Lawrence historic resources Commission

Agenda for September 20, 2007

City Commission Room, City Hall, 6 E. 6th Street

6:30 pm

 

SPECIAL NOTICE: THE CITY OF LAWRENCE HAS EXECUTED AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER TO CONDUCT CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEWS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. THEREFORE, THE LAWRENCE HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMISSION WILL MAKE ALL DETERMINATIONS REGARDING PROJECTS THAT ARE CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEWS.

_________________________________________________________________________

Commissioners present:  Williams, Meyer, Marvin, Sizemore, Antle, Veatch, Wiechert

Staff present: McCullough, Braddock Zollner, Burke, Parker

_________________________________________________________________________

 

 

ITEM NO. 1:         Action summary

Ms. Braddock Zollner stated the Action Summary from the previous August 3rd, 2007, and August 16th, 2007, meeting was not completed.  Commissioner Sizemore stated the Action Summary would be deferred until the October 18thth, 2007 meeting.

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 2:         CoMMUNICATIONS

a)     No communications received from other commissions, State Historic Preservation Officer, and the general public.

 

b)     No declaration of abstentions from specific agenda items by commissioners.   

 

ITEM NO. 3:        DR-07-93-07 618 12th Street; Demolition and New Construction; Certified Local Government Review and Certificate of Appropriateness Review.  The property is within the environs of the Hancock Historic District, National Register of Historic Places and the Oread Historic District, Register of Historic Kansas Places.  The property is also within the environs of the Jane A. Snow Residence, National Register of Historic Places and Lawrence Register of Historic Places.  Submitted by Thomas Fritzel of Triple T, L.L.C., for himself and Robert Pottroff, the property owners of record. 

 

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Ms. Burke presented the item.

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

  Paul Werner, Paul Werner Architects, stated the name of the proposed project had changed to The Oread Inn.  He said the team had met again with neighboring property owners to resolve minor issues and discuss revisions like the structure decreasing in size.  Mr. Werner said the traffic study was complete and numerous photos had been taken from all over Lawrence.  He said the building had been pulled back from the north property line twenty feet, six feet from the east property line and the radius along the 12th Street entrance had increased.  Mr. Werner said valet service was added to the underground parking garage and the team had met with Public Works and the pedestrian paths were now detailed.  He said most pedestrians walk on the east side of Oread Avenue and to move the paths further down Louisiana would be a mistake.  Mr. Werner stated the traffic study was performed to verify the turning radius on the new alignment and the Fire Department was happy with it.  He said the overall square footage of the parking garage had decreased from 90,840 square feet to 82,000 square feet and the finished square footage went from 109,000 to 92,864 which was a 15% reduction.  Mr. Werner showed pictures of the Lawrence skyline which indicated what the building would look like. 

 

                   Mr. Tim Homburg stated the most noticeable difference was the removal of the enclosed conservatory, which reduced the building height by fourteen feet.  He said the roof terraces and the landscaping around the building would stay.  Mr. Homburg said the west elevation basically reflected a decrease in the overall length of the building by twenty feet.  He said the Historic Resource Commission had asked the team to get additional comments from other concerned persons in the Lawrence area and the city at large.  He said included in the packets was the original typed letter from Ms. Carol von Tersch who resided in the Snow House, a letter from the president of the Alumni Association, and the Kansas University Provost and basically all letters strongly support the proposal.  He said they had made themselves available to others to ask questions and they had reached out to The Lawrence Preservation Association for their input.  Mr. Homburg said they studied the projected skyline and performed a thorough job of taking pictures and there should be no concern that the structure was going to dominate the Lawrence skyline, but rather it would compliment the skyline.  He said he questioned Ms. Braddock Zollner’s comments regarding the four structures that would be demolished and if they were historic structures.  He stated the existing site had no reminisce of the original fabric of the neighborhood and asked if they were historic buildings or if they were just old buildings but not in a historic district.  Mr. Homburg said he would like for the Commission to take into consideration how the building addresses the street front and would also like the Commission to study other buildings in the area.  He said there would be more landscaping and a more historic feel to the curb front than what was previously there.

 

Commissioner Meyer said there were things previously built in Lawrence that were pre historic districts and if they came before the commission today they may not be built.

 

Mr. Homburg asked Commissioner Meyer to explain the meaning of ‘the environs’.

 

Commissioner Meyer explained environs and asked Mr. Homburg if he had a 3-D model.

 

Mr. Homburg said there had not been time to acquire a 3-D model since the last meeting, but he would present one if the Commission felt it was necessary.

 

Commissioner Wiechert said a 3-D model really would not be that effective unless the buildings around it were shown.

 

Commissioner Meyer stated she thought it would be helpful to better define the project itself, not to compare the structure to buildings that sat next to it.  She said the drawings do not do the project justice.

 

Commissioner Sizemore asked how to access the deck and if it would be ADA accessible.

