WICHITA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MINUTES 8 JANUARY 2001 CITY HALL, 455 N. MAIN, 10TH FLOOR-MAPD CONFERENCE ROOM 3:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board was held Monday, January 8, 2000, 3:00 P.M. in the Metropolitan Area Planning Department's Conference Room, City Hall-Tenth Floor, 455 N Main, Wichita, Kansas. Members Present: Randal Steiner Paul Cavanaugh Claire Willenberg Keith Lawing Sam Lentz Jim Guy Absent: Stan Shelden Staff Present: Kathy Morgan, Historic Preservation Planner Valerie Robinson, Recording Secretary Mike Gable, OCI Residential Permits Ex Officio: Heidi Dressler-Kelly, City Historian ITEM NO. 1 ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order and board members stated their name. ITEM NO. 2 ADDITIONS OR ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA MORGAN: You should have a copy of Environs Review Application HPC2000-00001 for an awing at 144 N. Market. They would like to be added to Agenda. ITEM NO. 3. REVOLVING LOAN FUND UPDATE 1. Program income – Residential + 30,000 Commercial $95,000 2. Deferred loan balance – $100,000 Planning staff will be a meeting with Neighborhood Housing Services on Wednesday, January 3 and I will have a report at the board meeting. MORGAN: I just got a year-end account. We have $126,265.01 in the Program Account. We still have the $100,000 in the Deferred Loan Account. We had a meeting today with finance, there have been some changes in how HUD is interpreting some of these things, and we are going back getting clarification, so that we maybe we can salvage the Revolving Loan Program. ITEM NO. 4. CORRESPONDENCE MORGAN: Letter received from Mr. Howard Ellington, which we will discuss later. The only other thing I would like to bring to your attention, I put in your packet the letter from Richard Moe, President of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, regarding the Program they have for Historic Tax Credit Projects. They have an investment fund through Bank of America, so if there are any projects that you might be aware of that could be eligible for this. This is again for income producing property; it has to be listed in the National Register. STEINER: Questions on that, it said it is in 21 states and we are in that list of the 21 states. MORGAN: That is my understanding. ITEM NO. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE 11 DECEMBER 2000 MEETING MOTION #1 (Lawing Motioned) (Guy 2nd) Motion carried unanimously (6-0) ITEM NO. 6. OLD BUSINESS 1. MAJOR: (HPC2000-00168) Environs Monroe/Mahan House APPLICANT: Paul Cohlmia FOR: 1419 S. Market Applicant proposes to repair porch floor, replace steps, and replace columns with synthetic material. I spoke with Mr. Cohlmia regarding submission of an elevation plan. He has indicated that he will attend the board meeting. MORGAN: Applicant called this morning and said he did not have his drawings together and so he would like to postpone. I told him we needed elevation drawings, he is going to put up porch railing, he is going to enclose the porch columns. I still think that there needs to be something about the center of this porch roof. He is going to enclose the PVC, he is going to square it and put some detailing at the capital and the base of those, and he is going to put steps and railing. We need to see detailing of that also. He asked to be moved to the February 12, Board Meeting. CAVANAUGH: We will defer that item until February 12, 2001. ITEM NO. 7. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATIONS 1. MAJOR: (HPC2000-00172) Environs Old City Hall APPLICANT: Luminous Neon FOR: 300 S. Main Applicant proposes to install new signage for A.G. Edwards. These signs are similar to others that have been approved within an environs situation. Staff recommends that the board find no significant negative impact to the environs of Old City Hall and approve the design. MORGAN: If you will look in your packet you will find a photo showing the building that is right on the corner of English and Main. We have Judy Manka and Greg present. Is this where the pedestal or the monument sign is going to go in this area right here? MANKA: It is a little hard to tell from that photo, but it goes where the Kansas Gas Service sign is now. MORGAN: You have a copy in your packet of what that signage is going to look like. They are going to have the individual channel letters, such that we have approved before in the environs, so at this point staff did not find any negative impact to the environs of Old City Hall with this design. CAVANAUGH: Did I have any comments from the audience at all? MANKA: I think we are here to see if you have any questions, I am here from a technical standpoint if you have questions about the sign. CAVANAUGH: Board members, any questions. STEINER: So are there actually three different sign then? CAVANAUGH: I might suggest that we move to approve this application as submitted. MOTION #2 (Lawing Motioned) (Willenberg 2nd) Motion carried unanimously (6-0) LAWING: I would just like to comment. I know Judy, you have appeared before us a couple of times and I do appreciate the detailed information in your application. That does help us when we get it in advance to make decisions as quickly as we did today. MORGAN: I will notify the sign zoning downstairs so that you can pull the sign permit. 