Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Landmark Commission - 01/25/2007 MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JANUARY 25, 2007 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Bunny Tinker, Chairman Ms, Susan Abarca • Dr. Clifton Baldwin Dr, David Blanke Mr. Stephen Bowling Ms, Michelle Braselton Mr. David Brown Dr. James Carter Mr. Myron Grossman Dr. Richard Moore Mr. Herb Morrison Mr. Craig Thompson Mr. Art Zeitler MEMBERS ABSENT: Ms, Anita Eisenhauer (Excused) Ms. Nita Selby (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. WELCOME & INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSIONERS: New commissioners were welcomed and introduced. Commission members and staff introduced themselves. Ms, Tinker explained that the Landmark Commission has Certified Local Government status from the Texas Historical Commission and as part of the criteria, certain competencies had to be maintained. Ms. linker expressed her excitement that the commission was back to its full membership status of fifteen (15) and she was happy to have the new members on board, At this point, new commissioners were asked to introduce themselves and provide brief information as to why they were interested in serving on the Landmark Commission. Mr. Art Zeitler stated he was a former member of the Landmark Commission in the late 1970s • and he was here several months ago to do a presentation to the commission. Mr. Zeitzer continued that he was a business and real estate attorney and was glad to be a member of the commission. Mr. Steven Bowling stated he was a realtor with Keller Williams and that he grew up in the area. Mr, Bowling stated he was glad to be a member of the commission. Ms. Tinker provided brief information regarding Anita Eisenhauer, Ms. Tinker continued that Ms. Eisenhauer was out of the country and that was why she was not at todays meeting. Ms. Tinker continued that Ms. Eisenhauer was also a former member of the Landmark Commission and she also • serves as chairman of the Nueces County Historical Commission. Ms. Tinker stated that Ms. Eisenhauer was owner of a local inspection company and was recruited by Ms. Tinker. Dr. James Carter stated he was a history professor at the Texas A & M at Corpus Christi and he was recruited by Dr. Blanke who currently serves on the commission. SCANNED Landmark Commission Meeting • January 25,2007 Page 2 Mr. Clifton Baldwin stated he had served three years on the Human Relations Commission and he had also worked for Housing and Urban Development working with people with disabilities. Mr. Baldwin continued that he has lived in the city for eight (8) years and having served on the Human Relations Commission he wanted to familiarize himself with other city boards and commissions. Ms. Tinker stated that with the addition of the new commissioners, all of the competencies were fulfilled. Several members were realigned to be in compliance - 3 history teachers, 2 architects, 2 title searchers and 1 civil engineer along with the other needed competencies. ACTION ITEMS: Approval of October 26, 2006 Minutes: The October 26, 2006 minutes were approved as distributed. Update on Proposed Meeting with Owner of Property Located at 1019 Furman Avenue & Possible Action to Proceed with Removal of Structure from Site Survey for Possible Demolition: For benefit of new commissioners, Ms, Tinker provided brief background information and update on this agenda item. Ms. Tinker stated that Staff presented this item at the September meeting. Ms. Tinker continued that the Neighborhood Services Department sent a letter to the owner stating that based on their inspection of the structure, the house was beyond the 51 percent rule for disrepair and that she had thirty(30) days to repair the house or tear it down. The'structure is located at 1019 Furman Avenue and it does not have the full "HC" designation, but it was considered as a "fill-in"for the area. At this point, Ms. Tinker cited a portion of the "HC" ordinance on page 15, Section 28A-10.03 Demolition for Public Safety and pages 16 and 17 which dealt with removal or amendment of a designation. Ms. Tinker continued that at that meeting, the Landmark Commission approved a thirty-day delay that would afford the commission time to contact the property owner to see what she wanted to do - demolish the property or sell it. If she was interested in selling the property, Mr. Grossman would be available to assist in trying to find a possible buyer or other solutions. At the October meeting, no action was action due to lack of a quorum so a special meeting date was scheduled for December 14, 2006 -- that meeting was also cancelled because of lack of a quorum. Ms. Tinker stated she and Mr. Thompson would be recused on ' this item since they both reside on Furman Avenue. At this point in the meeting, the floor was turned over to Mr. Grossman to present his findings. Mr. Grossman stated he found a possible buyer for the property and the offer was presented to the owner and she refused. Mr. Grossman continued that the owner was asked to come up with a value she wanted for the property but the amount was not practical-it was very obvious that the owner felt her property was valued