Landmark Commission Minutes - 06/26/2012RECEIVED IN
CITY CLERK'S OF ICE /
DATE:
R TIME:
a lop-
MINUTES
LANDMARK COMMISSION
June 26, 2012
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Christy Graham, Chairperson
■ Members
Stacie Flood, Vice Chairperson
■
John Kidwell
■
Andy Lee
■
Dianne Thueson
■
Steve Wood
■
Carolyn Looney
■
Karen Montgomery- Gagn6, Planning Administrator
■ start
Diane Parker
■
GUESTS:
Cindy Cotton
■ Guests
George Banta, applicant
■
Jan Banta, applicant
■
Lisa Gonzales, applicant
■
Calvin Davis
■
Rick Belz
■
ABSENT:
Marilyn Carper ■ Members
Michael Koen ■
Scott Stillson ■
Councilor Michael Smith ■ Council Liaison
I. CALL TO ORDER, INTRODUCTIONS & SWEARING IN NEW COMMISSION MEMBER
Chairperson Graham opened the Landmark Commission meeting at 12:06 p.m. Ms. Gagn6
welcomed all in attendance. The Commission members introduced themselves then the guests
were introduced: Cindy Cotton, owner of 1508 Tilden - West Floral Heights; George and Jan
Banta, owners of 1703 Hayes; Derrick Rinker, contractor for the Gonzales' with Enviro-Tech
Mechanical Services; Lisa Gonzales, owner of 126 Pembroke Lane; Calvin Davis, general
contractor with Marathon Building Co. for Gonzales'; and, Rick Belz, representative for Builder's
Wholesale.
Carolyn Looney, new member, recited the Oath of Office.
II. REVIEW & APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MAY 22, 2012 MEETING
Chairperson Graham called for approval of the previous meeting's minutes. Mr. Wood made a
motion to approve the May 22, 2012 Landmark Commission minutes as submitted; seconded by
Mr. Kidwell. The motion passed unanimously to approve the minutes.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 1
vow
III. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
1508 Tilden
West Floral Heights Historic District
Request for outdoor kitchen structure in rear yard
Ms. Cotton requested approval to construct an outdoor kitchen at 1508 Tilden. She commented
the roof of the proposed outdoor kitchen will be approximately 16ft in height but should not be
visible from the public right of way since there are eight feet of bushes and an eight foot fence.
In order to see the kitchen, a person would need to walk down her driveway through the portico
and enter through the eight foot fence. Ms. Cotton stated Ms. Gagn6 felt her (Ms. Cotton's)
position in the neighborhood as President of the West Floral Heights Neighborhood Association
warranted making an application for design review. She is also having an in- ground swimming
pool constructed in the backyard which would be to the north of the kitchen structure.
Mr. Wood asked what type of material would be used for the cabana posts. Ms. Cotton replied
cinder block surrounded by stone. He asked if the columns would match the house; Ms. Cotton
stated it was being considered but also looking at cast stonettravertine columns.
Ms. Thueson made a motion to approve the application for design review of the outdoor kitchen
structure and the in- ground swimming pool located in the rear yard of 1508 Tilden in the West
Floral Heights Historic District; Ms. Flood seconded. The Commission voted unanimously to
approve this design review application.
IV. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
1703 Hayes
West Floral Heights Historic District
Request for total renovation/rehabilitation of house and accessory structures
(roofline change, carport reconstruction, extension to the house, replace siding,
windows, porch, interior modifications, etc.)
Mr. George Banta, applicant, stated he and his wife purchased the home at 1703 Hayes about
two years ago. He commented the house requires almost complete renovation with the
exception of the plumbing and electrical which were updated within the past couple of years.
