Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Landmark Commission - 04/29/2010x .. MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 29, 2010 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Craig Thompson, Chairman Ms. Mary Lou Berven Mr. David Brown Ms. Kris Cardona Ms. Kim Charba Ms. Laura Commons Ms. Anita Eisenhauer Ms. Marie Guajardo Ms. Susan Kesler Dr. James Klein Dr. Mark Robbins Ms. Susan Rucker MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Herb Morrison (Excused) Mr. Leo Rios (Excused) Mr. Alan Wahlstrom (Excused) STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Andrew Dimas, City Planner Ms. Linda Williams, Recording Secretary AUG 16 2010 CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p,m. by Mr. Craig Thompson, Chairman. The roll was called and a quorum was declared. ACTION ITEMS: Approve March 25, 2010 Minutes: The March 25, 2010 minutes were approved with the following correction: Page 2, fifth paragraph, the last sentence was deleted. Resolution of Support to Submit the Official _Opinion of the CLG-City of Corpus Christi Landmark Commission Regarding Placement of the Memorial Coliseum and the Sherman Building on the National Register of Historic Place: Mr. Craig Thompson addressed the commission. Mr. Thompson stated that today's task of the commission was to approve or disapprove a resolution of support of the nomination for placement of the Memorial Coliseum and the Sherman Building on the National Register of Historic Places. Mr. Thompson continued that the action of support was to be based on whether the nominations met established criteria as set forth by the U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service and would have no impact on whether the building should or should not be demolished. Before the floor was opened for discussion and comments, Mr. Thompson asked if the commission wanted to discuss the nominations separately or as one since they were listed on the agenda as one item. After further discussion, it was decided the nominations would be discussed separately and the following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY MS. EISENHAUER AND SECONDED BY MS. BERVEN THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DISCUSS THE NOMINATIONS FOR MEMORIAL COLISEUM AND SHERMAN BUILDING SEPARATELY AND TWO SEPARATE VOTES WILL BE TAKEN ON THE RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT FOR PLACEMENT ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. MOTION PASSED. Mr. Dimas stated before Ms. Wood addressed the commission, he had a brief power point presentation on the Memorial Coliseum which was taken from Landmark Commission's historic survey that was compiled in 1994. Mr. Dimas continued that the historic survey was done by Ms. Sally Victor, Preservation Consultant. Mr. Dimas began his presentation by showing an aerial view of the Memorial Coliseum and the Exhibition Hall. The presentation outlined the following information: Landmark Commission Meeiing April 29, 2010 Page 2 ■ The coliseum was constructed in 1954; ■ Richard Colley was the architect of design for the coliseum; • Building is a 3 -story red brick with five (5) asymmetrical bays; ■ Three (3) sets of multiple aluminum/glass entry doors; ■ Ticket windows and deep canopy on the east facade; • Three (3) large concrete vertical panels across the east fagade of the building with deep overhang that protects the east fagade facing the Corpus Christi Yacht Basin; • Curvilinear asphalt roof with extended buttresses on the north and south sides. ■ Coliseum was dedicated on September 26, 1954, although it was not completed at the time; and ■ Dedication ceremony climaxed a three-day convention of the Gold Star Mothers, who unveiled a memorial plaque with the names of approximately four hundred (400) men and women from Nueces County who lost their lives in World War Il; and ■ The building was permanently closed in 2004 once the American Bank Center was completed. After the power point presentation, Mr. Thompson asked Ms. Carol Wood if she had any comments regarding the nomination submittal since she was one of the participants. Ms. Wood stated she came before the Landmark Commission last spring and asked several commissioners if they would be interested in working on the Memorial Coliseum project and there seemed to be no interest. Ms. Wood continued that after attending that meeting, during the summer she began her initial research. The first step was to send detailed information to the Texas Historical Commission (THC) and based on the submitted information, they would decide whether it was possible for the building to be designated. Ms. Wood went on to say that the more detailed research began in mid-July through August during the same time the RFP was out. In September, a letter was sent to THC, along with all of the research material that had compiled, after which they did their own research. Ms. Wood continued she received a letter of determination on October 7, 2009 stating the building was eligible for designation in two categories. Ms. Wood stated that after receipt of the letter, more in-depth research had to be completed documenting and supporting the nomination. Ms. Wood went on to say that once all of the research was completed, she hired Ms. Monica Penick, an Architectural Historian Professor at the University of Texas in Austin; whose specialty was in modern architecture. Ms. Wood continued that .on January 12, 2010, she forwarded all of the research to Ms. Penick for her to write the architectural description; which was her area of expertise and to put the nomination in its final form. Ms. Penick completed the nomination