Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/19/2022 - Historic Preservation Commission - AGENDA - Regular Meeting City of HistoricCommission F6rt CollinsAGENDA Meg Dunn, Chair Location: Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair This meeting will be held Margo Carlock Remotely via Zoom Walter Dunn Eric Guenther Anne Nelsen Jim Rose Staff Liaison: Vacant Seat Maren Bzdek Vacant Seat Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting January 19, 2022 5:30 PM 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 online via Zoom or by phone. No one will be allowed to attend in person. The 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. ONLINE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: You will need an internet connection on a laptop, computer, or smartphone, and may join the meeting through Zoom at https://fcqov.zoom.us/'/99525863329. (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 995 2586 3329. 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(a)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(cDfcgov.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. Page 1 Packet Pg. 1 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 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 with Commission-pulled items considered before Discussion Items and Citizen-pulled items considered after Discussion 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 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15, 2021. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the December 15, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. • CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW UP Page 2 Packet Pg. 2 This is an opportunity for Commission members to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. • CONSIDERATION OF COMMISSION-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS Any agenda items pulled from the Consent Agenda by a Commission member 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. 3. 1306 WEST MOUNTAIN AVE—CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to complete a 2"d round conceptual review of the applicants' project, identify key conflicts with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and outline alterations to the proposed project plans so that the project will better align with the Standards. The applicant is proposing an addition onto the side and rear elevation of the main building, demolition of a non-historic accessory structure, and construction of a new garage building. APPLICANT: Brian and Barbara Berkhausen (property owners), Alexandra Haggarty(legal counsel) Jeff Schneider, Armstead Construction (contractor) 4. 900 S COLLEGE— FINAL DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to complete a final design review of the exterior component of the applicant's project based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and either issue, issue with conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness. The applicant is proposing full rehabilitation of the main Scott Apartments building, with exterior project components including masonry repair, window rehab and partial replacement (to provide egress), and partial enclosure of the rear/east entry. APPLICANT: Steve Levinger • CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS Any agenda items pulled from the Consent Agenda by a member of the public will be discussed at this time. • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Page 3 Packet Pg. 3 CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO The following disclosure statement is submitted to the Clerk of the City of Fort Collins pursuant to the requirements of Article IV, Section 9 of the City Charter and, to the extent applicable, Section 24-18-109 3 a , C.R.S. or pursuant to City of Fort Collins Personnel Policy 5.7.2.F. Name: r tz l � &U L0 �_ e►2 Title: l�l S Yz\ vvh 'I Decision(s) or contract affected (give description of item to be addressed by Council, Board, Service Area Director, etc.): rnc� b1 �= t �r�bo�1S � 3 � b WgSl' I"O L)NT P6 � Pl\' " o L 1-o12r GoLt, �� S l0 vo5z ( Brief statement of interest: Nb poasor� �'U ��j1,ley),le N 0 V- 6 N hr- C l, At- 6'6_VV L 1 5 f t7W Ptni C STD p � L/KTj 1 Date: Signature: REMOVAL OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST I affirm that the above-stated conflict of interest no longer exists. Date: Signature: cc (if Councilmember or Board or Commission member): City Attorney and City Manager cc (if City employee): HR Director Updated: March 2014 27 Roll Call&Voting Record Landmark Preservation Commission Date: 1/19/2022 Roll Call Margo Walter Eric Kurt Anne Jim Rose Vacant Vacant Meg Vote Carlock Dunn Guenther Knierim Nelsen Seat Seat Dunn Present Present Present Present Absent Present N/A N/A Present 6 present, 1 absent Consent Agenda: Margo Vacant Kurt Eric Vacant Walter Anne Meg 1)MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15,2022 Jim Rose Carlock Seat Knierim Guenther Seat Dunn Nelsen Dunn Yes Yes — Yes Yes — Yes — Yes 6-0 3)1306 W MOUNTAIN AVE_rnurooTnnl oo.no Ai NO VOTEMargo Vacant Kurt Eric Vacant Walter Anne Jim Rose Meg Garlock Seat Knierim Guenther Seat Dunn Nelsen Dunn 4)900 S COLLEGE AVE-FINAL DESIGN REVIEW Vacant Kurt Eric Vacant Walter Anne Jim Rose Margo Meg Seat Knierim Guenther Seat Dunn Nelsen Carlock Dunn Yes I Yes I - I Yes — I Yes I Yes Yes 6-0 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Visitor Log [This meeting was conducted remotely. The Secretary filled out the visitor log.] DATE: 1/19/22 MailingName Address Phone Reason for Attendance Laura Bailey 1306 W Mountain Ave Karen McWilliams 1306 W Mountain Ave THIS IS A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD Please contact Aubrie Brennan at 970-416-4390 or abrennankfcgov.com if you inadvertently end up with it. Thank you! Agenda Item 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY January 19, 2021 Historic Preservation • • STAFF Aubrielle Brennan, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15, 2021 REGULAR MEETING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the December 15, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. HPC December 15, 2021 Minutes— DRAFT Item 1, Page 1 Packet Pg. 4 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 City of Historic Preservation Fort Collins Commission Meg Dunn, Chair Location: Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair This meeting will be held Michael Bello In Chambers, 300 LaPorte Walter Dunn And remotely via Zoom Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Jim Rose Staff Liaison: Vacant Seat Maren Bzdek Vacant Seat Interim Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting December 15, 2021 Minutes • CALL TO ORDER 11 -4 Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Mike Bello, Meg Dunn, Walter Dunn, Kurt Knierim, Anne Nelsen, Jim Rose ABSENT: Kevin Murray STAFF: Maren Bzdek, Jim Bertolini, Claire Havelda, Aubrie Brennan Chair Dunn read the following legal statement: "We are holding a remote meeting today in light of the continuing prevalence of COVID-19 and for the sake of the health of the Commission, City Staff, applicants and the general public. Our determination to hold this meeting remotely was made in compliance with City Council Ordinance 79 2020." • AGENDA REVIEW No changes to posted agenda. • CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW No items were pulled from consent. Historic Preservation Commission Page 1 December 15, 2021 Packet Pg. 5 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Ms. Bzdek discussed a grant from the State Historical Fund received by the Historic Preservation Department. She stated the grant will be used to develop a civil rights historic context for Fort Collins. • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • CONSENT AGENDA [Timestamp:5:39 p.m.] 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 17, 2021 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the November 17, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Co-Chair Knierim moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda of the November 17, 2021 regular meeting as presented. Member Nelsen seconded. The motion passed 6-0. [Timestamp: 5:40 p.m.] • DISCUSSION AGENDA 2. STAFF YEAR IN REVIEW REPORT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION The purpose of this item is to present the Colorado Certified Local Government Annual Report for 2021. Ms. Bzdek discussed the Certified Local Government Annual Report submitted by the City related to Historic Preservation program activities in the prior fiscal year. She provided additional details on the Certified Local Government designation and highlighted accomplishments of the program over the past year, including the landmarking of 308 Cherry Street. 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. 1433 S. OVERLAND TRAIL— LANDMARK NOMINATION DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Maxwell Rock House at 1433 South Overland Trail. APPLICANT: Ponds at Overland Trail (HOA); Timothy A Johnson, President Disclosures Chair Dunn noted Member Murray has recused himself from the discussion of this item due to a conflict of interest and noted she knows Lyn lannuzzi; however, that will not bias her decision in any way. Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the staff report regarding the landmark designation nomination for 1433 South Overland Trail, which is supported by the property owner, the Ponds at Overland Trail HOA. He discussed the location of the property and noted most of the area has lost its historic context; therefore, the designated area for the nomination is just the building and its immediate environment. Historic Preservation Commission Page 2 December 15, 2021 Packet Pg. 6 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Mr. Bertolini stated the property is being nominated under two standards: for persons and groups for association with Paul and Emerald Maxwell, and for design and construction as a strong and rare example of vernacular stone construction for a farmhouse. He stated this is one of only two known rock farmhouses in the Fort Collins area. Mr. Bertolini discussed the historical significance and contributions of the Maxwell family. He showed photos of the property and commented on the role of the Commission in voluntary designations. He stated the two public comments received were both in support of the landmark designation. Applicant Presentation Tim Johnson, Ponds at Overland HOA President, gave the Applicant presentation. He noted the Ponds and Overland development was built out around the Maxwell Rock House. He commented on the installation of the metal roof to help maintain the integrity of the structure and noted winterization repairs on the rock work have begun. He stated dollars have been set aside to work on renovation beginning in the spring with the ultimate goal of the building being something neighborhood residents could use. Public Input Lyn lannuzzi stated Paul and Emerald Maxwell were her grandparents and she discussed her memories of spending time in the home. She noted the metal roof was funded by a family member and was installed over the original roof in order to salvage the home. She expressed support for the designation. Karen Maxwell commented on her memories of the home and expressed support for the designation. Marie Wright clarified that Emerald lived in the house until 1983. Commission Questions and Discussion Chair Dunn asked if the original roof shingles are still under the metal roof. Ms. lannuzzi replied in the affirmative. Members Nelsen and Bello expressed support for the nomination and stated they are glad to see the property saved. Co-Chair Knierim stated this is a timely request in that it is a good opportunity to start to rehabilitate the home with some financial assistance. Chair Dunn asked if the HOA will be able to sell tax credits as it is a non-profit. Mr. Bertolini replied in the affirmative. Ms. lannuzzi stated the original roof shingles on the house were painted green, which is why the green metal roof was chosen. Mr. Bertolini stated he would get all research on the house transferred to the HOA. Chair Dunn commented on a letter received from Michael Murphy who stated this house is included in Fort Collins historic tours. Commission Deliberation Member Bello moved that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend that City Council adopt an ordinance to designate the Maxwell Rock House at 1433 S. Overland Trail, as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is eligible for its significance to Fort Collins under Standard 2, Persons/Groups, and Standard 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the staff report and Landmark nomination dated December 15, 2021, and that the property clearly conveys this significance through all 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 Nelsen seconded. The motion passed 6-0. [Timestamp: 6:22 p.m.] Historic Preservation Commission Page 3 December 15, 2021 Packet Pg. 7 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 5. 900 S. COLLEGE AVE— NATIONAL REGISTER REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to provide a recommendation to the State Historic Preservation Officer regarding the nomination of the Scott Apartments and Garage to the National Register of Historic Places. As a Certified Local Government, both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC)and the Mayor provide a written recommendation. APPLICANT: Steve Levinger(owner); State Historic Preservation Office Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the staff report noting this is a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places coming at the request of the property owner, Steve Levinger. He discussed the property,which has been a designated City landmark since 2002, noting the nomination falls under two criteria: A for events and trends in providing residential housing for working class professionals, and C for design and architecture as an example of an early 201h century apartment. He stated the building has strong integrity under all seven aspects and showed photos of the property. He commented on the role of the Commission. Applicant Presentation Steve Levinger gave the Applicant presentation. He stated he previously rehabilitated the Armstrong Hotel and looks forward to doing the same for the Scott Apartments. He commented on the symmetry of the building. Public Input None. Commission Questions and Discussion Member Bello stated this is a good candidate for the National Register. Member Rose stated the presentation summarized the value of the property and it has everything needed to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register. Chair Dunn stated she had not realized there was an armory in the area and stated the Scott Apartments are a good example of the buildings that were in the area. She commented on the role of A.W. Scott in the community. Commission Deliberation Co-Chair Knierim moved that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend to the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer that the Scott Apartments and Garage at 900 South College Avenue is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C, as supported by the analysis provided in the transmitted National Register nomination form dated November 5, 2021, and directing the Chair to complete the appropriate section of the Review Report Form indicating the Commission's recommendation. Member Rose seconded. The motion passed 6-0. [Timestamp: 6:41 p.m.] Historic Preservation Commission Page 4 December 15, 2021 Packet Pg. 8 ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 • OTHER BUSINESS Chair Dunn noted this was Member Bello's last meeting. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 6:43 p.m. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Minutes prepared by TriPoint Data and respectfully submitted by Aubrie Brennan. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on Meg Dunn, Chair Historic Preservation Commission Page 5 December 15, 2021 Packet Pg. 9 Agenda Item 2 REPORTSTAFF• - •n Commission-- ITEM NAME STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES AND OTHER STAFF-ISSUED DECISIONS AND LETTERS, DECEMBER 3, 2021 TO JANUARY 5, 2022 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 (HPC), 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 HPC 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 HPC 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 December 3, 2021 to January 5, 2022. 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 172 N. College Tenant finish of Suite 2A including window signs Approve December 8, (Northern Hotel) 2021 418 E. Oak St. Rear porch addition. Approve (report December 14, _--tissued) 2021 Item 2, Page 1 Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 2 Selected Staff Development Review Recommendations—Land Use Code 3.4.7 Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision N/A 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 Date Results Results? Finalized 216-220 E. Oak St. Not Eligible Yes December 9, 2021 501 S. Taft Hill Rd Not Eligible Yes December 21, 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 ce11/5G 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. 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 Date Location Description of Project Staff Comment Comment Issued Housing & Urban Scrape and Redevelop Single- Concur— No Historic December 14, Development, Impala Family homes into Multi-family Properties Affected 2021 Circle (Housing Catalyst) development Housing & Urban Development, Impala Modifications to existing housing Concur— No Historic December 14, Village (Housing units Properties Affected 2021 Catalyst) _ Housing & Urban Modifications to existing housing Concur— No Historic December 14, Development, Village on units Properties Affected 2021 Bryan (Housing Catalyst FCC, 1052 W Vine Mono-pole extension to co-located Support No Adverse December 17, equipment Effects 2021 Item 2, Page 2 Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 2 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 December 3, 2021 and January 5, 2022, staff processed a total of 11 5G/Small Cell towers. Of these, 10 were to replace existing street lights and 1 was for a new pole at the southwest corner of Magnolia and College. For that potential installation, historic survey of the adjacent property at 501 S. College would be required as part of the approval process. Item 2, Page 3 Packet Pg. 12 Agenda Item 3 REPORTSTAFF• Preservation C• • PROJECT NAME 1306 W. MOUNTAIN AVE, CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, REHABILITATION, ADDITION, AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to complete a 2"d round conceptual review of the applicants' project, identify key conflicts with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and outline alterations to the proposed project plans so that the project will better align with the Standards. The applicant is proposing an addition onto the rear elevation of the main building, demolition of a non-historic accessory structure, and construction of a new garage building. APPLICANT/OWNER: Brian and Barbara Berkhausen (property owners), Alexandra Haggarty (legal counsel) Jeff Schneider, Armstead Construction (contractor) RECOMMENDATION: This is a conceptual review that provides an opportunity for the applicant to discuss requirements, standards, design issues, and policies that apply to designated resources, as well as to identify problems that can be identified and solved prior to final review of the application. The applicant is not requesting a decision from the Commission at this time. Staff finds the current proposal to be an improvement over the 1 st round designs but that it remains inconsistent with the Standards for Rehabilitation and has provided an analysis below. 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 conceptual review of proposed plans to provide advance feedback under Municipal Code 14-54(a)(2)(a) and is not requesting a final decision at this meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The William and Violet Jackson Property was designated as a City Landmark on December 2, 2014. That designation included the full property, and specified that the main 1922 residence and 1942 garage constructed by the Jacksons are historic features, while the 1968 two-car garage is not. The property was designated under Standard C/3 for Design/Construction, specifically as an "excellent example of the west- coast Craftsman architectural style, popular in the early twentieth century." Item 3, Page 1 Packet Pg. 13 Agenda Item 3 The proposed project includes construction of an addition totaling 887 square feet. It also includes demolition of the non-historic 1968 garage and construction of a new, 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Character-defining features for this property discussed in the nomination form include: • A low pitched, open, front-gabled roof including exposed rafter tails. • Simple, rectangular massing under a single, front-gabled roof form, indicative of Craftsman Cottages of this style. • Outer brick walls set in Flemish bond with shiners and rowlocks facing outward and two distinct bands of darker brick near the foundation. • Craftsman-style front porch including two, open, low-pitched gables finished with shingles and supported by brick pillars • Wood, one-over-one sash windows of varying sizes with matching wood storm windows. • Two distinctive brick chimneys • A c.1942 single-car garage at the northwest corner of the lot. [nomination form is Attachment 2 to this packet] ALTERATION HISTORY: Known alterations of the property to date include: • 1922—construction of the original house • 1942—construction of the single-car garage • 1947—reshingling of the house • 1968—addition of two-car garage at northeast corner of the lot • 2000s—minor restoration of exterior, including removal of aluminum storm windows with current wood • 2007—reroof of buildings on the property HISTORY OF DESIGN REVIEW: Since designation in 2014, this property does not appear to have undergone significant Design Review. HISTORY OF FUNDED WORK/USE OF INCENTIVES: N/A- Unknown DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking a conceptual review for the following items: 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home (Note: 1,097 includes the rear addition slated for demolition). 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units and infill of west-facing main floor window and replacement with two small one-over-one windows. 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot. REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Staff has been in consultation with the applicant since January, 2021 with a previous iteration of the project. Consultation has included five meetings with the applicants to explain the design review process and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the requirements for design review on City Landmarks. Four of those meetings were related to a previous design of the project which has not been included in this packet and did not meet the Standards. One meeting was held in preparation for the November conceptual review discussion before the HPC. Per the applicant's request, all iterations of the project drawings, including the original building permit submittal Item 3, Page 2 Packet Pg. 14 Agenda Item 3 from January 2021, have been added as extra attachments. The HPC also submitted requests for additional information regarding how projects such as this had been reviewed in the past, with specific interest in feedback from the State of Colorado (via the State Historic Preservation Office)on how additions to designated properties had been reviewed in the past. Staff will research this and submit findings to the HPC at or prior to the January 2022 hearing. PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY A previous iteration of this project scheduled for conceptual discussion at the March 2021 Landmark Preservation Commission meeting was rescheduled with the owner's consent due to the late hour when the Commission got to the item on the agenda; the rescheduled discussion was later tabled at the owner's request. In advance of that conceptual hearing, staff received comments from seventeen (17) members of the public, all in opposition to the project, mostly due to the scale of the proposed addition. The plan for the addition has been significantly altered since that time.At the time of drafting this report, no public outreach has been conducted beyond posting a sign at the property. Since the November 10, 2021 Work Session, seventeen (17) public comments were received, all in opposition to the project in relation to the addition's size and scale. However, no comments have yet been received regarding the current iteration of the project. 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. Staff finds that the most relevant review criteria under the Standards for Rehabilitation are Standards 2, 5, 9, and 10. The City of Fort Collins adopted the federal U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards of the Treatment of Historic Properties both as a requirement to maintain a federal certification for the City's historic preservation program, and as a way to establish a consistent and predictable methodology for how exterior projects can be approved on City Landmarks. With adaptive reuse being the most common treatment of historic buildings in Fort Collins, almost all projects, including this one, are reviewed under the Standards for Rehabilitation. Those Standards, and their accompanying, recently updated guidelines from the National Park Service, provide a framework for decision-making that recommends certain types of actions, and recommends against certain types of actions, based on the historic significance of a property, and the needs arising from the modern use of that property. The Standards are intentionally not prescriptive in approach due to the diversity of historical significance, diversity of historic features, and broad range of potential project types that may come forward for review. The Standards instead create consistency and predictability through a standardized decision-making process that preserves the essential historic characteristics and features of a property while accommodating changes both minor and major on an historic property. Applicable Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation: Standard Code Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Met (Y/N) Standard A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires SOI #1 minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial Y relationships; The property will remain in residential use. However, staff would note that the size and scale of the addition inclines toward inconsistency with this Standard. National Park Service "Interpreting the Standards Bulletin 37: Rear Additions to Historic Houses,"notes that "in cases where an overly Item 3, Page 3 Packet Pg. 15 Agenda Item 3 large addition is required in order to accommodate an owner's programmatic needs, a more suitable building should be identified." The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal SOI #2 of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships N that characterize a property will be avoided. The building is characterized by its small size and compact massing compared to modern homes, its simple rectangular form under the front-gabled roof, and other Craftsman-style features including exposed rafter tails,the styled brick exterior,wood sash windows, and prominent brick chimneys. 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home —As Bulletin 37 notes, the expansion of modest scale houses can be particularly challenging in order to create an addition that is compatible with the historic building's size,scale, massing,and design. The addition, as designed, would alter the massing of the building as viewed from Mountain Avenue.While the addition is on the rear, and is at a lower height than the historic roof line,the east bump-out and significant additional space makes it difficult for this aspect of the project to meet this Standard, as the project would change a small cottage with a larger open yard into a larger house with significantly less surrounding open space on the lot. 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units, removal of a window on the east wall, and infill of west-facing main floor window, and replacement with two small one-over-one windows—Some of the exterior doors and most of the windows appear historic, although the storm windows were new(restored in the early 2000s by the previous owner).Treatment of the basement windows is common in this context and appears to meet this Standard (the basement windows are not a character defining feature).The modification of the west bathroom window from one historic unit to two non- historic is not ideal, but by itself may be considered consistent with this Standard due to the reduced visibility of this window on the west elevation,and the proposed preservation/rehabilitation of most of the remaining windows on the historic building. 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot—The 1968 two-car garage is not historic and could likely be demolished without compromising the property's significance.The overall design of the new garage seems generally compatible with the property.The roof orientation along a north-south axis is in keeping with the overall character and spatial organization of the site. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. SOI #3 Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding N/A conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right SOI #4 will be retained and preserved. Y The primary historic feature proposed for removal is the rear porch. While this feature appears historic and represents a common adaptation to historic residences in Fort Collins, staff does not believe the porch is a character-defining feature based on the significance of the property for Design/Construction as a significant example of a Craftsman Cottage.While staff would certainly encourage its retention, in this case, retaining it does not appear required in order to meet this Standard. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples SOI #5 of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. Y Item 3, Page 4 Packet Pg. 16 Agenda Item 3 Many aspects of the project, especially as redesigned since March of 2021, meet this Standard. The primary conflict with the current proposed plan is the level of demolition proposed for the historic building's northeast corner. 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home —While the size of the addition remains problematic, its installation does not appear to be resulting in the removal of any character-defining elements of the property. 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units, removal of a window on the east wall, and infill of west-facing main floor window and replacement with two small one-over-one windows—While the historic status of doors on the property is mixed,the windows appear to be historic with new (c.2000s)matching wood storm windows and appear to be in sound shape for repair. Replacement of basement windows in bedroom areas for egress compliance is a regular part of building rehabilitation and meets the Standard. While the modification of the bathroom window on the west elevation is not recommended, it does meet this Standard. 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot—While the 1968 two-car garage does not characterize the property,the 1942 one-car garage does as noted in the Landmark nomination. As noted previously,the overall design and massing of this garage is generally compatible with the overall property. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the SOI #6 severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new Y 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. 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home —N/A 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units, removal of a window on the east wall, and infill of west-facing main floor window and replacement with two small one-over-one windows—While the historic status of doors on the property is mixed,the windows appear to be historic with new (c.2000s)matching wood storm windows and appear to be in sound shape for repair,which is proposed. Replacement of basement windows in bedroom areas for egress compliance is a regular part of building rehabilitation and meets the Standard.While the modification of the bathroom window on the west elevation and loss of the rear-most east window is not recommended, it appears to meet this Standard. 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot—N/A Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the SOI #7 gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will N/A not be used. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such SOI #8 resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Y The proposal includes excavation for the foundation and crawlspace under sections of the addition. Based on the construction date of the property, the disturbed nature of the soil, and distance away from natural waterways (beyond 200 ft), it is unlikely that excavation would uncover significant archaeological materials from the pre-contact or Euro-American periods. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy SOI #9 historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be N 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. Item 3, Page 5 Packet Pg. 17 Agenda Item 3 Generally, this Standard calls for additions to meet three main requirements: to be compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate. While components of the addition's design meet these requirements, some conflicts remain under this Standard. 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home —In general,additions should meet three principles established under this Standard—they should be compatible, distinguishable,and subordinate. The addition as proposed has elements that meet some of these. The roof height of the addition is below the historic roofline, helping to subordinate the addition to the historic building.The siding is proposed as lapboard to differentiate from the historic building without disrupting the compatibility.The window selection for the addition are simplified versions of the historic. However,the new addition adds significant square footage to the existing house, making meeting the"subordinate" requirement difficult.The size of the addition disrupts the defining, symmetrical massing of the property, and is large for a property of this type(a small residential cottage). The bump-out of the addition by 7.75 ft is significant for a home and lot of this size, creating further compatibility conflicts.Additions, especially onto small historic homes, should be at or inset from the historic sidewalls of the historic building.Where this isn't possible, using a hyphen, courtyard, or other interrupting feature is recommended to clearly differentiate the new construction is recommended. While the design is close to meeting this Standard, improvements need made to offset the new construction from the old in order to meet this Standard. 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units, removal of a window on the east wall, and infill of west-facing main floor window and replacement with two small one-over-one windows—The removal/replacement of the basement windows should not conflict with this Standard.The removal of the window near the northeast corner as part of the addition, and the modification of the bathroom window on the west elevation is not recommended, but does not appear to conflict with this Standard. 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot—The proposed new garage is generally compatible, distinguishable,and subordinate to the existing property and appears to meet this Standard. Sol #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in Y such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. In these revised, 2nd round plans, this Standard appears to be met. 1. Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home —While the addition conflicts with Standard 9, it appears compliant with Standard 10 as no demolition of character-defining exterior walls is proposed in the Round 2 revised plans. 2. Replacement of all basement windows with egress-compliant window units, removal of a window on the east wall, and infill of west-facing main floor window and replacement with two small one-over-one windows—While the historic status of doors on the property is mixed,the windows appear to be historic with new (c.2000s) matching wood storm windows and appear to be in sound shape for repair,which is proposed. Replacement of basement windows in bedroom areas for egress compliance is a regular part of building rehabilitation and meets the Standard.While the modification of the bathroom window on the west elevation is not recommended, it does meet this Standard. Loss of the rearmost east window is not recommended, and contributes to the general finding that the overall proposed attachment of the addition does not meet this Standard. Item 3, Page 6 Packet Pg. 18 Agenda Item 3 3. Demolition of non-historic garage, and construction of a new 630-square foot garage at the rear of the lot—No historic resources appear to be affected by this aspect of the project. INDEPENDENT EVALUATION SUMMARY N/A FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request for the alterations, addition, and new construction at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue was designated as a City Landmark by City Council ordinance on December 2, 2014 based on its architectural significance under Standard C/3 (Design/Construction). • The proposed project for alterations and a rear addition to the main house at 1306 W. Mountain Ave, and demolition of the non-historic garage for the construction of a new, detached garage does not meet the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the project does not meet the Standards for Rehabilitation in several key aspects, as identified in the analysis table above, specifically: • The size and layout of the proposed addition is not subordinate to the historic house in overall scale, due to the bump-out of the east wall toward the rear by 7.75 feet and the overall, albeit reduced, size of the addition. SAMPLE MOTIONS This is being presented to the Commission as a Conceptual Review, with a Final Review occurring at a later date. If instead the Commission desires to move to a Final Hearing on the item at this meeting and believes it has the necessary information, it may adopt a motion to proceed to Final Review, and may then consider a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny. SAMPLE MOTION TO PROCEED TO FINAL REVIEW: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission move to Final Review of the proposed work at the Jackson Property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue. SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the plans and specifications for the alterations and addition to, and construction of a new garage at, the Jackson Property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue as presented, 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 the alterations and addition to, and construction of a new garage at, the Jackson Property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue as presented, finding that the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions: • [list conditions] SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission deny the request for approval for the plans and specifications for the alterations and addition to, and construction of a new garage at, the Jackson Property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue as presented, finding that the proposed work does not meet the Standards for Rehabilitation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Landmark Nomination form 2. Current Plan Set for project (addition and new garage) and concept renderings 3. Overall project set of photos from applicant Item 3, Page 7 Packet Pg. 19 Agenda Item 3 4. National Park Service Interpreting the Standards Bulletin 37: Rear Additions to Historic Houses (also available online, HERE) 5. Public comments received up to November 15 6. October 18, 2021 Drawing set w/renderings 7. March 2021 Original Drawing set 8. Copy of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, the adopted standards under which this project is being reviewed under Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV. 9. (pending) Staff memo and attached correspondence responding to HPC requests for more information 10. Staff Presentation Item 3, Page 8 Packet Pg. 20 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Ol Planning, Development&Transportation Services F=Cityort Collins Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 N College Avenue P.O.Boxox 580 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Landmark Designation LOCATION INFORMATION: Address: 1306 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado Legal Description: Lot 2, Block 2, Swett's Addition, City of Fort Collins Property Name (historic and/or common): William and Violet Jackson / Robert Bailey Property OWNER INFORMATION: Name: Robert Bailey Phone: 970-484-5411 Email: ecoregions(@cs.com Address: 1306 West Mountain Ave., Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 or P.O. Box 512, Fort Collins, Colorado 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: Mitchell Schaefer, Historic Preservation Intern; Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, P.O. Box 580, Fort Collins, CO 80522 Phone: 970-224-6078 Email: kmcwilliams(a)fcgov.com Relationship to Owner: None DATE: Prepared 2 September 2014. Revised 08-2014 PackVaPg 121 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 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 includes two contributing resources, the Craftsman bungalow home built in 1922 and the one-car garage located on the northwest corner of the lot, which William G. Jackson constructed in 1942. The two-car garage, constructed in 1968 by Robert Waldron, located southeast of the one-car garage and northeast of the home, does not contribute to the significance of the property due to its age. SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR 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. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. Significance: ❑ Standard A: 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: 1. ❑ A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or 2. ❑ A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. ❑ Standard B: 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 C: 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. ❑ Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Integrity: ® Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an historic event occurred. ® Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic form, plan space, structure, and style. ® Setting. This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings that reflect how and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and open space. ® Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that originally formed the property. ® Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site. ® Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time. This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. ® Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an important historic event or person. It 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. Revised 08-2014 PackVaggP222 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY The property at 1306 West Mountain Avenue is significant under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Standard C for embodying the distinctive characteristics of an architectural type and period. This one-and-a-half story 1922 Craftsman bungalow home is an excellent example of the west-coast Craftsman architectural style, popular in the early twentieth century. Its front-gabled roof, overhanging eaves with exposed roof rafters, false purlins, and iconic 19-by-7-foot porch are only some of the stylistic aspects that make up approximately one-third of all Craftsman homes in America.' This home retains an abundance of its exterior and interior integrity. The home stands in the very location where it was originally built in 1922, and has excellent integrity of materials, workmanship and design. Limited alterations to the property and to the surrounding neighborhood have helped to preserve its setting and feeling. The current owner, Robert Bailey, has made great efforts to restore the home to its 1920s character, and in doing so, provide a living snapshot into the past of the Fort Collins community. HISTORICAL INFORMATION This Craftsman bungalow home was constructed very likely in 1922. In September 1921, William Glenn Jackson, the vice president, advertising manager, and secretary for the Fort Collins Express-Courier(now the Fort Collins Coloradoan), purchased Lot 2, Block 2, of the Swett's Addition to the city for$500.00.2 On June 3, 1922, Jackson obtained a ten-year loan for$3,000.00 for construction materials.3 Jackson hired Walter A. Knight, a building contractor living in Fort Collins, to build the house, and on June 21, 1922, Knight obtained a permit from the city to construct a "Five-room brick bungalow" for$4'000.00.4 William Glenn Jackson, the only son of William and Della McMillan Jackson, was born on June 5, 1884, in Ohio. By 1888 the family had moved to Colorado Springs. The younger William attended schools in the area, and, on July 18, 1907, at the age of 23, he married Grace Violet Sanders in that city. The 1910 federal census shows that Jackson had begun his newspaper career, working as a reporter in Colorado Springs. By 1918, when William registered for the draft, he and Violet had relocated to Fort Collins, and were living at 1133 Laporte Avenue. The 1920 census found them still at that address, along with their two young sons, William Frank and Glenn V. In 1922, the Jacksons moved into this Mountain Avenue residence, where they lived until at least until 1927. In 1930, the family was living in Eugene, Oregon, where William Jackson worked in newspaper advertising. Soon after, the family relocated to Estes Park. In May 1931, William G. Jackson and Dean Kirby became owners of the Estes Park Trail. Jackson bought Kirby out in August 1934. Former secretary of the Estes Park Chamber of Commerce William Dings became editor the same year. Jackson's son, William F. Jackson, took over as the newspaper's editor in 1938. After living in Estes Park for many years, William and Violet Jackson returned to Colorado Springs, where they remained until William's death in 1966 and Violet's in 1973. When the Jacksons left this Mountain Avenue home in the late 1920s, they chose to rent the property out rather than sell. Over the next nearly thirty years, at least seven different tenants lived here. The occupations of those residents ranged from lawyers and editors to gas inspectors and "sheep commissioners." In 1942, Jackson acquired a building permit to construct a 12' X 20' ' Virginia Savage McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses: The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture (New York: Knopf, 2013), 567. 