He stated the house is structurally sound but the flat roof in the back of the building had sagging
rafters and was in terrible condition; he would like to install a pitched roof. There is vinyl siding
on part of the house; if it can be matched, he would like to continue installing it around the
house. Mr. Banta explained the interior modifications include a kitchen update, restructuring the
bathrooms, and moving the mechanical equipmenttwater heater to the open area between the
garage and the house that would become enclosed. He is also proposing to add a concrete
floor to the open area and extending it to make a laundry room. Mr. Banta stated he would like
to locate some older columns to restore the front of the house to its original design. He
introduced his contractor, Derrick Rinker of Enviro -Tech.
Ms. Looney asked Mr. Banta if he had considered removing the chain link fence [in the front
yard]; he replied he was thinking about incorporating some steel fencing in the front. Ms.
Looney stated none of the properties in the area have front yard fencing. Mr. Banta asked if he
should completely remove the chain link fencing; Ms. Looney commented fencing could be
installed down the sides of this lot. Ms. Gagne commented this property is unique because the
house was constructed in the rear yard with the fence bordering the backyard of the adjacent
property.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 2
Ms. Thueson stated the columns need to be design appropriate for the style of home not based
on era appropriate, as stated in Mr. Banta's application. She suggested reviewing the Design
Guidelines booklet or reviewing the Department of the Interior's preservation briefs.
Chairperson Graham confirmed this house was non- contributing but was still within a
designated historic district. The Commission's goal is that any proposed improvements will help
the structure become more contributing.
Ms. Flood inquired about the windows; Mr. Banta stated they are wood but are very
deteriorated.
Ms. Thueson read the list of items to be considered for the design review:
- Replace the flat roof area between the two bedrooms and the bathroom;
- Replace the carport and incorporate a slight pitch to the new roof to blend with the pitch
on the garage;
- Enclose the three foot space between the house and the garage for a laundry room;
- Match the existing siding or replace the siding for the entire house;
- Replace windows; and
- Add columns to the front porch.
Ms. Thueson and Chairperson Graham both expressed concerns with the proposed window
replacement, siding and enclosing the gap between the house and the garage/carport. Mr.
Kidwell asked if the Commission would vote for the entire renovation or separately for each
segment. Ms. Gagn6 stated it would be determined by the Commission's preference to address
each item separately or as one whole project. Ms. Thueson commented the issue revolves
around a non - contributing property and the Commission would prefer the owner follow the
design review guidelines in order for the house to eventually become a contributing property.
The end result is to upgrade the neighborhood and keep it stable.
There was discussion regarding the addition of the laundry room since it would be located in the
front of the house and was not original. Ms. Looney suggested using a landscaping screen. It
was noted this area was barely visible from the street in the pictures.
Mr. Lee stated the unique feature of West Floral Heights is the variety of setbacks and designs.
For example, the Tinsley's built a garage apartment on their property intending to live there
while the home was built. The home was never built; they continued living in the apartment.
Regarding this house on Hayes, Mr. Lee commented the columns would make a positive
difference in the front of the home. He stated Mr. Banta's renovation ideas were good and he
approved the continuation of the siding on the street side of the property and the lengthy
setback was a factor but it does hide flaws from visibility at the sidewalk/street level.
Mr. Wood inquired about the windows. Mr. Banta stated the current windows are wood with
single panes. He noted there were several houses in the neighborhood with six (6) pane
windows. Ms. Flood suggested using windows in the current configuration. Mr. Wood stated
the goal of this Commission is to maintain the original materials used in the construction of the
house. He asked Mr. Banta if the windows could be salvaged. Mr. Banta stated the wood
frames /sills were rotted; he would like to replace with wood windows if they are available. Mr.
Wood noted that vinyl windows are not an acceptable replacement. The Commission members
preferred Mr. Banta find wood replacement windows but if not available then aluminum windows
- with the same profile would be acceptable. Mr. Banta noted the front windows' unique size,
approximately 28 inches x 5ft, might create a problem.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 3
Mr. Davis asked why vinyl siding is permitted when vinyl windows are not. Chairperson Graham
stated since his home is a non - contributing home that already had partial vinyl siding when the
area was designated, the Commission will permit it to be completed with the siding.
