Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 01/21/2008L MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Dowdy, Chairperson Cindy Cotton Stacie Flood Ron Fox Christy Graham Jim Newsom Marilyn Carper Steve Wood Karen Montgomery-Gagne MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION January 21, 2008 CITY CLERK'S OFFICES Date By Time 10,0 Michael Archie, Applicant 1401 Buchanan Brian Byrd Chagnon, Contractor (Golden Eagle Construction) ABSENT: Pat Sullivan Dianne Thueson 4P ® Councilor Charles Elmore ■ Members ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Staff ■ ■ ■ Council Liaison I. CALL TO ORDER, INTRODUCTIONS & SWEARING IN NEW MEMBERS Chairperson Dowdy called the special Commission meeting to order at 3:35pm, after a quorum of members was obtained. II. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON & VICE CHAIRPERSON 2008 Chairperson Dowdy requested nominations to consider a chairperson and vice - chairperson for 2008. Mr. Dowdy opened nominations by nominating Ms. Dianne Thueson for chairperson. Mr. Newsom was in agreement and requested Ms. Thueson be nominated by acclamation. Commission members were all in agreement and Ms. Graham noted Ms. Thueson would be an ideal Chairperson with her experience in the preservation field and time served on the Commission. Mr. Dowdy closed nominations for chairperson. In Ms. Thueson's absence, Mr. Dowdy continued to fulfill the role of Chairperson for the January Commission meeting. III. REVIEW & APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 2007 MEETING MINUTES Mr. Dowdy called for review and approval of the September 20'h, 2007 meeting minutes. Ms. Flood introduced a motion to approve the minutes as presented and Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page 1 IV. REVIEW & APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 2007 MEETING MINUTES Ask Mr. Dowdy called for review and approval of the October 11th, 2007 meeting minutes. Ms. Graham introduced a motion to approve the minutes as presented and Mr. Fox seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Carper inquired if work had begun at 1409 Garfield. Ms. Cotton responded that no work has been done to the house exterior and the neighborhood is concerned the owner will not move forward with either painting or adding siding. V. APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW REGARDING SIDING — 1401 BUCHANAN Chairperson Dowdy requested staff update the Commission regarding 1401 Buchanan. Planning staff provided additional information and photos of the house at 1401 Buchanan that were not included with the meeting packets. Ms. Gagne explained the house was currently covered with asbestos shingle siding and constructed in 1923. The applicant requested to cover the house with vinyl siding because of health concerns associated with asbestos on the exterior. Initially the contractors applied for a roofing and siding permit — staff reviewed the roofing request and granted an administrative review based on the work being replacement and ordinary repair. However, the contractors were informed no permit could be issued to install vinyl siding until it was authorized via Design Review by the Landmark Commission. Staff noted when the City contacted the applicant (Mr. Archie); the contractors already required a down payment of $4,000 for the vinyl siding project without mentioning any information to Mr. Archie that the project was dependent on obtaining authorization from the Landmark Commission before a building permit could even be issued. Mr. Archie indicated his concern about being refunded by the contracting company considering he had changed his mind and would be keeping the asbestos siding. Mr. Dowdy requested the applicant clarify his intentions and Mr. Archie indicated he was removing his request for vinyl siding. Mr. Dowdy called for design suggestions from the Commission members. Mr. Fox commented if renovation work was being completed, the front columns were x too small and spindly to be original to the house and should be replaced with wider columns to match the original porch design and wooden scroll work. Ms. Carper inquired if the porch was ever enclosed? Mr. Archie replied the porch was not enclosed but a picture window (plate glass) was previously installed in the front facade. Mr. Newsom reiterated the Commission does not review color schemes but noted 1401 Buchanan would be a good candidate for a tri -color paint scheme with the detailed trim along the gable and eaves. He suggested the applicant review 2905 9th Street as a good example of recently completed tri -color paint scheme on a similar styled house. Ms. Cotton commented the asbestos shingle paint very well and Mr. Newsom outlined replacement shingles can still be purchased at Shamburger Building Company. Ms. Cotton said it appeared Golden Eagle Construction did a good job with the replacement roof. Commission members were concerned with the up -front charges by the contracting company for vinyl siding and discussed the situation with Mr. Archie. Commission members recommended the applicant (Mr. Archie) paint the trim and house. Mr. Archie thanked the Commission for their suggestions and