Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 08/28/2002MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION August 28, 2002 CITY CLER/�K'S OFFICE � Date ii q , 1 o — [) a Time By PRESENT: Jan Schaaf, Chairperson ■ Members Ken Dowdy, Vice - Chairperson ■ Ken Birck ■ Loraine Blackwood ■ Michael Collins ■ Douglas James ■ Mike Koen ■ Jim Newsom ■ Dave Clark, Director, Community Development ■ City Staff Steve Seese, Planning Administrator ■ Karen Montgomery-Gagne ■ GUESTS: Carolyn Looney, Floral Heights Neighborhood Assoc., Liaison ■ Shirley Craft, Exec. Director VISIONS, Inc. ■ Rowena Jackson, VISIONS Board member ■ Gail Natale, VISIONS Board member ■ ABSENT: Dianne Thueson ■ Arthur Bea Williams ■ Council Liaison I. CALL TO ORDER The Vice - Chairperson, Mr. Dowdy called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF JULY MINUTES Mr. Koen introduced a motion to accept the July 17th meeting minutes as presented and Mr. Newsom seconded. Minutes approved unanimously as presented. Ill. INTRODUCTION & SWEARING -IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER(S) Mr. Dowdy indicated that this item would be addressed at the next Commission meeting. VI. REVIEW, DISCUSSION & APPROVAL OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE INSTRUCTIONAL BOOKLET FOR NOMINATING LANDMARKS & HISTORIC DISTRICTS Mr. Dowdy asked Commission members for comments regarding the proposed revisions to the Instructional Booklet. Planning staff highlighted the major items proposed for alteration in order to obtain feedback from Commission members. Key areas for revision were sections of the Booklet that addressed the submittal of District applications. Mr. Dowdy suggested that the wording be revised on page 4 to require the Commission's pre - approval for any district petition /consent form (other than the form on page 32/33) prior to submittal. Commission members were in agreement on the necessity for pre - approval along with an application fee in line with the costs associated with processing the nomination. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that at the July 17th meeting Mr. Dowdy requested staff revise Section 3 — Procedures (Historic Districts) to clarify requirements for district nominations. She noted the historic district nomination requirements were simplified into four key stages prior to the Neighborhood Association submitting the application. The four main stages at the Neighborhood Association level include: 1) Property Owner Notification; 2) Property Owner Petition /Consent; 3) Appointment of a Neighborhood Preservation Liaison; and 4) Development of a District Design DRAFT Landmark Commission August 28, 2002 Page 1 of 3 Standards Committee. Planning staff and Commission members discussed the revised wording and recommended minor clarifications to wording and process. All Commission members were in favor of the step -by -step explanation process for district nomination requirements since it clearly outlines the City's expectations for a complete application and it provides neighborhood associations direction. Commission members asked Ms. Looney, the liaison from the Floral Heights Neighborhood Association about their proposed application. She indicated that the Floral Heights Association began working on the nomination process last September with an area from 10th Street south to Avenue H and from Hayes Street east to Buchanan, consisting of approximately 192 lots. Ms Looney indicated that the Association has worked with the Planning staff over the past year and are aware of on -going revisions and updates to the Instructional Booklet. Ms. Schaaf and Mr. Collins inquired about association membership and if it were representative of the area? Ms Looney responded that currently Floral Heights has 67 families as members in the association and there is already strong interest in designation throughout most of the area proposed for nomination. She informed the Commission that the Association is aware of the minimum 2/3 (66 %) commitment necessary from property owners and that should not be an issue with their application. All Commission members were in favor of the revised wording on page 27, which states the following requirements: "An approved consent form or petition which contains a minimum of 213 (6691o) signature consent by the property owners in the area of designation, along with the required filing fee must be submitted prior to consideration by the City Landmark Commission as a complete application." Mr. Collins recommended an alteration to page 36, regarding photograph submissions — "(7) Digital photographs may be included to supplement the traditional photograph requirements. " Mr. Dowdy introduced a motion to accept the proposed wording changes and new amendments to the instructional guidebook - Instructions For Completing Wichita Falls Landmark & Historic District Nomination Forms and it be prepared for consideration by City Council. Mr. Birck seconded the motion. Motion unanimously approved as presented. Planning staff indicated that this item would tentatively be scheduled for City Council's October 1St meeting. V. DISCUSSION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS MAINTENANCE FOR BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DEPOT SQUARE HISTORIC DISTRICT Planning staff indicated that they received a request from VISIONS to discuss maintenance issues within the downtown Depot Square Historic District. Staff explained to members, the City's limitation with the current Design Review Guidelines that they address proposed alterations /rehabilitation but not routine maintenance. Ms Craft noted that this issue was thoroughly discussed