Landmark Commission Minutes - 04/17/2002MINUTES
LANDMARK COMMISSION
April 17, 2002
PRESENT:
ff
m
Andi Holland, Chairperson
■ Members
Jan Schaaf, Vice - Chairperson
■
Ken Birck
■
Loraine Blackwood
■
Michael Collins
■
Ken Dowdy
•
Doug James
■
Jim Newsom
■
Karen Montgomery -Gagne ■ City Staff
GUESTS:
Shirley Craft, Executive Director, VISIONS
Greg Washburn, Jennings Family Medicine (1411 9th Street)
Bob Mayfair, B & C Printing, Inc.
Keith Sands, Keith Sands, Signs, Doors & Wood Art
ABSENT:
Michael Koen ■
Arthur Bea Williams ■ Council Liaison
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Chairperson, Ms. Holland called the meeting to order at 2:04 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairperson asked if there were any changes to the March 28th meeting minutes. There being no
changes, Mr. Birck introduced a motion to accept the minutes and Ms. Schaaf seconded. Motion passed
unanimously — no discussion.
III. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION — Dr. Fanous' Office — 1411 9th Street
The Chairperson introduced the application and asked if the applicant would explain their proposal for
1411 9th Street. Dr. Washburn informed the Commission that he and his wife (Dr. Jennings) purchased
the building in February 2000. He noted that the building contains approximately 13 single -pane
windows proposed for replacement now that they are financially at a point to improve the existing
building. Dr. Washburn stated that he proposed to replace the windows with Anderson Wood Windows,
which are double hung /double pane style. In addition to replacing the existing windows, Dr. Washburn
indicated that they wanted to repaint the exterior of the building in the same neutral tan color. Ms.
Blackwood asked the applicant about the front and side windows with metal inserts. Dr. Washburn
replied that the inner windows with the metal dividers would remain the same on the building but with
energy efficient windows added to the exterior. Mr. James asked about the current use of the building.
Dr. Washburn stated that the building is still functioning as a medical center for the Jennings Medical
Practice, which specializes in family medicine. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne referred members to their
application, which included photos from the initial landmark designation file in 1985. The research
information noted that Dr. Singleton built the building as one of the first medical offices in Wichita Falls in
1941 and that it had remained as a medical office since that time.
Landmark Commission April 17, 2002 Page 1 of 4
ff
m
LU
U
t=
+i
U_
U
�
I
Y
W
W U
�"
U
W_
or U
o m
The Chairperson asked if there were any changes to the March 28th meeting minutes. There being no
changes, Mr. Birck introduced a motion to accept the minutes and Ms. Schaaf seconded. Motion passed
unanimously — no discussion.
III. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION — Dr. Fanous' Office — 1411 9th Street
The Chairperson introduced the application and asked if the applicant would explain their proposal for
1411 9th Street. Dr. Washburn informed the Commission that he and his wife (Dr. Jennings) purchased
the building in February 2000. He noted that the building contains approximately 13 single -pane
windows proposed for replacement now that they are financially at a point to improve the existing
building. Dr. Washburn stated that he proposed to replace the windows with Anderson Wood Windows,
which are double hung /double pane style. In addition to replacing the existing windows, Dr. Washburn
indicated that they wanted to repaint the exterior of the building in the same neutral tan color. Ms.
Blackwood asked the applicant about the front and side windows with metal inserts. Dr. Washburn
replied that the inner windows with the metal dividers would remain the same on the building but with
energy efficient windows added to the exterior. Mr. James asked about the current use of the building.
Dr. Washburn stated that the building is still functioning as a medical center for the Jennings Medical
Practice, which specializes in family medicine. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne referred members to their
application, which included photos from the initial landmark designation file in 1985. The research
information noted that Dr. Singleton built the building as one of the first medical offices in Wichita Falls in
1941 and that it had remained as a medical office since that time.
Landmark Commission April 17, 2002 Page 1 of 4
Mr. Newsom introduced a motion to approve the proposed window replacement with Anderson Wood
Window double hung /double pane windows and repainting the structure in the same neutral tan color.
Mr. Collins seconded the motion. Motion approved unanimously.
Dr. Washburn indicated that he had some questions regarding owning a property with a Landmark
designation. Both the Chairperson and planning staff addressed Dr. Washburn's questions, noting that
the medical office is still referenced as 'Dr. Fanous Office' because that was the name at point of
designation (1985) by the City Council. In addition, the City developed Design Review Guidelines in
order to help maintain and preserve designation historic resources such as 1411 9th Street. Any
proposed exterior modifications, other than routine maintenance /upkeep, require review and discussion
from the Landmark Commission in an effort to avoid destruction of key architectural features.