2 Warranty Deed, September 16, 1921, Conveyance No. 41, Abstract of Title to Lot 2, Block 2, Swett's Addition to Fort Collins, in possession of Robert Bailey, Fort Collins, Colorado. 3 Mortgage Deed, June 3, 1922, Conveyance No. 44, Abstract of Title; Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer County Directory, 1922(Colorado Springs: R. L. Polk Directory Co., 1922), 85. 4 City of Fort Collins Building Permit No. 1027, June 21, 1922. Pack P 23 Revised 08-2014ag�3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 "frame one car garage" on the northwest corner of the lot; the estimated cost of labor and materials was $200.00.5 In 1947, Jackson re-shingled the home.6 In October 1949, the Jacksons sold the Craftsman home to Gordon and Evelyn Heumesser. Gordon Heumesser was employed as a steward for the Elks Club, and Evelyn Heumesser worked as a bookkeeper.' The Heumessers remained here until 1963.$ In November of that year, they sold their home to John H. Rust Jr., a machinist, and his wife Dorothy.9 The Rusts financed their new home through the Fort Collins Federal Savings and Loan Association for$12,800.00, and remained here for five years until selling it to Robert "Bob" and JoAnne Waldron in 1968.10 The same year that the Waldrons purchased the home, they also paid $1,000.00 to construct a 22' x 26' two-car detached garage on the property.11 Bob Waldron, a World War II veteran, met his future wife, Joanne Bancroft in 1947, while both were working in downtown Fort Collins. The couple was married on February 22, 1948, and raised two daughters, Suzanne (Henderson) and Gwen (Felt). Bob worked at Paramount Laundry and then at Colorado State University Food Services, retiring from this position in 1972. JoAnne retired from Steele's market in 1991, where she worked for 34 years. Bob Waldron passed away on December 6, 1999,12 and JoAnne on September 11, 2002. The current owner, Robert Bailey, purchased the home in 2001. Bailey, an ecological geographer and writer, is employed by the U.S. Forest Service.13 Since purchasing his home, Mr. Bailey has made great pains to restore it to its original 1920s Craftsman style both inside and out. "Fortunately," he stated in an American Bungalow article he published in 2011, "the exterior needed little work." He did, however, replace old aluminum storm windows with wood frames to fit the period, and in 2007 he paid to tear off the existing roof and replaced it with asphalt shingles.14 In an effort to "bring back the spirit of the original construction" Bailey has done extensive interior work including re-installing the original bathroom sink and toilet (which he found in the basement), removing the carpet to refinish and improve the pine flooring, and repainting much of the interior. Even much of Robert Bailey's furniture fits the beautiful 1920s style of this beautiful brick Craftsman home.15 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION Construction Date: 1922 Architect/Builder: Walter A. Knight, Builder Building Materials: Brick, Wood Architectural Style: Craftsman Bungalow Description: This one-and-a-half story 1922 Craftsman bungalow home retains much of its original integrity of design, workmanship and materials, and stands as a wonderful example of the west-coast Craftsman style. The low pitched, open and front-gabled roof includes overhanging exposed roof rafters and is topped by asphalt shingles. The outer brick walls are set in Flemish bond with shiners and rowlocks facing outward. Two distinct bands of darker brick are set in a repeating pattern with only rowlocks exposed and pairs of specialty cut smaller bricks edge all corners of the main house. The lower band of rowlock bricks sits flush with the outer layer of brick as it wraps around the house, including the front porch, and forms the lintels for the basement windows. The 5 City of Fort Collins Building Permit No. 6968, May 6, 1942. 6 City of Fort Collins Building Permit No. 9851, May 12, 1947. 'Warranty Deed, October 31, 1949, Entry No. 65, Abstract of Title; Fort Collins City Directory 1952 Colorado Springs: Rocky Mountain Directory Co., 1952), 131. See Fort Collins city directories, 1952, 1954, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1960, 1962, 1963. 9 Deed, November 4, 1963, Entry No. 70, Abstract of Title. 10 See Fort Collins city directories, 1964-1968. 11 City of Fort Collins Building Permit No. 12395, June 10, 1968. 12 Obituary of Robert Waldron, Coloradoan, December 8, 1999. 13 Julie Estlick, "Back to Life," Lydia's Style Magazine, September 2008, 34. 14 City of Fort Collins Building Permit No. B0703533, June 5, 2007. 15 Robert Bailey, "The Sustainable Bungalow: Ecological Design in Historical Perspective,"American Bungalow 71 (2011): 72-83. Pack P 24 Revised 08-2014ag�4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 higher-placed and corbelled band runs around the house forming the bottom sill of the first-story windows and connects with the cement cap of the porch's wall structure. An undated addition to the kitchen on the rear (north) elevation sits on the northeast corner of the home and opens to a rear porch. The foundation is unexposed, but the base of the front and rear porches are constructed of cement. The front (south) elevation includes two open, low-pitched gables finished with shingles, one as part of the larger roof and the other covering the porch. The open and covered porch runs only a partial length of the front elevation. Its brick walls are set in Flemish bond capped by cement and lead to the front entryway. The porch's gabled roof is supported by two brick pillars set in stretcher bond that rise from the porch's brick walls. These pillars may have been repaired or installed sometime after the original construction, but building permits reveal no information concerning their addition. The porch's gable has a slightly lower pitch than, and is symmetrical with, the front gable of the home and includes the exposed and overhanding rafters typical to Craftsman homes. Two decorative purlins are found below the soffits on either side of the porch's gable. The steps leading up to the porch, along with the main entryway, is slightly asymmetrical and located just to the east of the center of the south elevation. The front entryway is protected by a glass door with wood rails and opens inward while an accompanying screen door opens outward. On either side of the front entryway are double-hung sash windows in cream wood frames that the current owner replaced after purchasing the property in 2001. The steps leading up to the porch are made of poured cement and adorned with decorative metal hand rails. Both of the east and west elevations are simple with little elaboration and continue the Flemish brick bond with the two distinctive dark-brick bands. On the west elevation four single pane windows that are nearly flush with the ground are surrounded by cream wood frames and provide light to the basement. Three double-hung sash windows and one single-pane window for the bathroom make up the first-story windows on the west elevation. Each of these windows is surrounded by cream wood frames. The three larger double-hung windows use the upper band of rowlock-patterned bricks as their sills. The east elevation bears a brick chimney set in corbelled Flemish bond before it pierces the roof, but set in standard, or running, bond there above without any corbelling or decorative patters above the roof line. This elevation bears four separate windows, one located just to the south of the chimney and three to the north. The only window located to the south of the chimney is a double-hung sash window surrounded by cream wooden frames. Like almost all other first-story windows it uses the higher-set band of rowlock bricks as its sill. The first, and smaller, of the three windows located north of the chimney is a double-hung sash window. The second window is comprised of three double-hung windows surrounded by cream wood frames and divided by two cream wooden mullions. The third and northern-most window has its own row of dark bricks for a sill that also bear only rowlocks in a uniform pattern, but is separate from the band that extends around the entire house. This window has four lights arranged in two double-hung windows separated by a single cream wooden mullion. Two, double- pane windows are flush with the ground and, like those on the east elevation, provide light for the basement rooms. The rear (north) elevation includes the same low-pitched gable as the front also finished with shingles, but also includes a wood-frame addition to the brick structure on the northeast corner of the home. The only window on the north elevation that is set in the brick structure is located west of the addition and is a double-hung sash window set in a cream wooden frame and it also uses the higher-set rowlock band of dark bricks as its sill. The partial hipped-roof addition protrudes from the northeast corner of the home and provides additional space within the kitchen. This addition very well may have been a later addition as the current owner informed Historic Preservation department staff that when he restored the wood flooring in the kitchen he found a portion of the wall that is now covered by the restored wood floor. Its outer walls are finished with vertical wood siding without a rake and the roof rafters are open and exposed on the west and east elevations of the addition itself. The northern exposed rafters are hidden by the rain gutter than runs the entire length of the addition's northern roof. It also bears a door with light pane and a screen door on the outside that lead out to the back porch and backyard. West of the rear entryway on the addition are two double-hung windows surrounded by cream wood frames and separated by a cream wood mullion. The back porch is entirely composed of cement andlback P 25 Revised 08-2014ag�5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 surrounded by a simple metal pipe railing. The steps to the porch are found on both the west and east sides and have since cracked away from the rest of the porch structure due to ground settling. The one-car garage included within this landmark designation is located on the northwest corner of the property and was built by William G. Jackson, then the owner of the property, in 1942. The car door faces north and opens into the alley. It is a front-gable structure with overhanging, exposed roof rafters and asphalt shingles. The four elevations are covered with light brown drop siding and all edges are protected with cream wood corner boards. The car door is symmetrical with the gable and made up of eight green wood panels and surrounded by a cream wood framework. The entryway is located on the east elevation in the southeast corner and is painted to match the car door. It has two wood panels within rails and is surrounded by cream wood framework. The east elevation includes one four-pane window with cream wood frames and a wooden sill to match. A similar four-pane window is fond on the south elevation and is slightly offset to the west from the center of the gable. The two-car garage on the property built in 1968 by Robert Waldron is located to the northeast of the home and to the southeast of the one-car garage described above. This structure is not considered to be a historically significant element of this property, and is not included in this landmark designation. Revised 08-2014 Pack'OaggO626 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION Abstract of Title of Lot two (2) in Block two (2), of Swett's Addition to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado; in Larimer County, Colorado, compiled by The Fort Collins Abstract Company. In the possession of Robert Bailey, Fort Collins, Colorado. Bailey, Robert. "The Sustainable Bungalow: Ecological Design in Historical Perspective." American Bungalow 71 (2011): 72-83. Ching, Francis D. K. A Visual Dictionary of Architecture. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1995. City of Fort Collins building permits, City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, Fort Collins, Colorado and Fort Collins Local History Archive, Fort Collins, Colorado. City Directories of Fort Collins, City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, Fort Collins, Colorado and Fort Collins Local History Archive, Fort Collins, Colorado. Estlick, Julie. "Back to Life." Lydia's Style Magazine (September 2008): 32-34. Family Search: William Glenn Jackson. https://familysearch.org Federal Census of the United States: 1880, 1900, 1910, 1920, 1940. Accessed through www.heritageguestonline.com. "JoAnne Waldron." (Obituary). Fort Collins Coloradoan, September 13, 2002. McAlester, Viriginia Savage. A Field Guide to American Houses: The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2013. "Robert Waldron." (Obituary). Fort Collins Coloradoan, December 8, 1999. Revised 08-2014 PackVaggP727 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 AGREEMENT The undersigned owner(s) hereby agrees that the property described herein be considered for local historic landmark designation, pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 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: 1. Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the property, or; 2. Preparation of plans for construction of, addition to, or demolition of improvements on the property DATED this j� day of Apt . , 20� Ro (J'ER 7— Owner Name (please print) I Owner Signature State of )ss. County of L& r,1lre.ej ) Subscribed and sworn before me this �I �" day of_ ,r , 20 lL , byye�b�-vim}- Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires Le d'.,'-.4.4, Not ry MARGARET R CLANCY 4 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO ' NOTARY ID#20134040425 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUGUST 06,2017 r Packet Pg. 28 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Cityof Community Development&Neighborhood Services Fort Collins 281 North College Avenue P.O.Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134-fax fcgov.com LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 10, 2014 STAFF REPORT PROJECT: 1306 West Mountain Avenue CONTACT: Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner APPLICANT: Robert Bailey, Owner REQUEST: Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property at 1306 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado BACKGROUND: The William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property, located at 1306 West Mountain Avenue, is being nominated for Landmark recognition for its significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standard C, for its embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The Jackson/Bailey house is a classic example of the Craftsman style, popular in Fort Collins during the early-twentieth century, with many noteworthy architectural details. Constructed in 1922, the building's distinctive features include varying colors of brick set in a beautiful Flemish bond, exposed roof elements, a prominent front entry, and a substantial front porch. The first of two automobile garages was constructed in 1942; as a simply designed single-car garage, it illustrates a time when many Americans were purchasing personal vehicles for the first time, and contributes to the significance of the property. The second garage, constructed in 1968, is not considered to be a historically significant element of this property, and is not included in this landmark designation. The current owner, Robert Bailey, has made extensive efforts since his purchase of the property in 2001 to restore the exterior and interior of the home, and is pursuing this Landmark designation. The property's context is that of an early twentieth century residential neighborhood. Limited alterations to the property and to the surrounding neighborhood have helped to preserve its setting and feeling, and the Jackson/Bailey property relates to and contributes to the neighborhood's context. COMMISSION ACTION: The Landmark Preservation Commission shall make a recommendation to Council regarding the request for Landmark designation of the William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property, 1306 West Mountain Avenue. REVIEW CRITERIA: Municipal Code Section 14-5, Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and districts for designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Landmark Districts, provides the criteria for determining the eligibility of a property for Landmark designation. It states, "Properties eligible for designation must possess both significance and exterior integrity. In making a determination of eligibility, the context of the area surrounding the property shall be considered." Standards for determining significance: Packet Pg. 29 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 A. Events. Properties may be determined to be significant if they are associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. A property can be associated with either(or both) of two (2)types of events: 1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or 2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. B. Persons/Groups. Properties may be determined to be significant if they are 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. C. Design/Construction. Properties may be determined to be significant if they embody the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represent the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possess high artistic values or design concepts; or are part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. This standard applies to such disciplines as formal and vernacular architecture, landscape architecture, engineering and artwork, by either an individual or a group. A property can be significant not only for the way it was originally constructed or crafted, but also for the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and/or uses over a period of time. Examples are residential buildings which represent the socioeconomic classes within a community, but which frequently are vernacular in nature and do not have high artistic values. D. Information potential. Properties may be determined to be significant if they have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Standards for determining exterior integrity: a. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. b. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a property. c. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. d. Materials are the physical elements that form a historic property. e. 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. f. Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. g. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property 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. Context: The area required for evaluating a resource's context is dependent on the type and location of the resource. A house located in the middle of a residential block could be evaluated in the - 2 - Packet Pg. 30 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 context of the buildings on both sides of the block, while a house located on a corner may require a different contextual area.... - 3 - Packet Pg. 31 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Leland Ave d Q d c Y U z Laporte Ave d a _ > N G7 C C L N O Y > N <n a z z Site W Mountain Ave QFU Oakwood School m m N O N O > FY Q N T d Y N U Q C O N Y U R N W Oak St of 3 v City Park City Park or 1 inch = 200 feet N 1306 W Mountain Ave Packet g. E s ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 7 7- t 01 Front (South) and Side (West) Elevations,July 2014 ? I Side (East)and Rear(North) Elevations,July 2014 Packet Pg. 33 L ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 >S f Rear • Elevation, Garages facing a '7Y 1Ct • f�f North, Packet • ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 rY t� ll W + North and East Elevations, One-car Garage built 1942,July 2014 z 111 - South and West Elevations,Two-car Garage built 1968,July 2014 Packet Pg. 35 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 City.Of Planning, Development & Transportation Fort Collins Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O.Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134-fax fcgov.com RESOLUTION 6,2014 _ OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE WILLIAM AND VIOLET JACKSON/ROBERT BAILEY PROPERTY 1306 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE,FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, it is a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects, and districts of historical, architectural, or geographic significance, located within the city, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this city cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architectural and geographical heritage of the city and by ignoring the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets; and WHEREAS, the William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property, 1306 West Mountain Avenue in Fort Collins (the "Property") is eligible for landmark designation for its high degree of exterior integrity and for its significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Standard C, Design/Construction, for its distinctive Craftsman architecture; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has determined that the Property meets the criteria of a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the code and is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the owner of the property has consented to such landmark designation. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins as follows: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are incorporated herein by the Landmark Preservation Commission as findings of fact. Section 2. That the Property located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: Packet Pg. 36 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution No. 6, 2014 The William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property, 1306 West Mountain Avenue Page 2 Lot 2, Block 2 of Swett's Addition, City of Fort Collins County of Larimer, State of Colorado be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Section 3. That the criteria contained in Section 14-48 of the City Code will serve as the standards by which alterations, additions and other changes to buildings and structures located upon the above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins held this loth day of September, A.D. 2014. "ki 5A2 ea Ron Sladek, Chair ATTE OE ecretary/Staff Packet Pg. 37 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. 168, 2014 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS DESIGNATINGTHE WILLIAM AND VIOLET JACKSON/ROBERT BAILEY PROPERTY, 1306 WEST MOUNTAFNT AVENIJE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PtJRSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a public policy encouraging the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of historic landmarks within the City; and WHEREAS, by Resolution dated September 10, 2014, the Landmark Preservation Commission (the "Commission") has determined that the William and Violet Jackson/Robert Bailey Property located at 1306 West Mountain,Avenue in Fort Collins as more specifically described below (the "Property") is eligible for Landmark designation for its high degree of exterior integrity, and for its significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Standard C, Design/Construction, for its distinctive Craftsman architecture; and WHEREAS, the Commission has further determined that the Property meets the criteria of a landmark as set forth in City Code Section 14-5 and is eligible for designation as a landmark, and has recommended to the City Council that the Property be designated by the City Council as a landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property have consented to such landmark designation; and WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the Property's significance to the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and desires to approve such recommendation and designate the Property as a landmark. NOW, THEREFORE, RE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are incorporated herein by the City Council as findings of fact. Section 2. That the Property located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows,to wit: Lot 2, Block 2 of Swett's Addition, City of Fort Collins County of Larimer, State of Colorado be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Code. - 1 - Packet Pg. 38 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Section 3. That the criteria in City Code Section 14-48 will serve as the standards by which alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the Property will be reviewed for compliance with City Code Chapter 14, Article III. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 18th day of November, A.D. 2014, and to be presented for final passage on the 2nd day of December, A.D. 2014. Of FgRrC" M yor l.lJ ATTEST: •':fir SE •M cn City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 2nd day of December, A.D. 2014. F FORT a c M r �p• •........ 0 ATTEST: ' '•. . SEAS City Clerk R PI - 2 - Packet Pg. 39 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 RMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION Inc. "Building Dreams" 12-23-21 RE: Design Changes for 1306 W. Mountain Revised Plan set dated 12-8-2021 and consisting of 7 pages Demolition of existing brick wall: - Revised plans show there will not be any existing historic brick being removed and all brick walls can be reversible. Exterior Windows: - Revised Plans show retaining the existing windows in the home except for the removal of and fill-in in the existing bathroom. Floor plan square footage: - Revised plans show adding onto the existing home of 1097 square feet a new addition of 887 square feet reflecting a reduction of 24% from previous plans. Roof Details: - Removal of dormer on the east roof elevation based on the commission's recommendations. P.O. Box 330 • La Porte, CO 80535 Office (970)472-1113 • Fax (970)472-8313 www.armsteadconstruction.com Packet Pg. 40 ITEM 3, ATTACHMP T 2 exISTPG�o'+ooeu noonoN FF Li e i• .� �i'��,• ;+.:•i...• --_. a ----- � a � fast. �$ 5 ^$. i p � t exbnryr,neenocai ?1�{ �I� -n + " It Z §5 � �kBZ A m 0 � AodriON.Ro�ocn I aooRWN j E6 a� l.Latl 0 I A 3 3 O - n ozA n �mQPmP�°off Q3 n3 ev_ '� 1 ii ��E�� Z A O z D n<z U°2 D D 3 0 3 �ne�oo 0 n °� p D -( °� N m A Z �iZ O O N p[go AS A ZC ° DyDDj ail m 4y`d Z O L30 mpzm A$ aDBz�Q�m o Rr m�mZp tlS °poi§ -4 O D V o= �. °�, o E . e r i11 �z ' Nm� Z m i A BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. once: DRAWN SY: APPROVED: 1 AODITIONALINFORMATON 12 R 2021 JD 41 1ID6 W.M� E.HORSETOOTH RD. OFFICE',(WOI4M.tt13 V FORT GOWNS.DOLO 66521 rTla G6 SURE 162 FPX', rero1aRE313 SWETTS ADDRION FORT CDWNS,COLO 00.525 in()mmsreaticansbuction.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 ExieTnw Aoornorl ' o I f ! �� xf y ; ji1••ij R �x 3 9 C v 3 ii(l�i. infs [rg I re"a al A i 3 3 �� --------- ----- _ to D o" cW m 03 "' � s; � ;, = w€E`•;' Sig r mmN R {i `lp I N 4 s "ji is N z �yy O - —_—______ — m m= m z I';a3 m E z x —4 0 E O D Q ekleTwr, .owrwN m zm N - r b z S'-49s" 13 TREADS a 10" EXISTING EXISTING o BASEMENT MAIN LEVEL v Q� $ o N Z f�tf X1 /� PANTRY A '- �_ ab 9 aDD x 0 1'- ro BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DnTE: DRAWN BY A PROVED: N 1E-8-E021 JD n__I._t n_ ADOITONAL INFOgMATION 42 808 WEST MOUNTHN AVE. 3T5 E.HOgSETODTH qD. OFFICE:(Bl0)4R-ltt3 V FOgT COLLINS,CO 80521 BLDG<SUITE tC2 (STO)CT9d319 SWEETS AODRION FOgT SCOW- nro@armateaticonatrunlon.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 3 X 91 ZQJ A mmz mm o o A z 20 g= g a m g y m a== 3 � O € O s„ r m � A . ® � 00 7CI q YA a v 6 Z uJ m Xa n n ` Eck _ z o =b � �g 3 7i IF � Q - o ul 0 N m ° 3 3 m A ds e Z 0 og4 w m BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN By: l,PPROVED: nooinorvu wcoRnuno" RD. iz-R- 21 LID Packet lg 43 oFFice�WO)4 V EM (wq a�za72— aia FORT COLLINS COW— MAR. 'I,maR.Pom ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 a `o m 's II II II I z� Y m _ pY _ II m II T ; 1.7 a -4 fie, = O m r m I , . Is II tl I II s — ti II a II I II I i i i sE� m BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. D28-: DRAWN BY: nraRoveD: ADDITIONAL wFORMATION 202, JDPacket Pg 44 1 W.MDIINTAINAVE. E.H SUE102 RD. OFFICE:13N)4R-,113 V FORT COWNS,COL00o521 FORT COLLINS LUTE OR EM (9'I%4]EA313 SWETTS AODRION FORT COLLIN9�COLO eW2E EMAIL', Info@emwteatlmneVuctlon.wm ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 i �;illlj III III � ���i ?" loll 14 m st ' if rn r � III N m Z I I m II ! —4 A i . I I i. m �I � mLi �.. m — r II �' m §I . r I I f f; !1 n m II s IN r b Z b yy L c II ► II J f I II IIl Ills f I l Ifi o i BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN BY: APPRDVE (n 12b2021 JD 7fArplf Dq 4 S HORSETOOTH BD W.MOUNTNN AVE. OFFICE:ty)S)a12-t 113 V FOBTCOLLINS,COLD 30521AD 10-L-011ATION a SUITE W FA%: 1aT0)4 M13 SWiTT'SAOOITION ONG COLLINs�LOLO B0E25 EMAIL IMo@erm9eaOconsWCAon.wm ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 ORAWL SPADE MAIN LEVEL ADDII y 2 R R HII 8 $D a4 80uj II IIiA n� I'�ino V Il z�y z �� II II n s II W II On I T ipp "c hum EB j�I;i�-- $q �sls z� y ¢§ b 9 e �z CRAWL SPADE 3a MAIN LEVEL ADDITION BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN BY, ARRROVED: i 12-&2021 JD Packet a c I��L 1-1�.. ADDITIONAL INFOPMATION . 46 1308 W.MOUNTAIN AVE. 0i , -NOPSETOOTH PD. OFFICE:(elU7 AT2-t1 t3 V FOPTCOLLINS,COLD 80521 PT COLLINS, 02 (m 0)6120913 6WER'SADOTION S�COLO 80525 a@armneatlwnnmcilon.wm ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 d I - m Az-, m P sg�x�om 3�WE� Z mAr�D �OG�wNm UE- n i 4 ( i a f e mzw i pZrgeq r»» gec�e o z m r bz BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. Dnre: DHAWNEY: A11R2 A V 12-8-2D21 JD 7f� p fl '# AODDIONAL INFOSMATON ]sE M ((M HORSETOOTH RD. 1366 W.M� OFFICE.IeT01 n2-ttt3 J FORI GOWNS,WlA�521 EWO4 SUITE I . -6313 swETrs nnDlnory FORT cowrvs,co6o 80525 tt'�•af 'yO�iK ,r�� -� ll�ii e •� � i per .4'•��' ,((i� � :•Y. �� � r S• 1s. � � .�x�N 'j a,. to • j _ •�. ,tea i • pp. ti. 'I • ..ram .� � :. t. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT r �► Packet 'y `� -anti• `'. _ ti ,� '���A �j��'. r�•$j..b' ' ♦ _mod - c�} cam: y r •fir s., r F 'g 50 c �t } —glow- Packet Pg. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Preservation Services Interpreting The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation Subject: Rear Additions to Historic Houses Applicable Standards: 9.Compatible New Additions/Alterations io.Reversibility of New Additions/Alterations Issue: Whenever possible, new additions should be con- Application i (Incompatible treatment): This modest resi- structed on rear elevations where they will have less of an dence began as a two-story log house. Later,the main portion impact on the building's historic integrity. Rear additions—like of the house was converted into a distinctive Bungalow-style all new additions—should be subordinate to the original build- residence. Over time,multiple additions were also made along ing in size,scale,and massing,as well as design. Additions that the natural grade at the rear of the house. Prior to rehabilita- feature a higher roofline,that extend beyond the side of the tion,these later additions were quite deteriorated. building,or that have a significantly greater footprint than the original building are usually not compatible. The expansion of modest scale houses or those in prominent locations(such as a corner lot) can be particularly challenging. Standard r states that"A property should be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and envi- ronment."In cases where an overly large addition is required in order to accommodate the owner's programmatic needs,a more suitable building should be identified. Rear additions that meet the Standards are compatible in de- sign,yet differentiated from the old building,often through a process of simplification. For example,if the original house features narrow clapboard siding, multi-light double-hung sash windows and an elaborate decorative cornice,the new ad- dition could be sided with different clapboards,one-over-one r double-hung sash,and a less detailed cornice. New materials need not match exactly the historic materials but should be A appropriate to the building type, compatible with existing materials,and unobtrusive in appearance. � I Rear additions that do not require significant removal ofexist- ing materials may help retain the house's historic appearanceand character. Connecting the new addition to the historic _ �+ building with a modest hyphen can limit removal of historic materials,drastic structural changes,and irreversible changes to the original building. A hyphen can also more clearly dif- ferentiate new from old construction.Rear additions can also provide the opportunity to make a building accessible,rather Top andAbove:This historic house had been altered numerous times in than constructing ramps on a more prominent elevation. the past--including multiple additions to the rear of the building. REAR ADDITIONS Packet Pg. 52 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 When the project began, the existing rear additions were determined to be beyond repair and were demolished. A re- placement addition of a similar size to those removed would likely have met the Standards. However, the new addition constructed on the rear doubled the size of the structure as it ` existed before the rehabilitation. As built,the cladding,open- ` ings, and rooflines of the new addition were appropriate to „ I I L•� 1 the building's historic character. Yet this was not sufficient to overcome the effect of an addition substantially more massive than the additions that were demolished. With two full floors, a footprint that was much deeper than the previous additions, - a new deck extending from the rear and side elevations,and significant grade changes at the rear,this work competes for The size of this new rear addition—incorporating two floors and an ex- attention with the historic structure to which it is attached and tended depth--combined with substantial changes to the site overwhelm has seriously impacted the property's historic character. the modest historic house. Application 2(Compatible treatment): This large brick house was converted for use as offices. As part of the rehabilitation a new addition was constructed at the rear of the house. With a brick ground floor and a clapboard upper level set beneath a roofline that was lower in height than the original structure,the rear addition's design was both distinct from,and compat- ible with,the size,scale,massing and architectural features of the historic house. The use of varied materials on the addition (brick below,clapboard above)was handled with restraint in a manner that did not compete visually with the main house. The addition provided space to locate new systems for the entire structure as well as accessibility to the historic house at grade, making exterior ramps unnecessary. A hyphen(with a lower roofline and narrower footprint)separated the new addition from the old,further distinguishing the various periods of construction and reducing the addition's massing. The hyphen required only a minimal amount of distur- bance to the rear wall of the historic house and left the plan of the main house intact. If the addition were ever removed,the house's historic integrity would remain undiminished. Right: The house prior to rehabilitation. "S Below right: Drawing of proposed rear addition and hyphen,show- ing how the new construction was subordinate in size to the historic house. 1 Below left: New addition and connecting hyphen. The new materials and fenestration complement,yet are distinct from,the historic house. it Chad Randl,Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service These bulletins are issued to explain preservation project decisions made by the U.S. Department of the Interior. The resulting determinations, based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation,are not necessarily applicable beyond the unique facts and circumstances of each particular case. June 20(Rg41SE1tfte6_* ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Julie St.Croix To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Cc: Laura Bailey Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: Please reject 1306 W. Mountain proposal Date: Sunday,March 14,2021 6:32:34 PM Sent from my iPhone On Mar 14, 2021, at 6:30 PM, Julie St. Croix<juliestcroix I @hotmail.com> wrote: To whom it may concern, I believe that it is important for the house at this address be preserved as a historical property. I was privileged to go on the historic home tour in 2008 with my sister Veronica Lim who lives in old town. Please reject this plan for remodeling this home. Thank you for your consideration. Julie St. Croix Sent from my iPhone Packet Pg. 54 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Gina Janett To: Gretchen Schiager Subject: [EXTERNAL]Comment for LPC: Please reject conceptual design and garage demo for 1306 W Mountain Ave. Date: Monday,March 15,2021 6:41:01 PM Attachments: The Sustainable Bungalow American Bungalow Magazine.pdf Comments to LPC on Agenda Item#8 1306 W Mountain Conceptual Review of Proposed Changes I am writing as chair of Protect Our Old Town Homes to provide comments on proposed modifications to the Jackson-Bailey home at 1306 W Mountain Ave. Our group is an association of Fort Collins' residents living in east and west Old Town neighborhoods who treasure the historical architectural character of our homes and seek to preserve them. This special home is a very important Fort Collins' resource because it contributes significantly to the historic character of the residential corridor along W Mountain Avenue which is the heart of Old Town and beloved by both visitors and residents city-wide. The home is an excellent example of a 1920's Bungalow cottage that maintains all the original features and materials that make it especially important as a Fort Collins Historic Landmark. The home has been toured by many historic preservation enthusiasts and local residents during both the Historic Home Tour and private tours conducted by its former owner, Bob Bailey. The home, built circa 1922, is special in part because Bailey restored and maintained the home for many years in as close to its original condition as possible, both inside and out. A tour through his home was like going back in time to the 1920's to how Fort Collins' early residents and our grandparents and great grandparents lived. The home even has national significance as it was highlighted as the cover story entitled "The Sustainable Bungalow" in the fall 2011 edition of the American Bungalow magazine. https://www.americanbungalow.com/the-sustainable-bungalow/. See attached article. In the story Bailey described the sustainability of the "ecological design that took the form of large eaves, deep shaded front porches, and generous patio overhangs that sheltered the home from the elements". The brick walls and attic effectively provide insulation from heat and cold. Over the years of his ownership, Bailey painstakingly worked to undo bad remodel jobs and to restore the home's original character from plumbing fixtures to paint colors and furnishings. He replaced old aluminum windows and doors with wood ones. As noted by the historic survey completed in 1998, the home is "a superb example of small-scale brick Craftsman dwelling." And that was BEFORE Bailey restored it to a near original condition. But the point of the story is that the home's design is sustainable even today and bungalows are "still prized as models of gracious, affordable living, and they have proven to be quaint but durable forerunners of sustainable residential design and construction for the 215t Century." Because of the home's significance to our community's historic character, the proposal to add a very large addition to the side of the building and to demolish the 1942 garage, which was explicitly included as part of the city's Historic Landmark designation, should be categorically rejected. The City's staff of historic preservation professionals has provided the LPC with all the specific Secretary Packet Pg. 55 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation that the proposed design fails to meet. Protect Our Old Town Homes strongly urges the LPC to reject the proposed design because of the home's historic character and significance that our community treasures and which provides an exemplary example of Fort Collins early homes. Gina C Janett Chair, Protect Our Old Town Homes 730 W Oak St Fort Collins, CO 80521 970 222-5896 ginaciaolcDfrii.com Att. "The Sustainable Bungalow", American Bungalow, Fall 2011 Edition Gina C. Janett ginaciao@frii.com 970 222-5896 Packet Pg. 56 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Attachment to Gina Janett Email • Itr:it%V f Mwt w�IR 7f f r E S TO R AT I Ely IN TM[ INTEREST Of CcI �18PRESERVING►"' ► U N NG lL STORING^"' �p� R1CAN DuTTAMC �G 2p N I IMf BUNGALOW H l t� s n M &A�TIME AFFORDS. Uf!�! DA N x D p 1 N PAT T O ij5N C I A LOW VAt LAIC" Ca -- � I a fl i z� Packet Pg. 57 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Attachment to Gina Janett Email The Sustainable Bungalow I American Bungalow Magsinc https:-?w w%%.amenzzLnbumgalow'.o=n the-suswinable-bungalow! THE SUSTAINABLE BUNGALOW BY RDBERT GL B Alt EY From 15wt:71 , T V T BETWEEN 1900AND 1945,a typical middlydassAmerican home comprsed approximately L000 squarefeet and had no more than two bedrooms—one for the parents.one shared by the children—and one bathroom Tens of thousands of parents rased families in such homes.in whatsccmed to them relatively affordable comforL Today thesehomcs,survivingin inner-city suburban neigh borhoods all ovc r the country,arc considered small-suitable for a single person or,at most,a married couple.Yet they arc still prized as models of gracious,affordable living,and they have proven to be quaint but durable for erunnersof sustainable residential design and construction tar the 21stcentury. That-it turns out,is no accident.The bungalows of yesteryear have been able to last for a century because their de signers and builders incorporated many elements of an ecologi tally sensitive approach to design that made them so. With the middle-class bungalow.ecological design took the form of large eaves.deep front porches aril generous patio overhangs tha t sheltered the house from the c lane nts.Those fcatu cs helped make it what we now describe as energy efficient—easier to heat and keepcod.to my own home.aclassic 1922 Craftsman brick bungalow n Fort Coll ins.Colo.,60 miles nor th of Denver on the Great Plains dry steppe,my 19-by-7-foot porch shades the front of the home in the summer.Because the house faces south,sunlight can penctra tt the front of the house dur- ing the winter,helping to warm it_The wa its at double courses of bricks insulate the interior,helping to keep it warm in the winter a nd cod i n the summer.The attic space provides further insulation_ ofJ 3MCO21,3A5 PM Packet Pg. 58 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Attachment to Gina Janett Email The Sustanabic Bungalow I American Bungalow Magazine hUps:i N wwamaiwnbwnealo .convtho-sustainab1c-bLmgalow. A Sense of N ace I he task of ecological design is to create I and uses arid structiwesthat are deep I y adapted to particularplacvs-to the local climate,topography and flora-drawing u an IoLalbulding materials,practices and braditions_Successful ecological designs 411 1- derive in large part from understanding the natural processes that distinguish dif ferent regions,then designing strudures and land uses accordingly � f This approach is the opposite at one site-fits-all mass productiorL in which Stan- rt1U Bard templates are replicated with little regard to place Ecdogkal de5ignisnot new.Aboriginal pecplespractired itfor millennia in their vernacular architecturesA well known cxampleof NorthAmerican buildingsde- signed to fired their regionalclimatc arc the Anasazl cliff dwellingsof the Southwestern U5.These higfrmass adobe dwel lings were built in south-facing caves that afforded passive solar gain in thewinter and blocked heatgaln in the summer.Local materials were used in ways that artfu I ly maArnited human com- fort In the pueblosof Zuni.Taos,A.coma and elsewhere in the Southwestem deserts,the Anasazis'succ ssorsused adobe and thermal mass to create pueblo dwellings that were easily kept cod in the open desert Today,adobe homes in Albuquerque,even those lacking InsulatiorL stay 15 to 20 degrees coder than the middaypeak tempera- ture,often eliminating the needfor air conditioning In other regions,homes wristructed of brick like mine,have the same cffccL in regions where massing was an impractical method of thermal control,other measures were adopted.The Rocky Mountain Irstitute's 1M Primer on Sustainable Building provided general guidelines on using buildingshape and or irritation to,f or«ample,capture sunlight for passive solar heating and lighting in cold aril temperate climates Eaves and windows c an be olaced so tha t Not rier su nliP_,ht reaches into the dwelling but summer s un l ig ht wi ll not_ Deep covered porches provide additional shading tram their overhangs and sheiter outdoor gatherings during hot spei is. Ecological design practices can also have the effect of enhancing a regions(or,for that matter,a nelgh borhoodsl sense of architecturalidentlty-its visual diaracter-which has becomeso sorely degradedover the past century at subur ban sprawl.for architects and builders who arc sensitive to regional ecology,a structure's materials,colors and vis ua I style asser t its"fitness'-its appropriateness-for its bu i It c nvi ron men t while s im ul tancou sly enhancing the environmentaltabrL Restorinig andUving in aSustairubleBungalow Over the past 30years,encouraged in part by Incentives to restore historic properties and protect historic neighbor-hoods.mgrants from the suburbs have been moving back to older urban communities.for many,like me-the comforts of home are amplified IN links to history.Living in a house like mine helps me satisfy my desire to make sustainable uscofrmurces.