No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2021 - Historic Preservation Commission - AGENDA - Regular MeetingPage 1 Meg Dunn, Chair Location: Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair This meeting will be held Michael Bello remotely via Zoom Walter Dunn and at Chambers, Kevin Murray 300 Laporte Ave Anne Nelsen Jim Rose Staff Liaison: Vacant Seat Maren Bzdek Vacant Seat Interim Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting October 20, 2021 5:30 PM Historic Preservation Commission AGENDA Pursuant to City Council Ordinance 079, 2020, a determination has been made by the Chair after consultation with the City staff liaison that conducting the hearing using remote technology would be prudent. This remote Historic Preservation Commission meeting will be available in person at Council Chambers, online via Zoom or by phone. Members of the public are allowed to attend in person. The online meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:00 p.m. Participants should try to join at least 15 minutes prior to the 5:30 p.m. start time. IN PERSON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Members of the public that feel comfortable may appear in person at Council Chambers, 300 LaPorte Avenue, and address the Commission when recognized by the Chair. ONLINE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: You will need an internet connection on a laptop, computer, or smartphone, and may join the meeting through Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/94284162189. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). Keep yourself on muted status. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to comment. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY PHONE: Please dial 253-215-8782 and enter Webinar ID 942 8416 2189. Keep yourself on muted status. For public comments, when the Chair asks participants to click the “Raise Hand” button if they wish to speak, phone participants will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Commission. When you are called, hit *6 to unmute yourself. Documents to Share: Any document or presentation a member of the public wishes to provide to the Commission for its consideration must be emailed to abrennan@fcgov.com at least 24 hours before the meeting. Provide Comments via Email: Individuals who are uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing comments to abrennan@fcgov.com at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If your comments are specific to any of the discussion items on the agenda, please indicate that in the subject line of your email. Staff will ensure your comments are provided to the Commission. Packet Pg. 1 Page 2 Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government (CLG) authorized by the National Park Service and History Colorado based on its compliance with federal and state historic preservation standards. CLG standing requires Fort Collins to maintain a Historic Preservation Commission composed of members of which a minimum of 40% meet federal standards for professional experience from preservation-related disciplines, including, but not limited to, historic architecture, architectural history, archaeology, and urban planning. For more information, see Article III, Division 19 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:00 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php.  CALL TO ORDER  ROLL CALL  AGENDA REVIEW o Staff Review of Agenda o Consent Agenda Review This Review provides an opportunity for the Commission and citizens to pull items from the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Commission-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered before Discussion Items. Citizen-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered after Discussion Items.  STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA  CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 18, 2021. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 18, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Commission to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Agenda will be considered separately under Pulled Consent Items. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will be approved by Commission with one vote. The Consent Agenda consists of: ● Approval of Minutes ● Items of no perceived controversy ● Routine administrative actions Packet Pg. 2 Page 3  CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW UP This is an opportunity for Commission members to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.  PULLED FROM CONSENT Any agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by a Commission member, or member of the public, will be discussed at this time.  DISCUSSION AGENDA 2. REPORT ON STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS FOR DESIGNATED PROPERTIES Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Historic Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. This item is a report of all such review decisions since the last regular meeting of the Commission. DESCRIPTION: This item is to notify and inform residents of the possible demolition of a single family property over 50 years of age and to identify potentially important historic, architectural, and cultural resources, pursuant to Section 14-6 of Municipal Code. 3. 155 W MOUNTAIN/130 S MASON – FINAL LANDMARK DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is a final design review of the applicants’ project, to be approved or denied based on the Commission’s evaluation of the project’s compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The applicant is proposing a combination of replacement and repair techniques to address the deteriorated conditions of the upper street-facing windows on both abutting landmark buildings at 155 West Mountain and 130 South Mason. APPLICANT: Josh Harrison, Helix Property Management, LLC 4. MOUNTAIN AVENUE RESHAPING PROJECT – PLANNING PROJECTS REVIEW DESCRIPTION: FC Moves is returning to the Commission to share preliminary design results based on public outreach over the last two months. This will be an opportunity to provide additional feedback and direction regarding the conceptual designs for Mountain Avenue between Howes Street and the Lincoln Avenue Bridge over the Poudre River as they relate to cultural resources along the corridor. APPLICANT: FC Moves  OTHER BUSINESS  ADJOURNMENT Packet Pg. 3 Agenda Item 1 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 20, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission STAFF Aubrielle Brennan, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 18, 2021 REGULAR MEETING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 18, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. HPC August 18, 2021 Minutes – DRAFT Packet Pg. 4 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 1 August 18, 2021 Meg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair City Hall West Michael Bello 300 Laporte Avenue Walter Dunn Fort Collins, Colorado Kevin Murray and via Zoom Anne Nelsen Jim Rose Vacant Seat Vacant Seat Regular Meeting August 18, 2021 Minutes •CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. •ROLL CALL PRESENT: Meg Dunn, Walter Dunn, Kurt Knierim, Kevin Murray, Anne Nelsen, Jim Rose ABSENT: Mike Bello STAFF: Maren Bzdek, Jim Bertolini, Claire Havelda, Marcus Coldiron, Aubrie Brennan Chair Dunn commented on the meeting being conducted in a hybrid fashion. •AGENDA REVIEW No changes to posted agenda. •CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW Jim Bertolini reviewed the agenda. •STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. •PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. Historic Preservation Commission ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 5 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 2 August 18, 2021 • CONSENT AGENDA [Timestamp: 5:36 p.m.] 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JUNE 16, 2021 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 16, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. 2. SINGLE FAMILY DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 320 WOOD ST Member Knierim moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda of the August 18, 2021 regular meeting as presented. Member Rose seconded. The motion passed 6-0. [Timestamp: 5:36 p.m.] • DISCUSSION AGENDA 3. STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Historic Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. This item is a report of all such review decisions since the last regular meeting of the Commission. 4. 201 S LOOMIS AVE – LANDMARK DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Portner Property at 201 South Loomis Avenue. APPLICANT: Kathryn Wernsman Belden (daughter), on behalf of owners Charles & M. Gayle Wernsman (**Secretary’s Note: Chair Dunn recused herself from the discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest.) Staff Report Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner, presented the staff report. He noted this is a landmark designation request from the property owners at 201 South Loomis Avenue. He discussed the location of the property and noted it was recommended for designation as part of the recent historic property survey for the Loomis Addition. He stated the property is being nominated under standard 3 for design and construction as a significant example of classic Queen Anne architecture and he noted the property has good integrity under all seven aspects. Mr. Bertolini discussed the history of the ownership of the house by the Portners and Wernsmans and commented on the Loomis Addition survey report which makes some fairly heavy recommendations for individual landmark eligibility. He outlined the role of the Historic Preservation Commission to make a recommendation to Council after determining whether the criteria established in the Municipal Code are being met. Applicant Presentation Kathryn Wernsman Belden gave the Applicant presentation and noted her parents have owned the property since 1981, though her mother recently passed away. Mom was caretaker and passed away. They hope to restore the house. Public Input Gina Janett stated she was part of the group that worked on the Loomis Addition survey and thanked the Wernsmans for requesting landmark designation and the City for providing support for the survey. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 6 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 3 August 18, 2021 Commission Questions and Discussion Member Murray asked if anything besides the house would be designated. Ms. Belden replied in the negative. Commission Deliberation Member Murray commented the home stands out and is historically well documented. Member Knierim said the house had a great story and the original owners are buried in Grandview Cemetery. Member Rose agreed with the significance of the property and commended the designation petition. He also noted the integrity of the home is remarkable. Member Nelsen concurred with Members Murray and Rose that the property is well-preserved and has a beautiful story. Member Dunn agreed and supported landmarking the property. Member Rose made a motion that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend that City Council adopt an ordinance to designate the Portner Property at 201 South Loomis Avenue, as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is eligible for its significance to Fort Collins under Standard 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the staff report and Landmark nomination dated August 18, 2021, and that the property clearly conveys this significance through seven aspects of integrity to a sufficient degree; and finding also that the designation of this property will promote the policies and purposes of the City as specified in Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. Member Murray seconded. The motion passed 5-0. [Timestamp: 5:55 p.m.] (**Secretary’s Note: Chair Dunn rejoined the meeting at this point.) 5. 528 W MOUNTAIN AVE – LANDMARK DESIGNATION HEARING 2 DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council on Landmark designation of the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property at 528 W. Mountain Avenue. The nomination is not supported by the owners, Jason and Misha Green. APPLICANT: Mark Greenwald, Resident; Gina Janett, Resident; Robin Stitzel, Resident; William Whitley, Resident Claire Havelda, City Attorney’s Office, noted Member Murray disclosed he did some research regarding 528 West Mountain Avenue. Member Murray stated he received a report on the property in May relating to methamphetamine use at the property. Havelda noted the request for a second methamphetamine mitigation report was transmitted to the homeowner who did submit that report and asked Member Murray if he had similar concerns after reviewing the second report. Member Murray replied in the negative and stated he has not prejudged this matter based on his involvement. Chair Dunn outlined the process for the consideration of this item. She noted all six members would need to be in support of recommending this designation to Council in order to move it forward. Chair Dunn disclosed her involvement with historic preservation and stated she knows at least three of the applicants through that involvement; however, she stated that will not affect her judgement of this matter. Member Murray noted he can see this property from his house and he knows two of the applicants; however, he did not believe that would affect his judgement of this matter. He stated he would not have any personal financial interest regardless of whether this property ends up being designated. Mr. Bertolini requested a representative from each group would come forth indicating approval of the hybrid meeting format. Gina Janett, applicant, expressed approval. Jason Green, property owner, expressed approval. Mr. Bertolini asked if all six members received today’s confidential memo from the City Attorney’s Office. All members replied in the affirmative. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 7 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 4 August 18, 2021 (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting and a roll call was taken upon returning to ensure all six members were present.) Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the staff report and noted this is an involuntary landmark designation request for the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue. He stated the role of the Historic Preservation Commission in this item is to determine whether a recommendation should be made to Council to place a landmark designation on the property. Because the property owner is not in support of the designation, two separate hearing are required. The first hearing, which occurred on May 19th, involved the determination the property met the eligibility requirements; therefore, this second hearing is occurring and the primary task of the Commission is to determine whether the criteria in Section 14- 33(C) are satisfied. Mr. Bertolini discussed the next steps should the Commission recommend for or against designation. He discussed the historic elements of the property and provided further detail on the eligibility as found by the Commission at the first hearing. He discussed the nomination petition submitted by four citizens and provided additional geographic information related to the property. He outlined recommended questions for the Commission to consider, primarily what specific policies and purposes in the applicable City Code sections are being met by requiring preservation of this property, and are they being met to a sufficient degree to justify a designation against the owners’ wishes. Additionally, the Commission should consider to what degree should the environmental health concerns that have been documented and confirmed affect whether designating the property meets the applicable provisions, and whether required mitigation, if designation moves forward, may result in a loss of historic integrity to the property. Mr. Bertolini discussed the staff analysis of materials provided by both the applicants and property owners over the course of this process. He also discussed the questions brought forth at the work session noting there is likely a cost difference between simple demolition of the property and methamphetamine mitigation and preservation of the property. He provided a summary of public comments noting 24 of the 36 individuals providing comment expressed favor for designation. Applicant Presentation Gina Janett introduced herself and Mark Greenwald gave the applicant presentation. He discussed the application for designation stating it was based on the historical significance of the property’s long-time early occupants, two of whom were highly regarded schoolteachers, and the quality of its well- preserved 19th century architecture. He discussed the history of the property and its occupants, primarily school teacher Jessie Moore, and stated replacement of this home with a larger and less affordable one would significantly disturb the balance of the neighborhood resulting in a loss of equity, enhancement of which is increasingly sought by preservationists and others whose concern focuses on our collective past. He also noted restoration efforts, in contrast to demolition and rebuilding, have a relatively positive impact on the environment. Owner Presentation Jordan Obermann gave the owner presentation. He discussed the meaning of ‘general welfare’ noting health and safety are widely considered as being part of that definition. He discussed the methamphetamine (meth) contamination of the property and noted decontamination will not rid the property of meth. He also commented on the poor condition of the property. Dr. Jason Green, owner, discussed the health implications of prolonged exposure to meth and noted there is little research regarding health side effects of living in methamphetamine-remediated homes. He questioned whether it seems rational or reasonable to expect people to live in a building where the long-term side effects and potential health risks are unknown. Mr. Obermann discussed the options for decontamination, specifically addressing times when an occupant may come in contact with the interior of a wall. He reiterated decontamination does not equate to removal. He outlined cost estimates of decontamination and questioned whether any monetary value can be put on the health and safety of occupants. He stated the only way to ensure the safety of this property is to demolish it and he outlined the state allowances for demolition in these instances. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 8 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 5 August 18, 2021 Mr. Obermann provided additional details regarding what aspects of the building will need to be removed based on their levels of contamination. Ultimately, he stated this structure cannot remain if the goal is to have zero meth levels. He stated most nearby neighbors are in support of demolition of the home and he showed slides of the current condition of the property. Applicant Presentation Additional Time (**Secretary’s Note: the applicants were granted additional time due to the overrun of the owner presentation.) Ms. Janett stated there are two individuals present who are certified by the state, one to do meth testing and one to do meth remediation. She reiterated Section 14-1 and noted the Commission is tasked with upholding the Code. She commented on zero interest loans and tax credits that could be applied to some of the cost of the interior remodeling work that would not be available to the owner if the property is not landmarked. (**Secretary’s Note: Havelda requested a brief recess be taken to confer with staff and a roll call was taken upon returning to ensure all six members were present.) Havelda noted Kyle Baber was the consultant Member Murray had review the first meth report; however, she stated she did not believe Member Murray was aware Mr. Baber was present to give comment. She stated the applicant team requested his testimony. Kyle Baber, owner of an environmental remediation and demolition firm, discussed his experience in remediation and historic preservation. He discussed the reports produced regarding this property and suggested it is unfair for individuals who do not carry accreditation are allowed to make recommendations to the general public. He discussed his experience in remediating meth-affected properties and stated the second report on the property showed no signs of meth manufacturing in this home. He stated the levels of meth in the home would be a hundred times what is seen in this home if it were actually manufactured there and stated the only solution based on those levels is not demolition. He acknowledged the objective in cleaning these properties is not zero levels of meth, nor is that the goal of the environmental community or the scientists behind the recommendations. He stated he is completely confident this property is a candidate for extraction and remediation. He stated his price to clean the house would likely be around $10,000 assuming no asbestos was present. Member Murray acknowledged he has a working relationship with the following speaker. Jim Dennison stated his firm does environmental testing for things such as meth. He discussed his experience and stated he has done meth testing since 2005. He stated he first submitted public comment on this issue prior to being contacted by the applicants and stated the cost for his testing service and remediation on a home such as this would not exceed $15,000. He also stated he has never heard of the state giving a variance to allow for higher levels of meth to be allowed after remediation. Public Input Shelly Terry spoke in favor of designation in honor of Jessie Moore due to the value of education in Fort Collins and the value of women’s history. Kimberly Medina spoke in favor of designation of this property and in favor of historic preservation in general in Fort Collins. She stated this home can be remediated and its historical significance cannot be understated. Alan Braslau spoke in favor of designation due to the sense of responsibility purchasing a historic home implies. He compared radon mitigation to meth mitigation and stated both are possible. Mark Greenwald, applicant, commented on an historic property in Chicago that was once in poor condition but is now a major tourist attraction. Myrne Watrous spoke in favor of designation due to the home’s proximity to the Downtown Historic District and the Loomis Addition. She opposed the style of recent redeveloped homes. Beth Fisher spoke against designation due to the property rights of the homeowners and the current condition of the house. She noted the home was vacant for years and questioned why the applicants didn’t purchase it when it was vacant if they wanted the property to be designated. Carol Goettl stated she lives in a landmarked home across the street from this house and spoke against designation because of its level of disrepair. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 9 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 6 August 18, 2021 Jim Dennison spoke in favor of designation because he believes the house could be safely remediated under the Colorado guidelines. Commission Questions and Discussion Member Murray asked Mr. Obermann if he has received a mitigation cost estimate from a registered subcontractor. Mr. Obermann replied he has received one estimate from NovaTech Environmental, which recommended demolition of the property, of about $49,000. Chair Dunn asked which of Mr. Obermann’s contractors were licensed. Mr. Obermann replied one of the original testers was not licensed; therefore, they sought testing from Quest. He stated NovaTech is certified and the other contractor, Resolution Contractors, do not need to have any meth related certification for demolition. Member Murray asked Dr. Green if the article he cited in his presentation are part of the packet. Dr. Green replied in the affirmative. Chair Dunn requested a list of what would be removed from the property during remediation. Mr. Obermann replied all plaster would be removed and the entire house would be gutted. Additionally, all wood would be sanded. He stated the demolition list was created with the idea of bringing meth levels down to zero, not just to acceptable standards. Member Rose asked if there was a requirement to treat the exterior in normal protocol for this remediation. Dr. Dennison replied, in his experience, he has not seen anything removed from an exterior in a meth remediation. Member Nelsen asked if the contamination of the porch is safe within the State’s acceptable cleanup levels. Dr. Dennison replied no remediation of the porch would be necessary because it was within acceptable levels; however, structurally the porch may need to be rebuilt. Member Nelsen asked if the meth could seep into the house from exterior materials. Dr. Dennison replied he had tested meth migration several times and it does not occur to any significant level. He explained most meth transfer occurs through skin and stated many houses have meth contamination that is unknown. Member Nelsen asked if there was anything else Dr. Dennison wanted to add to address the homeowners’ safety concerns. Dr. Dennison replied Colorado law includes a section that if a certified contractor is hired to mitigate the property to standards, a certified tester is hired who certifies it meets the standards, and reports are filed with the health department, then nothing has to be disclosed on further sales of the house and any tenants could not sue for health effects. Member Murray asked if meth permeation would come to the surface later. Dr. Dennison replied some will be absorbed into the paint layer and contractors would extract it from the paint layer during cleaning. He stated regulations require porous materials to be discarded; however, painted drywall is not considered porous. Member Murray asked how a traditional plaster wall would be remediated. Dr. Dennison replied they are not hard to clean. He commented on the meth levels in the house being about five times the legal limit, which is lower that was is usually seen. He stated he cannot think of a single instance wherein the exterior of the house has been cleaned. Member Nelsen asked how wood windows and entry doors are remediated. Dr. Dennison replied contractors would clean interiors with the windows down and nothing on the exterior would be cleaned. Member Nelsen asked if painted wood is considered porous. Dr. Dennison replied there are not many true porous materials in a house without personal belongings. He stated carpet is typically the main porous item found in a home. Member Knierim asked Mr. Obermann to comment on what it would take to rehabilitate the damage to the exterior of the home as that speaks to the integrity of the building. Mr. Obermann replied there are foundation failures that will need to be addressed in some fashion based on the ultimate goal and on meeting building standards. He noted state law gives property owners the right to remove items that are contaminated, and in this case, that will lead to historic losses. He stated the health risks are not worth preserving the historic nature of the building. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 10 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 7 August 18, 2021 Member Nelsen asked if there is any situation wherein remediation would be worth it. Mr. Obermann replied it would be up to the level of acceptable risk and noted the homeowners are granted the right to protect themselves from risk based on future scientific evidence that may show greater risk. He stated he believes zero meth contamination should be the standard. Member Nelsen asked if there is any value to the house if it could be assumed meth contamination was not an issue. Mr. Obermann replied he has not fully been able to assess the structural integrity of the house as no one is allowed inside the house. He also noted his experts are the only testers who have provided testimony that have actually been inside the home. He stated the owners are willing to donate the house if someone wants to move it. Member Nelsen asked if there is any merit to the house’s context and location from Mr. Obermann’s perspective. Mr. Obermann replied there are large homes on the street and the lot has inherent value because it is on Mountain Avenue. Member Nelsen asked if Mr. Obermann believes there is value to the community of the location of the home. Mr. Obermann replied it is a prominent location in town for many reasons; therefore, it is even more important to remove a meth-contaminated home. He stated he did not believe this hearing would be occurring if the house was not on Mountain Avenue. Chair Dunn requested staff input on why this section is part of the Code and homeowners are not allowed to do what they wish with these homes. Mr. Bertolini replied the involuntary landmark designation option has been in the Code since about 1990 and it has only had one successful use on an individual property, which is the former Old Town post office. He stated the intent behind having this option is, in part, because the process of designating a property as historic falls under the land use regulations of a local government; therefore, a city has the option of designating resources and protecting them if they feel that would provide a public benefit. He noted the core question for the Commission is whether it finds the public benefit of designation to be so great that it overwhelms the very important consideration of private property rights. He stated the intent in allowing someone other than the owner to nominate the property for designation is to acknowledge there is some community stake in the preservation of historic properties and to acknowledge that the knowledge about what constitutes a property worthy of preservation does not necessarily rest in one place. Ms. Bzdek noted involuntary designation is not unusual across the Unites States. Chair Dunn requested staff input regarding City priorities related to preservation. Ms. Bzdek replied there are some directives in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, or City Plan, as well as in the adopted Our Climate Future plan. She stated the current Council is in the process of finalizing its list of priorities. Chair Dunn asked if Moore School is still named Moore School. Member Knierim replied Moore school closed in 2011 and the building is now Polaris Expeditionary School. Member Murray disclosed the next speaker is his wife. Suzanne Murray asked when a house is considered historic based on its structure and development and questioned why buildings are attached to individuals who may or may not have been integral to the development of the community. She questioned when the importance of a former resident trumps someone’s right to decide what to do with their property. She stated she feels this discussion has lacked details about the physical historic significance of the house. Member Murray noted those questions were answered at the first hearing regarding whether the property had significance, which it was found to have. Chair Dunn stated the house was found to qualify for designation and was found to be significant for architecture and its association with a person. She noted this second hearing is required because the designation is involuntary. She reviewed what the Commission would be deciding this evening. Member Nelsen asked Marcus Coldiron to weigh in on demolition by neglect, structural integrity and whether it is uninhabitable. Mr. Bertolini noted the demolition by neglect ordinance relates to designated historic properties. Mr. Coldiron replied the home is not inhabitable as it stands now due to the meth contamination. He stated the Larimer County Health Department would have to clear the property for habitation following remediation. (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting and a roll call was taken upon returning to ensure all six members were present.) ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 11 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 8 August 18, 2021 Applicant Rebuttal Gina Janett stated both a certified meth tester and remediation contractor have testified the meth levels in this house can be cleaned for an affordable price. She commented on Council’s equity and inclusion priorities and stated this house tells an important story for the community’s history. She discussed the role of Jessie Moore and the history of Germans from Russia in the sugar beet industry in Fort Collins. Mark Greenwald stated any structural issues with the house have yet to be discussed by an impartial party and should therefore not be part of the consideration. He stated there is no way to get rid of trace amounts of chemicals to which people are exposed every day and stated he would not personally hesitate to live in the home after remediation. Owner Rebuttal Dr. Green stated he has lived in Fort Collins for sixteen years, has started his family here, and serves the community as an emergency room physician. He stated the meth contamination is a very real problem and commented on an article which stated elimination of risk through demolition may be a safer option. He stated there is no way to possibly predict the possible future effects of meth contamination in a home and there is evidence it does penetrate through walls. He also stated the home is dilapidated and is not an example of community pride. He discussed the Colorado regulations which allow a homeowner, in consultation with a contractor, to remove and properly dispose of materials at a solid state waste landfill in lieu of remediating them and questioned why individuals would be able to force someone to live in a property that is contaminated with methamphetamine when there are no guarantees about the long-term effects of such exposure. He also stated there was no interest in this property as being the Moore house prior to this proceeding and stated there is a great deal of overreach in telling individuals they should live in a property contaminated at a level with which they are not comfortable. Staff Comment Havelda noted the City disagrees with the homeowners’ analysis of the state law regarding meth- affected properties. She also cautioned the Commission on the level of weight it gives statements that may be considered heresay in a court of law and reminded the Commission it needs to consider the policies in Sections 14-1 and 14-2 against the articulated opposition of the homeowners. Commission Deliberation Chair Dunn requested the Commission first consider Section 14-1, which is a declaration of policy. Member Knierim stated this section addresses civic pride and stated it is clear the definition is met by this property. Chair Dunn explained what Code sections should be considered at this hearing. Member Rose commented on a general understanding of history and background being consistent with the general welfare and stated this property meets that definition. Member Nelsen noted the home has been a part of Fort Collins history which contributes to civic pride and general welfare. Chair Dunn commented women’s history being a subset of history that is lacking in Fort Collins in terms of landmarking specific properties. Member Nelsen agreed and stated it is important to consider the entire cross-section of the community, which this designation would help preserve. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to subsection B. Member Murray commented on this home being built on the far edge of town at the time. Member Rose stated the home could be characterized as a cultural asset and is part of the built cultural heritage. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider 14-2. Member Murray stated the property could be a local landmark based on the survey. Chair Dunn commented on the property reflecting important city heritage elements of cultural, social, architectural, and artistic. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 12 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 9 August 18, 2021 Member Nelsen commented the economic category playing a role as well as Fort Collins is a city for everyone. Chair Dunn agreed that places of lower socioeconomic classes should be protected. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider whether the property ‘fosters civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past.’ She stated she believes it does. Member Knierim stated there is beauty in the 50 years of schoolchildren that have a history with the property and the building reflects that heritage. Chair Dunn stated that would fall within the accomplishments of the four women who lived in the home serving those most in need. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection C and stated, if this home were preserved and rehabilitated, it would significantly help to stabilize and improve the continuing economic vitality of the structure. Member Nelsen agreed it could be stabilized and used as originally intended. She stated there are details on the home that exist solely for aesthetic reasons. Chair Dunn stated the state tax credits and zero interest loans would not be able to occur unless the property is available for their use. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection D. Member Murray stated it should be ensured Mountain Avenue homes are connected to its history. Chair Dunn commented on the location of the property being on the trolley route and stated this house is one of the key homes people notice. Member Nelsen stated the scale and architectural charm of the home are appealing and its story enhances that. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection E. Member Knierim commented on stories provided by trolley drivers related to important sites and structures. Member Murray discussed the time period during which this home was built. Member Nelsen stated this home also has a link to some more unpleasant parts of the history of Fort Collins in terms of Jessie Moore helping to end child labor on sugar beet farms. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection F. Member Nelsen stated the home promoted good urban design in terms of scale, green space, walkability, and footprint. Member Rose commented on the wide front porch that is now being adopted in New Urbanism. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection G. Member Knierim stated this situation is difficult as requiring the owners to live in the house will not encourage private ownership and utilization of historic properties. Member Murray noted the buyers never intended to live in the home. Chair Dunn directed the Commission to consider Subsection H. She stated this designation would fit with the financial incentives offered and feedback the Commission can given in terms of rehabilitation; however, it does not seem to fit in terms of a nonconsensual designation. Member Nelsen commented on the designation promoting environmental sustainability through the potential rehabilitation of an existing building. Chair Dunn commented on the home addressing some aspects of history that have traditionally been skipped over and stated its designation seems to fit all terms of the policy. She stated most members seem to agree the purposes are met with Subsections A-F with some questions on G and H. Member Murray commented on looking at the highest use of the property. Member Knierim questioned whether the home, despite its historical significance, has been broken beyond the point of people wanting to live there. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 13 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 10 August 18, 2021 Member Nelsen stated she did not believe the home is damaged beyond repair but questioned whether the value of the home is irreplaceable. Chair Dunn stated a question to consider is whether Fort Collins will be a substantially different community if the house is demolished and stated she believes it will. Member Nelsen agreed. Member Murray noted nonconsensual applications are rarely submitted. Chair Dunn discussed how many people had commented on this item which she stated speaks to the community’s value of the building. Member Rose stated it is his job to make a recommendation to City Council and acknowledged he has a bias as he has been involved in historic preservation for some time. He stated losing contributing resources diminishes the community. He stated there is no question this is a contributing structure. Member Murray asked if the garage on the property is part of this designation. Mr. Bertolini replied the application considers the full parcel and both structures. Member Murray questioned whether the property could be divided based on the zoning and stated the designation does not need to include the garage. Member Nelsen stated the Commission considers demolition requests for potentially eligible properties frequently and disagreed with the notion the Commission landmarks properties simply because they are old. She stated the community participation around this property was significant and the designation seems to meet the applicable Code requirements. Member Dunn stated he is struggling with the rights of the property owners as they did not voluntarily submit for the designation. He stated this action would not ‘promote and encourage continued private ownership.’ Chair Dunn commented on homes being owned temporarily whereas the homes themselves remain. She stated there was reference to the fact this house has historic relevance and there may be neighbors that would try to landmark it prior to the purchase of the property. She stated the historic value of the property outweighs the property owners rights to demolish the home. Member Rose commented the Commission is not exercising eminent domain and seizing the property. He stated the Commission is charged with doing everything it can to preserve the cultural heritage of Fort Collins. (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting and a roll call was taken upon returning to ensure all six members were present.) Member Murray made a motion that the Historic Preservation Commission adopt a resolution to be signed by the Chair, finding that the designation of the main house on the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property, 528 W. Mountain Avenue, will promote the following policies and purposes of the City as specified in Sections 14-1 and 14-2 of the Municipal Code to a sufficient degree to justify designation of the property without the owner’s consent: • Section 14-1 A and B; and • Section 14-2 A through F and directing that the nomination be forwarded to City Council for a final decision pursuant to Municipal Code 14-33(c). Member Knierim second the motion. Chair Dunn asked how to include information regarding the significant public response on this property compared to those that regularly come through the demolition process and have zero response. Havelda replied she would suggest adding that as a friendly amendment and she encouraged the Commission to speak to why it believes the Code applicability outweighs the individual property owner’s objection. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 14 DRAFTHistoric Preservation Commission Page 11 August 18, 2021 Chair Dunn made a friendly amendment to include the following language after the listed sections: but not including G and H as the Commission felt this was beyond promotion and encouragement. Noting that older houses regularly go through the demolition process without any public outcry, and yet this house has received significant support from the community, noting that two meth experts gave testimony during the meeting and this level of meth can be successfully mitigated and that they have seen multiple examples where that was the case in Colorado, and noting that both the polices and purposes listed will help to convey the full story of our community, including the story of women, educators, lower and middle-class lives of former residents, of our earliest architecture, and of advocacy activities for some of our most poor and needy in the community. Members Murray and Knierim accepted the amendment. Member Nelsen asked about the lack of inclusion of the garage. Chair Dunn stated the entire property would definitely be landmarked if this was consensual; however, as it is not, she is comfortable focusing just on the house. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Walter Dunn, Kurt Knierim, Anne Nelsen, Kevin Murray, Jim Rose and Meg Dunn. Nays: none. Chair Dunn reminded the property owners that this action did not landmark the property but is just a recommendation to Council. [Timestamp: 12:07 a.m.] • OTHER BUSINESS None. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 12:09 a.m. Minutes prepared by Tripoint Data and respectfully submitted by Aubrie Brennan. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on __________________. _____________________________________ Meg Dunn, Chair ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 15 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 1 STAFF REPORT October 20, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission ITEM NAME STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES AND OTHER STAFF-ISSUED DECISIONS AND LETTERS, AUGUST 5, 2021 TO OCTOBER 6, 2021 STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner INFORMATION Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Historic Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. Staff decisions are provided in this report and posted on the HPS’s “Design Review Notification” page. Notice of staff decisions are provided to the public and LPC for their information, but are not subject to appeal under Chapter 14, Article IV, except in cases where an applicant has requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a project and that request has been denied. In that event, the applicant may appeal staff’s decision to the LPC pursuant to 14-55 of the Municipal Code, within two weeks of staff denial. Beginning in May 2021, to increase transparency regarding staff decisions and letters issued on historic preservation activities, this report will include sections for historic property survey results finalized in the last month (provided they are past the two-week appeal deadline), comments issued for federal undertakings under the National Historic Preservation Act (also called “Section 106”), and 5G wireless facility responses for local permit approval. The report below covers the period between August 6, 2021 to October 6, 2021 (there was no meeting of the HPC in September 2021). There is no staff presentation this month. Staff Design Review Decisions & Reports – Municipal Code Chapter 14 Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision 512 Peterson St. New garage construction. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Approved (report issued) August 11, 2021 630 Peterson St. Rooftop solar. Project amended to remove forward-located panels and meet SOI Standards. City Landmark. Approved August 16, 2021 819 Mathews St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Approved (report issued) August 18, 2021 416 E. Plum St. Rooftop solar installation. Did not meet SOI Standards. Contributing property to Sheely Drive Landmark District Approved (report issued) August 24, 2021 Packet Pg. 16 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 2 412 Wood St. New fence in front yard, site improvements for drainage; renewal of previously approved concrete sidewalks that are damaged. City Landmark. Approved August 24, 2021 227-229 Mulberry St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). City Landmark. Approved September 2, 2021 220 Remington St. Wood screen windows for all exterior windows. City Landmark. Approved September 3, 2021 614 Remington St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Approved (report issued) September 3, 2021 201 S. Loomis Ave. Repaint exterior. City Landmark (designation pending). Approved September 14, 2021 721 Peterson St. Rooftop solar installation. Did not meet SOI Standards. Contributing property to Sheely Drive Landmark District Approved (report issued) September 22, 2021 408 W. Mountain Ave. Installation of new curb cut and driveway along property’s west side (historic alignment). City Landmark. Approved September 27, 2021 511 Whedbee St. Rear addition and south carport addition. Addition meets Standards, carport addition does not meet SOI Standards. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Approved (report issued) September 30, 2021 802 Peterson St. Dormer on front-facing roof slope. Property likely already non-contributing due to addition of non- historic front porch. Approved (report issued) October 1, 2021 232 Walnut St. (Firehouse) Replace EIFS stucco on non-historic rear upper story section. Contributing property to Old Town Landmark District. Approved October 1, 2021 719 Remington St. In-kind roof replacement (EPDM / membrane). Garage. City Landmark. Approved October 4, 2021 Historic Property Survey Results City Preservation staff frequently completes historic survey for properties for a number of reasons, usually in advance of development proposals for properties. The table below includes historic property survey for the reporting period for any historic survey for which the two-week appeal period has passed. Address Field/Consultant Recommendation Staff Approved Results? Date Results Finalized 202 W. Laurel Street Not Eligible Yes September 14, 2021 121 W. Olive St. Not Eligible Yes September 20, 2021 National Historic Preservation Act – Staff Comments Issued The City of Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government, which provides the Historic Preservation Services division and Landmark Preservation Commission an opportunity to formally comment on federal undertakings within city limits. This includes actions that are receiving federal funding, permits, or have direct involvement from a federal agency. Note: Due to changes in how Preservation staff process small cell/5G wireless facilities, staff does not provide substantive comments on those undertakings (overseen by the Federal Communications Commission) and do not appear in the table below. Packet Pg. 17 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 3 National Historic Preservation Act – Staff Comments Issued The City of Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government, which provides the Historic Preservation Services division and Landmark Preservation Commission an opportunity to formally comment on federal undertakings within city limits. This includes actions that are receiving federal funding, permits, or have direct involvement from a federal agency. Lead Agency & Property Location Description of Project Staff Comment Date Comment Issued HUD, 2845 Conquest Dr. Constructing Habitat for Humanity home at local high school to be relocated to 2845 Conquest Dr. Concur – No Historic Properties Affected. August 17, 2021 HUD, 1550 Blue Spruce Dr. Rehab of existing affordable housing development, Coachlight Apartments Concur – No Historic Properties Affected. August 17, 2021 CDOT, Timnath Trail project segment Filling gap in Poudre River multi-use trail south of Timnath. No Comment – outside city limits and GMA. October 5, 2021 Staff 5G Wireless Facility Summary Note: Co-locations with existing street infrastructure, usually traffic lights, is considered a co-location and not subject to denial due to proximity to properties that meet the City’s definition of historic resources (Sec. 14-3) Due to recent changes in how Preservation staff reviews small cell/5G towers, co-located towers no longer receive substantive review except where historic resources would be impacted directly by the tower’s installation. These types of direct impacts would include potential damage to archaeological resources and/or landscape features throughout the city such as trolley tracks, carriage steps, and sandstone pavers. This report section will summarize activities in this area. Between August 5 and October 6, 2021, staff processed a total of 4 5G/Small Cell towers, all of which were to be co-located with existing City streetlights. Packet Pg. 18 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 1 STAFF REPORT October 20, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME WINDOW REHABILITATION PLAN - 155 W MOUNTAIN/130 S MASON STREET FINAL LANDMARK DESIGN REVIEW STAFF Maren Bzdek, Interim Historic Preservation Manager PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is a final design review of the applicants’ project, to be approved or denied based on the Commission’s evaluation of the project’s compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The applicant is proposing a combination of replacement and repair techniques to address the deteriorated conditions of the upper street-facing windows on both abutting landmark buildings at 155 West Mountain and 130 South Mason. APPLICANT/OWNER: Josh Harrison, Helix Property Management, LLC RECOMMENDATION: While staff finds that the application is within the spectrum of justifiable treatments that are in keeping with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission develop more specific findings that respond to the considerations presented in the staff report below in order to issue a decision about the work as presented, noting any conditions that may apply. COMMISSION’S ROLE: Design review is governed by Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV, and is the process by which the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviews proposed exterior alterations to a designated historic property for compliance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (the Standards). The HPC should discuss and consider the presented materials and staff analysis. For City Landmarks and properties in City Landmark Districts, the Commission is a decision-maker and can choose to issue, or not issue, a Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA). Issuing a CoA allows the proposed work to proceed. In this case, the applicant is requesting a final design review of proposed plans under Municipal Code 14- 54(a)(2)(b). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments (155 West Mountain and 130 South Mason), Lots 25 and 26, Block 111, was designated as a City Landmark on February 4, 2020. The property was designated under Standard 1, Events (155 West Mountain) and Standard 3, Design/Construction (both buildings). The street-facing, upper-level windows of both buildings are wood double hung windows with eight-light transoms. The proposed project includes two phases: the first involves removing the existing wood sash and replacing with a new wood double hung sash with insulated glass in the original frame and adding a tapered aluminum sill cover over the sills, which are sandstone (Express building) and concrete (McCormick apartments building), to Packet Pg. 19 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 2 address the negative slope. In phase two, the frame, brickmould, and upper transom will be scraped, repaired, primed, and painted. New weather stripping will be installed around the lower sash and the balance system will be adjusted (system TBD). ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Character-defining features for the two early 20th century commercial buildings associated with this landmark property that were highlighted in the nomination (attached): • Two-story light-colored brick buildings with rectangular forms, flat roofs, and undulating parapets with decorative brick details • Decorative window surrounds (tall, flat segmented arches on street-facing, upper W Mountain windows; surrounding soldier-coursed brick lintels with square stone corner details on S Mason building) The 2019 window study notes: • The windows’ distinctive quality is a function of the shared fenestration pattern on upper floors of both buildings (repeats primarily as pairs), and their design, materials, and workmanship (wood, double- hung one-over-one windows with eight-light fixed transoms above). There are two unpaired (single) wood double-hung windows on the west elevation of 155 W Mountain in the same style. The balance system for the double-hung windows is a rope and weight system. ALTERATION HISTORY: Known alterations of the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building to date include: • 1909 one-story addition, replicated original building • Alterations over time to window and door configuration of the one-story Mason Street, west-facing elevation (bricked up window openings) • Replacement of non-street facing windows at rear in February 2021 Known alterations of the McCormick Apartments property to date include: • Replacement of one pair of windows on east elevation • Alterations over time to window and doors on ground floor; most recently, 2019 modification of south entry, from recessed to flush with changes to the pattern • Replacement of non-street facing windows in February 2021 HISTORY OF FUNDED WORK/USE OF INCENTIVES/INDEPENDENT EVALUATIONS: In 2019, the Historic Preservation division funded a full window study of these properties, which was conducted by Barlow Cultural Resource Consulting. The study was intended to provide detailed information to potential owners of the property. The window study is attached to this staff report and referenced throughout. HISTORY OF DESIGN REVIEW: Since City landmark designation in February 2020, approved alterations to the property have included only one project: the approved replacement in February 2021 of the thirty-eight window sashes on the two buildings that are in the non-street facing locations, with repair and restoration of the existing historic frames. That work was in keeping with the recommendations provided in the 2019 window study. Because it involved only the windows on the rear elevations, it was reviewed and approved by staff in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 14. Staff approved Kolbe Forgent fiberglass replacement windows for the rear windows, a budget- saving option that offered effective replication of the original wood window sash design characteristics. This alternate material was supported in recognition of the anticipated cost of the street-facing window rehabilitation Packet Pg. 20 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 3 work and the intention to support the financial investment in the rehabilitation of those more visible, public facing windows. