HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 08, 2014 AgendaAGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
April 8, 2014
After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will
convene in 2nd Tuesday Session on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Work
Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items
will be considered:
NOTE: A 2nd Tuesday Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City Council
Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction into whether or not such
matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting of the Council for citizen input,
City Council deliberation and formal City action. At a 2nd Tuesday Session, the City Council
generally receives informal and preliminary reports and information from City staff, officials,
members of City committees, and the individual or organization proposing council action, if
invited by City Council or City Manager to participate in the session. Participation by
individuals and members of organizations invited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the
session is being closed to public input. Although 2nd Tuesday Sessions are public meetings, and
citizens have a legal right to attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to
participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Any citizen may supply to the
City Council, prior to the beginning of the session, a written report regarding the citizen's
opinion on the matter being explored. Should the Council direct the matter be placed on a
regular meeting agenda, the staff will generally prepare a final report defining the proposed
action, which will be made available to all citizens prior to the regular meeting at which citizen
input is sought. The purpose of this procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting
the opportunity to hear the views of their fellow citizens without having to attend two meetings.
1. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding an application from
the Denton County Historical Commission for the Texas Historical Commission
Recorded Texas Historic Landmark Marker for City Hall West.
2. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the
City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or
accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting
AND
Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of
community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of
thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an
honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a
reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body;
information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored
by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be
attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the
municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and
safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda.
Following the completion of the 2nd Tuesday Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed
Meeting to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting
section of this agenda. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on
any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the Texas Government
Code, as amended, or as otherwise allowed by law.
1. Closed Meeting:
City of Denton City Council Agenda
April 8, 2014
Page 2
A. Consultation with Attorneys — Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071.
1. Consult with and provide direction to City's attorneys regarding legal
issues and strategies associated with Gas Well Ordinance regulation of gas
well drilling and production within the City Limits and the extraterritorial
jurisdiction, including Constitutional limitations, statutory limitations
upon municipal regulatory authority, statutory preemption and /or impacts
of federal and state law and regulations as it concerns municipal
regulatory authority and matters relating to enforcement of the ordinance.
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the
City of Denton, Texas, on the day of 2014 at o'clock
(a.m.) (p.m.)
CITY SECRETARY
NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS
ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.
THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING
IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED
MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349 -8309 OR USE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800 -
RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED
THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
AGENDA DATE: April 8, 2014
DIVISION: Planning and Development
ACM: John Cabrales, Jr.
SUBJECT: HL13 -0001 (221 N. Elm Street)
Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding an application from the
Denton County Historical Commission for the Texas Historical Commission Recorded Texas
Historic Landmark Marker for City Hall West (CHW).
BACKGROUND
In July 2013, a representative of the Denton County Historical Commission (DCHC) approached
a Historic Landmark Committee (HLC) member and asked for HLC support on a
recommendation for a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark (RTHL) designation of City Hall
West. The item was placed on the HLC's August, 2013 agenda (Exhibit 5). During that
meeting, the item was not voted on because staff informed HLC that the City Council had
requested that the HLC postpone consideration of the recommendation for the RTHL until
further notice. At that time, there had been significant interest in the purchase of this property by
a private developer.
On November 11, 2013, the HLC voted unanimously (8 -0) to recommend approval of a petition
by the DCHC to the Texas Historic Commission for a RTHL designation of City Hall West,
located at 221 N. Elm Street (Exhibit 1). On December 11, 2013, the Planning and Zoning
Commission was briefed on this request during Work Session (Exhibit 7) and on March 5, 2014,
the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend CHW for a RTHL designation
(Exhibit 8).
The subject site, known as City Hall West was designated as a local historic landmark on
September 7, 1982, per Ordinance No. 82 -69 (Exhibit 3). Constructed in 1927, the building has
been repurposed over time and used by several City departments. It has served as Denton's City
Hall, a Fire Station, a Police Department, and now houses the City's Planning and Development
Department.
Impacts of Historic Designations
Timelines for approval of Exterior Modifications
As a result of the local historic landmark designation, any exterior renovations must first be
approved by the HLC through the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) process (Exhibit 10).
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 2 of 7
The application must include copies of all detailed plans, elevations, perspectives, specifications,
and other documents pertaining to the work to the HLC. If the renovations also require a
building permit, the building official, will then forward the information and request to the HLC.