Ms. Thueson made a motion to approve the design review request at 1703 Hayes as outlined
with the following stipulations:
1. replacement of the house roof and decking; repair flat roof on the rear portion with change in
pitch, maintain exposed rafters;
2. rebuild carport with slightly pitched roof to match garage roof line - metal carport columns no
closer than aft from the property line and metal roof can be no closer than 2ft to the side
property line; carports made of combustible material (wood) can be no closer than 5ft from
the property line;
3. enclosure of the space between the house and garage; approximately 3.5ft x loft area to
accommodate water heater /utilities;
4. repair existing siding and add where previously unfinished;
5. replace the house windows with wood windows and if unable to find suitable wood windows,
secondary option is to allow replacement with aluminum in the same pane configuration as
original;
6. add columns to the front porch that are appropriate for the architectural style of the house.
Mr. Lee seconded and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.
V. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
126 Pembroke — tabled application
Morningside National Historic District
Request phased window replacement (wood to vinyl)
Ms. Gagn6 presented photographs from the May 2012 meeting which also included staffs
research and an excerpt from the Secretary of the Dept. of Interior's booklet on rehabilitation.
The Department of the Interior sets the national standard for proper treatments to historic
structures. There are four standardized treatments which are utilized by communities
throughout the U. S. and meet the states' historic preservation officers' standards. The first
standard is preservation, followed by rehabilitation, restoration, with the final one being
reconstruction. The last resort would be replacement.
Staff researched communities similar to Wichita Falls with populations from 5,000 to 200,000 in
Texas, Oklahoma, and Colorado. Ms. Gagne explained there were numerous similarities
between states which included: not having the artificial look of separated window panes and
having exterior muntins rather than those sandwiched between the glass. Windows and doors
are the primary architectural features of a structure, especially residential. The manner in which
they are addressed can completely alter the architectural style of the building. Windows and
doors can enhance a building or ruin an architectural style and the character of a structure. Five
out of the 20 communities were specific regarding their preferred choice between aluminum and
vinyl stressing either to avoid aluminum or avoid aluminum and vinyl.
The Texas Historical Commission's (THC) regional architectural reviewer submitted comments
regarding this case. Most communities with Certified Local Government (CLG) designation take
into consideration the comments and suggestions provided to them by the state. However, it is
the responsibility of the community to determine what is appropriate in their community (Wichita
Falls) and then adhere to those parameters. The national standards focus on repair and
maintenance of the original windows. The original windows were constructed of old growth
wood /timber which was more dense and of better quality that the current wooden windows.
THC stated the ideal situation would be to locate a craftsman to repair the [original] window.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 4
Studies rating the energy efficiency of the wood windows compared to replacement windows
were similar in their comparisons. More energy loss occurs through the doors and the roof than
windows. The THC reviewer noted a study performed by the Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development in 2000 comparing vinyl and aluminum windows. The expected life span of a
quality wood window is 20 -50 years and aluminum or vinyl is 15 -30 years. Generally, a historic
designated home will be around a longer period of time. Once the original windows are
replaced, it starts a cycle of ongoing replacements for the life of the structure. The THC
reviewer was pleased the bronze storm windows would be removed.
Three recommendations by the THC reviewer for consideration and discussion were:
1. Repair the existing windows, if at all feasible;
2. Consideration of exterior storm windows;
3. Following state guidelines, replace with wood or aluminum replacement windows
Ms. Gagn6 noted the National Alliance of Preservation's article "What's Wrong with Vinyl
Windows" was included in the handouts. She noted the long -term issues with vinyl windows
have not been fully tested to the degree that aluminum has over many decades. A vinyl
replacement window today, based on research and studies, will most likely require replacement
again within 15 -20 years which would create another investment. Vinyl could also cause a
home to go from a contributing structure to a non - contributing.
Mr. Kidwell asked why the windows were being replaced. Ms. Gonzales stated they have been
painted closed.
Ms. Gonzales asked about the difference between contributing and non - contributing. Ms.