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking a final design review for the following items: Phase 1 • Replace window sashes: replicate existing sash with Jeld-wen Siteline wood double-hung windows (install new sash, with insulated glass, into the existing frame) • Add new weather stripping around lower sash • Add aluminum sill cover over sandstone and concrete sills to create additional slope to bring water away from the frame/building • Balance system TBD (adjust for additional weight or replace) Phase 2 • Repair (scrape/paint) the frame, trim, and transom sash in place REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: [TBD] PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY No public comment about this project has been received at this time. STAFF EVALUATION OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: As provided for in Chapter 14-53, qualified historic preservation staff meeting the professional standards contained in Title 36, Part 61 of the Code of Federal Regulations has reviewed the project for compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is the appropriate treatment approach because modifications and alterations to support modern residential living standards and IEBC compliance will be necessary. The National Park Service Brief 9 on Repair of Historic Wooden Windows is also a resource to guide review for window rehabilitation projects, and we can also reference other guidelines about specific issues such as adding different storm window types of energy performance. The NPS guidance on the consideration of repair versus replacement is available at https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/applying- rehabilitation/successful-rehab/windows-evaluating.htm. Staff finds that the most relevant review criteria under the Standards for Rehabilitation are Standards 5, 6, and 9. Discussion and findings for each of the ten rehabilitation standards, with consideration of the guidance in the above-referenced technical information, is provided below. Applicable Code Standard Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Standard Met (Y/N) SOI #1 A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships; The property will remain as a mixed-use building with residential (rental apartment units) on the upper floor and commercial below. Y Packet Pg. 21 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 4 SOI #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. The landmark buildings’ historic character as early 20th century commercial structures with residential space on the upper story currently retains overall integrity in all seven aspects. As an architectural features, the windows’ distinctive quality and contribution to the building character is reflected in the fenestration pattern and in their style and construction, as one-over-one double- hung wood windows with a divided-light transom above, sandstone sills, and simple, decorative brick and stone surrounds. The brick construction and its decorative details, including the window surrounds, and the buildings’ overall window pattern and style would not be impacted by the proposed work. Neither would the buildings’ other distinctive features, such as the characteristic parapet design and detailing. The proposed work seeks to avoid removal/alteration of some portions of the historic wood windows (the frame and transoms) while replacing the window sash and altering (enclosing) the existing sandstone and concrete sills with an aluminum sill cover as a protective measure to correct the slope. To evaluate compliance with this Standard following NPS guidance on this topic, the Commission should consider whether these alterations are justified and would not cause the historic character of the property to be lost and provide any specific comments on the proposed work that would further enhance the satisfaction of this Standard. TBD SOI #3 Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. N/A SOI #4 Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. N/A SOI #5 Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. As noted above in the discussion of SOI #2, the street-facing windows constitute distinctive visible features for these two related landmark buildings. Standard 5 calls for consideration of an approach that would preserve and support the windows’ craftmanship, design, and materials. As the 2019 window study notes, “the windows are an example of mortise and tenon joinery and have survived approximately 100 years, indicating they are of fine quality, albeit standard craftsmanship for the period in which they were created.” The proposed project seeks to replace rather than preserve and repair the window sashes with replicate wood sash windows in the same style, while it also calls for retaining and repairing the existing frame and eight-light transoms, which offsets the alteration of the sash. The degree to which the retention of the frame and transoms mitigates the changes to the sash should be considered, along with the overall repairability of the windows, versus a scenario in which much of the units would be replaced with new in-kind material and epoxy fill. TBD Packet Pg. 22 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 5 Another consideration relative to this standard is that the proposed work would include covering the existing sandstone and concrete sills with aluminum sill covers to resolve the slope issue that is preventing water from moving off the building. While this technique preserves the existing sill material, it also obscures it and changes the visual character of the sills. The work is limited in scope to a portion of the buildings’ windows. The proposed treatment of the upper street-facing windows will not have a negative effect on any other distinctive, character-defining features of the property. SOI #6 Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. This Standard provides the most direct opportunity to engage with and evaluate the proposed work. The project involves a combined treatment of replacement and repair for the upper floor windows (replacing the original window sash with a new wood sash in the same design and new insulated glazing, while repairing the frame and eight-light transom and retaining and covering the existing sandstone sill with an aluminum cover to carry water away from the building). The project also refers to the need to either adjust the balance system for the additional weight or replace it, although those details are to be determined. As the NPS guidance notes, the relevance of an evaluation of the deteriorated condition of the windows is to conclude whether it is sufficiently severe to justify replacement. Other factors to consider are the key elements of the design and craftsmanship of the windows, importance of the elevation and building space that the windows occupy and the number of windows that are proposed for replacement, and how that effects the overall consequence of the work on the building’s historic character. The NPS guidance also notes that issues such as occupant operation and energy performance may be considered along with the degree of deterioration. However, it must also be noted that these concerns can be addressed by means other than replacement. NPS Brief 9 does state that replacement sash, installed into the existing frame, is an alternative that may be considered when parts replacement is required, particularly when extensive replacement of parts is necessary and the overall job becomes prohibitively expensive. The brief notes: “It is necessary to thoroughly investigate the alternatives for windows which do require extensive repairs to arrive at a solution which retains historic significance and is also economically feasible.” It goes on to note that “Even for projects requiring repairs identified in this section, if the percentage of parts replacement per window is low, or the number of windows requiring repair is small, repair can still be a cost-effective solution.” For this reason, an understanding of the overall quantity of parts that would require replacement is important for understanding the appropriateness and reasonable cost effectiveness of repair versus sash replacement in this particular proposal. Because the windows display a fairly similar level of deterioration ranging from poor to severe (see attached photo sets and summary window schedule in the 2019 window study) and they also are of the same design and placement/prominence on the buildings, staff finds it is appropriate to consider the possibility of a similar scope of work for each window rather than evaluating TBD Packet Pg. 23 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 6 each window individually. This approach is also supported by the federal guidance in similar scenarios. The primary sites of deterioration are: • lower rail of the lower sash (poor to severe) • the meeting rails (poor to severe) • lower sash stiles (poor) • lower jambs (poor to severe) The windows also display failing paint and glazing compound and minimal operability due to deterioration of components and/or are fixed in position with caulk and paint. As noted in the window study, options for these deteriorated components include: • epoxy repairs (at minimum), or • dutchmen repairs, or • component replacement The 2019 window study also notes that many of the windows on this project would lose more than 25% of their historic fabric in a repair process, and in some cases perhaps the majority of the material. Where the condition of the window sash could involve replacement of some material and repair of other material, the overall quantity of replaced materials should be considered relative to the wholesale replacement of the sash. The window study also cautions against a wholesale replacement of all windows, which would negatively affect the overall character and integrity. The question before the Commission is whether the retention and repair of the frame and transoms is sufficient to offset this concern by avoiding what might be characterized as wholesale replacement. Per the federal guidance on wood window rehabilitation options, staff is theoretically supportive of approving a combination of repair and replacement methods for this rehabilitation project, as long as the Commission feels this treatment is sufficiently justified for the project in question based on the level of deterioration of the windows and what it would take to restore them to full operability, as well as the impact of the alteration on the property’s historic character and integrity. SOI #7 Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. Repair of the window frames and transoms will involve sanding and repainting in a manner that is consistent with this standard. Y SOI #8 Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. N/A SOI #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. N/A Packet Pg. 24 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 7 SOI #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. N/A FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the window rehabilitation proposal for the upper street-facing windows at 155 W. Mountain Avenue/130 S Mason, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The property at 155 W Mountain and 130 S Mason was designated as a City Landmark by City Council ordinance No. 019, 2020 on February 4, 2020. • The proposed approach to this window rehabilitation project is generally within the spectrum of appropriate treatments as outlined in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as well as NPS Preservation Brief 9, “The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.” • The two northernmost upper story windows on 130 S Mason’s west elevation are the only two in question that were already replaced in the past; those windows should be approved for new replacements, regardless of the decision the Commission makes about the other windows. • The primary considerations for a decision regarding the remaining upper story, street-facing windows on the two buildings are as follows: the visibility of the street-facing location of the windows; the number of windows that would undergo this proposed rehabilitation plan; the degree of deterioration of those windows, along with the anticipated quantity of replacement material that would be required in a repair- only scenario; the Commission’s evaluation of the appropriateness of the replacement window, relative to the design, materials, and workmanship of the existing window sash they would replace; the degree to which the combined elements of the proposed treatment would impact the integrity of the windows; and the importance of the windows to the property’s overall historic character and integrity. • The balance system of the windows is yet to be determined and should be discussed as a potential condition of approval to ensure an outcome that the Commission believes is in keeping with the Standards. RECOMMENDATION: While staff finds that the application is within the spectrum of justifiable treatments that are in keeping with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission develop more specific findings that respond to the considerations presented in the staff findings above in order to issue a decision about the work as presented, noting any conditions that may apply. SAMPLE MOTIONS This is being presented to the Commission as a Final Review. If the Commission believes it has the necessary information, it may consider a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the plans and specifications for window rehabilitation at 155 W Mountain and 130 S Mason as presented, and direct staff to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project, finding that the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the plans and specifications for or window rehabilitation at 155 W Mountain and 130 S Mason as presented, and direct staff to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the project, finding that the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions: • [list conditions] Packet Pg. 25 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 8 SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission deny the request for approval for the plans and specifications for window rehabilitation at 155 W Mountain and 130 S Mason as presented, and direct staff to issue a denied Certificate of Appropriateness for the project, finding that the proposed work does not meet the Standards for Rehabilitation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Owner approval for remote hearing 2. Design Review Application 3. Design Review Application Attachments 4. 155 W Mountain – Full Photo Set 5. 130 S Mason – Full Photo Set 6. 2019 Window Evaluation by Barlow Cultural Resource Consulting 7. Landmark Nomination form 8. Staff presentation Packet Pg. 26 From:Josh Harrison To:Maren Bzdek Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: REQUIRED - acknowledge of remote hearing Date:Thursday, October 7, 2021 9:42:18 AM Maren, I have been notified, understand and agree with the October 20th hearing be held as an in person/remote hybrid meeting. Thank you, Josh Harrison On Oct 6, 2021, at 7:42 PM, Maren Bzdek <mbzdek@fcgov.com> wrote: Josh, For our records, please reply to this email acknowledging that you understand the design review of your application for 155 W Mountain/130 S Mason, at the October 20 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, will be conducted using a hybrid format. Some Commission members and attendees will be present via a Zoom meeting link and others may choose to attend in person at City Hall. This is in accordance with emergency ordinance 2020-079, which states that “any person or applicant seeking a quasi-judicial decision from City Council, a City board or commission or an administrative hearing officer under the City Code or the City’s Land Use Code shall be notified in writing or by email of the intention to conduct a Quasi- Judicial Hearing using Remote Technology. Such person or applicant shall be entitled to request that the Quasi-Judicial Hearing be delayed until such time as the Hearing can be conducted in person.” I understand that you have already agreed for the hearing to proceed on October 20 under our hybrid remote/live format, but I need an email that specifically states that agreement. Many thanks, Maren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MAREN BZDEK She/Her/Hers Interim Historic Preservation Manager Historic Preservation Services 281 North College Avenue 970-221-6206 office mbzdek@fcgov.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 27 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 1 Design Review Application Historic Preservation Division Fill this form out for all applications regarding designated historic buildings within the city limits of the City of Fort Collins. Review is required for these properties under Chapter 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. Applicant Information Applicant’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence) State Zip Code Email Property Information (put N/A if owner is applicant) Owner’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence) State Zip Code Email Project Description Provide an overview of your project. Summarize work elements, schedule of completion, and other information as necessary to explain your project. Reminders: Complete application would need all of checklist items as well as both pages of this document. Detailed scope of work should include measurements of existing and proposed. The following attachments are REQUIRED: □Complete Application for Design Review □Detailed Scope of Work (and project plans, if available) □Color photos of existing conditions Please note: if the proposal includes partial or full demolition of an existing building or structure, a separate demolition application will need to be approved. Additional documentation may be required to adequately depict the project, such as plans, elevations, window study, or mortar analysis. If there is insufficient documentation on the property, the applicant may be required to submit an intensive-level survey form (at the applicant’s expense). ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 28 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 2 Detail of Proposed Rehabilitation Work (*Required) If your project includes multiple features (e.g. roof repair and foundation repair), you must describe each feature separately and provide photographs and other information on each feature. Feature A Name: Describe property feature and its condition: Describe proposed work on feature: Feature B Name: Describe property feature and its condition: Describe proposed work on feature: Use Additional Worksheets as needed. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 29 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 3 Required Additional information The following items must be submitted with this completed application. Digital submittals preferred for photographs, and for other items where possible. At least one current photo for each side of the house. Photo files or prints shall be named/labeled with applicant name and elevation. For example, smitheast.jpg, smithwest.jpg, etc. If submitted as prints, photos shall be labeled Photos for each feature as described in the section “Detail of Proposed Rehabilitation Work”. Photo files or prints shall be named or labeled with applicant name and feature letter. For example, smitha1.jpg, smitha2.jpg, smithb.jpg, smithc.jpg, etc. Depending on the nature of the project, one or more of the following items shall be submitted. Your contractor should provide these items to you for attachment to this loan application. Drawing with dimensions. Product specification sheet(s). Description of materials included in the proposed work. Color sample(s) or chip(s) of all proposed paint colors. □ Partial or full demolition is a part of this project. Partial demolition could include scopes such as taking off existing rear porches to create space for a new addition or removing an existing wall or demolishing a roof. If you are taking away pieces of the existing residence, you are likely undergoing some partial demolition. Signature of Applicant Date ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 30 155 West Mountain Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 For: Helix Property Management 2nd Floor Mountain and Mason Street By: Colorado Sash & Door, Inc. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 31 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 32 The windows in the upper level of these two building, are wood hung windows with transom windows. The lower sash are simple one lite units but the transoms are multiple lites but done with clear glass. Most of the historic glass has been replaced over the years and one of the windows assemblies was replaced with a new wood unit but this unit is not much better condition than the original windows. The existing wood sills have no or now negative slope. These windows have been painted many time over the years but the painting was not consistent or done well to protect the wood. The sash at this point are in extremely bad condition where some of the check rails have failed where only caulking is holding the glass in place. Most of the sash have metal mending plates to hold the bottom rail of the sash to the side rails.. The following photos will show you the current conditions. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 33 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 34 The last sash shown also has wood applied to hold in the glass, as the sash is no longer structurally sound. Our solution to provide a working window system for the tenants and get the building back in a weather tight and functioning condition is to add a tapered aluminum sill cover for the hung windows only. The balance of the frame including the brickmould and upper transom sash will be scraped, repaired as needed, prime and painted the same white as the 2nd floor roof windows and alley windows that have been replaced. The low sash will be replicated with a new wood sash that will have insulated glass installed. These sash will also have new weather stripping installed around the lower sash. The balance system will be adjusted for the ad- ditional weight or replaced, but this will not be exposed, when opened or closed. System to be determined. This work may be done in two phases, where the new sash will be installed with the sill work, and then the repairs to the frame, trim and transom being worked on come spring time. The intent is to ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 35 Bldg / Open Sash Oper Cut Notes Finished Unit Width Height Sill Thickness Lights 155 - B Base 35.75 70 Include 1.375 DH 155 - B Base 36 50.25 Include DH 155 - B Base 35 21.5 Include Fix 155 - 1 1 34 65.25 0.75 1.375 DH 10-Sep 155 - 1 2 34.25 65.5 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155 - 1 3 34.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155 - 1 4 34.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155 - 1 5 34.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155 - 2 1 40 65.5 0.75 DH Re-Built 10-Sep 155 - 2 2 34.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155 - 3 1 28 53.25 0.75 DH New Sash 10-Sep 155 - 3 2 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155 - 3 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155 - 3 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155 - 3 3 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155 - 3 3 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155 - 3 3 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 1 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-4 1 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 1 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 2 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-4 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 3 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-4 3 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 3 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 4 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-4 5 42.25 53 0.75 DH Sash Opening ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 36 155-5 1 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-5 1 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-5 1 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-5 2 42 53.75 0.75 DH 155-6 1 42 18 Trans 4w1h 155-6 1 42 53.25 0.75 DH 155-6 2 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-6 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-6 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-6/7 3 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-6/7 3 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-6/7 1 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-7 2 90 18 Trans 8w1h 155-7 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-7 2 42.25 53 0.75 DH 155-7 3 42.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155-7 4 42.25 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155-7 5 34 65.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 155-Hall 1 28 41 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-1 1 70 13.75 Trans 8 light 128-1 1 32 45 0.75 DH 128-1 1 32 45 0.75 DH 128-1 2 70 13.75 Trans 128-1 2 32 45 0.75 DH 128-1 2 32 45 0.75 DH 128-1 3 32 60.75 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-2 1 32 60.75 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-2 2 32 60.75 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-2 3 32 60.75 0.75 DH 10-Sep ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 37 Bath 1 36 61 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-3 1 36 61 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-3 2 31.75 33 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-3 3 27.75 53 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-4 1 27.75 53.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-4 2 28 29.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-4 3 32 53.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-4 4 32 53.25 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-4 5 28 29 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-5 1 27.75 33 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-5 2 28 29 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-5 3 28 53 0.75 DH 10-Sep 128-5/6 4 70.5 44 ?DH 128-6/5 1 69.5 13.5 Trans 8 light 128-6 1 32 45 0.75 DH 128-6 1 32 45 0.75 DH Completed in Last Phase This Phase of Work Replaced 2-Wide ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 38 Historic Wood Double Hung Windows with Transom (single wide units similar details) Replace Sash with Replica units with Insulated Glass Increase slop of sill and Clad with White Metal Existing Transom To have Glass Replaced Existing Frame Scraped and Painted 155 West Mountain 1 of 1 Street Side 2nd Floor Windows . Helix Property Management 155 West Mountain Fort Collins, Colorado .. . . 09/16/2021 3/4" = 1' - 0"MJW REVISION: 3 2 1 DRAWN BY FIRST ISSUE DATE SCALE ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR PROJECT TITLE OF DRAWING DRAWING NO. PROJECT NO. Colorado Sash & Door, Inc. 4521 Endeavor Drive, Unit C Johnstown, Colorado 80534 ph (970) 226-1460, Cell (970) 402-2623 office@colosash.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 39 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 40 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 41 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 42 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 43 Product Information General Information................................................................................................................2 Grid Patterns ..........................................................................................................................3 Grid, Bottom Rail & Glass Stop Options .................................................................................4 Section Details Sash Pack Sections ...............................................................................................................5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 44 Size Minimum Size Maximum Size Wood Double-Hung Sash Pack Min/Max Sizing Width x Height 20 3/4" x 30 1/16" 44 3/4" x 90 1/16" ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 45 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 46 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 47 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 48 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 49 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 50 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 51 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 52 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 53 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 54 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 55 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 56 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 57 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 58 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 59 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 60 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 61 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 62 WWiinnddooww EEvvaalluuaattiioonn for 159-163 West Mountain avenue fort collins, CO 80524 Prepared for: city of fort collins historic preservation department 281 N college avenue fort collins, co 80524 Prepared by: Phillip Barlow Historic Preservation Specialist barlow cultural resource consulting llc 4576 Tanglewood Trail Boulder, CO 80301 Evaluation Date: October 22, 2019 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 63 Survey Findings: 159-163 West Mountain Avenue and the commercial building to the south at 130-161 South Mason are c.1907 commercial buildings with retail and restaurants on the first floor with apartments above. There is a small one-story commercial building on the south end of 159-163 West Mountain that appears to be part of the main block of the building as it shares stylistic details. There are no historic windows on this building so it is not included in this study. The one-story building connects directly with 130-161 South Mason on the south. Per the 1992 Fort Collins Survey of Historic Buildings, 159-163 West Mountain (Site ID: 5LR.1623) has two historic names associated with it, the Express Building and the Mc Cormick Building. Evidence for the origin of these names can be found in the 1910 Fort Collins City Directory which lists "The Morning Express" newspaper as a resident of the West Mountain building. The same directory lists the "McCormick Bros" as proprietors of Express Publishing Company, publisher of The Morning Express. The S.Mason building does not appear in the Colorado Historical Society database of architectural surveys as a separate entity. The first floor of both buildings retains their commercial nature but the original storefronts have been replaced with modern materials. The apartments above retain their original character, design, and materials. Both buildings are two-story, brick, with rectangular forms and flat roofs accentuated by undulating parapets. The parapet on 159 West Mountain features three courses of bricks stepped out to protrude from the plane of the wall. The parapet on 130 South Mason undulates in a similar manner, but features a soldier course of brick that stays in-plane with the wall surface. Both buildings have decorative window surrounds, W.Mountain being a tall, flat segmented arch and S.Mason having a surrounding course of bricks with stone corners at the upper left and right of the window opening. Both buildings follow the same fenestration pattern for the second-story street facades, which is a pairing of double-hung one-over-one windows with divided-light fixed transom above. All of the windows on both buildings are wood. Double-hung windows are counterbalanced with a rope and weight system. Image 1: W.Mountain. Note the fenestration pattern and decorative lintel Image 2: S.Mason. Note the fenestration pattern and window surround The window evaluation uses the following labeling system for the two buildings: ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 64 Each building has apartments on the second floor. The West Mountain building address for these apartments is 154 West Mountain, and there are seven apartments on the second floor. There is a basement apartment on the west elevation, a basement apartment on the north elevation which has an address of 155 West Mountain, and one window in a common hallway. There are seven ground floor windows which are associated with a restaurant. The windows in this building are labeled in the following manner for the condition matrix, documentation photos, and elevation labels: Address-Unit Number_Window Number_Descriptor For example, for one of the second floor apartments, a window would be labeled "154-Unit1_Window 2_Interior". One of the north basement apartment windows would be labeled 155-Unit 101_Window 1_Exterior". One of the ground floor window labels would be "154-Ground level_Window 3_Exterior". Image 3: Example of labeling format 154-Unit 1_Window 4_Exterior The labeling system is similar for the South Mason building. The apartment level addresses are 161 South Mason. There are six apartments on the second floor and a restaurant on the ground level. This is one common bathroom in the hall on the east elevation. There are no basement apartments associated with this building. The images on the following pages will illustrate where each window number corresponds to an opening on each building. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 65 Image 4: Aerial View. For each bubble, the first digit is the apartment number and the second digit is the window number within that apartment ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 66 Image 5: West Mountain, North Elevation Image 6: West Mountain, West Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 67 Image 7: South Mason, North End of West Elevation Image 8: South Mason, South End of West Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 68 Image 9: South Mason, South Elevation Image 10: South Mason, East Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 69 Evaluation of treatments: Restoration or Replacement The Secretary of the Interior's(SOI) Standards are the guiding principles for preservation activities nationwide. The SOI Standards were developed as part of the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program, which works with state historic preservation offices and the Internal Revenue Service to encourage private sector investment in historic rehabilitation. There are four sets of standards, each tuned to the specifics on the project being considered. The four standard sets are Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. The most applicable standard for this proposed project is Rehabilitation. Per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: “Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.” Unfortunately, there is no quantitative measure for "severity of deterioration" that crosses the threshold from the restoration category to replacement. Historic wood windows specifically can be disassembled and individual components replaced, so the question is at what point does the replacement of components mean that the historic window is no longer historic? The National Park Service (NPS) does have guidance on the consideration of repairs versus replacement. The full article is available online here: https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/applying-rehabilitation/successful- rehab/windows-evaluating.htm Deterioration is the primary consideration for decisions regarding treatments, however other factors may affect the final determination. Those factors include: • Importance of the windows to the overall character of the building. • Do the windows have distinctive features? • Are the windows examples of particularly fine craftsmanship or are they manufactured units? • How many windows are being replaced? Per the NPS, if the number of replaced units has an inconsequential effect on the character of an elevation, then replacement may be acceptable • Where are the windows that are proposed for replacement located? The more prominent the elevation, the more important it is that the windows be preserved Please note that energy efficiency and meeting modern codes are not factors that warrant replacement by themselves. Each factor will be considered here with suggestions for next steps to follow: Deterioration: All of the windows share a similar baseline of deterioration, including poor to severe condition of the lower rail of the lower sash, poor to severe condition of meeting rails, poor condition of lower sash stiles, poor to severe condition of lower jambs, failing paint, failing glazing compound, and minimal operability due to deterioration of components and/or being fixed closed with caulk and excess paint. All of the components listed as 3 on the attached conditions matrix will require epoxy repairs at a minimum, dutchmen repairs, or component replacement. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 70 Image 11: 154-Unit 2_Window 1. Meeting rail has failed Image 12: 154-Unit 3_Window 1. Lower rail has failed ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 71 Image 13: 161-Unit 4_Window 3 Image 14: 161-Unit 4_Window 2. Bottom rail has failed ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 72 Importance of the windows to the overall character of the building: 155 West Mountain is on the corner of West Mountain and South Mason on a heavily traveled pedestrian and vehicular corridor. 161 South Mason fronts along South Mason with a storefront and is also highly visible. Several of the windows on each building are facing out over either the roof of an adjacent building, a parking lot, or an alley and are less visible to the public. These least visible windows are: 154 West Mountain Unit Window #s 1 1 - 5 2 1-2 3 1 Hall 1 7 4-6 Basement 101 1-2 155 West Mountain 101 1-3 161 South Mason 1 5 2 1-3 Bath 1 3 1-3 4 1-5 5 1-3 Ground level 1 - 10 The remainder of the windows face West Mountain and South Mason and are highly visible. As these are commercial buildings with few other ornamental features, the fenestration pattern and style of windows are important to the overall character of both buildings. Do the windows have distinctive features? The windows are wood, one-over-one double-hung windows arranged in pairs with a single divided-lite transom above. Both buildings share the same pattern, and the arrangement is considered a distinctive feature. Are the windows examples of particularly fine craftsmanship or are they manufactured units? The windows are an example of mortise and tenon joinery and have survived approximately 100 years, indicating that they are of fine quality, albeit standard craftsmanship for the period in which they were created. How many windows are being replaced? Per the NPS, if the number of replaced units has an inconsequential effect on the character of an elevation, then replacement may be acceptable Please see the recommendations section for more detail. Where are the windows that are proposed for replacement located? The more prominent the elevation, the more important it is that the windows be preserved Please see the recommendations section for more detail. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 73 RECOMMENDATIONS: Two factors being considered on this project are the poor condition of the windows and the highly visible and significant character of the buildings. While any historic wood window can be repaired, many of the windows on this project would lose over 25% of their historic fabric during the process. However, wholesale replacement of all windows would negatively affect the character and integrity of both buildings. To best preserve the integrity of the buildings, it is proposed that the windows facing West Mountain and South Mason be restored, while all other windows are approved for replacements that meet the City of Fort Collins Design Guidelines. Two exceptions to this recommendation are on Building 161 South Mason, Unit 5, Windows 4 and 5. This windows have already been replaced in the recent past and should also be eligible for replacement with new windows that strictly match adjacent windows along South Mason Street. Windows recommended for restoration are: 154 West Mountain Unit Window #s 3 2-5 4 1-8 5 1-3 6 1-4 7 1-3 Ground Level G 1-7 161 South Mason 6 1-2 1 1-4 Image 15: Ground floor windows to be restored highlighted in yellow ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 74 Image 16: Second floor windows to be restored highlighted in yellow ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 75 From the National Park Service: Technical Preservation Services Full text available online at: https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/applying-rehabilitation/successful-rehab/windows-replacement.htm "Factors to consider in evaluating the match of a replacement window Window unit placement in relation to the wall plane • The degree to which the window is recessed into the wall. The location of the window affects the three-dimensional appearance of the wall. Window frame size and shape • For example, with a wood window, this would include the brick mold, blind stop, and sill. • The specific profile of the brick mold is usually less critical than its overall complexity and general shape, such as stepped or curved. • Typical sight lines reduce the importance of the size and profile of the sill on windows high above ground level, especially when the windows are deeply set in the wall. • Though a blind stop is a small element of the overall window assembly, it is a noticeable part of the frame profile and it is an important part of the transition between wall and glass. • Steel windows that were installed as a building’s walls were constructed have so little of their outer frame exposed that any replacement window will necessitate some addition to this dimension, but it must be minimal. Glass size and divisions • Muntins reproduced as simulated divided lights – consisting of a three-dimensional exterior grid, between-the-glass spacers, and an interior grid – may provide an adequate match when the dimensions and profile of the exterior grid are equivalent to the historic muntin and the grid is permanently affixed tight to the glass. Sash elements width and depth • For example with a wood window, this would include the rails, stiles and muntins; with a steel window, this would include the operator frame and muntins. • The depth of the sash in a double-hung window, or its thickness, affects the depth of the offset at the meeting rail of a hung window. This depth is perceived through the shadow that it creates. • Because of its small size, even slight differences in the dimension of a muntin will have a noticeable effect on the overall character of a window. Shape, as well as depth, is important to the visual effect of a muntin. • The stiles of double-hung historic windows align vertically and are the same width at the upper and lower sashes. The use of single-hung windows as replacements may alter this relationship with varying effects on the appearance of a window. In particular, when the distinction between the frame and the sash is blurred, details such as lugs may be impossible to accurately reproduce. • Meeting rails of historic windows were sometimes too narrow to be structurally sound. Reproducing a structurally-inadequate condition is not required. • The operating sash of a steel window is usually wider than the overall muntin grid of the window. In addition, the frame of the operating sash often has slight projections or overlaps that vary from the profile of the surrounding muntins. The shadow lines the muntins create add another important layer to the three-dimensional appearance of the window. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 76 • Materials and finish • While it may be theoretically possible to match all the significant characteristics of a historic window in a substitute material, in actuality, finish, profiles, dimensions and details are all affected by a change in material. • In addition to the surface characteristics, vinyl-clad or enameled aluminum-clad windows may have joints in the cladding that can make them look very different from a painted wood window. • Secondary window elements that do not match the finish or color of the window can also diminish the match. Examples include white vinyl tracks on dark-painted wood windows or wide, black, glazing gaskets on white aluminum windows. Glass characteristics • Insulated glass is generally acceptable for new windows as long as it does not compromise other important aspects of the match. • The clarity and reflectivity of standard clear window glass are significant characteristics of most windows. Because these characteristics are often diminished for old glass, new glass equivalent to the original should be the basis for evaluating the glazing proposed for new windows. Color should only be a noticeable characteristic of the new glass where it was historically, and any coating added must not perceptibly increase the reflectivity of the glass. • Where the glazing is predominantly obscure glass, it may be replaced with clear glass, but some evidence of the historic glazing must be retained, either in parts of windows or in selected window units." ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 77 The following is the process necessary to return the original windows to functional condition: Wood Double-Hung, Casement, and Fixed Windows On-Site Method of Procedure Window Sash Removal: 1.) When required per EPA regulations, place poly-sheeting on the floor at the work area to collect any dust or debris created during the sash removal process. The sheeting will extend 10 feet from the window opening towards the interior of the room and 6 feet on either side of the opening. If these minimum distances cannot be achieved, the sheeting will extend as far as possible into the room as well as side to side in front of the window opening. 2.) Remove the lower window sash from the existing opening by scoring and removing the “interior stop” from the existing frame. 3.) Remove the upper window sashes, including transoms where present, by scoring and removing the “parting stop.” 4.) Number each sash for each opening according to the window schedule using a “Sharpie” to write the corresponding number on the unfinished side of the stile of each sash. Where multiple sashes are present in one opening, a dash (-) followed by a sequential numbering system will be used. For example; a window opening designated 236C has 4 total sashes. There are two upper sashes and two lower sashes. As viewed from the interior, if sash removal will begin in the lower left hand corner of the opening: The lower left hand sash will be labeled 236C-1, the upper left hand sash will be labeled 236C- 2, the lower right hand sash will be labeled 236C-3, and the upper right hand sash will be labeled 236C- 4. This system will be utilized in the same order where transom windows are present. The interior stop will be labeled with 236C and differentiated by an “L,” “C,” or “R” to designate its original location (Left, Center, or Right). The parting stop is not typically labeled or restored as it is most often time damaged beyond repair during the removal process and new parting stop will be fabricated to match the existing for every opening. 5.) When required per EPA regulations, bag or wrap all components; including sash, interior stop, parting stop and trash in heavy duty poly-sheeting or poly-bags to assure containment of any dust or debris during transport. 6.) When required per EPA regulations, cleaning verification will be provided following a thorough cleaning of the area using damp wipes and/or HEPA vacuums; including, but not limited to, all sills, stools, floors, weight pockets, poly-bags and poly-sheeting. Installation of Temporary Enclosures: 1.) The material selected for use as the temporary enclosure, “Verolite” or similar, will be cut to fit inside the existing opening whenever possible. If not specified, plywood or OSB will be utilized. When required, the perimeter of the Verolite, plywood, or OSB will be wrapped in foam tape in an effort to create the most effective weather seal possible. The wood backing for this will be screwed to the existing frame where the interior stop and/or parting stop was located. The screw holes created will be hidden by the interior stop or parting stop upon reinstallation of the restored components and causes little to no damage to the frame. The verolite will then be attached to this backing material utilizing screws. Existing Frame Restoration: 1.) Loose and Flaking or failed paint is removed following the National Park Service Preservation Brief number 10. A “wet method” utilizing chemical strippers, carbide scrapers, or HEPA approved mechanical sanders (or a combination of all three) will ensure that no lead based paint dust is created. Following the paint stripping process, a thorough visual and tactile examination of the existing wood substrate will ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 78 be performed. 2.) If there are any pieces or components that have shifted or become loose on the frame, counter-sunk coated screws and/or galvanized brad nails will be utilized to restore the integrity of the components. 3.) If it is determined that the existing substrate is beyond repair through the use of epoxy, the deteriorated wood will be “cut” out of the existing frame and a replacement piece fabricated to replicate the removed component, commonly referred to as a “Dutchman,” will be installed in its place. After all of the Dutchmen have been installed, epoxy will be utilized to make any other repairs that are deemed necessary. 4.) When the epoxy has dried, it will be sanded to shape. A thorough review by our staff will determine if any additional epoxy consolidate is required. 5.) All window frame components will then be primed, and an additional review completed to ensure that we have achieved the acceptable criteria set forth by the “Mock-up Review.” If more consolidation is deemed necessary, the primer at that location will be removed and steps 5-7 will be repeated. 6.) A modified polyurethane sealant will then be applied to any and all areas that require it. The sealant will either be color matched and/or paintable. It will be a low-modulus elastomeric product. 7.) A minimum of two finish coats of paint will then be applied and given ample drying time before the restored sash will be installed. Sash Installation: 1.) The sash will be delivered pre-finished to site and will be installed per the plans and specifications. Depending on the specifications, “T-Rail” weather stripping will be utilized on both sides of the window opening jamb legs. This will often require adjustment (shimming) in order to achieve the appropriate fit. Foam glazing tape will be employed for this task. The sashes are installed in a manner which attempts to balance the ease of operation while still maintaining the best possible seal against air infiltration. 2.) The hardware will then be installed. 3.) All necessary caulking and paint touch up will be preformed after installation to provide a clean and seamless finished product. Please understand that the interface of the interior face of the interior stop and the interior window frame is not typically caulked as this inhibits future access for general maintenance purposes. 4.) After the owner and architect have reviewed the finished product, all necessary punch-list items will be corrected. Off-site Method of Procedure Receiving Sash: 1.) When the sashes and interior stop arrive at the “Shop” the window designation numbers are “stamped” into the sash at the same location. This is to ensure that the number is not inadvertently removed during the restoration process. Glazing Putty, Glass Removal, and Glass Cleaning: 1.) Steam ovens are utilized to soften the historic glazing putty and all existing putty is removed. This ensures a wet method technique that is non-invasive and is the best method to avoid breakage of the glass during this process. 2.) When the glass has been removed, the corresponding sash number is written on a piece of tape and applied to the surface of the glass. 3.) This number will be removed temporarily when the glass is cleaned, but will be reattached after the cleaning is complete. Typical glass cleaners such as Windex are utilized. All glass that can be reused will be reused. Existing scratches on the glass that were not created during the removal or cleaning process will not dictate replacement of the glass unless directed by the architect and/or owner. 4.) When the sash has completed the restoration process in the shop, the original piece of glass will be ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 79 installed in the same location from which it came. Sash Restoration: NOTE: The Method of Procedure for the Off-Site Sash Restoration is identical to the On-Site Existing Frame Restoration section, excluding steps 8 and 9, with a few additional steps: 1.) All sashes, after they have been stripped, are re-squared prior to applying epoxy consolidates. This is achieved by clamping the sash and when 90 degree internal angles are achieved, dowels are utilized to maintain the shape. 2.) Before the glass is set and bedded, and after the sanding of the epoxy is completed, the glazing rabbit is primed. 3.) After sanding the epoxy consolidates, kerfs are cut for future installation of the bulb seal and, when specified, t-rail weather stripping. Interior Stop Restoration: 1.) This process is similar to the Existing Frame Restoration section but may include some new fabrication to replace pieces which were damaged beyond repair during the sash removal process. Parting Stop Fabrication: 1.) All parting stop will be fabricated to match existing and will be prefinished in the shop prior to installation on-site. Glazing Process: 1.) Dap Glazing compound is applied to the glazing rabbit and the glass is installed using push points when traditional glazing putty is utilized. Push points are not used when glass stops (wood or other) are utilized. 2.) The residual Dap compound that “oozes” out is cleaned from the glass and wood sash surfaces. 3.) When the Dap has “set-up” Glazing putty or wood glass stop is applied. 4.) The sash is then placed vertically in a drying rack. 5.) Depending on the type of glazing compound utilized, dry time can range from a little as a few days to as long as 6 weeks. Painting and Staining Process: 1.) The sashes are masked to protect the glass but still allow the finish paint to extend very slightly beyond the glazing bed to create a seal. 2.) They are transferred to painting racks, and the primer and two finish coats are applied with an airless or a HVLP paint sprayer. 3.) When the finish coat is dry, the masking is removed, the bulb seal installed, glass cleaned, and the sash delivered to the site for installation. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 80 Thank you for the opportunity to visit this property. If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 303-746-1602, or barlowpl@gmail.com Regards, Phillip Barlow, Owner Enclosed Materials: Window Evaluation Matrix Photo Documentation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 81 LocationOpening NumberDescription/NotesOperationMaterialSillJambsExterior trim & stopsStoolInterior trim & stopsInterior wall surfacesLowest RailOther rails & stilesMuntins and mullionsMeeting RailsGlazing putty & gasketsOperators & handlesMovement MechanicsLocksSquareWeatherstripping154-1 1 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 2 1 N/A 2 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 2 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 3 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 4 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 1 Y Y UPS 5 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 1 Y Y UPS 154-2 1 3' 3" X 5' 5"DH W 3 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 2 2' 9 1/2" X 5' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 154-3 1 2' 3 1/2" X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 2 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 3 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 2 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 4 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 2 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 5 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 2 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 154-4 1 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 2 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 2 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 2 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 3 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 2 1 2 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 4 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 2 1 2 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 5 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 2 2 1 2 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 6 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 2 2 1 2 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 7 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 3 N/A 3 2 N/A 1 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 8 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS 154-5 1 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 3 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 3 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 3 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 154-6 1 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 3 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 3 3' 6"X 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 3 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 4 3' 6"X 4' 5", Int. stop missing DH W 3 3 3 2 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS Frame Sash FunctionWest Mountain-South Mason Fort Collins - PAGE 1 Operation Impaired?KEY FRAME/SASH/FUNCT 3- Advanc. Deterior. 2- Unstable 1- Maintenance Req. 0- Excellent MATERIAL S- Steel W- Wood A- Aluminum O- Other GB- Glass Block OPERATION SH- Single hung DH- Double hung C- Casement HS- Horizontal Slider FX- Fixed O- Other MISC. PS-Painted Shut UPS-Upper painted shut ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 82 LocationOpening NumberDescription/NotesOperationMaterialSillJambsExterior trim & stopsStoolInterior trim & stopsInterior wall surfacesLowest RailOther rails & stilesMuntins and mullionsMeeting RailsGlazing putty & gasketsOperators & handlesMovement MechanicsLocksSquareWeatherstripping154-7 1 3' 6" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 2 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 3' 6" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 3 3' 6" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 4 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 5 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 6 3' x 5" 5"DH W 3 3 3 2 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 154 Hall 2' 4" x 3' 5"DH W 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 2 2 N/A 2 3 N/A 2 2 Y Y UPS 154-101 1 3' X 1' 2" Basement A W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 1 N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2'4" x 2' 9" Basement DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 1 N/A 1 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 155-101 1 3' X 1' 2" Basement A W 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 2 N/A 3 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2'4" x 2' 9" Basement DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 2' 9 1/2 x 5' 5" Basement DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 154 Grnd Lvl G-1 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-2 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 2 3 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-3 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-4 3-6" x 5' 5"DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 3 3 2 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-5 7'4" X 1' 2"FX W 1 1 1 N/A N/A N/A 1 1 1 N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-6 7'4" X 1' 2"FX W 1 1 1 N/A N/A N/A 1 1 1 N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A G-7 7'4" X 1' 2"FX W 1 1 1 N/A N/A N/A 1 1 1 N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Frame Sash FunctionWest Mountain-South Mason Fort Collins - PAGE 2 Operation Impaired?KEY FRAME/SASH/FUNCT 3- Advanc. Deterior. 2- Unstable 1- Maintenance Req. 0- Excellent MATERIAL S- Steel W- Wood A- Aluminum O- Other GB- Glass Block OPERATION A-Awning SH- Single hung DH- Double hung C- Casement HS- Horizontal Slider FX- Fixed O- Other MISC. PS-Painted Shut UPS-Upper painted shut ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 83 LocationOpening NumberDescription/NotesOperationMaterialSillJambsExterior trim & stopsStoolInterior trim & stopsInterior wall surfacesLowest RailOther rails & stilesMuntins and mullionsMeeting RailsGlazing putty & gasketsOperators & handlesMovement MechanicsLocksSquareWeatherstripping161-1 1 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 3 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 2 3 N/A 3 3 Y Y UPS 2 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 3 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 2 3 N/A 3 3 Y Y UPS 3 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 3 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 3 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 4 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 3 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 3 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 5 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 3 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 3 2 3 3 N/A 3 3 Y Y UPS 161-2 1 2' 8" x 5' 1"DH W 2 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 2' 8" x 5' 1"DH W 2 3 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 Y Y UPS 3 2' 8" x 5' 1"DH W 2 2 2 1 1 N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 Y Y UPS 161 Bath 3' x 5' 1"DH W 1 1 1 1 1 N/A 1 1 N/A 1 2 N/A 3 1 Y Y UPS 161-3 1 3' x 5' 1"DH W 2 2 2 1 1 N/A 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 2 1 Y Y UPS 2 2' 8" x 2' 10"DH W 2 1 1 1 1 N/A 1 1 N/A 1 3 N/A 3 1 Y Y UPS 3 2' 4" x 4' 5"DH W 2 2 2 1 1 N/A 2 2 N/A 2 3 N/A 2 1 Y Y UPS 161-4 1 2' 4" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 Y Y UPS 2 2' 4" x 2' 6"DH W 3 3 3 1 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 3 2' 8" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 4 2' 8" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 5 2' 4" x 2' 6"DH W 3 3 3 1 1 N/A 2 2 N/A 3 3 1 3 2 Y Y UPS 161-5 1 2' 4" X 2' 9"DH W 3 3 3 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 2 2' 4" X 2' 9"DH W 3 3 3 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 3 2' 3" X 4' 3" Replacement DH W 3 3 3 2 3 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 4 2' 11" X 3' 7" Replacement DH W 3 3 3 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 5 2' 11" X 3' 7" Replacement DH W 3 3 3 2 2 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 2 3 2 Y Y UPS 161-6 1 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 2 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 3 Y Y UPS 2 2' 8" x 3' 9"DH W 2 2 2 2 1 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 1 3 1 Y Y UPS Frame Sash FunctionWest Mountain-South Mason Fort Collins - PAGE 3 Operation Impaired?KEY FRAME/SASH/FUNCT 3- Advanc. Deterior. 2- Unstable 1- Maintenance Req. 0- Excellent MATERIAL S- Steel W- Wood A- Aluminum O- Other GB- Glass Block OPERATION SH- Single hung DH- Double hung C- Casement HS- Horizontal Slider FX- Fixed O- Other MISC. PS-Painted Shut UPS-Upper painted shut ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 84 LocationOpening NumberDescription/NotesOperationMaterialSillJambsExterior trim & stopsStoolInterior trim & stopsInterior wall surfacesLowest RailOther rails & stilesMuntins and mullionsMeeting RailsGlazing putty & gasketsOperators & handlesMovement MechanicsLocksSquareWeatherstripping161 Grnd Lvl G-1 2' 4" x 5' Not original FX W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 N/A 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-2 2' 4" x 4' 5" Upper replaced DH W 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-3 2' 4" x 4' 5"DH W 3 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-4 2' 4" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-5 2' 4" x 4' 5"DH W 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 3 3 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-6 3' x 5' 1" Upper boarded DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 N/A 2 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-7 3' x 5' 1"DH W 1 1 1 N/A N/A N/A 2 1 N/A 1 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-8 3' 4" x 5' 6" Lower boarded DH W 3 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 3 2 N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-9 2' x 5' 6"DH W 3 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 3 3 N/A 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y G-10 3' 4" x 5' 6"DH W 2 2 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2 2 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Y Frame Sash FunctionWest Mountain-South Mason Fort Collins - PAGE 4 Operation Impaired?KEY FRAME/SASH/FUNCT 3- Advanc. Deterior. 