The HLC will then hold a hearing on the application to determine if the "proposed work... will
not adversely affect any significant architectural or historical feature of the designated historic
landmark, and is appropriate and consistent with spirit and purposes" of the originating
ordinance. If such findings are made, the HLC will grant a COA and renovations may begin. If,
however, the HLC deems the proposed work as adversely affecting or destroying "any
significant architectural or historical feature of the designated historic landmark" or as
"inappropriate or inconsistent with the spirit and purposes of this article," the applicant is
notified and provided "with the changes necessary to secure approval of the application."
Recorded Texas Historic Landmark Designation
A "RTHL designation helps preserve the state's historically and architecturally significant
resources" per the Texas Historical Commission (THC), (http: / /www.thc.state.tx.us /fags). Bob
Brinkman, Coordinator for the THC's Historical Marks Program, provided the following
information:
"Owners of RTHL- designated structures must give the Texas Historical
Commission 60 days notice before any alterations are made to the exterior of the
structure (interior changes, normal maintenance and in -kind replacement of
materials do not require THC review). The full procedure is described in the
Texas Government Code, Section 442.006 (f): "A person may not damage the
historical or architectural integrity of a structure the commission has designated as
a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark without notifying the commission at least
60 days before the date on which the action causing the damage is to begin. After
receiving the notice, the commission may waive the waiting period or, if the
commission determines that a longer period will enhance the chance for
preservation, it may require an additional waiting period of not longer than 30
days. On the expiration of the time limits imposed by this section, the person may
proceed, but must proceed not later than the 180th day after the date on which
notice was given or the notice is considered to have expired." Normal
maintenance, and interior renovations, are permissible and do not require THC
review. Proposed work which would alter historical or architectural integrity of
the exterior does require THC review and permission."
If CHW is designated as a RTHL, in addition to the current designation as a local historic
landmark, approval of any exterior modifications to the building would have to be reviewed and
approved by both the THC (state) and the HLC (local). Per Chapter 442, §442.006(f) of the
Texas Government Code:
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 3 of 7
(f) A person may not damage the historical or architectural integrity of a structure the
commission has designated as a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark without notifying
the commission at least 60 days before the date on which the action causing the
damage is to begin. After receiving the notice, the commission may waive the
waiting period or, if the commission determines that a longer period will enhance the
chance for preservation, it may require an additional waiting period of not longer than
30 days. On the expiration of the time limits imposed by this section, the person may
proceed, but must proceed not later than the 180th day after the date on which notice
was given or the notice is considered to have expired.
Normal maintenance and interior renovations are permitted and do not require prior approval
from the THC. The Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Historic Preservation states that
normal maintenance includes treatments such as rust removal, caulking, limited paint removal
and re- application of protective coatings, cyclical cleaning or roof gutter systems, or installation
of fencing, and alarm systems.
Typically in situations where a building has been designated by both the state and the city, the
THC would review the proposed renovations and approve them prior to consideration by the
HLC. The review comments /approval by the THC would be included in the application
reviewed by the HLC.
The THC requires applications be submitted 60 days prior to the anticipated renovations. If the
proposed renovation is a simple renovation such as an in -kind replacement (replacing like with
like), the review time could be as short as a week. Typically however, the first 30 days of the
THC review consists of an evaluation of the effects the renovation could have on the building. At
the end of the first 30 days, the THC will issue a letter that either waives the remaining 30 day
review time and approves the request, or asks for more information regarding the proposal which
will then be reviewed in the remaining 30 day time frame. If the building in question is one that
the THC is unfamiliar with, or if the proposed renovations are extensive and will have a
profound effect on the integrity of the facade, an additional 30 day may be added to the 60 day
time frame (Exhibit 9).
After the proposed renovations have been reviewed and approved by the THC, they must be
reviewed and approved by the HLC through the local COA process, which takes approximately
41 days to complete the local review.
Marketability of City Hall West
Another factor for consideration in obtaining a RTHL designation is the marketability of CHW.
For the past eight (8) months, the City has fielded inquiries from local developers /investors
interested in purchasing CHW for redevelopment. In order to determine if the RTHL designation
would be beneficial in the marketability of CHW, staff reached out to a few developers to
determine, from their perspective, what effect the RTHL designation would have.
