Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Landmark Commission - 10/24/1991 zzy� V MINUTES LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOK OCTOBER 24, 1991 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Peggy Clark, Chairman Ms. Patricia Atkins Mr. James Catron Mr. Edwin Goodman Ms. Cynthia Hill-McKinney Mr. Leslie Mabrey Mr. Govind Nadkarni Ms. Alclair Pleasant Ms. Bunny Tinker, Advisory Member MEMBERS ABSENT: Ms. Mary Ellen Collins Ms. Pam Lakhani Mr. Joe Williams STAFF PRESENT: Ms. Faryce Goode-Macon, Staff Liaison Ms. Linda Williams, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order at 4:35 p.m. by Ms. Peggy Clark, Chairman. The roll was called and a quorum was not present. Upon arrival of Ms. Atkins, a quorum was declared. ACTION ITEM(S): Approval of September 26. 1991 Minutes: Ms. Clark requested that the site plan showing placement of the future Texas Historical Marker in Heritage Park be attached to the permanent minutes. There being no further comments or requests, the minutes were approved. DISCUSSION ITEM(S): Slide Presentation of Historic Survey: Ms. Faryce Goode-Macon, Staff Liaison, presented the remaining portions of the slide presentation for the Saxet Heights Subdivision and the Leopard Street Corridor. The remaining properties reviewed in Saxet Heights were as follow: 336 Merrill , built in 1928, Mission/Spanish Revival style; recommendation - medium. Commission revised priority to high priority. 353 Merrill , built in 1920-1940, recommendation - medium. 362 Merrill, built in 1955, recomnendation - medium. Commission revised to low priority. 3634 North Saxet Drive, built in 1920-40, Bungalow style; recommendation - medium. SCANNED Landmark Commission ting October 24, 1991 Page 2 3742 North Saxet Drive, built in 1939, Moderne style; recommendation - medium. Commission revised to high priority. (Baushaus Family Home) 3749 South Saxet Drive, built in 1920-40, Gambrid Farmhouse style, recommendation - medium. Commission revised to high priority. This property will be submitted as a nominee for the Landmark Commission's award. The following properties were reviewed in the Leopard Street Corridor: 1914-1/2 Leopard Street, built in 1900, no style; recommendation - medium. 1016 Leopard Street, Melba Movie Theater, Exotic Revival style; recommendation - medium. Commission revised to high priority. 1108-10 Leopard Street, LaTerraza Ballroom; built between 1900-1930; Spanish Colonial Revival style; recommendation - medium. 1118-20 Leopard Street, Bell Finance Company, built between 1900-1930; Classical Revival style; recommendation - medium. 1214 Leopard Street, built between 1900-1930, Classical Revival style; recommendation - low. 1409 Leopard Street, built between 1900-1930, no style, recommendation - medium. 1414 Leopard Street, Gonzalez Funeral Home, Queen Anne style; recommendation - high. 1519 Leopard Street, Turner Company, built between 1910-1930; Moderne style; recommendation - high. 712 North Staples Street, built in 1940s, no style; recommendation - medium. 714-24 North Staples Street, built in 1950, no style; recommendation - medium. Status Report on Sidewalk Tiles: Ms. Faryce Goode-Macon, Staff Liaison, stated that at the September meeting, the Commission approved contacting the City Streets Department to follow up on the sidewalk tiles in the Del Mar Subdivision. Ms. Macon continued that after speaking with Staff in the City Streets Department, it was learned that the job was not performed by the City, but the job was Landmark Commission°ting October 24, 1991 /1100 Page 3 contracted out. The contractor was informed about saving the sidewalk tiles and he agreed to remove those that were salvageable and relocate them to the contractor's office site. A group of residents from the Del Mar Association were to go and look at the tiles removed. The sidewalk tiles that are damaged will be reproduced as close to the original ones. The coordinator and contact person is Ms. Katherine Brookbank. Ms. Clark asked if tiles had to be ordered who would pay for it and Ms. Macon responded she did not know if the City or the Del Mar Neighborhood Association would absorb the cost. Ms. Macon continued that an agreement was reached between the City, the contractor, and the Del Mar neighborhood to have the tiles placed in the sidewalk because insets were placed to allow for the contractor to go back and install the tiles. Ms. Macon stated that at some corners, more specifically at Southern Street, the tiles were completely destroyed and they are to be reduplicated. Mr. Catron asked Ms. Tinker if any of the streets in the Del Mar area had gone through a name change and Ms. Tinker responded yes several of the street names were changed in the area. Confirmation of Members Attending CLG Conference: Ms. Macon stated she needed to confirm those commissioners who would be attending the CLG conference October 30 - November 1, 1991 in San Antonio, Texas so that the necessary paperwork could be completed for the per diem. After a brief discussion, it was confirmed that Commissioners Goodman, Nadkarni , Tinker, and Michael Gunning, Staff were going to the conference. Ms. Macon stated that the car rental agency would deliver the car on Wednesday afternoon to Mr. Goodman's office and he would take the driver back to the rental agency and complete the necessary paperwork. Ms. Macon continued that she would also deliver the conference packets and travel advances on Wednesday afternoon. November Meeting Date: Ms. Clark stated that the Landmark Commission's regularly scheduled meeting for November fell on Thanksgiving Day. The Commission should decide whether or not to meet or select an alternate meeting date. Ms. Macon stated that another meeting location might be needed, since the meeting could conflict with another board meeting on that date. The commissioners were discussing changing the meeting date to November 21, 