greater than what it was worth. Mr. Grossman went on to say that any decision made today would be made without the owner not being able to find a buyer because of the amount she wants. Mr. Grossman continued that looking at the situation -that being the owner does • not have the money to repair the house and there are no prospective buyers, he felt the only thing the . commission could do was to approve removing the property from the survey so that it could be torn down. Mr. Thompson asked Mr. Grossman what amount was the owner asking for the property and if the structure was torn down, what were her plans for the property and Mr. Grossman answered she wanted $200,000 for the property. Mr. Grossman continued that the implication was that if the property was zoned commercially, it would be worth more. The question was raised regarding what would be the next step if the structure was not removed from the listing. Ms. Tinker stated if the commission approved • not to remove it from the listing, the property owner would be advised and the commission's recommendation would be forwarded to the Building Standards Board and the commission could state their case in greater detail at that time. Ms, Teena Houston, Staff Liaison to the Building Standards Board, addressed the commission. Ms. Houston stated that regardless of the decision of the commission to remove or not remove the Landmark Commission Meeting • January 25,2007 Page 3 - structure from the list, staffs recommendation would still be to demolish the structure, As long as the structure remains on the list, federal funds could not be used to demolish it, but private funds could be used after the thirty-day period. Ms. Houston went on to say that the City participates in "Operation Clean Sweep,"which is a federal program used to clean up blighted neighborhoods and areas of town with substandard structures where illegal activities take place. Ms. Houston continued this structure qualified for the program and the Board normally concurred with staffs recommendation. Dr. Moore asked if the City did not tear the house down through Operation Clean Sweep, who would pay for the demolition and Mr. Arispe re-emphasized again that as long as the structure was on the list, it could not be demolished using federal funds, but the City would file to have a lien paced on the property. Ms. Jean Marie, a property owner next door, stated that she has paid a great deal of money for vector control in trying to control the rodent problem and also vagrants have been removing the boards to go inside to keep warm, especially with the cold weather. Fires have been started inside to keep warm, Illegal activities have also been going on inside the house. Ms. Jean Mare continued that if the structure was not going to be removed the listing, then the commission should overtake the responsibility of the house all of the negativity that goes with it. • Mr. Kevin Buchanan resides at 1007 Furman. Mr. Buchanan addressed the commission. Mr. Buchanan stated he has done a lot of work on cleaning up his property and the cost of trying to control • the rodent problem has been considerable. Mr, Grossman asked if the house at 1019 Furman was demolished would that solve the rodent problem and Mr. Buchanan answered he did not know. Mr, Thompson asked if the owner knew the house was being torn down if nothing was done to repair it and Ms, Jean Marie responded she did. It was continued that the owners son was the owner of Gemini Printing Ms, Tinker stated that the city does not have historical district designations. If Furman Avenue was to become a future historical district, the structure at 1019 Furman would be considered as a • contributing element to the overall character of the district. Ms. Tinker went on to say that she felt the structure could be repaired and brought up to code if a buyer could be found and was willing to restore it, Mr. Thompson stated he was conflicted in his role as a commissioner and as a homeowner on • Furman Avenue, Mr, Thompson continued that as a commissioner, he understood the commission's function to try to save as many structures as possible. Mr. Grossman was given time to talk with the owner and try to find a prospective buyer, but at some point, common sense should prevail especially when there was not a buyer. If no one was willing to pay the owners price, that means the house could • possibly set there for another twenty-five (25)years and deteriorate even further. Mr, Brown stated he reviewed the house and it was his belief that the house was not worth the amount of money the owner was requesting. Mr. Brown continued that it would take at least that amount or more to restore the house and bring it up to code. Mr. Brown went on to say even though it was the commission's function to preserve and maintain history, in this situation, the commission did not have any options. After continued discussion regarding whether the structure should be removed or left on the • survey, each commissioner was canvassed. The result of the canvass was twelve (12) members agreed the structure should be removed and one (1) member was in opposition to the removal. Mr. Baldwin stated that as important as it was in preserving and