 

Mr. Homburg stated a spiral staircase and a platform lift.

 

Commissioner Williams said the height of the building was less dramatic when looking at it from the press box, rather than Mississippi Street.  He said it appeared that the height would be three times as high as any building in the neighborhood.

 

Mr. Homburg stated the Oread apartments were on a raised first floor, and they also had taller floor to floor heights.

                       

Commissioner Williams stated he spoke with Ms. Braddock Zollner and the scale of the building blended with the other buildings on campus.  He said he believed the project to be positive, but it was still in a historic area, and the scale was more dramatic because of the slope of the hill.  Commissioner Williams said that maybe the plan should be reversed.

 

Mr. Homburg said the method to the design was to keep the tallest side of the structure to the University end.

 

Commissioner Marvin asked if the details of the plan were the same as what Staff had addressed. 

 

Mr. Homburg said they were addressing those issues.

 

Commissioner Williams asked how many square feet of useable space was there now and said he was concerned with the density of its use.

 

Commissioner Meyer asked if the retail space was 4,000 square feet and asked what type of retail would be there.

 

Mr. Homburg said the team had been approached by numerous local business owners that were interested in leasing space.

 

Commissioner Meyer said it would be nice to see something that people in the neighborhood could use.

 

Mr. Homburg stated the types of businesses would be in the restaurant industry.

 

                   Commissioner Wiechert stated he was impressed with what the team had done.  He said he had suggested they show photos of the skyline and he was quite surprised.

 

Mr. Homburg said the team felt it was very fitting.

 

                   Commissioner Wiechert said when looking down Oread Avenue towards the building, the Alumni Building was not seen.  He said from that view it looked residential.

 

Mr. Homburg said that was what the team had wanted and they would also plant large trees along the face of Indiana so that thirty to forty years down the road only the top of the building would be seen.

 

                   Commissioner Wiechert stated there was a concern with canonizing the streetscape but the structure seemed to enhance the neighborhood.

 

Commissioner Meyer asked where the outdoor dining area would be.

 

                   Mr. Homburg said the outdoor dining area would be on the first floor, accessed from the main entrance.

 

Commissioner Wiechert asked if the throat closest to 12th street would be moved further to the north.

 

Mr. Homburg said yes.

 

Commissioner Williams asked what the setbacks would be.

 

Mr. Homburg said the setbacks would be fifteen to eighteen feet.

 

Commissioner Williams asked if there would be a driveway in the front.

 

Mr. Homburg said yes.

 

                   Mr. Werner said there would be a 100 foot right away at 12th street and a 110 foot right away at Oread Avenue.

 

Commissioner Wiechert asked if the proposed project had been through the Public Works Department.

 

Mr. Werner said the Fire Department had the biggest equipment, and they had signed off on the proposal.

 

Commissioner Wiechert asked if semi’s had been considered.

 

Mr. Homburg said there would be a service lane to keep deliveries off the street.

 

Mr. Werner said the footprint of the building was twice what the buildings there now were. He said they were putting all of the parking underground, which was a big expense.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Dennis Brown, president of The Lawrence Preservation Alliance, stated he appreciated the name change and the elimination of the observatory, and that the building was getting smaller rather than bigger.  He said the Lawrence Preservation Alliance was a preservation advocate and there was a wide range of expertise on the board. He said the board discussed the proposal and with a 10-0-1 vote they had agreed with Staff that the proposal should be rejected.  He said the Oread Neighborhood component was formed to meet with the developers and their team and they were all very supportive of the proposal.  He said there had been concerns with parking and a street level bar, pedestrian and vehicular traffic, set back and delivery issues.  He said all of those issues had now been addressed and resolved.  He said the proposal was far more superior to a previous owner’s proposal one year ago.  Mr. Brown said there was a neighborhood fear that if this project was rejected, something far worse could be approved and they agreed with Staff that the structure would encroach upon the Hancock Historic District.  Mr. Brown said they believed the developer should incorporate a professional preservation consultant into the planning process.  He said The Lawrence Preservation Alliance was concerned with the demolition of the house at 1142 Indiana and the height of the structure.  He said The Lawrence Preservation Alliance had received a letter from a local architect that said he did not believe that the Oread project could have a greater impact on the Lawrence skyline.  He said if the project met the environs standard, then the standards were meaningless.  Mr. Brown said The Lawrence Preservation Alliance agreed that a hotel in the area was desirable but he would like to request a deferral to work with the ARC.  He said four architectural consultants agreed the architectural design was too busy and that the design needed to be more consistent and the height should be no more than five stories on the south, which would make seven stories on the north.  Mr. Brown said after a strong evaluation of each floor and its use, it might be possible to cut a couple of floors from the project.  He said that if the height could be five stories instead of seven stories The Lawrence Preservation Alliance might be able to sign off on the project.