2. MAJOR: (HPC2000-00174) Park Place/Fairview Historic District APPLICANT: Sue Schamp FOR: 1700 N. Park Place Applicant proposes to remove an existing kitchen porch – not original to the structure – and build a new kitchen porch on the northside of house. In addition, add a deck to the East End of the porch. This project has already begun and a stop work order was issued. MORGAN: This house is at the corner of 16th and Park Place, it is on the Eastside of the street, it faces Park Place the main entrance. This is the landing for the kitchen door, right here; this is on the north side of the house. From their plans they started doing this and they did not realize that they needed a permit, and so they were stopped, so they have some of this done. They have enlarged the landing for the porch. SUE SCHAMP: Actually, we are putting it back to the original size. It was enlarged, now we are putting it back to the original size. MORGAN: What they are going to do from that landing is they are going to come off the side of the house, come back, and connect to a new rear deck. This would be the east elevation of the house. Let me back up so you can follow me around here. This is the northside of the house, you are going to go back and turn the corner. I don't have any, other than what was shown to you in the computer generated plan that I guess Home Depot did for them, that is the railing system that you are going to put up there etc. CAVANAUGH: It is just pressure treated lumber, set in concrete pier footings. SCHAMP: Yes. CAVANAUGH: What kind of railing, were you talking like 2 x 2 vertical wood railings? SCHAMP: I think so. AUDIENCE: It is going to be lattice. SCHAMP: Not on the back porch. Not on the porch AUDIENCE: This is on the deck. SCHAMP: On the porch, part on the northside of the house parts it's gonna have just… AUDIENCE: It will match the front porch. CAVANAUGH: Do we have any pictures of that? SCHAMP: One of my pictures I think has the front, the one from across the street. MORGAN: Here it is this picture. CAVANAUGH: Are you going to stain or paint the wood once it is done, or just leave it? SCHAMP: I was not planning on painting, not unless you want us too. We were going to just leave it to weather. CAVANAUGH: We might have you coat it with gold or something. SCHAMP: Well we are not going to do that I can tell you that. STEINER: Is the porch floor going to be more than 30" off, of the ground? SCHAMP: The one on the northside? The small porch is going to be about 32". STEINER: Mike is that going to force them to put on a 42" rail? GABLE: 36" inch on residential. SCHAMP: 36" rail. That is what we had planned. GABLE: 36" high guard rail for residential. SCHAMP: On the top part? GABLE: On the high deck, anytime you have a difference of more than 30" or greater, then you need a guardrail around. Along of course the appropriate pick that is inside that you cannot get your 4 ˝' diameter ball between the pickets. However, 36" from the bottom of the surface to the top of the handrail, guardrail excuses me. MORGAN: You said something about latticework. SCHAMP: That is going to be on this low one from the ground. MORGAN: That is going to be the skirting, around the deck, the latticework. SCHAMP: Right and in the back here on this low deck, there is going to be lattice between the railing and the deck. MORGAN: Okay, I am showing that in my drawing as the rails. SCHAMP: On this back one, they did not have a program for that. CAVANAUGH: It is going to be similar to the front porch railing. SCHAMP: The kitchen porch is, yes, obviously it will be taller. WILLENBERG: Will it be painted? The kitchen porch section is going to be painted. SCHAMP: If you want us to paint it, we will paint it white other wise we will leave it. CAVANAUGH: Well I think the kitchen porch section ought to be painted white. It is most visible from the street. The rear deck is no big concern. General conversation by the board. (Tape 1A-183) CAVANAUGH: Just so I can be straight in my head again, the railing and the vertical rungs that go around that kitchen porch area will be similar to the railing on the front porch of the house. SCHAMP: Yes, except of course taller like, we need it, but it will be the same type of design. CAVANAUGH: On this rear deck, will it be similar all the way around? SCHAMP: On the rear deck, no it will not be like that. CAVANAUGH: It will similar to what is now on the kitchen porch railing, right. MORGAN: There is no kitchen porch. SCHAMP: There is no kitchen porch, right now. CAVANAUGH: No, I am talking from the deck to the handrail. SCHAMP: On this back one, the short one, it is going to be lattice in there instead of verticals. On this, back one only. GUY: I am curious about the poles that seem to have lamps on top of them. SCHAMP: Yes they do. GUY: They do not show up in your drawings. SCHAMP: They could not put those in the drawing, they were somewhat limited with their computer there, but they are there. GUY: They are intended to remain there, are they? SCHAMP: Yes, it is dark in that back area. CAVANAUGH: There are only two of them? SCHAMP: Yes, on the corners. GUY: One of them sticks out rather tall. MORGAN: Perhaps if you wanted to take a walk over here and look at this picture, they are more visible on the computer screen then they are on the board. LAWING: There is a garage just to the right of it correct? SCHAMP: This is an L shaped garage. Yes, my garage, I come in from Park Place and then the house behind us has access to the other side. The garage is l-shaped on the property line. It was a mother-in- law house in the back of our house, but we do not own that anymore. MORGAN: And you can't see it because of the Bar-B-Q grill here, but their area steps that come down that allow you access to that door. CAVANAUGH: What about the lights on the posts, is that a concern? GUY: I am concerned about them because, they are so disproportionate in height in the house, and that one sticks out from the corner, should be enormous visible. I think we are going, I think we may be approving something that is unnecessary intrusive. CAVANAUGH: The other one is not quite so visible. GUY: No, you do not really see that one. You really have to scrounge around there to do it. It is the one on the corner that I am worried about. CAVANAUGH: No, you do not really see that one. Do you feel like you need those two lights? On the other hand, could you make due with one? Could you make due with one? SCHAMP: I like the two, for the balance. WILLENBERG: Could they be lower? SCHAMP: That is my question, if we put them lower. MORGAN: Or, how about floodlights on the house, it looks like, here is the electrical right there you could put floodlights, right there. GUY: I do not know. Why they look unnecessarily Venetian or something. WILLENBERG: The light is small for the post. SCHAMP: The light looks awfully tall from here but it is only 6'. WILLENBERG: Is that right? GUY: That is amazing. SCHAMP: It looks extremely high for some reason. It looks 20' tall. WILLENBERG: It will look different once the railing is up too. SCHAMP: It is only 6' off the ground. GUY: It is very deceptive. You are right. SCHAMP: Is that what your concern is. GUY: It looked like it was much above the door there. LAWING: I get the impression that it is 10' tall, the way it is angled and stuff. GUY: It is one of those optical illusions things. I guess that maybe that is why I am worried about it. LAWING: Well Jim, do you have less of a problem with it. It is only 6', I mean was agreeing with you, I was looking at it thinking it was more like 10 maybe 12' high, but with that knowledge it is only six feet, I might have less. GUY: When the Ringlets are in of course. LAWING: It is going to be a little bit more gothic Guy: Yeah I do. It will not be quite so intrusive. Cavanaugh: Could you flip back Kathy to the other picture from the front of the house? Do they show in front view? MORGAN: That is the light fixture right there. SCHAMP: I think so, MORGAN: The other thing you are looking at too, it is almost 2' off the ground. They are talking 6' off the deck. Therefore, it is 8' tall from the ground level. GUY: Of course, with that rail there is going to be 36" tall. (General discussion, four people talking) MORGAN: Then you have another, what the fixture itself is probably at least 12" tall on top of a six-foot pole. WILLENBERG: Well, could we compromise and just ask if they could lower it 2' or something? Is that a problem, does it keep it from… CAVANAUGH: If you bring it down 2 feet, it is going to be right in face. LAWING: I think this is an all or none. GUY: And I could see why you would want to get that light above the average person's head. LAWING: I could see why you would want to put a light closer to your garage. GUY: Of course, you would. I do not feel normally as bad about it as I was. SCHAMP: It is not a bright light. It is a candle bulb. GUY: They are quite intimidating. SCHAMP: Sometime I have intimidating ideas. They are not that tall. WILLENBERG: Anything else that is of concern? MORGAN: I need to write this up so they can go ahead and issue permit. If you are going to approve it, with the latticework are we talking about the lattice only being on this side and these two panels here over to the corner and everything on the north elevation is going to be rails. How are we doing that? CAVANAUGH: I guess my understanding and correct me if I am wrong, but even the northside of the lower deck would be latticework. SCHAMP: Right. CAVANAUGH: Then the higher portion on the northside of the house would have the railing that matches the front of the house. SCHAMP: That is right. CAVANAUGH: In my opinion I think that higher portion should be painted white. WILLENBERG: I agree. CAVANAUGH: The lower portion I do not think there is a problem with it the way it is. MORGAN: Break it at the steps. SCHAMP: That is kind of, what I was planning to do. GUY: Are we going to use rail or latticework on those stairs rails? SCHAMP: On the stair-rails from the sidewalk? Up you mean. I would say we are going to use rails there. There are three steps and then two more down. GUY: You are going to use rails instead of lattices. MORGAN: So latticeworks back from the east from where the stairs come up to the landing, from the ground level on the northside. GUY: The rail on the stairway and forward. Are we going to require that the stairs to be painted too Paul? CAVANAUGH: Well I think so, yes. LAWING: I think it needs to match the front porch. CAVANAUGH: I think that would be a good point of demarcation. GUY: I was thinking that. Will that work for you folks? WILLENBERG: To get it on I will try, I move that we approve the project with the north porch and the porch steps completed with railing similar to the front porch painted the same color. The lower deck skirted with lattice and unpainted. Does that cover it? MORGAN: It is not skirted. It is the lattice is taking the place of the vertical railing. LAWING: Of the vertical railings. WILLENBERG: The vertical railings. SCHAMP: It will be skirted too so that we do not have possums under that. MORGAN: The main thing is to allow the latticework. WILLENBERG: To allow the latticework between the railing and the floor of the deck. CAVANAUGH: Is that understood, Valerie? ROBINSON: In the floor of the deck, is that what she said? CAVANAUGH: I think you are talking about going from the railing to the ground. SCHAMP: In pieces, it will not be one solid piece. WILLENBERG: In two sections. SCHAMP: There will be a bottom rail. WILLENBERG: With two sections of lattice covering from the top rail to the floor of the deck and a second section from the deck to the ground, around the deck. SCHAMP: The railing is 3'. The lattice is 2', plus our kick-space so we will have some gaps, between the lattice and the top ground GUY: Is that all right on that higher floor? GABLE: The low stuff is, what is it, that low deck is how much? MORGAN: 20" off the ground. GABLE: Do not care. SCHAMP: There is not going to be lattice on the top GUY: That is right, that is right. GABLE: As long as they can't get either the 4" sphere between either the pickets or the bottom rail above the deck, as long as they can't get the 4" ball through there then they should okay. CAVANAUGH: Do we need to state that motion or is everybody clear? MORGAN: Not for my purposes. MOTION #3 (Willenberg Motioned) (Lentz 2nd) Motion carried unanimously (6-0) GABLE: Your or your contractor, whoever is going to pick up the permit, can come in tomorrow and get it. SCHAMP: Do we need