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 4 of 7
The results were mixed with emphasis on two issues consistently noted as a positive and a
negative. According to the developers /investors questioned, the designation would be viewed
positively. Many businesses use the designation as a marketing tool, having an address within an
historic structure is a benefit. However, the concern arises from the ability to make
improvements to the exterior of the structure that would require State and City approval. They
were of the opinion that the timeframes for approval of exterior work would be viewed
negatively.
Opportunities as a result ofRTHL Designation
There are many benefits that can be obtained from obtaining the RTHL designation. Some of the
benefits of RTHL designation include:
1. Access to technical preservation assistance through the THC.
THC staff can assist in determining appropriate preservation methods which comply with
the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Preservation.
2. Inclusion in the Texas historic Sites Atlas; http: / /atlas.thc.state.tx.us.
3. Increased property value.
Studies have shown that property values can increase up to 20% as a result of historic
designation.
4. An increase in "Heritage Tourism ".
In 1997, one in ten travelers in Texas was a "heritage traveler" who was primarily
interested in visiting historic sites. Heritage travelers typically stay longer, and spend
more money than do non - heritage travelers. They are more often from out of state and as
such, more likely to pay for lodging rather than stay with relatives. In researching the
economic impacts of Heritage Tourism, the Texas Historical Commission reported that in
2002 -2003 Texas was the second most visited state by Heritage Travelers after
California.
The most significant state grant for rehabilitation of historic structures is through the THC, the
Texas Preservation Trust Fund. Unfortunately, the Texas Preservation Trust Fund grant program
was suspended by the 82nd Texas Legislature's budget reductions in 2011. Currently there are no
funds available for this grant.
A new State Tax Credit program was approved by the 83rd Texas Legislature in 2013. The new
tax credit is equal to 25 percent of eligible costs and expenses incurred in a certified
rehabilitation that totals more than $5,000 was recently approved. The tax credit may be applied
against franchise tax obligations beginning Jan. 1, 2015. State historic tax credits can be
transferred multiple times. Unused credits can be carried forward on up to five consecutive
franchise tax reports. The Texas Historical Commission and the Texas Comptroller of Public
Accounts will adopt the rules necessary to implement the new credit.
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 5 of 7
Partial Designation of City Hall West
As noted, CHW has been repurposed over the years that have necessitated exterior modifications
and changed multiple sides of the structure from the original design and construction. Past
maintenance, repairs, and exterior modifications have included the removal of the old Fire
Station bay doors on the north side and west side of the building. The roof has been replaced and
more recently some windows on the north and south side of the building were replaced. As a
result, only the front of the structure, facing Elm Street, has maintained most of the original
design. Staff contacted Bob Brinkman with the THC to ascertain if a portion, (i.e., front facade)
of the structure could obtain the RTHL designation.
Mr. Brinkman advised that designation of part of a building or structure is not permitted by the
THC but noted in order to accomplish that task the City could resort to some sort of preservation
covenant or easement (facade easement) which would run with the land. He advised that these
usually are for periods of 99 years and are convened to some independent body or organization.
They operate much like conservation easements applied to protecting large pieces of land from
future development.
Proposed Capital Expenditures
The age of CHW requires continual maintenance and upkeep and a consideration in whether to
retain ownership of CHW should include required capital costs and maintenance cost. Facilities
Maintenance has prepared a maintenance program for the next seven years to ensure CHW
remains a profitable asset to the City.
Pending interior improvements will include HVAC, flooring, and routine maintenance. In total
these items will cost approximately $317,155. As well, the Planning and Development
Department has proposed modifications to the interior lobby of CHW to make the building more
conducive to the activities of the public. These modifications are designed to create more of a
counter to conduct business and a wait area setting for the public. The cost of these modifications
will be approximately $35,000. In total, the approximate cost for the next seven years is
$352,155.
Private Reinvestment
A concern expressed by advocates of the City retaining ownership of CHW is that the exterior
structure will be modified to the point of losing its historic integrity and the City will lose a
significant piece of history. However, through some research staff identified locations where
private reinvestment has occurred with no or minimal significant exterior modifications.