maintaining history, thee were other items to be considered other than the physical condition of a structure, Mr. Baldwin continued that in a situation as this, the decision had to be made to default and let the process take its course. • Landmark Commission Meeting k. January 25,2007 • Page 4 • Ms. Tinker stated that since the prospective buyer for the property was sent, she would like for him to state his name. Mr. Curtis Speed addressed the commission and began his comments by stating that his father, Charles Speed, was a former member of the Landmark Commission and he was • aware of what the commission was trying to accomplish by saving this structure. Mr. Speed went on to say that he and his father were interested in purchasing the house at 1019 Furman, but because of the amount the owner requested, they felt it was not a good investment. Mr. Speed continued that his cousin also lives on Furman Avenue at 1000. Ms. Tinker thanked Mr. Speed for coming to the meeting. After all comments were received, the following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY DR. BLANKE AND SECONDED BY MR. GROSSMAN THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION APPROVE REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE AT 1019 FURMAN AVENUE FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S SITE SURVEY OF POTENTIAL LANDMARKS. MOTION PASSED WITH VOTE IN OPPOSITION. Action to Consider Removal of the South Bluff United Methodist Church located at 1329 Seventh Street from the City Landmark Commission's"HC" Designated Listing &Site Survey: Ms. Tinker stated this was on the agenda because a letter was received from Barbara Ruth, on • behalf of the South Bluff United Methodist Church, informing the commission that the church had officially closed and no longer would be used as a local congregation. A buyer had been found for the church building and they were requesting the Landmark Commission to remove the "HC" designation from the structure. Ms. Tinker continued that after the initial letter was received, staff received a telephone call from Pastor Keith Wyatt, Pastor of First United Methodist Church, stating that the church was rescinding their request to remove the "HC" designation from the church. At this point, Ms. Tinker asked Pastor Wyatt if he would like to address the commission. Reverend Wyatt stated he was the Senior Pastor at First United Methodist Church. Pastor Wyatt continued that when the church received the "HC" designation, he was Vice Chairman of Trustees and former superintendent. Pastor Wyatt went on to say that the church had a buyer for the building and they did not have a problem with the "HC"designation, therefore, they were withdrawing their request for removal of the designation. Mr. Brown asked Pastor Wyatt to explain the statement in the letter referencing the the structure was dangerous and Pastor Wyatt explained the statement was with regard to the asbestos found in the building. Pastor Wyatt went on to say that an asbestos testing had been conducted and the findings were presented to the new owner. Pastor Wyatt continued that the new owner is a church-based organization in Abilene, Texas and the group will be conducting mission work in Mexico. Pastor Wyatt maintained that it was never their intention to tear the structure down. Aller Pastor Wyatt's comments, Ms. Tinker expressed thanks to him for attending today's meeting and providing information as to who purchased the church and what their intention was. Ms. Tinker continued that it was great that the designation would remain on the structure and the new owner did not consider the designation as a hindrance. Action to Consider Approval of the Rotary Club of Corpus Christi's Proposal to Provide a Town Clock for Installation in Heritage Park: Mr. Art Zeitler, Landmark Commissioner, briefly addressed the commission. Mr. Zeitler stated before he came on the commission, he presented a proposal to the Landmark Commission at the October meeting regarding the Rotary Club's proposal to purchase and donate a town clock to the City and having the clock installed in one of the citys parks. Mr. Zeitler continued that club members felt the logical place for the clock to be installed was in Heritage Park. Mr. Zeitler stated that since he was now a member of the Landmark Commission, Mr. Jim Mailhes, Club President, would do the final presentation and answer any questions commissioners might have. At this point in the meeting, the floor was turned fr Landmark Commission Meeting January 25,2007 Page 5 over to Mr. Mailhes. Mr, Mailhes stated he appreciated the opportunity to be a todays meeting to talk about the town clock project. Mr. Mailhes continued as previously stated by Mr. Zeitler, the concept was presented to the Commission in October and club members were excited about the project and were • especially happy since total funding had been secured. The funding was secured through private donations as well as donations from the membership, It was continued that the City Park Board unanimously approved the project. Mr. Mailhes provided brief background information about the club. The Rotary Club was founded in 1914 and the organization has been involved in community projects