(I'm sfiN driv- ing the Volkswagen Bug I bought new in 1964.)Wfii lc I may rely on h ig it tech appliances in almost every room of the house,the objects of mygreatest affec bons are traditional artifacts Imbued with a sense of history:an old enamel top kitchen table from the Great Depression era my great-grandmother's rocker,Jade itc glassware,an Arts and Crafts side table.a Navajo rug_ My compact.1.093-square-f oot,single-story bungalow is located in the 1910 SwtAts Addition.one of several areas 2 of 4 3/1 V2021,3:45 PM Packet Pg. 59 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Attachment to Gina Janett Email The Sustainable Bungalow I American Bungalcnv Magazine hUM:�;Nw-w.arnQlcanbtmgaiow.comthe-sustainable-bungalcn that developed a long West Mountain Avcnucduring the first haft of the 20thcentury as Fort Call ins expanded westtoward City Parkand GrandviewCermetery.The homesdoublrgabled frontand unique mix of red,yellow- buff a nd dark-brown brick work make it stand out in the neighborhood,rich in bu ngalov-6,whkh expo le rxed its peak growth at ter the First World War.Today it is par tot the city's revivi rig Old Town.near Colorado State U rivers tty.A restored 1919 trol Icy operates on West Mountain on weekend a fternoons f rem May through September. From myhome-I don'tnecd acar to make most local daily or weeklytripsAneighbor hood grocery is two blocks away-T he urivers ity.a I ibra rye rest au rants,toff cc shots and downtown shopping are with n wal ki rig or bik ing dis- tance C lase by ar e a park and an d cmerntary sc hooL T hese features arc a ttr act ing others as pa rt of a yr een move- men t to renovate and build in Old Town I am the sixth owner of the bungalow.whkh was built for W.Jackson in 1922 at a cost of S4.000.I was already III v- inginamid-1920sCraftsman style bungalow when it became available 10ycars ago-Itteatures original Southern yellow pine floori rig and built in drawers and cupboards convenientl y aLcesised from the hallway L)4--twm-n the bedrooms and bath An undivided living-dining room a kitchen,and par bat-width front parch complete the plan- T here is no entry hall:the f rant door opens directly into the living room The f ram i rg and d adding of the one-car "Model A'garage in back are wood.A clothesline stretches between two poles in the backyard.In a s mall gardern- vegetables r i pen. Fortunately.the exterior needed little work Windows are doublesashed;to restore sustai nab i lit y,I replaced old aluminum storm windows and doors with wooden onus,which arc(orrect for the period and more energy efficient I ns ide,rm trying to bring bath the spirit of the original construction-The procrss.now almost aumple4c,has en- tailed acombination of undoing poor remodeling Jobs to restore the home's original dnaractcr and add irig plumbing fixtures,furnishings and paint colors from the bungalow era. I refinished thebeautiftll pine f1mrs that w poreserved tsidel wall-to-war carpet thrVughuutthe house When I removed the carpet 1 discovered that a wa 11 separating the kitchen from the back porch had been removed some- time in the past,leaving a gap in the f loor ing.I wove in matching flooring sa tvaged from another older home to fill the gap-I saved or xg inal hardware from au pboa rds.door sand windows.and retained original I ig ht fixtures.where possible or located fixt iresfrom the period.In the basement I found theoriginal bathroom sink and toilet which 1 reinstalled.The medieinecabinet was missing.and the recess inthe wall had beenclosed up.so I bought a repro- duction from Rejuvenation in Portland Ore.Several two-panel door were also missing;I found suitable replace- ments at an architectural salvage(cimpany in Drnver- I*xL after ccnsuking Robert 50nweitzer.the authority an bungalow colors,I turned my paintbrush onto the plaster walls of every room in the house. �• UnfortunatcN,a previous owner had pal rite d every room white,including the j 1 wood trim and doors.Rathcr than strip the wood down I decided,in corsu lta- tion with Schwcitzcr.to paint ita color to complement the walls. i 11 The Idtchenhadbeenremodcled in the 1950s.and a subsequent owner had installed butcher-block countertops and painted every other surface white. Rather than compktiM rip outeverything and start over.I decided toinstall � linaleum countertops with metal-trim edging and used a'cream-and green" paint scheme typical of that era.(For the countertops.1 consulted with Tim Counts author of the Summer 20011No.301 American Bungalow article 3 Of A 31S2(V-1.3:45 PN Packet Pg. 60 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Attachment to Gina Janett Email The Sustainable Bungalow�American Bungalow Magazine https:/�w-w-A'.amai:anbvnigabw•.ccm tl:Ns sainablrb 1gabw• 'Creating a Cl as sic Bungalow Kitcheri 1 I found a 1950 Writgomery'Na rd cledric range to complete the look. The f urniture is eclectic,most of the pieces from the early 20th century.A f ew pieces handed down from my great grandparents reflect the ambiencr of the bungalow era.Fundamental in the Arts and Crafts philosophy is the idea of creating things by hard,and in this spirit I display American Indiano bjects:Navajo rugs,Hopi pots and katsi-nas. and Pima baskets.The original paintings and vintage prints are by local artists. Throughout.)wasguided by Tim Counts again,here try his Fall 1997(N,16)AB article"The Affordable Bungalow Interior'Ne points out that the early owners of these houses didn't fill them with expensive furnishings such as Stickfey f umfture T heirgoa I was to acate dwellings that were both artistic and affordable- Now 89 years old.my home was buIt to Iast.l t is truly as us tainabk-,piece of architecture-'a superb c xampic of small scale brick Crattsmandwelling acrording to the suryryor who evaluated it in 1998for the Wc515idc Neighborhood Survey_One day,I hope to pass it on in a little tit batter condition than it was in when I found it.Its time has come- i • I Robert G.Willey,PhD,is on ecobgicnig®grapherand author who works far the Rocky Mo nton Research Stotion,U_S. Forest Service,n Fort Coffins.Cob. This arbde draws on his book Ecoregion-Based Deign for Sustafna fity(Sprirgo 2002).tine thanks his dauShter.Lard Bailry,for her assistance with this arbde. sofa 3/15l21'J21,3:45 PN Packet Pg. 61 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Veronica Lim To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Subject: [EXTERNAL]Proposed project at 1306 West. Mountain Date: Monday,March 15,2021 5:40:07 PM It has come to my attention that the new owners of 1306 West Mountain have intention to add an addition to the home and tear down the two garages,thus changing the home and the property significantly. I am a long-time friend of Bob Bailey,and am an Old Town resident myself. I understand his intention to preserve the home through historic designation. The home is a fine example of a 1922 historic bungalow,and sits on one of our premier historic avenues. It has even been featured in American Bungalow magazine with its small,simple design. It would be a loss to compromise the integrity of historic 1306 West Mountain. Please do not approve the proposed project! Sincerely, Veronica Lim Packet Pg. 62 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Andrew McMahan To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 w mountain Date: Monday,March 15,2021 10:39:31 AM Please reject the development proposal for 1306 west mountain avenue. I believe that it is incompatible with the property's historic designation. Andrew McMahan former resident of the Carolyn Mantz Neighborhood, and current resident of a (non officially designated) historic property in north Fort Collins' GMA. 200 gregory rd, fort collins, co 80524 mcmahanaj@yahoo.com Packet Pg. 63 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Laura Bailey<laurabailey2l@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 16, 2021 3:27 PM To: Karen McWilliams<KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com>; Gretchen Schiager<gschiager@fcgov.com> Subject: Please reject remodel proposal for 1306 W. Mountain Dear Commission Members: I am the daughter of Dr. Robert Bailey,the community member who owned the Jackson-Bailey home on 1306 W. Mountain for almost two decades until his passing in 2019. 1 inherited the home and carefully cared for it until July of 2020, at which point I sold it to Brian and Barbara Berkhausen. I am also a long- time Fort Collins resident and a real estate owner with three of my own properties here in Fort Collins. I would like to provide feedback on the proposal to alter the Jackson-Bailey home and ask that you reject the proposal before you and all similar proposals in the future. I speak as a both community member and as someone intimately aware of the value and history of this home. First I'll say that I believe there is plenty of room for new and old homes and large and small houses in our town and for limited remodels in Old Town under appropriate circumstances.That said,the extreme changes being proposed by the new homeowners are boldly incompatible with this home's historic designation and the obligation the city has to honor the Interior Secretary's standards for treatment of historic properties.The city report shows the homeowners proposal is deeply and broadly incompatible with those standards. Even a largely scaled back version of this plan would be quite incompatible. This home, a superb example of small-scale bungalow architecture, has become well known as an intact and living reminder of yesteryear. It is so special that the national architectural magazine American Bungalow featured the home as a 12-page cover story. It was also featured in a piece on historic homes in our local Style magazine and was part of the Poudre Landmarks Foundation Historic Home Tour in 2008.This publicity was based on the home and premises being authentic, intact and undiluted by excessive modern architectural changes. My father spent years ensuring the home's authenticity and made the required effort to earn landmark protections. For that reason, among others, I considered the city's commitment to adhering to the protective standards as an important factor when deciding to sell the home,vs. keeping it in our family. My strong expectation was that the city would not approve plans that would alter the visual aesthetics of visible portions of the home,the overall integrity of the premises and the protected 1942 garage. I would also like to attest that my realtor ensured we received acknowledgement that the new owners were aware of the historic designation before going under contract. I also personally handed them a copy of the full designation materials and chatted with them about historic designation during the closing. While I respect reasonable homeowner choice when balanced with the good of the community and immediate neighborhood, in this case the new homeowners did have the necessary information to make their choice before purchase of the home. If they felt this home was unacceptable,there were many others without historic landmark designations available on the market last summer, including many in Old Town. I can also attest that the home is in very good shape and the 1942 garage is in good working condition and also quite visible from the public alleyway where many neighborhood residents walk and jog. Older elements, such as windows, are there by design; the beautiful old glass double-paned windows were Packet Pg. 64 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 intentionally restored to fit the period.And several prospective buyers and a realtor commented on their special beauty when the home was for sale. (Please note attached images of 1306 W. Mountain for the most accurate representation of the home and garage.) You'll also notice something special about the lot as well. While it is narrow by today's standards, it is green and full of nature.The architects of this home would have intended for nature to be a selling point of the design since Bungalow architects wanted to blur the lines between home and nature with the iconic deep-set patios and green space between houses and throughout the yard. The proposed additions would engulf the lot and almost completely consume the side and back yard, permanently altering the overall aesthetic of the property which is currently historically accurate. The new additions are so large,they would dominate and overshadow the original historic elements of the home and profoundly decrease the originality of materials. (Excluding the 1960s garage,the home and premises are probably about 95 percent original). Ironically,this proposal would destroy the very identifiers (the small footprint, quality brickwork, simplicity of the rectangular design,yard-to-house ratio)that makes the home an exemplar of small- scale West Coast bungalow architecture and that earned the home landmark designation in the first place.Those characteristics represent hallmarks of the Bungalow architectural movement that rejected the larger and fussier Victorian homes of the day. The preservation and designation of this gem was a gift to our community, one that has the potential to last and benefit historic Mountain Avenue for future generations while still providing a high-quality living experience for current and future owners.That gift should not be thrown away based on short- term appetites and trends. I support the commission applying the Secretary's standards and ask that you not approve this plan or any future plans that significantly damage the aesthetics, land-to-hardscape ratio, and original historic materials of the home and historic garage. Sincerely, Laura Bailey,4731 Crest Rd., Fort Collins 21 ,l��,`'i• '� Y� � - T /n .�. nil Garages facing North,July 2014 Packet Pg. 65 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: pkclmbr@digis.net To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiager Cc: pkclmbr(adigis.net; laurabailey21(agmail.com Subject: [EXTERNAL]please reject 1306 W. Mountain proposal Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 2:31:04 PM Having been homeowners on West Mountain Avenue since the 1970's, we take very seriously the historical landmark designation of the City of Fort Collins. We feel this has been a significant benefit to the character of the neighborhood, as well as preserving the distinctive characteristic of this architectural type and period which allowed the 2014 designation of 1306 West Mountain Avenue as a City Landmark. The proposed additions to the side and rear of the house would be highly visible from the street and compromise everything that the historical landmark designation is designed to achieve. With so many homes on West Mountain Avenue having been renovated to the detriment of their original character, it is especially important that houses like 1306 West Mountain Avenue, be preserved. Therefore, please deny the 1306 West Mountain proposal. Robert and Mary Ann Bjornsen Packet Pg. 66 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: michelle.a.haefele@gmail.com To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaoer Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please reject proposal for Jackson-Bailey House Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 10:36:16 AM To: Landmark Preservation Commission I'm writing to ask that you deny the proposed alteration of the historically designated Jackson-Bailey House at 1306 W. Mountain Ave. This is an iconic house that is one of the few remaining intact examples of a Craftsman Bungalow style which was an important American architectural movement in the 1920s. Few of these houses (built following the first World War) remain in Fort Collins and this is arguably one of(if not the) best examples. Recognized by American Bungalow magazine as an irreplaceable icon, this house was featured as the cover story (written by Bob Bailey himself). The characteristics for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins landmark include it's small size (a defining characteristic of the style), it's simplistic rectangular footprint, the well preserved details such as the original brickwork, and the two original structures comprising the entire property. While a modest remodel might be appropriate, the one proposed is not. It is so extensive and so large that it will eliminate the historic character that the designation was intended to preserve. The size of the addition would subsume the small house. The addition on the side and back will be highly visible from the street and will overwhelm the architectural details and characteristics of the original house. The proposal would destroy most of the original exterior brickwork and the essential architectural details that characterize the Bungalow style. The 1942 historic garage (built by the original owner) was one of the explicit features protected in the landmark designation, the demolition of this garage should be denied along with the addition as proposed. As noted in the staff report, this proposed alteration fails to comply with most of the with the standards set by the Secretary or the Interior and going forward with this enormous alteration would be a grievous loss to the community. Dr. Bailey restored the home to its original 1920s style (both inside and outside) and the designation of his home as a city landmark was a great source of pride for him. This designation was a generous gift to the city of Fort Collins and should not be discarded. Please ensure that this legacy continues and that the integrity of the designation is upheld. Thank you, Michelle Haefele "The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."—Plato Packet Pg. 67 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Per Hogestad <per.hogestad@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, March 16, 2021 3:41 PM To: Karen McWilliams<KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com>;Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com>; Gretchen Schiager<gschiager@fcgov.com> Subject: LPC hearing, 1306 West Mountain Ave. Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission, Karen McWilliams,Jim Bertolini, Comments to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission on the proposed modification to the Jackson-Bailey House for commission meeting of March 17,2021 Agenda Item #8 As a former Longtime Landmark Preservation Commission member,Architect associated with the Design Assistance Program and resident of the Historic Sheely neighborhood I am interested in the preservation of our city's past and the benefits of preservation to the city. I am concerned with the proposed addition and demolition to the locally designated Jackson- Bailey House, 1306 W. Mountain Ave. If the commission moves to final hearing on this item tonight I urge that the members vote to unanimously deny the application to construct the addition and demolition of the historic garage. In your deliberation please consider that the addition will cause the substantial loss of distinctive historic material and finishes, a loss of historic architectural form and character, and the erosion of context leading to the loss of neighborhood continuity. Further please find that the proposed addition design makes no attempt to relate to the simple rectangular plan of the Bungalow.The simplicity of understated detail of this historic structure is completely lost in the overly complex and overwhelming design. It is rare to find a structure with this level of integrity.This landmark should without question be protected as intended by the existing landmark designation status. It is unusual to be able to definitively date accessory buildings. In many cases the accessory buildings are simply included in the nomination with little documentation. Here is a dated well preserved garage that enhances the understanding and interpretation of the overall site and social context.The proposal to completely demolish this designated structure is at best a total disregard for the designation and the preservation program itself. Proposals of this degree of impact on preservation fortunately do not occur often. In this case the commission must consider the individual structure and the neighborhood impact but also the impact to the city's landmark preservation program as a whole. Thank you for your participation in the city's Landmark Preservation Commission and your consideration of this letter. Per Hogestad 1601 Sheely Dr. Fort Collins Packet Pg. 68 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: MerryRun To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please reject 1306 W. Mountain Proposal Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 6:39:49 PM I am writing to urge you to not allow the enlargement of the historic Jackson-Bailey house at 1306 Mountain Avenue. The planned addition would destroy its historic character as a small scale 1920s brick craftsman Bungalow Cottage. This small home is a jewel that was designated as a City Landmark by the Landmark Preservation Commission in 2014. Allowing the Jackson-Bailey house to be enlarged would also set a bad precedent for the enlargement of other small historic homes. The charming 1942 garage is also of historic importance and should not be demolished. Please deny the proposed project plans and all future similar plans. Sincerely, Carole Hossan 504 Edwards Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 m e rry ru n Qto a d away.net Packet Pg. 69 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: wjacobi@fcconnexion.net To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 West Mountain Ave Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 2:52:36 PM Dear Landmark Preservation Commotion Members. I have reviewed all the materials provided by the city on the proposed changes to the home at 1306 West Mountain Ave. I have previously toured this home on historic home tours and found the home a perfect example of an Bungalow that has not been altered over the years. The proposed demolition of parts of this home and the addition of two-story structures to the east and north are not at all in keeping with the original bungalow structure. The home was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark because it was essentially an unaltered home. The submitted plans do not preserve the character of this home and I fully support the city review that states the plans are not acceptable. I strongly urge the Landmark Preservation Commission to deny the current plan for the home at 1306 Mountain thank you. William Jacobi 2725 McKeag Drive 40 year resident of Fort Collins Packet Pg. 70 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: S Mondia To: Gretchen Schiaaer; Karen McWilliams Subject: [EXTERNAL]comment on 1306 W Mountain proposal,urging the LPC reject it Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 11:32:32 AM Comment to the Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding 1306 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO As a resident of West Mountain Avenue and as a supporter of the historic protection programs of Fort Collins, I am writing to comment on the proposed changes to 1306 West Mountain, a designated City Landmark, and to urge you to reject this proposal at the March 17th Land marksPreservation Commission meeting. The assessment of the city staff is clear and fairly complete.This proposal will destroy most of the elements which made this structure eligible for designation in the first place. Beyond the individual architectural features of this home, its original size, compact form, and simple geometric shape is a key element of this structure.The proposed remodel will eliminate the very essence of this home. I want to emphasize that the damage that these proposed changes will extend beyond the physical impact on this individual home. Mountain Avenue is clearly the premier prewar historic street of Fort Collins, from the downtown, past St Thomas Church, the Avery House,the sugar beet mill era cottages, 1306, and ending at Grandview Cemetery, with the trolley running down most of its distance. The street has always been changing, architecturally, and will continue to change. But so few of the individual homes which have been afforded any recognition, let alone protection.The previous owner of 1306 chose to do the work required to have his home recognized and designated. It is the contribution that 1306 makes to this neighborhood which amplifies its value and which makes its importance really matter. I don't fully understand the legal and administrative ramifications of a home owner seeking and obtaining City Landmark status for their home, but I'd to like think that it creates a moral, if not legal obligation for the city and the Landmarks Preservation Commission to guard the qualities of the home which made it a Landmark building.The staff report is clear that almost every thing which the current owners propose to change about this structure is incompatible with the historic elements of 1306.They are perhaps more importantly incompatible with the historic neighborhood context in which the home exists. I urge you to reject this proposal at your March 17, 2021 meeting. Eric Smith, 1216 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Packet Pg. 71 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: William Whitley To: Gretchen Schiaaer; Karen McWilliams Subject: [EXTERNAL]Please reject the proposal for 1306 W Mountain Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 8:25:42 PM Regarding the upcoming hearing on 1306 W Mountain: I am asking you to reject the proposed conceptual and project plans for altering the home and demolishing the garages at 1306 W Mountain(item#8 on your agenda).The proposed addition is more like an appendage,and larger than the existing house.The project would require demolition of a significant portion of the original structure,and both garages. This project goes against everything the Landmark Designation was created to protect.This home was meticulously restored by the previous owner over a long period of time,in an effort to save a classic example of a craftsman bungalow cottage and promote sustainable living on a modern scale.Bob was adamant about this. The listing realtor should have taken care to explain the benefits,responsibilities,and limitations of a landmark designation;if not,it was a clear dereliction of their duty,and their responsibility to their profession and the city. This should not be just another old small house that someone can buy and then destroy because it's too small. If you allow this,you are exposing*every other landmarked structure*in Fort Collins to the same fate. William Whitley 618 W Mountain Ave Fort CollinsCO 80521 (The Crose/Scott/Dickey House) Packet Pg. 72 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Nancy York To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaaer Subject: [EXTERNAL]please reject 1306 W. Mountain proposal Date: Tuesday,March 16,2021 11:49:40 PM Landmark Preservation Commission Folks, It is inconceivable to me that this historically designated Fort Collins home, which was so expertly and thoroughly restored, would become structurally altered if approved by the Landmark Preservation Commission. Such a vote would besmirch the very classification of historic designation and undercut the purpose of this Commission. This particular home was legitimately recognized by American Bungalow magazine, Please honor this home and recognize the category of"historic designation." Best regards, Nancy York Packet Pg. 73 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Laura Bailey<laurabailey2l@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 9:39 AM To: Karen McWilliams<KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com>; Gretchen Schiager<gschiager@fcgov.com> Subject:A few more images for 1306 W. Mountain comments Hi Karen and Gretchen, Would it be possible/advisable to add these photos to the other two I sent and have them included in my comment materials for the Commission? If it's not overkill, I think they tell a fuller story of the condition of the home.The images I sent yesterday are great and should be included as well, but these new photos I'm sending are bit more current (from June 2020). 1 think it's key that there be no mischaracterizations that suggest the home,windows and 1942 garage are in anything but very good condition. So I've included an image of a window that is representative of the character of all the restored windows in the home.These window are beautiful and in good condition with perhaps a few normal imperfections from age (and with the possible exception of some paint needing be cleaned off some of the pull ropes to make closing and opening easier.) Note that the cracked window on page 245-246 of the report was actually in excellent condition when I sold the home last summer so it's impossible to know why it is cracked now. I am including an image of that window here. I've also included a current photo of the 1942 garage that the new owners proposed to demolish. It shows the garage in fine condition and quite visible and adding to the charm of the back alleyway which is also visible from McKinley. Again if this is overkill, please let me know. Otherwise I'd love to include them. Many thanks for your help. See you this evening. Laura Bailey 4731 Crest Rd., Fort Collins 970-430-9493 a, F tr s x� 4 1- Packet Pg. 74 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: KEVIN COOK To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaoer Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please reject 1306 Mountain Avenue proposal Date: Wednesday,March 17,2021 9:44:38 AM To the Landmark Preservation Committee: I am writing to both ask and to encourage you to decline approval for remodeling the Jackson-Bailey House at 1306 West Mountain Avenue. I met Bob Bailey on a professional basis in 1988. Through our mutual professional interests we developed a close personal friendship that included many hours of conversation about the need to preserve aspects of cultural heritage. Many times Bob posed three rhetorical questions: How do we know how far we have come if we don't know where we started? How do we know where we are if we don't know where we started? Is it too much to ask to preserve by reasoned care-taking the historical character of at least one neighborhood out of hundreds? With such points of consideration, Bob worked carefully and deliberately to preserve and to maintain the house he called home and to do so by preserving the structure as a landmark by which future generations could meaningfully engage those questions. Other houses in other neighborhoods have already been modified or have gone without essential maintenance to preserve their original character. Remodeling them would fit more with the neighborhoods they are in and would not betray the good-faith efforts of a man who believed in preserving a special part of history for future generations to embrace. Remodeling the Jackson-Bailey House would destroy an element of cultural history that could never be honestly recovered. For these reasons I encourage you to decline approving the remodeling of the Jackson-Bailey House. Respectfully, Kevin J. Cook (970) 617-4455 Packet Pg. 75 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 1"email from Sally Dunphy: From: Sally Dunphy<sally.dunphv@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 5:46 PM To: Karen McWilliams<KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] please reject 1306 W. Mountain proposal While I respect a property owner's right to live in a home which meets their needs, it seems to me — based on the plans for alteration —the current owners of the historic property at 1306 West Mountain would be better served had they chosen another home to purchase. I see the responsibility of any person who purchases property designed as historically significant as that of a caretaker who, in buying the property, has accepted responsibility to maintain the integrity and features of the property which give it its unique, unspoiled character. I feel strongly that this alteration of 1306 would not merely dilute, but utterly overshadow and therefore destroy the features which make this home a true example of an unspoiled bungalow. Please reject the 1306 West Mountain proposal. -------------------------- 2nd email from Sally Dunphy: From: Sally Dunphy<sally.dunphy@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 5:57 PM To: Gretchen Schiager<gschiager@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] please reject 1306 W. Mountain proposal I was dismayed to hear of the plans to alter the home at 1306 West Mountain. I had imagined the historic designation, richly deserved for a home which has been on the local historic home tour and lavishly featured in the national architectural publication "American Bungalow", indicated a true understanding of the significance of the home as it currently stands.The proposal I viewed would alter the scale of the home (an important aspect of bungalow architecture) and make it a mockery of the movement which inspired its design and scale. I do not mean to sound bitter, but if historic designation is a one-owner-only thing, easily circumvented, why bother? If people buying historic properties can simply treat those properties as if they've purchased a lot with a partial tear-down there is a problem. Please reject the 1306 West Mountain proposal. Sally Dunphy 970-217-0871 Packet Pg. 76 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Susan Peak<peakandpeak@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 20214:37 PM To: Karen McWilliams<KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Bob Bailey's Mtn.Avenue Bungalow Re the expansion of this authentic house on Mountain Ave... What a pity to learn that the new owners of this gem want to move in and undo all of Bob Bailey's restoration work. I don't understand why people buy these smaller well kept houses along the avenue and then totally remodel and expand them. Perhaps the buyers should have purchased the house right across the street.....all the room anyone could want without destroying a bit of history. Susan Peak 1415 W Mountain Ave. Packet Pg. 77 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Kendal Stitzel To: Karen McWilliams;Gretchen Schiaoer Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please Reject Proposal for 1306 W. Mountain Ave. Date: Wednesday,March 17,2021 8:13:02 AM To the Landmark Preservation Commission: I have read about the proposed changes to the historic property 1306 W. Mountain Avenue, the so-called Jackson-Bailey home, and I urge you to reject these changes because of the huge adverse impact on a historically designated property. My concerns are as follows: • The size of the addition is huge. This scale of change alters the simple and beautiful Craftsman design of the 1922 home. I am told that the house, as is, was once featured in a national architectural magazine as a fine example of this style. It would no longer be such a historic example if these changes are accepted. • The large addition would dramatically alter the visual appearance of the house from the sides and even from the street, further violating the historic nature of the property. • Lots of the original brickwork would be destroyed. As the owner of a historic property myself, I can attest that modern brickwork can seldom equal the qualities of the original work. • Even though they were added later, at least one of the garages in the back yard was part of the historic designation, yet the proposed changes would see it torn down. This proposal seems to "mansionize" most of the historic character out of what is now a beautiful and simple example of Craftsman architecture. If the owners want a large house, it seems there are many alternatives versus destroying the historic nature of an Old Town landmark. There seems little point of a historic designation if such massive changes are permitted for designated homes. Super-sizing a historic home and destroying parts of it is not in keeping with the character of old Fort Collins or in the spirit of the property's historic designation. I hope you will keep the historic and the visual integrity of the Jackson-Bailey home intact by rejecting the proposed changes. Sincerely, Kendal Stitzel 1412 W. Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 970-214-8279 Packet Pg. 78 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Laura Bailey <laurabailey21 @gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 11:56 AM To: Historic Preservation; Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments for 1306 W. Mountain Ave. hearing Dear Commission: I am the daughter of Robert Bailey,who owned 1306 W Mountain previously and who worked with this commission to have the house designated. I'm also a long-term resident of Fort Collins and someone who is fairly well acquainted with Westcoast craftsman bungalow architecture. I inherited this home after my father passed away in 2019. 1 choose to sell the house having been advised by three separate realtors that the historic designation carried enough weight that any additions, should they be allowed, could not be obvious from the street, could not significantly alter the historic aesthetics of the home or have high visual impact; any future changes to the home had to be in accordance with very specific standards that matched or were highly compatible with the home's historic aesthetics. It was my father's passion to restore this home to its 1920s glory and to have it designated so that future Fort Collins residents could enjoy a window to our town's past. Had I believed that future owners could make such drastic changes as the Berkhausen's have proposed, I certainly would not have sold this historic treasure. For my part, I made sure my realtor was careful to communicate the historic designation multiple times before we entered a contract with the Berhkausens. And I personally handed the Berkhausen's a complete copy of the designation paperwork upon closing,which they gladly received. Frankly, I have been surprised and deeply disappointed that they have proposed and continue to propose such extreme changes that seem to flout our town's landmark designation program. The demolition of such a large portion of this home's original brickwork and walls to make way for a large, aesthetically incompatible addition that engulfs much of backyard and spills into the side yard encroaching on the neighbors property would have seemed profoundly wrong to my father who understand that the small, rectangular layouts of bungalow architecture and the green space surrounding the home were intentional as a direct rejection of the larger,fussier homes of the Victorian era. Bungalow architects also intended to bring nature into the homespace via the large front porches and the relatively ample lot size of the day.Thus,the ratio of green landscaping to home is indeed important to the historic accuracy. I inherited my father's appreciation for craftsman homes and have co-written and edited numerous articles about bungalow architecture for the national American Bungalow magazine, which also featured his home as a full-spread i Packet Pg. 79 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 cover story in 2014.As such, I am keenly aware that this latest proposal would irrevocably undo the hallmark small-scale bungalow characteristics for which this home was designated. The large addition would destroy the small, symmetrical character of the home and the land-to-building ratio that bungalow architects sought to achieve in the 1920s.The proposal would double the size and above-ground footprint of the home, and alter the symmetrical, rectangular lay-out. The plan would forever destroy a large percentage of the brickwork and original structure of the home.And it would fill in an extensive part of the natural grounds, changing the intentional small cottage/large natural space aesthetic to something quite different from what makes this home and property such a superb example of small-scale West Coast bungalow architecture. Ironically, all of these changes are quite antithetical to the characteristics and values for which this home was designated. This sort of proposal seems shortsighted and wildly dismissive of the values the home and the historic landmark program.Thus, approval of the Berkhausen's current proposal or any similar iteration would create a concerning precedent for our town's historic designations program. I personally find great value in the commission's mission and work I thank you for following your commitments on 1306 Mountain Ave.,to date. I encourage you to continue to do so by holding strictly to the Interior Secretary's standards and not allowing this incompatible proposal, or any similar iteration, to move forward. With sincere thanks, Laura J. Bailey 4731 Crest Rd. Fort Collins, CO., 80526 2 Packet Pg. 80 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Michelle Haefele <michelle.haefele@outlook.