Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Landmark Commission - 05/25/2006 MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING f.. �s:• CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS " MAY 25, 2006 /,*` \ MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Bunny Tinker, Chairman �', web vkki ,ro/ Ms. Susan Abarca \c', F/C4.'�, Mr. David Brown Mr. Myron Grossman • Dr. Richard Moore Mr. Herb Morrison Ms. Nita Selby Mr. Craig Thompson MEMBERS ABSENT: Dr. David Blanke (Excused) Ms. Michelle Geiger (Excused) Dr. Thomas Kreneck (Excused) STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Wesley Vardeman, Planning Technician Ms. Linda Williams, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order at 4:40 p.m. by Ms. Bunny Tinker, Chairman. The roll was called and a quorum was declared. ACTION ITEMS: Approval of January 26, February 23 March 23, 2006 Minutes: The January 26, February 23, and March 23, 2006 minutes will be approved as distributed. Approve Designating Armando Chapa, City Secretary, or Designee, as the Public Information Coordinator On Behalf of the Landmark Commission: This item was discussed at the April meeting and it was the consensus of members present that the Landmark Commission approved Mr. Armanda Chapa as the Public Information Coordinator on behalf of the Landmark Commission. Because a quorum was not present at the meeting, no action was taken. After a brief discussion,the following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. GROSSMAN AND SECONDED BY MS.ABARCA THAT MR.ARMANDO CHAPA BE APPOINTED AS THE PUBLIC INFORMATION COORDINATOR ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S BEHALF. MOTION PASSED. Proposed Street Renaming of Winnebago Street: At this point in the meeting before Ms. Tinker began her comments, she acknowledged a gentleman in the audience and asked if he had any comments regarding the proposed renaming. Mr. Joel Mumphord introduced himself and stated he was President of the local Chapter of the NAACP and was at todays meeting to go on record that the organization was not in favor of the proposed name change. Mr. Mumphord continued that because of the displacement of the north side community and the Hillcrest area, renaming any portion of Winnebago Street would not be seen as a positive move for the community. Mr. Mumphord went on to say that so much of both communities have already been lost and with the proposed realignment of the Harbor Bridge, and placement of the new wastewater plant in the Hillcrest area, renaming of Winnebago Street would be an even greater loss to the area. Mr. Mumphord asked for clarification as to which part was actually proposed for renaming and Ms. Tinker answered it was that small portion in front of the old Atlantic Richfield oil building and across from the former Greyhound Bus Station that is SCANNED A Landmark Commission Meeting 7 . Max25,2006 — - ' Page 2 • now Knuckles. Mr. Mumphord restated that he wanted to make sure that the City was aware of that the organization was opposed to the renaming of Winnebago. After Mr. Mumphord's comments, Ms. linker expressed thanks for his attending today's meeting and that the NAACP concurred with the historical community's recommendation. • Ms. Tinker stated she responded to correspondence received from Ricardo Guzman, City Traffic Manager, regarding the proposal to rename a portion of Winnebago Street. Ms. Tinker stated she responded to Mr. Guzman's correspondence as a citizen, and not on behalf of the Landmark Commission. Ms. Tinker continued she outlined several reasons In her letter that the street name should not be changed and the item was placed as an agenda item so input could be received from the Landmark Commission and a formal response could be sent to Mr. Guzman. Mr. Tom Utter, Assistant to the City Manager, addressed the commission. Mr. Utter stated he was familiar with the proposal to rename Winnebago Street. Mr. Utter continued that the normal procedure in handling requests of this nature was that after staff received the request, it was forwarded to the appropriate staff and city boards that have an interest of the proposed renaming. After input was received from the appropriate boards and city staff, a recommendation would be forwarded to City Council for a public hearing. Ms. Abarca asked who submitted the request and Ms. Tinker answered that Joe Adame submitted the request on behalf of the owners of the new high-rise loft apartments that are for sale. After further discussion, Mr. Utter stated that before the Landmark Commission took action on the proposal, Mr. Guzman could answer any questions that the commission might have. At this point, Mr. Utter request staff to see if Mr. Guzman was available to answer questions and provide more information on the renaming proposal. Mr. Ricardo Guzman was available to address the commission's questions and came to the meeting. Mr. Guzman stated the portion of street that was proposed for renaming was the section from Comanche Street to Upper Broadway. Mr. Guzman continued that Mr. Joe Adame submitted the request and he was also the developer for the Atlantic-Richfield building. Mr. Adame's group is investing