2- Unstable 1- Maintenance Req. 0- Excellent MATERIAL S- Steel W- Wood A- Aluminum O- Other GB- Glass Block OPERATION SH- Single hung DH- Double hung C- Casement HS- Horizontal Slider FX- Fixed O- Other MISC. PS-Painted Shut UPS-Upper painted shut ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 85 North Elevation of 154 West Mountain West Elevation of 154 West Mountain ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 86 Southernmost Elevation of 154 West Mountain South and East elevations of 154 West Mountain ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 87 North End of West Elevation of 161 South Mason South end of West Elevation of 161 South Mason ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 88 South Elevation of 161 South Mason East Elevation of 161 South Mason ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 89 North Elevation of 161 South Mason ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 90 154-Basement Level_Unit 101 154-Basement Level_Unit 101_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 91 154-Basement Level_Unit 101_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Basement Level_Unit 101_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 92 154-Basement Level_Unit 101_Window 2_Exterior 154-Ground level_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 93 154-Ground level_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Ground level_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 94 154-Ground level_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Ground level_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 95 154-Ground level_Window 3_Exterior 154-Ground level_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 96 154-Ground level_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 2 154-Ground level_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 97 154-Ground level_Window 4_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Ground level_Window 5_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 98 154-Ground level_Window 6_Exterior 154-Ground level_Window 7_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 99 154-Hall_Window 1_Exterior 154-Hall_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 100 154-Hall_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 154-Hall_Window 1_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 101 154-Hall_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 154-Hall_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 102 154-Unit 1_Window 1_Exterior 154-Unit 1_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 103 154-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 104 154-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 1_Window 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 105 154-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior 154-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 106 154-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 107 154-Unit 1_Window 3 154-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 108 154-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 109 154-Unit 1_Window 4 154-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 110 154-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 111 154-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 112 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 113 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 114 154-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 115 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 116 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 117 154-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 118 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 119 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 3 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 120 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 121 154-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 122 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 123 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 124 154-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 3_Windows 2 and 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 125 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Exterior 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 126 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 127 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 128 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Exterior 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 129 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 130 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 131 154-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 5 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 132 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 133 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 134 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 3_Window 4_Interior_Detail 5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 135 154-Unit 3_Windows 4 and 5_Exterior 154-Unit 3_Window 5_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 136 154-Unit 3_Window 5_Interior 154-Unit 3_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 137 154-Unit 3_Window 5_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 3_Window 5_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 138 154-Unit 4_Windows 1 and 2_Exterior 154-Unit 4_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 139 154-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 140 154-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 4_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 141 154-Unit 4_Window 2_Interior 154-Unit 4_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 142 154-Unit 4_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 4_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 143 154-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior 154-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 144 154-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 145 154-Unit 4_Windows 3 and 4_Exterior 154-Unit 4_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 146 154-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior 154-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 147 154-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 148 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Exterior 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 149 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 150 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 151 154-Unit 4_Window 6_Exterior 154-Unit 4_Window 6_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 152 154-Unit 4_Window 6_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 4_Window 6_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 153 154-Unit 4_Window 7_Exterior 154-Unit 4_Window 7_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 154 154-Unit 4_Window 7_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 4_Window 7_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 155 154-Unit 4_Window 7_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 156 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Interior 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 157 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 158 154-Unit 4_Window 8_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 5_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 159 154-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 160 154-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 5_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 161 154-Unit 5_Window 2_Interior 154-Unit 5_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 162 154-Unit 5_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 163 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 164 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 165 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 166 154-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 6 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 167 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 168 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 169 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 170 154-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 6 154-Unit 6_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 171 154-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior 154-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 172 154-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 173 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Exterior 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 174 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 175 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 6_Window 3_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 176 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Exterior 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 177 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 178 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 179 154-Unit 6_Window 4_Interior_Detail 5 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 180 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Interior 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 181 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 182 154-Unit 7_Window 1_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 7_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 183 154-Unit 7_Window 2_Interior 154-Unit 7_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 184 154-Unit 7_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 7_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 185 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Exterior 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 186 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 187 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 7_Window 3_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 188 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Exterior 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 189 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Exterior_Detail 2 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 190 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 191 154-Unit 7_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 192 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 193 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Interior 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 194 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 195 154-Unit 7_Window 5_Interior_Detail 4 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 196 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Exterior_Detail 1 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 197 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Interior 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 198 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Interior_Detail 2 154-Unit 7_Window 6_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 199 155-Basement level 155-Basement level_Unit 101_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 200 155-Basement level_Unit 101_Window 2_Exterior 155-Basement level_Unit 101_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 201 161-Ground Level_Window 1_Exterior 161-Common Bath_Window 1_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 202 161-Common Bath_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 161-Ground Level_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 203 161-Ground Level_Window 3_Exterior 161-Ground level_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 204 161-Ground level_Window 5_Exterior 161-Ground level_Window 6_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 205 161-Ground level_Window 7_Exterior 161-Ground level_Window 8_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 206 161-Ground level_Window 8_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Ground level_Window 8_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 207 161-Ground level_Window 9_Exterior 161-Ground level_Window 9_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 208 161-Ground level_Window 9_Exterior_Detail 2 161-Ground level_Window 10_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 209 161-Ground level_Window 10_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Ground level_Window 10_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 210 161-Unit 1_Window 1_Exterior 161-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 211 161-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 1_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 212 161-Unit 1_Window 2_Exterior 161-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 213 161-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 1_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 214 161-Unit 1_Window 3_Exterior 161-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 215 161-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 1_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 216 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Exterior 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 217 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 218 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 161-Unit 1_Window 4_Transom_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 219 161-Unit 1_Window 5_Exterior 161-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 220 161-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 1_Window 5_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 221 161-Unit 2_Window 1_Exterior 161-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 222 161-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 2_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 223 161-Unit 2_Window 2_Exterior 161-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 224 161-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 2_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 225 161-Unit 2_Window 3_Exterior 161-Unit 2_Window 3_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 226 161-Unit 2_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 2_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 227 161-Unit 2_Window 3_Interior_Detail 3 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 228 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 229 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 230 161-Unit 3_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 3_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 231 161-Unit 3_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 232 161-Unit 3_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 3_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 233 161-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior 161-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 234 161-Unit 3_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 235 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 236 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 237 161-Unit 4_Window 1_Interior_Detail 4 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 238 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 239 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 3 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 240 161-Unit 4_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 241 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 242 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 243 161-Unit 4_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 244 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 245 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 246 161-Unit 4_Window 4_Interior_Detail 3 161-Unit 4_Window 5_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 247 161-Unit 4_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 4_Window 5_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 248 161-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior 161-Unit 4_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 249 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Exterior 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 250 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Exterior_Detail 2 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 251 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 5_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 252 161-Unit 5_Window 2_Exterior 161-Unit 5_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 253 161-Unit 5_Window 2_Exterior_Detail 2 161-Unit 5_Window 2_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 254 161-Unit 5_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 255 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 1 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Exterior_Detail 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 256 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 257 161-Unit 5_Window 3_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 5_Window 4_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 258 161-Unit 5_Window 4_Interior 161-Unit 5_Window 4_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 259 161-Unit 5_Window 5_Exterior 161-Unit 5_Window 5_Interior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 260 161-Unit 5_Window 5_Interior_Detail 1 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 261 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 262 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 263 161-Unit 6_Window 1_Interior_Detail 4 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Exterior ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 264 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 265 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 2 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 266 161-Unit 6_Window 2_Interior_Detail 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 267 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Landmark Designation LOCATION INFORMATION Address: 155 West Mountain Avenue Legal Description: Lots 25 and 26, Block 111, Fort Collins Property Name (historic and/or common): Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building; McCormick Apartments OWNER INFORMATION Name: Mountain 155, LLC & Hello Investments, LLC Company/Organization (if applicable): Helix Property Management, LLC Phone: (970) 632-6051 Email: jharrison@HelixPropertyManagement.com (Josh Harrison) Mailing Address: P.O. Box 711, Fort Collins, CO 80522 CLASSIFICATION Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing Designation Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register Site Religious Object Residential District Entertainment Government Other FORM PREPARED BY Name and Title: Reyana Jones, Historic Preservation Specialist Address: 281 N. College Ave., Fort Collins, CO 80524 Phone: (970) 221-6206 Email: preservation@fcgov.com DATE: December 4, 2019 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 268 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES Individual Landmark Property Landmark District Explanation of Boundaries: The boundaries of the property being designated as a Fort Collins Landmark correspond to the legal description of the property, above. The property (hereinafter the “Property”) consists of the historic commercial building, constructed 1907-1909 (parcel no. 9711414025). STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and INTEGRITY Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(a): Standard 1: Events This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events: a) A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or b) A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building, the northern portion of 155 W. Mountain Ave., is significant under Standard 1, Events, for its association with communications history in Fort Collins, specifically newspaper publication. In this building, between 1907 and 1923, the Fort Collins Express, the first newspaper published in Larimer County, solidified its success as a publication, especially through the quick rise in popularity of its Morning Express daily edition, unveiled in 1907. Unlike many of its previous locations, the Fort Collins Express’s building at 155 W. Mountain Ave. was constructed specifically for the newspaper in 1907 by its owners, brothers James and George McCormick. In its weekly and morning editions, the paper reported on important happenings at local, national, and international levels, “carrying war measures into effect in the community” in 1917 and 1918, for example.0F 1 The Express occupied its Mountain Avenue building until 1923, around the time when the McCormick brothers purchased the Fort Collins Courier, their biggest rival, and the building formerly at the southwest corner of Mountain and Remington; the McCormicks moved the Express to the Courier building and consolidated their two newspaper holdings into one: the Express-Courier. This newspaper later became the Coloradoan. 1 Frank McClelland, “Later Story of the Express: Why the Express is an Open Shop,” Fort Collins Express, May 20, 1923. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 269 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Standard 2: Persons/Groups This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. Standard 3: Design/Construction This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building, the northern portion of 155 W. Mountain Ave., is also significant under Standard 3, Design/Construction, as an excellent example of early twentieth-century commercial architecture. Characteristic of early twentieth- century commercial structures, this 1907 building is constructed from light-colored brick and is simply adorned with a shallowly stepped parapet with corbelled detail. Flat arches top the second-story windows on both street-facing elevations of this building as well. The entrances on the façade are deeply recessed to allow passers-by to step off the main sidewalk to window-shop, another feature of early twentieth-century commercial architecture.1F 2 Although the east and south portion of the building were not part of the original design, they are a historic alteration; this 1909 addition was commissioned by the James and George McCormick for the Post Office just two years after the original construction date and was designed to be cohesive with the older portion. The McCormick Apartments The McCormick Apartments, the southern portion of 155 W. Mountain Ave. also called 126-30 S. Mason St., is significant under Standard 3, Design/Construction as a good example of early twentieth-century commercial architecture. Like its companion to the north, this building was constructed by the McCormick brothers in two phases, in 1917 and 1925, and was designed in such a way that the façade appears cohesive. It features a light buff-colored brick facade and reflects the older building’s architectural details that are indicative of early twentieth-century commercial designs, including its shallowly stepped parapet and recessed entry. Rather than flat arches, this building’s upper story façade windows have soldier-coursed brick lintels with a square stone detail at each end, distinguishing this building from its neighbor. Rather than being constructed entirely in stretcher bond brick, the uppermost portion of the building uses brick headers to create the appearance of panels, which allude to the recessed brick panels on the Express/McCormick Building. 2 “Early Twentieth-Century Commercial,” History Colorado, https://www.historycolorado.org/early-twentieth- century-commercial. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 270 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Standard 4: Information Potential This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(b): location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Standard 1: Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic or prehistoric event occurred. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building has not been moved. The McCormick Apartments The McCormick Apartments building has not been moved. Standard 2: Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure and style of a resource. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building The design of the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building has changed very little since its 1907 construction. It retains the character-defining features of an early twentieth- century commercial building, including its shallowly stepped, corbelled parapet, its second-story windows with flat-arched tops and multi-light transom windows, as well as its deeply recessed Mountain Avenue façade entrances. It also retains its sidewalk- accessible basement entries, which are visible in historic photographs. The major alteration to the structure, a 1909 addition,, was constructed by the McCormick brothers, the building’s first owners, just two years after the original portion of the building, during the period of significance for its use as a newspaper publishing building. The two-story addition to the east side of the façade replicated the original portion. This two-story addition drops to one-story, which extends south beyond the length of the original portion, then west to Mason Street. The Mason Street storefront of this addition, although one story, continues the architectural details of the rest of the building, including the stepped parapet and flat arches. The window and door configuration of the one-story Mason Street storefront has changed over time. Before 1960, the storefront was bricked over entirely, based on a historic photograph. Then, in the 1970s and 1980s, bricks were removed from some openings, and others were created, resulting in the current appearance of the storefront., Despite these alterations, the character-defining architectural details of an early twentieth-century commercial building are intact, making this one-story section cohesive with its two-story counterpart. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 271 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Other design changes, like the addition of an entrance on the Mason Street elevation, the bricking over of three windows on that elevation, and the reconfiguration of the Mountain Avenue west storefront to include two doors, are more than fifty years old, occurring before 1969 based on historic photo records, and are compatible with the design.2F 3 More recent alterations do not damage the building’s integrity of design, including interior alterations to suit changing commercial tenants, re-roofing, awning installation, and sign changes. For a chronological summary of exterior alterations, see Table 1. The McCormick Apartments The design of the McCormick Apartments has also changed little since its 1917/1925 construction. Although the north section of this building is an addition to the original 1917 structure (which itself was built in two phases that year), it was constructed for the building’s first owners, the McCormick Brothers, as a deliberate expansion of that structure to accommodate additional businesses and residential tenants. The configuration of windows and doors on the façade has remained mostly the same over the years based on historic photos. The most significant alteration to the façade was the 2018 modification of the south entry. This was once a recessed entry with narrow sidelights and transom window, according to a c. 1960 photograph. This door was brought out flush with the rest of the building and set just slightly to the right to accommodate a larger window beside it rather than sidelights. Despite this change, the entry still feels like a commercial entry, and the design included narrow transom windows like those in the original design. Furthermore, one of the recessed entries on the façade has been retained, preserving this character- defining architectural element. There is no existing documentation of alterations to the rear of the building and no photographs. Based on a window study conducted in 2019, one window on the east elevation is not original to the building, the vertical, three-light, leaded glass window on the north end of the building. One window on the south elevation was also integrated into some sort of ventilation shaft. The metal patio enclosures around the Mason Street storefronts were also added at an unknown date but are easily reversible and do not damage the building’s integrity. Standard 3: Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Setting refers to the character of the place; it involves how, not just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. 3 “NE from the top of Larimer County Court House,” Coloradoan, H11730, Historical Image Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO; Lots 25 and 26, Block 111 Tax Assessor Card, 1968, Tax Assessor Record Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 272 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building This building retains its downtown commercial setting. It sits on a corner lot with two elevations, north and west, still prominently visible from the street. The east elevation, part of the 1909 addition, abuts the neighboring building. The south elevation originally faced an alley, but construction quickly filled in south of this building, adding to its downtown commercial context. The McCormick Apartments The McCormick Apartments building’s setting has also changed little since its construction. This business/apartment building once sat across Mason Street from the Larimer County Courthouse; although that building was demolished, it was replaced with another County Courthouse/County building. The McCormick Apartments building is nestled among other commercial buildings, including the associated building to the north. Standard 4: Materials are the physical elements that form a resource. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building This building retains many of its original materials. In addition to its original building material, light-colored brick, the second-story windows are all historic wood windows with mortis and tenon joinery. Several of the windows on the first story are historic one- over-one wood windows, although some have been altered to accommodate the businesses inside. Several doors also appear historic. The prominent brick chimney is still retained as well. The north elevation storefront windows were replaced, but this change occurred more than fifty years ago, based on a 1969 tax assessor photo. The most obvious change in materials to the building is the enclosure or significant reduction of three window openings on the west elevation’s north side. However, this change can be considered historic; according to a building permit, this change occurred in 1936 and was enacted as part of fire regulations.3F 4 Though the large windows are no longer there, the multi-light transom windows remain, and the brick infill in recessed to suggest the former voids, minimizing the visual impact of that alteration. Also on the west elevation, the one-story addition has undergone remodeling of its storefront that resulted in some loss of materials. Before 1960, all of the openings on this storefront were bricked up. According to building permits, in 1979 and 1988, the property owners removed bricks from closed windows and door openings and remodeled this storefront; the current appearance is likely the result of these alterations.4F 5 The character-defining features of the early twentieth-century commercial building, the 4 Building Permit #4387, August 18, 1936, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. 