Landmark Commission Minutes - 06/24/2025 LANDMARK COMMISSION
MINUTES
June 24, 2025
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Christy Graham •Chairperson
John Dickinson •Member
Bill Enlow •Member
Joel Hartmangruber ■Vice-Chair
Janel Ponder Smith ■ Member
JD Dixon • Member
Monica Aguon, Assistant City Attorney ■ City Staff
Robin Marshall, Admin. Assistant, Dev't Services Dept. ■ City Staff
Karen Montgomery-Gagne, Principal Planner/HPO ■ City Staff
ABSENT:
Dr. Dawn Ferrell, Maj. Gen.(retired) ■ Member
John Yates ■ Member
Whitney Flack ■Council Liaison
GUESTS:
Sandra Lawson (2806 Ave E) is Applicant
:emu, Danny Lawson (2806 Ave E) •Applicant
Dylan Bussey -contractor(2806 Ave E) •Representative
I. Call to Order, Introductions and Welcome:
Chairperson Christy Graham called the meeting to order at 12:05 p.m.
Ms. Graham welcomed guests and Commission members provided introductions.
II. Review & Approval of Minutes from May 20, 2025:
Chairperson Graham called for review and approval of the May 20, 2025, Landmark
Commission meeting minutes. Ms. Janel Ponder Smith made a motion to approve the
minutes as presented, Mr. Joel Hartmangruber seconded the motion. Minutes were
unanimously approved.
III. Action Item: Design Review Case — 2806 Ave. E:
Request authorization to construct a free-standing carport composed of metal and steel
(20x14 ft; height 8 ft in rear and sloping to 7 ft in front). Sample Carport: 1609 Tilden
Applicants: Mr. & Mrs. Lawson
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne informed board members this case was modified from the
proposal presented in May. Staff indicated an unusual property location on Ave E, style
of house was non-descript/undetermined architectural style. Property originally had a
rear garage apartment pending construction of a primary residence fronting on Tilden
Landmark Commission 2 June 24,2025
which was never built. The rear garage apartment/lot was split from the portion at
Tilden/Ave E at some point and converted to traditional residence along with the garage
as additional living space. Staff referenced inventory photos noting changes throughout
the years and unique details, such as the curved driveway access. This particular
driveway design complicates the request for a carport in order to fit the structure on the
property within setback parameters and be functional for vehicle access. Staff
referenced additional photos showing proposed site plan for the new carport. The new
construction will not be attached to the house, placement will be approximately 2ft from
the house, and 1ft from attached single car garage. The proposed carport will be 20x14ft
with a minimal 1 ft slope from rear to front of carport allowing drainage runoff. The carport
will not extend beyond the front building line of the house and should maintain a 10ft
side yard setback. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne indicated the owner's primary reason for
requesting a carport was to reduce damage to vehicles as a result of: a) falling
trees/limbs, and b) hail and windstorms.
Proposed carport would be 100% metal and detached from the house, as stated before,
maintaining a front setback of approximately 18ft from edge of property along Ave E. A
sample drawing prepared by the contractor, Marant Construction, was referenced which
allowed the Commission a better view of how the metal carport will appear and be
positioned on the lot. The carport will be rectangular with metal framework/support
system and a standard R-panel metal roof, (hidden by metal trim work) and maximum
height of 8ft (follows zoning requirements for carports).
Staff noted with all the questions last month about carports in West Floral Heights
Historic District, the HPO conducted carport research. It was discovered, of the 213
properties in the district, five of those (as of 2025) still being exempt from original 2005
ordinance requirements, there were 48 carports. More extensive research conducted
and 37 carports were pre-existing historic district designation. This is a significant
number the Landmark Commission had no design review input as to whether the
materials/design were appropriate. Many property owners within WFH historic district
assume all carports were approved by the Commission and meet design standards for
materials, placement, design, etc. However, that is not the case. Staff provided slides
showing some of the pre-existing carports and a location map of all WFH historic district
carports including illegal ones marked in red. The HPO spoke about some of the illegal
carports, why they were illegal, and if the Commission subsequently heard a case on
them. Since 2005 district formation, 11 carports have come before the Landmark
Commission with only 5 being 100% metal.
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne noted the proposed carport will be constructed using 11-gauge
steel posts welded to 6x6 anchor plates that would be drilled into existing concrete
driveway with full metal wrap trim. The owners are looking to utilize the dark gray metal
Landmark Commission 3 June 24,2025
for the roof to blend with garage roof. Spacing between support posts will be 13-15ft.
Staff highlighted key areas for consideration when assessing the proposal:
• How does the proposed alteration fit within the historic district?
Height of new construction should not exceed the tallest contributing buildings.
Which in this case, it will not. Focus on the quality of construction and type of
materials should be prioritized over style.
• Design new accessory buildings so compatible with the scale of the associated
primary building and historic character of the district. Materials and finish used for
these outbuildings should correspond to overall character of the district.
• What is currently in the district, was it there prior to the design standards, and what
has the Commission considered since then (consistency)? As stated, the
proposed carport meets zoning requirements. Potential question of whether the
"all metal" carport materials correspond with overall character of this residential
district. Ms. Montgomery-Gagne noted just over 48% of carports in WFH historic
district, and built pre-district, are 100% metal. Out of carports constructed post-
district creation (and were reviewed by Landmarks), 45% were all metal (5 of 11).
Chairperson Graham asked if there were any questions.
Ms. Janet Ponder Smith asked about a detail on the submitted drawing of the carport
that extended from the support posts. She stated liking the added detail because it gave
some character to the project. She also pointed out the S-curved metal detail on the
house front porch columns and asked if that could be added to the carport columns.
Using this simple design detail would tie the carport and house together with similar
style. Contractor indicated that two metal scrolls could be added under the overhang
and the owner agreed.