a great deal of money into converting the building into a high-rise unit. The proposal is scheduled for a public hearing at the June 13, 2006 City Council meeting. Mr. Guzman continued that notices were sent to the owners of the property and they had no problem with the renaming. The notices were sent to Shutters Management Development who owns all of the property on both sides of Winnebago. A notice was also sent to Larry Williams, who leases from Shutters Ltd. and is the owner of Knuckles. Mr. Guzman stated letters were sent to department heads and local historical groups and the Landmark Commission and the Nueces County Historical Commission were opposed to. the recommendation. Mr. Grossman stated that the Landmark Commission's job was to maintain and protect the c'rfys historical resources and he personally did not like of the idea the renaming and he felt it was city staffs job to serve the entire public and not just a select group. Mr. Grossman asked what other groups were. opposed to the renaming and Mr. Guzman responded that excluding the Landmark Commission, both county groups were opposed, but he had not received anything in writing. Mr. Guzman maintained that. any letters that were submitted would be presented at the council meeting. Mr. Guzman stated that the packets for the meeting will be prepared In about ten-10 days and he suggested that commission members ,After Mr. Guzman's comments, a brief discussion ensued. After all comments had been received,the following action was taken: - IT WAS MOVED BY MR. GROSSMAN AND SECONDED BY MR. MORRISON THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OPPOSE THE RECOMMENDATION OF RENAMING A PORTION OF WINNEBAGO STREET TO 'UPTOWN AVENUE" AND THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S.RESPONSE BE SENT IN WRITING TO BE PRESENTED AT THE JUNE 13, 2006 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING. Landmark Commission Meeting May 25,2006 , Page 3 MOTION PASSED. Ms. Tinker expressed thanked Mr. Guzman for coming to the meeting and clarifying several questions that the commission had regarding the proposal. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Submittal of Potential Properties to Review for Possible Designation: Item will be placed on the agenda for the August 24, .2006 meeting. Ms. Tinker stated that over the summer months, commissioners should have enough time to come up with the names of two properties that can be. considered for possible designation. Relocation of Mary Carroll House: Ms. Tinker stated that at the last meeting, she told the commissionersthat she and Mr. Grossman.were going to meet with the City Manager regarding the proposed relocation of the Mary Carroll House. Ms. Tinker continued that the proposed relocation site of that the house has been placed is next to the Ballet Studio and auction building. Ms. Tinker stated she had spoken with Sally Gavlik, Director of Park and Recreation, and they had come up with three(3) other. possible sites in the vicinity of Heritage Park. Ms. Tinker continued that at this time, she would let Mr. Utter give his update on the Mary Carroll House project and complete her comments after he had spoken. Mr. Utter began his presentation by stating that Heritage Park was a project that was near and dear to his heart and he was happy to say that he had a part in the initial development of the concept and was able to see it come to past Mr. Utter provided brief background information regarding how the concept began. Mr. Utter stated that the City held a bond election and money was provided for "multi-cultural center" that was to be built in the existing BayfrontArtsand Science Park. City Council appointed a task force to recommend a plan for the center, but problems In defining the purpose and function of the center caused the project to be shelved. Years later, a group of citizens created a group called "Community Unity' and they came to together to discuss the varied and distinct ethnic, cultural and economic points within the community and felt the plan should benefit all citizens of the city. The Community Unit group developed its concept, but they wanted to get a better idea of how to proceed so the group took two buses to tour"La Villita" Plaza in San Antonio, Texas to get ideas of how the concept could be developed. Mr. Utter continued that Malcolm Matthews, former Park and Recreation Director, came up with.a plan to have the multi-cultural center to be based around three historical houses: Sidbury; Lichtenstein and the Guggenheim. Mr. Utter stated that there was a great deal of community input and discussion regarding the plan. The Galvan Family donated a portion of the original Galvan House, which currently houses the center. After discussions were held with the various historical groups, a site plan was developed. Mr. Utter continued that the groups wanted to make sure that open was maintained for each house. The Lichtenstein House had a great deal of open space, the Guggenheim and Sidbury Houses had 85.9 percent open space each.'The design for the park was to have a great entrance with a circular planting area in front of the center. Mr. Utter continued that each house currently