Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-14-93 HLC MinutesThe June 14, 1993 Meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission was called to order by Chairman Milton Bell. The following Commissioners were present: Chairman Milton Bell Commissioner Jessica Foy Commissioner M. L. Lefler Commissioner Walter Sutton Commissioner Charles Walker Commissioner Debra Kay Johnson Commissioner Mary Jane Buttriil Commissioner Bruce Hamilton The following Commissioners were absent: Commissioner Raymond Chaison (Excused Absence) Commissioner Sam Pullig (Excused Absence) Commissioner JoAnn Stiles (Excused Absence) Staff present: Stephen Richardson, Secretary; Nicholas Karavolos, Planner; Sterling Pruitt, Assistant City Manager; 'Tyrone Cooper, Assistant City Attorney; Lawrence Baker, Field Supervisor -Demolitions; Danny Daniels, Economic Development Administrator; Patsy Ellis, Recording Secretary; Kimberly James, Drafting Technician. Also present: Councilman -at -Large Andrew Cokinos;CouncilmemberLulu Smith; Carolyn Howard, Beaumont Main Street Program. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Commissioner Lefler made the motion to approve the minutes of the May 10, 1993 meeting. Chairman Bell added a correction to the minut(s in that Commissioner Debra Kay Johnson was an excused absence from the May meeting. Chairman Bell then called for a vote but because there was no second, the vote is void and will carry over to the July 12th meeting. (Due to lack of business, the July meeting was cancelled. All applicable business was tabled until August 9. MIIIUTES Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 REGULAR MEETING A) Chairman's Re rtrt: No Report Chairman Bell reported that there was a very successful meeting at Tyrrell Park for the presentation of the Historical marker on the Recreation Center Building and was well attended. He also stated that the publicity from the Beaumont Enterprise for the commission and Tyrrell Park was appreciated. B) Committee Reports: Marker Committee: No report Marketing Committee: No report Conference Committee: No report Education Committee: No report Bylaws Committee: No report Catalog Committee: No report Building Committee: No report. C) Formation of KCS Depgt Marketing Committee Tabled. D) The Oaks Historic District Designation WCLrDI) 1. Enabling Ordinance - Revisions of Existing Ordinance At this time, Chairman Bell turned the meeting over to Stephen Richardson, Planning Director, to report on Part One of the ordinance, a request to consider several amendments to the existing zoning ordinance of concern to the Historic Landmark Commission. Mr. Richardson stated that Articles 2 and 4 of the Zoning Ordinance titled "Specific District Regulations" and "Administration", Sections 30-21 and 30-39, respectively, would be amended to permit the definition of designation of Historic -Cultural Preservation Landmarks and Districts. Mr. Richardson stated the amendments also serve to clean up some administrative and grammatical errors in 2 MINUTES Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 the existing ordinance. The section regarding Article 4, Section 30-39, Sub -section (a) #3, Letter (0, addresses the amount of meetings, both specific number and percentage, within a year's time that a commission member must attend. An amendment was made to change the required percentage from 60% to 50% attendance. In general, amend Article 2, "Specific District Regulations:, to crate two new sections identified as: Section 30-21.1, "HC-L, Historic -Cultural landmark Preservation Designation"; and Section 30-21.2, "HC-D, Historic -Cultural landmark Preservation Overlay District". Section 30-21.1 replaces Section 30-21, "H-C, Historical -Cultural Preservation Overlay District Regulations". Section 30-21.1 is identical to the preceding Section 30-21, with some minor changes. The alterations are identified according to the previous numbering system. Throughout Articles 2 and 4, Sections 30-21 and 30-39, everywhere and in every form "District Designation", "Designation Districts", District", "Overlay District" appear, they shall be replaced by the word "Designation". Throughout Article 4, Section 30-39, "Historical -Cultural" changes to "Historic -Cultural"; throughout Article 4, Section 30-39, "Historical Landmark Commission" changes to "Historic Landmark Commission"; and, throughout Article 4, Section 30-39, "H-C" changes to "HC-L". In Article 2, Section 30-21, Sub -section (d), numbers 1 and 2, add the word "Historic"in "...the Landmark Commission..." after "the" and before "Landmark". In Numbers 2 and 3, change "located in" to "awarded". In Article 4, Sub -section (b), Number 2, change "designated as" to "awarded an"; in Number 3, change "located in" to "awarded an". 