IV. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION — B & C Printing, Inc. — 600 Ohio Street
The Chairperson introduced the application and requested Mr. Mayfield and Mr. Sands discuss the
signage proposal. Mr. Sands, a regional specialized sign maker provided members with a brochure of
sample wooden, hand carved signs. He noted that the proposed sign for B & C Printing Inc., will be a
carved wooden sign with raised lettering. Mr. Mayfield stated that he envisioned replacing the existing
metal sign with a wooden design however the existing metal sign is welded to the awning. In lieu of
removing the metal sign, the wooden sign will be mounted to the existing sign. Mr. Mayfield asked
members for appropriate color schemes for the sign considering the building exterior is not the original
color. Ms. Holland encouraged Mr. Mayfield to look within the District to see the color schemes on other
buildings /signs. Mr. Mayfield discussed the potential in the future for repainting the entire building to a
lighter more neutral ivory/sand color but at this time wanted to keep the sign relatively neutral. Mr.
Newsom noted that if the building will be repainted in the future it would require review from the
Commission. Both representatives indicated that they are probably going to paint the sign a dark wood
color and the outer border and letters will be raised and painted in a tan color.
Mr. Collins introduced a motion to approve the proposed signage request for a wooden, hand - carved 3 -D
sign with brown background and tan /ivory raised lettering. Ms. Blackwood seconded the motion. Mr.
Birck asked the applicant about the historic color of the building, pointing out that it may be difficult to
determine the historic color. Mr. Mayfield indicated that the building and signage would be painted in
neutral earth tones. Motion was unanimously approved.
Mr. Mayfield addressed the Commission indicating that he moved his printing business from Broad Street
to the historic downtown and is glad to be downtown. He's also received positive feedback from
customers regarding the new downtown location and it's accessibility. He noted that Wexler Investments
(Bob Castleman) owns the building and he is aware of historic district requirements, encourages building
upkeep and included a statement within the lease stipulating that alterations and changes must be
reviewed and approved by the City Landmark Commission.
Mr. Newsom asked the applicant if the upper fagade windows would be uncovered similar to other
renovated buildings along Ohio Street. Mr. Mayfield stated the building was originally a candy factory
then sold and developed as Pond's laundry. At some point when the building was utilized as a
Laundromat, the ceiling was dropped and the windows were boarded up, he noted that probably the
original glass and window hardware are still intact.
V. DESIGN REVIEW FOLLOW -UP — OLD CAFE — 612 7th Street
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne provided some background information regarding the request for additional
signage review in order to increase the restaurant's visibility. The applicant did not attend the meeting to
discuss their proposal. Mr. Newsom empathized with the applicants regarding difficult starting a new
business but the fagade needs to be opened so pedestrians can view activity. Mr. Collins and other
Landmark Commission April 17, 2002 Page 2 of 4
members agreed, the applicant needs to invest some time and money into researching ways to develop
the business site.
Mr. Mayfield asked if he could comment on the application. The Chairperson encouraged his comments.
Mr. Mayfield stated that he didn't know the restaurant was open even with the new awning banners. He
added that as a downtown business owner, he probably would have eaten at the restaurant that day if he
thought it was open. The exterior of the building still looks like a nightclub and doesn't draw people into
the business. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that planning staff outlined some ideas to assist the
applicant in gaining visibility, such as opening the front fagade with windows, etc. In conversations with
the applicant, they are investigating the potential for purchasing the vacant lot next door to develop a
patio area.
Mr. James introduced a motion to not approve the two polyurethane 'Now Open' awning signs and they
must be removed within 60 days of the determination (June 17, 2002). Mr. Newsom seconded the
motion. Commission members also recommended that planning staff discuss possible alternatives with
the restaurant owners. Motion approved unanimously.
VI. DISCUSSION of UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING for SOUTHLAND NEIGHBORHOOD
APPLICATION for HISTORIC DISTRICT NOMINATION
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne provided an update regarding the Southland application from their March
meeting. She referred members to the neon green flyer in the packets and indicated that flyers were
mailed to all property owners within the Southland application area in order to ensure increased
awareness of the public hearing for April 25th at 7pm in the MPEC. The public hearing /information
session will also be advertised in the Times Record Newspaper and staff is anticipating a feature article
leading up to the date of the hearing. Planning staff informed members that the Neighborhood
Association president indicated that he had made a mistake in February, and that the western properties
fronting Harrison Street should also be included with the application. An additional 47 properties were
researched for ownership and forwarded flyers. As of April 8th the office had received 129 responses in
favor and 66 opposed for a total response rate of 30 percent. Members and staff discussed the mapped
responses and areas that appeared to show strong interest in designation.
