CITY OF DENISON

HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING

AGENDA

Tuesday, September 1, 2020

Pursuant to section 551.127 of the Texas Government Code, and in conjunction with the guidance

and provisions provided by the Governor of Texas in the declaration of disaster and subsequent

executive orders altering certain Open Meetings Act requirements and ordering that gatherings of

more than 10 people shall be avoided, the Historic Preservation Board of the City of Denison,

Texas will conduct the meeting scheduled at 12:00 PM on Tuesday, September 1, 2020 by video

teleconference in order to advance the public health goal of limiting face-to-face meetings (also

called “social distancing”) to slow the spread of the Coronavirus (COVID-19). A quorum will not

be physically present.

The public toll-free dial-in number to participate in the meeting by telephone is 1-866-899-

4679, Access Code 639-177-621#.

A recording of the meeting will be made and will be available to the public in accordance with the

Open Meetings Act upon written consent.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION

Citizens may speak on action items listed on the Agenda. A “Request to Speak Card” should be

completed and returned to the City Clerk or Board Secretary prior to the Board reaching this

section of the agenda. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes, unless otherwise required

by law. Comments related to Public Hearings, if any, will be heard when the specific hearing is

called.

A. Receive a report, hold a discussion and take action on the Minutes from the August 4, 2020

Meeting.

B. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request for of a mural located at

227 W Chestnut. (Case No. 2020–048H)

C. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request to install new windows

and window frames at 400 W Main. (Case No. 2020–039H)

4. ADJOURNMENT

CERTIFICATION

I do hereby certify that a copy of this Notice of Meeting was posted on the front windows of City

Hall readily accessible to the general public at all times, and posted on the City of Denison

website on the 28TH day of August, 2020.

______________________________

Fanchon Stearns, Deputy City Clerk

In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, the City of Denison will provide for reasonable

accommodations for persons attending Historic Preservation Board Meeting. To better serve you, requests should be

received 48 hours prior to the meetings. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 903-465-2720, Ext: 2437.

CITY OF DENISON

HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING

MINUTES

Tuesday, August 4, 2020

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Mason called the meeting to order at 12:32pm.

2. ROLL CALL

Board present were Chair George Mason, Vice Chair Linda Anderson and Jennifer Knott.

Staff present were Planner Bill Medina, Community and Development Services Felecia

Winfrey and Deputy City Clerk Fanchon Stearns.

3. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION

A. Receive a report, hold a discussion and take action on the Minutes from the July 21, 2020

Meeting.

Board Action

On motion by Vice Chair Anderson, seconded by Board Member Knott, the motion to

approve the Minutes passed unanimously.

B. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request for the addition of an

awning at 108 W. Main. (Case No. 2020–045H)

Board Action

Mr. Medina shared that staff was working to fill the two vacant seats on the Board. Vice

Chair Anderson asked how many positions were on the Board, and Mr. Medina said there

are five with only three filled.

Mr. Medina introduced the item by saying the Police Department has requested to install

an awning on the rear of their building. It will be used to cover equipment stored outside.

The material and color of the awning would match the existing building color.

On motion by Vice Chair Anderson, seconded by Board Member Knott the motion to

approve the awning passed unanimously.

C. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request for the addition of a

sculpture located within the 300 block of W. Main Street. (Case No. 2020–046H)

Board Action

Mr. Medina explained that the sculpture would be in memoriam of the fire that burned the

300 block of West Main Street in October 2019. He said the proportions would be similar

to the existing guitar sculpture on the opposite corner, being about 8-9 feet tall. The

sculpture will be created with materials taken from the wreckage of the fire. He also said

the item can be relocated, being installed before the scheduled rebuild of Main Street,

removed for the project, and then reinstalled afterwards.

On motion by Board Member Knott, seconded by Vice Chair Anderson, approval of the

sculpture proposed for the 300 block of West Main commemorating the fire of October

2019 passed unanimously.

D. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request for modifications to the

rear of 421 W. Main. (Case No. 2020–017H)

Board Action

Mr. Medina said a few revisions to the staff report would be presented as additional

information had been brought to staff’s attention since the report was created. The applicant

is proposing the addition of a roll-up door that would require cutting a new opening in the

existing brick. The staff report indicated that the roll-up door would be installed in an

existing opening. A wooden fence and some miscellaneous attachments would also be

removed. The staff report also indicated that the painting of the unpainted brick was not

recommended. After additional research, staff determined the brick would only be painted

in the rear, and that the existing brick is deteriorating. The paint would help protect the

brick in this case. While unpainted brick should not be painted in the Historic District, the

paint will help protect the brick. Two other items were proposed, including a rooftop bar

and a balcony on the front of the building. Those two items do not need to be acted on at

this time, and staff will continue to work with the developer and applicant to find a solution

that meets their needs and preserves the historical character of the building and the District.