and submitted it to the Texas Historical Commission on February 15, 2010 and the nomination was placed on the Texas Historical Commission's agenda in March and they, in turn, notified the City of Corpus Christi in March that the nomination had been received, After Ms. Wood's comments, the floor was opened for questions and comments. Mr. Thompson stated that in reviewing the packet, the application was very good and quite comprehensive. Mr. Thompson asked Ms. Wood if she would briefly describe the two criteria as to why she felt the coliseum should be placed on the National Register. Ms. Wood stated that the nomination was based on the criteria of "historical significance" and architectural significance." Ms. Wood explained that the first thing she found during her research was that various architectural magazines and journals from around the world had write-ups regarding the Memorial Coliseum and she further investigated as to why. Ms, Wood continued that during her ongoing research, she found that after the war, there was a big movement in using new materials and trying to come up with ideas and designs that opened a whole new world in modern architecture, This movement; which took root in the 1930s, but it actually came to fruition after the war. Ms. Wood went on to say that a lot of the plans and ideas that architects had could not be enacted until a set of materials was sent to the federal government for approval, Any new designs or plans had to take in to consideration the shortage of materials. Ms. Wood went on to say that one of the things that Richard Colley was able to do for the City of Corpus Christi was to meet its budget and design a three - building complex, which included the coliseum, to be constructed using available materials and at the same time, met a need for the City. Planning for this project began in 1942. Ms. Wood explained that Mr. Colley revived an old 1920'5 method of using a lamella structure and re-engineering it. Using this method, the coliseum was rectangular in plan and had a short -span barrel form shell roof which was a very big deal at that time. Mr. Colley's use of this method was included in one of the architectural write-ups. Ms. Wood contended that Mr. Colley was very involved in climate control and, originally, the coliseum was to face Park Street, City Hall and Exhibition Hall was to face Kinney Street. Because the City did not budget enough money to install air conditioning in the coliseum, the building was turned to face the prevailing breeze with louvered windows. Ms. Wood went on to say the City did not approve the original windows and instead installed solid glass windows. To make the building tolerable in cooling, large exhaust fans were installed at the rear of the building. Ms. Wood continued that the building was constructed as an Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 3 open, clear -span arena and the interior space was characterized by its expansive height, large arena floor, horse-shoe stadium seating and its raised stage. Ms. Wood went on to say that the coliseum was further characterized by its barrel-shaped thin shell roof, made of a steel lamella space frame that was supported by a series of concrete buttresses. Ms. Wood explained that Mr. Colley hired the firm of Roof Structuring, Inc. out of St. Louis to help him work out the lamella steel roof structure for the coliseum. Ms. Wood continued that the gentleman that assisted Mr. Colley also constructed the Astrodome in Houston, Texas using the same method and, after his death; his son constructed the Superdome in New Orleans. Ms. Wood continued that because of Mr. Colley's idea of bringing the roof down and for creating an outdoor market in between the buttresses, these types of architectural ideas was the basis for the nomination. Ms. Wood continued that for over fifty (50) years, the Memorial Coliseum was the center of community events - from high school graduations, city- wide religious services, a venue for sports events, concert hall, etc. Ms. Wood continued that according to the National Register criteria, the nomination was viewed for the first ten (10) years. Ms. Wood cited a 1968 quote from a Chamber of Commerce newsletter; whereby people complained that coliseum was a very ugly structure and it should not have been placed on the city's bayfront, but fourteen years later, another article appeared in the Chamber's newsletter stating the complete opposite and praising the construction of the coliseum and how it benefited the entire community. Dr. Klein, Landmark Commissioner, stated that the coliseum was also significant in that about thirty years ago or longer, the late Reverend Elliott Grant and the NAACP held a town hall meeting basically to discuss desegregating the community and bringing all of the factions together, Dr. Robbins added that by having the town hall meetings in the coliseum, town leaders at that time, came together for a common cause; which was to unite the community. Community leadership that included Dr. Dana Williams, Superintendent of CCISD, Dr. Hector Garcia, a local physician and leaders of the NAACP came together in one of many historic moments at the coliseum trying to unite the community and this was an important factor for the coliseum. After Ms. Wood's comments, Mr. Thompson expressed thanks for her interest in historical preservation and for initiating the nomination. At this point in the meeting, Mr. John Bell, Attorney, addressed the commission. Mr. Bell stated he represented the City leadership and their position in what should be done with the coliseum; which at this point, demolition. Mr. Bell acknowledged the presence of Mr. 