Ms. Montgomery -Gagne highlighted the general outline for the public hearing, noting that there will be a
strong emphasis on providing information to dispel any misconceptions about historic district designation.
Both preservation consultants are available to assist with the hearing and graciously volunteered to
participate for minimal charge of mileage costs. A working deli lunch /preparation meeting will be held at
prior to the public hearing at 5:30 — 6:30 pm in the Council Conference Room and staff would request all
Landmark Commission members attend. The meeting will provide an opportunity discuss proposed
outline /agenda for the public hearing, meet the consultants and ask staff key questions regarding
process.
Mr. Newsom recommended sending Floral Heights Neighborhood Association a flyer regarding
Southland's public hearing in order to keep them up -to -date on the application progress. Planning staff
noted that a flyer would be mailed to Ms. Carolyn Looney for distribution to the neighborhood residents.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS:
City Council Review — Historic Preservation Ordinance Amendment — Landmark Composition,
Quorum and Voting — April 16'h meeting
The Chairperson introduced this item and requested staff to address. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated
that the agenda item was removed from the City Council agenda. Planning staff added that some
concerns were raised regarding the appointment of a downtown non - profit agency representative when
the Preservation Alliance has no representation on the Commission. She added that additional
information regarding this item would be available for discussion at the April 25th meeting. Commission
Landmark Commission April 17, 2002 Page 3 of 4
members were concerned regarding the delay in review by City Council. Mr. Newsom commented that
the Commission should already have a representative from the downtown historic district. He
recommended that the original worded developed at the March meeting be revised to request a
'representative' from downtown be on the Commission instead of referencing the VISIONS group. Ms.
Holland agreed that the general wording should remain but alter the section of 62 -36(b) which states
"...shall either own property or reside within the district" and denote `representative.' Commission
members requested that staff communicate to Council the importance of having representation from the
downtown historic district.
Mr. Dowdy introduced a motion to forward the proposed ordinance amendments to City Council for
approval. Mr. Newsom seconded the motion. Mr. James asked for a point of clarification. Ms. Holland
and Ms. Montgomery-Gagne outlined the proposed changes for members: Open membership number -
Sec. 62 -36 (a) will remain unchanged from the proposal in March; Downtown representation — Sec. 62-
36(b) will be amended to state "....one member shall be a representative from the Downtown Depot
Square Historic District... "; Quorum — Sec.62 -38 will remain as proposed at the March meeting.
Ms. Craft requested clarification regarding the proposed wording of the ordinance amendment. The
Chairperson indicated it would be amended from the Executive Director of VISIONS to a representative
from the downtown historic district. Motion was approved unanimously.
VIII. TOUR Of The SOUTHLAND NEIGHBORHOOD — APPLICATION AREA For HISTORIC
DISTRICT DESIGNATION
The Chairperson requested to discuss two items prior to leaving on the tour of the Southland application
area. Ms. Holland asked how much time should be allocated on the Commission tour to the historic
overview by the neighborhood association representatives. Planning staff indicated that is was important
for members to have sufficient time to review and discuss the application among themselves as an entire
Commission. Members determined that 30 minutes was adequate time to present key historical and
architectural information regarding the application area. Mr. Birck indicated concerns that it appeared the
Commission was at odds with the neighborhood association's intent on designating Southland. The
Chairperson and other members indicated that the Commission is not at odds with the neighborhood and
would like to see the area as a historic district. However, it is important the process of review move
forward and that the neighborhood association does not tell the Commission or city staff how the
application process should unfold. Mr. Collins recommended that if the neighborhood representatives
had a lengthy presentation, it should be submitted in written text to summarize key points or ideas for the
Commission members and then members could tour the area individually with the written synopsis.
Ms. Dawn Murer and Mr. Edgar Shockley provided a guided history tour for Commission members
through the Southland application area, beginning at Huff and Brook Street and proceeding westward to
Harrison east along 11th Street and then winding through the proposed area until McGregor Street.
IX. ADJOURN
Meeting was officially adjourned at 4:45 p.m. after the tour of Southland. The Commission members will
meet on Thursday, April 25th at 5:30 pm to discuss the public hearing items, then go into the public
hearing at 7:00 p.m. The next regular meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, May 15th at the Memorial
Auditorium for 3:00 p.m.
Andi Holland, Chairperson
Date
Landmark Commission April 17, 2002 Page 4 of 4