a contractor? GABLE: No, you own the house, you live there, and you may act as your own contractor. The only thing is you will need one to do the electrical work. CAVANAUGH: We are down to the added item. 3. MAJOR: (HPC2000-00001) Lassen Hotel APPLICANT: Anna Beglaryan FOR: 144 N Market MORGAN: The Lassen Hotel is right over here, right were you see my little arrow down in the corner. It is across the street. You have this building and then a parking lot and then you are right at the corner of First and Market. WILLENBERG: It is Weigand Commercial Division. MORGAN: Right, this is Weigands office building, right here. This was not in your packet, but you do have a copy of this that we just put at your place here before the meeting. What I am showing here on the site plan that they drew to get the sign permit is, I am reading this to mean that from this point here over to this wall is about 18'. Then it is approximately 18' from the corner of this building to the sidewalk. This awing is approximately 4' wide; it is 3' feet from this point to the crest of the barrel. Then the little valance is 9" wide. They want to put a 4' rectangular as you can see rectangular awing will have a 4' drop. It will have 1' valance and it will cover this whole area. My problem with this is that it is over scaled for that storefront. I think it would be better if we maintained the size, the 3' drop on the awing and then a 10" valance as opposed to the 3' x 6" on the drop and 1' x 6" on the valance. It is going to have the 8' clearance above the sidewalk. However, I have a problem with the size that they have it designed as right now. LAWING: Are you talking about the height or the length of it, Kathy? MORGAN: The heights of it. If we make the height of it 3' drop, they want to project it 4' that is durable and then make the valance 9" or 10" so that it's overall dimension, its drop is 3' x 10" instead of 5'. Then they wanted 17 ˝ ' wide. Now let me give you some other angles here. The concern is this Wichita Key Lock and Safe Co. Sign. In that, it is going to block this awing from the north bound traffic if we go that small. GUY: Do we have northbound? LAWING: It is a one-way street. MORGAN: Yeah, it is a one-way street. LAWING: So you are talking about northbound pedestrian traffic is going south I guess? No, I see what you are saying. You are saying that Key Lock sign will block this signage. Okay, I was thinking you were talking the other way around. MORGAN: Standing on the sidewalk that is what you have. GUY: I would think that would be argument for more awnings still. CAVANAUGH: How far out does that existing awing project now? The stripped awing did you say. MORGAN: I did not actually measure how far out it projected out. I would say it is around 3'. GORDEN STOWE: It is less than two ˝. MORGAN: This projects out less than two ˝. Okay. Therefore, if you bring it out 4', you are going to be out this point. GUY: It would be about the same width as the sign. Stowe: It is 3" BEGLARYAN: I would say two ˝. WILLENBERG: Will the awning eliminate the necessity for a signage on the glass, like you have the temporary sign? MORGAN: Could I say something? BEGLARYAN: That is temporary. First, I would like to thank you for adding our case to your agenda. The thing is we owned Andrews Café on the West Street, previously and we have decided to move to downtown for two simple reasons. 1) First we had the majority of our customers were from downtown. 2) We though that our own personalities and our cuisine would create the downtown of Wichita much better than any part of town. The reason we decided to go with the awning is because we though awing would fit the downtown much better than any sign, than the sign for instance that Wichita Key and Lock has. Our contractor from Wichita Awning Co. was not aware of the size that we have chosen require a special permit, since it is located in a Historical Place. We have spoken to the owners of downtown Deli, that previously owned that location and they suggest that they could have done much better if their sign was bigger. The problem with them, they moved to corner of Douglas, Market, and Douglas and they have awnings through the entire location. And the reason they did not do well was because of the sign. The Wichita Lock Sign is 5' tall and practically anything that you would put blocks our sign because it is a one way street. WILLENBERG: I agree. BEGLARYAN: Most importantly is that the awning is already made and everything is ready for us to open except for not having the sign there. CAVANAUGH: What color is the sign? BEGLARYAN: It is black with white letters. GUY: I may be entirely wrong, but I do believe that more of that storefront we cover up, the better off we are going to be. CAVANAUGH: I really want to encourage any business to come back down town that we can possible can. I like it. LAWING: I do not have a problem with it either. MORGAN: I have no problem with the sign; I think it is oversized for the storefront. Could you come to the microphone please? AUDIENCE: The only reason we want a 5' awning is that I think that the name of the restaurant, people can notice it much better. When you are a new business in downtown and everybody has 30 minutes or 1 hour for lunch, when you have that small sign, people do not know where you are. When you get that 5' awning with your name on it, they can notice you right away. The first year it is very critical, very important, that is where people notice you. Trust me when they try our food they will come back, we are very confident on that. That is where the people recognize us, and where we are at advertising and everything else is important too, but the sign I think especially in restaurant business is very important. Thank you. LENTZ: I motion that we approve as written. MOTION #4 (Lentz Motioned) (Guy 2nd) Motion carried unanimously (6-0) WILLENBERG: Do you think the height of the building to the north is going to help mediate