Loading...
Landmark Commission Minutes - 10/22/2013 RECITI\ 1`5 q q e CiTY CLERK" or-FicE MINUTES DATE: - 4_5L4_71--3— LANDMARK COMMISSION __ __ T1 M E: GtS October 22, 2013 MEMBERS PRESENT: Stacie Flood, Chairperson • Members Christy Graham • Carolyn Looney • Andy Lee • John Kidwell • Steve Wood • Jackie Lebow • Councilor Michael Smith •Council Liaison Karen Montgomery-Gagne, Planning Administrator •staff Peter Scott, Assistant City Attorney II • Leo Mantey, Planner I • ABSENT: Michael Koen • Members I. Call to Order and Introductions Chairperson Flood called the meeting to order at 12:07 p.m. and introduced members of the Commission. II. Review and Approval of Minutes from September 24, 2013 Chairperson Flood called for approval of minutes from the September 2013 Landmark Commission meeting. Ms Graham motioned for approval and Mr. Kidwell seconded. The motion carried. III. Review, Discussion, and Recommendation of Commission's Proposal to Revise Wording in the Code of Ordinances-Chapter 62–Historic Preservation; Sec. 36(b) Landmark Composition Ms Gagne indicated this item was put on the agenda to ensure any related issues were brought up with the Commission allowing them along with council liaison, Councilor Smith, an opportunity to make final revisions to the proposed text amendment prior to submittal for Council review. Staff is requesting final review or comments by the Commission regarding the proposed text amendment in order to begin preparation of an agenda item for City Council consideration at their November 19t meeting. 0 The Landmark Commission reviewed staff research regarding Landmark Commission/Preservation Board composition in other comparable CLG designated cities in conjunction with five suggested options at the September 24, 2013 meeting. The current language in Chapter 62 – Historic Preservation Ordinance (Sec. 36b) is as follows: LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 1 "Of the nine (9) members, one shall be a licensed real estate broker or appraiser, one shall be a member of the planning and zoning commission, one shall be a member of the Wichita County Heritage Society, one shall be a member of a historic district that shall either own property or reside within a district, two shall be licensed or have expertise in the field of architecture, and three shall be members at-large. In the event that a member from a category noted above is unable to serve on the commission, city council may appoint an additional member at-large. The preservation district liaison from each district shall be considered a non-voting member of the commission." Ms Gagne said at the September meeting Commission members deliberated about board composition to reach a consensus regarding the existing 'non-voting' preservation liaison position. It was determined with a unanimous vote to consider the following revision to the City's Code of Ordinances: "Of the nine (9) members, one shall be a licensed real estate broker or appraiser, one shall be a member of the planning and zoning commission, one shall be a member of the Wichita County Heritage Society, one shall be a member of a primarily residential historic district - - - - _ - • _ - _ - - _ . _ _ that shall either own property or reside in the in-a district and one shall be a member of a primarily commercial historic district that shall either own property or reside within the district, two shall be licensed or have expertise in the field of architecture, and three two shall be members Oat-large. In the event that a member from a category noted above is unable to serve on the commission, city council may appoint an additional member at-large. -The Red indicates new text; etrikeeut indicates deletion. Both Chairperson Flood and Ms Graham said the revised wording in the ordinance was clear and well defined. Councilor Smith said he appreciated the work the Commission had done so far in order to address the composition issue with the text revision. He stated it was a needed course of action to allow the Landmark Commission to function effectively and will also be appreciated by Council. Ms Gagne stated if everybody was in agreement with the text amendment the next step would be presentation to City Council for their review and approval. Ms Graham made a motion to accept the text amendment to the Historic Preservation Ordinance - Landmark Commission section (Chapter 62- 36b) relating to membership. Mr. Wood seconded. The motion was unanimously approved. IV. Discussion & Recommendation Regarding the Establishment of a Tax Increment Financing 0-I9 District in Downtown Ms Gagne referred the Commission to the memo and map in their packets which outlined the proposed downtown TIF#4 boundary. She indicated Mr. Lee had requested staff place this TIF #4 item on the agenda for discussion at the September meeting and it missed getting on the agenda prior to posting so no official action could be taken by the Commission. Mr. Lee