direction. Mr. Chagnon, contracting company representative did not comment. Commission members and staff discussed issues relating to the design review application. Concerns were raised about the lack of information received by new /prospective property owners in the West Floral Heights Historic District that is not being provided by realtors or at closing by the title companies. Mr. Dowdy suggested when property ownership changes it would be ideal if a handout or information could be given outlining the design review process, when it's required and what doesn't need prior approval. Mr. Newsom commented there should be a notification and the title company's show at the point of sale the property is situated within a designated historic district or is an individual landmark. He indicated he'd contact some of the title companies to discuss the issue. Staff explained they were in the process of preparing a mailing to the West Floral Heights Historic District and a similar letter could also be developed and mailing to the title Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page companies in Wichita Falls. Ms. Cotton outlined the Neighborhood Association includes information in the monthly newsletters and in welcome packets distributed to new residents explaining any exterior alterations, other than maintenance, require approval via design review. is She indicated the information is getting to people but they don't necessarily read it and understand the impact. Ms. Cotton believed it's critical to get the basic information in the hands of realtors because people are purchasing homes the historic district without any knowledge of its designation. Ms. Gagne stated this would be addressed in more detail under Agenda item VII. VI. KELL HOUSE MUSEUM — FENCE REPLACEMENT Mr. Dowdy requested staff provide an overview. Ms. Gagne referred members to their meeting packet photos which illustrate the rear, perimeter fence deterioration along with earlier photos of the Kell House grounds /fencing circa early 1900's and 1940's. Ms. Flood, Kell House Museum curator, provided additional explanation regarding the need to replace the fence because of security issues associated within entering the alley to put trash in the dumpster and staff is unable to see activity on the alley side of the fence. The existing fence was constructed in the 1980's. The proposed fence will be situated in the same location but will be anchored to a concrete footer to prevent rot and have a lattice style gate to allow visibility when entering the alley. Ms. Flood noted the fence will be 6ft in height and be painted white. Mr. Fox questioned if the 1940's photo had a lattice fence. Ms. Flood responded the lattice photo was an example of what the Kell House staff would prefer as a replacement gate but the 1940's also appears to have a lattice or woven fence. Commission members questioned if the steel fence posts were on the alley or yard side of the fence? Ms. Flood stated the existing fence posts are on the inside and they plan to keep the new fence that way so it maintains a clean look to the public along the alley. Mr. Newsom commented about the use of vinyl fencing and cost considerations. Ms. Carper commented the vinyl material tends to shatter in cold weather. Ms. Flood commented the price quote was based on wood slats and then having it pieced together. The project, if approved, will be bid to obtain the best price. Ms. Cotton inquired if the lattice fence would be replaced with the same style and Ms. Flood responded the fence would be a solid wooden privacy fence with a lattice gate. Commission members questioned the details of the fence base & top. Ms. Flood noted the base will be concrete and a top rail installed to extend the life of the fence. Mr. Fox commented that it was bothersome having galvanized fence posts visible on a historic property and asked other Commission members if they knew of an alternate method to conceal the posts. Members discussed various options of having the fence posts exposed vs. facing the public right - of -way. Mr. Wood questioned how the 91h Street fence was designed and if the posts were on the exterior. Ms. Flood stated she had concerns with the added cost of having to mask the metal posts. Mr. Fox stated the posts definitely had to be galvanized not wooden. Ms. Carper inquired if the fence posts were visible when looking out from the Museum windows into the courtyard? Ms. Flood noted the existing fence had wooden fence posts on the inside but shrubbery and landscaping hides much of the fence. Both Mr. Fox and Mr. Wood stated from an architectural and aesthetic perspective the fence posts on the 9th Street segment should be on the outside. Ms. Flood noted there is landscaping on both sides of the 9th Street fence. Commission members debated the location of the fence posts and concern with extra cost to conceal posts placed on the exterior of the fence. Mr. Dowdy questioned the length of fence along 9th Street — Ms. Flood stated perhaps 50ft from the driveway to the alley. After significant discussion, Mr. Fox introduced a motion to approve the perimeter fence replacement as outlined in the application with the proviso