1991, but Ms. Macon pointed out that the meeting for the Task Force on the Nueces County Courthouse was scheduled on that date at 2 p.m. Ms. Macon continued that it is possible that the meeting will be lengthy since representatives from the Texas Historical Commission and the Daniel Center for Legal History of the State Bar of Texas were invited to attend the meeting. Ms. Macon emphasized that she was part of the Task Force, along with several Landmark Commission members. After further discussion, commission members approved meeting on Wednesday, November 20, 1991 at 4:30 p.m. at a place to be determined later. Staff will find a meeting location. Landmark Commission sting V October 24, 1991 Page 4 CLG Grant Request: Ms. Macon stated she received the .CLG grant packet from the Texas Historical Commission. The Commission needed to select the next five (5) areas for the historical survey. Ms. Macon continued that the grant packet had to be submitted by December 20, 1991 and, if a determination could be made at today's meeting, it would provide Staff more time to write the grant application. The areas that have not been surveyed are: Hillcrest, Port Avenue, Downtown, Staples Street, Del Mar, Naval Air Station, and Oak Park, which will also include several houses back of Miller High School to Up River Road. Ms. Clark suggested that this phase of the survey include three areas instead of five and pursue more indepth research on one or two of the properties previously surveyed for a possible National Register nomination. Ms. Macon stated that this was not the Consultant's recommendation in the report and asked if this was the direction the Commission wanted to go. The Consultant's recommendation was to complete the historical survey and then take out those properties that merit National Register nominations. Ms. Tinker commented that by the time the historical survey is completed, the information obtained will be outdated. Mr. Mabrey asked for clarification as to what the survey was about and Ms. Clark explained that for Phase I of the historical survey, the consultant conducted a windshield survey of potential historical properties throughout the city. In Phase II of the survey, the Commission selected five (5) specific areas for the Consultant to perform indepth research on properties identified in Phase I. Ms. Clark continued that the CLG grant pre-application packet was received by Staff and the Commission needs to select the areas to be researched for Phase II-A. Mr. Mabrey asked if the Consultant had ranked the properties in a system of merit and Ms. Macon stated that the properties were rated as low, medium, or high. Ms. Hill asked if the grant money had to be expended for the survey only or could another project be substituted and Ms. Macon answered that the money had to be spent according to the original grant application. The application was submitted for a multi-phase (five in total) for the historic survey. This phase will be the third one of the five. After further discussion, the following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY MS. HILL-MCKINNEY AND SECONDED BY MR. GOODMAN THAT THE FOLLOWING AREAS BE INCLUDED IN PHASE II-A OF THE HISTORICAL SURVEY: HILLCREST, UP RIVER ROAD/LONGVIEW/OAK PARK, AND THE MORGAN/PORT CORRIDOR. MOTION PASSED. Ms. Clark stated she would like the Landmark Commission to get a copy of the slide presentation used in the educational program compiled by Ms. Nadine Coyle. Ms. Macon stated she will see what funds are available to have the slides copied. Landmark Commission 1 'ting October 24, 1991 16 Page 5 Properties Located at 1001 Agnes & 1011 Marguerite Streets: Ms. Clark stated there are two houses scheduled for demolition, the smaller house is located at 1001 Agnes, and the two-story house is located at 1011 Marguerite. The houses are not on the historical survey. Ms. Clark continued that Ms. Tinker saw the notification in the newspaper and requested to give a small presentation at today's meeting. At this point, the floor was given to Ms. Tinker. Ms. Tinker stated that these two houses and many other properties were reviewed by the Building Standards Board at their meeting today. Owners were previously notified to either repair their properties, bringing them up to code, or they would be demolished. Ms. Tinker presented slides for the two houses. The first house reviewed was the one located at 1011 Marguerite Street directly behind Suniland Furniture Store. The furniture store is located at the corner of Marguerite and Staples Street. This is the only house on that side of the street facing Marguerite. There is a vacant lot between this house and the corner. The Neighborhood Improvement Department received a letter from the owner, who is out of the country, stating that he has tried to sell the house for $20,000, but has been unsuccessful. The owner is not willing to pay the demolition costs or back taxes. The owner will be back in the country on October 31, 1991 and would like to sell the house for $5,000 to $10,000. Mr. Mabrey asked if the owner wants to sell the house only or the house and lot and Ms. Tinker answered she did not know. Ms. Clark asked Ms. Tinker what was her proposal and Ms. Tinker stated that she addressed the Building Standards Board and since the owner requested an extension in order to sell the house, that if the owner's request is granted, the Landmark Commission be granted an extension to give the Commission enough time to work with the owners on both properties. Ms. Tinker continued that the Commission has been successful in the past for advertising for historic homes. Ms. Tinker stated she felt the extension would be granted. 