The applicant is going to pursue a Conditional Use Permit for an icehouse in an accessory

building in the alley. This is where the roll-up door would be located and be facing the

alley. They would like to paint the accessory building white with black trim and replace

the existing fence with a privacy fence extending to the property line. Mr. Medina said that

he cannot find record of the accessory building having historical significance.

The Texas Historical Commission, or THC, provided a photo of the building that staff did

not have previous access to. The photo portrays Main Street in 1920 and shows the building

in question. The transoms to the top of the building has been preserved and looks identical

to the same are in the photograph. The THC representatives who reviewed the case said

that the addition of the balcony as presented by the applicant would likely render the

building non-compliant. This is, in part, due to the disproportionate nature and addition of

new materials. Addition of a balcony and rooftop bar as would render the façade, which

has presumably been the same for at least 100 years, would be substantially altered in a

way that is irreversible. The applicant has also proposed to replace the doors on the

building. Staff and THC have asked that the doors be stored so the change could be reversed

in the future if the building’s contributing status were in jeopardy. A balcony would not be

as easily reversed and would significantly alter the building’s historic architecture and

features.

On motion by Board Member Knott, seconded by Vice Chair Anderson, the proposed

changes at 421 West Main to include the installation of a wooden fence with metal gate,

replacement of doors, adding a door, replacing the back doors, removal of miscellaneous

wall attachments, painting of the window and door trim, the installation of the roll-up metal

door on the accessory structure and painting the rear bricks, passed unanimously.

Chair Mason said the balcony and rooftop addition were not recommended as presented.

The applicant, Rhonda Borgne, said they were still exploring options regarding the two

items to make them less invasive. She said the rooftop addition could be eliminated at this

time. Her engineer, Cory, who was also on the line, suggested installation of the balcony

without the columns and without the roof. He said he found physical evidence of an awning

existing on the building at one time, and that they would be adding a structural balcony in

place of an awning. Chair Mason said he was also concerned about the removal of the

middle window and installation of a double door. Cory asked if accessing the balcony

through the window would be an appropriate compromise. Ms Borgne said an interior

stairwell could be added to access the window, and it is large enough to function as access

with a door installed in the existing window frame. She said she is happy to store the

window along with the ground level doors she is going to replace in case they ever need to

be reinstalled. She said she did not want to compromise the building’s historical status and

wanted to redevelop the building in a less obtrusive way. She said the balcony would add

value as a commercial or residential lease space. Chair Mason said the design was nice, but

it jeopardizes the historic status of the building and the district. He said he did not know if

the changes proposed would alleviate those concerns, and he would research this. Ms

Borgne asked if he would be able to verify if utilizing the current window opening with a

custom single-hinge door installed would be acceptable. Mr. Medina clarified if the

window would be closed with a door. She said that she was proposing to close the window

with a door but save the window for reversibility. She asked if she would be able to repaint

the trim on the pediment—Mr. Medina said that could be administratively approved by

staff in a few minutes with the same color or an approved historic color. Mr. Medina said

the THC staff who helped review the case had pointed out that while there was an awning

in the 1920 photograph, it is in an entirely different place than the proposed balcony. Ms

Borgne said there was evidence on the building of an awning where the balcony is being

proposed but it may have been later. Mr. Mason said that, based on the drawings submitted,

there would be considerable steel work to cantilever the balcony structure. Ms Borgne said

that was correct, but a new design would not be as invasive. Her engineer said with the

new design, 2 C-channel metal eyebeams would butt up to the exterior wall with a bolt

passing all the way through the exterior wall, using the wall as support. This would require

2- 6 inch by 8 inch holes made in the front of the building. Vice Chair Anderson stated that

installation of a balcony on the front of a building on Main Street was a substantial change,

and one that needed to be very carefully considered. She said it sets a precedent of putting

non-historic features on to historic buildings and asked if the State had weighed in on that.

Mr. Medina said they shared that while buildings with balconies existed during the time

the building is from; there is no evidence of them existing in Denison and especially on

Main Street. The State’s opinion also referenced 4.2 and 4.3, stating that additions to

historic buildings should be consistent with existing building materials and should not

obstruct the building itself. Ms Borgne said the building is currently a twin building. The

neighboring building has been refaced and appears totally different than at the time of the

1920 photograph. Chair Mason said that appears to have been done in about 1950. She said

other properties on Main Street were being renovated and asked about the process they had

gone through for redevelopment or if there were a grandfathering clause. Chair Mason said

every building undergoing façade change has come before the Historic Preservation Board

and gone through the same process. He used 208 West Main Street as an example. He said

a metal façade was installed in the 1950s, and historic photos show the original building.