expressed the importance of creating a downtown TIF zone and requested the Landmark Commission consider recommending to City Council they establish a TIF #4. Ms Gagne provided a brief history and some statistics of the former downtown TIF#1 zone for Wichita Falls. LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 2 Ms Gagne informed the Commission the TIF #1 Zone, which encompassed the north- central portion of downtown, expired Dec. 31, 2008; The State of Texas Attorney General opinion was sought but indicated a new zone must be established rather than extending the life of the original TIF zone. Staff outlined the TIF #1 Zone was successful based on the following final statistics: Project Cost TIF Expenditures Total Project Values $ 73,037,858 $ 3,217,304 Total Projects: 35 completed between 1991 and 2008 Staff indicated that during the five (5) year interim since 2008, at least three (3) catalyst projects were anticipated but did not come to fruition to essentially initiate the TIF zone with a known increment. Additional work was conducted by planning staff in 2009/10 to consider areas for inclusion with a second generation, downtown TIF zone. In early 2011 City Council created a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) to work with staff to research and develop a project plan for creation of a TIF zone utilizing the 2010 property valuations. However, the project and research were at the point in late 2011 of trying to `creatively' figure out a projected increment in absence of any major projects in order to pay for numerous public and semi-public improvement projects. Staff explained that in 2013 additional research is pending based on initial analysis in 2012 of Wichita Co. Appraisal District (WCAD) valuations which indicate a reduction in value for the originally identified area proposed for a TIF zone between 2010 and 2011. The valuations appear to have declined for the area within the proposed boundary from 2010 to 2012. The area recommended by the CAC for inclusion in the TIF #4 zone is generally bounded by the area north of the J.S. Bridwell Ag. Center, thence west to Central Freeway, South to Brook Ave. then along Holiday St. and west to Grace St. south along Kell east/Spur 447 and bounded to the east by the railroad lines. Staff indicated that even in late 2011 city management had expressed some reservations regarding the effectiveness of any generated increment in such a large area and suggested reducing the land area included for a TIF designation to focus on the core of downtown. Staff had worked with the CAC to develop basic goals and objectives along with some project priorities for the proposed TIF zone. However, Ms Gagne informed members that based on the numerous projects outlined for the future TIF (20 year timeframe) it got to a point where management was searching for ways to figure out funding for all the identified projects in absence of a catalyst project. Project priorities came from staff reviewing the original TIF #1 plan from the 1980's to determine what had been accomplished and what still needed to be completed in concert with recommendations outlined in the 2008 Downtown Master Plan. Staff explained there were lots of projects but there weren't plans to show how these projects were going to be funded. Ms Gagne stated one catalyst project that was expected to be developed in the proposed TIF # 4 area would have been redevelopment of the hospital (8th/Brook Ave.) which never materialized. However, now that the buildin g is demolished this has become a prime site for development. Ms Gagne informed the Commission there were concerns from City management regarding the large size of the proposed TIF zone. She stated it is difficult to notice improvement in large planning areas. She informed the LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 3 0 Commission that staff looked at narrowing the downtown master plan into areas such as an art entertainment area, river development area, a core business area, historic area etc. She said subdividing the area will allow for better planning and monitoring of improvements in the areas. Ms Looney asked if the City had ever investigated a Main Street program and that they were missing out on funding from the Texas Historical Commission. Ms Gagne said they had done that in the past but not in recent years and many of the grant/funding programs are geared for smaller communities (under 50,000). Ms Graham stated that was something the Downtown Development Board looked at in the past and Mr. Lee added a Main Street program was seriously investigated in the 1980's with the Midtown Plan and Ms. Susan Campbell was the Main Street coordinator. However, Mr. Lee stated the program only lasted four years due to lack of funding. Mr. Lee also informed the Commission that, the City of Fort Worth has fourteen (14) TIF districts and he believes is a contributing factor to the massive development in