with VISIONS Board members who also own property within the downtown historic district— Rowena Jackson, Gail Natale and Jim Newsom. Mr. Newsom noted the idea of requiring general building maintenance is important for the downtown, however, the property owners would have to be involved in the development of the standards similar to the design review guidelines. Ms Craft highlighted numerous issues (ie. security of structures, derelict buildings, crumbling foundations, absentee and multiple land owners) that have complicated the process of trying to improve the maintenance of buildings within the downtown. Ms Craft requested assistance from the City planning staff and the Landmark Commission in order to help rectify or solve these problems. Mr. Collins recommended two research avenues: a) looking at how other cities within the State or region are addressing the issue of derelict downtown buildings; and b) necessity of obtaining broad base support from the Depot Square property owners prior to implementing maintenance guidelines. Mr. Seese commented that if maintenance requirements were developed for the Depot Square Historic District, they may be retroactive with a time limitation for coming into compliance. Ms Craft stated that the VISIONS Board envisions very simple, stream lined maintenance guidelines that would be self - policing. She noted this is a side project for downtown enhancement but the project needs to be viewed by downtown property owners as an incentive. Mr. Dowdy suggested the creation of a neighborhood association for the Depot Square Historic District and to obtain the minimum 2/3 or 66% of property owners to agree to develop maintenance standards. Ms Craft stated that from discussions with property owners obtaining a 2/3 majority of the Depot Square owners would be attainable. DRAFT Landmark Commission August 28, 2002 Page 2 of 3 Ms Montgomery-Gagne noted that planning staff conducts an annual mailing to all Depot Square and individual City Landmark property owners to remind and inform them that they are recognized as a historic resource and that design standards apply to all major exterior renovations. She added that the annual mailing would be an opportunity to invite Depot Square property owners to a meeting to discuss the creation of an association. Ms Craft invited all Landmark Commission members to VISIONS Annual Reception at the Depot Building on September 12th from 5:30— 7:30 pm, adding that this will be an opportunity to invite Depot property owners to an 'Enhancement Meeting' to discuss maintenance standards, etc. Ms Craft indicated that she envisioned a coordinated effort between VISIONS, City Planning and the Landmark Commission to follow -up with an Enhancement meeting sometime following September 12th. Ms Craft also informed the Commission that with the number of downtown apartment/loft dwellers steadily increasing there is discussion about forming a downtown residential association. Ms Schaaf inquired about the opportunity or ability to sell properties that are delinquent in property taxes. Mr. Clark stated that the City determines whether they will choose to foreclose on a property in order to obtain back taxes. The City would prefer to develop creative avenues to address the situation of delinquent properties /taxes rather than having additional properties maintained by the City and off the tax rolls. VI. OTHER BUSINESS: a) Update — Southland Applications & Materials for Association Ms Montgomery-Gagne referred Commission members to their packets with a follow -up letter (July 22") to Southland Neighborhood Assoc. President, a revised Reply Form that included a "No Opinion" category, to be interpreted as being in favor of historic designation and that all non - responses are affirmative responses. Ms Schaaf outlined some issues regarding recent telephone conversations with Ms Murer who formerly resided in Southland. The Commission members and planning staff discussed concerns with conversations regarding pending applications and the reasoning for forwarding the application back to the Neighborhood Assoc. for additional information. It was determined that if people involved with an on -going application contact individual Landmark members rather than addressing the entire Commission, members should indicate that they can no longer discuss the issue without the benefit of the entire Commission. Mr. Collins recommended encouraging people to forward a letter or fax outlining issues on a particular application, etc. for the benefit of the entire Commission rather than having individual members singled out for an opinion. b) CLG Subcommittee Meeting Date — early November The three CLG Subcommittee members (Mr. Dowdy, Ms Blackwood and Mr. James) determined that they would meet with City staff in early November to discuss historic preservation projects suitable for a CLG funding application. Mr. Newsom commented recording the oral history of the Wichita Falls area may be a useful application of CLG grant funds so the detailed history of people, events and sites are not lost. c) Other: Copies of The Medallion — Planning staff indicated that The Medallion is a publication of the TX Historical Commission and contains useful preservation information. Mr. James and Mr. Newsom indicated that they currently receive copies of The Medallion and do not require additional copies. Ms. Schaaf commented about the feature of a successful CLG project implemented by Round Rock as an example for the Landmark Commission's CLG Subcommittee. VII. ADJOURN Meeting was officially adjourned at 5:00 p.m. Jan Schaaf, Chairperson Date DRAFT Landmark Commission August 28, 2002 Page 3 of 3