2. Historic -Cultural Landmark Preservation Overlay District Designation At this time, Mr. Richardson turned the meeting over to Mr. Karavolos, City Planner, to report on Part Two, Addition of Article Five to Section 30-39, Historic - Cultural Landmark Preservation Overlay District Designation, Mr. Karavolos stated that the second part of the ordinance is an addition to Section 30-21.2, Article 2, an Ordinance adding the designation HC-D which is Historic - Cultural District. Mr. Karavolos explained the different sections of the ordinance, the first part being" Definitions", which are self explanatory. The second section deals with reconciliation with other ordinances. All City of Beaumont codes, as amended apply to all historic districts unless expressly modified by ordinance. The Enforcement section, Section 3, concerns Certificates of Appropriateness, Exceptions, Additional Offenses and Responsibility. Section 4, Use Regulations for Historic Districts, states that all uses which were previously allowed within the area receiving Historic -Cultural Landmark 3 muqu ;S Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 Preservation Overlay District designation shall remain so upon adoption of this Ordinance. Section 5 is Development Standards for Historic Districts and covers density, height, story limitation, lot size, special exception, setbacks, off-street parking, signs, litter/trash and junk and outdoor furniture. Section 6 is rehabilitation guidelines. Section 7 is Preservation Criteria for an Historic District and covers building placement, form and treatment, landscaping and fences. Section 8 is Review Procedures for Certificates of Appropriateness in an Historic District. Included are review procedures, actions not requiring review, actions requiring review by the director, review by the Historic Landmark Commission, and appeals and exceptions. Section 9 deals with Nonconforming Uses and Structures including rebuilding damaged or destroyed structures and amortization of nonconforming structures. Section 10 is Designation as a Contributing Structure; Section 11, Penalty Clause; Section 12, Saving Clause, Section 13, Severability Clause; Section 14, Effect of this Ordinance on Pending Building Permit Applications; and, Section 15, Effective Date Clause. At this time, Chairman Bell stated that the Historic Landmark Commission will review, discuss and make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and from there it will go to the Planning Commission and to City Council for enactment of the ordinance, Chairman Bell asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to express themselves before the commission relative to the proposed changes in the ordinance. Those who wished to speak were: Raised Questions Roberta Morrow 2095 North Spoke in Favor David Bradley' 615 North 5th Tom Sibley 2150 Harrison Judy Boutte 2095 North Georgc'Blake - Blake's Clocks 2098 McFaddin At this time, Chairman Bell closed the public question and answer portion of the meeting. Commissioner Lefler made a motion to approve the recommended changes as outlined. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Walker. Commissioner Foy stated that she had some questions about the proposed ordinance. The commission listened to Commissioner Foy's questions and then asked that the following changes MINUTES Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 be made to the ordinance prior to submittal to the Planning Commission: *Include stucco structures in Section 7, Number 1, Letter k, Numeral II; *Clearly define "lights" as electrical, not windowed; *Allow realty and political signs temporary exemption from ordinance; *Allow for copper gutters and downspouts; *Permit limited use of wood shingles; *Relax regulation of security and ornamental window and door bars; and •Amend Section 9, Number 3 to exempt fences from amortization At this time, Commissioner Lefler stated that he would like to amend his motion to include all the changes as outlined by members of the commission and would request a second to his motion to his amendment. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Walker. Motion carried 8:0. 3. Historic -Cultural Landmark Preservation Overlay District Status for the Area Henceforth Referred to as The Oaks Historic District At this point, Chairman Bell, Commissioner Lefler and Commissioner Sutton recused themselves from participation in the proceedings because they own property in the district in question. Chairman Bell turned the meeting over to Commissioner Buttrill. Commissioner Buttrill then asked Stephen Richardson for the next section of the ordinance. Mr. Richardson stated that the commission is asked to consider a request for an application for the designation of a Historic -Cultural Landmark Preservation District. The area in question is approximately located between McFaddin and Louisiana Avenues and First and Eleventh Streets. This area encompasses approximately 287 acres. Staff recommends approval of this request. The area in question meets all of the standards outlined in Section 30-39 regarding historic significance. the presence of several already HC designated homes an&'two nationally registered properties augment the historic value of the community. Scores of historically contributing structures also provide strong incentive to designate the area. The HC overlay ideally fits the area and conforms to the policies, goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This overlay will create few non- conforming uses. The proposed overlay will allow for the continued uses permitted to date, yet facilitate a greater sense of harmony between them. In addition, the overlay will foster a renewed sense of community pride and involvement. Finally, future incompatible land uses and nuisances will be prevented. The area is primarily residential