that the steel posts on the alley fence segment be on the alley side of the fence and the posts on the 91h Street section be located on the property side of the fence. There was discussion among Commission members whether the shrubs would hide the posts. Ms. Flood indicated the shrubs were approximately 4 -5ft in height and would hide the majority of the fence. The original motion was amended by Mr. Newsom to include the provision that additional fence boards shall be installed to cover the galvanized steel Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page 3 posts on the interior portion of the 9'h Street fence segment. The motion was seconded and all members except for Ms. Flood voted in favor. Ms. Flood abstained from voting due to a conflict of interest as museum curator. VII. ANNUAL MAILING —WEST FLORAL HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT Planning staff referred Commission members to the draft letter included with the meeting packets for their review & discussion. Ms. Gagne explained the West Floral Heights Historic District was designated 3 -years ago by City Council and since that time there have been numerous situations /requests for design review where property owners appeared completely unaware of the basic restrictions for altering the exterior of their homes /out buildings. In conjunction, there are many new property owners in the neighborhood that were not living there at the time of designation. The letter will be mailed to all designated property owners within the District and provide a basic overview of the design review process. Planning staff commented at district designation there were 16 property owners that followed the process for exemption but two of those properties (1403 Hayes and 1510 Grant) have subsequently transferred ownership and revert to being in the Historic District. Ms. Graham asked if those two property owners know they are within the District. Mr. Newsom stated the realtors should have informed them prior to closing for full disclosure based on the requirements outlined by the Area Board of Realtors Association. Mr. Dowdy questioned if the neighborhood Commission liaison is listed there should also be a contact phone noted in the letter. Commission members were in agreement and Ms. Carper indicated her name /phone number could be added in the letter as a secondary contact person. Commission members began discussing wording changes for the third paragraph. Mr. Fox stated the letter should explain the process for design review, ordinance requirements and when the liaison should be contacted. Ms. Graham commented the first process involves contacting the neighborhood liaison and then secondly filling out the design review application. After discussion, Mr. Fox recommended the letter include wording that it's highly recommended to first contact the West Floral Heights Historic District liaison for guidance in completing the design review application. All Commission members were in support of Mr. Fox's recommendation. Ms. Cotton, District liaison commented that in many cases issues arise at the building permit stage when a contractor is trying to pull a permit and the property owner for whatever reason are not familiar or not aware that a design review is required. Recommendations came forward from Commission that a design review training should be provided to the Board of Realtors to explain what is required for homes situated in designated historic districts so prospective buyers know they are purchasing in a unique district. Mr. Newsom stated the MLS data sheets that are filled in at time of property closing has numerous check -off categories and "Property is situated within a City Designated Historic District" (yes or no) could be added to the form. Mr. Newsom stated he'd suggest this at the next Board of Realtors committee meeting. Mr. Fox stated this project needed to move forward and Commission members agreed. Ms. Gagne indicated the draft letter would be revised to reflect the Commission's revisions and emailed for final review and clarification prior to mailing. A letter will also be drafted for each of the Title companies in Wichita Falls. VIII. OTHER BUSINESS a Annual CLG Report — TX Historical Commission Planning staff provided copies of the 2007 Certified Local Government report to Commission members which outlines all activities relating to historic preservation (e.g. projects undertaken, document revisions, meetings, number of properties designated, number of properties for design review, training for the Commission, etc.) conducted over the past calendar year for the Texas Historical Commission review. Ms. Gagne noted the Commission had a busy year and were very successful in completing the preservation documentary "Wichita Falls — The Future of Our Past" with production expertise from Barry Levy with the City's Public Information Department. Members discussed the report and staff Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page 4 explained the documentary project to new Commission members. Staff noted a copy of the DVD will be provided to each recently appointed Commission member for their information. 