the City. He therefore believes creating another TIF district in the downtown is a worthy cause. Ms Graham said most buildings in the downtown area that were deteriorating or vacant have been redeveloped and are being used for a variety of profitable uses. She said all these have taken place over a period of time, hence there is a potential for more development in the downtown area as time goes on. Ms Looney asked why there was such a lack of investors and incentives to develop the 0 downtown area as compared to other areas like the Kell Boulevard/Lawrence area. Ms Graham said the area along Kell Blvd. is being developed due to the TIF district being created. Mr. Lee also said developers invested 25 million dollars in that area which accounts for the TIF growth and development in that area. Councilor Smith stated the population growth of the city is towards the southwest that is why most development goes in that direction as opposed to the downtown area. Councilor Smith added to provide more incentives it would most likely result in a tax increase and the people of Wichita Falls have indicated they won't support increased taxes. Ms Graham suggested the City needs to provide incentives such as a Tax Abatement Program for reinvesting in the downtown area. Councilor Smith stated that similar initiatives (eg. Public Improvement District— PID) had been researched in the past by the City but the level of investment was considered too costly by property owners. Ms Graham stated she would like to see the newly appointed Chamber of Commerce Executive Director willing to work with Downtown Wichita Falls Development, Inc. (DWFD) and help promote development in downtown. Ms Looney said there needs to be a massive incentive for developers and more work should be done to beautify the downtown. Ms. Graham raised a concern about the proposed TIF coverage area being large. She referenced when DWFD organization brought in Scott Day to analyze downtown he noted that our downtown considered of 114 blocks which is a very large area— it is not an easily configured area. Ms Gagne stated the large size was due to the fact that, the CAC created that demarcation to include certain potential areas for redevelopment such 0 as the former hospital site which is now vacant, the vacant building beside the Attebury grain elevators and to not have a gap between the western edge of the TIF#3 zone and the downtown TIF zone. Mr. Wood asked if shrinking the proposed area or splitting the area into two or more districts had any advantages or was more economical. Ms Gagne said creating two or more districts will result in double the work because each zone requires an individual project and financial plan that must be approved by the LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 4 participating taxing entities (Wichita Falls and Wichita Co.) and the state with on-going oversight. Members discussed the boundary concerns and staff indicated there is merit to going back and analyzing areas of residential concentration, areas with a concentration of non-profit/institutional properties (no contribution to the taxing valuation) and meeting with the WCAD to determine if parking lots and secondary lots for institutionaVgovernment entities are taxable. Mr. Kidwell stated he agreed with the boundary created by the CAC because it captures all the relevant parts of the downtown. Councilor Smith and Mr. Lee discussed the importance of the area along the Wichita River remaining in any area for TIF consideration as there is a need for a full- service convention hotel. Mr. Lee noted other key sites along Kell east (TxDOT right-of- way), the hospital site, the historic district, the former Sears and Maskat Temple buildings on Lamar, etc. Members continued discussion regarding the value of creating another downtown TIF zone. Ms Graham introduced a motion to request City Council consider creating the proposed TIF#4 which is vital to downtown, will hopefully help attract a convention hotel and provide more funds to the City of Wichita Falls for reinvestment. Mr. Kidwell seconded. The motion unanimously carried. Councilor Smith stated he supports the creation of a downtown TIF district and a PID; noting he would recommend it to City Council for review. V. Review & Comment on Draft Request for Proposal (RFP)for Historic 0 Preservation Consultant—2013 CLG Grant—Historic Preservation Survey and Plan Update Ms Gagne provided the Commission with a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) for the City's Historic Survey and Plan Update. Ms Gagne said the final document will be sent to the Texas Historical Commission for review. She also said that this survey was very essential because the last historic survey was done in the 1980's and therefore outdated and did not include many of the Landmark properties. Ms Gagne said she hopes the Commission will review the draft document and give their comments or feedback within