that a little bit through or make it worse? MORGAN: It has been my experience WILLENBERG: It does not affect it. MORGAN: You have to look at the wall surface where that awning is going and it is 30 % of the building or the storefront. That is okay. LENTZ: In this case, I think it is. LAWING: That would be one thing if that were an attractive building. CAVANAUGH: We would like so much to see more things happening down there. LAWING: I would agree, I would agree. ITEM NO. 8. MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS 1. Preservation Plan Morgan: We are going to go ahead and close out The Preservation Plan. Marvin and I have been talking about having a public hearing at MAPC on January 18, I think we are still good for that. I have to verify that with him. However, if it is not on the 18th, it is probably going to be the February MAPC meeting. We kicked around the fact, that we want this to be apart of the Comprehensive Plan, which is a County wide plan but we have gotten determination form Law that since it only effects the City, they won't have to sign off on the plan. So those issue with, wanting the County to become a CLG and putting that kind of language in that should not create any problem. We are going to move ahead with this and get off our agenda. What you have in your packet is what we had discussed, when I presented the plan back in August or September, and the changes that we made at that time are marked on the pages. There are bars in the left margin to indicate where we made changes, possible the right margin. I do not believe there have been any new issues that have come up with this since we first drafted it. I guess what I would suggest at this point is you look it over and if there is anything we need to add, let me know. I can run it by the board, through a fax, e-mail, or whatever to get everybody's comments and have it incorporated by February. Because of the public notice requirement, the 21 days, or whatever the MAPC has to have time to review it. LAWING: Kathy, let me ask you, under "Promotion and Education" we added some stuff to try to strengthen our relationship with the HPA, this Historic Preservation Alliance, have we contacted them about this at all. Do they know we desire to do this? Have sent them a copy and all? MORGAN: I have sent them information, they get notices, I have not heard back from them. I can make a specific effort to sent them a copy of the plan and ask them to please respond. LAWING: I would like to ask my fellow board members if we would like maybe to extend a formal invitation to Greg Kite who is in charge to maybe attend one of our meetings in the near feature. So that we can discuss with them directly how we could strengthen the relationship or something. Personally, I do not know Mr. Kite, I have not had dealing with him in the past, I would defer to some of my peers on this board who might have better knowledge, if that is a worthwhile endeavor. GUY: Definitely CAVANAUGH: This is something that we have touched on in the past, but never taken action. MORGAN: I guess what we could do is we need to start thinking about when we are going to have our annual board retreat, cause last year we had it in February, I don't know if it is reasonable to think that we could do it in February, I would almost like to do it in April after we get through tax season and get through the State Wide Preservation Conference. Maybe at that point we could ask them to have a contingent of their executive board in attendance at the retreat. LAWING: I think that would be a good idea, holding off the retreat, also I think we might have a new member at that time, and that might be a good chance to orientate a new member with all respect to Mr. Guy. MORGAN: He will not go off until the end of June. LAWING: Really, correct me. I am thinking municipal elections are April, new council members, etc. MORGAN: And depending on how quickly the Mayor replaces him, he could sit on the board another 2 years if the Mayor doesn't find anyone to replace him. GUY: The Mayor does not drag his feet to that extent. MORGAN: I would encourage him to do this. If there is someone, out there that you can make a recommendation to, to take your place that would be welcomed. GUY: Actually, I am going to see if Gregg Kite is interested. LAWING: That is probably not a bad idea. CAVANAUGH: Formalize a relation real quick. That would be good. LAWING: I'm still kind of curious, do we want to try to invite them to a meeting before then, like possible the February or March meeting. MORGAN: That would certainly be fine. LAWING: Paul do you know Gregg Kite? CAVANAUGH: Only from meetings during this board meeting. LAWING: Jim do you have a relationship with him, I would almost prefer the invitation come from the board itself, somebody, maybe the chair, myself as opposed to staff. No offence to staff, but I would prefer it to be a chair. GUY: Frankly if you invite him, he will come. I have been trying to HPA up on what is going on here since I am also on the board of that organization. We really do need to change things around in anticipation of my departure. LAWING: I would agree. CAVANAUGH: What is the February meeting date MORGAN: February 12. CAVANAUGH: I will give Gregg a call and get back with you. LAWING: Kathy would you recommend, when this goes in front of the MAPC that we have a few board members there at that meeting? MORGAN: Yes I would because they are not going, for example there is going to be questions, like the Delano neighborhood came before MAPC last week to present there plan, and there was resistance to the downzoning etc. that they were wanting and until there were number of people out in the audience that got up and said we want this, we planned for it, and they really couldn't go anywhere other than to act on what the neighborhood association had brought forth. There was big consideration from the Planning Commission about down zoning. They would not have handled that had the audience participation was certainly needed. CAVANAUGH: When will this go to MAPC? MORGAN: I will think we have 21-days, it has to be advertised, and there is a 21-day notification period. If we got it advertised right away, it could go to the first meeting in February, but I do not know when that is. I will talk to Marvin about getting it on there. We really need to get it approved so I can get it in final print form for approval and I can close out that Grant. LAWING I know I cannot make it on January 18, but it doesn't seem like it could be considered on the 18th, but if you could inform us if come up prior to our next meeting or next notification. There is strength in numbers. I will try to attend, and I would like to see a couple of us if possible attend the meeting. Even if we do not end up commenting, the fact that we are there might make a difference. 