Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 01/02/2002Dave Clark ■ City Staff Steve Seese ■ Karen Montgomery-Gagne ■ ABSENT: Lin Purtle, Chairperson ■ Member GUESTS: Shirley Craft, Executive Director, VISIONS I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice - Chairperson Newsom at 3:07 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Vice - Chairperson asked if there were any changes to the November 15th meeting minutes. There being no changes, Ms. Holland introduced a motion to accept the minutes and Ms Koch seconded. Motion passed unanimously. III. DISCUSSION & REVIEW OF GUIDEBOOK ADDITIONS: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne referred members to the proposed amendments for the Instructional Booklet, noting three additional items requested by Commission members at the November meeting. 1) Eligibility for a Historic Rehabilitation Tax Freeze: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that City Council had adopted Landmark's proposed revisions to the existing historic tax freeze ordinance and that the new standards or minimum requirements were incorporated in the nomination process. Ms. Schaaf and Ms. Holland recommended a wording change on page 3, para, 3 "....for a historic tax freeze on the portion eity pe#ien of the property tax for the City of Wichita Falls for the assessed value of the approved renovations /rehabilitations. "to ensure that it only refers to the City tax portion. Landmark Commission January 2, 2002 Page 1 of 4 M I N U T E S RECEIVED III CITY CLERK'S OFFICE LANDMARK COMMISSION Date January 2, 2002 By Time PRESENT: Loraine Blackwood ■ Members Ken Dowdy ■ Andi Holland ■ Doug James ■ Susan Koch ■ Michael Koen ■ Jim Newsom, Vice - Chairperson ■ Jan Schaaf ■ Arthur Bea Williams ■ Council Liaison Dave Clark ■ City Staff Steve Seese ■ Karen Montgomery-Gagne ■ ABSENT: Lin Purtle, Chairperson ■ Member GUESTS: Shirley Craft, Executive Director, VISIONS I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice - Chairperson Newsom at 3:07 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Vice - Chairperson asked if there were any changes to the November 15th meeting minutes. There being no changes, Ms. Holland introduced a motion to accept the minutes and Ms Koch seconded. Motion passed unanimously. III. DISCUSSION & REVIEW OF GUIDEBOOK ADDITIONS: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne referred members to the proposed amendments for the Instructional Booklet, noting three additional items requested by Commission members at the November meeting. 1) Eligibility for a Historic Rehabilitation Tax Freeze: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that City Council had adopted Landmark's proposed revisions to the existing historic tax freeze ordinance and that the new standards or minimum requirements were incorporated in the nomination process. Ms. Schaaf and Ms. Holland recommended a wording change on page 3, para, 3 "....for a historic tax freeze on the portion eity pe#ien of the property tax for the City of Wichita Falls for the assessed value of the approved renovations /rehabilitations. "to ensure that it only refers to the City tax portion. Landmark Commission January 2, 2002 Page 1 of 4 2) Landmark/Historic District Application Submission /filing fees: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne stated that based on the Commission's request at the November meeting planning staff developed a sample fee schedule based on both individual landmark nominations and district applications. Staff noted that to their knowledge, no fees were being charged for landmark status because the office receives significant inquiries but few completed applications. Mr. Koen asked when the last landmark was designated. Planning staff stated the most recent City designated landmark was September 2000 — Cline- Bridwell Mansion. Both Mr. Clark and Mr. Seese commented that the necessity for a fee schedule, in particular, for nominating historic districts comes down to a cost recovery issue. Prior to Commission review and Council designation of potential historic districts, each property owner must be contacted in addition to posting of public notices and advertisements. Mr. Newsom and Ms. Schaaf commented that the fee schedule based on the number of properties proposed for designation appeared reasonable. Mr. Newsom and Ms. Koch added that both the Morningside and Floral Heights Neighborhood Associations require fees for involvement and membership in the Association (ie. Floral Heights - annual fee of $25/ household). Commission members agreed that if the neighborhood is applying for historic status a portion of the association dues should be used toward the application fee. Mr. James introduced a motion to accept the first scenario for historic district nomination fees, which was seconded by Ms. Blackwood. Motion approved unanimously. Historic District Application (Properties /Structures for Inclusion) Processing / Filing Fee Less than 50 properties /structures $50.00 50 —100 properties /structures $100.00 101 or more properties /structures $200.00 Ms Koch believed that there should be a minimal processing fee for individual landmark applications. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne stated that some older reference material noted a $25 fee per landmark application and that based on the district fee schedule a fee of $15.00 per landmark nomination seemed appropriate. Mr. James introduced a motion to accept the landmark nomination fee at $15.00 per application that was seconded by Mr. Koen. Motion approved unanimously. 3) Historic Districts - Neighborhood Preservation Liaison: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne referred members to Section 3 — Procedures, which addresses specific application requirements for nominating historic districts. Commission members had requested that a neighborhood liaison be appointed as a contact to the Landmark Commission regarding activities within a designated historic district. Mr. Newsom recommended that the neighborhood association annually notify the City of the current preservation liaison in order to maintain contact. Ms. Schaaf added that if the liaison changes during the year there should be a provision that the Landmark Commission be notified. Ms. Holland and Ms. Craft agreed that the neighborhood association should be required to notify both the Landmark Commission and City of Wichita Falls of changes to the preservation liaison. Commission members commented that ideally the neighborhood preservation liaison would be appointed by the neighborhood association for a period greater than one year to provide continuity and maintain knowledge of the Design Review Guidelines. Mr. Koen introduced a motion to accept the inclusion to the instructional booklet of a neighborhood preservation liaison as a requirement of designating a historic district and that the neighborhood association notifies the City annually regarding the designated liaison. Mr. Dowdy seconded the motion that passed unanimously. Landmark Commission January 2, 2002 Page 2 of 4 Ms. (Montgomery-Gagne and Commission members proposed draft wording to address the annual notification to City staff of changes in the neighborhood preservation liaison for residential historic districts: The neighborhood association for the designated historic district shall be responsible for annually notifying the City Landmark Commission and Department of Community Development regarding the designated preservation liaison (ie. contact name, address, phone number, etc.) If the preservation liaison appointee changes during the course of the year, the neighborhood association shall notify the City Landmark Commission. IV. REVIEW & APPROVAL OF GUIDEBOOK: Commission members determined that the discussion and approval of the Landmark/Historic District Nomination Instructional Booklet was premature and should be postponed until the January 17t' meeting in order to allow members to review the instructional booklet in it's entirety with the revised sections. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that an updated final version of the booklet would be mailed to all members for review prior to the next meeting. She added that depending on any additional recommendations or amendments by the Landmark Commission, the instructional booklet would be prepared for City Council's endorsement via a resolution. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne noted that at the November meeting, members had requested that Council review and endorse the instructional booklet as it contains numerous requirements that are not included in an existing City Ordinance (ie. requirements for designating a historic district, petition of consent, etc.) V. HISTORIC DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION — Updated Signage Ms. Craft informed the Commission about progress being made with the updates in downtown regarding street signage, street poles, painting, etc. She noted that the VISIONS organization approached the Traffic /Streets Department requesting that the street/light poles in the downtown area be repainted. The poles will probably be painted in a standard forest green (with gold accents) and the street signs will be revised to a bigger format and provide a fresher look to the downtown area — the painting should be complete by the end of January. Mr. Craft stated that they are interested in collaborating with the Landmark Commission and Heritage Society for a coordinated effort between the Historic Depot Square area and the remainder of downtown. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne noted that the Commission members began developing sample sign designs last fall for prepared at the City's Street Dept. (sign division) during the winter months but designs, costs, etc. were not developed early enough to meet the timeframe of January through March. Planning staff provided copies of the sample designs developed by the CAD coordinator as a starting point for additional designs and discussion. Mr. Seese recommended that a Historic District Signage Subcommittee be developed in conjunction with the VISIONS downtown organization to research, review and prepare sample design proposals for the entire Commission's review. The Signage Subcommittee will consist of Ms. Schaaf, Mr. Koen, Ms. Holland and Ms. Craft (Exec. Dir., VISIONS). Mr. Koen commented about the potential for a tri -color design. Ms. Craft commented that the tri -color design would be more distinctive but may necessitate a simple design. Planning staff reiterated that the Traffic and Streets Department has a limited time frame during the winter months to develop the updated signs /poles, etc. so time is crucial in the implementation of the updated signage. VI. OTHER BUSINESS: 1) Southland Addition Application for Historic District Status: Planning staff informed the Commission that on December 15"' the office received a copy of the Southland Addition's application for historic district nomination. The application covers an area from Brook Ave. west to Harrison Street and from 11th Street south to Kell Boulevard with approximately 623 properties. Councilor Williams asked if the application was submitted as entire area or in phases. Ms. Montgomery-Gagn6 stated that the application was submitted for the entire portion of west Southland and it was not separated into phases or Landmark Commission January 2, 2002 Page 3 of 4 subcomponents for review. Ms. Schaaf asked if the application, as submitted, would meet the requirements of a seventy (70 %) commitment from property owners? Commission members indicated a concern with obtaining the 70% commitment necessary to review the application. Staff referenced Section 3 — Procedures from the instructional booklet, noting that district applications would be reviewed in phases as approved by the Commission. However, as the application was submitted for the entire area, it would require 70% of the total property owners being in favor of the application process to proceed. Mr. Clark indicated that at this time the office did not have a petition submitted with the application outlining property owner commitment for a historic designation. Mr. James commented that it appeared the application should be divided into phases or smaller areas before the Commission could begin any review /analysis. He added that based on past experiences with the expansion of the Depot Square Historic District if smaller areas or subcomponents were selected it may resulted in greater commitment and interest from property owners. Commission members deferred further discussion of the Southland Addition application for historic designation until the January 17`h meeting. Councilor Williams and planning staff indicated that they would discuss the Southland application with Ms. Murer. 2) City Council Endorsement of Amended Historic Tax Freeze Ord.: Ms. Montgomery-Gagne informed members that City Council endorsed their proposed revisions to the historic tax freeze ordinance on December 4`" 3) TX Historical Commission — Landmark Training (Jan 24 -25 — Austin): Staff reiterated that due to budget constraints and City policy there were no funds available for sending Commission members but it was anticipated that a planning member would attend the training and if any members were interested in attending, they may share a ride with City staff. The training seminar will be held at the Radisson, downtown Austin with workshops/seminars all day Thursday and through Friday at noon. The cost of the registration is $74 for non -CLG members and staff would fax/email additional information to interested members by January 3`d. Mr. Newsom encouraged Commission members to attend noting his experience in the past with a TX Historical Commission training seminar was an excellent learning opportunity. 4) Educational Training Tour — Landmark Commission Members: Mr. Newsom recommended that both Ms. Koch and Ms. Purtle be invited to participate in the educational tour because of their knowledge of the historic structures in the community and as recent Commission members. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne and Mr. Clark indicated that the educational tour would involve a bus ride through key areas of the City along with providing accompanying information (ie. Depot Historic District, potential downtown landmark sites, Austin Elementary, Southland Addition bungalow area, City housing rehabilitation project — Giddings /Ave. F, Floral Heights and Morningside, etc.) It is anticipated that this tour will be scheduled for early February after the TX Historical Commission's training seminar in Austin. VI1. ADJOURN Mr. James introduced a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Koen to adjourn the meeting at 4:20 p.m. The next regular meeting was scheduled for January 17th at Memorial Auditorium for 3:00 p.m. 1---1 Jim New,sofrt, Vice - Chairperson Date Landmark Commission January 2, 2002 Page 4 of 4