40 Ms. Gagne informed Commission members the preservation documentary was submitted for consideration in the Texas Historical Commission's Preservation Awards in the Excellence in Media category. Successful entries will be announced at the annual conference set for May in Corpus Christi. b Accessibility Report Kell House Museum Planning staff provided an explanation regarding the Voltz & Associates Accessibility Report for the Frank Kell Home that was previously submitted to the Commission during fall 2007. A secondary report was sent to the Planning Division along with a request for an administrative review for an accessibility ramp at the Frank Kell House Museum. Commission members discussed the report and the additional request for a staff determination. Ms. Gagne indicated staff had not responded to Ms. Tere O'Connell's request from Voltz & Associates until it could be discussed at a Landmark Commission meeting. The Commission members were in agreement that the issue was addressed at their September 20, 2007 meeting and directed staff to respond and include a copy of the Certificate of Appropriateness issued to the Kell House Museum staff. c TX Historical Commission — CLG Seminar Update Planning staff updated members about a recent training seminar conducted by the Texas Historical Commission in Austin, January 16th -17th. Ms. Gagne participated in the second day of training which focused on ways to maintain a strong local preservation program within our communities. Guest speakers discussed design guidelines, best practices, legal issues pertaining to the preservation ordinance with expert attorney Chris Bowers (City of Dallas) followed by question & answer sessions to share success stories from around the State. d Progress Report - West Floral Heights District Update — Ms. Cotton indicated there's a lot of activity within the District and they are directing people to City staff for design review when necessary. Ms. Cotton stated the Neighborhood Design Review Committee will have regular meetings on a quarterly basis and they will be held the same week as the regular Neighborhood Association meetings. She added there are Design Review Committee members that represent almost every street in the District but at times it is still difficult to get the information to the right people prior to them starting a project that triggers the design review process. e Other Business — i) 801 Burnett — First Baptist Church Ms. Graham requested discussion regarding 801 Burnett, the former Women's Y (The Place) that was recently purchased by First Baptist Church and potential to have the building recognized as a City landmark. Commission members discussed the potential for submitting an application to consider designation because any potential demolition can be delayed for historically designated structures. Mr. Dowdy questioned if the Commission should begin the process of preparing an application for 801 Burnett. Ms. Graham suggested working with the Museum of North Texas History, the Wichita County Heritage Society and Downtown Wichita Falls Development Inc. Mr. Fox questioned if anyone knew First Baptist's long -term intentions for the building? Ms. Graham stated the intent for the site is to tear down the building and develop a parking lot. Ms. Cotton commented that it was her understanding as member of the First Baptist church the lot would be developed for a new children's building. Ms. Graham was very concerned about the continued loss of historic buildings in our downtown and in the original # townsite — she noted a photo in their office and at least 35 buildings are now gone from when the photo was originally taken along with 27 facades completely altered. The Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page 5 Commission discussed the best approach to discuss trying to save the building with the new owners (First Baptist Church). It was determined the Commission should work with Ms. Cotton, as both a Commission member and member of First Baptist to set up a meeting with the Church's Planning Committee. Ms. Graham reiterated that these situations will continue to happen in our downtown unless the community and public know what is happening and get involved to reuse buildings rather than tear down & build new structures that lack any character or historic value. (ii) Both Mr. Fox and Mr. Dowdy raised questions regarding the carport design review case in September 2007 regarding email communication among Commission members and what may be classified as `exparte' communication. Mr. Dowdy commented, from his understanding of `exparte communication, it was acceptable to inform the entire Commission via email regarding information related to a project or application but caution must be exercised. Any recommendations must be discussed among Commission members at a public meeting and discussed in front of the applicant. Commission members discussed this particular situation and were in agreement regarding clear communications and caution for use of email as a method of communication between members. IX. ADJOURN The Commission adjourned the meeting at 5:40 pm. Ken Dowdy, Acting Chairperson for Dianne Thueson �/ /4 - D? Date Landmark Commission January 21, 2008 page 6