promoting and preserving city history. In 1983, the club provided funding for restoration of the Coppino Fountain located at the bottom of the bluff area. Mr. Mailhes continued that the club also funded improvements to the Hazel Bazemore Park, Mr. Mailhes went on to say that the town clock project was by far, one of the most exciting projects that the club has done and installing it in Heritage Park would be an excellent addition to the park while providing a great photo spot. Mr. Mailhes explained that the town clock project was not only a community project, but it was also a way in which to honor former club members. Mr. Zeilter, past president, has done extensive research as to which style of clock that would be best suited for Heritage Park in keeping with the overall historical flavor. A handout was provided of different clock styles, including the one selected for placement in Heritage Park. The style of clock selected has two clock sides - one facing the street and other facing Heritage Park. The propose clock was a Howard Replica (II) with two back lighted dials measuring 24" in . diameter. The clock and post would be black with gold accent and in Roman numerals. The date of the citys incorporation would be placed on the header above the clock on both sides with the "Rotary Wheel" in center of one face of the clock. Mr. Mailhes briefly reviewed the site proposal for installation of the clock. The clock would be installed in the plaza walkway off of Chaparral Street in lieu of the one light fixture closest to the street, The base would be placed 4-foot below grade and anchored and would be installed according the manufacturer's specifications. The following would complete the installation: • Limestone material around the concrete base with one side cut at an angle to allow the plaque to be seen; • Current surface material in the immediate area around the light post would be removed for installation of the clock and replaced by red brick pavers currently used in . the park, The City will install concrete base and red brick pavers. • • Electrical hookup for the clock would be provided by a Rotary Club contracted electrician; • Landscaping after construction was completed would provide additional Mexican Heather to fill the adjoining flowerbed, which would be located between the clock and , Chaparral Street; and • The City would reinstall the replaced light fixture elsewhere in Heritage Park. Ms. Tinker asked whey red brick pavers would be used to surround the base and Mr. Mailhes responded that the pavers were already there. Ms. Tinker went on to say that there were no red brick pavers in the city. Mr. Brown stated he felt the pavers were appropriate for that location. Ms. Abarca asked who would maintain the clock after it was installed and Mr. Mailhes answered the clock would be maintained by the city, but the mechanics of the clock would be the Club's responsibility. The Club purchased a 5-year warranty on the mechanics of the clock. After all comments had been received, the following action was taken: Landmark Commission Meeting January 25,2007 Page 6 IT WAS MOVED BY MR. GROSSMAN AND SECONDED BY DR. MOORE THAT THE LANDMARK • COMMISSION APROVE THE GIFT OF THE TOWN CLOCK AND ITS PLACEMENT IN HERITAGE PARK IN THE AREA WHERE THE LIGHTED LAMP POSTS WERE CURRENTLY LOCATED. ONE OF THE LAMP , POSTS WILL BE RELOCATED TO ANOTHER SITE IN THE PARK. MOTION PASSED. Ms. Tinker expressed thanks to Mr. Mailhes and the Rotary Club for the town clock project and what a wonderful addition it would be to the Heritage Park OTHER MATTERS: Ms. Tinker reminded members to mark their calendars with the meeting dates for the remainder of the year. Ms, linker continued that now that the commission was back to its full membership status, she hoped that would be easier to obtain a quorum for the monthly meetings. Ms. Tinker expressed thanks to staff for providing the calendar and other handouts that were included in the packet.. Ms. Tinker referenced the annual preservation conference scheduled for April 12-14, 2007 at the Lakeway Inn in Lakeway, Texas. Ms. Tinker stated any commissioners that were interested in attending the conference should contact her. Ms. Braselton informed commissioners that the Junior League was trying to find a buyer for the Blucher House. Ms. Braselton continued that the League wanted to sell the house because of the extensive cost to maintain it, There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. r - . Linda Williams WesleyVman, PlanningTechnician Recor•ing Secretary Acting Staff Liaison to Landmark Commission H:PLN•DIR\WORD\LANDMARK MINUWESWAN2507.MINU1ES) SUMMARY SHEET LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 25, 2007 1, Landmark welcomed four (4) new members to the commission. The new commissioners were Mr. Clifton Baldwin, Mr. Steve Bowling, Dr. James Carter, and Mr. Art Zeitler. 2, Landmark Commission approved removal of the structure at 1019 Furman Avenue from the Landmark Commission's site survey of potential landmarks. 3. Landmark Commission approved the gift of the town clock and its installation in Heritage Park, The town clock is a gift to the City of Corpus Christi from the Rotary Club. n�`v [�p 2OI (, - Ct1Y s 0;