with scattered commercial uses along arterial and collector streets. About 79% of the lots within the area are historically significant. Of those, about 54% are 5 M114U S Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 SPARE properties and 25% were constructed prior to 1950. The western half of the area is historically intact. Incompatible and insensitive development encroaching from the east caused some blight throughout the eastern half of the area; nonetheless, the district is sound and maintains scores of exceptional homes. At this time, Mr. Richardson turned the meeting over to Nicholas Karavolos to elaborate more on the district. Mr. Karavolos asked the commission to grant a rebuttal after the open public hearing for the Old Town Neighborhood Association and The Oaks Historic District Committee. Mr. Karavolos also presented the commission with three (3) exhibits which included signed petitions exceeding 150 signatures by home owners, a phone log of approximately 175 conversations with home owners, 97% of whom were in favor written responses of the surveys sent out in our letters with a 92% favor, rating (a 11:1 ratio) and a listing of properties [hat are listed in SPARE Beaumont Surveys. At this time, Mr. Tom Sibley questioned if the commission still had a quorum. Tyrone Cooper, Assistant City Attorney, corrected the matter, saying that the quorum is not lost, only that the number changes for voting, not for the quorum purposes. Before continuing with the staff report, Mr. Karavolos showed slides of a map depicting the existing zoning in the area. He reminded the Commission that some of the properties in the area are designated SPARE properties, some are pre-1950 properties and some have already been awarded HC designation and some are nationally registered properties. He noted that the area consists of , RCR(Residential Conservation and Revitalization), RS(Single Family Dwelling, LI(Light Industrial and GC-MD(General Commercial Multiple Family Dwelling) zoning districts. He stated that the districts will remain unchanged, only the structures are impacted by this ordinance. 1,110 notification letters were mailed out to property owners, 818 within the district and 292 within two hundred feet (200'). The average response rate was approximately 92% (approximately 500 favorable responses). All the property is zoned in a minimum flood hazard zone and its existing zoning varies. The area is approximately 288 acres, more or less, and is mixed residential and commercial. The Comprehensive Plan calls for conservation and revitalization and stable area located in the district's northwest section. There are several streets located within the study area. Calder and Eleventh are not effected by the overlay with the exception of three properties abutting Calder Avenue to the north. Other streets are First through Eleventh and Louisiana through Calder. MURYIEs Landmark Commission Meeling June 14, 1993 Mr. Karavolos then showed slides of some of the homes in the district, many of which are historically significant and need protection. The area in question meets all of the standards outlined in sections 30-39, subsection 3 regarding historical significance. Mr. Karavolos went on to outline the criteria for the benefit of those who did not know them. Condition "a" is met because the area contains existing or proposed National Registered and Texas Historic Landmark property; Conditions "b and d" are met because each of the aforementioned homes manifests significant architectural characteristics; Condition "c" is met because some of the homes within the proposed district were designed by Master Architect Henry Conrad Mauer, who designed such noteworthy buildings as the White House, Beaumont Water Works and Texaco Office buildings in Port Arthur, to name a few; Condition "e" is met because of the fact that the many historical structures complement each other and illustrate entire eras of Beaumont history; Condition "f and i" are met because the founding families of this area exemplified an important cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of the city, county, state and nation; Condition "g" is met because the area in question was the city's first subdivision west of the railroad tracks; Condition "h" is satisfied because the area is host to over 765 SPARE listed properties and approximately 325 SPARE eligible properties; and, Finally, Condition "j" is met because the district contains scores of contributing structures which are eligible as historically significant` properties because of their proximity to the primary structures of historic significance. These relationships help define and strengthen the significance of the district on the whole. At this time, Commissioner Buttrill opened the meeting to the public for comments or questions. The following citizens spoke: Raised Questions Hubert Oxford Oprah Comeaux No Address Given 2465 Beech St. hl Sarah Biscamp 2575 Beech St. Dwayne Fowler 2435 Harrison Spoke in Favor Jerry Johnson No Address Given Gene Alford No Address Given Steve Wetzel No Address Given Wendell Radford 2570 Louisiana David Bradley 615 5th Street Spoke in Opposition Dr. Walter Sutton 2530 Louisiana MINUTES Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 Dan Dennis 2435 Beech St. Mike O'Rear No Address