5 Building Permit # Un-readable, 120 S. Mason St. for Henry Hudek, October 22, 1979, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=269106&dt=PERMITS; Building Permit #29885, 122 S. Mason St. for Paul Wagner, August 12, 1988, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=24575&dt=PERMITS. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 273 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 decorative brick flat arches and the shallowly crenelated parapet, were retained throughout this remodeling. The McCormick Apartments The McCormick Apartments building also retains many of its original materials. It still features a light buff-colored brick façade and many of the doors appear historic. According to the 2019 window study, many of the wood windows are also original, including most of the prominent upper-story windows on the west and south elevations. The storefront windows have been replaced with modern materials. The transom windows above these storefront windows and doors have also been boarded; the date of these storefront window changes is unknown. The entryway altered in 2018 resulted in the loss of some window material as well. On the south elevation, one window was boarded and integrated into what appears to be a ventilation system. There is also a section of brick around the east-most window on the south elevation that was likely replaced based on the difference in color. The 2019 window study points out several windows that have been replaced or altered and many are in a deteriorated condition. The east-most pair of upper-story windows on the façade have been replaced; however, they were replaced in-kind with wood, one- over-one double-hung sash windows. The south elevation’s east-most window’s lower portion has been boarded. On the east elevation, the right window of the north-most pair of windows has had its upper sash replaced. Also, on the east elevation, the ground- level window partially obscured by the stairway has had its upper portion boarded. Because of their advanced level of deterioration and limited visibility, the professional who conducted the window studied recommended that the windows on the secondary elevations, south and east, be replaced.5F 6 Standard 5: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure or site. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Several architectural details on this building evoke the workmanship of the builder and are emblematic of an early twentieth-century commercial building. For example, there are decorative masonry elements like the corbelled parapet, slightly recessed panels beneath the windows, and flat arched window toppers. A local material, sandstone was also incorporated in several prominent places, like windowsills and the base of some entrances. Additionally, the seamless blending between the 1907 and 1909 portions of the façade indicate the workmanship of the builder. 6 Phillip Barlow, “Window Evaluation for 159-163 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524,” Prepared for City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department, Barlow Cultural Resources Consulting LLC, October 22, 2019. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 274 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 The McCormick Apartments Like the Express Building, this building also exhibits workmanship. It similarly blends the 1917 and 1925 sections of the building in a cohesive façade, suggesting the workmanship of the builder. It also features several architectural details that are emblematic of early twentieth-century commercial architecture, such as the slightly stepped parapet, decorative brick and stone lintels, and variation in brick bonding. Standard 6: Feeling is a resource’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the resource's historic or prehistoric character. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building evokes the feeling of the early twentieth century in a commercial context through its retention of setting, design, materials, and workmanship. Nestled among other commercial structures from a similar time period, including the abutting building to the south built by James McCormick, the setting of this building contributes to its feeling. Similarly, the primary material, light-colored brick, and the overall design conjure feelings of an early twentieth century commercial building. Finally, architectural details that show significant workmanship, like the corbelled, stepped parapet, are highly visible on this corner-lot building, compounding its integrity of feeling. The McCormick Apartments This building similarly elicits the feeling of the early twentieth century in a commercial context. It is clear how this building’s design and materials were inspired by the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building. The light buff-colored brick façade and architectural details like the stepped parapet and brick and stone lintels evoke the feeling of an early twentieth-century commercial building. This building is not as monumental as the Express building, its decorative light buff-colored bricks reserved only for the façade, for example; that difference reinforces the feeling of importance surrounding the Express building. Standard 7: Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or prehistoric resource. A resource retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Although the function of the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building is no longer newspaper publishing, the building does retain its association with the Express under James and George McCormick because of its overall integrity. This building was constructed specifically to house the Express. It was a testament to the paper’s status as a journalistic powerhouse in Fort Collins under the McCormicks’ leadership, expanding to include both a weekly and morning daily paper and knocking out competition like the Morning Democrat. Furthermore, the presence of the basement stairways with sidewalk ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 275 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 access are a reminder of the labor of the printers who descended those steps each day to work the heavy printing machinery that was once housed in the basement of the Express Building. The prominence of this building on a corner lot in downtown and the workmanship evident in its design and construction harken to this building’s association with one of Fort Collins’s most important newspapers and its accomplished owners. The McCormick Apartments This building continues to have mixed use: a business in the lower level and residences in the upper and eastern portions. The obvious similarity in design between this building and the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building abutting it to the north suggests the strong association between these two buildings, both constructed by the McCormick brothers in the early twentieth century and both adapted to the changing needs of commercial and residential tenants. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 276 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 HISTORICAL INFORMATION Introduction In July 1907, the Fort Collins Courier lamented the removal of “the stately cottonwoods that were planted thirty years ago to shade the old Commercial Hotel”,6F 7 but perhaps what it bemoaned more was the reason for their removal—the rise of a stately building for its surging competitor: the Fort Collins Express. Brothers James and George McCormick each purchased a half-interest in the newspaper,7F 8 and then bought the corner lot at Mountain Avenue and Mason Street for the new Express building from the heirs of hotelier David M. Harris.8F 9 Harris was the former proprietor of the Commercial Hotel (Northern Hotel); he had moved his hotel, previously named the Agricultural Hotel, from Lots 25 and 26, Block 111 to its new location at the corner of Walnut Street and College Avenue in the late 1870s.9F 10 On the hotel’s former site at Mountain and Mason, the McCormick brothers economized their space, completely filling Lots 25 and 26 with business and apartment buildings. In one of these buildings, the Fort Collins Express became the preeminent newspaper of Fort Collins. Construction History Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building: The two-story brick building at the southeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Mason Street was designed by architect E. Francis Williams and was built by Jones and Bull, among other contractors.10F 11 The printing office moved into the new building December 25, 1907. In 1909, the Post Office needed a temporary location while its federal building was being constructed. The McCormicks secured the Post Office as a tenant and constructed a large addition to the original Express Building. This L-shaped addition replicated the two-story Mountain Avenue façade, then dropped to one story along the rest of the original portion and wrapped around the back to create a one-story Mason Street storefront. This building was home to the Post Office for three and a half years.11F 12 This early expansion was the most extensive alteration the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building underwent. The Mountain Avenue façade had one significant change in 1936, a historic adaptation of the building for new commercial tenants undertaken by James McCormick that continued the usability and appearance of the building as an early twentieth-century commercial structure. The west storefront was 7 “City and Country,” Fort Collins Courier, July 3, 1907. 8 “A Change at the Express,” Fort Collins Courier, April 24, 1907. 9 Deed of Guardian, Guardian Emma Harris to James G. and George C. McCormick, July 3, 1907, Book 204, Page 334, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO; Warranty Deed, Grace Vandewark (nee Harris) to James G. and George C. McCormick, June 8, 1907, Book 234, Page 539, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 10 Reyana Jones, “The Northern Hotel,” April 23, 2014. 11 “Completed by October,” Fort Collins Express, June 19, 1907; “Near Completion,” Fort Collins Express, October 9, 1907. 12 Frank McClelland, “Early History of Fort Collins Express, Pioneer Newspaper Identified with Growth of County,” Fort Collins Express, May 20, 1923. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 277 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 remodeled to create a “double entrance,” changing the configuration of the windows somewhat, based on the comparison of a 1914 newspaper photograph and a building permit.12F 13 This change most likely occurred to accommodate the use of the upper-story rooms as residential apartments rather than offices; the two doorways separated building access for residents and business tenants or patrons. James McCormick frequently altered the interior of the building to create various partitions for these apartments and business spaces; this trend of interior alteration to suit changing tenant use continued under later owners.13F 14 Contrary to the information in a 1992 survey form, the basement stairways on both the Mason Street and Mountain Avenue sidewalks appear to be original to the design based on the photo from a postcard showing the building before its 1909 addition, although the brick knee-wall around the Mason Street stairway is not original.14F 15 The most significant exterior alterations to the Mason Street elevation occurred in 1935 and 1936, and was, again, part of James McCormick’s efforts to adapt the building to the evolving needs of his tenants. In 1935, J.G. McCormick took out a building permit for “120 Mason,” which most likely referred to the one-story portion of the building facing Mason Street. It included closing up a cellar stairway and bricking up an opening in the wall; it is unknown if this was when all of the openings on this portion of the building were bricked up, but it is probable given that the remodel was intended to accommodate a “cold storage plant.”15F 16 Later owner Henry J. Hudek removed bricks from one of these window openings in 1979, and in 1988, Paul Wagner created a new window opening; the current window/door configuration is likely the sum of their joint works.16F 17 The 1936 alterations included bricking-up the west elevation’s three north- most first-story windows “to comply with fire district rules.”17F 18 Other building permits taken out for the Express/McCormick Building were for: re-roofing, usually using “elaterite,” insulation, signs/awnings, plumbing, and electrical work.18F 19 There are several changes to the building that are not precisely documented by building permits or other records, but almost all of them occurred before 1960, based on a Coloradoan photograph, or before 13 Building Permit #4387, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; “Home of the Fort Collins Express Courier,” Historic Photograph Collection, Image ID#H03050, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 14 Building Permit #s: 7820, 6082, 5022, 4555, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO; Building Permit #19685, 159 W. Mountain Ave. for Henry Hudek, April 5, 1973, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=287070&dt=PERMITS; Building Permit #B0016406, 159 W. Mountain Ave for Jay D. Stoner, October 20, 2000, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=399457&dt=PERMITS; Building Permit #B0017036, 159 W. Mountain Ave for Jay D. Stoner, December 14, 2000, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=399456&dt=PERMITS; Letter of Completion, 159 W. Mountain Ave. for Astride a Starship, October 8, 2012, http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=2010407&dt=CO%2FLOC. 15 “Birdseye View of Fort Collins,” Photograph by Charles T. Gilbert, Historical and Postcard Collection, Image ID#H21170, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 16 Building Permit #4387. 17 Building Permit # Un-readable; Building Permit #29885. 18 Building Permit #4387. 19 Building Permit #s 4516, 4547, 4987, 6218, 6686, 8413,10076, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 278 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 1969, based on the tax assessor record,19F 20 and can be considered historic. On the west elevation, a 1910 photograph shows only one entrance toward the center of the building with a double-door;20F 21 that entrance was reconfigured to its present state and another entrance was added further south by 1960. It is possible that these alterations to the west elevation occurred in 1931 under a building permit to “remodel storefront,”21F 22 but no additional details about that record are available. Early photographs also show windows at the level of the sidewalk below some of the sash windows, but these appear to have been removed by 1969, based on the tax assessor photo. On the Mountain Avenue storefronts, early photos show stairs leading to entrances,22F 23 but these were changed to ramps by 1969, based on the tax assessor photograph. Additionally, the installation of the multicolored glass transom above the west storefront may have been part of the 1936 remodeling of this storefront,23F 24 but a precise date is unknown.24F 25 McCormick Apartments: On the southern portion of Lots 25 and 26, Block 111, builder J.F. Stewart constructed a brick business building. He first built a one-story brick building in July 1917, then built the second story in September 1917, according to building permits.25F 26 This building was used for painting, including by auto painter Frank J. Ulrich, for several years. In 1925, the McCormick brothers commissioned builder J.R. Snedaker to construct a brick business building with apartments on the second floor in the space between that building and the former Express building.26F 27 This building continues to be used for mixed business and residential use to today. Like the building to its north, this structure underwent many interior alterations over the years, including partitioning and remodeling, to suit the needs of tenants. Because the address of this building and nearby buildings changed frequently and dramatically over the years, it is difficult to conduct a thorough and definitive search for exterior alterations for this building; historic and modern 20 “NE from the top”; Lots 25 and 26, Block 111 Tax Assessor Card. 21 “Birdseye View.” 22 Building Permit #2954, 159 W. Mountain Ave. for James McCormick, April 21, 1931, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. 23 “Home of the Fort Collins Express Courier.” 24 Building Permit #4387. 25 Before the McCormicks constructed their newspaper building at 155 W. Mountain Ave., that site hosted the Commercial Hotel/Agricultural Hotel as well as the Auntie Stone Cabin, formerly located on Jefferson Street. The Auntie Stone Cabin was used by the Agricultural Hotel as a kitchen/laundry. It remained on the lot after the demolition of the hotel and served as a residence until 1907, after which it came under the ownership of the McCormicks and became a paint shop behind the Express Building. In 1909, perhaps anticipating the expansion of their building that same year, the McCormicks listed the Auntie Stone Cabin for sale for $150. The cabin was “rescued from destruction” by the Pioneer Women of the Cache la Poudre Valley, who purchased the building and moved it to a site further down Mason Street between Oak and Olive Streets to preserve the building as a historical museum and for use as a meeting place. (Ansel Watrous, History of Larimer County (Fort Collins, The Courier Printing and Publishing Co., 1911), 219; E.H.H., “Early Hosteleries,” Weekly Courier, January 31, 1913; “May Buy Log Cabin for Permanent Headquarters,” Weekly Courier, March 3, 1909.) 26 Building Permit #118, SE Cor Mountain and Mason, July 7, 1917, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; Building Permit #137, SE Corner Mason and Mountain, September 4, 1917, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. 27 Building Permit #1007, 118 Mason, McCormick Brothers, April 7, 1925, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 279 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 building permit searches of addresses from 118-130 S. Mason St. yield only one definite exterior change that is not a re-roofing, sign, or awning change, the 2018 alteration of the south storefront for The Regional restaurant. There are several other alterations that are distinguishable from the current appearance of the building, though the dates of these changes are unknown. The transom windows on the façade above the north- most door and above each storefront were boarded up. There are several other boarded or partially- boarded windows on the east and south elevations. There is also one non-original window opening containing a vertical, three-light window on the east elevation’s north edge. Newspaper History and Later History: The Express was a pioneer newspaper. Established in 1873, it was the first newspaper published in Larimer County, but a handful of other journalistic enterprises cropped up soon after in Fort Collins. Most of these papers “lasted about a year” and included the Bee, Gazette, Star, Argus, Beacon, and Chronicle, among others.27F 28 Others, including the Express, fared better. The Courier, for example, was founded in 1878 by Ansel Watrous and Elmer M. Pelton. It was originally a Democratic newspaper, but became a “rigid adherent” to the principles of the Republican Party in 1899 after a change in ownership. 28F 29 In 1906, the Larimer County Democrat, later called the Review, emerged as a Fort Collins newspaper. Later, it introduced a daily edition, the Morning Democrat. Both the Express and the Courier also published dailies, so these two established papers bought up the Review in 1918 and divided its subscribers and equipment among themselves.29F 30 The Express’s success was not inevitable. In fact, before the founder of the Express, James Simpson McClelland, came to Fort Collins, he ran a failed newspaper in Galesburg, Illinois called the Free Press. McClelland constructed a building in the 100 Block of West Mountain Avenue with a “flaring front,” a two-story front and one-story back, to house his Fort Collins paper. The first edition was printed in 1873, but those early times were “days of stress…, every week was a struggle to print the paper.” This difficulty was partly due to the hard costs required to purchase specialty materials like ink and paper rolls “that the county farms did not produce.” McClelland worked odd jobs, especially doing farm-work, to get by and to support his fledgling newspaper. As the town expanded and construction boomed, the Express experienced times that “bore a slight resemblance to prosperity.” It was, however, McClelland’s ultimate dream to run a prosperous farm, not a newspaper, so as his paper thrived, he devoted more and more time to his farm, which developed into a successful orchard.30F 31 28 Coloradoan Staff, “Plethora of Publications Came and Went,” Coloradoan, April 15, 1984. 29 Ansel Watrous, The History of Larimer County (Fort Collins: Courier Printing and Publishing Company, 1911), 158-160. 30 Coloradoan Staff, “Plethora of Publications.” 31 McClelland, “Early History.” ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 280 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 By 1880, McClelland sold the paper to H.A. Crafts, a New Yorker who had worked for the World. The earliest editions of the Express are believed to have been burned by Crafts as part of this transition. Crafts released a daily evening edition of the Express, which was continued until 1884. Crafts also built a brick building at 117 Linden St. to house the printing office. He sold the paper to Frank S. Smith in 1890. Under Smith, the Express was located at 107 E. Mountain Ave. above a drugstore, and then in a brick building on the alley at 125 W. Mountain Ave. Smith sold the newspaper to Howard L. Russell in 1897, who later sold a half-interest to Walter B. Sheppard. Sheppard and Russell ran the Express until selling to William B. Junkin in 1904. Junkin sold a half-interest in the paper to James G. McCormick of Albia, Iowa. Because his daughter suffered from illness, Junkin wanted to move his family somewhere with a lower elevation; he traded his remaining half-interest in the Express to James’s brother, George C. McCormick, for his paper in Albia, the Republic.31F 32 As soon as George McCormick arrived in Fort Collins from Iowa in 1907, he and his brother purchased lots 25 and 26, Block 111, at the corner of Mountain Avenue and Mason Street. At this location, they commenced the construction of a two-story brick building on the north-west portion of the property. The Express building became the official new home of the newspaper Christmas day, 1907. The main printing office was on the first floor, printing equipment was stored in the basement, and there were other offices in the upper story.32F 33 As construction began on their new building, the rivalry between the Express and the Courier intensified. A great deal of mudslinging commenced between the two newspapers. For instance, the Courier declared it a “remarkable feat” that the Express had united “237 different kinds of jackass . . . in its own personality.”33F 34 The Express took a slightly more personal approach, calling the editor of the Courier a “disgruntled old mossback with a bad digestion.”34F 35 Compounded by a libel case against the Express,35F 36 this months-long exchange of quips seems to have been precipitated by the establishment of the Express’s daily edition. Just before its initial release, the Courier wrote that the city’s merchants told them “one daily will be a benefit to any town, but they don’t want any more dailies,” and that the other publishers were “satisfied to let the Courier have the daily field.”36F 37 Apparently not so—the Express released its first daily edition as the Morning Express May 28, 1907.37F 38 Due to the existing competition in the daily field, printing a morning edition was “a strenuous experience” for the Express.38F 39 Because the McCormicks themselves worked in both the front and back of the shop to print the daily, they drew the ire of the powerful printers union. The McCormicks were stoutly anti-union, believing that unionization prevented the prosperity of both business owners and workers alike, and so 32 Ibid. 33 “Near Completion.” 34 “Editorial Comment,” Fort Collins Courier, September 25, 1907. 35 Fort Collins Express, Quoted in “Editorial Comment,” Fort Collins Courier, October 2, 1907. 36 “How the Express Brought on that Suit for Libel,” Fort Collins Courier, August 28, 1907. 37 “Editorial Comment,” Fort Collins Courier, January 9, 1907. 38 “Today’s News,” Fort Collins Courier, May 22,1907. 39 McClelland, “Early History.” ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 281 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 the Express was open-shop under their ownership.39F 40 Their primary competitor, the Courier, held an opposite position, believing in the virtues of unionization, such as the professional training opportunities offered by unions, and so was a closed shop.40F 41 Strikes against the McCormicks occurred in both 1912 and 1913 for the goal of wage increases. The McCormicks refused to meet union demands, operating printing equipment themselves and hiring non-union men to work at the Express/McCormick Building.41F 42 Soon, the Express overtook the Courier in subscribership and in soliciting businesses for advertisements; the Courier was purchased by the Express in 1920, and the Courier printers immediately struck for higher wages under their new employers. In response, the McCormicks loaded a team of about twenty Express printers into cars and drove to the Courier building. There, the non-union employees printed the issue the strikers delayed. More non-union printers were hired to take the jobs of strikers until the unionists gave up their cause or left town.42F 43 For three years after the Express purchased the Courier, the same stories were printed in both papers each day under different headlines.43F 44 In 1923, the Express and Courier suspended independent publication and consolidated into the Express-Courier, both papers moving production to 145 E. Mountain Ave. Spiedel Newspapers, Inc. bought the Express-Courier in 1936, and in 1945, the Express-Courier became the Coloradoan, a local daily newspaper still published today.44F 45 Following the acquisition of the Courier by the Express, the McCormicks held onto Lots 25 and 26, Block 111, for other ventures. The brothers rented the office and store space formerly occupied by the Express to businesses or organizations such as: House & Humphrey Tires, the Army Goods store, the Larimer County Agricultural Conservation Association, the Amana Food Plan, Mac Van Frigid Locker Plant, and Gregory’s Meat and Lockers.45F 46 At the rear of lots 25 and 26, George and James McCormick, with builder J.F. Steward, constructed a 25X40 foot shop made of brick, which initially served as a paint shop.46F 47 Then, in 1925, the McCormick brothers, with builder J.R. Snedaker, erected a brick business and apartment building in the remaining space between the one-story portion of the Express/McCormick Building and 40 McClelland, “Later Story.” 41 “Trade Education for Printers,” Weekly Courier, December 22, 1910; “Union Men Force Newspaper to the Open-Shop System,” Fort Collins Courier, May 17, 1920. 42 McClelland, “Later Story”; “A Matter of ‘Principal,’” Weekly Courier, January 10, 1913. 43 “Union Men Force Newspaper,” Fort Collins Courier. 44 McClelland, “Early History.” 45 Patricia Gallagher, “A Chronology of the City’s Chronicles: Competition, Transition Mark History of Newspapers in Fort Collins,” The Coloradoan, April 15, 1984. 46 163 W. Mountain Ave. Research Document, August 2012, 159-63 W. Mountain Avenue Property File, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services Property File Collection, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Building, Fort Collins, CO. 47 Building Permit #118, SE Corner of Mountain and Mason for J.F. Steward Applicant, July 7, 1917, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO; 1917 Sanborn Map: Fort Collins, Digital Sanborn Maps Collection, Proquest, http://0- sanborn.umi.com.catalog.poudrelibraries.org/about.html. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 282 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 the 1917 construction.47F 48 Architectural features of this building, like the stepped parapet, mimic details on the Express/McCormick Building. Tenants of this building included businesses like the Farm Loan Association (1938-1940) and Hulquist Watch and Clock Repair (1956-1964) and residents like Bayard Case (1948-1964), a service station worker, Margaret McSparron Sr. and Jr. (1925, 1956-69), and many university students.48F 49 George McCormick sold his ½ interest in Lots 25 and 26, Block 111, to his brother in 1928.49F 50 James married Agnes Young in 1929,50F 51 and the couple retained ownership of the Express/McCormick Building until their deaths. In 1963, the estate of Agnes McCormick bequeathed the property to Walter Biehle, who sold it two years later to Henry and Julia Hudek.51F 52 The Hudeks continued to rent the property to various businesses and apartment residents, including Mother’s Market, Gutscher Music Company, and Paul’s Vacuum and Sewing Center.52F 53 In 1980, Alan R. Porter and Paul L. Wagner purchased the property from the Hudeks, and Porter sold his ½ interest in the property to Wagner less than two weeks later.53F 54 Wagner continued to rent to apartment residents and businesses like The Business Link, Communications, Cables, and Connections, Smartz Computer Services, and the Indigo Gallery.54F 55 He quit-claimed the property to Casana Corporation in 1991, a real estate company associated with Wagner.55F 56 Casana Corp. held the property until 1997, selling to Jay D. Stoner for $900,000.56F 57 Stoner sold to Mason Mountain, LLC in 2002 for $1,425,000, and Mason Mountain, LLC sold to Astride a Starship, LLC for $1,818,000 in 2006.57F 58 In 2016, Astride a Starship sold to Mountain and Mason, LLC for $4.5 million.58F 59 Finally, Mountain 48 Building Permit #1007, 118 Mason for McCormick Brothers, April 7, 1925, Building Permits Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO; 1925 Sanborn Map: Fort Collins, Digital Sanborn Maps Collection, Proquest, http://0-sanborn.umi.com.catalog.poudrelibraries.org/about.html. 49 City Directory Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 50 Warranty Deed, G.C. McCormick to J.G. McCormick, April 12, 1928, Book 574, Page 82, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 51 Marriage Record, James G. McCormick and Agnes Young, June 5, 1929, Colorado, County Marriage Records and State Index Collection, Ancestry Operations, https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=61366&h=261678&tid=&pid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=VUg16&_phstart=successSource. 