Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 04/25/2007RECEIVED IN M I N U T E S CITY CLERK'S OFFICE LANDMARK COMMISSION Date 6G- /I- April 25, 2007 1 By Time MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Dowdy, Chairperson ■ Members Michael Collins ■ Cindy Cotton ■ Christy Graham ■ Jan Schaaf ■ Pat Sullivan ■ Dianne Thueson ■ Councilor Charles Elmore ■ Council Liaison David A. Clark ■ Staff Karen Montgomery-Gagne ■ ABSENT: Ron Fox ■ Stacie Flood ■ I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Dowdy called the meeting to order at 3:35pm after a quorum of members was obtained. II. REVIEW & APPROVAL OF MARCH MEETING MINUTES Mr. Dowdy called for review and approval of the March 28`h, 2007 meeting minutes. Dr. Collins introduced a motion to approve the minutes as presented and Ms. Thueson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. III. REVIEW RESEARCH & DRAFT WORDING for LANDMARK ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - UNPAINTED MASONRY and MURAL POLICIES Chairperson Dowdy requested staff provide an update with research information. Ms. Gagne referred members to a revised set of information with sample polices for mural placement and unpainted masonry from the National Park Service Preservation Briefs and the following communities: Staunton, VA; Pittsburg, PA; Sanford, NC; RioGrandeCity, TX; Fort Worth, TX; Granbury, TX; Durango, CO; Portland, OR; Plano, TX; and City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Staff provided a reference hand -out outlining all 44 National Park Service's Preservation Briefs with information regarding rehabilitation, maintenance and restoration for historic properties /structures. Ms. Gagne explained the proposed additions for murals and masonry were tentatively included with the text of the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance under Section 62 -99 with 'General criteria for use in designated district or landmark' and addressed issues relating to signs, sidewalks /curbs and parking /loading. Chairperson Dowdy suggested the Commission review each component of the proposed revisions. Staff explained research showed many other cities included murals in their sign ordinance or classified them as a type of sign in their Zoning Ordinances. Commission members discussed whether the draft mural language should also be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission for potential revisions to the City Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Clark commented the sign ordinance was updated within the past 3 -years and those regulations are applicable city -wide whereas the proposed text amendments relate Landmark Commission April 25, 2007 page 1 specifically to historically designated properties. Ms. Thueson commented that it may be simpler to consider murals as an extension of signs rather than wall art. QP Staff highlighted draft language to address murals — definition of a mural; subject matter /theme; materials allowed; and maintenance. Members discussed the proposed requirements and suggested much of the detail should be incorporated as a policy amendment to the City's Design Review Guidelines. Dr. Collins commented, in his opinion, the best way to address murals was to classify them as a sign. Other Commission members agreed with Dr. Collins suggestion and requested the amendment be included as Sec. 62 -99 (1)d. under the 'Sign' criteria. Chairperson Dowdy questioned how the specifics for a mural would be addressed? Dr. Collins noted the Ordinance language leaves some room for creative interpretation and when an artist and /or organization submits the actual mural proposal for Commission design review the detailed requirements would be addressed. Ms. Thueson echoed these comments — the mural language in the Preservation Ordinance is general but the details will be outlined in the Design Review Guidelines. Dr. Collins remarked both current and future Commissions will grapple with the issue of murals. Murals become an issue whenever a submission is presented for consideration because no parameters are currently in place - developing basic guidelines is key. Councilor Elmore commented many people go to historic districts to view older mural signs. He inquired if the Commission would take individual submissions? Commission members responded that they viewed themselves as a review body not the entity seeking potential mural submissions for the Depot Square Historic District. Ms. Christy Graham stated Downtown Wichita Falls Development, Inc. (DWFD,Inc.) would be the entity involved with seeking mural submissions downtown. Ms. Pat Sullivan and Mr. Clark both noted under (b) Subject matter /theme, consideration needs to be given to commercial signs that reflect a connection with the community, for example the Coca -Cola sign on the LaSalle Crossing apartments. The mural sign was original to the building and repainted when the building was restored. Members requested the language 'no commercial