2. Allen House MORGAN: You saw the letter of Mr. Ellington about the Allen House. CAVANAUGH: I wanted to ask the committee is that enough, do you think. Does that feel like it is enough of an explanation? GUY: Actually I am greatly reassured to discover that there is historic brick, which I am not previously aware of. MORGAN: Are they going to need a building permit to repair that spaulding brick and some of that other stuff? Although it does not require a building permit it needs to have, the approval of the Historic Preservation Board before the work commences. Because I am not certain that, it requires a building permit. LAWING: I agree that maybe that is a way to get them here. Another thing I would like to maybe here is a general update as to what has been going there and maybe what some of there plans are. I would almost think that we should probably have at least an annual report from these folks talking to us about what has been going on. Truly this is one of the corner stones of Historic Preservation in the City of Wichita and I think this board, he does comment in here about " ongoing cooperation and to achieve our mutual goals. I really do not feel we have been co-operating too much cause I really have not heard or seen from him at all. Just like what we are doing with Historic Preservation Alliance, lets try to open some communication channels. If possible, go ahead and extend another invitation to him to get the approval on the work that is going to be done and an overall update about the facility itself. That is what I would suggest, I do not know if the board members fell that away. CAVANAUGH: I think that is very appropriate. LENTZ: Would there be any possibility that our board retreat could be there? WILLENBERG: That is a through? MORGAN: I can find that out, it will cost us. LAWING: If he wants to cooperate, he will shoot us a good price. MORGAN: I has been my experience I had people from France over here and I called to see if we could an impromptu tour, yes it would cost us the going rate to run those people through. LAWING: What was the going rate? MORGAN: $7.50 or whatever. LAWING: So if we were to conduct our retreat there he would charge us $7.50 a head MORGAN: It is $8.00 a head now but it would probable be I do not know that they do not allow you to sit on the furniture. CAVANAUGH: Do they have a limit to the age you can be? MORGAN: I think the age is 16. We all qualify on that. CAVANAUGH: I would like to know a little bit more about how their programs are handled there and tours. MORGAN: When I write the letter, I will ask him, that the board if very interested in the property and would like to have a presentation about the programs and different things that they are doing at the house. CAVANAUGH: I have heard that it is really closed off pretty much to the public, that is the response I hear from a lot of different groups. MORGAN: It is one of the places I do get complaints about, that when you call to book tour, you get an answer machine, and then it takes weeks for them to respond to the tour request etc. CAVANAUGH: I have had an architect in my office that has tried to call for several tours over the years and has never, ever had anyone contact her. DRESSLER-KELLY: I heard that the telephone number on the web site is wrong to. MORGAN: I always get through but it is always to an answering machine, and then you wait days and days and days for a response. GUY: Do we have some since that this is turning into a private place? LAWING: That is what it sounds like. CAVANAUGH: Absolutely that it is. LAWING: Do you have the web address for that site, or is it easy to find? DRESSLER-KELLY: I think it is on the southwind server. If you do a search, you will find it. LAWING: Under Frank Lloyd Wright, or Allen Lamb. DRESSLER-KELLY: If you Allen Lamb, it should come up. LAWING: I would encourage board members to visit that site and maybe try to get as much information about them, that is what I had planned on doing before this meeting. Before we meet with them I would like to come in here a little informed and maybe ask some pointed questions. STEINER: In this letter, it does not say anything about trying to get at the cause, as to why this brick is falling. I am assuming that they are also looking at that. MORGAN: Another thing that, I would like to know Randal. Are they a member of the Frank Lloyd Wright Home Association? I do not know if they are members, but this is a common problem with Wrightian houses because of the mortar joints. He designed the mortar joints that way. You get a lot of water penetration in the mortar joints. CAVANAUGH: He likes to strike, square, and not concave, so they had a ledge that holds the water. MORGAN: That creates problems. The only other thing that I have; I will get a letter off to them this week and ask them to schedule at their earliest conveyance a presentation. In addition, remind them that they have to; they need to get a certificate of appropriateness approval for the work to be done although it may not require a permit. It still requires a certificate of appropriateness