Given June O'Rear No Address Given Max Sears 2140 Hazel Tom Sibley No Address Given Commissioner Buttrill asked if anyone else would like to speak. No one did, so she closed the public meeting. Commissioner Foy complimented everyone who spoke on behalf of designating The Oaks Historic District. She stated that it was a great idea and personally hopes that it goes through. At this time, however, because the ordinance that was just voted on is extremely involved and contains many specific details and will have a great impact on all property owners in this district, and to allow time to examine the requests for the inclusion of the Beech Street neighborhood, she would like to make a motion with respect to Mr. Bradley, that the vote be tabled on the designation of this district until the next meeting. Commissioner Buttrill called for a second on the motion. No second was forthcoming. Motion died for lack of a second. At this time, the hearing was interrupted by very loud applause. Once order was re-established, Commissioner Johnson made a motion to establish 8 MRVLFM Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 The Oaks Historic District. Commissioner Hamilton amended the motion to include the Beech Street section and stated that he seconds the motion with the amendment. Commissioner Johnson accepted the amendment and included it in her motion. Mr. KaravoIos asked if the Beech Street amendment is at the discretion of the staff, or are they determining which properties are to be included. Commissioner Johnson stated that all of them are included. Mr. Karavolos stated that the boundary has been excluded on Eleventh Street and asked that we maintain an exclusion of Eleventh Street properties. Mr. Karavolos reminded the commission of the previous amendment to the district which will affect this amendment, that the northwest corner was granted exclusion. Commissioner Hamilton amended his amendment and Commissioner Johnson accepted. Commissioner Foy again commented that she thinks this is a wonderful idea, however, she knows that there are many people in this district who have no idea what the specifics of this ordinance are and would hope that within the next two weeks there will be an effort made to share that information with the property owners. At this time, Commissioner Buttrill called for a vote. Motion passed 5:0. The hearing was again interrupted by very loud applause. Commissioner Buttrill turned the meeting back over to Chairman Bell. Chairman Bell thanked the property owners for attending the meeting and stated that the meeting was not concluded as other business must be attended to and would appreciate order and quiet so the meeting can continue. Chairman Bell recalled the meeting to order and stated that at this point he would entertain a motion from the commission to forego the rest of this agenda until the next meeting. Commissioner Hamilton made the motion and Commissioner Lefler seconded the motion. Mr. Karavolos reminded the commission of the demolition properties which required immediate action. Chairman Bell asked how many items were on the list and Mr. Karavolos stated that there was only one and stated that it would take no more than five minutes to conclude. Commissioner Foy asked if there was a problem with tabling this item. Mr. Karavolos stated that it was very important that it be taken care of as soon as possible. Chairman Bell asked if Commissioner Hamilton withdrew his motion. He declined. Commissioner Lefler withdrew his second and the motion died for lack of a second. z MINUTES Landmark Commission Meeting June 14, 1993 E) Budget Report Tabled, F) Communi Initiated Development Conference Tabled. G) Demolitions Mr. Karavolos showed a series of slides and Lawrence Baker spoke about the structural integrity of the buildings being viewed. Mr. Baker stated that the properties are causing problems in the neighborhood. He also stated he has been approached by the Sheriffs Department and the Beaumont Police Department about the problems these houses have been causing. Also, neighbors have complained about the poor condition these buildings are in. In addition, Mr. Karavolos submitted a police report stating month by month, for the last two years, the crimes statistics for the area. Mr. Baker stated that he has permission from the property owner to demolish the property. The tagged structures include: 1054, 1064, 1078, 1086, 1088 & 1098 Ashley 1073, 1075, 1081, 1083, 1085 & 1095 Miller 1114, 1126, 1146 & 1156 Forrest 1115, 1125, 1137 & 1153 Stephenson A motion was made by Commissioner Lefler to demolish all tagged structures and seconded by Commissioner Johnson.' Commissioner Hamilton stated that maybe these structures could be rehabilitated instead of building new structures for housing. Mr. Karavolos assured him that as far as the state and federal guidelines are concerned, the structures are sub -standard and not usable for housing purposes. He stated that if someone in the private sector wanted to rehabilitate the houses, without using state, federal or CDBG monies, they could be rehabilitated; however, they were still sub -standard as far as the Beaumont Code is concerned. A vote was called for by Chairman Bell. Motion carried 6:2. H) Other Business Tabled. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 10