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 11:14 AM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments for the Historic Preservation Commission Attachments: 2021-11-12-letter to LPC-Jackson-Bailey House 1306 W Mountain Ave.docx Mr. Bertolini, please convey my comments (below and attached)to the Commission. Thank you, Michelle To: Members of the Historic Preservation Commission While the revised proposal for the alteration of the Jackson-Bailey House at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue is less egregious than the prior proposal, it still does not adequately protect the historic resources for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark. The Craftsman Bungalow movement espoused a rejection of the ostentatiousness of the Victorian era by embracing smaller houses, simple designs and interior arrangements,with yards and large porches to allow residents more connection with nature. The proposed alterations would reverse this deliberate design and would diminish the characteristics for which this iconic house example of the style was designated. Few of these houses (built following the first World War) remain in Fort Collins and this is arguably one of(if not the) best examples. Recognized by American Bungalow magazine as an irreplaceable icon, this house was featured as a cover story(written by Bob Bailey himself). The characteristics for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins landmark include its small size (a defining characteristic of the style), it's simplistic rectangular footprint,the well preserved details such as the original brickwork, and the two original structures comprising the entire property. While a modest remodel might be appropriate, the one proposed is not. It is still too large and visible from the front of the house. A more appropriate addition would be of a single story confined to the back(without the projection out to the side).This would preserve more of the original exterior brickwork and the essential architectural details that characterize the Bungalow style. As noted in the staff report,this proposed alteration still fails to comply with most of the with the standards set by the Secretary or the Interior and going forward with this enormous alteration would be a grievous loss to the community. Dr. Bailey restored the home to its original 1920s style (both inside and outside) and the designation of his home as a city landmark was a great source of pride for him.This designation was a generous gift to the city of Fort Collins and should not be discarded. Please ensure honor Dr. Bailey's legacy and require that any alterations faithfully preserve the integrity of the designation and the iconic Craftsman Bungalow style. Thank you, Michelle Haefele "The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." — Plato i Packet Pg. 81 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 To: Members of the Historic Preservation Commission While the revised proposal for the alteration of the Jackson-Bailey House at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue is less egregious than the prior proposal, it still does not adequately protect the historic resources for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark. The Craftsman Bungalow movement espoused a rejection of the ostentatiousness of the Victorian era by embracing smaller houses, simple designs and interior arrangements,with yards and large porches to allow residents more connection with nature. The proposed alterations would reverse this deliberate design and would diminish the characteristics for which this iconic house example of the style was designated. Few of these houses (built following the first World War) remain in Fort Collins and this is arguably one of(if not the) best examples. Recognized by American Bungalow magazine as an irreplaceable icon,this house was featured as a cover story(written by Bob Bailey himself). The characteristics for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins landmark include its small size (a defining characteristic of the style), it's simplistic rectangular footprint, the well preserved details such as the original brickwork, and the two original structures comprising the entire property. While a modest remodel might be appropriate,the one proposed is not. It is still too large and visible from the front of the house. A more appropriate addition would be of a single story confined to the back (without the projection out to the side).This would preserve more of the original exterior brickwork and the essential architectural details that characterize the Bungalow style. As noted in the staff report,this proposed alteration still fails to comply with most of the with the standards set by the Secretary or the Interior and going forward with this enormous alteration would be a grievous loss to the community. Dr. Bailey restored the home to its original 1920s style (both inside and outside) and the designation of his home as a city landmark was a great source of pride for him.This designation was a generous gift to the city of Fort Collins and should not be discarded. Please ensure honor Dr. Bailey's legacy and require that any alterations faithfully preserve the integrity of the designation and the iconic Craftsman Bungalow style. Thank you, Michelle Haefele Packet Pg. 82 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Veronica Lim To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 West Mountain Ave. Date: Friday,November 12,2021 1:12:05 PM Greetings,Aubrie, 1306 West Mountain has official Historic Designation. The current owners purchased this home knowing this. The proposed alterations and additions are not in keeping with the Historic Designation. Surely the proposed changes to the property should not be allowed. Thank you for conveying my thoughts to the Commission. Sincerely, Veronica Lim 108 South Whitcomb St. Fort Collins,Colorado 80521 Packet Pg. 83 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: paiae noon To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 west Mountain Date: Saturday,November 13,2021 9:32:55 AM Hello I live at 1307 West Mountain Ave and highly recommend you not allow this modification of a historic structure. Mountain Ave is a historic area and already some very inappropriate remodels of historic properties have been allowed to the detriment of this district. Citizens of Fort Collins love this street...Halloween, tour de fat, parades, running races all come down mountain Ave . It's a precious resource for our entire community. Let's stop the degradation of its historic value. I don't mind thoughtful appropriate additions that enhance a historic structure but not additions that ruin it. Please don't permit this. Paige and Barry Noon Packet Pg. 84 11/15/21, 12:08 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] Reject requested changes at 1306 West Mountain Vicky McLane <vmhmclane@gmail.com> Sat 11/13/2021 3:53 PM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.conn> Historic Preservation Commission - I am writing to ask you to reject the remodel proposal for 1306 West Mountain Avenue, which was designated as a landmark in 2014. The proposed changes are absolutely incompatible with the home's protected designation nor, as I understand it, do the requested changes meet Department of Interior standards for changes to a landmarked home. The proposed changes are incompatible because they would double the size of the house and destroy the aesthetic value for which this type of architecture is known. Furthermore, the changes call for demolishing a significant section of the back half of the cottage and its historic brickwork. Changes of the type being proposed would be contrary to the standards that have been followed by the Commission and would act as a damaging precedent for other landmark homes. We used to live in the 1100 block of West Magnolia, and we would walk our dog all over the Mountain neighborhood, so I am familiar with this property. Changes of the type being proposed are not consistent with the historic integrity of the landmark homes in this neighborhood. Please reject the proposal. Vicky McLane 1607 Ticonderoga Drive Packet Pq. 85 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYiO4Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQAA5dKlRoN3JJjoQZZJjb3p... 1/1 11/15/21, 12:02 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] 1306 W. Mountain Historic Home Susan Seneshen <seneshen@telus.net> Sat 11/13/2021 12:00 PM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.conn> Hello, As a resident of Fort Collins for over 30 years and owner of a home in Old Town, I want to see the historic and architectural integrity of the 1306 W. Mountain home honored according to the guidelines set out by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Department of Interior's Standards for changes to a landmarked home. These designations have been created by people in Fort Collins who understand the character and history of our community. The designations are there to protect the community and prevent outside interests from negatively impacting the collective aesthetic. Just as when you go to dinner at someone else's home (pre-COVID)you follow their customs and guidelines-take off your shoes at the door, etc. The newcomers to our community need to adhere to our stated guidelines when considering changes to the 1306 property. Susan Seneshen Packet Pg. 86 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYiO4Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQAAj5JuJSzStCuVXsLyLXpyY... 1/1 11/15/21, 12:11 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] Jackson-Bailey Home on West Mountain Avenue jacko@frii.com <jacko@frii.com> Sun 11/14/2021 4:37 PM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.com> Hello I write to express my thoughts and feelings about the proposed addition to the Jackson-Bailey home at 1306 West Mountain Avenue. I do not approve of the proposed addition to this house. This house is a lovely, well cared for expression of the time it was built. To remove/ demolish a significant amount of the structure in order to double the size of the house does not fit with the guidelines for preservation of historic homes. Usual additions to historic homes are to the rear of the building, and are accessed by opening up window and door areas, not demolition of walls. Additions are also meant to be much smaller than the existing structure. If the current owners of this house wanted a 2,500+ sq.ft. house, they should have just purchased one. Please act to preserve the character of this fine home by not approving the requested addition. Thank you, Jack Armstrong Fort Collins, Colorado Packet Pg. 87 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYiO4Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQACgYdgMgUIJDtn%2Fc5z7cl... 1/1 11/15/21, 12:10 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] Comments to Landmark Preservation Commission Robert Viscount <rrviscount@yahoo.com> Sun 11/14/2021 3:34 PM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.conn> To: Members of the Historic Preservation Commission: I urge you to reject the proposed remodel for 1306 West Mountain Avenue. This craftsman bungalow cottage is one of the few remaining examples of homes that were built in the 1920s, after World War I. It was designated as a landmark in 2014 and has been featured on historic home tours. The proposed remodel would destroy the aesthetics of the building by adding an extensive addition to the side and back of the house. This multi-story addition would dominate the property, and the basic simplicity of the bungalow would be lost. For several years I was a motorman on the Birney Car 21, and I enjoyed hearing the comments from passengers as they not only rode the historic trolley but also saw the history of Fort Collins preserved in the homes that line Mountain Avenue. We need to work to preserve this living history that we are so lucky to have. Robert Viscount Golden Meadows Neighborhood Packet Pg. 88 https:Houtlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYi04Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQADCNWzeRrnxBpXX5EXjCEi... 1/1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Gretchen Williams To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 W Mountain Ave historic designation Date: Sunday,November 14,2021 8:16:12 PM I urge the historic designation of this 1920 bungalow style house at 1306 W. Mountain Ave, the Jackson-Bailey House. It is important that we recognize and preserve our architectural heritage before it perishes. Once gone, it is gone for good. We should cherish and protect the structures representative of the past before they are all gone, especially when there are significant past owners and/or residents associated with them. This structure is one that can and should be preserved for those reasons. I sincerely hope that the elected representatives of the City of Ft. Collins do the right thing and protect this example of an important era in the City's architectural and civic history. Thank you for your careful and sincere consideration of preserving Ft. Collins' past. Gretchen Williams 484 Gilpin St Denver, CO 80218 Packet Pg. 89 11/15/21, 12:45 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] 1306 Mountain Avenue Proposal Loretta Bailey <lorebailey@comcast.net> Mon 11/15/2021 10:42 AM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.conn> > To Whom it May Concern: > I am writing regarding the proposal to build an addition to the Historic Landmark house at 1306 Mountain Avenue. This quaint bungalow is a historic landmark and part of our town's history. It should be protected as such. > The proposal before you is extreme and would permanently change the look and feel of this historic home to an unreasonable point. The historic details that will be damaged cannot be returned once they have been lost. > I believe a historic designation should be treated seriously. These days there are fewer and fewer intact historic homes in Fort Collins. While I can understand that some homeowners in Old Town want to renovate or enlarge their older homes, I do not think such largescale changes are at all appropriate for historically designated landmarks. The character of our Old Town is one of the special things about our city and needs to be preserved in some small way. Ensuring that historic landmarks are actually protected from largescale changes is one way to get that job done. Please follow the standards and reject this extreme proposal. > Thank you, > Loretta Bailey Packet Pq�. 90 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYi04Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQAGKkPDYSWAlKvS83crTq ... 1/1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Joel Danforth <joeldanforth@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2021 10:16 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comment for hearing on 1306 W. Mountain To Whom it May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed renovations at the historic landmark home at 1306 W. Mountain. The home perfectly represents a piece of 1920s Fort Collins bungalow architecture and the commission was wise to protect it as a landmark. As I understand it,the addition and other changes being proposed would double the size of the house and require demolition of a significant amount of historic material. While some thoughtful renovations may be acceptable to landmark buildings, the proposed plan would add a rather large addition on the side of the home. This will alter the look of the house beyond the style that was indicative of this time period and architecture. The plan seems to alter the home so significantly that it would rob our community of a historic resource and a piece of charm that makes old town neighborhoods so special. A proposal,that is so out of sync with our community and your standards for historic homes and must be rejected. Regards, Joel Danforth i Packet Pg. 91 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Sally Dunphy <sally.dunphy@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 4:31 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 W MOUNTAIN AVE - Please reject this inappropriate proposal I am wholly opposed to the proposed alteration of 1306.The proposal would alter the structure so significantly the historic value would be greatly reduced.The plans appear not to have taken the nature and character of the home into account. I believe the home deserves respect and hope your recommendation supports the values our community places on preserving our history. The home at 1306 Mountain Avenue is on the historic trolley route, near our beloved City Park, and a prominent example of the life of our city as it developed. One need not live in the neighborhood to understand and appreciate its value. Historic designation cannot be meaningful if that designation applies to only the owner who originally sought the designation.The integrity of the entire process is undermined, becomes meaningless, if it is a one-owner-only! It must carry forward. I do understand property owners have rights. With those rights come a responsibility for honoring rules of the community they've voluntarily joined.Just as we respect and abide by laws, zoning restrictions and HOA covenants, so too should the current occupant(s) of a historic home respect and abide by the limits that designation entails. I hope the current owners are able to find their way to a plan which honors the home and meets their needs. Sally Dunphy 970 217 0871 (m) Packet Pg. 92 11/15/21, 12:39 PM Mail-Aubrie Brennan-Outlook ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 [EXTERNAL] HPC Comments: 1306 W Mountain Conceptual Review Gina Janett <ginaciao@frii.com> Mon 11/15/2021 7:05 AM To: Aubrie Brennan <abrennan@fcgov.com> Dear Historic Preservation Commission, I am writing to urge the Commission to reject the conceptual plans for changes to the Jackson—Bailey home at 1306 W Mountain. As you know, our city has a long tradition of valuing the historic buildings and architecture of our earliest European settlers who founded Fort Collins.The residents of Old Town, whether newly arrived or long term residents, treasure the historic style and character of our community's earliest houses. Please reject the conceptual plan because it does not meet Fort Collins' City Code and the Secretary of Interior's Standards. The design features that are most egregious in terms of the standard include but are not limited to: - An almost doubling of the size/square footage of the house. Craftsman homes are characterized by their rectangular footprint and compact size, in part, because they were built for people with modest incomes; - The massing and scale of the proposed addition on the side of the house does not meet the standard that additions should be smaller, subordinate, and less visible than the main house. - The demolition of walls in the northeast corner of the home violate the rules that require the original building and its materials to be preserved in as close to its original state as possible. - A major change of how the property appears from the street. Filling the empty lawn with a large addition would be readily visible from the street and would detract from the simple rectangular character of the landmarked home. Finally,this home isn't just an old house. It is a home whose previous owner treasured its original historic architecture and character so much that he went to the time, money and effort to have it designated a Historic Landmark so that it would be permanently protected and preserved. This designation by a previous owner in line with the rules and standards in City Code should be respected.The proposed conceptual design does not adequately meet these standards and should be rejected. Gina Gina C.Janett 730 W Oak St. Fort Collins,CO 80521 970 222-5896 ginaciao@frii.com Packet Pg. 93 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADZmMGViNThkLTcxMDUtNGFjYiO4Y2FkLTM5MmEyNGJjOTZkNAAQAD6agAHx7Op3nAx2JdYwbx... 1/1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Bill Jenkins To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL] Protect the landmark Jackson-Bailey home from destructive remodel proposal Date: Monday,November 15,2021 3:20:22 PM Hello commissioners, I am writing to express my concern about the proposed rebuild of the home at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue. Please do not let t his property lose its value as a Landmark home. The addition would double the size of the home and take away its historic significance. The proposal would go against the standards followed by your commission. Please consider not approving the proposed changes to this home. Thank you, Bill Jenkins Ft. Collins Community members are invited to submit public comments by Monday November 15th against a proposal that would destroy the historic integrity of a well-known Fort Collins landmark bungalow at 1306 W Mountain Avenue. (The Fort Collins Historic Preservation Commission will vote on this item on Wednesday, Nov. 17.) The Landmark Preservation Commission (now called Historic Preservation Commission) designated this small craftsman bungalow cottage at 1306 W. Mountain Ave as a landmark in 2014 for its superb exemplification of small-scale 1920s brick craftsmen homes that became popular in the Swetts addition of Mountain Avenue after WWI. The home was not only featured on the historic home tour, but was featured as a full-spread cover story in the national American Bungalow architectural magazine. However, a California couple recently purchased the home and have proposed changes that are incompatible with the home's protected designation. Specifically, they are asking to add an extensive addition to the side and back of the house that would ruin the very historic aesthetics for which the home was designated. They submitted another proposal that has already been rejected by the Historic Preservation Commission and this is their second submittal. The proposed changes do not meet the Department of Interior's Standards for changes to a landmarked home. Packet Pg. 94 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Why is the proposed addition incompatible with the home? • It would double the size of this small cottage house and irrevocably ruin the simple, rectangular aesthetic for which bungalow architecture was known. • The addition would engulf much of the historic property and be highly visible from the street, damaging the overall historic character of this snapshot of 1920s Fort Collins. • It would also demolish a significant portion of the home back half and its historic brickwork. • The proposal goes against the standards followed by the landmark commission, and if allowed it would set a dangerous precedent for other landmark homes. Approval of this proposal or any similar iteration would not only take away from the charm of Mountain Avenue, it would undermine the public's trust in the historic designation Packet Pg. 95 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 November 15,2021 Fort Collins Historic Preservation Commission As a resident of West Mountain Avenue and as a supporterof the historic protection programs of Fort Collins, I am writing to comment on the proposed changes to 1306 West Mountain,a designated City Landmark,and to urge you to rejectthis proposal at the November 17th Historic Preservation Commission meeting. The assessmentof the city staff is clear and fairly complete.This proposal will destroy important elementswhich made this structure eligible fordesignation in the first place. Beyondthe individual architectural features of this home,its original size, compact form,and simple geometricshape is a key elementof this structure.The proposed remodelwill eliminate the veryessence of this modest bungalow home. I wantto emphasize thatthe damage thatthese proposed changes will extend beyond the physical impact on this individual home. Mountain Avenue is clearly the premier prewar historic street of Fort Collins,from the downtown,past StThomas Church,the Avery House,the sugar beet mill era cottages, 1306 itself,and ending at Grandview Cemetery,with the trolley running down most of its distance. The street has always been changing,architecturally, and will continue to change.But so few of the individual homes which have been afforded any recognition,letalone protection.The previous ownerof 1306 choose to do the work required to have his home recognized and designated. It is the contribution that 1306 makes to this neighborhood which amplifies it value and which makes its importance really matter. I don't fully understand the legal and administrative ramifications of home ownerseekingand obtaining City Landmark status fortheir home,but I'd to like think that it creates a moral, if not legal obligation for the city and the Landmarks Commission to guard the qualities of the home which made it a Landmark building.The staff report is clear that proposed changes of this structure is incompatible with the historic elements of 1306.They are,perhaps more importantly,incompatible with the historic neighborhood context in which the home exists.This is an important case which tests whether Fort Collins is going to uphold the meager protections afforded the historic elementsofourcommunity. I urge you to rejectthis proposal at your November 17,2021 meeting. Eric Smith 1216 West Mountain Avenue Packet Pg. 96 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Shelly Terry To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 W Mountain preservtion Date: Monday,November 15,2021 8:46:03 AM Historic Preservation Commission: The integrity and promise to communities, states and the nation that there is in place a means to preserve and then protect the 'living' history of our heritage is at stake in the hearing before the Commission on the house at 1306 W Mountain Ave. This home is obviously a structure worth saving and protecting as evidenced by its designation, national attention as a perfect example of bungalow architecture of the post-WWI era, and a beautifully well maintained addition to the history of Ft. Collins. Everyone can be proud that we have this home preserved since so many of this era have been lost or altered. If we cannot continue to hold fast to designations with each challenge then other owners will be emboldened to act as if it means very little and I fear a time in the not to distant future that could become true. HOLD FIRM and don't let this hard fough t right to protect history be diluted.. Respectfully, Shelly Terry 817 W Mountain Ave. Ft. Collins, CO 80521 shelly.terry@mygait.com Packet Pg. 97 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: William Whitley <william.whitley@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 4:32 PM To: Aubrie Brennan Cc: Jim Bertolini; Maren Bzdek Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 W Mountain Ave November 15, 2021 To the Landmark Preservation Comission, Once again I am asking you to reject the proposed conceptual and project plans for altering the home at 1306 W Mountain. Referring to page 72 of this month's packet,the proposed alterations to this house *do not meet applicable rehabilitation standards*, and so should not be allowed. My wife and I live in a landmarked house at 618 W Mountain Ave,the "Crose/Scott/Dickey' house (and attached garage).The reasons which influenced us to designate our home were twofold: a financial incentive in the form of tax credits (to assist in the costs of restoration), and the desire to preserve an historic structure for posterity. This home is a singular classic example of a modest craftsman bungalow cottage, and was restored by the previous owner to promote sustainable living on a modest scale.The proposed alterations would irreparably alter the historic fabric of this designated house, and would potentially invalidate the protections which the Landmark Designation was created to protect. If you allow this to happen,you are exposing *every other landmarked structure* in Fort Collins to the similar fate. William Whitley 618 W Mountain Ave Fort CollinsCO 80521 Packet Pg. 98 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Shelly Terry To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL]comments on 1306 W,Mountain/11/17 Date: Thursday,November 18,2021 7:17:36 AM Historic Preservation Commission: Speaking before you last night against the proposed addition to the Bailey house I feel I came on strongly against all additions to HD homes and even used too strong a negative word with regard to the current plans for addition to this home. I do find the plan totally unacceptable in that the size and roof line give the visual message that I am looking at a house where a historical front area has been added, not left to mark the 1920 era of bungalow construction. I am not against additions on HD homes. It is in the interest of this living, thriving area that families (w/new and different needs) move in and care deligently abt the condition of the homes and the history of the area. I worked to have my cottage home designated knowing that going forward a family would love it, but need more space. I relied on the HD requirements to keep the addition in p roportion to the home. I was very heartened to hear Meg Dunn talk abt 33% increase in the footprint be a guiding measurement. I do not know if this email will find its way to you or into the record, but hopefully it can amend my remarks and add to the email I sent to the Commission on 11/16. Respectfully, Shelly Terry 817 W. Mountain Ave. Fort Collins, Co 80521 970-484-0892 Packet Pg. 99 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Shelly Terry To: Aubrie Brennan Subject: [EXTERNAL]comments on 1306 W,Mountain/11/17 Date: Thursday,November 18,2021 7:17:36 AM Historic Preservation Commission: Speaking before you last night against the proposed addition to the Bailey house I feel I came on strongly against all additions to HD homes and even used too strong a negative word with regard to the current plans for addition to this home. I do find the plan totally unacceptable in that the size and roof line give the visual message that I am looking at a house where a historical front area has been added, not left to mark the 1920 era of bungalow construction. I am not against additions on HD homes. It is in the interest of this living, thriving area that families (w/new and different needs) move in and care deligently abt the condition of the homes and the history of the area. I worked to have my cottage home designated knowing that going forward a family would love it, but need more space. I relied on the HD requirements to keep the addition in p roportion to the home. I was very heartened to hear Meg Dunn talk abt 33% increase in the footprint be a guiding measurement. I do not know if this email will find its way to you or into the record, but hopefully it can amend my remarks and add to the email I sent to the Commission on 11/16. Respectfully, Shelly Terry 817 W. Mountain Ave. Fort Collins, Co 80521 970-484-0892 Packet Pg. 100 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: Laura Bailev To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Public comment on 1306 W. Mountain Ave. proposal Date: Tuesday,January 18,2022 7:54:51 AM Jim- Here's my letter for the meeting. Some others may be coming as well. Regards, Laura Dear Commissioners: As the previous owner of historic landmark home on 1306 W. Mountain Ave., I would like to voice my opposition to the latest proposal to add an incompatible addition to the side and back of the home. Not only would the addition ruin the historic aesthetics and damage historic material,but it would violate the spirit and the letter of the Landmark Designation, setting a dangerous precedent for the future of our Landmark program. While I understand the applicants are entitled to request reviews of proposed alterations, this is now the third proposal they've submitted that is obviously and extremely out of sync with this commission's feedback and with the Interior Secretary's standards. The homeowners have had ample meetings,public hearings and specific feedback from this commission to steer them in directions that would comply with the standards while helping them achieve more living space. It is now clear that they are not hearing the feedback this commission has so clearly provided. The most current iteration,while less extreme than the previous two, still almost doubles the size of the home (specifically the plan increases the home size by about 80 percent), and retains the incongruent bump-out that ruins the symmetrical cottage shape of the home. This addition would still be highly visible from Mountain Avenue. (The staff report notes that additions should be subordinate and inset or flush with the home). At the November 2021 commission meeting we heard the applicant Brian Berkhausen explain how he feels the home is not suitable for his individual lifestyle preferences. That is something any reasonable homebuyer would have considered before buying a historically landmarked home. If the commission approves the current proposal, this case could gut the validity of the landmark program in the public's eye all together. In no time, realtors will be telling clients the landmark designation doesn't carry much weight. While the Berkhausen's may not appreciate small-scale sustainable living that this restored home affords, many individuals consider smaller homes like this one to be highly desirable-- Packet Pg. 101 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 and yet increasingly hard to find in Fort Collins. This proposal would replace yet another one of our town's smaller homes with a larger, much more expensive home during a time when simple, small-scale sustainable living is increasingly needed and desirable among a growing subset of homebuyers. You may recall my father Robert Bailey worked with this commission to earn the historic designation for this home. He recognized that his house was a superb example of small-scale West Coast craftsman architecture. And while he wanted to see its value preserved for future generations, but he also believed deeply in the value of small-scale living. Ironically, the proposed plan would alter the very characteristics that make this home such an iconic example of both. I ask you to please apply the secretary's standards fully and reject the current proposal or any future proposals that do not comply. Thank you for your time and your commitment to honoring a small slice of Fort Collin's history. Sincerely, Laura Bailey Packet Pg. 102 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Sally Dunphy <sally.dunphy@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 3:32 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Public comment for 1306 W. Mountain-please deny Please ask the current owners of 1306 W Mountain to stop squandering taxpayer money by engaging the city's time and resources with these repeated requests to violate the Standards and intent of landmark designation. I am in awe of the patience and respect city staff and the commission members have shown in carefully and repeatedly explaining the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and in offering suggestions which address the homeowners' needs while adhering to those Standards. I begin to see the respect goes in only one direction. It is now becoming clear the homeowners have no regard for the integrity of the historic designation process,the staff and committee's time,the architecture of the home itself, nor for the trust they undertook in purchasing a designated home. The homeowners have been able to succinctly articulate their needs and the ways in which this home fails to meet those needs. I find it surprising they purchased a property which clearly falls so wide of the mark. It gives rise to the suspicion that the home buyers never intended to honor the home's special attributes and significance. I do not believe it is homeowners' goal to create a permanent breach which will completely undermine the integrity and intent of the historic landmark designation in our community. I believe their goals are based in simple self-interest. Nevertheless, I strongly believe the future integrity of the historic landmark program is at stake if standards are not applied and adhered to in the case of 1306 West Mountain Avenue. Please deny this unreasonable, repetitious request. Thank you for your kind consideration, Sally Dunphy Fort Collins CO 970-217-0871 1 Packet Pg. 103 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Michelle Haefele <michelle.haefele@outlook.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 4:47 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Conceptual Review for the Jackson-Bailey House 1306 W. Mountain Mr. Bertolini, Please convey my comments to the Landmark Preservation Commission. To: Members of the Historic Preservation Commission Once again the new owners of the designated Jackson-Bailey House at 1306 W. Mountain Ave. are proposing an alteration that would destroy the historic character that underpins the designation. The house is an outstanding example of a West Coast Craftsman Bungalow—a style which deliberately rejected the large, highly ornamented, ostentatious Victorian houses of the previous era. The Craftsman Bungalow movement embraced smaller houses, simple designs, uncluttered interior arrangements, ample windows, and large porches to allow residents to focus on yards and foster a greater connection with nature. The proposed addition is too large and obtrusive. It would overwhelm the original house, and is still visible from the front. Few of these houses (built following the first World War) remain in Fort Collins and this is arguably one of(if not the) best examples. Recognized by American Bungalow magazine as an irreplaceable icon, this house was featured as a cover story(written by Bob Bailey himself). The characteristics for which this house was designated as a Fort Collins landmark include its small size (a defining characteristic of the style), it's simplistic rectangular footprint,the well preserved details such as the original brickwork, and the two original structures comprising the entire property. While a modest remodel might be appropriate, the one proposed is not. It is still too large and visible from the front of the house. A more appropriate addition would be of a single story confined to the back(without the projection out to the side).This would preserve more of the original exterior brickwork and the essential architectural details that characterize the Bungalow style.There are several examples of discrete additions that provide more space without altering the appearance of historic(designated or not) houses. As noted in the staff report,this proposed alteration still does not comply with most of the with the standards set by the Secretary or the Interior and going forward with this enormous alteration would be a grievous loss to the community. Dr. Bailey was a friend of mine and I know how much this designation meant to him.The pictures provided by the applicant include the marker with the inscription "Circa 1922"that has had pride of place since Bob conceived of it as a way to proclaim the historic nature of his former home. He spent years working to restore the home to its original 1920s style (both inside and outside) and the designation of his home as a city landmark was a great source of pride for him as well as a generous gift to the city of Fort Collins. Please ensure honor Dr. Bailey's legacy and require that any alterations faithfully preserve the integrity of the designation and the iconic Craftsman Bungalow style. Thank you, Michelle Haefele i Packet Pg. 103-1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Gina Janett <ginaciao@frii.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 7:04 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] HPC - Agenda Item 3 1306 W Mountain Importance: High Jim, Please forward these comments to the HPC for tomorrow's meeting. Hello to the Historic Preservation Commission, I am writing to encourage the HPC to deny approval of the proposed addition on the back of 1306 W Mountain.The proposed 887 square foot addition on the 1,097 square foot home clearly violates standards SOI#1 and SOI#2. The Department of Interior's standards are clear for changes to landmarked properties.Additions should be significantly smaller in size, scale, and massing than the main building.The proposed addition is 80%of the size of the current home. And if the square footage of the existing back porch is deducted from the current house size,the addition is actually even larger in comparison to the house itself. The standards recommend additions be no more than about 30%of the original home's size. The proposed addition clearly does not meet this standard. The Department of Interior's Publication 37 on rear additions to landmarks states (highlights added): "Rear additions—like all new additions—should be subordinate to the original building in size,scale,and massing, as well as design. Additions that feature a higher roofline,that extend beyond the side of the building,or that have a significantly greater footprint than the original building are usually not compatible." In addition, the proposed addition would demolish a portion of the existing building's wall and would extend the addition into the side yard, significantly changing the view of the rectangular home from the street. The property owners knew the house was landmarked and had some restrictions due to its landmark status when they purchased the property. Either they did not do due diligence prior to purchase or they made a decision to ignore the restrictions. In either case,their proposed addition does not meet the standards and should be denied. It would seem the owners need to accept the home they have purchased as is, or find a larger home for purchase and terminate their efforts to try to inappropriately modify this excellent example of a Craftsman home. Please deny the proposed addition to this landmarked home. Thank you! Gina C.Janett ginaciao@frii.com 970 222-5896 Packet Pg. 103-2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Derm Collosus <dermcollosus@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 10:08 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] Dear Historic Preservation Commission: I urge you to reject the latest proposal for an addition to the historic home at 1306 W. Mountain.This size and nature of this proposed addition violates the Interior Secretary's standards for historic preservation. Not only would it nearly double the size of the home(additions are meant to be small and subordinate according to the standards),but it would destroy the simple rectangular layout and large,natural space that defines the home.The secretary's standards are clear that additions and renovations should not alter the character defining features of historic homes.This proposal would do just that. It is clear that this newest proposal is very similar to past proposals in the manner in which in disregards the secretary's guidance. Letting it move forward would undermine the integrity of the historic landmark program and set a terrible example for the future. I appreciate the work you've done to protect a portion of our town's historic heritage and ask you to continue to uphold the standards that help make our Old Town special. Joel On Tue,Jan 18,2022 at 10:04 PM Derm Collosus<dermcollosus@smail.com>wrote: 1 Packet Pg. 103-3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Veronica Lim <veronica lim@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 10:24 PM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 West Mountain To the Commission: I respectfully request that the Landmark Designation of the home at 1306 West Mountain Avenue be upheld. Otherwise, what is the point of historic designation? I own my home at 108 South Whitcomb, where my entire block from Mountain Avenue to Oak Street is historically designated. I value the charm, the unique character of the Old Town area. I see this character being eroded every time a new owner is granted an exception from the requirements of Landmark Designation. Old Town represents the very soul of Fort Collins. Are we going to allow that soul to be gradually destroyed? Veronica Lim 1 Packet Pg. 103-4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Jim Bertolini From: Eric Guenther <eric.e.guenther@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 7:30 AM To: Jim Bertolini; Aubrie Brennan Cc: Brad Yatabe; Maren Bzdek; Eric Guenther- Contact Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1306 West Mountain Avenue - COI and Public Comments Attachments: Guenther - COI Form.pdf, Design Review - 1306 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO.pdf Good morning, COI Form and my Private Citizen Public Comments are attached. Please advise if you require anything else. Thank you...drive safely today, it's nasty outside! Eric E. Guenther 1308 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Cell: 248.767.5023 e-Mail: eric.e.guenther@gmail.com i Packet Pg. 103-5 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 To: Fort Collins Historic Preservation Commission Subject: Design Proposal for 1306 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80521 Dear Commissioners: Please recognize that Eric and Pamela Guenther, owners of 1308 West Mountain Avenue, strongly support approval of the proposed enhancements at 1306 West Mountain Avenue for the following reasons: • The proposed modifications largely meet Federal, State and Local guidelines for historic preservation. The street view of the property remains essentially unchanged, while the addition provides a livable and flexible solution for current and future owners. We believe the proposed modifications preserve and respect the character of the home and the important role it plays in telling the story of Fort Collins. • The current owners have demonstrated an ongoing commitment to nurture and maintain the interior, exterior and landscaping of the property in an appropriate and tasteful way. Furthermore, their ties to the community suggest a deep and thoughtful understanding of Fort Collins dynamics and an appreciation for the diverse nature of our city's architecture. We are confident in their reverence for the home and their commitment to properly preserve key interior and exterior design attributes for the education and enjoyment of future generations. • We believe it is in the best long-term interests of the neighborhood and the community to facilitate a family-friendly solution for the property. Homeowner needs and expectations change over time, and the proposed modifications represent appropriate adaptations that are very much aligned with the cultural, historical and architectural traditions of the City of Fort Collins. In seven years as residents of Old Town Fort Collins, we have observed many changes in the commercial and residential characterics of the neighborhood. We believe the proposed plans for 1306 West Mountain Avenue represent reasonable, respectful and livable enhancements to an important historic property. In the future, this approval process can be studied as an example of thoughtful deliberation and balanced decision making resulting in a solution that meets the needs of a wide range of interested parties. Packet Pg. 103-6 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 From: c M To: Jim Bertolini; Maren Bzdek;Aubrie Brennan;Mea Dun-Contact Subject: [EXTERNAL]FW: 1306 West Mountain Ave Date: Wednesday,January 19,2022 4:29:13 PM HI, all -Sending again, as Jim's email was incorrect. Best, Karen Sent from Mail for Windows From: C M Sent: Wednesday,January 19, 2022 4:25 PM To: abrennan(@fcgov.com; Maren Bzdek;ibertolini(@fcgov; barefootmegPgmail.com Subject: 1306 West Mountain Ave Dear Historic Preservation Commission Members: Please do not allow these proposed alterations to the Robert Bailey Property at 1306 West Mountain Avenue, as they do not comply with Chapter 14 of the City's codes and do not uphold the codified Policies and Purposes for historic preservation. The changes: 1). Do not meet each of the ten Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation; meeting all ten Standards is required for approval; and 2).Do a disservice to the collective residents of Fort Collins, by failing to preserve and protect this significant resource, thereby diminishing the architectural and historical value of this and all Landmark properties in Fort Collins. Historic preservation is a Council-recognized community value, and the protection and preservation of Council- designated landmarks is a community expectation. A geographer and environmental ecologist, Bob Bailey was particularly interested in the role of smaller, older homes in promoting sustainable living. He put this passion into practice, by investing both a considerable amount of his money and time in the painstaking restoration of this 1922 home, and into words, by regularly using this restoration to write about sustainable living for the national architectural magazine American Bungalow. Mr. Bailey had witnessed several Old Town tear-downs and inappropriate remodels. To protect this carefully restored property, in 2014 Bob requested Fort Collins Landmark designation, recognizing that in doing so, he would be sacrificing both a level of autonomy and potential increased economic value. He chose to do this because he believed strongly in historic preservation. In requesting Landmark designation, Bob placed his trust in City Council and the Preservation Commission to protect his investment for the future. Please honor the City's commitments to those homeowners who choose to forgo personal gain and autonomy to preserve our heritage. Sent from Mail for Windows Packet Pg. 103-7 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 PRMeSTEAD CONSTRUCTION Inc. "Building Dreams" 10-18-21 RE: Design Changes for 1306 W. Mountain Revised Plan set dated 10-4-2021 and consisting of 9 pages Demolition of existing brick wall: - Revised plans show removal of exterior brick wall to be 10'-2" of the exist exterior brick wall. Exterior Windows: - Revised Plans show retaining the existing windows in the home except for one window in the existing kitchen and removal of and fill-in in the existing bathroom. Floor plan square footage: - Revised plans show adding onto the existing home of 1097 square feet a new addition of 1036 square feet with no basement below and no exterior stair entrance on the east side basement level. Overall Height: - Revised plans show the addition to be 17'-0" from grade or 2'-6" lower than the existing structure. Detached Structures: - Revised plans show retaining the existing 250 square foot garage, removal of the existing 534 square foot garage, and building a new garage of 630 square feet. P.O. Box 330 • La Porte, CO 80535 Office (970)472-1113 • Fax (970)472-8313 www.armsteadconstruction.com Packet Pg. 104 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 ° ma' e��PA ��mso - 33�- U"nAm 0 °A8 m< N 00°14'45"E n9.610' t 0_ - N O ml Iw =cc Zo - ip of a.