When the metal façade was removed, a lot of the detail from the original façade was still

there, though some glass blocks had been installed in window openings at one time. He

said those applicants are attempting to restore the building to how it looked in the 1950s

and went through the same Historic Preservation process. He said the Board understands

somethings are not feasible due to finances or available materials. In regards to the

neighboring building being redone into the “twin building,” he said at the time it was done,

historic preservation wasn’t a priority, which could be why so many metal facades and

stucco elements were installed in the 1950s. Vice Chair Anderson asked if the Board

needed to take action. Mr. Medina said no action was recommended until the new plans

were reviewed by staff and the Board, and said a balcony being installed in the rear of the

building had been suggested to maintain the historic integrity of the front of the building

while letting the applicant meet their desire for a balcony. Ms Borgne said a deck was in

place on the rear of the building already, and rooftop access was also in the rear of the

building. Chair Mason suggested the balcony be tabled and revisited when new plans are

submitted. Vice Chair Anderson said she did not support approval as presented but would

be open to the modified plans being presented in the future. Board Member Knott

concurred, and looked forward to getting a better understanding of how the project could

affect the district and contributing status of the building. Mr. Medina said he would get the

updated plans from the applicant and would work with the Board Members for guidance

in the interim.

Vice Chair Anderson motioned to table the balcony addition. Board Member Knott

seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.

The Board said they appreciated the work being done at the property and looked forward

to reviewing the new plans. The applicant said she appreciated the Board’s consideration

and feedback.

4. STAFF UPDATES

A. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding department staff updates.

Board Action

Mr. Medina said there were no cases scheduled to be heard at the August 19th meeting at

this time, but staff would confirm if the Board needed to meet between now and then.

5. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 1:07pm.

_____________________________________

BOARD CHAIR, George Mason

ATTEST:

_____________________________________

DEPUTY CITY CLERK, Fanchon Stearns

Historic Preservation Meeting

Staff Report

Agenda Item

Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request for of a mural located at 227 W Chestnut.

(Case No. 2020–048H)

Staff Contact

Bill Medina, Planner

bmedina@cityofdenison.com

903-647-5566

Summary

The applicant is proposing the addition of a new mural on the alley facing wall of 227 W.

Chestnut.

Staff recommends approval of the mural.

The location of the proposed mural has been previously painted.

Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of the proposed mural.

Recommended Motion

"I move to approve the proposed mural at 227 W. Chestnut.

Background Information and Analysis

The applicant is requesting to install a new mural featuring a series of wildflowers on the North-alley

facing façade of the subject property. The mural will be reviewed and acted upon by the Denison Design

Committee. Pending approval by other Boards/Commissions, the applicant wishes to move forward with

the installation of this wildflower mural. The mural may receive minor changes or amendments, but the

proposed size and location is not subject to changes. The proposal measures 25’ W x 20’H on an alley

wall that was previously painted. Due to the wall being previously painted, staff recommends approval

of the proposed mural.

Financial Considerations

N/A

Prior Board or Council Action

None

Alternatives

The Historic Preservation Board may, table, deny, or approve the request with conditions.

Historic Preservation Meeting

Staff Report

Agenda Item

Receive a report, hold a discussion, and take action on a request to install new windows and window

frames at 400 W Main. (Case No. 2020–039H)

Staff Contact

Bill Medina, Planner

bmedina@cityofdenison.com

903-647-5566

Summary

The applicant is requesting to install new windows on the Eastern façade of the subject

property.

Staff recommends approval.

Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of the proposed changes.

Recommended Motion

"I move to approve the proposed modifications at 400 W Main.”

Background Information and Analysis

The applicant recently received approval for the façade renovations to include removal of a metal

panel façade and the installation of stucco, awning repairs, and repainting. In addition to removing the

metal panels, previously approved, the applicant would like to receive approval to install three (3)

double pane 6’x8’ windows. The window openings and glass will be framed with wood and painted

white. The proposed windows will be installed after the new stucco has been applied.

The building is not a historically contributing structure and staff recommends approval of the proposed

improvements.

Financial Considerations

N/A

Prior Board or Council Action

The Historic Preservation Board granted façade renovation approval at the July 21st, 2020 meeting.

Alternatives

The Historic Preservation Board may, table, deny, or approve the request with conditions.