 deadline for the research to be complete. Ms. Ramirez stated Mr. Gomillion was awaiting a decision and had already been before the Commission twice. Ms. Gagn6 stated after talking with legal it was brought to her attention that applicants were required to wait 6 months before returning to the Commission with an identical design review. Ms. Ramirez stated she didn't know about that therefore, she was sure the homeowners are not aware either. Ms. Graham stated it was unanimously decided to give the research the requested time extension. VI. Other Business: a) Monthly Report — Depot Square, West Floral Heights Historic District & Morningside Historic District Depot Square: Ms. Derr gave updates: • Oct. 31 st — Downtown Trick or Treat 4-7pm • Nov. 7th — After Hours Art Walk 5-9pm • Nov. 2nd — Veterans Day Parade 9-11 am • Nov. 2nd — Farmer's Market Winter schedule • Nov. 8th — Backdoor Theater, Dinner stage — Evening at the Improv • Nov. 22nd — Backdoor Theater, Dinner stage — Miracle on South Division Street • Nov. 231d — City of Lights Parade • Dec. 6th & 7th — 57th Season of The Nutcracker West Floral Heights: Christine Heidebrecht also gave update: • Annual Turkey Trot is on schedule • Revamping website —would appreciate links to City of Wichita Falls preservation resources Morningside: Jim Johnson gave update: • Nov. 14th & 15th, Morningside Luminaries, alternate weather date Dec. 21st & 22nd • Lowder home (117 Pembroke) purchased by Paul & Crimson Shultz, they are continuing restoration. • Continued work on the Tudor style home on Grant and 9th Street • Ms. Gagn6 gave update on Morningside correspondence issues with THC o City will not be sending letters to all property owners in the district — Morningside is still requesting; previously stated in May 2019. Landmark Commission 8 October 29, 2019 • Morningside felt a timely response was not received from THC representative; • Morningside sent letters to the Executive Director of THC as well as Governor Greg Abbott • Email response was not acceptable; design review in Morningside ceased after May 20, 2019 meeting/conference call involving THC, City of Wichita Falls and Morningside Association Executive Committee. b) Updates: 615 to Street Ms. Gagn6 provided photos and a brief timeline of the remaining structure at 615 7th Street. In 1995 this structure was still structurally sound and intact. This structure dates back to the late 1890's in the Depot district. In 2008 Ron Keller, from Dallas, Texas who purchased the building and had a proposal to turn it into an artist's loft/studio. However, Mr. Keller was under financed and the project never gained traction. At the time he worked with Syd Littiken, a local architect to put together plans similar to what the Commission reviewed earlier this year. In 2016, the walls were still intact, but there was a hole in the west wall. There were issues with transits getting in the building before it was secured. In 2017 in a windstorm the west wall was lost and after that time the building basically became a shell and by 2018 the appraisal district showed the value had dropped to $2600. A letter was mailed to Mr. Scott who purchased the building in 2012 indicating this structure was on a demolition watch list from the city. When this case came before you in the spring of 2019 the remaining wall had been braced. This case went to City Council for a public meeting for a Council demolition order which does trump chapter 62 of the Preservation Ordinance stating they have ultimate authority when a demolition is ordered by City Council. It was required to have the building stabilized within 5 days and obtain a permit within 90 days. A date in July was set for substantial completion of which the owner was not able to comply. Staff has talked many times with Mr. Scott and the finances are not available for renovations. Two serious buyers are lined up that would like to make use of the structure but current owner has not entertained sale of building. c) Board Appointments: Reappointments and Vacancies • Board and Commission members should have received an email invitation to the Appreciation luncheon on November 6 th — RSVP City Clerk's Office • Board members up for renewal should have received an email from City Clerk • Blake Haney (filled Rodney Martins vacancy) • Michele Derr • John Dickinson • Jim Johnson Cindy Ramirez leaving Commission; recommended an applicant with architectural background. J d) Design Review — Staff Authorized — Minor Alte ratio n/Repa i rs Landmark Commission 9 October 29, 2019 • 2106 Hiawatha (Landmark) — complete bathroom remodel- electrical/plumbing permit • 1512 Hayes (West Floral Heights) — plumbing/mechanical permit — gas inspection: water heater e) Next Meeting November 26, 2019 VII. Adjourn Meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m. J6,- Christy Graham, Chairperson Date