-y z •��t o o g\ ° j { j I moo I m _ -------- ----- b s oo�s'za'w ns.uo' A �-+ o�3oQo �� 000mN� ymQ�u o°�On FA DAO oA�n b O m o K m A =80 D�~ r Z O c=0 mNX Z-N y 0+Z D= O '^ nN EOp V' m _ I -4 i z�gcQio o vz��o 3AQo�A r E � �mAlg j',wio O oRMz i i m y ZD Imi D GTiO QmL� m°yOOD g �r dry °Q""-wi p $"gIE QAoeAma�i A p O r T �;. �uDDO•iSDl�o 'o F U NA O O z k E Aom ° �hpo4�OPF z x z E>> al r Z O Dm r D�O� pm �IA��O� EEz S m 3 m r— mmHg m �• A $D3 m D r O z y Z O m Q y mm° I � iE, mw �z °Wmi o rl� BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DAB: DaAwNev: ArraoveD: 1 05 (� 10-aZm21 JD wl RMSTEAD E.HoasEToo*x Do. EEICE:m"oian.i its fil CONSTRUC71ON Inc. eigi coiiwE mz vAx: Inv)411'11s "Buibing Dreams" S,—80525 EMAIL: b@e�msteedcansuuctlan.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 EXISTING(REMODEL) ADDITION H8111 dAsg �D day„i €c 4 • % auto. �as•.aa'ax w . a O �g� •�� � "� z R�g yea � - ��� L s t N�s m a x b ---�---- c n 0 OZ L p5 m � � r E € ga m� wa iFz S �fi b seA� m O m ; J pia z IT 0 I I .zu o, ------------- E I EXISTING(REMODEl) ylAp E �IT 6 a Z 0 bIn n oxm � oD g /� 1— mod $ g�O D rm-� { omQ �roPE I ; Ama ADDITION••REMODEL ADDITION eA � m � R R F a� 1vE � �E WEB B lad Ili R 3/12 \ $ Sm2mmim o �mm�I"o =mpmm'�ApAo �!na op ~I a& � ~OAOz! A ~AD imX zpAL�Dr'A2 �2 D � _——_———_— _— m0 Z E 11ttlI pGz OAz DI�3 p3 _ qq ZD Tml M. TI xmG� O���I D n DQim A zio >E> �'z_Ao�A_m3z n O r-4 cP an -y� W �R �DO 31 w 3Er m mm Drzp Aym N� E E= b A m O �VmsR DO p �'A 3Ez(lzp p j C m AjoB �8 n D N Teo O F qi (a rrt T m An Thn oQoPF �z z E r c @000 G,Mr, O V $ g =n ��yyy-� mFD p AAm Z�O (t A O z O m m 1�1 8r ! ®z A z o o o.uai m z m� i o„ oWml o D SOD j b i11 0 8 n N M GN I _n O A BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATB: DRAW'NJD BY: ARRR D: 06 1 10-9-2021Lj Re oFTlce.cnol wzn,a v CONSTRUCTgNIne. " larolare-ea,a „Bmlel�e a••m,,, EUA�: �mmp—a�oamamoa.�om ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 RR m D � i vA �mmD Ay ' Anm�O O D mm v E��wmmy O II � Oy II m L li A = D � � mz41m�GD mn eD z; F nom€� Do 0 m as � Pc T 9 mop �m D A AB�F R. 5 II A g �03 = II D"a U3 A a I� ° $ �9m a as $ ®: $ o n o o N ---------------------------------------- HE ° l �z8 DETACHED GARAGE m n °8 ° Z -Dp F6 DzrA Z. /V g p A o � ®Ll r �� []Flu m A ®OLD LLI r n p -4 ° po m m r Z� g '� »m x n D 08 D w m o A OI ®®® p -n O a fin II II V 6 z s II m II IL II N II m r g m5-0n eR Acm m ]> ----------------------- yA� s Z � 3 o m c m 0. e e mz 1 00n II e � °aRR r II ° O n sp I U 9,-B, D g m N A ----------------------- kPRELKHARY PLANS NOT FOR cCONSTRU T ION A BERKHAUSEN DETACHED GARAGE RTEARM STEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DaAwN av: APPaoveo: i 10-a-2oz1 JD P acke1 N 0 7 1 w.Mourvrary AVE. STRUC D W5E.BORSETO-C. E.(9)0)aM-1113 Fom couws,cow ea5zl noomorvu wsosMAnory CONSTitUCTION Inc. SLDO,sunEOz (m)—s313 swETrvs ADDmory -B,.Idi,g Dreams• FORT COUIrvS1cOL0 80525 a@ama�eaamnam¢1ian.mm ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 IXISiING ADDITION -9 a a m(P g a s m N a Ea;<R � 3 s� _ �ir a O 3 A r € €�I• ��; a� o n€��e ��� Cl — 3r ,e m Em w ul — S m n y 83 O - I � c m m X w o g mNz mO mm= mz x0° Z '" NA �Ju �n �r 71a r Z 0 O EXISTING m ADDITION ADDITION zm �r b n N - b Z 8'49a" 14 RISERS 13 TREADS®10" EXISTING EXISTING z$ EASEMENT $ MAIN LEVEL � /n n Db A n m m OPANTRY DA y —4 Zmx � 00 AZUjOA D O A s �€ w m = �D Om A O 6r �z BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL a ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN APR eD: OQ N DTE: JD C v 1mswEsr mounraN avE RhLTEAD 3]SEHORSETOOTN RD. E:(970)4-113 V FORT cowNs,co eo5zl CONS"VIC TION Inc. SWO4 SUITE 102 (s7 of ai—IS sWETTS AOD i "B�Ilafng Dreamy' FORT COLLINS,OOW S 5 n®arma[eeacormtruciion.cwn ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 11 M 2 m -4 Z uj A j U3 m M r m z 0 Mm -n Z m rz A T ! ; j \ y " p - ---\� \ } (P mL/. r z 2m C) Em < 9 \\ \_rz ij (P m m -4 FE-01 W m X (p )> C) z 4 L$ m O 03 0 z U3 m 0 ® on J 6_ BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL �cc� C. DAIT DRAWN BY. APPROVED: RtARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION IN 1-2021 JD T TE 3Z5E'HO SETOOTH RD, Haeket Pa. 09 DO ..... ) ;—J I (970)=CC.NS.COLO- EMAL: El ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 G". 1"° I E I i---- 1 °R II � m II F- /� I I I II I I I L II I I II � N $ ° mR.R r ps. m Q { n D � II II b "oR �I II m O II II Rill E.s. a .N. IoleR ry Ig z e ❑ llI b I IA I I Nei;;,---- I R II il ♦�: A I I • �"G �� I I F" r ° II°�y • II Fi I ; R F II I� ) nn"nz II II — — UNR B o e I °iM III s I jj I a I II j I I to I° to I Ito $R 16 to sm 19 BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. oATE: oanwM sv: naPnoveo: m-a-zozl do 10 oRMAnoN TEgp HORS oOTN Ro 1 W.MOUNTAIN AVE. OFFICE:(9i0)-113 - V Fom cowrvs,colo m3zl noolnoNAL wF CONSTRUC710N Inc asurt oz Ax: ryzo�nza3�3 SWETTS AODRION ^iWItlNp OF.YII.^ RT COWN9,OOL0-5 EMAIL: inb@a�ms4edwnsWcti°n.wm ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 II II E r II m II u II GOR gL 6 Z 6- z HE F 7 1 II I cn m .B�E�RMK..UH'A-U S EN ADDITION&REMODEL p " ARM-OSOTE A D CO NSTRUCT11I3O N INC. 1D�E2 02 DRAWN BY APPROVED: -ketr." -0IJT--R� 07CE: wo)m— PO— 11 — CONSTRUCTION Inc. D. RnE _ —)4— 'B,ildi.g Dreams' E-L ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 VV DRAW MAIN LEVEL ADDITION j F_ 4 ggr (P rn m UJI ---------- mp hiddhilliddh o -4 R= Fist7l 6 F_ z r m (P El m Nl- MA ci < M m 1> Z! J (30 Z Z IE' DRAWN BYPRO�D' BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL bW;� ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. 11�2021 LID 'FRM-"TEAD 1375E.Hons­no. ­E: ==PaGKet Vq. 12 Roszl CONSTRUCTION inc. RLDG I S­102 ­ 070)472�1133 Rw___N FORT COLLINS,COU0 8­ EMAIL ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 r eQ —� -- m ______ ____ . . r ° / 4 "V 1 r ... .... ° Z @DEmm00 smm- 1- m N b N O ptt�Ar�D z�z= � �z AT C1 E p mODm�Ds. Rc: g2s � s § OAr_0 mZ(P z1>m(P �mSP )> A r -------- ------------------ N m o- -------- —— / r ...... o = A bz V BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. 1oaz021 DRA D BV: APPROVED: AooinoMAEwroRMAnory TEAD re 13 308 W.MOUNTAM AVE, E.HORSETOOTH R0. E.(—)art-1119 J FORT COWNS,C0008052t C TRUCTm IYIO, WOa SUi .D (Mo)Cr2-B913 swErrs AnomoN ^Bwiainvor»•ns•• FONr cowrvs,coo eoszs ca„m,te,aaoaevaaeoa.rom 1 � V Ap !•*t . .10 ry "#'� 1. =t` ' il.� �>-- •r L 1 - �� a +.Y N r7 '1 + ' %,ate � � �•« t 1 - `tom `��••�'�•�.. �. ,. - _ :,W... w Packet .g 7 EXISTING(REMODEU ADDITION s �r3. r aE b R F - m � � � A � Df� f� as •� �; € -,-� - gk8 m z° �a� . a ccc Ala A � s I" B e °°_; = a ms .g 4pa s E. ' m ��R r yoo 3 gmpzk W N z / roRnR \ weal. e Z II A 3: >5'$ off, so Off ' o oo ....... z c a" Zk d wwo •a I ' viA a . EXISTING IREMODEU DINING rROOM�ADDI:"ION ADDITION<REMODEL ADDITION I �z o �N m z a o < 3 F am ;m i rm 2 —n O g ro ,=O r = ----------x------------- ---------------------------- OXJ %s,IN ---------------- °nSX10O O � r �A10 JJ,, +°IAp3p p3 II �TTlImmam � OCA F. 00(l l Ax Dx RE F. n<O A�i I i�°i<c-A y� 3 3 I 6/13 - 6�I2 III __________ aA*m n °A$m�j °� '"oSl na o3 -- e�£ oQ?g A nBo' Ez :n •n b A m O W mP m Awao'm° j c n Bz rog"o ��poom 000 n� �('ZA O ��(( �i6m GB�y O m(,\A O�EDIi Dpg x'Z z2 ° N T Dzc A AAZ O�LA 3S�5 n E m Z m no°o A m 1 m A mwoa nA Do`vwaii�F, r m N A-Z n °Do oQ aE A� CIR� tt.nn' �B Om� ,'J Z Z O m m m a (o D. '.B ° Z O O Q A ow ioouo °' n m Z o =n ° 0 0 F N m N o mm O llE* A BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. 1-2 DRAJD APP D: ^G -� I,-2-2020 W D g I V ,awe w.NouNrAIN AVE. RMSTEAD TSE.HORSETo 0. E:ISTol 142N,a 1-&2021 PERMIT PLAN V1 FORT cool eosz, CON5TRUCT,ONInc. R= SUITE PTO)wz Bala SWETTSAoOInorvLO .-1306Mg Dreams' FORT DOLLINS. LODW- EMAL@ermataeUconaVuction.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMffN—F 7 EXISTINCS ADDITION (,P Im 03 U3 m(P 96 m 1> se C) :1 �2 LZ C) m Pg f7l 41 m 3 ul... Lo -46 v O p oaf N ....... 13 1> -n m ------- 717 1 6 H 66 % I Rs 12 e P 6 .Tl 6 Z --T lZ-1-1 pp T=I Z.T it M, 6A EXISTING 3. T BASEMEN p o-o 21 P m II U3 lmz m It z 4 z z M z m F m m o JA T1Tzo q 0 v M (P I Im Ni M m m (P r 6 Z Z m L 11 15 TREADS a 10" —4 6- z 6- 6 Z NEW BASEMENT MAIN LEVEL r BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE DRAWN BY APPROVED: 11-2-W20 JD EAI) 1-021 PERMIT T '7 E'ORS—H.. o,,,.E: ­­ Packet Pa. 17 EMAIL: w..---i- 02 _oM5TZ,,CTl014 Inc. 2—MWET—T" (970)_3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 =Ei mx U3 ZU3 A - 8 -4 mmz , < m mm -n z A f-Z A tp -4 -4 m z A f,l M o 6 -0 z 21, m 0 m r r7 4 Z uJ m X Q U3 I> r 0 FR L.u— DAM DRAWN nPRQVED BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. 11--on JD 1-6-M1 PERMF PA Packet, 13 18 IEAD 171 E 4--RD.. FRCE:(DM)4M1113 .. ... OWTRWTMInc BLD� (970)472Wl3 F.RT OSLU M 102 LINS com— E— ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Q apI . Eli 'I o R gn N g� s o — I Q t €r - - € g€ q. O ' m IQ q II a e < C [ I � R I . a . IF r . I �tf I I O Rye ® D II — ° Z a -4 !� — Ip - 9� aLl nAix.Ev.0 m I I °>i�' il g�� 3m a z n O mpN II � iN Ej e °o s�o � I I � II I 3= II Pn it iv D js BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN BY' APPROVED: 11.2-2020 JD ^ ADDmONALINFORMAnON RALSTEAD PO 1-6-2021 PERMIT PLAN `� CONSTRICTION Ine o6sETao OFFICE:(970) -1113 V CO 00521 FA%: (9)0)a]2-3 DRIONLO "M1Mtllny OlNmt" EMAIL in(o@emistezdwnsduclian.wm ITEM 3, ATTACHMEN-F 7 ------------ II f lij -------------- IIIF zoo ---------- m M -n IR II II Z iq II II I II II II BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL(SiARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DRAWN BY. APPRi 0 � j JD —Faeket Pa. 20 315 HORSETOOTH RD. OFFICE:(9111 `'- l-�2021 PERMIT ON4T,MT041— PAX: (97 13 'S.1i D—.. DO. E �0--fton-- I I EM :3, ATTACHMEnT 7 aK e-E-1 IN LEVEL ADDITION r �gu Lu 3 ul J� 2 1 -4 (P m ul m uj r 61 6 7' No (P m MY -4 6 z 2 BASEMENT i MAIN LEVEL ADDITION No 5 ..5.., 5 m (P mz OO �.$ �_ � � �8 0� 8 m HP BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE DRAWN BY' "W— r 11-2-2020 JD ;KTEAD I S E 4-- RD. — (E10)-1113 1�6-2L21 PERMIT 2 "'E" LA. IDITINALINIFIR F.A—LIJI cow­5 EMAIL CONSTRUCTIONInc. BI w� .5WI-1—.., ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 4 - --- ——. -- W' D, — r i 0 Or Xl a-__-----Q- r \ - (�---- 6"----� d 8'---4--4 17� ...... ... _ 0 uJ Idt i /• I p 4 p I I I 1 I m I 6 -- ---------- --A dt 1 0 — \ Ii --------------- O z BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL 3TEE oRMST1EAD CONSTRUCTION INC. DATE: DRAWN BY: APPROVED: �� m 11-2-2020 JD wL Pa ADDInONA�wFORMAnO" AD 1-&2021 PERMIT PLAN 308 W MOUNTAIN AVE OFFICE:(S]0)an-1113 V FORT COLLINS.COLD B0521 co► rRucTaN�nc. ULOGO SURE_ (�T(I)an-3313 SWETTS PDOITON °M1M�My OFwm�• FORTCOWNS,COL0 E0525 o@armsieaticonsimction.com ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 =crap mo= � =o=I► mom. _� D11 O o�43�P OD' zy 36'-0" 36-0" 6-10' 4'd" 4:-0:' Om -77 b z y r WINDOW WINDOW WINDOW O WINDOW WINDOW y. ca a �D <51 m O D I Op� 7y =z 1 3'. D'A ODm A OI 1za•' m-z/' 1z-4/ I m o y y yN o -za n �8o b m cF �s � .2 �I z ... , BEAM PER 51.1 a a 13'-0y" 1]'-103�y' k - - -'—.L - - - - Nr I a B D L-i O _ j� BE PER Sim1 m S I O _ L Jv EXISTING m b= u o= m om a a I ——. — — ED NOATION n 3 N o E 14'-3.. ]'-T' 6'-11" iS-10�" m a z vx I I ��as sy I o m - 0 cF-1z. - m="mop I� I r sp 10 Z - o cF-zo mo, y_ 03 I so A� T O n x z HEADER HEADER HEADER ur CFI I o PER S1.1 PER S1.1 PER 51.1 — J r �,a'WALL m. m $ L _ € ,v WALL o3 STAIRWELL p I4 osm — — — — --- 6 -- I "7y� o 69- o5ti a Op0 N 3DF yy� yZ N�tn DDv Zy� -Zm -� tpn 4�1 OT pnyy jD? y O oz Oe0 ♦ ►$O 0 .Q - Z DSO m0 2 4 6'" O m 4g' _ gmn 4 SH m g 8 4 3 cg4mC 7 8"'s �g $-' u \\ p s s o °N m � Ly/ � „ gg His a��$ �3g�sa3g Po C .. O i? p N r Z _ D iS 411 p 41 A _o Z = OD 99599 m A 333 i= D m O €x - - °m _ n om D xm o z O O> Z d � £o o ST ZO mc'o m =m o4oNm g g CMSTEADLIE o STRUCTION FOUNDATION PLAN PROJECT LOCATION: (rY CTL ITHOMPSON 375 E.NORSETOOTN RD. ], _ BLDO 4 SUITE,az eN . o ' (n FORT COLLINS OOLORADO 1W6WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE - cn,Hwnasory rvcoRroRnTEo m scRNEIDFR FORT COLCK2,SWETTS ORA Pale Pg 23 O S]04]211,3FF FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 3 co�.coaosz4 ITEMS ATTACHMENT 7 \\/ � . . @ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y __FLOOR . \ �} /) a \ yip: e !;■ �j T \� ._._._./i »SV,LV N - - - ._/.&mom._, l }, ceSTAIRS, « m@= m ! \ \— o ! G\ \ ® a=w_em e - ) � o ; L _, _, / 2 } , ... ... .. / / §\) 9 ` 2 » � 2 0 � \ 2 f(0 | |q ) }im �0 m A/H m , ;!R MIlaH ;](r]!(( ! [; 51 \) ( q% _ ( f ) ` o \ > .. !�, { !|| | 1,,,.;-: )] ~)!! ;\ | ! 88/8'm .. °): ( )(;> lrl;!■ ,. - �a ;l � l;/ ) � - !/||) ) !! /.§ ,;;•/ ) ! `»#/ - \ �(; []! ij |;)9 CLIENT: INFLOOR FRAMING PROJECT LOCATION: - cTLITNOmPSON \ \ : � z>t .• ` �,_�R RA ~: SUITE 1 _ ` 441 " P§�} Pj 24 ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 O pm � ON `g EXISTING EXISTING HF28 HF28 EXISTING HF28 HF28 HF28 HF28 HF28 HF28 HR xm T HF210 HF28 HF28 (2)2X10HFIY2 I TRUSS I MO X ENGINEERED TRUSSES Ny M O y G Ip I0 m `I X' MM % m E%ISTING ROOF GIRDER TRUSS G �� LVL210 GIRDER TRUSS I GIRDER TRUSS(25PAN) EXISTING PE. ING" —m— ---0 (4)2X4 COL. �--ai c O T� m yI ENGINEERED MONO_ m pN TRUSSES A T O o HF28 HF28 OF2 H8 HF28 HF28 ENGINEEREDMONO n ^o TRUSSES M n m D HF210 mO pm ps N mN0. m� o DQO OT m pO p0 y o s z 'o M> 3s p Nny Z. ^ m _ y G) p V w v r D z o.0 v o 00 a S �O 2 n a = $"N 9 0 oma m ggo 08 NApgN Aso amwe =a m € 7 0 ngNgD4D85o D y °s=o85 °FS8 o sm mna> D m IT s 3 s amp e a a a o a r a; oA—A� x� 3 s m eso° mg g H m Op m 9�-ROMM `f° 9om e CLIENT::ARMSTEAD PROJECT LOCATION: CTL ITHOMPSON E.g $ 3]SNORSETOOTRUCT ROOF FRAMING PLAN — BLOG 4 SUITE 102 CONSTRUCTION •,� (n FORT COLLINS COLORADO 1306WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE = - RaoRATEo SCHNEIDER LOT 2,BLOCK 2,SWETTS N P�I" Pg 25 N S]0-0]211,3FF FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 3 co ne co aosza ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 8" 2'-0"MAX D i 8" 9'-0"MAX c r m m rzpI = I ; �N co ,14" Y ym r 9 D - sci D zm --- W co D ti W m o o m 00iOA- ~ O m z Sig zo z ai y°FB y A o o_ _ my4D m 5 8$�� Gzi�D -_--_ 1 r pxm0� zmn A�-Q il" 3: p'o m0 z> ^' i o s`yog o I r yypm 3 n o ci n� 88 00=� Q9 moy� m o m g s� o mF9Q azm mo m_o off' 8 oma >- znmym ��5y y m o -�a8o z� �m�� X ~ ~Oy m op mIm ;Om a zz zc : yv za i �rz (a vOD�> OO zm i m y @v3>�z DO O0 1>mn Cn �' Fo " �� mm� z spa �p> °'- mpn goy n omy� yn_ g`p a m xym n y a Fo z ~ m° o "z "z 8o i>= M. ® Fmxp o "om o� ps= GZj z p _ yZ' oz Qi "n s� poo y > m m - �I.n o my ma mn --- O �,�----- ---yt,r-i, o a » F o o m o x o n Z p oo m = y5 - 2 8" Y-0"MAX Z m m MAX m ---- O C Gj 7 N C II PER DfCL�RZPLANCa 31'x" Zi o mn O 'm as x:Hi y OZOm S m 1Cy pbpF(� i1 z ml D O� Q mz yz 0 AO? Qz mm8 mm pD3p� Oz ycu a� m o Om m ` A $ O o�D-m - m 55� P zx� aiii pi zi p> p AzA _Qc� _ mQ�. yzm Oe$mr n M> z ao � �x�zs ~o om $ 90 m ��pcA,�np > �" Om m o� o �o� s yQ om�9 yam yz:myo oz� 00 'm' OEM z m RS wF m m n m z P yz� ag mon���� >m " z= z y �i P ygZ =y>po� �� - myz za" _ym pz -W--- oz m m EQ. EQ. EQ. 3" i I I I I Z m S" 91-0"MAX O � 0 O 8" J Z W O D 1 m W m c m Zz c I v I S I I a 9 `L MINN. m m z p - () Z .'0 A z � I° � I I I < 1 _ _ --- ---- -I---- IH- W y� op z z o > ma oo> oZ y ym p'� C D nxgmy ?e g mmmo�om Am yA Dnmx p1 - � r r8m�u= Ss m zpr po s <mmxy- yz- m� _ m or ° p mmw m zmym� ?r mxr�p~p °m °m ZRZ A m z onm oz s po m y �p mm 3 yA ? x rp mom mo m p p > 0 M. m n pz o D x m m O pp zz z OzD m .5 IS m 3 e�3men'eS 3 'amp de$z$A 'oe - - o ;a - m - O 2 n' ..3= 3SBn�e e'S5''m'e3 �3 'ne-- Sim 2 m gs Z rg�Rd¢' .. _mm§See .. _ m3ec' m alma olr- > m n m o r0 v m 3z m 40 ' eq n m-=_8d-Rc - mg'g w'3 u_'-n_"mi d-P 3- ee�m i_ B' m () O 030 a0 O pz D - T` :. " �c ^'3n _S - -o3�u30S �m - 3� m mb2 �a - m nyyo cp cp D`: Q003_ m3m�?°cad o sm ?i =a$c uam= n _ $33m Q° z�m Tg mm �C _ a m5ea - n8 20 m a $m$5. Hml 3 ft w a m V7 o mo° yN � 3y - 3mmPsz-_ �m_ s�a1"1� a_q gg`Azd 84 '3Lmam';; mid- £. 'A `z o py yy �� f�fl m�cg3. a ,'; e.;�fe " n8 a_�.a`= 3 C/> D n Sm n> mi zma - '=aanan ?ban= 8� 3 - asa< Z z may F�' oam '- d�m`3m <va �¢ =`m3 ;a w`3 „_d3 O y4l Si n pDo aim m�A9 oOg�y3 ^am S°qg qi'-B=mEg _ �m� �, �m8 2��3172 nOo�' Sq3 8 M a Om 3 �v 0. � ��p'a m�� $3,.mm3m 03�"`S g5npo3 ma cg�m N.3m d'£ m 3cy ax ?a� m'p3o'3 - xa m.3. . z to ^r'O F >n $�m mS�n n6�m2`m e_ $3n --_- em3�n 0 v m5-moo Nga Gn^3m 3m 'm -Qm n _ 'm3 my 3m a3 %u e m3m n m� m npB m m 3v I g- CLIENT:STRUC ION FOUNDATION PROJECT LOCATION:ARMSTEADO CTL ITHOMPSON €" 375E.HORSETCOTHRD. DETAILS AND NOTE N BLDG 4,SUITE IO] - P�»,=ab s FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 1306 WEST MOUNTAINAVENUE _ RroRATEo contact 3F SDRNEIDFR LOT 2,BLOCK2,SWETiS .=t.�,m' n!y 2G O 9]0-4]]-1113FF FORT COLLINS,COLORADO nco m,coeosza {'yew` rUJ V ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 O a° s•a'MAx U) A -FULL HEIGHT AO m r ° � x z ° °-0 b- ,o�mzapy �*o�m 0myz '0 °'y° Amog mm� z o O A W -o° °m '~c Z O � O°S Dz r D 0 Dr D= ° O °- - � mzZ MIN. On z m( y T �ma Ap GC7 x�i m� ng 08 c1v M°xx z° Fri 'a G °m � —i`A g� y A°p my ODvF�A qm y41 D z T oNpg i o'g oa np O Olz D zp -11 °Dpm - O m y zOn pgvp m i0 ip m -111I III' zyTy i~ A - 000m n mp - II 2 fm 4- O p : r 9 D � y z o I r III II II' � y� r -LI ILI IILI IL S^.1-I_I-1_I-1_I I_I 9-0"MAX 8" 4-011MAX I I n a.. 7-1 mll IHI C IHI�I 0 zm - -- IVI�ILI-1 � Z �yo=n " op o my '< xD o=r ma r z 10 'm m' y Fm F m ym yr i pD�� mm 6 O DDT P DO (� y vD�tj �m Og�a zaf ^— z OA A;°°�^ z0 Fgry — A T m on m - g mm � o�p Gn�oN� n$ r�z °3 z ° o" - per` m g m M p� � r mn �i _24'° ° �9> r "g °p °5 m no m -�F S� °= p r- -- 0Por z"'py yn z m y 3mo xi1 D - - z on�Dyn m0 z= `o m °m ~ ° - p p _ 24..__ a y z r y r �Po� c Z Z z D- O m x n d p I <n _ 1____1______L _____I_ � II II II II Z II II II II I I -n 0 f z Z < m oy- y�yz�O�am omxyi3o Z °' novo rmm-z0> ° nmU ; �� -0 yD z Ea.Op- �^ 0 zw>m px 90 O zpA mOm zDz yO MH Y v' - I-2 m - O eO'e-m-gm 2 �z e Z oB 3.n°.eq n me_S w'3=_"ma d._Pgn °ee v z- "'m0 m m 00 N3w a m zcm3. - a ,'; ''8F'e " _Ta8 = n °8g 3 fn ma dm.ma�nadnn 28mn_ '�;, m Paz ad'n as Aa< a Z o smmud 3 'm d" =4a 'R_=m3 as a O =amS> _s- 3e.2 R �ggn sq3 m g e o'mm38 6v� 01dw nm� c8_c nS.e'em mm A ve �au_nO3o �0 8^d 9d�m z2: wn8 Sac � $m mgaa cSn$�m2`me 3 83n8-n-obi_ xa m3 m 9S3 not u c m mn3 _ m'1 nc 83n am - m= min"ON oo.0 qNa m'a n - -P9e 'm3 m' v 3maa 3 %u e m3m n w3 Hm m npB m m 3�' " m m n I g- CLIENT:STRUC ION FOUNDATION PROJECT LOCATION:ARMSTEADO CTL ITHOMPSON €" 375E.HORSETCGTHRD. DETAILS AND NOTE N BLDG 4,SUITE 102 — P�»,=ab s FORTGOLLINS,COLORADO 1306 WEST MOUNTAINAVENUE _ RroRATEo contact 3F SDHNEIDER LOT 2,BLOCK 2,BWETiS .=t.�,m' n!y 27 9]0-4]2-1113 FF FORT COLLINS,COLORADO nco ti,co eosza �'y^ �` rUJ ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 ol mo v A lkm ym O a Z m O r p x m yo z 0 o m°- N 2 -°per p n n s Fp v„ N O �$P Dp _ m p Tz ° - m i1� -0 1— Z o yy°� O p=zm� o o m y = A Z <o '� D z pp mA g� gm m1z. noz � m = zoI A y< _> p A ms 3 m °z m °m om. aPmy _ 1. 0.-* D 3P�Fpx i p yn a Vt N 0 O Z O D CAI ch C m _=pq° n0 _ �i] =oy O CE 'gap ezc p �' v mA Pp„ 2'° N m o 5'y m Z p z m 2 z a x i° a74 mO G�7 ° i ° �Oz m z[i Dw CA 02 °P° m os® s0.Z, D � p A _ 0 W o Ay m p�o o O 9zO �� i?i� -n zo"a8 D ` =U) °py O m m no no (/) rm °>900 3p�Ax ym=yam° 8z(]] .`xmo N ��trail 28'oM zo 0z1 aA y�°O Ux N mo D 9D o<o rAo ymw X D�O a' 3y� D 6 -0 Amy O D � � 0� A 00 -On I% a �a w I Idle I= co a �. dg s- °a 33=�'•'•a$ S�3e "e."-_``-sa C 3z a 'S 3 3a,Q a' m'c mv_ n a$'�'m E.a'3 'm^a -L7n33 S�'v Sm�A C7 II m ° � q Igo. m a �aaa_ =� 1 84- 3"_sp za d n3A_ s8 �, �d iic m A ��_ wih3 n.P3v 3a Sc _ Y°8 °mm4 :� m88� 3AA3u O -.33 cram^�� n3N °^Pa`-rail 3q.O Xa 9 nH3 _w S$mag N o?n3 g� 3 �' 8 _ _ = $ A min ae- o a d3 n_S RK Arcu3a ON n myc.n n FA -- n- - m' W'm I g CLIENT:ARMSTEADCSTRUC ION FRAMING DETAILS PROJECT LOCATION: CTL ITHOMPSON €" 375 .HORSETOOTHRD. AND NOTES W FORT SUITE 10]WL - FORTLLINS, ORADO LOT2,BLOCK STAIN AVENUE -1. 3F SCHNEIDER LOT2,BLOCK2,SWETiS m RroRnTEo P� Pa, 28 N FORT COLLINS,COLORADO nco i.coeosza 9]0-4]]-1113FF ' ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 22'-0 n (2)2X11HF N2 (2)2Xi0 HF It2 O EiGINEI REDITRUSI ES ii n TI iz O u O b TI - �L_ x.-, _ GIRDER TRU88 -��� a b Z D R O D D �r. Zj HF28 O — ---� F22— -------- r ----- -------- Z ———————— ZbI I �a l ----- ———————— ----- p-------- W I WI----- ———————— e a a l l ————— ------ ————— ———————— bl l HF28 HF28 --- ----- ----� OO -O 22'-0' $O < Z. 3 g= `D gyg gu w$Mgr.vsrv-s ► °mm 9 8 8 amAAas x" °s =m y am 9 a9 $� omoi2§;Apt m O gA- ^EY YYlY e wim m �� ° ° Amp ^°mm �° $ $mosm z D o 18� ��� m _� o - x r omy o +-Fs o , m `' S 3 � �> n9 c .. o o p` rrn zo g'goo mN oo m m = z s D x� m = _ o 5y 'z cn D om8 - vm � E 8 H 53 $ O o, A o m Fmcn o' z : � 4'q o e m Ge g g CLIENT:STRUOTION GARAGE PLAN PROJECT LOCATION: (rY CTL ITHOMPSON 3]5 E.H SUITE 1 OTH RD. ], DLDDa suRE,a2 13W WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE771 N cn,Hwnasory rvcoRroRnTEo m (n FORT COLLINS COLORADO /A��F/oLas�� ^/Q SOHNEIDER LOT 2,BLOCK 2,8WETi8 Pal Pg LJ O S]04]2,,,3FF FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 3 co�.coaosza ITEM 3 ATTACHMENT 7 01 D DS, WMIN 0> VARIES M,O 0 a IM 'OOy -n O v 0 Z zpDmq p D � S„ Z �m vo $� vo nn ° p° ion °� i p0. io Si . Sm o,< pa=x nv zO _ zc n! p� zo Fyn bm-z >m S �p 0 o--r x ° rg `na �-0 _o9m m M, p FULLHEIGHT r m 0 A O ra o n nm IT — . p oo - M, i>$A nip o� p -Z a 0 Oz z x M.; C Z O D 30 MIN ° O p� Z � _ � I O e�3�e'g9 3 _'�� m3'£>•S n3 ? -".m _ ° - C7 �Sa�B o.n 'Ao'ax Oeq S _ .wa o"g B Pn a"s3 Z g, Isle any° 3q ? mom mgv_ - m'gaid-mm� m 183` �ei{Qgz- u8�° 3R mn^O� 2A i Ill mssa _ m --o3daP� sw o's2�- = wnm as" 00 "a 2n m8m= a O mS fn mcn3i -' a= -= '13 3A u ZO Qm. m 3 F.a. g9-'"=.3= = 3n� 2nN3miS1O -mS 3 IT Q�;mmmg m8m =b3 3wS�w aoo q= 8 Tn 92 1°03' w?2. en'�='3'v nA cb3 vac-�°ems °'no3u - 3�u3 wan `Fg3 n' - xa m3.3 4£.>Qc wmm -n H: zm a_ °.2 -c5m - nm' - .cS=m I% a �a w I Idle I= CO a - 3wA a' m'c mv_ n 3B�' 5.�'3 'm"a =�aiQ n33 S�'v Sm�A 0 84 mQ C R. �.�s m m889 3AA3u O 'm c�c psO z zm -' and rv�c qb- _x3m_n IT z ;� maa8 °aw z '"n.ge mom; Tn _ S asu Sy 33� B'� £. = v^e 3_ -.333 10 5Ovq m£. cmm^�� n3N a^Pa`-rail o A m 3q'0 Xa v n�g- 3'ao?n3$� we o- a d nw _S - SNQe o 92- - zO daa i�nu Q.. nm$u& man an 25 I g CLIENT:STRUC ION GARAGE DETAILS PROJECT LOCATION: CTL ITHOMPSON €" 375 .HORSETOOTHRD. AND NOTES F�-, O SLDG 4,SUITE 102 FORT WLLINS,WLORADO 1306WESTMOUNTAINAVENUE RroRnTEo contact 3F scRNEIDFR LOT 2,BLOCK 2,sWETiS "' Pdd my 30 O 9]0-4]2-1113 FFti FORT COLLINS,COLORADO nco ti,co eosza r rU./ ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 City Fot Collins Application Request for Variance from the Land Use Code The Zoning Board of Appeals has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Board may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant(i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Zoning Board of Appeals may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 1306 West Mountain Ave Petitioner's Name, Jeffrey J. Schneider if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Contractor to the Owner is Zip Code 180521 Petitioner's Address PO Box 330 LaPorte, CO 80535 Owner's Name Brian & Barbara Berkhausen 199 Petitioner's Phone# 970-472-1113 Code Section(s) 4.7 (D)(6) Petitioner's Email Jeff@armsteadconstruction.com Zoning District INCL Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) 2. Equal to or better than Representative's Address Justification(s) 3. Nominal and inconsequential Representative's Phone# Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning Please see attached letter If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted Date 12-29-2020 Signature Jeffrey J. Schneider Pack�t�fQ.oJ. 120 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 ;?MSTTEAE) CONSTRUCTION Inc. "Building Dreams" 12-30-2020 City of Fort Collins Zoning Board of Appeals 281 North College Avenue Fort Collins. CO 80524 RE: Variance Request for 1306 West Mountain Ave. To Whom it May Concern, On behalf of my clients Brian and Barbra Berkhausen, I am requesting a variance to the Land Use Code to section 4.7(D)(6) regarding the allowable detached structure to be no more than 600 square feet. My clients would like to construct a new detached two car garage approximately 656 square feet in size, to be in the rear half of the property off the existing alley. My client would like to deconstruct the existing shed of 250 square feet and existing garage of 534 square feet and construct a new 656 square foot detached garage. We believe that the claim for Equal to or better than is justified by removing the existing structures that are not on structural foundations and building a new detached garage that complies with the current building codes and standards is equal to or better than the existing structures. We believe that the claim for Nominal and Inconsequential exists because, there has been detached structures on the property for decades. Adding a new detached garage in the same location as the previous structures would not change the character of the existing neighborhood. We respectfully ask that the board grant us the variance to section 4.7(D)(6) as we are requesting to allow a new detached garage to be 656 square feet instead of the allowable 600 square feet. Thank you for the consideration and we appreciate your time on this variance request. Sincerely, Jeffrey J. Schneider President, Armstead Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 330 • La Porte, CO 80535 Office (970) 472-1113 • Fax (970)472-8313 www.armsteadconstruction.com Packet Pg. 132 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 uj n c o� m�oa n a o zg`v" ^ ' 0 zo Gamzy n Y r F5� D �o�A r A4 n cm s p O m a O wp_- mz AO r'wp Z Z $6 02 � A m0 zw a ��wma a "dA Sao �aRo-5tr II. e � a DZAp n3 n � 8- �1 ACDA w S O n a F Y A m ill an A A OZO wa4znA A m fl m Zz m _ yXc F!" n I I A p WWA�� az m m vmZ I 0 FG�� ICI �D z N c A -n z m 11 O �E 6€ g Z m _ m Z z w m '$ v _ m r - ® 15 15 m b w n _ m + 1 1 m A < I ]> z II El I l _ II o z° 9 m L 1� IpRp '� � .osPo�c� rovo-0s.c,L 101-01. ENGINEERED TRIJ6 6®24 �i w IH a m av a a i- 8 I n >: Dm b w � sO 4R o e 1g mH m F u 1 D n mu i z ° 1> 8> SR 9 § N m V w - hm '�� I �S s R $ D. _ ENGINEERED TRU66E6•24"o s m e Z s I� 9$ Rn IR PREL NARY OOONO, NOT FOR O W ° BERKHAUSEN DETACHED GARAGE ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. once: oMWNBY: nPPRoveB: 11-4-2020 JD 33 oiiiONAL INFORMATON 1 W.MOUNTAIN AVE. 0]SEHOBSETOOTH BO. OFFICE:(5l0)4i21tt3 FORT COW NS,COLO 00521 C TRVLTION IF14 BLOG 4 SURE 102 A reT07 arzb3t3 GO SWETTS ACDRION "lYIIlnp Dreim�• WBT WNS,COL080525 WAIL; inb@armsbaticonstruutli°n.com a4 m o j= ^ o I � oo col I m I a l a J.> L ° I v 0 Imo. 180.00'(R) So0.24'45"w 1z9.61'(M) so3z. 9 <,il d X I a ° ° ———„ 36 0' -w3z.Xsoaz.ao k5oaz.sa I I I -H ;Z ohm o\W -� wa2.ezx mr X� i z a o D ° I -�.I ro -fio d.w �' "0 3 a o s o s� sD32.a9 —3— 1132.56x o a9a2, 3� 20 f 13 s' g I m ef� ° ° N xx 234.9' ae V µX o3 26.3' i O 23L9 _ 60 308' ass' of N f�a III m C I° 4!° ° µ 4. Xw3z.ao s a 8 —32 nz63 .�z93X—t6.2' I p O r'—cro X X x 3 X X F�cc X J I I A S00'25'28"W 179.74'(M) TlX U I ":wl' p C j I I 2 180.00'(R) av m l p O 3N3 gm 3N II Zo m I �_ ° i'll >f jw a• oo " s. -- �� �mmi ^Om ml imA . In LJ �DJz z alvv n vl�m to a m� AO cn 0 0 s y F" I DD.DD 1R1 N° D z �o l 7 C Soo'26'02"w 179.90'(c) Ic$ z0a.o0'(c) _ McKINLEY AVENUE N00.26'02"E 397.90 'M) �., n�//l (61.3' R.O.W.) 39ei OZ \ pp r m - �36- 3 "fin =a m p" Al v3° 3'°'' 3n �30 - - - - �.3 Q�a T1 < J� m n" m a o o - r - m v v TI V Z 3°- .. 3 33' - m R 3o n m ,°3° C -° Is a �`m 3 - N m _ T7 m i F _ _ ��� y 9, y _ mm'E 3A _ - 3°- N3O SR ol _ n3o .Z1 "3 - o lo �11NIRIIII »3- 0 -- - 3 0 0 _ a _ _ n n - zn�n/l�IpIIINlp11'� 3 n°3 f 3 - L w 3 w f3. _3 30 _ 3 a oo ^ m3 _ 3m' _ - 03�- (TITLE: IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT v m z TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP NM ILOT 2, BLOCK 2 SWETT'S ADDITION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS O Z. OD I K NK CID (CLIENT ARMSTEAD coNSTRucrloNCD INTERMILL LAND SURVEYING, INC. P.O. Box 330 La Porte, Colorado 80535 1301 NORTH CLEVELAND AVENUE,LOVELAND,COLORADO 80537 P:(970)-669-0516 F:970)-635-9775 —) * \\HAL\PRE\P-8998-ARMSMAD\DEG\SP-MPo-D8-2o-2a 7 N 00'X'45"E M... # � i wv.w rvi .a v e j 3 til b �npo Ia E nC �i r b of ou.a - n m m m i m o w —�-- - s O Amm 1d —oi000 m p �v � W N ox � m 3 Z oU i= ow rm 3� m� aA r � z � N i n I> m O z O < m m0 cry b tJ BERKHAUSEN ADDITION&REMODEL ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC. oATE: DRAWN BY: APPR o: 5 oniorvu wrow.unory RMSTEAD D 3]5 E.XORSETO�TH X0. E:R]01 a]9-1„9 Z m CONSTRUCTION Inc s�osa surtE >al az-es,9 m FOXT couirvs.coo eosz, ^ewlelsg o.:.m:- coar cowrvs,cow eoszs @ann�esa�o�rv�,�no�.�om 4' rfn ♦ �� V r„ �i. `ice, Ilk r Packet Pg. 136 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 City of Historic Preservation Services Fort Collins Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522.0580 970.416.4250 Preservation(cDfcctov.corn fcgov.com/historicpreservation February 5, 2021 Mr. Ralph Shields, Chair Zoning Board of Appeals 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Request for Variance for 1306 W. Mountain Avenue, a City Landmark Dear Mr.Shields: This letter is regarding the property at 1306 W. Mountain Avenue variance request due for discussion at the Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting on Thursday, February 11, 2021.The property in question is a City Landmark, designated by City Council on December 2, 2014, and is subject to the requirements of Municipal Code 14,Article IV. The designation includes the full property established by the parcel line, and specifically identifies both the primary residence and the one-car, c.1942 garage as historic resources.The Landmark Preservation Commission is the final decision maker on demolitions, new construction or significant alterations on designated properties. The variance request is part of a larger rehabilitation project proposed by the applicant, which will require both issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) and an approved Plan of Protection in order for demolition and building permits to be issued.The LPC typically reviews projects comprehensively, and will be considering the full scope of the project, including the treatment of the existing accessory structures and the design and placement of the proposed accessory building (the subject of this variance request), alongside other proposed additions and alterations to the dwelling. At this time, please note the following: • This project has not received a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Landmark Preservation Commission. • Historic Preservation staff was not contacted about, or aware of,this project until the applicant submitted demolition permits for the two accessory structures on January 12, 2021. • As noted above, one of those structures affected by the variance,the one-car, 1942 garage is a protected historic structure under Municipal Code and cannot be demolished without Landmark Preservation Commission approval. • the design review process, which includes both a conceptual and final review by the LPC for the full, comprehensive project, has not been completed. • The conceptual review for this project is currently scheduled for the LPC's March 2021 agenda and will discuss both the alterations to the primary dwelling, but also the proposed treatment and infill construction regarding accessory structures. • Based on preliminary review of the demolition permits, building permit, and Zoning Board of Appeals packet,the project does not meet the Standards in Chapter 14 and is unlikely to be approved by the LPC as submitted, due to several items that are critically inconsistent with the Standards, including: Packet Pg. 137 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 o Demolition of the historic, one-car, 1942 garage o The size of the proposed accessory building relative to the site and to the historic structures o Substantial demolition and new construction on elevations of the primary historic residence that are highly visible from public rights-of-way that are out of scale with the historic building. Preservation staff has begun discussing alternatives with the applicant in advance of the March 17, 2021 LPC conceptual review, however, staff anticipates significant changes to this project, including the treatment of the existing accessory structures, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness and subsequent issuance of building permits by the City. If you have questions, please contact us at 970-416-4250 or preservation@fcgov.com. Sincerely, Jim Bertolini Historic Preservation Planner Packet Pg. 138 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 Berkhausen Property - . 1306 W. Mountain ? M� Packet 139 4 .b _ y Packet .g 140 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 1306 W. Mountain Pictures of double-hung windows in deteriorated condition 3/2/21 Packet Pg. 141 ., �.. +��ff�V�t y'�� it � \�� �,�ir,6��.� � R Yt':�•,y�i/i�A .,,y.. �,�" ,k�;�eft -�• r t J:. f: ,i,, L1 1 i� 1 1 F 1 II I *hrwe0..�i�\1 r - z - ���, ��,.•; .:,rib:' Packet .g 144 I N w ' r .� w 1 �r i i i� i •- � ��� _ tat+ �.:.•.�Le. .gyp y ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 IN 4 Z v _ Packet Pg. 146 Z .c rl 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 NEW z_ Id r .. Packet Pg. 148 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 l t � 3 Packet Pg. 149 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 I i I e M Packet Pg. 150 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 .0.00000, PaCKet g. 151 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 7 _ -wr Packet Pg. 152 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 National Park Service .--_-� Technical Preservation Services U.S.Department of the Interior Home >The Standards > Rehabiliation Standards and Guidelines Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, codified as 36 CFR 67, are regulatory for the Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program. The Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and the Guidelines on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, which assist in applying the Standards, are advisory. Applying the Standards for Rehabilitation Guidelines for Rehabilitating_ Historic Buildings Guidelines on Sustainability Guidelines on Flood Adaptation for Rehabilitating Historic BuildingsO Other Standards and Guidelines: Four Treatment Standards: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration,and Reconstruction Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Properties[i History of the Standards Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation The following Standards for Rehabilitation are the criteria used to determine if a rehabilitation project qualifies as a certified rehabilitation. The intent of the Standards is to assist the long-term preservation of a property's significance through the preservation of historic materials and features. The Standards pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy and encompass the exterior and the interior of historic buildings. The Standards also encompass related landscape features and the building's site and environment, as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. To be certified, a rehabilitation project must be determined by the Secretary to be consistent with the historic character of the structure(s) and, where applicable, the district in which it is located. The following Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall 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 architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. Packet Pg. 153 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 8 6. 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. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 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. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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. Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings The Guidelines assist in applying the Standards to rehabilitation projects in general; consequently, they are not meant to give case- specific advice or address exceptions or rare instances. For example, they cannot tell a building owner which features of an historic building are important in defining the historic character and must be preserved or which features could be altered, if necessary, for the new use. Careful case-by-case decision-making is best accomplished by seeking assistance from qualified historic preservation professionals in the planning stage of the project. Such professionals include architects, architectural historians, historians, archeologists, and others who are skilled in the preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of the historic properties. These Guidelines are also available in PDF formatb. The Guidelines on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic BuildingsC stress the inherent sustainability of historic buildings and offer specific guidance on "recommended" rehabilitation treatments and "not recommended"treatments, which could negatively impact a building's historic character. These Guidelines are also available as an interactive web feature. nps.gov EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA'" Packet Pg. 154 1 • • 1 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner City of Historic Preservation Commission—January 19, 2022 Fort Collins •N 1306 W. Mountain Avenue Landmark Design Review— Conceptual (Round 2) ; � : • T' T_ G i f . " TI, "�► �" i� w y ,act' '.. 2 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Fort, Role of • Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation • Provide guidance to applicant about how project can be improved to meet requirements of Municipal Code 14, Article IV 6M N PropertyNis Background • City Landmark f • Jackson-Bailey Property • Designated December 2, 2014 • Standards 3/C • No period of significance a; defined 1922 • 1942 Y • House constructed in c.1922 `•� • Garage in 1942 ` r - 4 Packet Pg. 156 2 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Current Review Timeline • January 12,2021: Demolition permits received for both accessory structures(holds placed,contractor contacted) • January 19,2021: Building permit requested for main house addition/rehab • February 4, 2021:Video conference with owner and contractor to discuss required Landmark design review process and key conflicts. • February 25,2021: Follow-up video conference to discuss review process • May 11,2021: Follow-up w applicant • June 28,2021: Follow-up w/applicant • October 27,2021: Process follow-up w/revised plans • November 19,2021: HPC Conceptual Review WIN Proposed Project_ 1 . Construction of an 887 square foot addition onto the existing 1,097 square foot home 2. Replacement of basement windows for egress, modification of west bathroom window, loss of rear-most east window 3. Demolition of the non-historic 1968 garage and construction of a new 630 square foot garage at the NE corner of the lot. 6 Packet Pg. 157 3 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Fort Collins Proposed Alterations — Site ALLEY �; ", �y... • ._ 1 YG • .w X` 1___—>• wr II BIRD'S EYE �- -: ; > . J ROOF PLAN - - FOR REFERENCE ONL7: BEE ENGINEERED DRAWINGS FOR --- ------- TRUBS SPECS AND COMPLETE MOUNTMN�AVENUE� LAYOUT WITH CONNECTIONS p4o'e,0W) 7 Proposed Alterations — South facade ., Addition extending elevation to east by 7.75 ft mom.... el LJ ------------ ------ ------ FRONT ELEVATION SOUTH •�• d so 8 Packet Pg. 158 4 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Proposed Alterations — East Elevation Fort Collins RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION EAST 9 RIMEWProposed Alterations — West - • _ © ---- + - - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION WEST 10 Packet Pg. 159 5 1 • • 1 City of Fort Coltins roposed Alterations — North/Rear Elevation REAR ELEVATION NORTH Proposed Alterations — Renderings Ao , . F e !T " �: � - 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Fort, ins �� 11 ---� O GARAGE FLOOR PL ILDING •"- ------ WEST ELEVATION :TION A -.-.... I�4 rcc:==c=r_=c=c==n rcv=_ --- ----_=====c S=W ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 13 OverallStaff Analysis - • Project does not meet applicable Rehab Standards • Standards respond to project in relation to building's"character-defining features." • Key Standards are: • 2—Preserve historic character • 5—Preserve character-defining features • 9—Additions/exterior alterations should be compatible,distinguishable,and subordinate • 10—Additions/exterior alterations should be reversible • ITS Bulletin 37—Rear Additions to Historic Houses • New use should require"minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment." • "Additions that feature a higher roofline,that extend beyond the side of the building, or that have a significantly greater footprint than the original building are usually not compatible." 14 Packet Pg. 161 7 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 ME r . Staff Analysis — • , • • 2 — Preserve historic character — not met • Addition has 7.75 ft bump-out and is adding significant size to what was Landmarked as a small, Craftsman cottage. • Standard 5 — Preserve character-defining features —met: • Pushing addition back to rear/north brick wall resolves conflict. 15 me f� Analysis Staff • Standards • . 1 • 9 —Additions/exterior alterations should be compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate — not met • Addition is large relative to historic building, disrupts overall massing of the property; bumping out rear portion of east wall by 7.75 ft • Use of lap-siding and height of addition roof meet Standard • 10 —Additions/exterior alterations should be reversible — met: • Pushing addition back to rear/north brick wall resolves conflict. imm Packet Pg. 162 8 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Responses to HPC Questions • How much area/square footage is proposed for demolition? • Area: approximately 76.25ft2 (rear mud porch addition) 17 Public Comments Received • 2 public comments in Round 1 conceptual review (November 2021 ) • Both in opposition • Earlier version precipitated 17 public comments received from city residents • All in opposition • Mostly based on the size and scale of the addition. 18 Packet Pg. 163 9 1/18/2022 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 10 City of Role of the HPC Fort, • Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation • Provide guidance to applicant about how project can be improved to meet requirements of Municipal Code 14, Article IV 6M 19 Packet Pg. 164 10 Agenda Item 4 REPORTSTAFF• - •n Commission PROJECT NAME 900 S. COLLEGE AVE, SCOTT APARTMENTS—FINAL DESIGN REVIEW, FULL REHABILITATION STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to complete a final design review of the exterior component of the applicant's project based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and either issue, issue with conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness. The applicant is proposing full rehabilitation of the main Scott Apartments building, with exterior project components including masonry repair, window rehab and partial replacement (to provide egress), and partial enclosure of the rear/east entry. APPLICANT/OWNER: Steve Levinger RECOMMENDATION: This is a final design review in which the applicant is seeking approval via a Certificate of Appropriateness for the exterior project components based on the City's requirements and standards, for designated City Landmarks. Staff finds the current proposal to meet the Standards for Rehabilitation and has provided an analysis below. 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 and the City to issue other necessary permits to complete the project. In this case, the applicant is requesting a final decision on design review of proposed plans to under Municipal Code 14-54(a) at this meeting. Due to the focus on repair and rehabilitation, and minimal exterior changes, the conceptual review requirement in 14-54(a)(2)(a) has been waived. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Scott Apartments and Garage were designated as a City Landmark on February 19, 2002. The property was designated under Standard 1 for Events/Trends and Standard 3 for Design/Construction, specifically for possessing "architectural significance to Fort Collins as a monumental and well-preserved example of brick twentieth-century apartment building architecture" and for being "historically significant for its association with the growth and development of Colorado State University." The proposed project is a comprehensive rehabilitation of the main apartment building along with some associated site work, including exterior work to the masonry, windows, doors, and the rear/east entry space. No work is proposed for the historic garage on the east side of the property along the historic alley. Item 4, Page 1 Packet Pg. 165 Agenda Item 4 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Character-defining features for this property discussed in the nomination form include: • A large, front-gabled, four-story structure with a mixture of double-loaded corridor apartments and some first floor garden-style units. • Simple, symmetrical, rectangular massing with matching entries on the front/west and rear/east and small, rectangular parapet along the roof on the fourth penthouse floor that carries down to the foundation as brick pilasters near all four corners of the building. • Outer brick walls over poured concrete set in English bond with soldier courses above each building level and a distinctly darker, outset brick covering the garden level. • Simple brick entries on the east and west, with a central stair with flanking landings dropping to grade to the north and south, both with brick half-walls with soldier courses and concrete caps and steps. • Wood, one-over-one sash windows of varying sizes throughout the building, either singular or in three- window sets. • A matching 5-car garage building along the east alley with heavy wood swinging garage doors. [nomination form (City and pending National Register) is Attachment 2 to this packet] ALTERATION HISTORY: Known alterations of the property to date include: • 1924-1925—construction of the original property • 1975—metal fire stairwells added to the east and west and modifications to entries for Fire Code • 1980—reroof(asphalt shingle) • 2008—reroof(asphalt shingle) • 2011 —repairs to garage building including flat roof framing, new EPDM roof, upgraded electric, removal of partition walls, and installation of 3 skylights. • 2013—reroof(EPDM membrane) HISTORY OF DESIGN REVIEW: Since designation in 2002, this property has completed the following Design Reviews: - 2002—Window repair and door replacement (LRL-supported) - 2008— Roof - 2011 —Garage rehab - 2013— Roof HISTORY OF FUNDED WORK/USE OF INCENTIVES: The property has leveraged the following incentives since Landmarking in 2002: - 2002—Landmark Rehabilitation Loan, $4,233, window repair and door replacement - 2021 — Design Assistance Grant, $1,575, masonry repair planning DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking a conceptual review for the following items: 1. Full rehabilitation of exterior masonry consistent with NPS Preservation Brief#2 2. Rehabilitation of most of the 139 windows and their screen units on the property; details to include: o Installation of interior storm windows on most window units o Replacement of large living room windows in units 1-10 and 14 with Marvin Magnum wooden block frame units to accommodate fire ingress/egress. o Note: Modification of bathroom windows updated to rehabilitation, not modification as previously proposed. 3. Rehabilitation of exterior doors, with one due for replacement due to damage 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on Item 4, Page 2 Packet Pg. 166 Agenda Item 4 west flat roof section. 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site. 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule. 7. Replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalks REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Staff has been in contact with the applicant since 2019 scoping out various aspects of the project. Primary prior consultation was related to the Design Assistance Grant awarded in 2021 to plan masonry repairs. Staff has requested additional information from the applicant about the size and location of the proposed new condenser units as part of the utility upgrades. That has been received and is Attachment 6 to the HPC packet. The HPC requested more information about the modification of the bathroom windows and additional details regarding the east/rear entry enclosure. The applicant has provided a plan sketch and description of the proposed enclosure, and an updated description of the rehabilitation project that has shifted the bathroom window treatment to a simple rehabilitation similar to the other historic windows. PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY No public comments have 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. Staff finds that the most relevant review criteria under the Standards for Rehabilitation are Standards 2, 5, 9, and 10. The City of Fort Collins adopted the federal U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards of the Treatment of Historic Properties both as a requirement to maintain a federal certification for the City's historic preservation program, and as a way to establish a consistent and predictable methodology for how exterior projects can be approved on City Landmarks. With adaptive reuse being the most common treatment of historic buildings in Fort Collins, almost all projects, including this one, are reviewed under the Standards for Rehabilitation. Those Standards, and their accompanying, recently updated guidelines from the National Park Service, provide a framework for decision-making that recommends certain types of actions, and recommends against certain types of actions, based on the historic significance of a property, and the needs arising from the modern use of that property. The Standards are intentionally not prescriptive in approach due to the diversity of historical significance, diversity of historic features, and broad range of potential project types that may come forward for review. The Standards instead create consistency and predictability through a standardized decision-making process that preserves the essential historic characteristics and features of a property while accommodating changes both minor and major on an historic property. Applicable Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation: Standard Code Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Met (Y/N) Standard A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires SOI #1 minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial Y relationships; The property will remain in multifamily residential use. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal SOI #2 of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships Y that characterize a property will be avoided. Item 4, Page 3 Packet Pg. 167 Agenda Item 4 The building is characterized by its large, four story size and symmetrical massing, prominent east and west entries, wood sash windows, and combined flat and gabled roof sections on the upper floors. 1. Full rehabilitation of exterior masonry consistent with NPS Preservation Brief #2—The masonry repair appears consistent with this Standard. 2. Rehabilitation of most of the 139 windows and their screen units on the property, including replacement of the large living room units in apartments 1- 10 and 14—The majority of this component appears to meet this Standard. The replacement of the large living room window units is not ideal since the motivation for replacement is not based on their condition. However, the units do require an egress option and an in- kind replacement of these larger units with sturdier windows that can accommodate that function appears to be the least intrusive of the options available. Staff considers this Standard met. 3. Rehabilitation of exterior doors, with one due for replacement due to damage —This component appears to meet this Standard. 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on west flat roof section —The installation of the second deck on the east flat roof portion does not pose a concern since it will be flush and not visible from public rights-of-way. 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site— Staff requested more information about the size and location of these condenser units in order to assess their visibility and potential effects on historic materials. After receiving that material, staff considers this item to meet this Standard based on the location and size of the proposed condensers. 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule—The proposed vestibule on the east/rear entry is inset from the to stair by 3' 6", making its visibility from anywhere but the approach stair itself minimal. Preliminary drawings indicate this will be similar or identical to the existing entry door, which will also remain. This enclosure does not appear to have a significant effect on this secondary entry space and appears to meet this Standard. 7. Replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalks— Replacement of deteriorated site features such as walkways in-kind meets this Standard. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. SOI #3 Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding Y conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. New exterior alterations to the property appear to be limited to in-kind replacement of the large living room windows, installation of exterior condenser units for the building's climate control system, installation of a new wood deck on the west flat roof section, and the east entry vestibule. All appear to be clearly distinguishable as new features and should not create a false sense of history. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right SOI #4 will be retained and preserved. Y It does not appear that any historic alterations made after the 1924-1925 construction are proposed for removal. Item 4, Page 4 Packet Pg. 168 Agenda Item 4 Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples SOI #5 of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. Y The building is characterized by its large, four story size and symmetrical massing, prominent east and west entries, wood sash windows, and combined flat and gabled roof sections on the upper floors. 1. Full rehabilitation of exterior masonry consistent with NPS Preservation Brief #2—The masonry repair appears consistent with this Standard. 2. Rehabilitation of most of the 139 windows and their screen units on the property, including replacement of the large living room units in apartments 1- 10 and 14—The majority of this component appears to meet this Standard. The replacement of the large living room window units is not ideal since the motivation for replacement is not based on their condition. However, the units do require an egress option and an in- kind replacement of these larger units with sturdier windows that can accommodate that function appears to be the least intrusive of the options available. Staff considers this Standard met. 3. Rehabilitation of exterior doors, with one due for replacement due to damage —This component appears to meet this Standard. 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on west flat roof section — N/A 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site— Staff requested more information about the size and location of these condenser units in order to assess their visibility and potential effects on historic materials. The applicant provided that information —based on the proposed locations and size of the condenser units, staff considers this item to meet this Standard. 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule—The proposed vestibule on the east/rear entry is inset from the to stair by 3' 6", and is noted as reversible (i.e., there should be little to no damage to the surrounding brick if the feature is removed in the future). Matching wood furred walls, door, and sidelights should meet this requirement. This enclosure appears to meet this Standard. 7. Replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalks— Replacement of deteriorated site features such as walkways in-kind meets this Standard. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the SOI #6 severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new Y 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. 1. Full rehabilitation of exterior masonry consistent with NPS Preservation Brief #2—The masonry repair appears consistent with this Standard. 2. Rehabilitation of most of the 139 windows and their screen units on the property, including replacement of the large living room units in apartments 1- 10 and 14—The majority of this component appears to meet this Standard. The replacement of the large living room window units is not ideal since the motivation for replacement is not based on their condition. However, the units do require an egress option and an in- kind replacement of these larger units with sturdier windows that can accommodate that function appears to be the least intrusive of the options available. Staff considers this Standard met. 3. Rehabilitation of exterior doors, with one due for replacement due to damage Item 4, Page 5 Packet Pg. 169 Agenda Item 4 —This component appears to meet this Standard. 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on west flat roof section — N/A 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site— N/A 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule— N/A 7. Replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalks— Replacement of deteriorated site features such as walkways in-kind meets this Standard. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the SOI #7 gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will Y not be used. The masonry repair is proposed to follow the requirements of National Park Service Preservation Brief#2, Repointinq Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings. Staff has no concerns on that item and considers this Standard met. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such SOI #8 resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. N/A No excavation is proposed as part of this project. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy SOI #9 historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be Y 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. Generally, this Standard calls for additions to meet three main requirements: to be compatible, distinguishable, and subordinate. The primary exterior alterations of note are the installation of condenser units and installation of the west deck. 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on west flat roof section —The new deck will be flush with the roof with little/no visibility from the public right-of-way. This component appears to meet this Standard. 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site— The installation of these condenser units appears to meet this Standard based on updated information from the applicant. SOI #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in Y such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. This Standard appears to apply to components 5-6. 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site— The installation of these condenser units appears to meet this Standard based on updated information from the applicant. 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule—As noted above, the simple wall, sidelights, and door proposed in the project appear to be fully reversible without damaging the surrounding brick. This component should meet this Standard. Item 4, Page 6 Packet Pg. 170 Agenda Item 4 INDEPENDENT EVALUATION SUMMARY N/A FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request for the rehabilitation of the Scott Apartment building at 900 South College Avenue, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The property at 900 South College Avenue was designated as a City Landmark by City Council ordinance on February 19, 2002 based on its historical significance under Standard 1 (Events/Trends) and its architectural significance under Standard 3 (Design/Construction). • The proposed project for rehabilitation of the main apartment building at 900 South College Ave, meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the project meets the Standards for Rehabilitation in several key aspects, as identified in the analysis table above and recommends approval of the project. SAMPLE MOTIONS This is being presented to the Commission as a Final Review. The Commission may adopt a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness. SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the plans and specifications for the rehabilitation of the Scott Apartment building at 900 South College Avenue as presented, 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 the rehabilitation of the Scott Apartment building at 900 South College Avenue as presented, finding that the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions: • [list conditions] SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission deny the request for approval for the plans and specifications for the rehabilitation of the Scott Apartment building at 900 South College Avenue as presented, finding that the proposed work does not meet the Standards for Rehabilitation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Landmark Nomination form and 2021 DRAFT National Register nomination form 2. Current tax credit application w/project details and description 3. Current plan set for project 4. Overall project set of photos from applicant 5. 2021 Masonry Design Assistance Report 6. 2022-1-10 Applicant response regarding condenser units 7. 2022-1-14 Applicant response to HPC questions on entry vestibule 8. Staff Presentation Item 4, Page 7 Packet Pg. 171 77777775`7' WTM�71'7777 71 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ITEM NUMBER: 21 DATE: February 5, 2002 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL FROM: Karen McWilliams SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No.017,2002,Designating the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage, 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, as a Historic Landmark Pursuant to Chapter 14 of the City Code. RECOMMENDATION: Both the Landmark Preservation Commission and staff recommend adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. At a public hearing held on January 9,2002,the Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously recommended designation of this property as a landmark for its architectural and historical importance to Fort Collins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage have architectural significance to Fort Collins as a monumental and well preserved example of brick twentieth-century apartment building architecture. The property is also historically significant for its association with the growth and development of Colorado State University. The current owners of the property,Charles and Lucretia Rhodes,are initiating this request for Fort Collins landmark designation for the Scott Apartments. The property is under contract for purchase by Stephen G. and Mary E.Levinger, who are in favor of the landmark designation and have signed the designation application as equitable owners/contract purchasers. History -The Scott Apartment Building is a three-story red brick building, representative of Early Twentieth Century Apartment architecture. It has a symmetrical facade with an inset gabled roof. On either end of the roof are parapet end walls with flat crests. The doorway is slightly inset, with a split staircase, constructed of stone and cement, leading to the entrance. The associated five-bay garage mimics the architectural features of the apartment building, with a parapet roof and similar brick construction. An architectural survey of this property,conducted on April 4, 1998,evaluated the apartment building and associated garage as individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Neither the apartment building nor the garage have undergone any significant changes, and thus maintain excellent architectural integrity. Located directly opposite the Colorado State University campus, the Scott Apartments has, since its construction in the mid- 1920s, served as housing primarily for students attending the university. Packet Pg. 172 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. 017, 2002 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS DESIGNATING THE SCOTT APARTMENT BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED GARAGE, 900 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 14-2 of the City Code, the City Council has established a public policy encouraging the protection,enhancement and perpetuation of historic landmarks within the City; and WHEREAS,by Resolution dated January 9,2002,the Landmark Preservation Commission (the "Commission")has determined that the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage have architectural importance to the City, as a well preserved example of brick twentieth-century apartment building architecture, and are also historically significant for their association with the growth and development of Colorado State University; and WHEREAS,the Commission has further determined that said property meets the criteria of a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the Code and is eligible for designation as a landmark,and has recommended to the City Council that said property be designated by the City Council as a landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the property have consented to such landmark designation; and WHEREAS, such landmark designation will preserve the property's significance to the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendation of the Commission and desires to approve such recommendation and designate said property as a historic landmark. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the property containing the building and structure historically known as the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage, located on lands in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: Beginning at the Northwest corner of Block 129, and running thence South 76.50 feet, thence East 140 feet,thence North 76.50 feet, thence West 140 feet to the point of beginning,together with a portion of the vacated alley as described in Book 1504, Page 935,City of Fort Collins,County of Larimer,State of Colorado, also known as 900 South College Avenue Packet Pg. 173 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 be, and hereby is, designated as a historic landmark pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Section 2. That the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines for the treatment of historic properties will serve as the standards by which alterations, additions and other changes to the buildings and structures located upon the above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of February, A.D. 2002, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of February,A.D. 2002. Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading this 19th day of February, A.D. 2002. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Packet Pg. 174 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Community Planning and Environmental Services Advance Planning Department City of Fort Collins RESOLUTION 1, 2002 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE SCOTT APARTMENT BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED GARAGE 900 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO WHEREAS, it is a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, and districts of historical, architectural or geographic significance, located within the city, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this city cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architectural and geographical heritage of the city and by ignoring the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets; and WHEREAS, the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage have architectural siyanificance to Fort Collins as a monumental and well preserved example of brick twentieth-century apartment building architecture; the property is also historically significant for its association with the growth and development of Colorado State University; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has determined that the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage meet the criteria of a landmark as set forth in Section 14-5 of the code and are eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the property, Charles G. And Lucretia R. Rhodes, has consented to such landmark designation. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins as follows: Section 1. That the Landmark Preservation Commission recommends to the Council of the City of Fort Collins that the building and structure known as the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage, located on the lands in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: North College Avenue • P.O.Box 380 • Fort Collins,CO 80522-0 80 • (9;0)21-1-v376 FAA(970),24-6111 • TDD(970)224-6002 • E-mail:apianningta fcgov.com Packet Pg. 175 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution No. 1, 2002 Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage Page 2 Beginning at the Northwest comer of Block 129, and running thence South 76.50 feet, thence East 140 feet, thence North 76.50 feet, thence West 140 feet to the point of beginning, together with a portion of the vacated alley as described in Book 1504, Page 935, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Section 2. That the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines for the treatment of historic properties will serve as the standards by which alterations, additions and other changes to buildings and structures located upon the above described property will be reviewed for compliance with Chapter 14, Article III, of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins held this 9th day of January, A.D. 2002. //" 'ec C Per Hq estad, Chairman ATTE Secretary/Staff Packet Pg. 176 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Community Planning and Environmental Services Advance Planning Deparhnent City of Fort Collins LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISMION January 9, 2002 STAFF REPORT REQUESTS: Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Scott Apartment Building and Associated Garage, 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado STAFF CONTACT: Karen McWilliams, Preservation Planner and Kara Hahn, Preservation Intern APPLICANT: Charles G. and Lucretia R. Rhodes, Owners HISTORY: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the landmark designation of the Scott Apartment Building and Garage. This three story red brick building is representative of Early Twentieth Century Apartment architecture. It has a symmetrical facade with an inset gabled roof; on either end of the roof are parapet endwalls with flat crests. The doorway is slightly inset with a split staircase, constructed of stone and cement, leading to the entrance. An iron fire escape, painted red. runs above the door and across the front of the building. The associated five bay garage mimics the architectural features of the apartment building with a parapet roof and similar brick construction. Neither the apartment building nor the garage have undergone significant changes and thus maintain their architectural integrity. The architectural survey of this property on April 4, 1998 evaluated the apartment building and associated garage as individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. According to Jason Marmor, who conducted the survey of the apartment complex, "this large early twentieth-century apartment building is a monumental and well preserved example of brick apartment building architecture, and is undoubtedly associated with the growth of CSU." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving this request for Fort Collins Landmark Designation of both the Scott Apartment Building and Garage, 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado for both its architectural and historical significance. '81 North College,Avenue • PO.Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 805L-0380 • (970)2 1-637 6 F.-X(970) 4-6111 • TDD(970)224-6002 • E-mail:aplanningru fcgov.com Packet Pg. 177 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Community Planning and Environmental Services Advance Planning Department Historic Preservation Office P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522 City of Fort Collins (970)221-6376 LOCAL HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOMINATION FORM Date:Tanu I5 Im? Please type/print all entries LOCATION PARCEL NUMBER: -A7132-19-001 Address: Scott ApartmentK, 9fln Snuth Cnlle,gP AyPntIP,Fnrt C'nllinc CO Rf)5„? r P Legal Description: APginning at the,N n thwct rnrnPr of Mark 129.City,of Fort Collins ralangdo�and rnnnyn�._,_ t_hence_5outh 76.50 feet. thence East 140 feet.thence North 76.50 feet.thence West 140 feet to the point of Property Name(Historic and/or common): Scott Apartments and A zmriatPd Carngr FORM PREPARED BY: Name/Title: Address: 28.1_N Coll-le Avenue P n Rnr 59A Fart Call!— r~n szn5»_n5un _ Phone: -4)71h 11-1-607R Relationship to Owner: None OWNER INFORMATION Name: Charles C, Rhndp- Ir and l ltrrPt'q R Rhnrier phone- (97nl 494_71M Address: 1-in 1 Pnttnn CtrPe,t Fort Collins CC 80511 BOUNDARIESf YPE OF DESIGNATION Landmark Landmark District Explanation of boundary determination: The landmark property corresponds to the legal location of the parcel. The property contains the historic aeartment building and historic detached garage. D 1DOCFILEIDESIGNAT.ION1900SCOTT,DES 1. 141 r.in.Lylin:r41R._rin Finn 2.S1 North College Avenue • P.O.Box 580 • Fort Collins,CO 8052?r0580 • (970)221-6376 FAX(970)2224-6111 • TDD(970)22 -6002 • E-mail:aplanning'a fcgov.com Packet Pg. 178 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 CLASSIFICATION Category: Ownership: Status: Present Use: --X—Building _Public _C.Occupied w Commercial _ Entertainment _C.Structure __X Private —Unoccupied ^Educational — Government Site ^Religious ^ Other: Object _C.Residential —District Existing Designation: _...National Register —State Register SIGNIFICANCE Architectural: —Represents work of noteworthy architect —Possesses high artistic value XRepresents a type, period,or method of construction Historical: —Associated with significant persons —Associated with significant event _�L_Associated with a significant pattern or trend Contributes to the significance of an historic district Geographical: —Related to or part of a distinctive area —Represents an established and familiar visual feature Further Comments: _According to the arrhitermrai-level utrvev of this property rnnrinrtPrl nn 411Q/09 by tncnn Xbrmnr_ this iarCe early?tlth C e-ninry nnnrtment building is a manument,�J,�,p{{ }ypil nrPCPrve-d example. of hrir'k nrtmPnt building_arr_hitPrtnre_ nnci is t nrintPri with the arnw•th of C.CT i ThP�tp�rrtir �yn<PvalnatPri hs hnvino_eyeellent integrity anti wmild likely he ind'virinntIV eli=ihlP fnr listina nn the National.Rr-oictPr of Pitzmrir Places (Add continuation sheet if needed) HISTORICAL.INFORMATION Please attach a narrative of the historical significance of the property. Include a title search or city directory research if the property is important for its association with a significant person. Further Comments: P1PasP seP nttnrhed survPTnre nrn rA by iasnn M-Irmnr nn 4/10198' PLEASE INCLUDE 35mm PHOTOS OF EACH ELEVATION OF EACH BUILDING AND STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. D:\DOCPiLE\DESIGN AT.ION\900SCOTT.DES U-1 w,­ .....:n..r Page Packet Pg. 179 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 ARCHITECTURAL AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Construction Date:• r,. 1926(Larimer County Assessor's Office) ArchitectBuilder:_Unknown Building Materials: Apartment Building-Brick_Associate)Garage-Brick_ Architectural Style. —Early_20th Century Apartment Building and Garage Special Features/Surroundings: (Add a continuation sheet if needed.) Describe any additions or alterations to the property: The apartment building and garage both exhibit excellent integrity. There are no exterior alterations or additions of note except for the iron fire escapes on the front and back of the apartment building. REFERENCE LIST OR SOURCES OF INFORMATION Records of the Larimer Countv Assessor's and Clerk and Recorder's Offices Citv of Fort Collins Eastside Neighborhood Architectural Survey Form, Prepared by Jason Nlarmor.-4/10/98 (Add a continuation sheet. if needed) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date Determined "Eligible" Ordinance# Application within last 12 months'? Yes No Date Recorded D:\DOCF1LRDESIGNATJON\900SCOTT DES Page 3 Packet Pg. 180 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 AiGkEEM7,NT The undersigned owner(s)hereby agrees that the property described herein be considered for local historic landmark designation, pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Ordinance,Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 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 Historic Preservation Office prior to the occurrence of any of the following: 1. Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the property,or; 2. Preparation of plans for construction of,addition to or demolition of improvements on the property. 3. I further understand that if I apply for a building permit for any one of the following: a. Alteration or reconstruction of or addition to the exterior of any improvement which constitutes all or part of a landmark structure or landmark district; b. Demolition or relocation of any improvement which constitutes all or part of a landmark structure or landmark district; c. Construction or erection of or addition to any improvement upon any land included in a landmark district; d. Or if I proceed with any work not requiring a building permit as set forth in Section 14-47; the Building Inspector and the Landmark Preservation Commission shall be under the time constraints and other requirements as outlined in Chapter 14. Article III of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 4. The Applicants reserve the right to withdraw this nomination application and their signatures therefrom at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the City Council for the vote upon the second reading of the designation ordinance. DATED this �~ day of� ��1 i11'�.1�',. [( I�•��1`Lil.� �ll�� �.L C i_..`�: 1.� I{�r: /l y_ �- Char�les G. Rhodes,Jr. and Lucretia R. Rhodes.Owners (Please Print Names) Char] s G. Rhodes,Jr. Ad Lucretia R. Rhodes,Owners (Signatures) t State of r(4'-CUC' ) )ss. Countyof 7� ► 1rt14 _ - ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this I ( c day of 20Q Lb>/ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires M COMMILv�l" �• `tt1V,tN1 gUflrlr(rFr Notary blic �Q;•' P+R y'•, D:\DOCFILEIDESIGNAT.ION\900SCOTT.DES ••^•. P V U—u Hlwnc l�nlrnnr\lhainann lv,n ,[,ram Page 4 '''�/�• Packet Pg. 181 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 AGkRkMENT The undersigned equitable owner(s)/contract purchaser(s)hereby agrees that the property described herein be considered for local historic landmark designation,pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Ordinance,Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. 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 Historic Preservation Office prior to the occurrence of any of the following: 1. Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the property,or; 2. Preparation of plans for construction of, addition to or demolition of improvements on the property. 3. I further understand that if I apply for a building permit for any one of the following: a. Alteration or reconstruction of or addition to the exterior of any improvement which constitutes all or part of a landmark structure or landmark district; b. Demolition or relocation of any improvement which constitutes all or part of a landmark structure or landmark district; c. Construction or erection of or addition to any improvement upon any land included in a landmark district; d. Or if I proceed with any work not requiring a building permit as set forth in Section 14-47: the Building Inspector and the Landmark Preservation Commission shall be under the time constraints and other requirements as outlined in Chapter 14.Article III of the Code of the Cit} of Fort Collins. 4. The Applicants reserve the right to withdraw this nomination application and their signatures therefrom at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the Citv Council for the vote upon the second readins,of the designation ordinance. DATED this day of 200 i f r 1,1 Stephen b. Levinger and Mary E. Le inger, Equitable Owners/Contract P_ chasers (Ple Print Names) Step en vinger and Mary E. L inger, Equitable wners/Contract PdrchasAs (S gnatures)1 State of )ss. County of 4 ) _ Subscribed and sworn to before me this _L__ ± dayQ EGG of 2 o(*? by Witness my hand and official seal. My ctWnmission expires L: I ` O,�p,6 11Y P�e! L �uLX�C/f' / 1 otary Pu I s GEOAGIMA J. D:1)OCFILE\DESIGNAT.[ON\9005COTT,DES � SEINES L11.1l.—L Lmu1,—A IX.r_nuwm r„�o Page 5 v_Wr g. 182 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARCHITECTURAL PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY FORM EASTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY PROJECT !(3�.orca,�. Address: 200 cc .S• e e r<4u �S f� Field No.: SL22z y8 Legal Description: Parcel No.: 9'-ri 3 2-z y -o o Architectural Style: Zo*k Est. Construction Date: 1pio No. of Stories 3 Roof Form(s): ❑ Front Gabled ❑ Side Gabled ❑ Cross-Gabled ❑ Hipped �y ❑ Gable/Hip ❑ Shed ❑ Mansard ❑ Flat ld Other a g 6/c„( D✓"4e f s V �'— ' Roof Material: ❑ Wood/Shake Shingles ■ Composition Shingles ❑ Composition Rolled Roofing ❑ Other Foundation: O Concrete ❑ Brick ❑ Sandstone Walls: ■ Bricic ❑ Wood Frame ❑ Stone Wall Covering: Lapped Board Siding Ili Brick ❑ Stone ❑ Drop/Tongue-in-Groove Board Siding ❑ Lapped Pressboard ❑ Wood/Shake Shingles ❑Asbestos Shingles ❑ Cast Block/SimulatedStone '❑ Stucco ❑Aluminum/Vinyl Distinctive Features: 11ja5jifc 3 5.12,+y ail b /d . �. Qd dd,4-_��/�.cd .f rrm C/ Grran oged.,f + C/n /-/GI g 6 � /[,l s- .., CI� Puj� i L.KSf P++t(S of �/i( /G F f -I .�....� eK1.fn i')+'J Coin •.'ni � 1 / f rj 1 ( C � d<n a� /J i! 6//C Sfeo .J e.'i CCl(nr�•^- eo�� n �/! 1 �.s+ lv+`. On isnf fi &4-,k dc.k Alterations: Integrity Status: ■ Excellent ❑ Good ❑ Fair ❑ Poor Outbuildings: ❑ Attached Garage G Detached Garage ❑ Shed(s) ❑ Other Contributing? •i Y ❑ N Architectural Significance: Individually Eligible? S Y ❑ N Contributing to District? 2 Y ❑ N (Field Assessment) Remarks: �,•� �Gr7cPa�! 6f(, C<^jv- �/rcJc ✓Gd C//�'.r w, /c Oil" Photograph(s): Roll Exposure(s) Date Recorded: y-/o -q8 Recorded By: fason Marmor Packet Pg. 183 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 E t Packet Pg. 184 �4 � . Packet '• t ii[_' a• � r r 4 NPS Form 10-900 OMB Contr 1 444H03/31/20221ftffflola HOMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin,How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented,enter"N/A"for"not applicable." For functions,architectural classification,materials,and areas of significance,enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: _Scott Apartments and Garage Other names/site number: 5LR.2298 Name of related multiple property listing: N/A (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing 2. Location Street&number: 900 S. College Avenue City or town: Fort Collins State: CO County: Larimer Not For Publication:❑ Vicinity: ❑ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this x nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: _national _statewide x local Applicable National Register Criteria: _A _B xC _D A / Cx Rl er in iN BOAtFZ& State or Federal agency nuru r T b v nment 1 Packet Pg. 187 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State In my opinion, the property _meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Date Title : State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other(explain:) Signature of the Keeper Date of Action 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: ■ Public—Local F I Public— State F-1 Public—Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) ■ District F I Site F-1 Sections 1-6 page 2 Packet Pg. 188 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Structure F-1 Object 1-1 Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing 2 buildings sites structures objects 2 Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _DOMESTIC—multiple dwelling_ Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _DOMESTIC—multiple dwelling_ 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) Apartment Section 8 page 3 Packet Pg. 189 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: BRICK; ASPHALT (roof WOOD (windows), CONCRETE (foundation) Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) Summary Paragraph The Scott Apartments, built in 1924, is located at 900 S. College Avenue. Situated on the southeast corner of College and Locust, the four-story brick building is just south of Old Town, Fort Collins. College Avenue, a segment of US Highway 287, is the main north/south thoroughfare in Fort Collins. In front of the Scott, three lanes of traffic flow in both directions. It is a street of commercial buildings, standing one to four stories high, and a handful of residential properties, most of which have been converted to commercial, retail, or office use. College Avenue forms the eastern border of Colorado State University's main campus. The Scott occupies the same mile-long segment of College Avenue, and stands directly across the street from the University's Glenn Morris Fieldhouse (photos I and 2). The exact construction date for the Field House varies by source,but it was likely constructed shortly after the Scott. Section 8 page 4 Packet Pg. 190 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Narrative Description The Scott Apartments is a large, gable-roofed structure that houses twelve single-bedroom apartments and one studio apartment. There is an associated five-car garage on site. The building design follows that of post World War I apartment buildings, typical of the 1920s. It is designed in a"double loaded corridor" style. Eight apartments on the first and second floors are accessed via a central hall running through the middle of the structure. The gable roofed portion of the building houses two additional apartments on the topmost floor, which are also accessed from a central hall. The remaining three garden-level units are of a"walk up" style, with doors leading directly to the exterior, however, they can be accessed from a central passageway as well. The design follows a simple symmetrical style. It features a large rectangular main structure, approximately 53' x 41'. This portion rises roughly 30' above grade to the fascia of a gable roof with a 6/12 pitch. The roofline does not extend beyond the brick wall at the fascia; there is no soffit. On either end,brick walls extend about a foot above the roofline to create gabled parapets. 32' long shed roof dormers protrude above the roofline on either side of the building. A large, square,brick chimney exits the roof near the center(photos 3-6). The main structure is flanked at either end by rectangular, flat-roofed wings, which are slightly narrower in width than the central building, and project roughly ten feet beyond each gabled end wall. These wings have parapet walls that extend one to three feet above a lightly sloped flat roof system. Short merlons at the corners, and an additional one centered on the long side, give the parapet a battlement look. This feature is reinforced on the gable ends, where one square merlon replaces the peak of the parapet wall, and two similarly sized ones are placed at either edge of each gable. Scuppers at each corner of the flat-roofed wings drain into sheet metal, federal style, leader head collectors that connect to aluminum downspouts. Entrances The first-floor main corridor is accessed via two entrances, one at each end of the building. The entrances are flush with the main portion of the building, cutting through the wings to form porticos (Photo 7). At the end of each portico, 72"wide concrete steps extend half a flight to a 48"deep concrete landing. Another half flight of stairs extends from either side of this landing to ground level. These stairs are 48"wide, to stay even with the depth of the landing (photo 8). The upper flight of steps are flanked by massive, 22"thick brick walls, whose top extends level to the main floor height. These walls do not slope down with the steps, and by their termination at the landing, they stand 48"tall. The landing itself is bordered by a slightly narrower, 18"thick, brick wall on the exterior edge. This wall maintains a level height of 36" across the entire landing. The lower flights of stairs are framed by 18"wide walls on either side, which do slope down with the steps. The walls are composed of a dark brown, wire cut brick in a running bond. The tops are finished with a soldier course of the same brick, and topped with a gently sloped concrete cap (photo 9). Exterior Materials Section 8 page 5 Packet Pg. 191 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State The walls of the building are constructed with two colors of wire cut brick, laid in a running bond. At the time of construction, the newspaper described the building material as "tapestry brick."' A dark brown brick is used as far as the top of the first-floor level and is four wythes thick. A sill of soldier bricks in the same color tops this wall, creating a belt course around the entire perimeter(photo 10). The rest of the building is constructed in a red field brick, and is three wythes thick. Rowlock window sills, soldier window lintels, and soldier parapet tops are all in the dark brown brick,both above and below the belt course (photo 11). Some rectangular embellishments composed of rowlock and header bricks protrude slightly beyond the field brick at the third-floor level,just below the windows on either gable side, which is the only decorative brickwork that uses the red brick. All the original mortar was dark black and struck with a raked joint. Over the years, Colorado seasons have leached most of the black color out of the original mortar, so that nearly all of it appears as a greyish brown color. However, where the porticos protected the bricks from the weather, the color of the mortar can be seen in its original glory(photo 7). All the windows in the building are wood double hung, with the exception of four casement windows that replaced the original windows around 1975, in conjunction with a fire safety modification. The majority of the windows have wood frame screens in place,just outside the glazing. The window frames are painted in a forest green, while the screen frames are painted in a dark pullman green. All building exterior doors are 15 lite glazed wood framed doors. The doors that serve as main entrances to the central corridor have 5 lite fixed panes on either side of the 15 lite entry doors. One exterior steel entry door on the garden level replaced an original door around 2010. All the doors are painted the same forest green as the window frames. The walk-up apartments have similar 15 lite glazed wood framed doors leading outside, with wood screen doors fitted over these. Centered along the north and south walls, 32-foot-long shed roof dormers protrude above the pitched roof. The dormers are sheathed with smooth cedar shingles, and contain five double hung windows along their length. A large, square, brick chimney exits the roof near the center. Roofing is a combination of asphalt shingles on the pitched roof segments, and EDPM rubber membrane on the flat roofs. ' "Apartment House Company Organized to Build Handsome Residence Apartments Here;First to be Erected Right Away on South College Avenue and Locust Street,"Fort Collins Express-Courier(Fort Collins,Colorado),Mar.9, 1924. Section 8 page 6 Packet Pg. 192 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Site Details Concrete sitework on the original structure was minimal, however, the concrete walk-up entrances are worth noting. Each entrance is roughly 14"below grade. 