product brand names currently available for sale' be removed. After lengthy discussion, Chairperson Dowdy recommended the proposed Ordinance language be more generic and specific details outlined (ie. materials allowed, subject/theme and maintenance) be incorporated in the existing Design Review Guidelines. Members were in agreement the Ordinance amendment must define what is appropriate for placement of murals in historically designated areas. The policies governing the details of murals are better suited in the Design Guidelines. Mr. Clark asked the Commission of try and think of potential items /buildings that may be suitable for murals within the District and acceptable themes, etc. Members discussed probable building locations suitable for future murals and associated concerns. Ms. Thueson commented that an 'event', proposed for a mural, is either considered historic or not and during the Commission's review they won't be making assessments of public art. Staff commented that for the proposed Ordinance amendment for Mural signs, it will state the following: Murals are classified as a type of sign and any proposed mural, if situated in a City designated historic district or an individual landmark, requires a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Landmark Commission prior to placement. The subject matter of the mural shall relate to and is recommended to be compatible with the surrounding streetscape and character of the historic district. The content shall relate to local historical significance or events. Murals become the responsibility of the building /property owner and if a mural is found to be in poor condition, the City Landmark Commission will notify owner in writing who is then required to make the necessary repairs within 90 -days. The second portion of the Ordinance amendment related to unpainted masonry. Councilor Elmore questioned wording in 4(a) regarding inspection of masonry surfaces. Staff responded the periodic building masonry inspection would be conducted by the building owner not a City Landmark Commission April 25, 2007 page 2 inspector. Chairperson Dowdy. commented that in the future he would appreciate staff preparing an Ordinance revision to allow more enforcement for historically designated properties regarding maintenance issues. He and other Commission members recalled that after the 2003 Ordinance revisions, the City's enforcement ability for violations within historic districts was essentially removed. Chairperson Dowdy requested staff revisit the issue of enforcement for historically designated properties for City Council consideration on a future agenda. Dr. Collins suggested this was a good idea but any Ordinance revisions won't fix past problems and questioned if there would be support from current/future Council members for increasing enforcement. Members discussed the masonry text amendments and Mr. Clark asked if the Commission would have any allowance for painting an unpainted building. Ms. Graham referred to the downtown Fort Worth example of Sundance Square and the creation of 3 -D painted murals on the font fagade of building to create a historic character. Mr. Dowdy agreed this situation will arise requesting to paint previously unpainted masonry. He added the Commission will be reviewing each request for murals within the historic district so an allowance may be granted on a case -by- case consideration for painting masonry. Mr. Dowdy and Ms. Thueson suggested the following wording: Any building or designated landmark with previously unpainted masonry must receive a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to any surface coating or treatment prior to commencement of work. Mr. Clark stated Council members will be interested in the opinions of property owners in the West Floral Heights and Depot Square Historic Districts. Ms. Cotton noted there are already some concerned people in West Floral Heights who may be opposed to the restrictive cleaning techniques. She indicated there may be concern voiced from property owners when the text amendment is presented for Council consideration. Chairperson Dowdy reiterated the Ordinance text will be relatively generic and the details will be outlined in the Design Guidelines. Mr. Clark added painting of unpainted brick should be addressed in the Ordinance because that can potentially alter the character of a designated building. Ms. Cotton informed members as the West Floral Heights liaison, Neighborhood Design Committee members try to educate residents through the monthly newsletter so property owners understand the reasoning why Design Guidelines are in place. Ms. Graham suggested the policy guidelines should include some photos illustrating the impact of improper masonry cleaning along with an approved technique, such as cleaning with water. Dr. Collins suggested avoiding specificity in the Ordinance and respond to property owners through education so they understand why masonry policies are in