approval. LAWING: Then they can kill two birds with one stone. MORGAN: So the only other thing that I have I gave you a copy, this is a draft of what the Preservation Conference Program is going to be. If you architects will notice, there are 10 ˝ CEU in there. For $75.00, you cannot beat it. The other thing is, since we are hosting this we really need to have a big representation at this meeting from the board members. We are looking forward to it. We are limited to 180 participants, we thing it is going to be sold out. We know that AIA membership has already received, or will be receiving; we have the mailing list for this, so AIA membership will receive this booklet. We have invested a lot of time. STEINER: Registration starts now or when. MORGAN: We are hoping to mail-out by 9 February then there is a "House Doctor" thing that is going on February 22 & 23. Randal did not you indicate that you were going to go to that? STEINER: I was notified of it, I do not know. It is being held three places in the state. One of them in the Flint Hills, and I didn't say that they had stated, that there were going to be some site visits to some buildings and don't know which one. MORGAN: See what you could do, if you were a property owner, you can sign up for it and request that your house be given a site visit, is what it is. I know they are going to be limited on the number of site visits they do. The other thing about this conference is that we may have money to help pay for registration. What I would suggest you do is, if you are serious about going let me know. I will create a list, run it through my budget person, and see how much money I am going to have left in my budget that we could throw toward your registration. Also, the state indicated that they might have money for like scholarships for board members. So, do not let cost slow you down, although for what we are putting, with the nationwide speaker's etc, I think $75.00 is not bad. WILLENBERG: Is this something that you could continuing education for realtors. MORGAN: We tried to do that, and we had contact with the state board of realtors and they are wanting, they want to know exactly what is going to be said. Other than giving the Speakers giving a title of the topic and having the professional credentials, that is all we have. WILLENBERG: I will try to see if we could do anything. MORGAN: I will certainly try to see if we could do something. MORGAN: We did not have a problem getting the CEU for the architects. WILLENBERG: I will mention that. MORGAN: Mike Seiwert was very easy to work with, and he all the information and he is going to take care of reporting so I don't have to. WILLENBERG: Actually you get our pamphlets in the mail and they do not talk about anything that is on the list. However, you have to have something, you are right. MORGAN: We had talked about that and that is even something that the State Preservation Alliance has talked about; creating some kind of partnership with the State Board of Realtors to put on educational programs that the realtors could get continuing education credits for. WILLENBERG: I did bring a copy of the Local Board of Realtors newsletter. They may have sent you one; you had your little blurb in it. MORGAN: Yes, and I had gotten quite a few call about that. WILLENBERG: It was announced in our sales meeting too. So at least some of the brokers noticed that. STEINER: On the photograph on page two, it looks like the photo credits might be in there. MORGAN: On the Mayors' letter, there is a watermark, look at the color copy. This is going to be done on recycled paper. It does not translate well to just the black and white. We had no problem selling any of the ads from participating organizations. It will be on some kind of buff colored recycled paper with the burnt orange either a royal blue or a dark teal color. DRESSLER-KELLY: Where are these going to be distributed? MORGAN: The distribution list that I have is from the State Historic Society, the AIA mailing list form the state office all registered architects, the Kansas Preservation Alliance mailing list. DRESSLER-KELLY: Do you think I could have a few to put in the Library, okay that would be great? MORGAN: Hopefully we will be doing a television, one of the city cable channels, that they can put on those adds, we are going to do that because we have the trolley tour that we are going to do at the concussion of the conference. WILLENBERG: Will the Eagle do anything ahead of time? MORGAN: She might. WILLENBERG: How about Universities, through WSU or K-state, KU. STEINER: A could see that there is mixer in there. MORGAN: I think those folks are on that State Office mailing list already. GUY: We have not had one of these for how many years. MORGAN: The last time we hosted the conference was in 1994. WILLENBERG: Update on soup kitchen. MORGAN: The soup kitchen the City Council approved the demolition. I am having a meeting over there at 10:00, Friday, morning. They got an estimate from property management here with the City worked on putting an estimate at the request of Joan Cole. LAWING: To move? MORGAN: To move, or relocate the property and John Philbrick, came up with $104,000.00 estimate that included moving the house, putting it on a basement, re-cladding the bricks; now the bricks are going to be new bricks. They are going to be buff bricks but they were not going to try… WILLENBERG: They cannot move it with the brick. MORGAN: No, because it is not a masonry structure, it is a frame structure, with brick veneer. I am sure there is going to be some stress fractures created, given all that we are looking at, $104,000.00 price tag. WILLENBERG: Could it possibly be moved to one of the vacant lots in the CORE areas? Where they are talking about that initiative? MORGAN: And that is what, I am sure Property Management has considered that. I will not know about that until this meeting. We are going to be better off the shorter distance we