38"wide steps run along the exterior wall, and lead down to a 38"x 72"landing in front of the door. The steps and landing are framed by eight- inch-wide concrete walls that protrude a few inches above grade on the north side, and are cast into a large slab on the south. Short, 12" square, concrete pillars terminate the wall at the steps and at the opposite corner. The pillars extend a few inches higher than the walls. Both the wall and the pillars have a slightly angled cap similar to that found on the entry step brick walls (photo 12). Exterior Alterations The building's exterior has changed little since its original construction. Around 1975, steel fire stairs were installed on the east and west fagades. In addition, steel railings were installed above the brick parapet walls of the wings. The aforementioned window changes also occurred at this point. The most significant changes to the exterior have involved the roofing system. The current roof is around 10 years old. It consists of asphalt dimensional shingles over 7/16" OSB decking on the gable portion, and EDPM rubber membrane over 7/16" OSB decking on the flat roof. Steel flashing was installed on top of the brick parapet walls in conjunction with the new roofing. Interior and Interior Alterations The building's interior corridor has seen more changes over the years than the outside. Around 1975, the original corridor was modified to create floor separation for fire safety. Much of the original balustrade and railing was removed to facilitate construction of framed walls, which surround the stairwells (photo 13). Automatic closing doors were installed in these walls to complete the fire separation project. Additional fire safety work done at this time included replacing the original hall entry doors with rated slab doors, as well as removing hallway grocery delivery doors, and covering the openings. There still remains some of the original balustrade on each floor. It is a fairly simple system of smooth, square, newel posts and rectangular balusters, capped with a smooth, rounded handrail. A small, triangular embellishment is applied near the top of each baluster and newel post. Interior trim is simple, flat 3/4"wood, with the exception of a crown molding, where the wall meets the ceiling. The hallways are carpeted wall to wall (photos 14-16). None of the original hallway light fixtures remain. Exposed electrical conduit runs along the ceiling and walls to furnish power to lighting and a fire alarm system. The individual apartments all retain their original floor plan. Ten of the apartments are nearly identical in layout. The hall door enters into a good-sized living room(photo 17). Two French doors lead off one side of the living room into what was originally called a"sun parlor,"but is now considered a bedroom (photo 18). The two outside-facing walls sport an impressive total of seven windows, making its original name quite apt. Off the other side of the living room is a small dining nook that opens to a small kitchen (photos 19 and 20). A door from the dining nook leads to a small, full bathroom(photo 21). Another door opens to a large closet. This closet has a second large door that opens back into the living room. Hardware remnants on this door frame indicate that a murphy bed was once installed. These beds, quite popular at the time, were referenced in the newspaper article announcing construction of the building; "[t]he living rooms will have disappearing beds which, with a touch of the hand, vanish Section 8 page 7 Packet Pg. 193 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State into adjoining closets."2 None of these beds remain in the building. Much of the original kitchen and bath cabinetry remain, as does the original pedestal cast iron bathtubs. Most of the original cast iron radiators remain, and are still in use. Toilets, sinks, and plumbing fixtures have mostly been replaced. Accessory Garage The five-car garage sits directly east of the apartment building. It is likely that this structure was constructed in conjunction with the apartment building, as its design matches closely that of the main structure. It is not, however, mentioned in either the original building permit, or any of the several newspaper articles that chronicled the construction of the Scott. Approximately 19'x50', it is built from the same two colors of wire cut brick as the main building. It also has brick parapet walls that feature similar"battlement" details to those of the rectangular wings on the main building. On the back and ends of the garage, parapet walls extend above the slightly sloped flat roof(photo 22). At the front, which faces east, away from the main building, the roof extends just beyond the exterior wall. This side has wood-framed openings for five, swing-out, wood garage doors, separated by brick columns (photo 23). The five-car garage received a major rehabilitation around 2010, when the building's current owner converted the structure into a wood shop for personal use. At that time, a new roof structure replaced the severely deteriorated original. Three roof skylights were installed, the new roof deck was covered with a TPO membrane roof, and brick parapet walls were capped with sheet metal flashing. Existing wood framed and sheathed interior partition walls were removed, and a new concrete floor slab was installed. A 200-amp electric service was added. Four of the five existing garage doors were fixed in place in their original frames. The fifth door was removed and repurposed in the workshop's interior. The vacated entry was framed, sheathed, and a new entry door was installed. All original windows were fixed in place. New exterior wood shutters were fixed in place in the original window frames. Brick walls received minor tuckpointing and repair as needed. The rehabilitation was reviewed and approved by The City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission prior to construction. 2"Apartment House Company Organized...,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Mar.9, 1924. Section 8 page 8 Packet Pg. 194 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State 8. Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria (Mark 'Y' in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.) eA. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. F-1 B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. ■ C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. F-1 D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark"x" in all the boxes that apply.) 1-1 A. Owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes F-1 B. Removed from its original location F-1 C. A birthplace or grave F-1 D. A cemetery 1-1 E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure F-1 F. A commemorative property F-1 G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions.) ARCHITECTURE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Section 8 page 9 Packet Pg. 195 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Period of Significance 1924 _1924 - 1950 Significant Dates 1924 Significant Person (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.) Cultural Affiliation Euro-American Architect/Builder Gustav Edwin Lundborg architect Herman Schroder Builder Section 8 page 10 Packet Pg. 196 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph (Provide a summary paragraph that includes level of significance, applicable criteria,justification for the period of significance, and any applicable criteria considerations.) The Scott Apartments at 900 S. College Avenue is significant under Criterion A at the local level in the area of Community Planning and Development. The building's period of significance extends from the construction of the apartments in 1924 until the sale of the buildings and dissolution of the Fort Collins Apartment Company in 1950. The building represents Fort Collins' adaptation of a new type of residential housing: the commuter-friendly apartment building, aimed at working class professionals. The building was probably designed by Gustav Edwin Lundborg, and built by Herman Schroeder, on behalf of the Fort Collins Apartment Company to cater to middle and working class Fort Collins residents during a population boom for the city. The Scott Apartments is also significant under Criterion C in the area of Architecture for the period of 1924 at the local level, as a particularly distinctive and unique example of a small number of sizable apartment buildings constructed in Fort Collins prior to the 1950s. Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.) Criterion A: Community Planning and Development, 1924-1950 The Scott Apartment Building is significant under Criterion A for its place in the Community Planning and Development of Fort Collins at the local level as an early example of how developers reacted to the increased need for middle and working class housing. While apartment units had existed in Fort Collins since the late 1800s, like elsewhere in America, they were typically either constructed on the upper floors of downtown commercial buildings, in hotels, or were adapted spaces in single-family homes. These included the Virginia Apartments,upstairs rentals in the building at 156 S. College Avenue; the Utana Rooms, a boarding house at 231 Jefferson Street; or the McCormick Apartments above the Fort Collins Express at 155 W. Mountain Avenue. Fourplexes and duplexes were built on dozens of lots prior to the 1920s where working- and middle-class families may have needed a cheaper housing option. Extant examples are typically along streets next to primary corridors, including on West Mountain Avenue, and on Remington and East Laurel Streets. Fort Collins, like much of the US, had a population boom following WWI as soldiers came home and families rapidly grew. Urbanization and a move away from farm work also contributed to the housing crush in many smaller cities. In Fort Collins, population growth was also fueled by the massively profitable sugar beet factory,3 rising attendance at the college, and the spreading of the Northern Colorado oil fields. 1923 to 1924 saw a hundred and fifty oil rigs constructed between Fort Collins and Wellington.4 By fall 1924, headlines in the Fort Collins-Express Courier proclaimed that the city's population was nearing the 15,000 mark.5 The Courier forecasted that there may be 50,000 people s"Sugar Beets, Streetcar Suburbs,and the City Beautiful, 1900-1919,"Fort Collins History and Architecture,Fort Collins History Connection,accessed November 2,2021,https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/sugar. 4"Post World War 1 Urban Growth, 1919-1941,"Fort Collins History and Architecture,Fort Collins History Connection, accessed September 30,2021,https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/post. s"Fort Collins Population Now Nearly 15,000"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Oct.2,1924. Packet Pg. 197 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State living there before decade's end.6 In the face of this rapid population growth, people scrambled to find and build suitable housing. The quick development of three separate apartment buildings around downtown Fort Collins in the 1920s reflects the significant expansion of the area's economy during that decade. As the commercial district of Fort Collins extended south along College Avenue, facilitated in part by a streetcar line, denser multi-family housing came with it. Property records indicate that the first stand-alone apartment building came to the city in 1922, with the construction of the Long Apartments at 220 E. Laurel Street. In 1924, the Scott Apartments was constructed, and shortly thereafter, in 1925, the Kensington Apartments at 200 E. Laurel Street. Excepting the Scott Apartments, these buildings were located in or around Old Town, where apartment residents could walk to most of the key financial and commercial centers of the City. It was more than a decade before a fourth came: the Chestnut Apartments, at 221 Mathews Street,built in 1936. The Scott Apartments, with its unique location close to what was then the Colorado Agricultural College, was interestingly not primarily devoted to housing students. The location was likely chosen to take advantage of both the school and the streetcar line that once ran up and down College Avenue. In addition, the choice to build a garage on site speaks to the Fort Collins Apartment Company's imagined clientele for the Scott Apartments: individuals who could afford to commute to work and live alone. Records show most of the Scott Apartments' residents were a mix of faculty and administrators for the school, as well as working and middle class individuals in unrelated fields, including some women who lived alone. The unique features of the building, such as its location on a streetcar line and its multi-car garage, evince its significance as one of the earliest apartment buildings purpose-built for middle and working class commuters in Fort Collins, and for its connection to the community's development during a huge population boom. Criterion C: Architecture, 1924 The Scott Apartments is further significant under Criterion C for its Architecture as an example of a unique and distinctive building type, the double-loaded corridor apartment building. Fort Collins had relatively few apartment buildings constructed prior to the 1950s, making the Scott Apartment building significant in both its configuration and rarity as a building type in the city. The design employs monumental symmetry intended to be viewed from all four facades, its massive entry steps are designed to ground a first floor that is nearly a full story above grade, and it has a unique purpose-built multi stall garage for resident use. One of the other character defining features of this building is its symmetry. The north fagade is nearly identical to the south fagade. The east and west facades are, similarly, nearly identical, including the massive entry steps. There is some difference in fenestration at the lower level,but overall, the building appears quite symmetrical. It is not uncommon for buildings to display some symmetry, but usually there are primary and lesser facades that correlate to the overall visibility of the structure. This is not the case with The Scott Apartments. Though now a motel sits just south of the apartments, at the time when it was built, the Scott was the only major building on the block. Photos indicate that there may have 6"Fifteen Thousand Present Population,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Oct. 3, 1924. Packet Pg. 198 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State been a couple small structures, possibly houses, at far end,'but when the motel was built in 1962, it is noted has having been constructed on a vacant lot.8 Whether or not other structures existed on the block with the Scott, it would have loomed over anything in the immediate vicinity. Anyone approaching from the north or south along College Avenue would have had an unrestricted view of the building. Until the Glenn Morris Field House was built on campus, a pedestrian approaching the street from the college could have witnessed the west fagade with its massive entry steps. For those heading towards College Avenue or the campus, the Scott would have been easy to compare to the grand structures built for the university,but with knowledge that it was, instead, owned by local men, and provided housing for the people of Fort Collins, rather than being a part of an institution like the college. The monumental symmetry allowed for the Scott Apartments to stand out as a promise to the growing prosperity of Northern Colorado, no matter the angle from which it was viewed. The front and rear entrances are a significant feature of the building and represent a unique design solution to building access. In this style of building, it is quite common to situate main floors about half a story above grade and have basement, or"garden level," apartments on a building's lowest floor. By making the main level entrances almost a full story up, the architect was able to make the lowest level apartments just a few steps below grade, creating walk-up access to the three basement apartments (photo 27). The size and mass of the steps, as well as the landing halfway up, serve to ground the building, so that the main floor doesn't feel as high above grade as it actually is. Lundborg had incorporated the basement floor walk-ups in the Shideler Apartments in Boulder. There, he was able to take advantage of a sloping site, and designed a half flight of wide steps to grade for the main entrance. These stairs are not nearly as massive as those found on the Scott Apartments. The resulting entrance to the Scott Apartments is a character defining feature of the building, not commonly seen on similar apartments. The five-car garage that was likely built in conjunction with the apartment house is also worth noting as part of the ingenuity of the Fort Collins Apartment Company. It is a well preserved example of what was a new and modern amenity in 1924 "The Automobile Garage". By the mid 1920s, real estate agents began reporting that a garage was very important to potential home buyers.9 The Fort Collins Apartment Company seems to have concurred for apartment dwellers as well. One aspect of the Scott that was repeatedly emphasized in the newspapers, was that the entire structure was to be "thoroly modern,"10 which seems have extended to the need to house the newest fad of car ownership. The separate brick structure, with separated spaces for five vehicles, was constructed either at the time the apartment house or shortly thereafter. The structure that still stands today is quite different from the barns and sheds found facing the alleys in the surrounding neighborhood. Most of these structures, built in the decade before the Scott, had been intended for livestock and buggies, which were essential to transportation at the turn of the century. They are simple, gable roof, wood frame buildings with minimal foundations and either dirt or wood floors. The Scott Apartments garage is solid and 7 Meg Dunn,"Then and Now:The Glenn Morris Field House at CSU,"Northern Colorado History,October 27,2014, https://www.northemcoloradohistory.com/csu-field-house/. a"Old Town Survey,914 College South,"Architectural Survey,Fort Collins,July 1, 1996. 9"A Brief History of American Garages,"Skywriters Garage Blog,Blue Sky Builders,accessed November 2,2021, https://www.blueskybuilders.com/blog/history-american-garages/. 10 Fort Collins Express-Courier,Jun 9, 1924. Packet Pg. 199 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State substantial, with brick walls and a concrete floor built to support a heavy automobile. The garage has a flat roof system that bears no resemblance to a barn. It was a modern structure intended for the equally modern mode of transportation that was becoming the norm in 1924. Developmental History/Additional Historic Context Information A New Type of Residential Housing Although both freestanding and attached houses have been constructed in America since the Colonial period, the apartment house as a recognized building form in the United States is a phenomenon of the last century and a half. Earlier apartments took the form of rented space on the upper floors of commercial buildings, or accessory rooms off the back of existing houses. Rowhouses and other attached single-family dwellings were also common. One of the defining features of the apartment house as a distinct building form was that the living unit entries were inside the building, connected by a common corridor. This represented a significant design change in architectural history, which then introduced new issues of safe egress and corridor lighting, but also provided for shared amenities, such as laundry and storage facilities. Apartment houses generally sprung up in urbanized areas, both large and small, where more units were needed. This was often to accommodate a large influx of workers in a particular industry; working- or middle-class families in denser, more expensive settings; or as housing for university students.t t In these situations, home ownership for many individuals and families became less practical, and the shift to apartment- living was booming. Apartment buildings as a new architectural form took on a significant diversity of variants, depending on the needs, lot configuration, and desires of the builder. For deep, narrow lots like that at 900-904 S. College, a horizontal structure with a double-loaded corridor was a common adaptation. An apartment building of any number of stories would have a front entry that opened into a central hallway. There may be stairs or an elevator located somewhere along the hall,but units typically faced inward onto the indoor hallway, and then had windows along the outward facing walls. Other variants included larger horizontal or vertical block buildings with multiple entries and stairways with two or more apartments accessed from a common foyer or landing on each floor. Smaller, square apartment buildings had a vertical emphasis, a single entry on the fagade, and,usually, fewer of units per floor. Many other variants, classified by their building footprint(often an"L," "T," "C,"or"H" configuration), had either single- or double-loaded hallways and incorporated more garden or courtyard space on the lot.12 For those who invested in building apartment houses, the return was twofold. First, they could establish housing for the incoming population. Secondly, and probably more importantly, they saw a potential for reaping a significant profit. The group of men who built the Scott Apartments laid these ideas out in a meeting with the Chamber of Commerce in July of 1924. As documented by the newspaper, they " "The Chateau,"DRAFT nomination form,National Register of Historic Places,5DV.8524,900 Sherman Street,Denver, Denver,Colorado,January 16,2016, Section 8,p13. 12 Utah's Historic Architecture Guide,Utah Division of State History,(Salt Lake City,Utah: 2018),pp64-71. Packet Pg. 200 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State highlighted the lack of apartment buildings in Fort Collins,particularly when compared to cities like Denver, saying: ... Denver has 476 apartment houses; that is, one apartment house for each 500 people. If apartments were built in the same proportion here, Fort Collins would have 22. It now has...only one apartment house for each 7,500 people. 13 This account included the still incomplete Scott Apartments which was only the second such building in the city, in that reckoning. While at the time Fort Collins had significantly more land for people to build homes on than the Denver area, the need for readily accessible housing was becoming pressing. From the perspective of those funding the project, ownership of an apartment house was supposed to turn a significant profit. It was forecasted that half the rent would be needed to cover the building's expenses, but the other half would return to the pockets of the owners as profit.14 Newspaper articles in the following months continued to tell the same story: apartments were needed to support Fort Collins' growing population, and dedicated apartment houses would turn a profit for the owner. In one such article, detailing the city's population reaching the 15,000 mark, the Scott Apartments is mentioned as nearing completion, and that: ...the prospects are that one or more similar apartments will be started soon. Apartment houses are about the most reliable and remunerative investments that can be made, and those who provide them for Fort Collins will reap the cream of the city's growth.is None of the articles provide an author, so it is hard to tell how true these claims were, or if they had been fed to the newspaper by those same people who were seeking to make money from the construction of apartment houses. The Fort Collins Apartment Company Jay Emerald Shideler was born June 24, 1896 in Kansas. He received a business degree from Columbia University,16 and then moved to Colorado to pursue real estate in Boulder. He established The Boulder Apartment Company with his brother, Arthur. They, with the help of Boulder architect Gustav Edwin Lundborg, constructed The Shideler Apartments at 1090 1 lth street in Boulder, Colorado, in 1923 (photo 24). From there, he witnessed Northern Colorado's rapid growth. He foresaw the impending need for more housing in the area, as well as the profit to be made. Shideler gathered his experiences and business sense, and headed to Fort Collins to replicate his Boulder ventures. He formed a partnership with a few Fort Collins businessmen and a Denver banker: on March 9, 1924, the Fort Collins Express- Courier ran an article announcing the formation of the Fort Collins Apartment Company by A.W. Scott, Jay E. Shideler, and Eugene Borland.17 This same article announced that the first house to be built would be on the corner of South College and Locust, taking up "five fine corner lots which face the ""Apartment House Company Tells Of Needs In Housing,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Jul. 13, 1924. 14 Ibid. is"Fifteen Thousand Present Population,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Oct. 3, 1924. 16"Apartment House Company Organized to Build...,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Mar. 9, 1924. 17 Ibid;Note:through the years,the name of the company is reported as both the"Fort Collins Apartment Company"and the "Fort Collins Apartment House Company,"the former has been used for ease of comprehension. Packet Pg. 201 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State north and west."18 This plot of land was already owned by A.W. Scott. The Express-Courier went on to describe the building, and acknowledged that it resembled the existing "Shideler apartments" in Boulder. An elevation drawing of the Boulder Apartment Company's building at 1090 1 Ith Street was included with the article. At the announcement of the company, the board of directors included Scott, Shideler, and Borland, as well as "two other prominent citizens of Fort Collins whose names will be announced within a few days."19 The company had plans, and the capital, to build several apartment houses. Shideler, who was to be president and manager of the Fort Collins Apartment Company, passed on the presidency of the Boulder Apartment Company to his brother Arthur, and moved to Fort Collins to direct the development and growth of his newest business venture.20 Fort Collins issued a building permit on March 27th, 1924 for a three-story building housing thirteen apartments,21 and a day later, H.W. Schroeder was hired to build the structure (photo 25).22 His involvement on the project is worth noting because, not only was he a prolific builder in Fort Collins during the early 20th century, but also a prominent figure in the community. From 1902-1905, he was associated with constructing or remodeling over two dozen buildings in the area.23 A description of his work appears in an article about the Honorable Thomas Jones' decision to build a home in Fort Collins: H.W. Schroeder, the well known contractor and builder, easily secured the contract to build Hon. Thomas Jones' elegant$8,500 cottage. His reputation for excellent, conscientious work insures Mr. Jones a satisfactory job. The many fine public buildings erected by Mr. Schroeder in Fort Collins and vicinity are enduring monuments to his skill and ability.24 Schroeder was also an active member of the community. He was the secretary for the fire department in 1890, and elected as an alderman in Fort Collins in 1897.25 He served as an officer for the Independent Order of the Odd Fellows,26 and was chosen as a Republican delegate for Southeast Fort Collins in 1904.27 He was an inaugural member of the Fort Collins Pioneer Association in 1906: a group honoring those who had lived in the area for at least 25 years.28 His home at 419 Mathews St is listed on the National Register as a contributing resource of the Laurel School National Register Historic District 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 21 Note:the apartment count in the building varies between twelve and thirteen.During the first couple of decades,the building always had a live in caretaker,so it can be assumed that,while there were thirteen apartments in the building,only twelve of them were up for rent. This seems to be the most logical explanation for the discrepancy in unit count. 22 Fort Collins Express-Courier,Mar.28, 1924. 21"Record Year For Building:Nearly$400,000 Expended on New Structures in Fort Collins During the Past Twelve Months,"Fort Collins Express,Dec. 31, 1902;"Fort Collins Still Booming:More than$2,000,000 Worth of Building Was Done During The Year 1903 in and about this City,"Fort Collins Express,Dec.23, 1903;"Building Outside of Collins:A Great Amount Was Done in 1903 at this End of the Poudre Valley,"Fort Collins Express,Jan. 6, 1904;"Fort Collins Still Booming:More Residences Built During 1904 Than Any Year in the History of the City—Though Not Many Stores,"Fort Collins Express,Dec.21, 1904;"New Homes for New People," Weekly Courier(Fort Collins,Colorado),Jan.4 1905;"A Season of Great Prosperity for Fort Collins Home Builders," Weekly Courier(Fort Collins,Colorado),Dec.27, 1905. 2a George S. Scales,"The Hon.Thomas Jones,"Fort Collins Express(Fort Collins,Colorado),Aug.27, 1902. 2s"Fire Department,"Fort Collins Courier(Fort Collins,Colorado),Jan.9, 1890. z6"Odd Fellows Plan Big Celebration,"Fort Collins Express(Fort Collins,Colorado),Mar.7, 1912. 27"Republican Delegates Elected," Weekly Courier(Fort Collins,Colorado),Apr.7, 1904. 28"Fort Collins' Pioneers,"Fort Collins Express Jan. 17, 1906, Packet Pg. 202 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State (5LR.463), and was listed as a local landmark by the City of Fort Collins because of his importance to the community.29 Construction on the apartment building began in June and progressed quickly. The Shideler Apartments, as it was originally named,put its first"For Rent" advertisement in the Fort Collins Express-Courier on January 8, 1925'30 although an earlier article documenting the progress of the construction claimed that all the apartments had been rented.31 City directories for the era indicate the company had little trouble filling its thirteen apartments with tenants. Given the quick turnaround and overall success of their first endeavor, their financial wherewithal, land ownership, and stated plans, it seems likely that the company would have proceeded with the construction of additional apartment houses in earnest. This, however, was not the case. The Scott/Shideler building at the corner of Locust and College remains the only structure ever built by the Fort Collins Apartment Company. Unfortunately, Shideler's business acumen included some less than reputable activity. In fall of 1925, the Fort Collins Express-Courier ran a story on him being sued by the D.T. Pulliam company for breaking a contract involving a land deal.32 He also sold the Boulder Apartment Company to his mother in order to improve its financial standings.33 In early 1926, Shideler attempted to borrow $10,000,using the Fort Collins apartment house as collateral, in order to pay off the debts incurred by the Boulder Apartment Company.34 The other board members filed an injunction to stop him. Eventually, the suit was settled when Shideler's shares in the company were purchased by A.W. Scott and E.G. Steele, giving them controlling interest.35 After this, Shideler is not mentioned in association with the company or building, and shortly thereafter, the building starts being advertised as the "Scott Apartments." Without Shideler to pursue and manage the development of more buildings, The Fort Collins Apartment Company seemed content to continue ownership of the Scott Apartments,but abandoned plans for additional structures. The company remained owners of the building until 1950, when it was sold to Bert and Edna Merrihew. The Fort Collins Apartment Company then was dissolved. Shideler's dream to create a company with multiple structures to serve the growing population of Fort Collins was never realized; cut short by his own ambition. His legacy, however, remains in the Scott Apartments. It is a distinct and monumental structure that embodies his desire to provide a new type of housing to the citizens of Fort Collins. Gustav Edwin Lundbor2 There is no official or historic record that identifies the Scott Apartment's architect; however, evidence points to Gustav Edwin Lundborg having at least some role. Though mostly known for his bungalow plans, Lundborg was credited with designing The Shideler Apartment building in Boulder.18 The striking similarity of this structure to The Scott Apartments, his established relationship with Jay Shideler, and the brief interval between construction of the two buildings leave little doubt to his role as the building's designer. Since no information can be found tying Lundborg to the Scott, it is unknown if 29 Cassandra Bumgarner,"Ordinance 4845-491 Mathews"(Agenda Item Summary,Agenda Item 6,October 4,2016). 30 Fort Collins Express-Courier, Jan. 8, 1925. 31 Fort Collins Express-Courier,Dec.9, 1924. 32"Shideler Sued for Alleged Failure to Fulfill Contract,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Sept. 16, 1925. ss Fort Collins Express-Courier,Oct. 15, 1925. 34"Temporary Receiver Asked for Apartment House Corporation,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Jan. 6, 1926. 35"Shidelers Sell Interest To Local Members of Company,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Jan.20, 1926. Packet Pg. 203 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State he was actively involved with the development of the building, or if Shideler simply reused the schematics already owned by the Boulder Apartment Company. Lundborg is credited for designing many fine single family Craftsman style homes in Boulder Colorado. Many of these single-family houses are within Boulder's University Hill neighborhood or the Mapleton Hill Historic District (5BL.535), which is a certified district and not listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Lundborg's own residence at 735 Lincoln Place in Boulder(5BL.3397) has been substantially altered, with most of the original cladding replaced. His apartment house at 1090 1 lth Street in Boulder(5BL.2849) and the Seventh Day Baptist church at 780 Arapahoe (possibly no longer extant) in Boulder are the only two commercial structures attributed to him.36 The 1 lth Street apartment house displays his strong preference for the Craftsman style. With the Baptist church, however, he departed from his familiar style and opted for Gothic arched windows and Colonial Revival detailing, more befitting the application.37 This displays Lundborg's ability and willingness to tailor his designs to suit his clients, as may have been the case with the Scott Apartments. While the Scott Apartments' resemblance to the Shideler Apartments in Boulder is striking, there are some notable differences. The Scott Apartments is larger, and has a more substantial feel. Craftsman details, such as overhanging eves and exposed rafters, are replaced with brick parapets, merlons, and massive entry steps. It is important to remember that the building was to be the first of several apartment houses constructed by The Fort Collins Apartment Company, and needed to make a statement about the new type of housing they were going to be offering. This was not lost on the architect, be it Lundborg, Shideler, or another, unknown party, and it is represented in the unique design and character of the Scott Apartments. Residents The initial tenants in the Scott apartment building reflect the time period in which it was built, and the working- and middle-class families that the Fort Collins Apartment Company sought to serve. By looking at local directories and census information, a profile can be built of the tenants who occupied the building during its first couple decades. The broad mixture of local citizens included:tool dresser;38 the vice president of the Taylor Clothing Company;39 the city engineer;40 a bookkeeper for Riverside Ice & Storage;41 several professors from Colorado Agricultural College;42 part of the legendary Ver Straten oil 36"G.Edwin Lundborg,"Boulder Daily Camera, May 24, 1943. 37 L. Simmons and C.Whitacre,"Seventh Day Baptist Church,"Historic Building Inventory Record,Carnegie Library for Local History,Boulder,Colorado, 1990. 38 Polk's Fort Collins,Loveland and Larimer County Directory,(Colorado Springs:R.L.Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1927),43. 39 Ibid, 103. 40 Ibid,81. 41 Ibid, 169. 42Polk's Fort Collins(Colorado) City Directory 1929;Including Loveland City and Larimer County,(Colorado Springs:R.L. Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1929), 154. Polk's Fort Collins(Colorado) City Directory 1931;Including Loveland City and Larimer County,(Colorado Springs:R.L. Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1931), 107. Packet Pg. 204 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State drilling team,43 whose discovery of oil started the Northern Colorado oil boom;44 several public school teachers, such as those of art, music,45 mathematics, and history;46 a chemist from the Colorado Portland Cement Company;47 a few lawyers;48 and a barber.49 The most interesting tenant in 1927 was Fenimore Chatterton.50 Though retired by the time he moved into the Scott, he had previously been the 6th governor of Wyoming, serving from April 28, 1903 to January 2, 1905. He had been serving as Secretary of State, starting in 1899, when the governor suddenly died, and Chatterton assumed the role. It appears that he continued to serve as Secretary of State under himself, and then under the following governor as well,before his term finally ended in 1907.51 The most notable occurrence during his term as governor was the hanging of famed gunman, Tom Horn.52 It is unknown what he was doing in Fort Collins in 1927, other than living at the Scott Apartments. 1936 saw several of the most fascinating tenants. Whitney McNair Borland moved to Fort Collins in 1935 to take over as the head of the U.S. Department of Reclamation hydraulics laboratory, which was housed on the Colorado A&M campus.53 He became a leader in snow and avalanche science, and his work was some of the preliminary information that led to the building of the Eisenhower Tunnel.54 His work on sedimentation, hydraulics, and avalanches continues to be relevant, and there is a scholarship at Colorado State University in his name.55 In addition, he was known for having climbed all the fourteeners in Colorado.56 41 Polk's Fort Collins,Loveland and Larimer County Directory,(Colorado Springs:R.L.Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1927),32. 44"Oil Interest Given New Impetus by Enormous Ver Straten Flow,"Daily Times(Longmont,CO),Mar. 6, 1925, 45 Polk's Fort Collins,Loveland and Larimer County Directory,(Colorado Springs:R.L.Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1927),86. 46 United States Federal Census Records,Vera Hickman and Lillian Catren,Fort Collins,CO, 1930. 47 Polk's Fort Collins(Colorado) City Directory 1929;Including Loveland City and Larimer County,(Colorado Springs: R.L.Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1929),44. 48 R.L.Polk's Directory Co's.Fort Collins,Loveland and Larimer County Directory, (Colorado Springs,R.L.Polk Directory Co., 1925),81. Polk's Fort Collins(Colorado) City Directory 1929;Including Loveland City and Larimer County,(Colorado Springs:R.L. Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1929),39. 49 United States Federal Census Records,Dee Brown,Fort Collins,CO, 1940. "Polk's Fort Collins,Loveland and Larimer County Directory,(Colorado Springs:R.L.Polk Directory Co.,Publishers, 1927),35. 51 "Fenimore Chatterton,"last modified November 8,2014,https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/fenimore-chatteron. 52 History.com Editors,"Tom Horn is hanged in Wyoming for the murder of Willie Nickell,"History,last modified November 18,2019,https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/tom-horn-is-hanged-in-wyoming-for-the-murder-of-willie- nickell. 53"Borland to be at Hydro Lab,"Fort Collins Express-Courier,Sep. 30, 1935. 54"Gov.Johnson Renews Push for Highway Bore,"Fort Collins Coloradoan, Nov.4, 1955. 55 Whitney Borland Scholarship-Colorado State University Scholarships,accessed October 27,2021, https:Hcolostate.academicworks.com/opportunities/41995. 56 gore galore,"A Pioneer in Snow and Avalanche Science,Whitney Borland Climbs All the Fourteens, 1941 AND 1954," Colorado 14ers, 13ers,and other peaks, 14ers.com,February 13,2019,https:Hl4ers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55727. Packet Pg. 205 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Two other residents of note in 1936 were Anna Lute and Elizabeth Wing. Lute, who lived in apartment ten,57 was the head of the seed lab at Colorado Agricultural College,58 and her work earned her a role on "one of the most important committees"59 of the International Seed Testing Congress in 1931. Of 63 people chosen for different committees that year, only two were women. Wing, in apartment twelve,60 was an associate professor of chemistry at the university, and worked there for over 30 years, before retiring in 1954.61 The Scott Apartments has always had a strong connection with the University, which lies just across College Avenue. Since 1925, countless staff, faculty, and students have made The Scott Apartments their home. While it has, and will continue to serve the institution, it has never been exclusive to it. Similar to 1927, the current roll of tenants contains a handful who are associated with CSU but also a broad mix of blue collar and middle-class residents,just as it did nearly 100 years ago. 9. Major Bibliographical References "Apartment House Company Organized to Build Handsome Residence Apartments Here; First to be Erected Right Away on South College Avenue and Locust Street."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Mar. 9, 1924. "A Brief History of American Garages." Skywriters Garage Blog. Blue Sky Builders. Accessed November 2, 2021. https://www.blueskybuilders.com/blog/history-american-garages/. "Borland to be at Hydro Lab."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Sep. 30, 1935. "Building Outside of Collins: A Great Amount Was Done in 1903 at this End of the Poudre Valley." Fort Collins Express, Jan 6, 1904. Bumgarner, Cassandra. "Ordinance 4814-491 Mathews."Agenda Item Summary, Agenda Item 6, Oct. 4, 2016. "The Chateau."DRAFT Nomination Form. National Register of Historic Places. 5DV.8524, 900 Sherman Street, Denver, Colorado. Jan. 16, 2016. Section 8 p13. 57 Polk's Fort Collins(Larimer County, Colo) City Directory 1936,Including Loveland City and Larimer County,Salt Lake City:R.L.Polk&Co.,Publishers, 1936. 58 Note:The University was originally known as Colorado Agricultural College.In 1935,it changed its name to Colorado State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts,which was usually abbreviated to Colorado A&M,although the directories seemed to use the abbreviation of CSC. Since that is the primary source for this information,CSC is used here. The college finally earned the name of Colorado State University in the 1950s. 59"Miss Anna Lute,Colorado's Seed Analyst,Honored,"Fort Collins Express-Courier, Oct. 11, 1928. 60 Polk's Fort Collins(Larimer County, Colo) City Directory 1936,Including Loveland City and Larimer County,Salt Lake City:R.L.Polk&Co.,Publishers, 1936. 