place. Ms. Schaaf suggested when talking to property owners, it's stressed that these policies are "recommendations" not to power wash or use abrasives on brick/masonry surfaces and a lot of discussion has gone into developing these policies not just in Wichita Falls but also at the National Park Service. Ms. Cotton stated that it's critical for her to have as much information as possible because whenever a property owner is considering an alteration she is the first point of contact in the District. Chairperson Dowdy stated the policies in place to preserve and protect buildings but they are not interested in policing historic districts. Dr. Collins added that by protecting the buildings it also improves property values. Chairperson Dowdy requested staff consider the most appropriate placement for these text amendments within the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Staff responded the Preservation Ordinance is comprised of three sections: 1) Purpose & Designated districts /sites; 2) Roles, Responsibilities and Function of the Landmark Commission and 3) Designation /Criteria relating to existing historic structures, new construction and general items for consideration. Ms. Gagn6 suggested it seemed most appropriate to include the text amendments under Article III — Designation, Sec. 62 -99. Mr. Dowdy requested staff prepare the revised text amendments for review at the next Commission meeting. IV. APPLICATION for NATIONAL REGISTER PLAQUE - Holt Hotel Bldg. Ms. Gagne referred members to the paperwork for the plaque request. Staff contacted Mr. Greg Smith, TX Historical Commission, National Register Program Division to discuss the level of detail Landmark Commission April 25, 2007 page 3 necessary to document the location of the Holt Hotel building in the established Depot Square District (National Register listed). The National Development Council, a project partner, agreed to pay for the plaque if the City prepared the paperwork for submittal. Staff anticipates receiving the plaque within the 6 -12 weeks; at that time the City Landmark plaque will also be placed on the building. V. OTHER BUSINESS a) Council Update — Holt Landmark Mr. Clark informed members their recommendation to recognize the Holt as a City Landmark was considered by City Council on April 17th and received unanimous support. The Holt Hotel building was designated as Wichita Falls City Landmark #28. b) Update — Downtown Plan Mr. Clark explained the City received 4 proposals in response to the RFP for planning services (Defense Diversification, Local Update and Downtown Plan). The project selection committee will meet on April 30th to review the proposals and interviews scheduled for the 1St week in May. Ms. Laney, Exec. Director, DWFD, Inc. is on the project selection committee and is eager to begin the Downtown Plan. Staff will prepare resolutions recommending a preferred consultant for City Council consideration at their May 15th meeting. Ms. Sullivan inquired which firms submitted proposals. Staff indicated national and international firms responded to the RFP which was either mailed to specific firms of interest and /or posted on the City's and American Planning Association's websites. Mr. Clark indicated due to the complex nature of the Scope of Services and request for one consulting firm — each proposal involved a `consulting team.' The firms responding to the RFP were: 1) Angelou Economics with Gideon Toal; 2) Economic Research Associates (ERA) and RTKL; 3) Freese and Nichols, Inc, Dunkin, Sefko & Assoc. along with TIP Strategies; and, 4) The HOK Group, Leland Consulting Group, with Kimley -Horn. c) Historic Preservation Documentary — Ms. Gagne highlighted the Preservation video was recognized at the April 17th City Council meeting for receiving two, local Addy Awards. In addition, the City was recently informed the video received two Aurora awards which are judged on a national and international level by people in the film /documentary field. d) West Floral Heights District Update — Mr. Clark commented City Council will be considering pressed brick street repair for 10th & Hayes Street since it is located in a historic district. Ms. Cotton was pleased with Council's decision to repair the streets with the reproduction materials. Councilor Elmore stated this intersection is in poor condition, very rough road surface and by utilizing the stamped concrete it maintains the historic character while providing a very durable road surface that can withstand traffic loads. Ms. Schaaf suggested when the street is being resurfaced the Neighborhood Association coordinate with Ms. McGinnis at Times Record News to develop a public interest story regarding the unique street repair in conjunction with the historically designated neighborhood. e) Next Meetinq — set for Wednesday, May 16, 2007 VI. ADJON The Corgmi ion adjourned the meeting at 4:58 pm. /6^74iA4 /Cl Ax 7 Ken Do dy, Chairperson Dat Landmark Commission April 25, 2007 page 4