Following are a few locations in the downtown:
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 6 of 7
Building Name
Address
Prior Use
Rusty Taco, HSL, Hoochie
210 -214 E Hickory
vacant warehouse / cash register store
Mellow Mushroom
217 E Hickory
Garbage King Warehouse
Andaman Thai, Vigne Wine
221 E Hickory
HVAC Contractor
Texas Building
100 W Oak
executive office suites (75% vacant)
In preparation for this discussion, staff has reached out to Justin Kockritz, the THC Architect for
our region who has agreed to attend the April 8 work session and discuss the pros and cons of a
RTHL designation.
Justin Kockritz is the North Texas project reviewer for the THC Division of Architecture, and he
meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications for architectural history. At the
THC, Justin is responsible for reviewing projects under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, the State Antiquities Code, Recorded Texas Historic Landmark legislation, and
for the federal historic rehabilitation tax credit program. Prior to joining the THC, he worked for
the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office and as a contractor for the National Park
Service and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in Washington, DC. He has a Master's
degree in historic preservation from the University of Maryland, and undergraduate degrees from
the University of Texas in urban studies and geography.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends City Hall West be considered for Recorded
Texas Historic Landmark (RTHL) (7 -0).
The Historic Landmark Commission recommends City Hall West be considered for Recorded
Texas Historic Landmark (RTHL) (8 -0).
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
1. November 11, 2013 - Historic Landmark Commission (HL13 -0001)
2. September 7, 1982 - City Council approved Historic Landmark Designation of 221 N. Elm
Street (Ord. No. 82 -69).
Agenda Information Sheet
April 8, 2014
Page 7 of 7
EXHIBITS
1. Location Map
2. Zoning Map
3. Ordinance 82 -69
4. HLC Recommendation Letter
5. HLC meeting minutes August 12, 2013
6. HLC meeting minutes November 11, 2013
7. P &Z Work Session meeting minutes December 11, 2013
8. P &Z meeting minutes March 5, 2014
9. RTHL Review Process
10. HLC Review Process
11. Historic Photos of City Hall West
Respectfully submitted:
OFF
Brian Lockley, AICP, CPM
Planning and Development, Director
Prepared by:
Cindy Jackson, AICP
Senior Planner
Exhibit 1
Location Map
Exhibit 2
Zoning Map
198L
Exhibit 3
Ordinance No. 82 -69
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING 221 NORTH ELM STREET IN THE CITY OF
DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS AS A HISTORIC LAND14ARK FINDER
ORDINANCE NO 80 -30 (ARTICLE 28A OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE) , AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning
and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton have recommended
that the property herein described be designated as a historic
landmark in the City of Denton, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS
s
The below described property shall be classified as
historical zoning
Block 15, Original Town Addition, also known as
the Old Municipal Building located at 221 North
Elm Street, Denton, Texas
is hereby designated as a historic landmark under Ordinance No
80 -30, Article 28A of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Denton, Texas
SECTION II
The historic landmark designation shall be indicated upon
the zoning map of the City of Denton by the letter "H ", and the
property herein described shall be subject to all of the terms,
provisions and requirements of Ordinance No 80.30, Article 28A
of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton,
Texas
SECTION III
This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
date of passage
PASSED AND APPROVED this the 7th day of September, 1982
ATTEST'
CHARLOTTE'ALLEN, CITY SEC '. ARY
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
C J TAYLOR, JR , CITY ATTORNEY
CI'T'Y OF DENTON, TEXAS
H-25-DENTON HISTORICAL ► r ONIP
Exhibit 4
HLC Recommendation Letter
CITY OF DENTON
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
August 12, 2013
Beth Stribling, Chair
Denton County Historical Commission
110 W. Hickory
Denton, Texas 76201
Re: Application for a THC RTHL marker for 1927 City Hall (City Hall West)
The City of Denton Historic Landmark Commission (HLC) applauds the Denton County
Historical Commission (DCHC) in its efforts to secure a Texas Historical Commission
(THC) Recorded Texas Historic Landmark (RTHL) marker for 1927 City Hall, now
called City Hall West, at 221 North Elm St. The City of Denton Historic Landmark
Commission is pleased to submit this letter of support for the RTHL application by
DCHC for one of Denton's most significant historic buildings.
City Hall West was built in 1927 to serve as home to the Denton City Hall, which
included City administrative offices and the fire station, police station and civic
auditorium. The building is one of the few buildings in Denton constructed in the Spanish
Colonial Revival architectural style, as evidenced by its tiled roof and embellishments
that recall similar details in Spanish missions found in South Texas. The architect of City
Hall West, Elmer Van Slyke, used this style in several buildings throughout the
Southwest including buildings at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth.