Gagn6 explained a contributing structure in a national historical district is pivotal and important
to the district because of the historical, cultural, architectural, engineering, archaeological
significance, and/or geographical significance.
Ms. Thueson stated for a historic neighborhood, such as West Floral Heights, an assessment of
the neighborhood is completed by reviewing every building [home], determining boundaries
based on structures that would be contributing, and reviewing photographs of all structures. The
final decision regarding classification is made by the Dept. of Interior. She noted West Floral
Heights has several non - contributing houses. A district is formed around the largest
concentration of contributing houses and sometimes the boundaries can be irregular because of
non - contributing houses. In the Morningside Historic District, most of the homes are
contributing. Ms. Thueson confirmed the question that a new property could be built in a historic
district. Ms. Gonzales asked if the districts progressed through levels, such as local to state
then to national designation; Ms. Thueson stated the Morningside National Historic District was
designated as a national district without local designation. The district was designated May 16,
1985. Mr. Lee noted the process for nomination was quite involved taking three and a half
years to complete. Staff explained that since a National Register designation exists for
Morningside the research /history for each property is readily available in order to move forward
with applying for a local district nomination.
Ms. Gonzales asked if new double -hung, wood sash windows with aluminum cladding would be
preferred. Mr. Belz stated the protection would be on the outside of the window; the window
would include the SDL pattern. He agreed with Ms. Gagn6 regarding the wood today is not of
Alk VV the same quality as the older wood. Mr. Belz stated he totally disagreed that an old window
could be made energy efficient. Mr. Kidwell asked if the Gonzales' had tried paint remover or
other methods to loosen the windows; Ms. Gonzales replied the windows had been painted
numerous times. Mr. Davis commented the windows had substantial rot on the outside.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 5
Ms. Gagn6 stated the windows are' generally the most significant architectural feature of a
home. Mr. Wood commented he discovered windows make a large difference in a home when
he built his new home several years ago. Ms. Thueson added it can sometimes be the major
expense of a home.
Ms. Gonzales asked if it mattered if the window is visible from the front. Staff explained the
Design Guidelines apply to everything on the exterior of the structure /site that is visible from the
public right of way. It was determined the kitchen window was not going to be moved or
enlarged, only replaced at its current location. This window is the starting point for the phased
window replacement project.
Mr. Wood stated the goal of this Commission is to protect the homes in the National District.
The first priority would be to salvage the current windows, in any possible manner. If the
windows are past the point of repair with deterioration, dry rot, etc., then an appropriate
replacement would be the best solution.
There was discussion regarding the approval of types of windows at the May 2012 meeting. Mr.
Wood stated no approval had been given at that meeting. He proceeded by stating the first
solution would be to repair the existing windows then attach storm windows on the outside. Mr.
Kidwell then commented if the original windows are past the point of repair, the replacement
window should be the aluminum clad, wood window. Mr. Davis asked if the Commission would
inspect the windows to determine whether they should be repaired or replaced; he asked who
makes the judgment call. Mr. Lee responded it would be a combination of the contractor's
opinion with the homeowner making the final decision. Mr. Davis stated there are few items
beyond repair if money is not an object thus the decision also becomes economic. In certain
cases, the financial viability of the repair can be unreasonable and present a challenge. Ms.
Thueson stated it is the owner's decision to repair or replace the windows. Mr. Lee noted that
Ms. Flood is facing the same decision at the Kell House.
Mr. Wood made a motion to approve the phased window replacement occurring between 2012
and 2015 with the first solution being to repair /restore the original wood windows but if they are
deemed by the homeowner and the contractor to be past the point of repair to allow
replacement with aluminum clad, wood windows with the same profiletpane configuration as the
original windows (muntins on the exterior) at 126 Pembroke Drive in the Morningside National
Historic District.; Ms. Thueson seconded. The vote was unanimous approving the motion.
VI. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
Fanners Market
725 Ohio
Depot Square Historic District
Request for signage
Mr. Lee abstained from voting since he was representing the applicant in this case.
