Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRequest for denial of FIP 1999 June 4 1999 Jane Kee, City Planner City of College Station Ms. Kee, As per my request to staff at last night's Hear Visitor's section of the Planning & Zoning Commission, I'm requesting that the Zoning Official inspect and determine if the project at 303 Boyett (Satchel's) is in violation of City Ordinance 1638, section 7.24.E.1.e - Historic Structures. On September 24th, 1998, the City awarded a Facade Improvement Program grant for the purpose of facade renovation of 303 Boyett. I since have reviewed, via an Open Records Act request, information on this project. I believe that all the HUD and College Station requirements for the FIP have been met by the city. I also know that the Texas Historical Commission judged this site to not be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. So what's the problem? Although the project meets those federal and state requirements, it seems that it doesn't meet the local zoning ordinance 1638, section 7.24.E.1.e. Let's review the requirements of the ordinance: Historic Structures: Structures over 50 years in age that are reflected as high or medium priority structures in the Northgate Historic Resources Survey or have been determined to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places shall be treated using methods and materials in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as outlined in Attachment A. The structure is located in section NG -1 of Northgate. As per the fax that the THC sent me on this site, the structure is listed as being around 68 years in age (built circa 1930). The survey lists the property as being Medium Priority. The age and survey qualifications for Historic Structures according to 7.24.E.1.e are easily met. Since the qualification requirements of the ordinance are met, then the structure should "be treated using methods and materials in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation ", to preserve it. What has been done that violates the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for this project? Part of the description of the award, which is listed as Agenda Item #7 -C, is for additional interior and exterior, beyond the FIP award. Approximately $256,700 was to be spent on the project, part of it for interior and exterior work. When you consider that the property is valued as $35,540 and that the matching funds from the FIP award alone are $112,795 (over 3 times the value of the entire property), then one should conclude that the structure is either being meticulously restored or (more likely) severely modified from its original state. Frankly, the FIP award is so out of line with the original building's value that I have to ask myself: just how much is this building being renovated or is it just a pretext to effectively replace it with a generous donation from Uncle Sam? Well, the merits of the FIP award don't matter to this case. What is being decided now is whether the building violated the ordinance. That's all you have to decide. And it should be quite easy. I attended the September 24th City Council meeting and saw a prospective drawing presented for the project. I also visited the site, before construction started, and since then numerous times. The building used to look like a small house, with a small, inset covered porch. The top view plan would show the structure as quite square. It was a quaint home from the '30s. Last night I visited this site, again, and saw how it has changed. The building has doubled in size, and is now rectangular in shape. There is a new covered deck, nothing like the original old- fashioned porch, with vertical supports that are shaped like pyramids. It looks like the interior was gutted. Not only is the architectural style of the structure radically changed, but dare say, a previous resident of this home would probably not even recognize it. I could list the federal requirement that the building violates, but there are so many, it's a waste of time. As I mentioned last night, I believe category 5 is the only category that it doesn't violate. Why is this building historically significant? Although the ordinance doesn't require it, we should consider the historical significance of this property. This property is not just any old house. The building was previously at 202 College Main, used as a parsonage for the previous First Baptist Church. It is also listed as the Commandant's House. The historical significance of these two uses alone should provide the motivation behind enforcing the ordinance to restore and preserve it in its original condition. Why did this happen? As I mentioned last night, it is quite possible that Community Development followed all the FIP requirements, but may not have considered the specific P &Z ordinance section, nor communicated with your department about this. I would recommend that there be more communication between CD and P &Z on FIP awards, to prevent this from happening again. It might also be useful to review the other FIP awards, although what I saw on Loupot's, Sparks, and Holick's projects seems OK. I don't know what is being done with Texadelphia, since it looks like no work has begun (its due in December 31st). Is it too late to act? Not at all. It should not be too late to act, as the project is still ongoing. When I visited last night, the building wasn't finished; I even saw a port-a -potty on site. The work crews should still be available, the original materials may be available, and the structure can still be brought back in compliance with the ordinance. I was first made aware of this ordinance on Wednesday, when I borrowed a copy, and started browsing through the book. Imagine my surprise to find that something as basic as the zoning ordinance was not being followed! You were provided with the fastest notice possible (at last night's meeting). Normally I have time to properly document everything for you, as I am now doing so. However, you need to fast track this inspection. It should take a mere 5 minutes to review the information that I have submitted on eligibility. All you need after that is a quick visit to the site or a cursory review of the original and proposed plans to agree with my assessment. Can it be done? Quite simply, it seems feasible to restore or modify the project to meet the federal requirements. It is possible that any original material removed has already been disposed of, so substitutes would be necessary. The covered porch and those out -of- character columns need to be removed. Any missing inside walls need to be restored and windows need to be of the original style. The building's addition needs to adhere to the federal requirements. Since a quarter million dollars was the budget for the structure, and half was a grant to the applicant, much of the funds are already there. As far as any additional funds, Mr. Ganter has a lot of financial resources to draw from. He is listed on the tax rolls as owning $741,110 of property, and his company, Dixie Chicken, Inc. has another $945,195. That is a total of $1,686,305 of real estate in his possession and control. As you can see from the bank's letter, his ability to get a loan is never in question. What actions need to be taken? You mentioned that there is currently no official "zoning official ", but that you or Sabine McCully serve in that position. So I address my request to whoever is the appropriate person. In summary, It is obvious that the project should have never proceeded to its current condition. You can remedy this by enforcing the ordinance. Mr. Ganter's financial standing is quite robust, so his ability to meet the requirements is not in question - he can get the funds. There is no reason to permit this project to progress as planned. Instead, we need to restore it to the original state, complying with the federal standards. It's that simple. As City Planner, I'm sure you want to preserve the past history of our proud city. I'm confident that you will do all you can to restore this building to what it was. You can do it. Sincerely, Benito Flores -Meath 901 Val Verde Drive College Station, TX 77845 -5125 409 - 846 -2340 Work 409 - 696 -8295 Home 409 - 846 -4367 FAX Proud B /CS resident since 1979 CC: Jo Carroll, Community Development Chairman, Historic Preservation Committee