'Angel Escobar, City Manager and Mr. Carlos Valdez, City Attorney. Mr. Bell referenced the letter the City Manager sent to the Landmark Commission outlining the City's position in not supporting the nomination of placing the Memorial Coliseum on the National Register. Mr. Bell presented a brief power point presentation based on the letter from the City Manager and several points were highlighted in the City Manager's letter as follows; • The City of Corpus Christi has worked hard for fifty (50) years to keep the Memorial Coliseum as a public venue for our community and the facility was has served the community well for many years, However, due to population growth since it was built in the 1950s, the coliseum faced increasing limitations on its ability to serve our community's needs; • The City constructed the Bayfront Plaza Convention Center facility in the late 19705 to meet the growing demand for a new theatre -style auditorium and convention and exhibition facilities. The coliseum was maintained as the primary, community arena facility and both locations were operated to complement each other, Eventually, the coliseum proved not to be large enough to meet the city's growing needs and the American Bank Center Arena was completed in 2004. • In the 1950s and 1960s, the coliseum was the right size to "pack the house" for entertainers such as Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly and Paul Revere and the Raiders. For today and in the future, the city needs a facility such as the American Bank Center to accommodate the much larger crowds; • Historical Significance - One of the main criterion upon which the nomination must be based is that the building "is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the city's history. While the coliseum has been a venue for a broad range of events, it does not have the stature of other properties placed on the National Register with events that made a significant contribution to the city's history. The coliseum served for fifty (50) years as a public arena facility and it hosted various events such as concerts, conventions, meetings, parties, celebrations and festivals. Many local churches, schools, meeting halls, and other facilities have hosted similar events in the city during that some time period; • The designation of the coliseum as a memorial to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our country in World War 11 should not automatically make the building a fitting placement on the Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 4 National Register. Each community across America rightly dedicated monuments, plazas, parks, bridges and buildings as memorials to those gave their all for our country. At times, those memorials need to be replaced and the city has reached that point that we need to create a more suitable, perpetual memorial in Sherrill Park for those who died in service to our country. The new memorial should be a place associated with veneration, respect, and contemplation regarding the contributions to our freedom made by those heroes, not just another place for rock concerts, sports events or trade shows; • The coliseum no longer fills a viable role as an arena or meeting venue in the city. It does not have the capacity, the accessible facilities or the technological capability to meet the community's needs and it cannot continue to serve as a fitting memorial for World War II. It has been replaced as a public assembly venue and it should also be replaced as a memorial site; • While the coliseum has been associated with many different events in the history of our community and has served well for many years as a fitting memorial, it has not been associated with any particular events that made a "significant contribution" to the broad patterns of our history." It is not distinguishable from many other excellent facilities in Corpus Christi, both now and in the future. If should not be considered for nominaffon to the National Register based on this criterion. ■ Architectural Significance - Another main criterion upon which the nomination for placement could be. based on that the property "embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a mater, or possesses high artistic values,.." The coliseum was not the first of its kind of any particular methods of construction and it does not have any distinctive characteristics or particular artistic values in comparison to similar auditoria or arena facilities; • The lamella -type structure that forms the roof is a fairly common method of construction that has taken many forms in the city and throughout the country. Other lamella roof structures were built with wood and were used in the original construction of Baker, Cunningham and Hamlin Junior High Schools in the city. This type of roof is a typical method of construction for large stadium facilities such as the "Astrodome" in Houston, Texas and the "Superdome" in Louisiana. This type of roof should not warrant its addition to the National Register any more than a designation should be considered for the "Superdome" in Louisiana; • Numerous changes were made to the coliseum since its original construction -- a south wing was added for restrooms, the north wing was modified to connect it to the Exposition Hall for shared restroom facilities and because the hall was demolished. The facility was retrofitted for air conditioning which created a problem with maintenance for the more than 100 windows on the east end of the building. The material and color of the roof were changed and over the years, various doors and windows were bricked in or replaced; ■ The restroom facilities are not