Slope of the roof was discussed, and the contractor said the proposed slope was
common, and that it is usually two inches of slope per foot. Mr. Dixon commented a 3/8"
per foot slope would result in a 7-8" drop based on quick calculations. The contractor
stated the slope could be modified if needed. There was some question whether the
slope was sufficient for adequate runoff. The location of the slope was discussed (long
direction vs sideways) and the contractor stated location of the slope chosen to ensure
water runs away from the house to avoid water damage. It was agreed the contractor
could make the slope for runoff work with a 6" drop so carport will be 8ft rear height and
drop to 7.5ft at the front.
Roof concerns were noted regarding use of the R-panel. Contractor confirmed it would
be 26-gauge steel R-panel on top, MetalMart pre-painted with forty-year paint
guarantee. Mr. Hartmangruber discussed the materials and thanked the
owners/contractor for redesigning the carport request. As an architect, Mr.
Hartmangruber noted he is opposed to using metal R-panel on other carports in the
Landmark Commission 4 June 24,2025
district but based on this unique case with the simple design of the house coupled with
metal awnings, it seemed the metal carport was a more fitting design/material. This
type of carport would not work on most properties within the district but was an
4,410
acceptable design fit for this situation.
Chairperson Graham called for public comments. There being no public comments, Mr.
Bill Enlow introduced a motion to approve the requested metal 20x14ft carport as
presented with the stipulation decorative truss pieces be installed, similar in design and
scale to the house front entry with black metal 'S' style curve pieces, on the front two
carport columns facing Ave E. and rear carport support columns are 8ft height and
provide at least 7ft clearance total in the front portion of the carport. Ms. Ponder Smith
seconded the motion. Chairperson Graham took the motion to vote, which passed 6-0.
IV. Other Business:
Depot Square Update:
• Chairperson Graham noted city workers preparing for installation of new lighting and
poles in the downtown historic area along with Farmers Market being open on
Saturdays 9am-1 pm. Wichita Theatre getting ready for'Annie' in September, and Little
Shop of Horrors in October. Tarzan currently running on main stage.
• Backdoor Theatre youth musical is called "Back to the 80's" and June 28th at 7:00 will
be an evening of the improv.
• Art Walk runs through September, 1st Thursdays from 5:00-9:00pm.
• Wichita Brewery offering entertainment weekends on their patio; more info online.
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne noted City Council conducted a public hearing for demolition
of numerous properties deemed a life, health and safety threat. City Landmark (Ord.
No. 115-85) Berry Brown House, situated downtown, was on demo listing which is
unfortunate because the owner has presented various design review requests to the
Commission over the years for renovation/maintenance. The last time a case was
brought to the Commission was 2011 to fix a gaping hole in the roof but there were no
funds to accomplish numerous repairs and the property has continued to deteriorate to
the point of becoming a public hazard. HPO stated when City Council authorizes a
structure for demolition due to life, health and safety issues it supersedes the
Commission's authority under Chapter 62 (Historic Preservation Ord.)
Ms. Ponder Smith said the West Floral Heights HD Volunteer Design Review
Committee will convene May 25 to conduct a basic overview and review a proposed
design review application. They are trying to find a better way to mobilize to get
information to neighbors so property owners understand the design review process
while also providing feedback to the City on design review cases.
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne updated the Commission about a Section 106 review for a
Landmark Commission 5 June 24, 2025
telecommunication tower in Jolly which is deemed as no impact since no additional
height and the ground won't be disturbed. The tower will only have components at a
height of 190ft altered, however, since it triggers "modification to telecommunications",
the company was required to conduct a review with closest municipality.
Chairperson Graham asked Ms. Montgomery-Gagne to discuss legislative updates.
Staff tracking some preservation bills, particularly Bill 4809, which is the Property Tax
Reductions for Locally Designated Historic Properties. It basically gives an opportunity
to appeal the appraisal of a designated property and/or structures due to additional
requirements/costs associated with complying with design standards. However, the
added design standards provide a level of protection from inappropriate alterations to
property and can stabilize valuations in a neighborhood. Essentially, the design
standards were deemed a 'burden' and impact comparable appraisals. The bill passed
the House 40-1 (two members abstaining); it then passed the Senate 30-1 May 21 st
Staff following to determine if signed by the governor.
Ms. Montgomery-Gagne informed the Commission there may be a special meeting in
July to address various pending projects in West Floral Heights HD.
a) 1401 Garfield (corner of 10th/Garfield) - owner wants to replace class 4
composition shingle roof with architectural style metal shingles (substitute
material) which triggers design review as visible from public ROW.
b) 3006 10th St — numerous modifications; Police Dept. involved as three citations
issued to remove construction materials stored on 10th St. (transport load of sod,
dump truck load gravel and dirt). Staff referenced recent photos of materials
stored on-street and numerous complaints to planning and code compliance of
blocked driveways. Ongoing design review & permitting violations; currently
waiting for Dr. Karen Reed's estate attorney to respond to phone calls authorizing
a design review application. Visible alterations are an evolving situation.
c) 1501 Tilden — owners obtained an insurance claim totaling roof on main house,
they also want to remove tile roof on two-story accessory building so it will match
composition shingles on house. HPO stated this modification would require
Commission determination as it involves removal of original tile roofing and
replacement with alternate material (composition shingle). Therefore, no building
permit can be issued for replacement roofing on primary structure unless design
review authorization is obtained due to potential for unauthorized work.
V. Adjourn:
Chairperson Graham adjourned the meeting at 1:08 pm and stated the next scheduled
meeting would be August 26, 2025, at 12:00 pm.
igfif447t)
e . /JQ5
Christy Graham, Chairperson Date