Loading...
06/18/2006 MINUTESMINUTES SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF PARIS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CITY OF PARIS CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 107 E. KAUFMAN PARIS, TEXAS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2006 12:00 O'CLOCK P.M. The Historic Preservation Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Arvin Starrett at 12:00 P.M. A. The following members were present: Barbara Wilson, Vice Chairman Paul Denney Sue Lancaster Jerry Raper The following members were absent: Ann Rogers, Secretary Brian Wear Alternates: Becki Norment Claudia Hunt B. Also present were Lisa Wright, Historic Preservation Officer; and Bethany Golden, Main Street Coordinator /Asst. HPO. 2. Consideration of and action on renewing the Certificate of Appropriateness for 361 Grand Avenue (Salvation Army). The HPO advised the Commission that this same application was submitted earlier; however, since the length of time to begin work has expired, they are asking that the COA be renewed. Motion was made to renew the COA by Sue Lancaster, seconded by Barbara Wilson. Motion carried 5 -0. 3. Consideration of and action on the following Certificates ofAppropriateness: A. 824 S. Main Street- Mariano Sanchez. Mariano Sanchez stated that he wanted to replace the roof and install a fence on the north side of the property. He is proposing putting in a cedar privacy fence, and on the east side, he is proposing a wrought iron fence about 4' to 5' high with arrowheads. Lisa Wright told Mr. Sanchez that the fence could not be higher than 40" from the front face of the building to the street, and he said that was okay. Mr. Sanchez stated there would be gates, and the fence would run the full width of the property to the driveway and sidewalk. Chairman Starrett told Mr. Sanchez that wood posts would need to be used with the cedar fence, because the SOI Standards require a material that is appropriate to the neighborhood, and the fence he is connecting to has wood posts. Mr. Sanchez said he was also okay with that. With regard to the metal portion of the fence, Mr. Sanchez presented photos of several kinds of fences. Chairman Starrett stated that in order for the commission to make a decision on this particular fence, they will need to see an exact representation as to what Mr. Sanchez is proposing, because the photos show so many types, and Mr. Sanchez wants the finial from one and perhaps the railing from the other. Chairman Starrett advised Mr. Sanchez that he would need to come back to the Commission on the wrought iron fence issue because they don't have a specific request on which they can act. The Chairman called for two motions on this item —in light of the Secretary of Interior Standards, one with regard to the proposed roof and the other with regard to the proposed wood fence —and then the Commission could act on whether or not to grant a certificate. Regarding the proposal for the roof, Chairman Starrett called the Commission's attention to the SOI Standards, which state "reasonable effort to adapt the property with minimal alteration to the building or structure, distinctive stylistic features of the property that characterize a building or structure in its neighborhood and the fact that the deteriorated feature should be replaced in kind with the new material reflecting the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture and other visual qualities." On this proposed COA, the roof would not qualify as meeting the SOI Standards but the wood privacy fence would meet those standards. Chairman Starrett called for a motion to so state. Motion was made by Barbara Wilson, seconded by Jerry Raper. Motion carried 5 -0. The second motion with regard to this certificate would be the granting or the denial of a certificate of appropriateness based on the SOI Standards. The Commission could grant a conditional certificate for the wood privacy fence; however, in light of the previous vote, the commission would have to vote for a denial of the application for the galvanized roof material. Motion to grant conditional approval for the wood cedar privacy fence and deny the application for the metal roof was made by Jerry Raper, seconded by Barbara Wilson. Motion carried 5 -0. B. 574 Church Street - Kelly and Melissa Wickersham. Melissa Wickersham stated that they are still looking and finding so many things. She stated that, when the wooden pillars were removed, they uncovered metal anchors that they believe prove the existence of metal posts in the past. She said metal anchors would not be used to support wooden posts. According to Mrs. Wickersham, she has contacted Mr. Kent, Mr. Gwinn, and Mr. Hunt, and they are all in agreement with her that those anchors were used for metal pillars and not wooden ones. Mrs. Wickersham presented letters from Mr. Gwinn and Mr. Kent supporting their request for metal posts. She also stated that Gary Green of the Ben Smith family, former residents of the home, recalls when he was a small child that there were rusted metal pillars there before the wood, but he is looking for photos. She stated that Mr. Green had just left town or he would have attended the meeting. Chairman Starrett stated that all the Commission has is pictorial evidence of what the house looked like before the current project began, and that was with wooden posts. Barbara Wilson added that the character of the building is what is being addressed, and the Commission does not know what that was without appropriate documentation. Paul Denney stated that he has seen metal bolts used regularly to support wooden posts, so the existence of metal bolts alone is not enough evidence to prove that metal posts existed on the house. Chairman Starrett suggested that if there is documentation forthcoming, the item could be tabled and not acted upon. Under the SOI Standards, the Commission would not be able to grant the COA without some sort of pictorial evidence. Chairman Starrett stated that the Commission is only authorized to act in accordance with the SOI Standards. Chairman Starrett asked for two votes on this COA. The first being, does the proposed work meet the criteria of the SOI Standards with regard to: (1) Every reasonable effort shall be made to adapt the property in a manner that requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, object, or site and its environment. (2) The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, object, or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. (3) All buildings, structures, objects, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. (4) Changes that have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a building, structure, object, or site and its environment. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and respected. (5) Distinctive stylistic features or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a building, structure, site, orobjectshall be retained where possible. (6) Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced wherever possible. In the event the replacement is necessary, the new material should reflect the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Repair or placement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historical, physical, or pictorial evidence rather than conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. Motion that this application does not meet the SOI Standards was made by Jerry Raper, seconded by Paul Denney. Motion carried 5 -0. Motion to table the COA to give the Wickershams more time to find additional documentation was made by Jerry Raper, seconded by Sue Lancaster. Motion carried 5 -0. The HPO told Mrs. Wickersham to call her as soon as they were ready to move forward on this item and she would contact the Commission to call a special meeting. - - - -- CONSENT AGENDA - - - -- 4. Discussion of and possible action regarding the following structures considered by code inspectors to be in violation of Article 111 of Chapter 7 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris, Paris, Texas, entitled "Substandard and Dangerous Buildings and Structures," to determine whether such buildings or structures can be rehabilitated and designated on the National Register of Historic Places, as a recorded Texas Historic Landmark, or as historic property as designated by the City Council of the City of Paris: A. 549 8th Street NE B. 702 E. Booth C. 720 Grove Street D. 1180 25th Street NE E. 365 29th Street NE F. 116 10th Street NE G. 1011 E. Houston H. 1399 10th Street NE L 1350 10th Street NE J. 1364 10th Street NE K. 1391 12th Street NE (Structure 1) L. 1391 12th Street NE (Structure 2) M. 401 E. Grove N. 440 Pine Bluff O. 636 W. Kaufman P. 1230 11 th Street NW Q. 1310 W. Henderson R. 1361 W. Campbell S. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 1) T. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 2) U. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 3) V. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 4) W. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 5) X. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 6) Y. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 7) Z. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 8) AA. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 9) BB. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 10) CC. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 11) DD. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 12) EE. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 13) FF. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 14) GG. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 15)1 HH. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 16) ll. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 17) JJ. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 18) KK. 3400 Block NW Loop 286 (Structure 19) LL. 990 Pine Bluff MM. Tract 37, CR 32900 (Structure 1) NN. Tract 37, CR 32900 (Structure 2) 00. 1240 Pine Bluff Motion was made by Barbara Wilson, seconded by Jerry Raper, for Items 4A thru 4Z and AA thru NN, excluding 400 to be referred to the Building and Standards Commission for demolition since these homes have no historic value in terms of being named a landmark and would not be salvageable historic properties. Motion carried 5 -0. Paul Denney made the motion that 400 be pulled from consideration, seconded by Sue Lancaster. Motion carried 5 -0. - - - -- END CONSENT AGENDA - - - -- 5. Receipt of report from the Historic Preservation Officer. The HPO stated that her report would be brief since they just met last week. She stated that two COA's have been received —one is not a rush, and the second was incomplete. Also, the house on 7th and Graham has been purchased and the new owners will be fixing it up. She pointed the Commission to a handout that was sent by the NAPC. She stated she hoped , by the next regular meeting to have booklet put together for everybody that will include the ordinance, rules and procedures, SOI Standards, etc. A handy little book that can be brought to the meetings. Barbara Wilson said there were several things listed in the alliance pamphlet that would be good to go in the booklet. Margie Bell asked the Commission if she could address them, and Chairman Starrett stated that she could. Mrs. Bell said that she did not understand the Commission's decision on wrought iron, especially since wrought iron was placed at City Hall. The Commission advised her the wrought iron is a handicapped ramp handrail, and that wrought iron has previously existed at the old Fire Station on the upstairs windows. Kelly Wickersham approached the Commission and stated that he wanted to discuss other COAs that had been granted in the past. Chairman Starrett said they could not discuss this item because it was not on the agenda. Mr. Wickersham said that they were related to his COA application. Chairman Starrett told Mr. Wickersham they would need to re -open his agenda item since they has already voted on it and tabled it. He called for a motion to re- open Item 3B. No motion was made. 6. Request items from Board for future agendas. There were none. 7. The meeting adjourned at 12:45 p.m. APPROVED THIS 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2006. Arvin Starrett, Chairman