City Hall West received City of Denton landmark status in 1982 in an ordinance
approved by the Denton City Council. The local landmark designation provides the
highest preservation protection available, as it requires the HLC to review designated
exterior modifications and any consideration of demolition. The RTHL designation
sought by the DCHC will enhance the integrity of protections already in place.
Once designated with an RTHL marker, City Hall West will be included on a list
maintained by the THC of RTHL- marked buildings. Inclusion on this list will raise
visibility of City Hall West and surrounding historic structures, including the Courthouse
Square, through heritage tourism. Inclusion on the THC list of RTHL- marked buildings
thus supports external marketing efforts of the City, a stated goal of the City of Denton
Downtown Development Plan.
Historically significant buildings in Denton are a rare, precious and significant resource
in our city. They carry unique value as a source of community pride, enhance
opportunities for historic tourism, and support economic development citywide.
DCHC efforts to strengthen preservation of this building by seeking RTHL status for City
Hall West are highly appreciated by the City of Denton Historic Landmark Commission,
and we fully support your application for a THC RTHL marker for this building.
(name)
Chain-nan
City of Denton Historic Landmark Commission
(name) Date
Exhibit 5
HLC Meeting Minutes
August 12, 2013
D. Hold a discussion and take action regarding the proposed state landmark designation of 221
North Elm Street. (Pati Haworth)
Haworth stated that she has distributed a copy of a letter under review to the Commissioners.
Lockley requested to advise the Commission of an update from City Council on this item.
Lockley stated that City Council has expressed an interest in 221 N. Elm Street and has
subsequently requested that the Commission postpone any action on this item until further
direction from the City Council. Haworth inquired why a state landmark designation would
jeopardize City Councils interest in the building. Lockley stated that City Council was only
requesting no further action for the time being. Haworth requested confirmation of how long
further action was to be postponed. Lockley stated that he would consult with the City Manager's
Office and advise the Commission of a time frame. Conte stated that the Commission should
postpone action on this item pending further direction from City Council. Haworth inquired if
the request to postpone further action on this item originated from staff or City Council. Lockley
replied that the request was from City Council which developed from a broader discussion with
staff regarding the downtown in general.
Exhibit 6
HLC Meeting Minutes
November 11, 2013
D. Hold a discussion and take action regarding the proposed state landmark designation
of
221 N. Elm Street. (Pati Haworth)
Haworth recited a letter of recommendation, which supported the Denton County
Historical Commission (DCHC) in their efforts to secure a Texas Historical Landmark
designation for City Hall West, 221 North Elm Street, Denton Texas.
Conte suggested the Downtown Denton Development Plan be referenced as such instead
of the older, dated format. Riddle commented that this letter would allow the DCHC to
move forward with their research and recommendation.
Riddle motioned, Mauelshagen seconded to approve the correction of the dated wording of
the letter to read Downtown Denton Development Plan instead. Motion approved. (10 -0)
Haworth motioned, Keffer seconded to approve the letter for presentation to City Council,
as amended. Motion approved. (8 -0)
Exhibit
P&Z Work Session Minutes
December &&,Z#&3
I requesaing additional parking spaces. Bentley questioned if the runoff in the designated areas
2 would allow the landscape msurvive-. Vicra stated some of the areas have u French drain which
3 allows the vuur to drain mo Bentley referred to Rom 'o 8oatm'mn` and then- landscaping
^ ubvmivu' Viem` otmnJ post oak- trees are not memutv he in n'm areas. Sobmxke stated further
5 discussion will occur during the regular session.
s
2. Receive a report, hold a discussion and consider making a recommendation to City Council
for a resolution to be sent to the Texas Historical Commission in ,,upport of a
recommendation from the Historic Landmark Commission For the designation of 221 N,
Elm Street, also known as Cilv Hall West, as a State Historic Landmark. 11c Historic
Landmark Commission recommends Citv HaH West be considered for State Historic
Landinark designation (8-0). (111,13-0001, City Ihdl West, Cindy Jackson)
a Lockley introduced Jackson. Jackson stated this item is for clarification since this item will come
y before this Commission in January 2014- Jackson stated Citv Council wanted time wexamine
10 their npbmm on the outcome of this building. Jackson muo^d any exterior renovations of this
11 structure would require a Certificale of ,Appropriateness that goes before the Historic Landmark
12 Commission (8I/C). /[/he 81,C deems the raoo,o/iuna to be Jct,imuoxul they work with the
sx applicant vnhow to move forward. Jackson stated ifthe building receives, the reconimendedstate
14 designation they are required to follow the Texas Historical Commission (THC) regulations.
