Loading...
08-E Hist Pres Comm (03-22-04) Heritage Preservation Meeting Minutes March 22, 2004 The meeting was called to ordcr by the Chairman, Arvin Starrett at 4:02 p.m. The Chairman asked for a roll call by the secrctary. the follo,^,ing membcrs were present. Suc Lancaster Ann Rogers Claudia Hunt Arvin Starrett Becki Norment Barbara Wilson Brian Wear Jerry Raper Paul Denny Present was Lisa Wright, Director of Community Development/Hcritage Preservation Officer The following guests were present Suzy Harper Karcn Wilkerson Lindsey Harper Item 2: No minutes wcre presented The item was tabled due to the absence of the secretary Ann Rogers Item 3: Discussion of and possible action on approving Certificates of Appropriateness A. The flfst applicants for a Certificate of Appropriateness were Michaella Bumgarner and Brenda Smyers for property loeated at 101 Grand Avenue. Their problems stem from the various colors of brick not matching and the proposal asks for permission to repaint the brick facade to match the old or be harmoruous with the old brick. They would tie together these various colors with beigc paint on1y where brick has a1rcady been painted. After discussion and clarification of where the paint would begin and end ,a motion was made by Paul Denny and seeonded by Barbara Wilson to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness to the applicants. The Chairman asked for an amended motion to stipulate that the color mateh as closely as possible aftcr a statcment by Ann Rogers that we were not to gct into paint color choiees .The amended motion was made by Becki Norment and seconded by Barbara Wilson. The motion carried with one nay vote and cight aye votcs. B. The second applicants were the City of Paris/Lamar County Chamber ofCommeree- 1125 Clarksville Street, Paris Santa Fe-Frisco Railroad DepotlHeritage Park Parking Lot. Thc applicants requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for asphalting of the parking lot between Paris Santa Fe- Frisco Railroad Depot and Heritage Hall scrving both buildings and Heritage Park. The Community Development Direetor, Lisa Wright was askcd to give the Commission an explanation ofwhat the city wantcd to do. The City Engineer was present and was then asked by Lisa to explain the project to the Commission. He related that the on1y minor change in thc original plans subnÜtted was to allow Coca Cola access. After a brief discussion period with qucstions by the Chairman and Barbara Wilson, a motion was made by Sue Lancaster and seconded by Becki Normcnt. The motion carried unarumously. Item 4 Discussion of and possible action regarding the following structure considered by code inspectors to be in violation of Article III of Chapter 7 of the "Code on Ordinances of the City of Paris, Texas. Building A: 438 1 st StreciliJ.l. . After some discussion on the wording ofthc motion, Barbara Wilson offered the motion that the structurc has no historical significance and can be razed. Building B.: ~S1....N..E. A motion by Becki Norment stated that this propcrty has no historical sigruficance . The motion was seconded by Sue Lancaster. The motion carried unanimously Building C: 758 1 st St N.E... Paul Denny urged that this property be opened for discussion. It was stated that this property had historical significance as an example of a shotgun house. He further stated that the Lamar County Historical Society has shown an interest in this house and had funds to move the house. He then made a motion to pull the property ITom thc list. The motion was seconded by Claudia Hunt. Thc motion carried unanimously Building D: 3..40-348 2nd Strcct N E Paul Denny madc a motion that the building was not historÌcally significant and the motion was seconded by Jerry Raper. The motion carried unanimously. Building E. 21Qli_J'xmline. The building was not deemed historically significant and could not be rehabilitated. The motion was de by Suc Lancaster and seconded by Claudia Hunt. After a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. Building F. :118 3rd St N.E. The building was not deemed historically significant and could not be rehabilitated. The motion was made by Ann Rogers and seconded by Suc Lancaster. A!lcr a voice votc, thc motion carried unanimously. Building G. un W Austin S1re.e1 The building was not deemed historically significant and could not be rehabilitated. The motion was made by Barbara Wilson and seconded by Bccki Norment. After a voicc vote, the motion carried unanimously. Building H. 350 3rd St N E The building was not deemed historically significant and could not be rchabilitated. The motion was made by Paul Denny and seconded by Barbara Wilson. After a voice vote, tbe motion carried unanimously. Building I S:29 6th St NW . The building was not deemed historically sigrùficant and could not be rehabilitated. The motion was made by Barbara Wilson and seconded by Becki Normcnt. After a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. Building J. 635 6th St N.W. The building was not decmed historically significant and could not be rehabilitated. The motion was made by Becki Norment and seconded by Jerry Raper. Afler a voicc votc, the motion carried unanimously. Building K. JilliJ:ith..~ The building was not deemed historically significant and could not be rehabilitatcd. The motion was made by Barbara Wilson and secondcd by Becki Normcnt. After a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. Building L. 649 W Shcrman St. Paul Denny asked to be recused from discussion and voting on this building after providing thc Commission with a 1958 picture ofthe building with no comments. Hc stated that he wrote a letter to thc owner to offer to purchase thc property ¡rom him. The motion to recuse Paul Denny was made by Barbara Wilson and seconded by Becki Normcnt. After Mr. Denny's dcparture, the discussion was opened concerning thc property. Becki Nonnent asked for clarification [¡-om the Chairman as to what the Commission's responsibility should be. Chairman Starrett said that we could declare that the house had historical significancc and that a 180 day time [¡-ame would be placed on the house. Barbara Wilson indicated that she wou1d like to see a time framc because even if it could not be rehabilitated, it may have historical salvageable items. She then moved that house was historically significant. The motion was scconded by Becki Norment and aftcr a voice vote, the motion passed unarumously. Before beginning thc last structure, Thc Chairman asked for a motion to allow Paul Denny to return. Thc motion was madc by Becki Norment and seconded by Barbara Wilson. Building M. 2.49 3rd St SW . The building was not deemed historically sigruficant and could not be rchabilitated. The motion was made by Claudia Hunt and seconded by Paul Denny. Aftcr a voice vote, thc motion carried unanimously. Item 5: Discussion and possible action on: A. Making revisions to thc Commission's rules regar--ding..Ct'.