52 Warranty Deed, Estate of Agnes Young to Walter Biehle, November 1, 1963, Book 1226, Page 389, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO; Warranty Deed, Walter Biehle to Henry J. Hudek, et al, February 3, 1965, Book 1279, Page 391, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 53 163 W. Mountain Ave. Research Document, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services. 54 Warranty Deed #383635, Henry and Julia Hudek to Alan R. Porter and Paul L. Wagner, October 16, 1980, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb; Warranty Deed #385349, Alan Porter to Paul Wagner, October 28, 1980, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb. 55 163 W. Mountain Ave. Research Document, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services. 56 Quit-Claim Deed #19910014655, Paul Wagner to Casana Corporation, April 10, 1991, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb 57 Warranty Deed #19970051412, Casana Corp. to Jay D. Stoner, August 7, 1997, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb. 58 Warranty Deed #20020045188, Jay D. Stoner to Mason Mountain, LLC, April 23, 2002, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb; Warranty Deed #20060044637, Mason Mountain, LLC to Astride a Starship, LLC, June 14, 2006, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb. 59 Warranty Deed #20160017989, Astride a Starship, LLC to Mountain and Mason, LLC, March 25, 2016, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 283 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 and Mason sold to the current owner, Mountain 155, LLC, in 2019 for $4.6 million.59F 60 In addition to apartment residents, the current tenants of the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building are Pinot’s Palette, Slyce Pizza Company, and Wok and Roll (120 S. Mason St.), and the current business tenant of the McCormick Apartments building is The Regional restaurant. Conclusion In 1873, Joseph Simpson McClelland established the Express and “aspir[ed] to build a newspaper ‘representative of the people’ . . . standing fearless and unafraid, constantly working for the advancement of the community.”60F 61 Under the ownership of the McCormick brothers, the paper sometimes faced criticism, but ultimately garnered popular favor for its reporting in its daily and weekly editions. The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building stands at the corner of Mountain Avenue and Mason Street as a physical reminder of this news publishing powerhouse, and the business acumen of the brothers behind that newspaper is embodied in the McCormick Apartments next door. 60 Warranty Deed #20190047729, Mountain and Mason, LLC to Mountain 155, LLC, August 14, 2019, Larimer County Official Records Search Database, Larimer County, https://records.larimer.org/landmarkweb. 61 “Later Story of the Express to Date, It’s Growth, Activity and Character,” Fort Collins Express, May 20, 1923. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 284 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION Construction Date: 1907-1909; 1917 and 1925 Architect/Builder: E. Francis Williams (Architect), Jones and Bull (Builders); J.F. Stewart, J.R. Snedaker (Builders) Building Materials: Brick Architectural Style: Early Twentieth-Century Commercial Description: Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building is located on the south-east corner of Mountain Avenue and Mason Street. Its east and south elevations are almost entirely covered by abutting commercial buildings. There are two stairways to access the basement accessible from the sidewalk, one on the north elevation, and one on the west elevation. The foundation is stone parged with concrete, and the building is made of light-colored brick. The flat roof has a stepped parapet with corbelled details across the entire building. The building has a prominent brick chimney toward the west side. The footprint is rectangular. Part of the building has two stories, and part has one story: the north section has two-stories– the west side of the building extends south about 85 feet and the east side extends south about 50 feet– but, the east side drops to one story and then wraps around the west side’s two-story portion in an L-shaped section that creates a Mason Street storefront.61F 62 There are storefronts on both the Mountain Avenue (north) and Mason Street (west) elevations. The north elevation has two stories. The upper-story windows all appear to be historic. There are four pairs of wood one-over-one sash windows. Each pair has a sandstone sill, an eight-light transom window, and is also topped with a brick flat arch.62F 63 Symmetrically, a recessed panel of bricks creates a subtle masonry detail beneath the two pairs of windows to the east and the west. The north elevation’s first story features storefronts adorned with burgundy cloth awnings with a scalloped edge. There is a gooseneck lamp mounted beside each awning at both edges of the building. The entrances to both storefronts are deeply recessed and are located toward the center of the elevation. Walkways slope up to both entrances. Both storefronts are also dominated by walls of nearly full-height windows that are not interrupted by masonry. There are decorative pieces of sandstone where the brick walls would meet the sidewalk on this elevation. On the east storefront, two of these windows face the street, and a third similar window angles inward to meet the left side of the recessed door. This non-historic door has one large light and is surrounded by other windows: a large sidelight to the right and two transom windows above. The wood frames and mullions of these windows are painted red or black, and a subtle geometric pattern is carved in narrow strips of the wood. Beneath the awning, across the length of the storefront windows and entryway, there are six transom windows with very narrow wooden 62 See Maps section for a footprint showing this configuration. 63 A series of 2003 photos in the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services property file shows all of the transom windows boarded over on both the north and west elevations, but the glass in these windows does appear historic, reflecting the appearance of earlier photographs. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 285 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 frames painted black. In the sidewalk in front of the east storefront is a stairway providing basement access. It is surrounded by a metal railing. The stairs and landing are made of stone, and the visible walls are parged with concrete. There are three windows in this stairwell, and the wall between each window is topped with a block of sandstone. Each of these windows has a stone sill. The east window is a rectangular, wood, fixed window. The center window is a wood, one-over-one sash window. The west window is a taller wood, one-over-one sash window. The wooden door at the base of the stair has an opening above it from which a light fixture hangs. The west storefront is similar, but does not have a basement stair. Instead, a metal rail creates a patio area in front of the building. There are also two large windows facing the street, but there are two windows angling toward the door because the entrance of this storefront is more deeply recessed than the one on the east side. This storefront has two doors: the left door has one light in the upper half and leads to the upstairs apartments, and the right door has one much larger light and serves the business; both doors appear historic and have transom windows. The framing beneath the storefront windows is paneled and painted in red and white. The transom windows spanning across all of these windows and the entry are not original to the building but are likely historic, although the date of this change is unknown; they are made of bands of dark and light- blue and clear leaded glass. The west elevation consists of the two-story original 1907 portion and the one-story 1909 addition. The second-story features wood, one-over-one sash windows with sandstone sills and brick flat arch toppers like those on the north elevation. These are configured as three pairs, two singles, and three pairs. Each pair or single window has a narrow multi-light transom window and a recessed brick panel below, also like the windows on the north elevation’s second story. The west elevation’s first story has three large bricked-up window openings on the north end. The bricks are recessed to suggest the former opening and are topped with narrow, multi-light transom windows, like those on the upper-story windows, that are original to the property based on a 1914 photograph. The south-most of these bricked openings was partially reopened and has small glass blocks in the left half and a small sash window in the right half.63F 64 There is a stairway to the basement in front of the north portion of this elevation. It has a non- original knee-wall made of light-colored brick that matches the rest of the building in hue; the knee wall has a decorative topper that creates a jagged pattern using the corners of bricks. A band of sandstone separates the first story and basement in this stairway. The stairs and landing are made of stone. The walls of the stairway are made with rough-cut stone, and the wall of the basement is parged with concrete. There are also two basement windows with sandstone sills. The north window is a rectangular, wood, fixed window, and the south window is a wood, one- over-one sash window. The non-historic wood door at the base of the stair has a rough-cut sandstone lintel. There is a light fixture mounted above the lintel. The boarded opening to the right of this door currently being used to accommodate a utility system was once likely a window. 64 The 1969 tax assessor photo shows this opening full of glass blocks; the right half were removed and replaced by a sash window sometime between 2008 and 2012 based on Google Street-view images. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 286 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Toward the center of the west elevation, there is an entryway that sits atop a sandstone step. The entry is covered by a burgundy cloth awning like those on the north elevation. On both sides of this awning, there is a gooseneck lamp. The wood frame of the doors and windows is painted beige. The wood door has one large light and is historic. Tall fixed windows flank both sides of the door; below each window is a beige, red, and white-painted decorative panel. There are fixed window transom windows above each window and the door. Beneath the awning, an eight-light fixed window stretches across this entry; the left-most pane of glass has been replaced with a vent. South of this entryway are two pairs of wood, one-over-one sash windows with sandstone sills. Both pairs have wood-framed decorative panels below them painted in beige, red, and white. The left pair has an eight-light transom window above it; the left pair’s transom window was boarded to hold a metal fixture for the business inside at an unknown date. South of these windows, there is another entry shrouded by a burgundy cloth awning. There is one gooseneck lamp to the left of the awning. A non-historic door with one large light is set to the right and is accessed by a concrete landing. Above this door is a wood, fixed transom window. To the left of this door is a large wood, one-over-one sash window with a sandstone sill. Below this window is a wood-framed decorative panel painted in beige, red, and white, like others on this elevation. Beneath the awning, there was likely once a transom window spanning across the entire entryway, but it has been boarded up. The west elevation’s one-story portion has two entries, each with their own black cloth awning. The left entry abuts the 1907 portion of the building. The non-historic door has one large light and is painted black; it also has a flat-arched brick topper. The second door is just to its right. This door is very similar, but has a fixed transom window as well as a flat-arched brick topper. To the right of this door is a picture window topped with a black-painted lintel. The right side of this lintel is topped with a brick flat arch, indicating the location of the original window. Located high on the wall near the shallowly stepped, corbelled parapet, there are two gooseneck lamps. The south and east elevations are almost entirely obscured by abutting buildings. The second- story portion of the building has some windows and doors that open onto the one-story portion, indicated by the segmental arches peeking out, but they are not visible from the street. Surrounded by the abutting buildings, a narrow segment of the one-story portion with a narrow wood, three-light window looks out onto the alley. The McCormick Apartments The McCormick Apartments are located on the east side of the 100 block of Mason Street. Train tracks run in front of the building, which is across the street from the Larimer County Courthouse Offices. An alley runs along the south side of the building, and there is a parking lot off of this alley on the building’s east side. This two-story brick building has a concrete foundation. The brick on the façade (west elevation) is light buff-colored, whereas the brick on all other elevations is ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 287 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 pink. The flat roof has a stepped parapet with soldier-coursed brick detail on all sides of the building excluding the rear. The building’s north elevation is partially covered by the abutting one-story building to the north; the second-story portion of the McCormick Apartments’ north elevation is not visible from the street. The north and south halves of this building were built at different dates; the south portion was built in 1917, and the north half was built in 1925. The 1925 portion extends slightly further east from Mason Street than the 1917 portion, making the overall footprint of not quite rectangular. The majority of the façade features light buff-colored brick in stretcher bond, but above the second-story windows, brick headers are employed to create the appearance of panels. The façade is asymmetrical. All of the windows on the façade have concrete sills. On the first story, there are two storefronts, set slightly south rather than centered on the building; each is covered with a gray cloth awning that is attached to a gray-painted board that stretches nearly the full length of the building. There are two gooseneck lamps by these awnings. There is a patio enclosure in front of each storefront made of metal painted black. Each half of the building’s façade has two doors. The north half has one door toward the north edge, not under an awning, and another where the two halves of the building meet; these doors are made of wood and have one large light in the upper half. The north door appears to have had its transom window removed. The second door retains its recessed hopper transom window. Between these doors, there are two large display windows with white-painted concrete sills. Beneath the awning, transom windows once stretched across this storefront, but they were boarded at an unknown date. The façade’s south storefront also has two doors. The north door is recessed and appears non- historic; it has one large light toward the center. Just south of this door is a storefront window that is as tall as the recessed entryway. The second door is located toward the center of this storefront; it has one light, about three-quarters of the length of the door. To its left is a storefront window with a wooden panel below it rather than brick. This door and window each have a narrow transom window. To the right of this door is a large display window. Above the entire storefront are transom window opening that were boarded at an unknown date. The façade’s second story has four pairs of wood, one-over-one, double-hung sash windows with divided light transoms, similar to those on the Express building. The north two pairs of windows have lintels made of soldier-coursed brick with square stones at either end. The south windows have the same style of lintel, but stacked between the sill and the lintel’s square stone ends are bricks, aligned with stretchers showing to create a complete window surround. The south elevation, located on an alley, is constructed from pink brick. All of the windows on this elevation are wood, one-over-one, double-hung sash windows with concrete sills. There is what appears to be a ventilation shaft at the center of the elevation connecting to a now-boarded window opening on the first story. There are windows on both sides of this boarded opening, two to the left (west) and one to the right (east). The brick around the right window is lighter in color than the rest of the brick on this elevation. The second story has four windows set toward the ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 288 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 west side of the elevation, one pair of windows in between two single windows. There are planters and metal posts supporting bistro lights just in front of this elevation. It is most obvious that this building was constructed in two phases from the rear (east) side. The north half extends slightly further east than the south half. All of the windows on this elevation are wood, one-over-one, double-hung sash windows with brick sills unless otherwise noted. On the south half, there is a wooden stairway that fills much of that inset; it provides access to the second-story apartments and roof. When the stairs reach the second story, they lead onto a wood porch with a solid wall and shed roof. On south portion’s lower floor, there is a concrete pad beneath the stairway and in front of a door, which is toward the south side of the elevation. The door is wood, but not historic; its transom has been boarded up. There is utility meter equipment to the left of this door. There are two windows to the right of this door; the north- most of these two windows has had its upper sash boarded. On the second story, there is one window above this partially-boarded window. To its left are a door and another window toward the south edge of the elevation. This south-most second-story window has geometric, leaded glass in the upper sash, and the lower portion is boarded. The north portion of the east elevation has five windows on the first floor. Starting toward the south, there is a pair of window, the right of which has been modified to accommodate a vent without damaging the window. North of this is another pair of windows, the right of which has had its upper sash replaced. North of this is a window non-original to the building, a vertical, three-light window; the center pane is textured glass, and the upper and lower panes are leaded glass. This window appears to be on a wall belonging to the Express building, but is attributed to the McCormick Apartments building in a 2019 window study. On the second story, there are two windows. On this projecting portion’s south wall, there is one small second-story window as well. The north elevation is partially covered by the abutting Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building, and the upper story is not visible from the street. The 2019 window study reveals, however, that there are seven windows overlooking the roof of the Express Building, all of which are wood, double-hung sash windows; the west-most window has been replaced. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 289 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 TABLE 1 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building DATE EXTERIOR ALTERATION Historic* Historic- compatible** Modern 1907 Original building constructed X 1909 Building expanded east and south for Post Office X 1935 Mason St. one-story section- openings bricked for cold storage plant, cellar stair removed X 1936 Mason St. two-story section- three large windows bricked X 1936 Mountain Ave.- West storefront remodeled for double entrance X <1960 Mason St. two-story section- central double-door entrance reconfigured and secondary entrance added to the south X <1969 Mason St. two-story section- sidewalk-level windows removed X <1969 Mountain Ave.- Storefront steps changed to ramps X 1979 Mason St. one-story section- Bricks removed from window openings X 1988 Mason St. one-story section- new openings X UNK Brick knee-wall around Mason St. stairway UNK Mountain Ave.- Multicolored glass transom above west storefront VARIOUS Re-roofings, awnings, sign changes *Within period of significance for early twentieth-century commercial buildings (1900-1940) **Greater than 50 years old, but outside period of significance ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 290 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION Barlow, Phillip. “Window Evaluation for 159-163 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524.” Prepared for City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department. Barlow Cultural Resources Consulting LLC. October 22, 2019. Building Permit Collection. Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD. https://history.fcgov.com/collections/building-permits. City Directory Collection. Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. Fort Collins, CO. City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services. Building Permit Collection. Community Development and Neighborhood Services Building. Fort Collins, CO. ———. “163. W. Mountain Ave. Research Document. August 2012. 159-63 W. Mountain Avenue Property File. Property File Collection. Community Development and Neighborhood Services Building. Fort Collins, CO. Colorado, County Marriage Records and State Index, 1862-2006. Lehi, UT: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2016. https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=61366&h=383461&tid=&pid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=ofc767& _phstart=successSource. Colorado Historic Newspapers Collection. Fort Collins Courier Database. Colorado State Library. https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=cl&cl=CL1&e=-------en-20--1--img- txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0--&sp=FCC. ———. Fort Collins Express Database. Colorado State Library. https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=cl&cl=CL1&e=-------en-20--1--img- txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0--&sp=FCE. ———. Weekly Courier Database. Colorado State Library. https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=cl&cl=CL1&e=-------en-20--1--img- txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0--&sp=TWC. Coloradoan Staff. “Plethora of Publications Came and Went,” Coloradoan, April 15, 1984. https://history.fcgov.com/explore/pdf/newspapers.pdf. Gallagher, Patricia. “A Chronology of the City’s Chronicles: Competition, Transition Mark History of Newspapers in Fort Collins,” Coloradoan, April 15, 1984, https://history.fcgov.com/explore/pdf/newspapers.pdf. History Colorado. “Early Twentieth-Century Commercial.” https://www.historycolorado.org/early-twentieth-century-commercial. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 291 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Landmark Web Official Records Search. Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. https://records.larimer.org/LandmarkWeb/Home/Index. Sanborn Maps Collection: Fort Collins. Proquest. http://0- sanborn.umi.com.catalog.poudrelibraries.org/co/0996/dateid-000009.htm?CCSI=1820n. Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. Tax Assessor Card Collection. Fort Collins, CO. ———. Historical Image and Postcard Collection. Fort Collins, CO. Title Books Collection. Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Fort Collins, CO. Watrous, Ansel. History of Larimer County. Fort Collins: The Courier Printing and Publishing Company, 1911. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 292 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 MAPS and PHOTOGRAPHS64F 65 Map 1: Highlighted area is all of Lots 25 and 26, including both the Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments. 65 All non-historic photos and maps by Reyana Jones, 2019 unless otherwise noted ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 293 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Map 2: Aerial View- Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building outlined in red, McCormick Apartments outlined in green (Google Maps) West Mountain Avenue South Mason Street ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 294 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Map 3: 1909 Sanborn Map (Poudre Libraries/Proquest Sanborn Maps Collection) Map 4: 1917 Sanborn Map (Poudre Libraries/Proquest Sanborn Maps Collection) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 295 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Map 5: 1925 Sanborn Map (Poudre Libraries/Proquest Sanborn Maps Collection) Historic Photo 1: 1910 Postcard Photo, Express building in foregorund, McCormick Apartments not yet constructed (Local History Archive) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 296 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Historic Photo 2: 1914 Newspaper Photo (Local History Archive) Historic Photo 3: Pre-1960 Photo from Coloradoan (Local History Archive) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 297 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Historic Photo 4: 1969 Tax Assessor Photo (Local History Archive) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 298 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 1: Context, looking east on Mountain Ave. from Mason St. Photo 2: Façade (North Elevation), Mountain Ave. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 299 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 3: North Elevation- upper-level windows, recessed brick panel, and parapet detail Photo 4: North Elevation- East Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 300 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 5: North Elevation- East Storefront Entry ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 301 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 6: North Elevation- East Storefront, Under Awning, Transom Windows Photo 7: North Elevation- West Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 302 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 8: North Elevation- West Storefront Entry ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 303 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 9: North Elevation- West Storefront, Under Awning, Transom Windows Photo 10: North Elevation- Basement Stairway and Rail ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 304 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 11: North Elevation- Basement Stairway, Top Window Photo 12: North Elevation- Basement Stairway, Center Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 305 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 13: North Elevation- Basement Stairway, Bottom Window Photo 14: North Elevation- Basement Door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 306 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 15: West Elevation Photo 16: West Elevation- Basement Stairway, Kneewall ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 307 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 17: West Elevation- Basement Stairway, Steps Photo 18: Basement Stairway, Top Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 308 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 19: West Elevation- Basement Stairway, Bottom Window Photo 20: West Elevation- Basement Door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 309 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 21: West Elevation- Basement Stairway, Rock Walls, Former Window, Utility Equipment Photo 22: West Elevation- Bricked Window Opening, North-most ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 310 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 23: West Elevation- Bricked Window Opening, South-most, Glass Block and Sash Alteration Photo 24: West Elevation- North Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 311 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 25: West Elevation- North Storefront, Under Awning Photo 26- West Elevation- North-most Windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 312 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 27: West Elevation- 2nd North-most Windows Photo 28: West Elevation- Center Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 313 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 29: West Elevation- Center Storefront, Under Awning Photo 30: West Elevation- South Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 314 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 31: West Elevation- South Storefront, North Door Photo 32: West Elevation, South Storefront, South Door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 315 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 33: West Elevation- South Storefront, Picture Window, Under Awning, Flat Arches Photo 34: West Elevation- South Storefront, Parapet Details and Gooseneck Lamps ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 316 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Photos Photo 35: Brick Chimney (most visible from West side) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 317 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 1: Context, looking west across Mason Street Photo 2: Façade (West Elevation) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 318 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 3: Façade- Parapet Photo 4: Facade- North Door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 319 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 5: Façade- North Storefront Photo 6: Façade- North Storefront Door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 320 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 7: Façade- North Storefront Under Awning Photo 8: Façade- North Storefront Patio Enclosure ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 321 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 9: Façade- South Storefront Photo 10: Façade- Recessed Entry by South Storefront ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 322 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 11: Façade- South Storefront Under Awning Photo 12: Façade- South Storefront Patio Enclosure ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 323 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 13: Façade- Second Northmost Second-story Window Photo 14: South Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 324 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 15: South Elevation- Lower West Window Photo 16: South Elevation- Lower Center Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 325 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 17: South Elevation- Lower Boarded Window and Ventilation Shaft Photo 18: South Elevation- Lower East Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 326 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 19: South Elevatio- Upper West Window Photo 20: South Elevation- Upper Center Windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 327 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 21: South Elevation- Upper East Window Photo 22: East Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 328 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 23: East Elevation- Stairway Photo 24: East Elevation- Upper Story Porch ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 329 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 25: East Elevation- Door Photo 26: East Elevation- Lower South Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 330 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 27: East Elevation- Lower 2nd South-most Window (photo by Phil Barlow, 2019) Photo 28: East Elevation- Upper 2nd South-most Window (photo by Phil Barlow, 2019) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 331 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 29: East Elevation- Upper South-most Window Interior View (photo by Phil Barlow, 2019) Photo 30: East Elevation- Upper Inset Window (facing north) ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 332 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 31: East Elevation- Lower South Paired Windows Photo 32: East Elevation- Lower North Paired Windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 333 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 33: East Elevation- Non-original Window with Leaded Glass Photo 34: East Elevation- Upper Northmost Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 334 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos Photo 35: East Elevation- Upper 2nd Northmost Window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 335 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 McCormick Apartments Photos ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The undersigned owner, or owners, of the Property hereby submit the Property for designation as a Fort Collins landmark pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. The undersigned owner, or owners, certify that all signatures necessary to consent to the designation of the Property are affixed below. I understand that upon designation, I or my successors will be requested to notify the Secretary of the Landmark Preservation Commission at the City of Fort Collins prior to the occurrence of any of the following: Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the Property or interior spaces readily visible from any public street, alley, park, or other public place; and/or Preparation of plans for construction of, addition to, or demolition of improvements on the Property. DATED this ________________ day of _______________________________, 201___. _____________________________________________________ Owner Name (please print) _____________________________________________________ Owner Signature State of ___________________________) )ss. County of __________________________) Subscribed and sworn before me this _______ day of ___________________, 201____, by____________________________________________________________________. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires _______________________. _____________________________________________________ Notary ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 336 10/7/2021 1 1 Landmark Design Review– 155 W. Mountain Ave. –The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments Maren Bzdek, Interim Historic Preservation Manager Historic Preservation Commission – October 10, 2021 2 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments 1909 Sanborn Map Parcel Boundary Fort Collins Express/ McCormick Building 1925 Sanborn Map McCormick Apartments 1 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 337 10/7/2021 2 Role of the HPC • Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation • Pass a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a certificate of appropriateness for the project under Municipal Code 14, Article IV 3 • Construction: •Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building – 1907/1909 • McCormick Apartments – 1917/1925 • Standards of Significance: •Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building – 1 (Events) and 3 (Design/Construction) • McCormick Apartments – 3 (Design/Construction) • Exterior Integrity: Location, Design, Setting, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association 4 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments 3 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 338 10/7/2021 3 5Standard 1 – Events The Express’s daily edition was unveiled in 1907 under the McCormick Brothers. 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building James G. McCormick (Local History Archive) George C. McCormick (Local History Archive) 6Standard 3 – Design/Construction 1969 Tax Assessor Photo Pre-1960 Photograph from Coloradoan 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building and the McCormick Apartments 5 6 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 339 10/7/2021 4 7Façade (North Elevation) 1914 Newspaper Photograph 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building 8 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building Façade (North Elevation) 7 8 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 340 10/7/2021 5 9West Elevation 1969 Tax Assessor Photo 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The Fort Collins Express/McCormick Building 10Façade (West Elevation) Pre-1960 Coloradoan Photograph 155 W. Mountain Ave. – The McCormick Apartments 9 10 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 341 10/7/2021 6 Existing Condition 11 Existing Condition 12 11 12 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 342 10/7/2021 7 Existing Condition 13 Proposed Project 14 Phase 1 •Replace window sashes: replicate existing sash with Jeld-wen Siteline wood double-hung windows (install new sash, with insulated glass, into the existing frame) •Add new weather stripping around lower sash •Add aluminum sill cover to create additional slope to bring water away from the frame/building • Balance system TBD (adjust for additional weight or replace) Phase 2 •Repair (scrape/paint) the frame, trim, and transom sash in place 13 14 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 343 10/7/2021 8 Proposed Project Summary 15 Proposed Replacement Product 16 15 16 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 344 10/7/2021 9 Proposed Replacement Product 17 Staff Analysis • Key Rehab Standards: • 5 – Preserve distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property. • 6 – Repair rather than replace deteriorated historic features. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. • 9 - Exterior alterations shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property; new work shall be differentiated and compatible to protect the historic integrity. 18 17 18 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 345 10/7/2021 10 Staff Recommendation • Staff generally recommends approval of a treatment plan that includes some replacement of window components that are reasonably beyond repair, as well as repair of remaining window components. • The Commission may wish to revise the final details of what will be repaired, versus replaced, based on your analysis of the existing condition, knowledge of repair options, and overall scope of the project and its impact on the buildings’ historic integrity. 19 Role of the HPC • Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation • Pass a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a certificate of appropriateness for the project under Municipal Code 14, Article IV 20 19 20 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 346 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 1 STAFF REPORT October 20, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME MOUNTAIN AVENUE RESHAPING PROJECT - PLANNING PROJECTS REVIEW STAFF Seth Lorson, Transit Planner, FC Moves Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FC Moves is returning to the Commission to share preliminary design results based on public outreach over the last two months culminating with a two- day design charrette. This will be an opportunity to provide additional feedback and direction regarding the conceptual designs for Mountain Avenue between Howes Street and the Lincoln Avenue Bridge over the Poudre River as they relate to cultural resources along the corridor. APPLICANT: FC Moves OWNER: City of Fort Collins RECOMMENDATION: Confirm no negative/adverse effects on designated/eligible historic resources EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND: FC Moves is leading an effort to explore design alternatives for the Mountain Avenue corridor between Howes Street and the Lincoln Avenue Bridge over the Poudre River. The purpose of the Mountain Avenue Reshaping Project is to identify future improvements for Mountain Avenue. Known and developing issues will be addressed, such as the degraded historical trolley tracks, missing sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, streetscape deficiencies, vehicle circulation, bicycle facility gaps, intersection functionality, and curb-use demand (outdoor dining, deliveries, on-demand pickups, and drop-offs). The concept study will develop a vision for Mountain Avenue that celebrates the importance and history of the corridor that is beautiful and user friendly and also supports the businesses along and adjacent to Mountain Avenue. This project originally began in early 2020, but was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City resumed this project in 2021. FC Moves introduced this project to the HPC at its August 11 Work Session. This follow- up includes results captured and developed by the City’s design consultant during a two-day design charrette and design pin-up on September 16 & 17, 2021. FC Moves has engaged a broad collection of stakeholders including downtown organizations, residents and business owners along the corridor, city residents who use the corridor frequently, and related boards and commissions in the City government. This engagement will continue through final project development. This presentation is informational only and intended to provide conceptual design results based on initial feedback from stakeholders, and capture any additional concerns from the Historic Preservation Commission related to historic resources within the project area prior to refining project design. Of primary concern for the Historic Preservation Commission will be designated resources along the proposed corridor, which includes the following: Packet Pg. 347 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 2 • The Old Town Landmark District, which includes 5 contributing properties along the project path and the right-of-way to the north curb on E. Mountain Avenue. • The Laurel School Historic District, listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1980, which includes 3 contributing properties along the project path. • 4 individually designated historic resources (1 in NRHP, 3 City Landmarks) o Express Building, 155 W. Mountain, City Landmark o Welch Block, 100-102 W. Mountain, City Landmark o Kissock Block, 115-121 E. Mountain, NRHP o National Guard Armory, 314 E. Mountain, City Landmark (& NRHP) • There are also 10 resources that are either individually eligible for City Landmark status or could contribute to Landmark districts, mainly clustered along Mountain Avenue between Mason & Jefferson Streets. These include commercial/mixed use buildings and a segment of the Fort Collins Municipal Railway track that runs down the center of E. Mountain Avenue between Montezuma Fuller Alley and Peterson Street. PROPOSED ALTERATION: Possible improvements to Mountain Avenue are in their preliminary phase pending public input about alternative design concepts. No specific modifications are proposed at this time. RELEVANT REVIEW CRITERIA: For Project Components within the Old Town Landmark District: Section 14-51. – Alterations to designated resources requiring a certificate of appropriateness or report. Alterations to rear elevations or other site features of designated landmark properties would require design review and approval based on the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. For Project Components affecting Landmark-eligible resources: Land Use Code 3.4.7, specifically Section D(3): To the maximum extent feasible, the development plan and building design shall provide for the preservation and adaptive use pursuant to the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties of any building, site, structure, or object located on the development site and determined to be eligible for Fort Collins landmark designation either through a binding or non-binding determination pursuant to Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(C). This requirement shall apply to development applications including building permit applications for partial or total demolition of, or work that may have an adverse effect on, any building, site, structure, or object located on the development site and determined to be eligible for Fort Collins landmark designation. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION These historic photos were provide to the HPC in August and have been retained here for reference. H03139, Mountain Avenue looking west from Remington and showing trolley tracks in brick roadbed inset (Museum of Discovery). Packet Pg. 348 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 3 H08076, East Mountain w/ trolley tracks (Museum of Discovery) H19402, showing E. Mountain Ave @ 302 E Mountain, June 1950, showing trolley rails with no foundation (dirt only) (Museum of Discovery). Packet Pg. 349 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Presentation from Design Charrette on September 17, 2021 (Toole Design) 2. FC Moves Presentation – To be included in the packet at a later date Packet Pg. 350 11111 Reshaping Mountain Ave Design Charrette Pin-Up September 17, 2021 Charrette Team Karen Fitzgerald, PLA Project Manager Cindy Zerger Urban Designer Aaron Villere Planner ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 351 Where are we in the process? Developing “Starter Ideas” Research Existing Conditions Meet with Stakeholders Refine Design Options Concept Report Option: Plan, Design, & Implement Quick- Build Projects Seek funding for Capital Projects Plan, Engage, Design Full Capital Reconstruction Why are we here today? ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 352 Mountain Avenue is a great street … … for Art! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 353 Mountain Avenue is a great street … … for Business! Mountain Avenue is a great street … … for Green Space! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 354 Mountain Avenue is a great street … … for Nightlife! Mountain Avenue is a great street … … for People! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 355 But… What are the challenges for the corridor? Missing Sidewalks ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 356 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Constrained or Congested Sidewalks What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Constrained or Congested SidewalksCollegeMasonHowesRemingtonMathewsOak Laporte Sidewalk Clear Path Width ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 357 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Pedestrian Permeability What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Pedestrian Permeability ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 358 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Difficult to Access by Transit What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Celebrating Transit’s History ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 359 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Destination Access What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Freight & Delivery Access ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 360 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Freight & Delivery Access What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Freight & Delivery Access ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 361 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Freight & Delivery Access What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Pick-Up & Drop-Off ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 362 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Bicycle Network GapCollegeMasonHowesRemingtonMathewsOak Laporte Mountain What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Bicycling can be stressful ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 363 What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Bicycling can be stressful What are the challenges for Mountain Ave? Traffic & Street are Mismatched 0 100 200 300 Hourly Traffic Counts (College to Walnut) EB WB Average Daily Traffic Counts, 2018-19 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 364 What we heard… ONLINE SURVEY ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 365 SURVEY: What do you LIKE most? Ambiance/Character 36% Businesses 16%Pedestrian Experience 5% Bicycle Access 9% Vehicle Access 12% Landscaping 20% SURVEY: What do you DISLIKE most? Pedestrian Experience 13% Maintenance & Quality 13% Bicycle Access 25% Motor Vehicles 29% Mountain & College 9% Parking 8% Ambience 4% ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 366 SURVEY: What IMPROVEMENTS would you like to see? Improve Pedestrian Facilities 31% Improve Bicycle Facilities 26% Reduce Motor Vehicle Usage 16% More Green Space 8% Improve Maintenance & Operations 11% Improve Ambiance 5% Improve Traffic Flow 2% None 1% Employees SURVEY RESULTS – Travel Mode Residents Visitors 0 5 10 15 20 25 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 367 Employees SURVEY RESULTS – Travel Preference Residents Visitors 0 5 10 15 20 25 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent Employees SURVEY RESULTS – Travel Preference Residents Visitors 0 5 10 15 20 25 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Most frequent More frequent ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 368 DESIGN CHARRETTE ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 369 Access is Key − Short-term parking for customers −Freight & deliveries − Density of destinations and businesses make the corridor great. − Safety at crossings Congested Sidewalks − Crossing connections between alleys − Width, and navigation around patios − Desire for activation and comfortable walking space. Connected Transit −MAX BRT is useful − Transit history should be celebrated − But other transit options are lacking (infrequent, and circuitous East of Walnut / Mathews − A “Gateway” to Mountain Ave. − Difficult connection to Brewery Row − Less inviting public realm Priorities Safety for All Users! Comfortable & Inviting Space to Walk Access to the Curb and Comfortable Bike Lanes Activated public realm (outdoor dining, seating) Cars Driving Through ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 370 Design Ideas ƒExpand sidewalks where feasible for comfortable walking, outdoor seating, retail spillout space ƒIncorporate bikeways ƒBalance desire for parking with opportunities to make it a more comfortable experience ƒOne lane of travel in each direction ƒ5 “starter ideas” explored…. Existing Conditions 137’ 13’ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 371 Light-touch Protected Bikeway, Formalized Center Parking Light-touch Protected Bikeway, Formalized Center Parking •Parking protected bikeway, “quick build” •Retain nearly all parking, but formalize directionality •Add green infrastructure opportunities •Preserve existing trees •Retrofits are not so easy as they seem! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 372 Light-touch Protected Bikeway, Formalized Center Parking Light-touch Protected Bikeway, Formalized Center Parking ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 373 Light-touch Protected Bikeway, Formalized Center Parking FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • ••ExExEEEEEExEEExExExExEExExExEExpapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapandndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndnnndnd cccccccccccccccccccenenenenenenenenenenenenenentetetetetetttetetetetttetetteteteter rrrrrrrrrrrr memmmemmddddddiddddddddiddan to be a lilneeennnar grererererererererererererererererererrererereererereeeeeeeeerreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneneneneeneneneneneneneeneneeeeeneneeeneneeneneeneneneeneneneeeneneeeneneeneenenenenennnnnnn (extend trolly?) ••••••••• 137’ 35’ Linear Green ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 374 FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • 137’ 35’ Linear Green •ExExExpapapandndnd cccenentetetr r mediddan to be a linear greeenenenen (extend trolly?) •• 37’ 35’ •Expanded Sidewalk •Sidewalk level bikeway •Parallel Parking / Drop Off / Loading / Bike Parking / Parklets •Linear green “park”, could incorporate trolly further east on Mountain Ave •Potential flush street condition, improving accessibility and creating opportunities for events •Potential to retain existing trees and supplement Linear Green ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 375 Linear Green Linear Green ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 376 FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • ••ExExExExExExExExExExExExExExExExExEExExpapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapandndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndnndndnnd cccccccccccccccccccenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenentetetetetettttetetetetteteteteteter rrrrrrrrrrrr memmemmmddddddiddddddddiddan to be a lilneeenar grererererererererererererererererererererererrerereeererreeeeeeerreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneneneneneneneneneneneeneeneeneeeeeeeneenneneeneneneeneeneeeeneeeneenenenenneennennnnnnnn (extend trolly?) •••••• 137’ 35’ Linear Green with Parking FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • ••ExExEEEEExEEExExExExEExExExEExEpapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapandndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndnnndnd cccccccccccccccccccenenenenenenenenenenenenenenentetetetetetttetetetetttetetetteteter rrrrrrrrrrrr memmmemmddddddiddddddddiddan to be a lineear grererrererererererrrerreeerrrrreeeen (extend trolly?) 137’ 35’ Linear Green with Parking linear grerereeenenenen (extend trolly?) •••Expanded Sidewalk •Sidewalk level bikeway •Parallel Parking / Drop Off / Loading / Bike Parking / Parklets •Linear green includes angled parking ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 377 FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • ••ExExExExExExExExExExExEEExExExExExExEExpapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapapandndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndndnndnd cccccccccccccccccccenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenetetetetetetettttetetetetteteteteter rrrrrrrrrrrrr mememmmddddddddddddididddan to be a lilllneeneeear grererererererererererererererererererererererererereerererrrereerreerreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneneneneeneneneneeneneeneeeeneeeeeneneneneneneneeneneeeeneneneeneneneennneenennnnnn (extend trolly?) •••••••• 137’ No Median 11’ 11’ 28’ FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • ••Expand cccccccccenennenenenenenenenenenenenenntetettetettttttettttetettterrrrrrrrrr memmmemddddddddddddididddan tobea 137’ No Median 11’ 11’ 28’ •ExExpapaandndnd cccenenenteteer rr median to be a linear grerenenenen (extend trolly?) •• 11’ 28’ •Repurpose center median to sidewalk areas •Sidewalk level protected bikeways •Back-in angled parking to improve safety •Angled parking could be parallel parking in some areas for drop off and loading •Opportunities for larger parklets, bump outs, bike parking ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 378 FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • •Expandnd ccccccccccccenenenenenennenenenenenenenenteteteteteteteteteteeteteeteteteteteter r r r r rrrrr rrrrrrrr rr mememememememememememememememememememememedididididdididididddiddddiddidididiananananananananananananananaaaaaa ttttttttttttttttoo bebbbbbbbbbbbbbbb a lilililillililililillllillllilillillliiililiiilliliiiineneeeeeearaararararararaaararaaararararaaaaaaraaaaaraaraaaraaraaaaararararrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggreren (extend trolly?) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Shared Use Path 137’ FPO •Expand center median to be a linear green (extend trolly?) • •Expandd ccccccccccccenenenenenennnnennnenenenenenenenteteteteteteteteteteeteteeteteteteteterr r r r rrrrr rrrrrrrr rr mememememememememememememememememememememedididididdididididddiddddiddidididiananananananananananannannaaaa ttttttttttttttoo bebbbbbbbbbbbb a Shared Use Path liliineeararara gggreen (extend trolly?) ••• •Similar to Linear Green idea but incorporates a shared use path in the center •Intersection configuration is important for shared use path continuity 137’ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 379 Center Shared Use Path Center Shared Use Path ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 380 Center Shared Use Path Lincoln Ave ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 381 East Side Connection Idea East Side Connection Idea ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 382 Sidewalk-Level Protected Bikeways Economic Benefits of Bicycling Source: Transportation Alternatives. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 383 Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 384 Back-In Angle Parking ƒBetter visibility for vehicles leaving the parking stall ƒLess buffer width required ƒEasier than parallel parking ƒSafer for all involved! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 385 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 386 Back-in-angled parking demonstration ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 387 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 388 Delivery & Passenger Loading Challenge “Free for All” ƒLack of designated loading zones ƒDelivery, freight, & pick-up/drop-off double-park ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 389 Dedicated Loading Zones ƒDesignated zones based on needs and context ƒTime Limits and Sizing Delivery & Passenger Loading Strategy “Free for All” ƒLack of designated loading zones ƒDelivery, freight, & pick-up/drop-off double-park ƒLack of designated loading zones ƒDelivery, freight, & pick-up/drop-off double-park Delivery & Passenger Loading Challenge Limited Options ƒInfill development increases demand for curb space ƒMore large-scale deliveries (food & beverage) ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 390 Flex Use by Time & Day ƒConversion of some on- street parking to loading access ƒManaged by time of day, or day of week Delivery & Passenger Loading Strategy Limited Options ƒInfill development increases demand for curb space ƒMore large-scale deliveries (food & beverage) ƒInfill development increases demand for curb space ƒMore large-scale deliveries (food & beverage) Parking Challenge Insufficient Turnover ƒEnforcement is labor- intensive ƒ2-Hour Parking still allows long-term parking for short trips ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 391 Paid On-Street Options* ƒConvert on-street parking to paid (per hour) ƒGive option for free short-term stays (e.g. first 15 minutes free!) Parking Strategy Insufficient Turnover ƒEnforcement is labor- intensive ƒ2-Hour Parking still allows long-term parking for short trips ƒEnforce ment is labor- intensive ƒ2-Hour Parking still allows long-term parking for short trips *Parking fees and policy structures are beyond the scope of this project; these options are provided as information. Delivery & Passenger Loading Challenge Operational Challenges ƒ“Domino effect” … more congestion, slower deliveries, more conflicts ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 392 Dedicated Loading Zones Flex Use by Time & Day Paid On-Street Options* Delivery & Passenger Loading Strategy Operational Challenges ƒ“Domino effect” … more congestion, slower deliveries, more conflicts ƒ“Domino effect” … more congestion, slower deliveries, more conflicts Parking Challenge Demand Distribution ƒFree On-Street is in high demand in core of Mountain Avenue ƒLow-Utilization of other blocks and garages ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 393 Parking Inventory Free / Discounted Off- Street* ƒGarage and off-street become more attractive options ƒMore balanced demand distribution Parking Strategy Demand Distribution ƒFree On-Street is in high demand in core of Mountain Avenue ƒLow-Utilization of other blocks and garages ƒFree On-Street is in high demand in core of Mountain Avenue ƒLow-Utilization of other blocks and garages *Parking fees and policy structures are beyond the scope of this project; these options are provided as information. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 394 Community Reinvestment* ƒReinvest revenue into transportation system (e.g. transit, public space, etc.) Parking Strategy Insufficient Turnover Demand Distribution Parking Challenge Vehicle – Vehicle / Vehicle – People Conflicts ƒDiagonal parking uses lots of space ƒIncreases conflicts ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 395 Change Parking Configuration ƒBetter sightlines and visibility ƒIncreased space for more modes & uses Parking Strategy Vehicle – Vehicle / Vehicle – People Conflicts ƒDiagonal parking uses lots of space ƒIncreases conflicts ƒDiagonal parking uses lots of space ƒIncreases conflicts •Parking Configuration & Inventory •Length of Parking Occupancy •Loading Zone Location & Regulation •Time of Day & Day of Week Operations •Wayfinding & Real-Time Information Things that Street Design can address Curb Management & Access Broader Policy Discussions •Fees and Fee Structure (On- vs. Off-Street) •Revenue and Investment Decisions ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 396 Where are we in the process? Developing “Starter Ideas” Research Existing Conditions Meet with Stakeholders Refine Design Options Concept Report Option: Plan, Design, & Implement Quick- Build Projects Seek funding for Capital Projects Plan, Engage, Design Full Capital Reconstruction 94949499494 THANK YOU! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 397