15
aa Jackson stated nuonu) maintenance and interior ^:nv,^/im`m are not required to have T8C
az review. Jackson stated the BLC recommends approval of the dcni0vndou (8-0). Cvmuo
19 uuoo`iuuod City Cnon*ii^s dimohvu� Cub,aluo stated staff is od|l in dimooeaim` with udo,dopo,.
m they are a part of a larger development proposal. Cabrales added this item has not been taken
zo back to City Council. Cnh,niem stated City Council has directed mmD,m move forward with
21 diouuauimm with the dm,m|npor- Bentley qmmmdunod if the City `ruu]d consider ,selling the
za property to anyone that i,%n't interested in preserving the property. Cabrales stated the developer
zs is aware vydbe importance ^ytbebuilding.
z*
zs Schonke requested clarification oY local and stale entities. Cohmlcm stated both cmhieu only have
za restrictions over the exterior nfdbebuilding. 8,igg|e questioned ifbwb entities have diOeom
27 standards- Jackson stated both entities lollow the Secretary ofthe Interior's Standards- Schaake
zu questioned if this Commission has reviewed this buo heioo� Jackson stated no, this is the finw
zo time this Commission has reviewed it. Jackson added this item would not have a public hearing
yo since it is notwniething the city would take action on, it would be the state taking action.
31
sz Schaake questioned if City Council moves the item forward m the state: Jackson stated City
yy Council would approve a ReSOI Ution in order for it to move for" ard. Conner questioned if City
34 Council is required m approve the resolution. Jackson stated they are not obligated mdo so.
ss Cvnuo, questioned why this Commission is owimviug this request; Cxh,n|em stated the property
yo owner has to be in u#p^cmcut and since the property owner is the City this is bmv it ,rno|d &v
sr hehono the stale. Bentley questioned if this Commission `,wNd only be making o
ax ,ccvmmeudativu-C�m|���d`bmiswno��
. .
39
Exhibit 8
P&Z Meeting Minutes
March 5, 2014
5. 1113BLIC HEARING:
A. Hold a public heafing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding
recognition of 221 N. Elm Street. also known as Citv Hall West. as a Recorded Texas
.Historic Landmark designation, The Historic Landmark Commission recommends City Hall
West be considered for State Historic Landmark designation (8-0).
3 Looklev stated this is a recommendation to City Council for this Commission to show their
4 Support or nonsupport of this designation. This is not a formal approval or denial on this item.
5 Lockley introduced Jackson. Jackson stated this is a recommendation to City Council to
6 designate City Hall West as a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark (R'I'Hl,)- City Hall West was
7 constructed in 1927 and has served as Denton's City Hall, a Fire Station., Theater, a Police
8 Department and now houses the City's Development Services Department. In July 2013, a
9 representative of the Denton County Historical Conimission approached the former Historic
10 Landmark Commission Chair, Karen DeVirtney and asked for the Commission',, support for the
11 proposed State Historic Landmark designation of City Ila][ West. The item was placed on the
12 HI C's ALLOUst, 2013 agenda. During that meeting, the item was not voted on per City Council's
13 direction. The Council requested that the IILC postpone consideration of the recommendation
14 for State Historic Landmark designation ofCIIW until 11irther notice. There has been significant
15 interest in the purchase of this property by art outside entity. '111C Council would prefer to
16 examine their options for the sale of this property More committing to making a
17 recommendation in support of an additional historic designation.
is
19 The building was designated a local historic landmark in 1982, per ordinance number 82-69.
20 Jackson stated a consequence of this local designation is that any exterior renovations must first
21 be approved through the Certificate of'Appropriateness (COA) process. The HLC reviews COA
22 applications to ensure that the proposed renovations would not adversely affect any sigpificant
23 architectural or historical feature of the designated historic landmark, and is appropriate and
24 consistent with spirit and purposes" of the originating ordinance.