accessible to persons with disabilities and they do not meet current standards. Consultants have advised that any future use of the facility for public gatherings would require construction of new restroom facilities, and with this addition would further erode any architectural distinction of the structure; ■ Richard Colley was clearly a talented architect who served this community well in the design of the city hall and utilities building originally located on Shoreline Drive, the D. N. Leathers Housing and local fire stations. As a talented professional, he utilized the lamella system and lift -slab method for roof structures to address particular needs. The community is proud that his talents were appreciated by Texas Instruments in the construction of its plant in North Dallas and later in other facilities around the world; • However, the hallmarks of his architecture were utility and efficiency in meeting needs of the client, whether it was the City's need for a simple and efficient city hall or civic auditorium or Texas Instruments' need in designing a flexibly manufacturing facility. Preservation of a facility that no longer serves any useful purpose would be inconsistent with his aims. The coliseum should not be considered for Inclusion on the National Register based on Its architectural significance. ■ Options for Adaptive -Re -use - When the American Bank Center was completed in 2004, the City immediately began a process for analyzing different options for the coliseum. The City has worked during the past six years with numerous developers in an effort to create a viable plan for the adaptive re -use of the facility in some form that would complement our community's resources. Those plans have run the gamut from a facility to house the Columbus Ships to a swimming pool;. ■ During the previous administration in 2007, Mayor Henry Garrett tried to bring the process to closure by forming the Memorial Coliseum Committee to solicit community input regarding re -use of the building. The committee included three (3) council members and thirteen (13) members from the community and they worked for nearly two years hosing five (5) public meetings and receiving Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 5 written comments from over 1,000 citizens with various recommendations. The committee commissioned Luther Snow, an outside consultant, to review meeting notes and all the public comments received. Mr. Snow was tasked with developing a report which included many ideas for the re -use of the building; Eventually, the committee recommended hiring PKF Consulting to evaluate optimal market uses, assess potential financial performance of the recommended uses, evaluate the possible economic impact and recommend the selection of a mixed-use developer for the building. The consultant assisted in the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFPs) in 2008 and several proposals were received and evaluated. The City negotiated with Leisure Horizon, in good faith, for several months regarding a missed -use development, but those discussions ended in May 2009 with a withdrawal by Leisure Horizons due to their inability to furnish adequate documentation of financial stability; In 2009, the current City Council directed staff to develop another RFP for the adaptive re -use of the coliseum along with some of the surrounding park land. This RFP was prepared and advertised throughout the country, including placing ads in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Los Angles Times, USA Today, Dallas Morning News as well as online advertising with Loopnet; which is an international commercial real estate organization and posting an advertisement on the International Economic Development Council website; City Council appointed four (4) council members and seven (7) community members to evaluate and make recommendations regarding the proposals received. Brass Real Estate initially was selected as the top choice to begin negotiations for a mixed-use development that included apartments, a hotel and retail area and the home of the Ice Rays hockey team. City negotiations encountered several obstacles regarding the proposed development; which included limitations on the use of the adjacent park land, density of the development on the bayfront and the financial viability of proceeding with the entire project. A critical Issue was Brass' insistence that the City remain liable for all future capital maintenance needs of the coliseum and the only apparent source of funding for those liabilities would the City's general fund. Negotiations with Brass Real Estate ceased and City Council authorized new negotiations with the National Swimming Center Corporation (NSCC). The NSCC proposed to develop a competitive swimming facility and utilize the adjacent property for a hotel and retail shops. The hotel and retail shops would be necessary to fund the on-going capital maintenance requirement of the facility. The City maintained its offer of $2 million in initial construction support, but the NSCC required a minimum of $7 million to make the project work. In addition, due to national economic conditions, the NSCC could not commit to a commencement date for construction of the hotel and retail facilities; Even if grant funding were received to provide full funding for restoration of the coliseum, finding a cost-effective means of operating and maintaining the facility would remain a problem. In addition, any further use of the coliseum as a venue for concerts, rodeos, festivals or meeting would divert funds from the American Bank Center facilities and create a larger operating loss. The City is currently