Mr. Lee stated Downtown Wichita Falls Development, Inc., (DWFD, Inc.) a subsidiary of North
Texas Visions of Wichita Falls, Inc., has a lease with the City of Wichita Falls which began May
1, 2012 to operate the Farmer's Market. The existing sign has been used for 20-30 years.
They are requesting a temporary banner with graphics, the phone number and hours of
operation so it is visible to the public.
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 6
Ms. Thueson commented the sign resembled a real estate sign and focused more on DWFD,
Inc. than the Farmer's Market. She noted this example is not appropriate for a permanent sign
in the historic district. Commission members were in agreement and noted they liked the
original sign — wording and font size but that is needed to be updated/repainted. Mr. Lee
suggested the Landmark Commission present some suggestions for signage. The original sign
faces Ohio Avenue with the proposed temporary banner placed under the awning is also facing
west on Ohio.
Mr. Lee suggested approving the temporary banner with a permanent sign to be considered in
the future. Staff noted the Design Guidelines allow one permanent sign per fagade.
Commission members discussed Mr. Lee's request and Mr. Kidwell made a motion to approve
the temporary market signage for the Farmer's Market at 725 Ohio in the Depot Square Historic
District and requested staff submit a letter to Downtown Wichita Falls Development, Inc.
outlining the City's signage requirements, including zoning and historic design standards, and
request plans or drawings for permanent signage; Mr. Wood seconded. The Commission
unanimously approved the motion.
VII. Timing for Review of Landmark Nominations for Special July Meeting
1300 Buchanan, 1300 Tilden & 2106 Hiawatha
Ms. Gagn6 stated some additional work is necessary to complete the proposed landmark
nominations for 1300 Tilden, 2106 Hiawatha and 1300 Buchanan in order for the Commission to
consider landmark designation. Staff suggested a brief meeting for July le. The Commission
members tentatively agreed. Staff will email a meeting notification to confirm member
availability and then forward the digital meeting packet.
VIII. Other Business
Staff Authorized Design Review — Minor Alterations/Repairs
1413 Hayes — plumbing permit for water service line leak
4 Crestway — gas pressure test/repair gas leak
131 Pembroke Lane —foundation repair
1301 Grant — installation of sprinkler system
Articles & Periodicals — NAPC — The Alliance — Infill construction edition
Ms. Gagne stated the National Alliance for Preservation Commissions (NAPC) website has
design review guidelines from other cities. She mentioned the City might consider a
membership next year. The current issue of The Alliance has some good articles. She
encouraged the Commission members to review the website. Mr. Kidwell requested staff find
out if the new Design Guidelines can be uploaded to the NAPC website.
IX. New Business
West Floral Heights Historic District — Monthly Report
Ms. looney reported there will be a home tour for the West Floral Heights Historic District on
October 13th. This will be a fund raiser for purchasing historically appropriate poles for the
street lights/stop signs within the District.
0 Awning for 1702 Tilden:
Ms. Gagn6 reported 1702 Tilden had a metal frame over the entry when the home was
designated. The current property owner is interested in obtaining a replacement awning to fit
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 7
D
the frame. Staff encouraged the owner to research the previous awning to determine if it was
constructed from canvas or metal and if it was in existence when the District was designated by
City Council in January 2005. Based on the cost, our high winds, and intense sun, canvas
would not survive for a long period of time. The homeowner is aware of those complications
and plans to have several spare canvases made. She stated it would be a big improvement for
the neighborhood and the replacement awning was allowed via administrative design review.
Museum curator for Heritage Center, Sheppard Air Force Base Museum
Ms. Gagne updated the Commission regarding the status of the SAFE Heritage Center
Museum. The curator will work part-time for the museum and part -time for the Public Affairs
office. The museum is not being relocated and the exhibits will remain here as local aviation
history for our community. The hours of operation may be reduced in the future as a cost
savings measure.
VI. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1:39 p.m.
Christy Gra m, Chairperson
0
Date
LANDMARK COMMISSION June 26, 2012 Page 8