25
26 Jackson stated the required pcniiiis for locally designated landmarks are as follows: Certificate
27 of Appropriateness (COA) is for exterior work- only; this can be reviewed in five days by
28 administrative approval for maintenance or by the IILC with a 21 day review time period. Also,
29 building permits might be required which is a 10 day review tinic period. Jackson added with the
30 RTHL Designation all exterior renovations would have to be approved by both the Texas
31 Historical Commission (THC) and the III-Cr The applications for the exterior renovations must
32 be forwarded to the THC 60 days prior to commencement of work. Subsequent to approval by
33 the THC, the HLC would then review the proposed renovations through the COA process. The
34 benefits of the RTHL are recopjrition that a property is of local, regional or state significance.
35 This allows protection for tip to 90 days from exterior alterations, including demolition or
36 relocation. Also, eligibility for state preservation grant funds. The HLC recommends City Hall
37 West be considered for Recorded'I'exas Historic Landmark designation.
38
39 Bentley questioned if the COA process is what is already required for the subject building,
Oct Jackson stated that is correct. Bentley referred to the review time for both entities-, Bentley
I questioned if these reviews can be reviewed nhno8nocovoly. Jackson stated the building permit
2 and the COA can bosubmitted at the same tinm:bmwever, staff doesn't recoommnd that process.
3
+ Conner questioned the designation being attached to the land. Jackson stated it is not the
5 property. only the standing building. Cuouo, stated the backup materials stated this Commission
a wished to postpone this itern; Jackson stated that was her understanding- Conner stated this
r Commission didnt Nvish to postpone this item, they were instructed to do so.
a
s 8ri&g|u qomodoumd the pmuuao to mumvm the dmaig`m\nn that is ounmoAy on the property-
10 Jackson rtcuud is similar to the m`zvuiug process. B,iggim noostivovd if that °nn|d require x
xz Y^k|ic Hearing; Jackson stated correct- 8hggjc questioned the process /o remove the proposed
12 state designation-, Jackson stated she is unfarniliar xith that process- Briggle cinestioned penalties
as for the developer doing the work they want mon the structure withoutpmrntission. Leal stated lie
14 in not &uni|im with the State Bimtmiu Designation and their nmucmmmn-
15
16 Briggle stated blooks likeuorne of the review, processes can happen Concurrently. whal was
17 provided looked mbe the worstuasescenario- Jackson stated typically applicants do not submit u
19 building perjuit until they have the first approval requirement- Briggle questioned if it tionrially
xy takes the four mmub,� Jackson stated with the ?8C.
zo
zz RcnUuy moucd the provided dcuu}|n and staff report are written ,o,y vague. Bcm|cy added he
zz spoke with the IDC and was provided other details. 8emioy added all of the ,mvimw pmueuxev
aa can be run concurrently- Bentley stated after speaking with the individual in Austin, Texas with
z* the l8C'lie gathered that their review doesn't require the approval or denial to go before a
zs 8n^od or Commission. 8uu|oy added tbmc are more benefits to the deni8ummiouzhou what was
26 provided in the wuC[ backup and p,mucmeuino- Juokam, n«^ud she h^mmd backup o`mmdu)
zr in8bmmatiou on the 7*^um Administrative Code. LvoNey added the backup materials umff
zo provided were till in[unnmiootbmy omoid oouGou; ououmcb was gathered and unmOnnmd and
zy provided support om that hdom`m}on-
so
az @ehx^km opened the Public Dmu,iv8-
y2
s* 8eUz@trihhiug, 201ABraidbU)Louc, /b@y\e,Iuxun
34
ao 0tribbibg stated she in the Chunnunof the Historic Resource Survey- St,ibWing added she was
36 addressed in2011 about this request. Denton currently has l5properties with this designation;
37 which in not u lot orproperties- There is ulm of value in designating this property- 06hNbng
yo stated she too felt the backup materials didn't provide enough information.
40 YmiBuvooi,. l586 Highland Park Road, Dunmo.Tcxum
41
*z Haworth stated authenticity of the downtoxvn is key to social, cultural, and long time residence.
43 Haworth stated she ioin support o[ this dmmigmmim`-
44
*s There was uv one else w speak ou this item. Sobna—ke closed the Public Hearing.
