Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Landmark Commission - 02/24/2005 2627�g2 �� ‘1Q, MINUTES �(Nt !FR 2005 LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING N RECEIVED CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS a� CITY SECRETARY'S cin FEBRUARY 24, 2005 cA, OFFICE °j <<�`SL�'�£lZ�d�j4� MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Myron Grossman, Chairman Dr. David Blanke Mr. David Brown Dr. Thomas Kreneck Ms. Grandis Lenken Dr. Richard Moore Mr. Herb Morrison Mr. Craig Thompson Ms. Bunny Tinker MEMBERS ABSENT: Ms. Susan Abarca (Excused) Ms. Michelle Geiger (Excused) Dr. Thomas Kreneck (Excused) Mr. Elmon Phillips (Excused) Ms. Nita Selby (Excused) STAFF PRESENT: Ms. Faryce Goode-Macon, City Planner Ms. Linda Williams, Recording Secretary ROLL CALL: Mr. Myron Grossman, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 4:40 p.m. The roll was called and a quorum was declared. ACTION ITEMS: Approval of January 27, 2005 Minutes: The January 27, 2005minutes were approved as distributed. Master Review Committee's Recommendation on Acceptance & Approval of Properties Proposed for "HC-N" Designation Located at 310, 313, & 324 Clifford Street: Ms. Macon stated that at the January meeting, she informed commissioners that Glen Peterson would be submitting applications for "I-1C" designation on at least three more properties located on Clifford Street. Mr. Peterson submitted the necessary paperwork, and at the January meeting, the Commission tasked the Master Review Committee to further review the properties and present their findings at the next meeting. Ms. Macon continued that at today's meeting, Ms. Tinker would be submitting the committee's findings. The floor was turned over to Ms. linker. Ms. Tinker addressed the commission. Before Ms. linker began her presentation, she briefly summarized some of the historical designations that the commission has been involved with. The historical projects were: • One building in the downtown area owned by Mr. Glen Peterson; • South Bluff Methodist Church; • Oak Park Methodist Church; and • The most recent designation of the property located at 1315 North Chaparral Street by Johann Collins. SCANNED Landmark Commission Meeting February 24, 2005 Page 2 Ms. Tinker gave examples of homeowners taking the initiative in restoring their properties - Mr. Garza residing in Old Irish Town who has restored three houses on his own and it has been wonderful to witness. Ms. linker reminded commissioners that the Landmark Commission does not have "historic districts," which if the city had historical districts, the houses that were designated on Clifford Street would have boon part of it. All of the designations occurring on Clifford have been spear-headed by Mr. Glen Peterson. Ms. Tinker stated the following information is provided on the three structures that the Master Review Committee was tasked to review. Two of the structures fit the criteria established for the "HC-N" designation and one would qualify as a "potential landmark." Ms. Tinker explained that the property designated as a "potential landmark" would be guaranteed a 30-day stay to allow the properly owner and the Landmark Commission time to try to reach a solution other than tearing the structure down, if no agreement could be reached within the 30-day period, the owner would be allowed to proceed with its original plans - either to tear the structure down or modify the structure so that it would not meet established criteria as a potential or historical landmark. The Master Review Committee's findings for the three structures were as follows: 310 Clifford - The structure had been altered the least of the three structures. Trtie and the burglar bars were original. In the Committee's review, there were three (3) exceptions noted for this structure: • The rear addition; • The grill work; and • The porch title. Ms. Tinker continued that any of those three items could be removed without damaging the structure itself. 313 Clifford - Several modifications have been to the structure. Two windows were boarded and under the porch, there was a picture window. These two items would be exceptions. The wrought iron cover and the porch would be exceptions because the porch was not part of the original structure. This conclusion was reached because the tops did not match the red brick found on the roof of the house. 324 Clifford - Two exceptions were found. There were two corners that were boarded up and there were two small porches. To the left of the porches, there was a white door with a window that did not fit in with the architectural style of the house. The house had not been maintained very well. Ms. Tinker stated that all of the houses on Clifford Street would not be "HC" designated, but some of them would be categorized as "contributing structures" in a historical district. Ms. linker continued that most of the modifications have been pretty minimal and the structures have retained most of its historical integrity. Ms. linker stated that Clifford Street would mostly likely be a great candidate if the city had historical districts. Ms. Tinker continued that if a street like Palmer() were to be considered for a historical district, it would be more difficult to achieve because there were more 'non-contributing" structures than "contributing." Ms. Tinker stated there should be someway for the Commission to have included in the existing ordinance a special recognition for property owners who have done an excellent restoration job for their properties; which would be a great incentive to participate. Ms. Tinker continued she would like to suggest that the Commission look into the possibility of establishing a special