in Heritage Park had its own unique story and contributed to the total concept of "multi-cultural." Mr. Utter provided brief information on how the Seamen Center evolved at its current location. ,-The Kennedy Foundation'was instrumental In providing funding to help restore,several of the houses in Heritage Park, including the Seamen Center. Mr. Utter stated that Ms. Tinker came to the city,about the Buddy Lawrence House. The family was selling the old family home and it was bought by the refinery. The refinery,wanted the land, but not the house and offered it to the city if it could be removed from site. The house was accepted, but there was no site for it to be placed. The house was placed on a barge and navigated through the port. The Mayor and City Council had-made a promise to the Veterans, Band that they would be the next Landmark Commission Meeting May 25,2006 Page 4 recipient if a house became available for a non-profit group. As far as the vacant area between the two sites, an agreement was made between the Iwo groups that a bandstand would be constructed in that area. Mr. Utter stated that the area the Mary Carroll House has been sited on is land that the City owns. In addition, the City also owns the building the Ballet Studio is occupying (Sid Richardson Building) and has been completely renovated. The City does not own the auction building. Mr. Grossman asked if the City could use imminent domain as a means to obtain the property and Mr. Utter responded that this approach could be taken, but there was no available funding. The owner of the auction building wants the City to purchase it. The developer of the bluff project, where the Mary Carroll House was formerly located, has cleared off the property and several of the houses are still in piers waiting to be moved off-site. Mr. Utter continued there was some discussion with the Seamen Center and the Veterans Band about the vacant area between their respective structures, but they do not want a structure placed in that space and are continuing with their plan to construct a bandstand to be used by both groups. Mr. Utter stated that the Mary Carroll House was placed on the property 6 feet back and will have a net setback line. In looking at the proposed re-alignment of the Harbor Bridge, at the same site, there will be space to place at least three more structures. No other sites have been reviewed and identified for any additional structures. Mr. Utter continued that after the Landmark Commission really looks at all four blocks, maybe the commission could develop recommendations on how to develop the sites through a workshop setting. Mr. Utter stated parking is a major problem in the Bayfront area as well as in Heritage Park. Mr. Utter stated he would like for the Landmark Commission to have several workshops to look at this area and come up with an overall plan of how the area can be developed and additional houses placed in the area. Ms. Tinker asked if the Landmark Commission could start the "HC"designation process for the Mary Carroll House where it currently sits and Mr. Utter answered that the house should be designated. Ms. Tinker asked if a tenant or group had been found to oversee the restoration and Mr. Utter answered that the Corpus Christi Independent School District has already set aside $50,000 to rehabilitate the house and it was hoped that the house rehab project would be completed within six(6) months. Ms. Tinker stated the normal procedure would for reviewing the different proposals would be for the Master Review Committee to review them and bring back their recommendation. A question was raised regarding the Sid Richardson building and Mr. Utter explained that Mr. Richardson was ,a big cotton merchant in the city. Mr. Utter continued that simple historical preservation was the key and these buildings will be in high demand with all of the activities proposed for the area. Mr. Thompson asked how many houses were coming out of the Lichtenstein Estate and Mr. Utter answered that approximately three; one hopefully would be the old Ropes House. Mr. Morrison stated that he would talk with the local AIA Chapter to see if they would be interested in sponsoring a workshop and have a charette to come up with an overall development plan for the area. After further discussion, no action was taken. Thanks were expressed to Mr. Utter for attending today's meeting to bring an update on the relocation/restoration of the Mary Carroll House. Thanks were also expressed to Wesley Vardeman for setting in as the staff liaison. Landmark Commission Meeting , May 25,2006 " 'Page 5 There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 6 p.m.. • Linda .liarrs esley Vardeman, Planning Technician Recordin Secretary Acting Staff Liaison H:PLN-DIR\WORD\LANDMARMAINUTES\MAY2506.MINUTES) _ I \1 SUMMARY SHEET LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING MAY 25, 2006 r i 4 G IVcla Cly*SECRETARY'S (-' OFFICE /` 1. The Landmark Commission voted to oppose the proposal to rename a portion of Winnebago Street tof Uptown Avenue. - . ' 2. Mr. Thomas W. Utter, Consultant, gave an update on the relocation and renovation of the Mary Carroll House. No action was taken.