46
Conner stated lie doesn't have an issue with this designation. Conner stated lie would like a
motion to be made for City Council to receive more information than what this Commission was
provided- Taylor stated this is a historic building with as lot of significance- There are a handful
of truly historical buildings, in the downtown area Taylor stated lie cannot make a decision on
the potential sale of the property since there was no information provided oil the sale of the
property-
8 Conner questioned his recommendation on staff's backup. Schaake stated that would need to be
9 directed it) staff Bentley the notice was listed as a recommendation- Bentley questioned if that is
10 legally different than this Commission providing their support. Lockley stated it is the same
11 language-
12
13 Commissioner Dcvin Taylor motioned, Commissioner Frank Conner seconded to recommend
14 this itC111 to City Council- Motion approved (7 -0)-
15
6. FL',TURE AGENDA ITEMS: Under Section 551.042 of` the Texxs Open Meetings Act.
re,sVond to inquiries from the Planniag-'I'l.1d Zollin� Commission or the public with specific
factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the
agenda for an upcoming meeting.
16
17 Lockley stated the requests made by Briggle and Taylor would be provided during a Work
19 Session Item at the March 19., 2014 meeting. Bentley stated he has a comment for staff and the
19 way that they look at notices for variances. The CVS Pharmacy case was noticed as a hardship;
20 Bentley stated he felt the request being made was not a hardship- Lockley stated staff can review
21 that.
22
23 Bentley stated an article in the Dallas Morning News that the City is allowing food truck parks-
24 Bentley stated this was heard before, this Commission as a Work Session Item and has, not been
25 brought back before this Commission. Lockley stated staff read the article in the Denton Record
26 Chronicle- There were ,several coninients that were inconsistent- '!Mien is not an approved food
27 truck park ordinance. Lockley stated slatfcan provide more information oil this item and bring it
28 back before this Commission.
29
30 There was no further discussion. Schaake adjourned the meeting at 835 p.m.
31
10
Application is reviewed
and determined to be
incomplete. THC
requests additional
information.
Days 2-30
THC reviews requested
information. Project is
approved.
Days 31-60
Application is forwarded
to HLC for review and
consideration.
Refer to Exh bit 10 for
HLC Review Process
Exhibit 9
RTHL Review Process
RTHL Review Process
COA Application is submitted
to THC
Day I
Application is reviewed
and approved.
Remaining 30 day review
time is waived.
Days 2 - 30
Application is forwarded
to HLC for review and
consideration.
Refer to Exhb it 10 for
HLC Review Process
Application is
determined to be a
simple rennovation and
approved.
Days 2 - 7
Application is forwarded
to HLC for review and
consideration. Refer to
Exh bit 10 for HLC Review
Process
Exhibit 10
HLC Review Process
Application is submitted to the Planning Department.
Application includes a Certificate of Appropriateness application and checklist with all
required backup material.
Day 1
Hislonc P,-or-firm Officer tHPO1 reviews application and determines if proposed work is a
minor alteranon/ommance maintenance or a major alteration per the guidelines in Section
35 7.8.8 or eetuien 35.7.7.4 of the Denton Development code (DDG) .
Day 2
Manor Alteration
Assigned to a Plan nor for review and routed to Planner.
Ray 3
Planner reviews application per the applicable design standards
and works with applicant requesting addldonal Information or
revisions which would demonstrate compliance with the
requirements of the hetoric district. With the submittal of requested
information from the applicant the application is considered to be
complete, 21 day crack begins s-
Days 4 to 20
Complete application is approved to schedule for HLC agenda.
Deadli €ne for adding items to HLC agenda.
Day 21 -23
Planner writes staff report, goes on site visit and takes site photos.
Rays 23 -26
HLC Liason compiles HLC packet with agenda.
Packet is serif to HLC Commissioners.
HLC Denies Application
Day 41
Applicant can appeal decision of
the HLC to the City Council
appeal must he received within 10
days of HLC denial of application.
City Council considers appeal
request and can overturn denial,
uphold denial or remand tack to
HLC for further consideration.
HLC approves application.
Day 41
Approval letter is sent out to
applicant.
Minor AfterationlOrdinary
Maintenance
City of Denton
Historic Landmark
Commission
Certificate of
Appropriateness Timeline
and Flowchart.
Approved administratively by HPO
Days 3 -5
Exhibit 11
Historic Photos of City Hall West