recognition for home owners who have done a wonderful job in restoring their property. Landmark Commission Meeting February 24, 2005 Page 3 A question was raised if there was a method that the commission could use in protecting structures from modifications and/or demolitions and it was answered that the only protection, to date, would be if the property was designated, there was a established time period before anything could be done to the structure, but ultimately, it would be left to the owner to do what was originally intended. After all comments and discussion concluded, Ms. Tinker gave the Committee's recommendation for designation for the three structures: 310-The structure be designated as HC-W"with three exceptions: the rear add-on, the burglar gates, and the tile d porch; 313-The structure be designated as a "Potential Landmark" with four exceptions: porch addition, wrought iron columns, the picture window, and the boarded-up window; and 324-The structure be designated as "HC-W"with two exceptions: enclosure of the side porch and filling of the windows on the left. A notation would be included regarding maintenance of the house. Ms. Tinker continued that even with the exceptions for the three structures, they all would be considered as"contributing structures." After Ms. Tinker's report, Ms. Macon stated that the City has not had a lot of interest in historic preservation in a very long time and it was hoped that all three structures would receive a "HC" designation. Ms. Macon continued there were three other owners on Clifford Street that are interested in pursuing "HC" designations for their properties. Mr. Morrison stated that he viewed the "HC' designation was for properties that have not been modified. Mr. Morrison continued that the reason a "potential landmark" designation was recommended for 313 was because of the modifications that had been made which changed the appearance of the structure. Mr. Morrison went on to say that if the porches were removed it would make a significant difference. With the porches remaining, the "potential landmark" designation would offer some kind of protection. Mr. Thompson stated he did not agree with the recommendation for the structure receiving a "potential landmark" designation because the owners built a porch over the window and because of that, the structure would receive a lesser designation based solely on that. Mr. Thompson asked if the designations were based on the view fronting the street and the back was not included for consideration and it was answered that the "HC"designation being proposed was for facade review only. Ms. Tinker clarified that in the preservation community, "additions or add-ons" do not negate the designations. Mr. Brown asked if there were significant differences on the additions and Mr. Morrison responded that if the additions were to the back of the properly and could not be seen, the outcome could possibly be different. The designations recommended would be for "facade only,"that portion of the structure facing Clifford Street. Mr. Morrison continued that how much of the original structure was retained was left largely to their opinions. Mr. Thompson asked if there were guidelines that defined what could be done to a structure and still be considered for a designation and Mr. Morrison answered they would review the existing ordinance that establishes the criteria for designations. Ms. Tinker stated that you could have design guidelines for each area and they would not be the same for each area. There would be some fundamental guidelines that would apply, but each area has its own unique character and the guidelines would be written accordingly. Landmark Commission Meeting February 24, 2005 Page 4 Ms. Macon stated that the action letter that would be sent to the property owner after the Landmark Commission and Planning Commission public hearing would list the exceptions that apply for each properly. After Ms. Tinker's report, the Landmark Commission accepted the Master Review Committee's recommendation with Mr. Thompson, Ms. Lenken and Dr. Moore voting no. Dr. Moore asked if commissioners were allowed to contact homeowners to see if they were interested in historical preservation and Ms. Macon answered that commissioners could make that contact. Ms. Macon stated that the commission could use the site survey as a resource of properties that are considered historically significant and staff would do the mail out to the owners. Mr. Thompson asked about the potential funding that might be available and Ms. Macon stated that contact would be made with Adele Lucas in Federal Grant Accounting to verify the account and any available monies that might be left over. Dr. Blanke suggested that if there were monies left, maybe the funds could be used to establish some special "PR" campaign highlighting the Landmark Commission's accomplishments in the area of historic preservation. Mr. Thompson suggested highlighting different historical homes and architectural styles in the home section of the Caller Times. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. AAtt_k) W )-(14-4-.0T �rA Itt� I r Linda Williams Faryce G•••--Macon, City Planner Recording Secretary Staff Liaison to Landmark Commission (H:PWRWORDUANDMARM`MINUfES"FEB24MTG) • • SUMMARY SHEET LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 24,2005 1. The Landmark Commission accepted the Master Review Committee's recommendation to designate • three structures located at 310, 313,and 324Ciifford Street. The structures located-at 310 and 324 Clifford Street were recommended for a "HC"-N" designation and the structure located at 313 Clifford • Street was recommended for a"Potential Landmark-designation.