Board approves façade renovation and painting at 215 S. Santa Fe for Kansas Bankers Technologies with conditions

The Salina Design Review Board voted 3–0 on Thursday to approve a certificate of compatibility allowing a storefront renovation at 215 South Santa Fe for Kansas Bankers Technologies.

The applicant proposed removing most of the existing stacked-brick and CMU masonry façade on the 25-foot-wide building and replacing it with a black curtain-wall framing system, gray and spandrel glass, a charcoal stone-coated metal tile roof, and painted brick accents on the north and south edges. Staff told the board the building, constructed in 1961 in a mid‑century modern style, has large plate-glass windows and a textured stacked‑brick exterior that the downtown guidelines generally recommend preserving when intact.

Staff’s report noted the design guidelines encourage restoration of original storefronts and discourage painting previously unpainted masonry. The report cited the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation to explain why applying paint or coatings to historically unpainted masonry is discouraged: paints and sealants can trap moisture and lead to masonry deterioration over time. Staff nevertheless recommended the board could find in support of the applicant if the board determined the building’s mid‑century elements were not character-defining in this location and the proposed changes would avoid a blank-wall condition and break large glass surfaces into appropriately scaled divisions.

Dax Mars, who identified himself as one of the owners of Kansas Bankers Technologies, told the board that the company’s contractor removed some brick earlier than intended while repairing a leaking roof and that the applicant did not intend to remove brick before board review. “It was not our intent to have the brick removed prior to this meeting,” Mars said. He said the design team considered alternatives for natural light, including skylights, but that skylight options would not effectively illuminate the building’s lower split level and would raise costs.

Board discussion addressed whether the building’s mid‑century features were character‑defining within the predominantly 1920s–1930s downtown fabric. One board member said the brick side pieces that face perpendicular to the street are an accent rather than the primary façade and that similar nearby storefront changes had been approved in the past. The board approved the application under option 2 — approval as submitted with a condition that any significant design changes be returned to staff and possibly the board for review. The vote was 3–0.

Staff noted painting original masonry remains discouraged by the design guidelines and that painting is not prohibited; the board’s approval includes the standard condition requiring resubmittal for substantial design changes.