the shortest possible time. Mr. Lee congratulated Mr. Mantey for developing the draft RFP. He noted agreement with staff, there are many properties in the City that need to be surveyed that were either not included or did not qualify as historic in 1982. Mr. Lebow stated the document should include a section describing the grading criteria for selecting the most qualified consultant. He said the document should indicate if it's going to be a point system or a matrix for grading. Mr. Lebow said that will help document the fair process the City used in selecting the final candidate for the project. Ms Gagne appreciated the good suggestion and thus will be adding it to the document and indicated the City will use the point-system. Chairperson Flood asked if there were an allocated number of properties to be surveyed in addition to the previously surveyed 389 properties. Ms Gagne said some of the previously surveyed properties might be excluded; the project will determine how many more properties in the City need to be designated as historic properties. Chairperson Flood stated she agreed some properties or houses need to be eliminated from the list of designated Landmarks in the City and undocumented properties of historic value should be identified and added to the updated list of landmark properties in the City. LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 5 Ms Gagne stated she will publicize the RFP as much as she can to make the selection ' process competitive. She informed the Commission that the project will be done in two phases; historic survey will be Phase I which is expected to be completed by September 2014. She hopes additional funds will be allocated for Phase II to create the plan after the survey. Ms Gagne also said the final draft will be reviewed by the legal and purchasing departments prior to advertising. She appealed to the Commission to deliver their feedback via email or phone by Wednesday, October 30, 2013. VI Other Business a)West Floral Heights Historic District— Monthly Report Ms Looney said the area lost one of its street lights. She also said citizens in the district are very concerned about the dead trees all over the neighborhoods and the City. She wanted to know if the city could do something about it. Councilor Smith said the City cannot do anything about the dead trees if they are on private property. Ms Looney asked what if the tree was situated in the City's right of way. Councilor Smith responded by saying the City can take responsibility if it's on the public right of way. He added that city departments are currently discussing options to tackle the problem. Councilor Smith also said any tree in the City that poses a safety threat due to its location should be reported to Code Enforcement. b)Graffiti—600 Ohio; Follow-up Letter from Landmark Commission Ms Gagne provided the Commission with a copy of the City's Graffiti ordinance and a draft letter to be mailed to Mr. Steams requesting he engage in community service work for violating the City's Code of Ordinances and defacing a historic district building. Ms Gagne stated, as discussed last month, the tenant wanted Mr. Stearns to be cited by Code Enforcement and then made to do community service. Ms Gagne said the Legal department stated it might not be effective because the statute of limitations has expired (2-years), hence it will be better to recommend Mr. Steams voluntarily do something. Mr. Scott said the case does not call for prosecution and as such the City cannot impose any penalty on Mr. Stearns. He said the City can ask him to voluntarily clean it up or do some other task. Mr. Kidwell suggested the introductory part of the written letter should state what the City's final decision is or what the City requests him to do. Councilor Smith asked if the owner can sue Mr. Steams in court of which Mr. Scott answered saying that it is possible but depends on the owner in question. Ms Graham said he feels Mr. Steams will ignore the letter; hence the City shouldn't waste time in writing one to him. She suggested the City should find a persuasive way to work with him. Ms Gagne said she will revise the letter and submit it to the Legal department for final review. c) Design Review— Staff Authorized Minor Alteration/Repairs - 1700 Hayes—foundation repair - 1506 Hayes—replace condensing unit(HVAC) d)TX Historical Marker Dedication Davenport Grocery (3,Farris St. - east of MLK Blvd.)—Sat. Oct. 26 - 10am 0 e)Articles & Periodicals— Preservation Magazine LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 6 VII New Business: -Top of Texas Art&Antiques Event—Wichita Co. Heritage Society—Oct 25-27 -1910 Era Gala Celebration, Holt Hotel lobby—600 8th St.— Nov.14—6:30-10pm - Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 26 at 12 pm VIII. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 1:17 pm. V.(r Stacie Flood, Chairperson Date 0 0 LANDMARK COMMISSION October 22,2013 Page 7