 

Ms. Betty Alderson stated she lived south of the hill, and she had walked down Oread Avenue from the south to the north and looked at the building that was there now, which was two stories.  She said five more stories would be too much and there would be storm water that would run down the street.

 

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Commissioner Antle stated it seemed the issue was the interpretation of the environs standards and how this project fits the standards.  He said there seemed to be interest in the neighborhood and in the community to have a hotel at that location, however those were not concerns that the Historic Resource Commission dealt with.  He said the project was getting better all of the time; it was getting smaller and there seemed to be more green space.  He said the issue was the scale of the structure in damaged environs.  Commissioner Antle stated placing a structure of this size at this location would completely disrupt the environs, but loosing a couple of floors could improve the proposed project.

 

                   Commissioner Meyer and asked how tall the structure would be from the first floor.

 

                   Mr. Homburg stated from the first floor line to the top of the railing was 94 feet and 3 inches tall.          

 

                   Commissioner Meyer said she agreed that the overall massing was too large, but does not necessarily have anything to do with the skyline.  She said she had compared this building to other buildings in Lawrence and that the US Bank Building was 77 feet tall, the Historic Eldridge Hotel was 63 feet tall, Hobbs Taylor Lofts measured 76 feet tall, and the Bella Serra Condo’s would be 69 feet tall.  Commissioner Meyer stated the Oread Inn would be on the highest point in Lawrence.

 

                   Commissioner Sizemore said the Historic Resource Commission rarely addressed design details of environs properties.  He said chapter 22, section 505, criteria 3, which stated all building structures and sites should be recognized as products of their own time and alterations, that have no historical basis, and seek to create an earlier appearance should be discouraged.  He said because of the visibility of the project, it should distinguish itself.

 

                   Commissioner Marvin stated at the last meeting she had expressed concern of the University creep and said she was not surprised to see that the University was interested in the project happening.  She said this was a business structure not another KU building.  Commissioner Marvin said KU had done a lot of things adjacent to neighborhoods that she did not agree with.  She said she did not see how the Commission could say it was ok to tear down a house that had architectural integrity.

 

Commissioner Veatch stated there were a lot of positive things about the project and the Historic Resource Commission was just one part of the process.  He said there was a lot of neighborhood support, the project would probably enhance the community, and it was probably a project that needed to happen.  Commissioner Veatch stated the responsibility of the Commission was to apply the standards consistently, and he did not see how the project was compatible with those standards.  He said the impact on the skyline was not part of this Commissions charge, however the impact on the district and the environs was the issue and they needed to maintain the integrity of the Historic Resource Commissions process.  Commissioner Veatch stated if this Commission concluded that this project did not encroach upon, damage or destroy historic environs, he would not see any project that ever came before the Commission being judged that way.

 

Commissioner Wiechert stated the project boiled down to the Commissions charge and following the guidelines.   He said he believed it to be a good project but did not believe it met the criteria.

 

                   Commissioner Meyer stated that most of the Commission believed it was a good project.  She said she does not think anyone was opposed to the idea but believed it might need a little more work.

 

Commissioner Williams stated in his estimation the Fritzel name was a benchmark of quality for Lawrence Kansas.  He said when asked about a Fritzel built home, he points out that the Fritzels were selected to do the Governors mansion in Topeka.  He said the style and character of buildings that Fritzels have built in Lawrence were a very strong positive. Commissioner Williams said the strengths of this project were numerous, and the fact that it was on the crown of the hill actually mitigated the amount of view or space that it would cloud. He said unfortunately Carruth-OLeary Hall and Joseph R. Pearson Hall were a historical travesty.  Commissioner Williams said that along with the concert with the University, the project was excellent, and for the community and the University of Kansas it was excellent.  He said the University and Lawrence were very tight and a very important merger, and working in cooperation was very strong.  He said the traffic study that was prepared and the trees that were to be planted were excellent and the sensitivity to the Oread neighborhood and the Lawrence Preservation Association was excellent.  He said he agreed with the Commission that scaling the project down would be appropriate and if the developers and their team could do that and still make it economically feasible, it would be wonderful.  He said he viewed a very extraordinary, complex and challenging decision but he now believed the decision was very simple from the Historic Resource view point.  Commissioner Williams said he believed it was a very very great project.

 

Commissioner Meyer asked if the applicant would work with the ARC to adjust the overall scale of the project.

 

Mr. Werner stated their team would rather have a vote on the issue.

 

Commissioner Sizemore stated he did not think the issue could be worked out in an ARC venue.

 

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Commissioner Antle, seconded by Commissioner Sizemore, to deny the proposed project based upon the grounds that it would encroach upon, damage, and destroy the environs of the listed properties based on the findings in the staff report.

 

              Motion carried unanimously, 7-0.

 

                   Motioned by Commissioner Wiechert, seconded by Commissioner Marvin, to deny the proposed project based upon Chapter 22, section 505, criteria 3 as identified in the staff report.

          

              Motion carried unanimously, 7-0.