1001 Agnes: This house is owned by Burkett and Burkett Law Offices. According to Mr. Burkett, the house was built in 1901, but he did not know who built it. Ms. Tinker stated Mr. Burkett appeared before the Building Standards Board and requested that they be allowed to board the house up and be given an extension so that he could talk with the Landmark Commission and see what possibilities could evolve. Ms. Tinker continued that an extension was granted. Mr. Burkett owns several pieces of property in the South Bluff Park area. Ms. Tinker continued that after speaking with the owner, it seems that they are looking at pursing a zoning change for the property. Ms. Tinker continued that she told Mr. Burkett that the Landmark Commission was meeting today and she would present the proposal to the Commission and vote on whether the Commission was interested and in support of saving the house. If the Commission is not interested, the next time the structure appears on the listing Landmark Commission looting October 24, 1991 Page 6 for demolition, the Commission will not be notified. Ms. Tinker added that the requests for demolition for both houses were based on 50 percent deterioration. Ms. Clark read the Building Standards' report on the condition of the houses. Ms. Clark asked if the houses were salvageable and Mr. Nadkarni replied no, if you are looking at economical feasibility. Mr. Goodman commented that the Commission should talk with Mr. Burkett, who at least has shown an interest in the property and is willing to work the Commission; while on the other hand, the owner of the house at 1011 Marguerite is not willing to cooperate at all . Ms. Tinker stated that she would like to contact the owner of the house located at Marguerite Street and find out what his bottom price would be and maybe the Landmark Commission could find a person interested in taking over the property. Mr. Mabrey stated that based on the report compiled by the Building Standards Board, it might not be economical feasible to try to save the house. Mr. Mabrey continued that it seems a lot of money will be involved for the person that takes over the property. Whatever restoration or renovation is done, the work cannot be done at its present location, since Mr. Johnson wants to sell the house. Ms. Clark asked if the Commission thought the houses were worth spending the energy on or were there other houses that are in better shape that the Commission could focus on. Mr. Nadkarni stated that if someone is interested in taking over the property, the house can be moved onto another lot. After the house is moved, whether or not the owner would be willing to spend that kind of money is another matter. The cost to restore or renovate that house will be extensive. After further discussion, the following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. MABREY AND SECONDED BY MS. WHITMIRE THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CONTACT THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD AND LET THEM KNOW THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CONCURS WITH THE 60-DAY EXTENSION GIVEN TO MR. JOHNSON, OWNER OF 1011 MARGUERITE STREET, AND DURING THE EXTENSION PERIOD, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL CONTACT MR. JOHNSON. MOTION PASSED. Ms. Clark read the description and conditional report of the two- story house located at 1001 Agnes. Mr. Mabrey asked what zoning district was this house located in and Ms. Macon replied the property was most likely in an "A-1 or A-2" District. A question was asked regarding the cost of changing the zoning and Ms. Macon replied that zoning fees are based on lot area, but in City initiated cases, the fee could be waived. Mr. Mabrey stated that contrary to the other piece of property, the owner seems to be willing to work with the City in finding a solution. Since the Landmark Commission:ting J October 24, 1991 Page 7 report did not indicate any structural damage, the owner might be able to convert it into another use if the Commission is interested in pursuing it. The property would not be viable as a residential use, but it would be as a commercial use. Ms. Tinker stated that on that same street, there is a group of four (4) small bungalow type houses so it would not be like fixing up one piece of property in the middle of junk. After all comments had been received, Ms. Clark stated the Commission could take the same action as was done on the Johnson property at 1101 Marguerite Street. The following action was taken: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. MABREY AND SECONDED BY MS. PLEASANT THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CONTACT THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD AND LET THEM KNOW THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION CONCURS WITH THE 60-DAY EXTENSION GIVEN TO MR. BURKETT, OWNER OF THE HOUSE LOCATED 1001 AGNES STREET, AND DURING THE EXTENSION PERIOD, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL CONTACT MR. BURKETT. MOTION PASSED. Awards Program: Ms. Clark stated the Landmark Commission should decide whether or not to have awards for 1991 or wait until spring 1992. After a brief discussion, it was decided that the awards program would be in spring 1992. Ms. Clark stated that she was asked by David Richter, Architect, to serve on a panel, sponsored by the State AIA Convention, on Friday, November 1, 1991. The topic is the Nueces County Courthouse. Ms. Clark continued that she agreed to serve; and since that time, a conflict has developed -- she is to be in Austin, Texas on the same day. Ms. Clark asked for a commissioner to serve on the panel in her place. After a brief discussion, Ms. Whitmire agreed to serve. Ms. Clark explained that each panelist has been asked to give a five-minute presentation, two minutes of historical background, and the remaining time focusing on its current situation. The panel members will be the Mayor, Berney Seal, a member from the Landmark Commission, and others. After hearing the presentations, the architects are to brainstorm creative solutions to save the courthouse. The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.