working hard to make the American Bank Center operate efficiently, but it cannot afford to re -open a second competing facility. After Mr. Bell's presentation, he continued that since the City Council was the duly -elected representatives of the owners of the Memorial Coliseum and the citizens of Corpus Christi have elected to demolish the coliseum, the Landmark Commission was respectfully requested to oppose the nomination of the Memorial Coliseum for placement on the National Register of Historical Places. Mr. Bell continued that, as outlined in the City Manager's letter, it is believed that the coliseum did not meet the criteria for inclusion on the National Register and the City does not have the resources or any other viable options to maintain the facility in the future and will continue with its plans to demolish the structure regardless of the designation. Mr. Bell continued that even if someone came at this late date with $4-8 million, it would still not be enough money to make it work within the National Register program. Mr. Bell went on to say that at the Nueces County Historical Commission's meeting, they approved a resolution of support by a vote of 8 to 4 of supporting the nomination of placement of the coliseum on the National Register. Mr. Bell continued that the Landmark Commission, as the CLG for the City, is being requested to provide comments based on the merit of the nomination and whether the Coliseum is to be placed on the National Register. Mr. Bell went on to say that the City does not need another albatross to this community like the Old Nueces Courthouse. It does not help the cause of historical preservation for this community and it is the City's position that the structure should not be placed on the National Register and should be demolished. Mr. Bell stated in talking with the Texas Historical Commission, it was clarified Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 6 that as along as federal funds were not used, the City will be able to do what it wanted once all of the hurdles were cleared, Mr. Bell continued that at this point, there were two issues at hand --- the process has limited City action through the courts and if the coliseum is registered as a Texas Landmark, the long the process goes on. Mr. Bell maintained that legally, the City will be able to what it needed to do. The THC Board of Review will meet on Saturday, May 15, 2010 in Beaumont, Texas to make a decision on the case. Mr. Thompson stated there has been some discussion regarding once the coliseum was demolished that some of the bricks would be used in constructing the new memorial to be placed in Sherrill Park. Mr. Thompson asked if the City had a plan on how the memorial would be constructed and it was answered that Marc Cisneros, City Staff, was heading up the committee to work on a proposal that will be a fitting war memorial for the park, Ideas have been discussed using the wall and some of the roof, but at the end of the day, it will be a committee based decision and the City will make available some of the materials to be used in the process. Ms. Eisenhauer asked for clarification as to if the memorial would be for World War I soldiers and Mr. Bell clarified that the memorial would be for those soldiers who served in World War II. Dr. Klein asked for clarification on how usage of the Memorial Coliseum would be competing with the American Bank Center and it was stated that in the proposal, to turn it into an open air pavilion and that area of downtown has a number of different events and one of the biggest deficiencies was the lack of shade. By using the structure as an open market pavilion would provide shade. Mr. Bell commented that Mr. Clower's proposal was seriously considered but there were considerable variables in the cost. Mr. Bell continued there were several deterrents to consider - high grade paint that would have to be maintained; bird dropping issues, installation of soffits on exposed buttresses and a lot of thought would have to be given to the long-term cost with maintaining the structure even as a large opened pavilion. Dr. Klein asked if a presentation had been given to the Texas Historical Commission regarding the Nueces County Commission's vote and Mr. Bell responded that the County Commission voted 7 to 5 in favor of a resolution of support to place the coliseum on the National Register. Mr. Bell continued that County Judge Loyd Neal was submitting a letter to the Texas Historical Commission on behalf of the Nueces County Commissioner's Court opposing the nomination. Mr. Thompson asked if any federal monies had been received for any construction on the Memorial Coliseum and Mr. Bell answered that the City had received federal dollars were used as a reimbursement for the use of the Coliseum as a hurricane shelter for the Katrina evacuees. Ms. Berven stated she heard there was a proposal to create a park in the location where the coliseum currently sits, and another park would not generate any money. Mr. Bell clarified that at this point, there was a pretty clean slate of possibilities of what would be placed there once the coliseum was demolished. Mr. Bell continued that there will be much discussion and debate as to what will actually happen. Ms. Commons commented that she did not understand why the City would place another park at the coliseum site when that site could be used as a money maker. Mr. Thompson stated that he believed that the City has been trying to bring people and development into the city that would generate money and he felt the City has done due diligence, but nothing has come out of the proposals previously submitted. Ms. Berven asked if the hockey team was interested in returning to the coliseum and Mr. Bell answered yes, but the facility would need other venues to make it work. Mr. Bell continued that moving the hockey team back to the coliseum would cause an impact on American Bank Center events. Ms. Cardona stated, as a parent whose son plays on the Jr. Hockey team, the coliseum would be a better fit because of the smaller space to fit rather than the American Bank Center. Ms. Cardona continued that in attending the hockey games at the Center, most of the arena is empty. Smaller events are not able to reduce the cost of scheduling events at the American Bank Center where as it might be more feasible in a smaller building. Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 7 Mr. Thompson stated at this time, the commission would provide time for any participant in the audience to provide comments. Mr. Thompson requested speakers not to exceed three minutes in their comments. Participants were asked to provide their name and address. Ms. Maxine Snapka of 3401 Manitou Drive addressed the commission. Ms. Snapka stated she always felt the coliseum was the heartbeat of the city. Ms. Snapka continued she felt Shoreline Drive would be a perfect place to maintain a restored coliseum. Ms. Snapka went on to say that the Memorial Coliseum did not belong to the City of Corpus Christi, but it belonged to the citizens. Ms. Snapka commented she felt the City should place a new roof over the structure and create a green center to beautify the surroundings of the building. Ms. Snapka continued she felt the building has earned the right to be on the National Register of historic places and the commission should be ashamed if they did not vote in support of then nomination, Ms. Kesler, commission member, stated that one of the things she read about Frank Wright was there was a foundation established for his architectural contributions, but Mr. Colley did not have one. Ms. Kesler continued that the coliseum has lost is usefulness and the City should move forward. Mr. Arturo Granado of 605 Vaky Street addressed the commission. Mr. Granado stated several years ago he served on a committee that was tasked to look at possible proposals of what could be done to save the coliseum. Mr. Granado stated that as long as tax dollars had to be used for any type of renovation, the City could not sustain two separate venues once the American Bank Center was completed and opened. There are so many hidden obstacles that developers are handcuffed as to what can and cannot be done. The biggest obstacle to date is to find a group who has the funding to put forth any proposal they might have to offer. Mr. Granado continued that the City has a very difficult responsibility in trying to make everything work together. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Thompson read the letter from THC that was to the Mayor informing the city that they had received the nomination and it was up for review. The Board of Review would be meeting on May 15, 2010 in Beaumont, Texas. Mr. Brown asked in what format would the commission submit its response to THC's request and Mr. Thompson answered the Commission would be submitting a letter. After all comments and discussion concluded, Mr. Thompson stated he wanted the minutes to reflect a voice vote on the following action taken: IT WAS MOVED BY DR. KLEIN AND SECONDED BY MS. EISENHAUER THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE NOMINATION OF PLACING THE MEMORIAL COLISEUM ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. THE MOTION FAILED EIGHT TO FOUR. Commissioners voting nay were: Mr. Brown, Ms. Cardona, Ms. Charba, Ms. Commons, Ms. Guajardo, Ms. Kesler, Ms. Rucker and Mr. Thompson. Commissioners voting in the affirmative were: Ms. Berven, Ms. Eisenhouer, Dr. Klein and Dr. Robbins, with Commissioners Morrison, Rios and Wahlstrom being absent. Mr. Thompson stated a copy of the unofficial minutes would be attached to the letter along with any comments commissioners would like to include. Mr. Thompson stated a draft copy of the letter to be sent to THC would be emailed to commissioners for review and comment. Any comments should be forwarded to staff by Friday, May 7, 2010. After the vote, Ms. Emilia Delgado - a retired faculty member of Del Mar College, addressed the commission. Ms. Delgado stated that the Landmark Commission's action this afternoon was a slap in the face to the city and to its citizens. Ms. Delgado continued that it was the commission's responsibility to support historic preservation and it should have been an honor to approve the resolution rather than making way for the structure to be torn down. Mr. Thompson clarified that today's action was not an up/down vote to demolition the coliseum, but the vote was based solely on the merit of the nomination for placement on the National Register. Mr. Thompson expressed thanks to the audience for attending today's meeting and for their input and comments. Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 8 Sherman Buildina: Mr. Dimas stated he had a brief power point presentation on the Sherman Building which was taken also from the 1994 Landmark Commission's historic survey. Mr. Dimas continued his presentation by showing an aerial view of the building and the presentation outlined the following information: • The Sherman Building, also known as the Nueces Building, was constructed in 1929 as a six -story office building that replaced a two-story framed store in 1855; • The building is one of the oldest buildings in the city; • The total construction cost of construction of the building was $215,000. Additional five (5) floors were completed in 1937 and the building was renamed "Jones Building;" ■ Brock & Roberts were the architects for the project that added in additional 26,000 square feet using the some color bricks, wind spans and a 5 -room penthouse with terraces was also added to the roof at an additional cost of $100,000; ■ H. G. and Belle Sherman had a real estate office in the office building; • The building retained the name of "Jones Building" until 1980 when it was renamed to its current name of "Nueces Building;" ■ The current building is 11 -stories with buff brick, has nine (9) symmetrical bays, fixed wood display windows, recessed double entry door with no canopy; • Upper floors have flat arched paired windows wood windows with Art Modern cast concrete string course above the first and second floors from the upper floors; • The building has cast concrete Art Modern medallions between floors, decorative cast concrete acanthus leaf coping at the parapet; and ■ The building has a flat roof and a secondary chamfered recessed entry to the building at the comer of Peoples Street and North Chaparral. After Mr. Dimas' presentation, the floor was opened for comments and discussion. Mr. Thompson asked Mr. Hoover if he wanted to address the commission. Mr. Bill Hoover, owner of the building, stated he was glad to be at today's meeting and he was really excited about the building's nomination for placement on the National Register of Historic Places. Mr. Hoover continued that he led the team in the renovation project for the building in mid-October in 1996. The building has sixty-four (64) apartments with two ground floors. Mr. Hoover continued that the neighborhood and City have been excited to see what has been happening on Peoples Street. Mr. Hoover added that at one time, Richard Colley worked for the firm that constructed the final addition to the building. Mr. Hoover stated that he was very excited to be able to give back to the community and city through completion of the restoration project and, at the same time, being able to retain the historical integrity of the building. Dr. Robbins stated to Mr. Hoover that he did a great job of restoring the building. Dr. Robbins continued he had an opportunity to tour the building and was very happy to see that a lot of the original interior was retained. Mr. Thompson expressed thanks and appreciation to Mr. Hoover for the great job in restoring the building and for being an example to other property owners of what could be accomplished with their properties. After all comments and discussion concluded, Mr. Thompson stated he wanted the minutes to also reflect a voice vote on the following action taken: IT WAS MOVED BY DR. KLEIN AND SECONDED BY MS. BERVEN THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION APPROVES A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE NOMINATION OF PLACING THE SHERMAN BUILDING, NOW KNOWN AS THE NUECES BUILDING, ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. MOTION PASSED UNAMIMOUSLY. DISCUSSION ITEM: Presentation on the Project to Cleanua and Paint the Surrounding Fence of the Old Bay View Cemetery: Mr. Dimas showed a power point presentation showing a bordering street on Ramirez showing the peeling paint on areas of the fence. Mr. Dimas stated in looking at the fence, rust has set in on the perimeter and water sides. As part of the project, it is also proposed to paint the Old Bayview Cemetery sign, since no certificate of appropriateness is necessary, and general maintenance will be performed that will include weed pulling, preservation of some of the markers, cutting and removal of Landmark Commission Meeting April 29, 2010 Page 9 heavy tree branches. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Dimas introduced Mr. J. C. Lugo, Trooper Leader, for Nicholas Battleson. Ms. Berven stated she was glad that the young man was willing to take on this project for the cemetery, but she was concerned whether the project was too large for him to do alone. Mr. Lugo explained that Mr. Battleson would not be doing the project alone, but the entire troop would be involved along with members from the football team. Mr. Lugo explained that in the category of "Venturing," older boys and girls within the troops were allowed to participate in projects of this nature. Questions were posed regarding whether the project would be completed in a weekend and who would be providing the materials for the project and Mr. Lugo responded that the project would be done over several weeks, possibly months and monies for the materials would be raised through fundraisers and donations. Thanks were expressed to Mr. Lugo for attending today's meeting and for his willingness, along with his troop, to participate in this project. Ms. Berven stated she spoke with Art Zeitler regarding the 2010 Awards recognition and to see if it was possible for the awards recognition to be held during one of the Rotary Club's month meetings. Ms. Berven continued that Mr. Zeitler stated the Club was willing to hold the recognition ceremony and he provided her three Thursday dates to select from and the commission has to decide which date would be the best. A question was asked regarding when the 2009 awards recognition was held and it was answered it was held in May. Mr. Thompson stated a committee needed to be established to begin working on finding honorees and he would like to place the awards recognition as a discussion item for the May meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Lind Williams Reco ing Secretary iH:P W-DIRUINOMWORDVANDMARKWINOTES\APR29510.WNS1 Andrew Dimas, City Planner Staff Liaison to Landmark Commission