úiticatcs of Appropriateness. There were conccrns among the members of the Commission as to how many times should an applicant appear before the Commission and if they ask for a request to be tabled, how many times should it appear on the agenda before being dismissed. Therc was also a discussion about requiring a time for the completion of a project. Steve Medven of Buildings and Standards stated that Planning and Zoning automatically rejects a perrlÙt if the homeowncr does not appcar a second time after being on the agenda. Several solutions were proposed by CornnlÍssion members. Onc was to use the P&Z's rule that a nÜssed second appearance triggers a rejection and requires reapplication. The Chairman felt that we should makc cvery cffort to assist homeowners. There was some question as to whcthcr the Commission could, by rule do this or would this action require a change in the ordinance by the City Council. After further discussion, it was dccided to havc Lisa Wright, Community Developmcnt Dircctor ask for a ruling nom the City Attorney's ollice. A motion was made by Barbara Wilson to have Lisa Wright ask the City Attorney for a ruling. It was seconded by Becki Norment Thc motion passcd unanimously. Claudia Hunt then suggested using P&Z's rules to trigger declination and fe-application of certificatc. A motion was then offered by Barbara Wilson that failurc of the applicant to appear on a requested Certificate of Appropriateness, the Ccrtificate would be tabled until the following Commission meeting. Ifthc pctitioner did not appear, the Certificate would be derued. . The motion was sccondcd by Becki Norment. The motion passed unanimously. At this point, Becki Norment asked thc Chairman, if questions that she had received [¡-om a homeowner would be appropriate at this time. After assurances [¡-om that this was thc place in the agenda to do so, she stated that a homcowner had callcd to say that she was told that she wou1d need a Certificate of Appropriatcness to plant flowers. Thc Commuruty Dcvelopment Director Lisa Wright said that shc did not tell a homeowner that they had to fill out a Certificatc, but that it might be best to just fill one out and put it on file. The Chairman noted that the 25% rule may app1y, but beds that have been traditionally planted ITom ycar to year do not rcquirc approval ITom anyone. Major. landscaping coverÌng more than 25% of a yard with large trees and bushes do require a Certificatc. Hc also stated that hc felt that thc Commission should only get involved in landscaping that would negatively affcct a property. Paul Denny stated that onc must look to see if something pcrmanently has becn ruined. Planting does not ruin ! Ruined means things that cannot be economically and practically reversed He then offcred a suggestion that the Commission do as little as possiblc on landscaping. Thc Commissioner offered a by rule declaration on the landscaping issue. It stated that the Commission would not regulate landscaping on rcsidcntiaJ propcrty. After discussion on the wording and the statement of the Community Dcvclopment Director that unless she had something in writing or a picture, she could not make a judgcmcnt. She wa~ then rcquested by the Commission to look into other CLG cities as to how they handle these issues and report back top the Commission in pcrhaps a week. The CornnlÌssion would thcn seek a call meeting to hear thc information she received.. Lisa would get togethcr with the Commissioner and sct up a call meeting. Aftcr discussion of a day that would bc accommodating to most members, it was decided to have a lunchcon meeting on Tuesday at 1 :00 p.m. at Paris Junior College if a room was availablc. Lisa Wright would look into the availability of a room for that day. B. Rcschcduling the puhlic hearing on the Church.S1r.(;ÇillÎ.stDkt Returning to Barbara Wilson's earlier suggestion of a meeting with homeowners in the South Church Street District, the Commissioner restated his position in favor of a town hall type meeting with thc homeowners. Barbara Wilson brought to the Commission's attcntion that the need is urgent to mcct with homeowners in the South Church St. District as soon as possible to answcr qucstions such as the ones that had been asked ofBecki Norment.. To conform with thc Open Meetings Act, thc mccting would be published in accordancc with the rules. It was felt that a meeting would allay the homeowners' fears and answer any questions they may have .about the HistorÌc Preservation Ordinance and what it entails. Becki followed this suggestion with two more questions posed by her neighbors. One being the installation of a gravel driveway( permissible in residential homes)and two, a bathroom addition to the house( depends upon visibility ITom the ITont and other factors).The meeting came back to the issue at hand scheduling a mccting. At this time, Paul Denny said that he was against the Commission scheduling a full Public Hearing because they Commissioners have a lot of work to do before being preparcd to answcr questions. He was however, in agreement with a Town Hall meeting. C. Setting..desigttstandards for the Church Street District Again returning to the items at hand, Claudia Hunt asked the ComnÜssion if we did not talk about hiring a design consultant to prepare the designs. She was reminded that at our March 1st meeting, Bratton Thomason suggested that we check out Design Teams and see what has becn donc in othcr citics, but she would not recommend any teams A motion was made by Barbara Wilson to petition the City Council to become part of their agenda if the Hcaring Officer detcrmines that this action becomes necessary. The motion was seconded by Becki Normcnt and the motion passed unanimously aftcr a voice vote.