move it. The better off we are. WILLENBERG: Kathy and I talked briefly about maybe not putting a full basement on it, but the way it is build the architect could speak to this better. It has the deep windows; a very deep basement and I do not know how you would, would it go to a property on crawl space? If you wanted to try to limit the cost by limiting the basement, do you remember how it is built? MORGAN: It is built up high, very high. It is probably at least 3'. STEINER: So it would be some kind of a phony looking basement deal. WILLENBERG: We had just kind of thrown out maybe just a basement over the back section of the house for a storm shelter type and eliminate the expense of a fully excavated basement, but I am not sure that would work with the way that house is designed. STEINER: That house probably does not sit very far down in the ground anyway, even now, maybe only 4' down. WILLENBERG: It is not a very deep, because the majority of it, not the majority, the most of it is above ground. It has a north door that goes to the basement; it would be hard to work that stairwell without the same excavation. I do not know that it would work. We just through that out there... MORGAN: If any of you want to come to that meeting, I do not see that there would be a problem. It would be 10:00 a.m. at the property, Friday morning. What Joan wants to accomplish with that is to get a time schedule from this Donna Rowe as to when they can get started with the Lorens Dinner Project. It could be that we have used up all of our goodwill on that. GUY: Does anybody know what happened to the sale of the Judge Wall House? WILLENBERG: I was wondering that, that was another question I had. MORGAN: I did not hear that that sold, did you. I talked to McCurrdy Auction and they were aware that it was a historic property etc., but I have not heard back from them, and I have not called them to find out how the sale went. I was thinking I had heard that it did not sell. WILLENBERG: On tax credit thing should we be thinking of projects that we could maybe nominate and would that, maybe the renovation of the Metro High School be one. MORGAN: But it is not listed property. GUY: And could you imagine how our friend on the school board, partitioning to put anything on the National Register. WILLENBERG: How about the Judge Wall House? It would not be a big enough project probably. STEINER: It takes ˝ million at the bottom end. WILLENBERG: It is. I wonder if that high school renovation might be. MORGAN: I would not qualify that use as Neighborhood Commercial; I guess you could make a case WILLENBERG: Part of that program at least is meets most of those. It does list Kansas as one of the states. The other one I wondered about, would be David Burks, "Locked Condo" that he is going to start again this spring. MORGAN: I think they would. The telegraphic building that you are talking about, well I have a meeting with him this week and I will shoot him a copy of that. WILLENBERG: There is a finder's fee and a referral fee. MORGAN: I do not know what we would do with that, but. WILLENBERG: We could go the State Convention: LAWING: We could go the National Convention. WILLENBERG: We might be able to donate it back to one of our projects. MORGAN: Back to this April deal, you know our regular board meeting is scheduled for April 9, which is the Monday right after the conference concludes. I would suggest that, I try to set up of course up after taxes, and Sam you can't take vacation right after taxes done, but I would suggest that we get together like at the end of April, that following weekend would be the 22nd, and April 29th would be the last weekend in April. Lets do a board retreat at the end of April. If you could be looking at those two dates, the 21st and the 28th, both of those are Saturdays. Or I am willing to do it in the middle of the week. Generally, when we do these we take about 5 hours, so we have an option here. Lets plan on a 5 hour board retreat and we can either start it during the week and go from 3-8, I could cater in a meal, that type of thing. I will find a location to hold this obviously, last year we did it in the Idea Center; I do not know that we need to do that again. However, to make it convent and see is Saturday good or do we want to see about doing it during the week. LAWING: I suggest we order food from our friend for the Beglaryans. MORGAN: What did we have last year? Oh Watermarks Book Store. We could go to Watermarks Book Store they have a basement meeting room. LAWING: That might not be bad. WILLENBERG: It would be nice if we could get in the Frank Lloyd House. MORGAN: I will at least ask. So, if you could be thinking about that and let me know what you want to do. Anytime after the April 16, the tax deadlines. I would say beginning the 21st, and if you just as soon not have it on as Saturday, I do not have problem with that. I know many times weekends do not work for you all. By the same token; I do not want to take up, I know it is difficult to get a whole day away from your job. LENTZ: I will not mind. WILLENBERG: I am open either, probably easier on the weekend, but if you give us enough notice, I can block out whatever time. LAWING: We can try to maybe come to a decision on the date of the February meeting and get that locked down. MORGAN: If you will be thinking about that, and Valerie lets make sure that we make a note in our minutes, for the staff report next time to bring calendars so that we can select a date. I really feel like we could be through whatever we needed to get through in 5 hours. If we were able to start a meeting at 3:00 in the afternoon, I could have you out of here by 7:30 or 8:00 and feed you supper. CAVANAUGH: That might be a good option. Shall we adjourn this thing? Meeting Adjourned at 4:15. WICHITA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MINUTES 8 JANUARY 2001 15 1 WICHITA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MINUTES 8 JANUARY 2001