61 "Elizabeth Wing Retires After 36 Years at A&M,"Fort Collins Coloradoan,June 10, 1954. Packet Pg. 206 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Dunn, Meg. "Then and Now: The Glenn Morris Field House at CSU."Northern Colorado History, October 27, 2014. https://www.northemcoloradohistory.com/csu-field-house/. "Elizabeth Wing Retures After 36 Years at A&M."Fort Collins Coloradoan, June 10, 1954. "Fenimore Chatterton,"WyoHistory, Wyoming State Archives. Last modified November 8, 2014. https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/fenimore-chatteron. "Fifteen Thousand Present Population."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Oct. 3, 1924. "Fire Department."Fort Collins Courier, Jan 9. 1890. Fort Collins Express-Courier, Dec. 9, 1924. Fort Collins Express-Courier, Jun 9, 1924. Fort Collins Express-Courier, Jan. 8, 1925. Fort Collins Express-Courier, Mar. 28, 1924. Fort Collins Express-Courier, Oct. 15, 1925. "Fort Collins' Pioneers."Fort Collins Express, Jan. 17, 1906. "Fort Collins Population Now Nearly 15,000."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Oct. 2, 1924. "Fort Collins Still Booming: More Residences Built During 1904 Than Any Year in the History of the City—Though Not Many Stores."Fort Collins Express, Dec. 21, 1904. "Fort Collins Still Booming: More than $2,000,000 Worth of Building Was Done During the Year 1903 in and about this City."Fort Collins Express, Dec. 23, 1903. "G. Edwin Lundborg."Boulder Daily Camera, May 24, 1943. gore galore. "A Pioneer in Snow and Avalanche Science, Whitney Borland Climbs All the Fourteens, 1941 AND 1954." Colorado 14ers, 13ers, and other peaks, 14ers.com, February 13, 2019. https://14ers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55727. "Gov. Johnson Renews Push for Highway Bore."Fort Collins Coloradoan,Nov. 4, 1955. History.com Editors. "Tom Horn is hanged in Wyoming for the murder of Willie Nickell."History. Last modified November 18, 2019. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/tom-horn-is-hanged- in-wyoming-for-the-murder-of-willie-nickell. Packet Pg. 207 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State "Miss Anna Lute, Colorado's Seed Analyst, Honored." Fort Collins Express-Courier, Oct. 11, 1928. "New Homes for New People." Weekly Courier(Fort Collins, Colorado), Jan 4, 1905. "Odd Fellows Plan Big Celebration."Fort Collins Express, Mar. 7, 1912. "Oil Interest Given New Impetus by Enormous Ver Straten Flow."Daily Times (Longmont, Colorado), Mar. 6, 1925. "Old Town Survey, 914 College Avenue South."Architectural Survey, Fort Collins, July 1, 1996. Polk's Fort Collins (Colorado) City Directory 1929;Including Loveland City and Larimer County. Colorado Springs: R.L. Polk Directory Co., Publishers, 1929. Polk's Fort Collins (Larimer County, Colo) City Directory 1936;Including Loveland City and Larimer County. Salt Lake City: R.L. Polk& Co., Publishers, 1936. Polk's Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer County Directory. Colorado Springs: R.L. Polk Directory Co., Publishers, 1927. "Post World War I Urban Growth, 1919-194L" Fort Collins History and Architecture. Fort Collins History Connection. Accessed Sept. 20, 2021. https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/post. "Record Year For Building: Nearly$400,000 Expended on New Structures in Fort Collins During the Past Twelve Months."Fort Collins Express, Dec. 31, 1902. "Republican Delegates Elected." Weekly Courier(Fort Collins, CO), Apr. 7, 1904. R.L. Polk's Directory Co's. Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer County Directory. Colorado Springs: R.L. Polk Directory Co., 1925. Scales, George S. "The Hon. Thomas Jones."Fort Collins Express, Aug. 27, 1902. "A Season of Great Prosperity for Fort Collins Home Builders." Weekly Courier(Fort Collins, Colorado), Dec. 27, 1905. "Shideler Sued for Alleged Failure to Fulfill Contract."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Sept. 16, 1925. "Shidelers Sell Interest to Local Members of Company."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Jan. 20, 1926. Simmons, L. and Whitacre, C. "Seventh Day Baptist Church."Historic Building Inventory Record, Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, Colorado, 1990. Packet Pg. 208 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State "Sugar Beets, Streetcar Suburbs, and the City Beautiful, 1900-1919."Fort Collins History and Architecture. Fort Collins History Connection. Accessed November 2, 2021. https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/sugar. "Temporary Receiver Asked for Apartment House Corporation."Fort Collins Express-Courier, Jan. 6, 1926. United States Federal Census Records, Vera Hickman and Lillian Catren, Fort Collins, CO, 1930. United States Federal Census Records, Dee Brown, Fort Collins, CO, 1940. Utah's Historic Architecture Guide. Salt Lake City: Utah Division of State History, 2018. Whitney Borland Scholarship - Colorado State University Scholarships. Accessed October 27, 2021. https:Hcolostate.academicworks.com/opportunities/41995. Previous documentation on file (NPS): preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67)has been requested previously listed in the National Register !previously determined eligible by the National Register !designated a National Historic Landmark recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey # !recorded by Historic American Engineering Record# recorded by Historic American Landscape Survey# Primary location of additional data: X State Historic Preservation Office Other State agency Federal agency Local government University Other Name of repository: Historic Resources Survey Number (if assigned): 40. Geographical Data Acreage of Property_.26 Packet Pg. 209 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Use either the UTM system or latitude/longitude coordinates UTM References Datum (indicated on USGS map): F-1 NAD 1927 or ■ NAD 1983 1. NW Corner, Zone: 13 N Easting: 493493 Northing: 4491607 2. NE Corner, Zone: 13 N Easting: 493540 Northing: 4491607 3. SE Corner, Zone: 13 N Easting: 493540 Northing: 4491583 4. SW Corner, Zone: 13 N Easting : 493493 Northing: 4491583 Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property.) Adapted from the Larimer County Assessor: "Beginning at the northwest corner of Block 129, Fort Collins 1873 plat, then south 76.5 feet, then east 140 feet to the alley, then north 76.5 feet, then west 140 feet to the beginning, and also including a portion of a vacated alley on the east side of the property. Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) The boundary conforms to the legal boundaries of Larimer County Assessor parcel 9713229001 which includes the associated and contributing historic features of the Scott Apartment complex, including the apartment building, associated garage, and building grounds. 11. Form Prepared By name/title: Rae Farrar organization: street& number: 29723 Pinon Court city or town: Buena Vista state: Colorado zip code: 81211 e-mail rfarrar500(&,,gmail.com telephone: (719)221-4719 date:11/5/2021 Additional Documentation Packet Pg. 210 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Submit the following items with the completed form: • Maps: A USGS map or equivalent(7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location. • Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map. • Architectural Drawings Existing Floor plan and elevation drawings • Attachment of Photos and Captions that correspond to photo log Photographs Submit clear and descriptive photographs. The size of each image must be l600x1200 pixels (minimum), 3000x2000 preferred, at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Each photograph must be numbered and that number must correspond to the photograph number on the photo log. For simplicity, the name of the photographer,photo date, etc. may be listed once on the photograph log and doesn't need to be labeled on every photograph. Photo Log Name of Property: The Scott Apartments City or Vicinity: Fort Collins County: Larimer State: Colorado Photographer: Steve Levinger Date Photographed: 4/24/2021, 7/27/2021, 8/l/2021 Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera: Photo 1 of 25 View of College avenue, circa 1924 (camera facing north) Photo 2 of 25 Historic postcard of College Avenue (camera facing north) Photo 3 of 25 North and east fagades (camera facing southwest) Photo 4 of 25 West facade, along College Avenue (camera facing east) Photo 5 of 25 North facade, along Locust Street(camera facing south) Photo 6 of 25 South facade (camera facing north) Photo 7 of 25 East portico (camera facing west) Photo 8 of 25 East entry stairs (camera facing west) Photo 9 of 25 Northern side of east entry stair, railing detail (camera facing south) Photo 10 of 25 Brick detail on the south facade (camera facing north) Photo 11 of 25 Brick detail on the east facade (camera facing west) Photo 12 of 25 Entry detail of walk-up apartment on north side (camera facing east) Photo 13 of 25 West stairwell (camera facing east) Packet Pg. 211 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Photo 14 of 25 First floor corridor from the west entrance (camera facing east) Photo 15 of 25 East end of the second floor corridor(camera facing east) Photo 16 of 25 Second floor apartment entry (camera facing north) Photo 17 of 25 Living room in apartment#5 (camera facing north) Photo 18 of 25 Bedroom/Sun Parlor apartment#5 (camera facing north) Photo 19 of 25 Dining nook in apartment#5 (camera facing north) Photo 20 of 25 Kitchen in apartment#5 (camera facing west) Photo 21 of 25 Bathroom in apartment#5 (camera facing north) Photo 22 of 25 North and west garage facades (camera facing southeast) Photo 23 of 25 East garage fagade (camera facing west) Photo 24 of 25 Shideler Apartments 1090 1 lth Street Photo 25 of 25 Original building permit, dated March 27, 1924 Packet Pg. 212 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State r t al" - �r P4 00 Photo 1 View of College avenue, circa 1924 (camera facing north). West facade of Scott Apartments appears on the right hand side of this photo. The Armory building (no longer existing) appears just north of The Scott. The Colorado A& M Administration building"Old Main" (no longer existing) appears on the left. Photo courtesy of Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Local History Archive Packet Pg. 213 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State s • � ti i wr Photo 2 Historic postcard of College Avenue (camera facing north). The Scott Apartments can be seen on the right side, partially hidden by a tree. The large building on the left side is the Glenn Morris Field House. Courtesy of the Steve Levinger collection. Packet Pg. 214 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State r, 6 v G Photo 3 North and east fagades (camera facing southwest). Photo courtesy of owner. b. Photo 4 West fagade, along College Avenue (camera facing east). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 215 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State XV V � h F � Photo 5 North fa ade, alon Locust Street camera facet south .Photo courtes o owner. 1 �n W INN Aff 1� a INES MW(, Photo 6 South fagade (camera facing north). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 216 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property Count and State J Y� Photo 7 East portico (camera facing west). Note the darker color of mortar in the portico, where is has been protected from the elements. Photo courtesy of owner. 1 Photo 8 East entry stairs (camera facing west). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 217 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State -61 r,y t i �1 ! a ,y Photo 9 Northern side of east entry stair, railing detail (camera facing south).Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 218 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State At,, I y •zf-mil= mL._i t1: •� _ n Lk tip, Photo 10 Brick detail on the south facade (camera facing north). Note the two different colors of brick. Photo courtesy of owner. Photo 11 Brick detail on the east facade (camera facing west). Also note the two colors of green used on the window and screen frames.Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 219 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property } County and State i_ N. '- ! r �r �µ "�• t M rl .i 1, n,t .•t r � t,. Photo 12 Entry detail of walk-up apartment on north side (camera facing east). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 220 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State t� l I Photo 13 West stairwell (camera facing east). This stairwell would have originally been open to the floor below on the right side with just a banister, but was walled in as part of the fire safety measures. Part of the original banister is visible at the top of the stairs, along the hallway. Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 221 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State I ' ,i 1 Photo 14 First floor corridor from the west entrance (camera facing east). The slab door in the foreground was a fire safety modification in the 1970s,but the 15 lite door in the background, with the 5 lite windows accenting either side, is original to the building.Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 222 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State r _ II ,l Photo 15 East end of the second floor corridor(camera facing east). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 223 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State Photo 16 Second floor apartment entry (camera facing north). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 224 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property Count and State ,I Photo 17 Living room in apartment#5 (camera facing north). Photo courtesy of owner. I M - Y. I r .? Gr z c - sr F c 1 I i Photo 18 Bedroom/Sun Parlor apartment#5 (camera facing north). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 225 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property Count and State f Photo 19 Dining nook in apartment#5 (camera facing north).Photo courtesy of owner. j1 ( Photo 20 Kitchen in apartment#5 (camera facing west).Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 226 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State f) i I � M Photo 21 Bathroom in apartment#5 (camera facing north). Note the original radiator in the corner. Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 227 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State „�` I •z• r i i �` - �j Photo 22 North and west garage fagades,with east stairs of the main building to the right(camera facing southeast). Photo courtesy of owner. _ o join Photo 23 East garage fagade (camera facing west). Photo courtesy of owner. Packet Pg. 228 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property Count and State 4? SC N 1 •:!a e -- IV w ,r Photo 24 Shideler Apartments 1090 1 lth Street. Boulder, CO note Walk-Up apartment to the left. Photo courtesy of Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO I ` -APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT c°sts_�`=Gave Permit Cost;-' �13- Pay Permit Charge at City Clerk's office ; Fort Collins, Colorado,_ PST e l 19 a Owner of Property 40 Lot i'. -Block_f Description of Proposed work as follows: 4- _ - O.K. — Budding Ins➢eetor 1- t Photo 25 Original building permit, dated March 27, 1924. Courtesy of the Steve Levinger collection. Packet Pg. 229 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Control No.1024-0018 Scott Apartments & Garage Larimer, CO Name of Property County and State r v. J I m i 1 Photo 27 South entrance of the Long Apartments at 220 E. Laurel, Fort Collins, CO (camera facing north). Note the typical, ground level entrance with"garden level"lower floor apartments.Photo courtesy of Steve Levinger. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for nominations to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing,to list properties,and to amend existing listings. Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act,as amended(16 U.S.C.460 et seq.).We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for each response using this form is estimated to be between the Tier 1 and Tier 4 levels with the estimate of the time for each tier as follows: Tier 1 —60-100 hours Tier 2—120 hours Tier 3—230 hours Tier 4—280 hours The above estimates include time for reviewing instructions,gathering and maintaining data,and preparing and transmitting nominations. Send comments regarding these estimates or any other aspect of the requirement(s)to the Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 1201 Oakridge Drive Fort Collins,CO 80525. Packet Pg. 230 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 NPS Form 10-168a(Rev.2019) National Park Service �V�*NATIONAt OMB Control No.1024-0009 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2-DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Instructions:This page must bear the applicant's original signature and must be dated.The National Park Service certification decision NPS Project Number is based on the descriptions in this application form.In the event of any discrepancy between the application form and other, supplementary material submitted with it(such as architectural plans,drawings and specifications),the application form takes precedence.A copy of this form will be provided to the Internal Revenue Service. 1. Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments Street 900 South College Avenue City Fort Collins County Larimer State CO Zip 80524 Name of Historic District or National Register property ❑ Listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places;date of listing ❑ Located in a Registered Historic District;name of district N Part 1—Evaluation of Significance submitted? Date submitted Date of certification 2. Project Data (for phased projects,data entered in this section must be totals for entire project) Date of building 1924 Estimated total rehabilitation costs(QRE) $0 Number of buildings in project 2 Floor area before/after rehabilitation 12,000 / 12,000 sq ft Start date(estimated) 05/01/2022 Use(s)before/after rehabilitation housing / housing Completion date(estimated) 12/15/2 0 2 2 Number of housing units before/after rehabilitation 13 / 13 Application includes phase(s) 1 of 1 phases Number of low-moderate income housing units before/after rehabilitation 0 / 0 ❑ Intend to elect IRS 60-month phased rehabilitation 3, Project Contact (if different from applicant) Name Company Street City State Zip Telephone Email Address 4. Applicant I hereby attest that the information I have provided is,to the best of my knowledge,correct.I further attest that[check one or both boxes,as applicable]: N I am the owner of the above-described property within the meaning of"owner"set forth in 36 CFR§67.2(2011),and/or ❑ if I am not the fee simple owner of the above described property,the fee simple owner is aware of the action I am taking relative to this application and has no objection,as noted in a written statement from the owner,a copy of which(i)either is attached to this application form and incorporated herein,or has been previously submitted,and(ii)meets the requirements of 36 CFR§67.3(a)(1)(2011). For purposes of this attestation,the singular shall include the plural wherever appropriate.I understand that knowing and willful falsification of factual representations in this application may subject me to fines and imprisonment under 18 U.S.C.§1001,which,under certain circumstances,provides for imprisonment of up to 8 years. Name Stephen Levinger Signature(Sign in ink) Date Applicant Entity Levinger Properties, llc SSN or TIN ##—###### Street 511 Mathews Street City Fort Collins State CO Zip 80524 Telephone (970) 430-0407 Email Address smlevi@msn.com ❑ Applicant,SSN,or TIN has changed since previously submitted application. NPS Official Use Only The National Park Service has reviewed the Historic Preservation Certification Application—Part 2 for the above-named property and has determined that: ❑ the rehabilitation described herein is consistent with the historic character of the property and,where applicable,with the district in which it is located and that the project meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.This letter is a preliminary determination only,since a formal certification of rehabilitation can be issued only to the owner of a"certified historic structure'after rehabilitation work is complete. ❑ the rehabilitation or proposed rehabilitation will meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation if the attached conditions are met. ❑ the rehabilitation described herein is not consistent with the historic character of the property or the district in which it is located and that the project does not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Date National Park Service Authorized Signature(Sign in ink) NPS conditions or comments attached Packet Pg. 231 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 5. Detailed Description of Rehabilitation Work. use this page to describe all work or create a comparable format with this information. Number items consecutively to describe all work,including building exterior and interior,additions,site work,landscaping,and new construction. Number 1 Feature The Scott Apartments Date of Feature 1924 Describe existing feature and its condition The Scott Apartments is a 3-story brick apartment building located on the southeast corner of south College Avenue and Locust Street in Fort Collins Colorado. In addition to the apartment building, there is a one story 5 car garage on site that was constructed at the same time, or shortly thereafter, as the building. The building and garage have been minimally altered since their original construction in 1924. Steve and Missy Levinger (Levinger Properties, LLC) , have owned and managed the property since 2002 Photo Numbers 1-8 Drawing Numbers 1-9 existing & 1-9 proposed Describe work to feature The overall goal of this project is to give another century of continued residential apartment service to this nearly 100-year-old building. This requires sensitive treatment of the most visible and important historic features of the building to preserve its integrity and longevity while updating elements related to everyday living of the residents who occupy individual apartments to give them a comfortable and efficient home that meets their expectations. The "project" will involve replacing all the buildings mechanical systems (plumbing, electric, & HVAC) . Each individual apartment will also have some of its interior spaces reconfigured to provide new kitchen and bath spaces that use existing space more efficiently and include desirable modern amenities. Thermal insulation and interior storm window will be added to improve comfort and energy efficiency. Common areas will be renovated as well with the goal of preserving the existing historic fabric and maintaining the overall historic integrity of these spaces while improving safety and security for building tenants. The building's exterior will receive a comprehensive rehabilitation of the existing brick structure and original wood windows and doors. Site details such as sidewalks will also be repaired or replaced. The 5-car garage was rehabilitated in 2011. No additional work will be done to this structure. Number 2 Feature Exterior Brick Date of Feature 1924 Describe existing feature and its condition The structures exterior walls are constructed with two colors of wire cut brick laid in a running bond. A darker brownish color brick extends up from grade one story. A reddish color field brick is used above this point with the brown brick being used for accent. The existing brick is in good condition with the exception of one location on the west fagade stair wall that has suffered from moisture infiltration resulting in a bulge in the wall. There are a few (less than a dozen) bricks missing in a variety of locations. The original mortar is dark black and struck with a raked joint. The existing mortar is in fair condition. Weathering has leached out the original dark black pigment leaving the mortar more brownish in color except in two porticos that have been largely protected from the weather. In addition, there are many places where mortar is missing or deteriorated. Evidence of shoddy mortar repair appears is several locations as well. At the buildings west end there is a substantial amount of Hedera Helix vine that covers Packef Val 28° ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO much of the fagade Photo Numbers 3,4,9,10,11,12,13 Drawing Numbers Describe work to feature The brick on the entire building will be restored in the following manner: 1. Treat deteriorated and shoddy mortar to NPS Preservation Brief #2 standards. Note; Limeworks.us, Telford, PA will provide mortar analysis, matching, and mix for mortar repair. 2. Remove all Hedera Helix vine and destroy plant roots. 3. Replace missing or deteriorated brick in kind with closely matched salvage brick 4. Repair bulge in step wall as follows; Provide temporary stabilization to the east side of this wall (step side) . Provide temporary stabilization to soldier course of brick above the bulge Carefully remove face brick in and around the bulge area and clean this brick for salvage. Remove moisture deteriorated clay tile area of wall that caused the bulge. Replace clay tile with new brick or cmu material mortared into existing non-deteriorated clay tile wall. Re-lay salvaged face brick over replaced clay tile wall with appropriately matched mortar. Remove temporary stabilization. Gently clean repaired area with clean water and bristle brush. Number 3 Feature Windows Date of Feature 1924, 1975 Describe existing feature and its condition There are 139 windows in the building. Nearly all are the original wooden sash double hung windows. They remain intact and serviceable and in relatively good condition with the exception the very large ones in the living rooms of apartments 1-10. Unfortunately, these windows were poorly designed at the time of original construction. The overall width of the window frames is simply too wide for the dimensional size of the window frame rails to hold up structurally. Thus, meeting rails of these sashes have all warped because they are over-spanned. They are also bind when opening or closing. This is caused when the wide sash wracks in the frame. To operate them effectively one must exert equal upward or downward pressure at either end of the sash to keep it from binding. This one window in each apartment is the only one large enough to meet current building code egress standards. It is important that this window, in particular, functions smoothly. Over the years a variety of solutions have been employed to mitigate the poor function of these windows. Silicone caulk seals glass where it no longer touches a swayed rail. Sash locks have been shimmed so the windows can still be locked and window stops have been loosened to prevent binding. However, these fixes are only marginally effective. These windows remain very leaky and difficult to operate. The rest of the original windows are mostly functional and have only minor issues such as broken sash cords etc. There are 4 windows in the building that have replaced the original double hung units. These are 2 casements at either end of the second-floor hall and one casement in each of apartment 11 and 12. These were replaced in 1975 as part of a building egress upgrade. These casement windows are in good condition. Nearly all the existing windows have wood frame screens installed on the building' s exterior. The screens and frames vary in their condition from relatively good to poor. Photo Numbers 14-20 Drawing Numbers 10,11 Packefp�2 23S ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO Describe work to feature All the original windows with some exceptions will be retained, re-painted, and rehabilitated to single hung function to NPS Preservation Brief #9 standards. All the original windows with some exceptions will be fitted with Larsen Comfort Seal functional single hung interior storm windows. Storm windows will install inside existing window jambs with no impact to existing window jambs or sashes. Existing interior window stops and pulls will be replaced to facilitate the storm window installation. Exceptions: The large living room units in apartments 1-10 and 14 will be replaced in kind with new Marvin Magnum wooden block frame units. This will involve removing existing damaged sashes and window stops. Existing window jambs, sills, and exterior brick molding will remain. New units will be secured within the existing window jamb and painted to match the original windows. Existing screens will be re-installed in their original location within the existing brick molding. Existing bathroom windows will be repurposed to provide a simple, effective, and sensitive solution for code required exhaust ventilation for individual apartment kitchens and bathrooms. Existing sashes will be fixed in place. Existing glass will be removed and replaced with 1/2" exterior plywood. Exhaust venting will be routed into a new interior wall to be built in front of the existing bathroom window and exit through the new plywood and finished with exterior vent caps. This solution resolves code compliance issues without damaging or removing any historic fabric. Existing exterior screens will mitigate the change to these windows so that the exterior visual impact is minimal. Screens; Each existing screen frame will be removed. Its condition will be assessed. Each screen will be repaired, or replaced in kind as needed. All screen frames will be repainted Number 4 Feature Exterior Doors Date of Feature 1924, 2010 Describe existing feature and its condition There are 8 exterior doors on the structure. With the exception of one steel door and frame that serves as an exit from the garden level corridor (installed around 2010) all the doors are 15 pane divided light wooden doors. 4 doors serve as entrances to individual apartments on the garden level. These doorways are also fitted with simple wood frame screen doors One additional door on the garden level enters into the shared laundry room. There are 2 doors that serve as entrances to the first-floor corridor from the porticos at either end. All the doors are in good serviceable condition and remain in use. However, they all need some amount of repair. Some door hardware is worn and poorly functioning. Most doors are not weather tight. One is significantly warped. The screen doors are reaching the end of their serviceable life. Photo Numbers 2 1—2 4 Drawing Numbers Describe work to feature Each door will be assessed individually and the following repairs may be made as needed: Install appropriate weatherstripping and thresholds to improve weather tightness. Re-install loose hardware and ensure it is securely fastened. Replace any missing or broken glass. Packef V�'�84 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2-DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO Re-paint The one severely warped door will be replaced in kind with a new door to match the existing. Apartment entrance door hardware will be replaced with new RFTD compatible door locks and latches to function with new tenant entry system. New RFID compatible door latches will be installed on both first-floor entry doors to function with new tenant entry system. The one steel door will remain in place. Number 5 Feature Roof Date of Feature 1924, 2008, 2014 Describe existing feature and its condition The structure has a 6/12 pitched gable roof over most of the structure. The roof is covered with dimensional asphalt shingles. It was replaced in 2008. At both the east and west end of the main structure there is a flat roof system over what was originally considered the "Sun Parlors" of Apartments 1-10. These roofs are accessible from apartments 11 and 12 and have been used as outdoor decks by tenants in these apartments. These roofs are covered with EDPM rubber membrane. They were replaced in 2014 . There is a wooden deck structure constructed above the east side flat roof. Framing for this deck bears directly on top of the brick parapet wall at its eastern edge and is through bolted onto the exterior brick wall on its western edge. Bolt holes in the exterior walls penetrate through mortar joints. The decks construction does not impact the historic fabric of the building and is reversable. Photo Numbers 2 5—2 7 Drawing Numbers Describe work to feature No new work is planned for the roofs. The existing wooden deck will be repaired or rebuilt as needed. A similar wooden deck will be constructed over the flat roof on the west end directly outside apartment 11. Number 6 Feature Building Mechanical Systems Date of Feature 1924, 1970, 1975,2015 Describe existing feature and its condition The existing plumbing system consists of a galvanized steel water supply system, a steel gas supply system, and a cast iron and lead drain/waste/vent system. A central gas fired water heater supplies hot water to all 13 apartments. The water service line is a 1 1-4" galvanized steel supply. The sewer is a 4" clay tile line. The existing water supply and DWV plumbing system are in poor condition and nearing the end of their serviceable life. The existing gas supply system is in good serviceable condition. The existing high voltage electrical system consists of a 260-amp 240-volt single phase electric service into the building. Individual meters for apartments were installed around 2015. Each apartment has one 15amp circuit that powers lights and outlets for each individual apartment. The building wiring is mostly the original "knob and tube" system with some conduit and "Wiremold" that runs along walls and ceilings. The existing meters and service entrance are in good condition. The remainder of the electrical system is serviceable but outdated and nearing the end of its serviceable life. Packefp�4 23t ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO The existing low voltage electrical system consists of a fire alarm system that was installed around 1975. Control wires are all run in %g" EMT conduit throughout the main corridors. It Is in good serviceable condition. However, the fire alarm control panel is outdated. The original telephone system is cloth insulated copper wire that is fully encased in the building walls and floor. A demarcation point is located in the garden level main corridor. The cable tv system consists of coaxial cable strung haphazardly around the building' s exterior. There is a demarcation point located near the southeast corner of the building. The existing heating system is a one pipe steam heat system. A natural gas fired steam boiler is located on the garden level. It was installed around 1970. Each individual apartment has between 3 and 4 cast iron radiators located along exterior walls. These radiators are connected to the central boiler via a network of steel pipes. The system is controlled by one thermostat located in apartment #9. In addition, radiators are fitted with thermostatic air vent valves that allow tenants some control of the temperature in their apartments. The system is in fair condition, is serviceable, and functional. There is no system for apartment cooling. However, many tenants use window air conditioners to provide some cooling in their apartments. Photo Numbers 2 8—3 3 Drawing Numbers Describe work to feature None of the existing plumbing system will be retained. Existing DWV and supply lines will be removed or abandoned in place. A new 1 1/4" copper supply will be installed to the same location as existing. The water meter may remain or be moved to an outdoor vault to be determined by the City of Fort Collins. New water supply will be a combination of copper and cross-linked polyethylene pipe. Each apartment will have an individual electric hybrid water heater installed in the unit. A new PVC DWV system will be installed. The Existing sewer line will be replaced with a new plastic one. Existing gas piping system will be retained and rerouted as needed to facilitate new range locations in individual apartments and removal of the central water heater and boiler. A new 240-volt (amperage TBD) single phase electric service will be installed. Most of the existing high voltage electric system will be replaced. The existing meters and service entrance will be retained provided they are compatible with the new higher amperage service. New 240-volt (amperage TBD) circuit breaker panels will be fed to each apartment. All apartment circuits will be replaced with new wire, junction boxes, and fixtures. All the existing apartment electrical components will be removed. Some existing original light fixtures may be reused provided they can be safely used. All existing public space electrical systems will be removed and replaced. All existing surface mounted electrical conduit both interior and exterior will be removed. All exterior lighting circuits will be fed from wire routed inside the building to metal boxes mounted on the existing brick walls. The existing low voltage electrical system will be entirely replaced. This includes communication systems, keyless entry systems, and the building fire alarm systems. In addition, provisions will be made for future systems that may be installed at a later date. A new fire panel will be located in the entry vestibule (see Architectural Feature 7) . A new low voltage demarcation room will be created in an existing closet located on Packefp�5 23t ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO the garden level under the stairway. Each apartment will have coaxial cable and cat 5e cable routed from the demarcation to wall outlets located in each apartment. In addition, 1" plastic conduit will be fed from the demarcation to a location in each apartment to facilitate new low voltage wiring in the future. 2" plastic conduit will be provided for telephone and cable services from the demarcation room to the outside utility connection location. One additional 2" conduit will be provided for any future needs. Wiring for wireless access points, keyless entry systems, etc. will all be installed during rough-in so there will be no wire or conduit visible in the public spaces. All existing low voltage wire and conduit will be completely removed. The existing gas heating system will be replaced with electric heat pump "mini-split" heating and cooling systems for each individual apartment. Outdoor condensing units for apartments 7-12 will be placed on structural framework installed over the existing flat roof areas above the 2nd floor apartments. The remainder of outdoor condensing units will be placed at grade in locations that are inconspicuous. All refrigerant lines will be run through interior walls to minimize any impact to the exterior facades of the building. Interior heat exchangers will be installed in locations that will not obstruct existing doors or windows. All refrigerant lines will be routed inside wall and ceiling cavities. Most of the existing one pipe steam system will be removed. However, pipes and radiators located in public space hallways will be retained as non-functional reminders of the original system. Electric baseboard heaters will be installed in individual apartments and in some public space areas to supplement the heat pump systems during the very coldest times of the year to ensure tenant comfort year-round. Number 7 Feature East Portico Date of Feature 1924 Describe existing feature and its condition The east portico is the covered entryway at the top of the east steps. It is approximately 9'-6" long by 7' wide. It is open to the east and has exterior brick walls on its north and south sides. The floor is concrete and the ceiling is lath and plaster with a rough texture. The west side is formed by the exterior 15 pane hall entry door with 5 pane sidelights on either side. The entry door is fitted with a keypad entry door lock. The portico is in good condition. Photo Numbers 34 Drawing Numbers 7existing, 7 proposed Describe work to feature A portion of the east portico will become an interior entry vestibule. This will be accomplished by installing new exterior wall that will enclose the portico space. This wall will form the eastern edge of the vestibule and will be 42" west of the eastern edge of the existing portico. The wall will include a 15-pane wooden entry door with two 5 pane sidelights similar to the existing entry door. None of the existing entry door or any other existing entry portico walls will be removed or altered in any way. All the new construction necessary to create the vestibule will have minimal impact to the existing exterior walls of the portico. The construction will be reversible. The portico could be returned to its original state at any time in the future with no damage to the existing historic fabric of the building. The vestibule will house a new tenant mailbox apparatus, a new fire alarm panel, and a new entry intercom system. Vinyl plank flooring will be installed over the existing concrete landing inside the vestibule. Appropriate lighting and a baseboard electric heater will be installed into the vestibule. Packefp�6�8T ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO Number 8 Feature Individual Apartments Date of Feature 1924 Describe existing feature and its condition The Scott Apartments building houses 12 one-bedroom apartments and 1 studio apartment. The layouts of these 13 apartments remains unchanged from their original construction in 1924. Each apartment has received some degree of updating over the years. This includes flooring replacement, kitchen counter replacement, removal of some kitchen cabinetry, replacement of plumbing fixtures, electrical system upgrades that include lighting and additional outlets, removal of some cast iron radiators, and normal painting and floor refinishing. Nearly all the original doors, cabinetry, trim, and hardware remain as do the original oak flooring in the living and bedroom spaces. The overall condition of the individual apartments is fair. Most things like doors and drawers are functional but not easy to operate. Nearly 100 years of constant service has taken its toll. Furthermore, the original construction materials and techniques of the cabinetry was not high quality. Most of the original fixtures and cabinetry have reached the end of their useful life. Layouts designed 100 years ago use interior space inefficiently resulting in cramped kitchens and bathrooms. Overall, the original apartments are livable but lacking the comfort and convenience today's tenant's demand. Photo Numbers 3 5-4 1 Drawing Numbers 6-9 existing, 6-9 proposed Describe work to feature Layouts: Apartments 1-10 have nearly identical layouts. With the exception of apartment 7 all of these apartments will have the current kitchen, bathroom, closet, and dinning nook space remodeled to facilitate installation of new kitchens and bathrooms. The overall layout will change allowing better utilization of the current space. The current bedroom and living room layouts in these apartments will remain unchanged. Apartment 7 is one apartment that retains nearly all its historic cabinets and fixtures. The layout of this apartment will remain with only a minor modification to one large closet to facilitate the installation of a refrigerator and a washer/dryer. All the original fabric in this apartment will be restored thus preserving one example of the original construction. Apartments 11 and 12 are located on the top floor of the building and share a similar layout. These apartments will also be redesigned to better utilize current space. In addition, some of the existing 3rd floor corridor space on this floor will be incorporated into these apartments. Existing original balustrade in this corridor will not be affected and it will be retained in its entirety. Both these apartments have access to flat roofs that are over the second-floor apartments. There is a wooden deck constructed over the flat roof just outside apartment 12. This deck may be repaired or replaced and a new one will be constructed just outside of apartment 11. Apartment 14 is the only studio apartment. It will be redesigned to better utilize the existing space. In addition, space that is now occupied by storage and the boiler room will be incorporated into the redesigned apartment 14. Construction: Construction work in all the apartments will involve removal of all existing lath and plaster that covers the ceilings and walls and removal of some wood frame partition walls within each individual apartment. All existing cabinetry, plumbing fixtures, electrical systems, one pipe steam system, and some flooring within the apartments will be removed. No demising walls or masonry walls will be removed or altered. All original French doors and jambs will be retained. No walls will be removed in apartment 7 but lath and plaster ceilings, some existing flooring, and one pipe steam system elements will be removed. Packefp�7 288 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO All exterior masonry walls will be furred with 1 %2" framing to facilitate installation of a new electrical system and closed cell foam insulation. Existing baseboards some trim on these exterior walls will be removed to facilitate the installation of insulating walls. Existing windows will not be removed or altered with the exception of extending the existing window sills beyond the new walls and replacing interior window trim as needed to facilitate interior insulating wall installation. Soundproofing measures will include sound insulation in joist cavities, sound decoupling metal hat channel attached to joist bottoms and sound proof specific drywall ceilings installed onto hat channel. New cabinetry and fixtures will be installed into all apartments with the exception of apartment 7. Original oak flooring in living rooms and bedrooms will be repaired and refinished. New vinyl plank and tile flooring will be installed in kitchens and bathrooms. New trim, doors, and hardware will be installed Number 9 Feature Public Spaces Date of Feature 1924, 1975 Describe existing feature and its condition The buildings public spaces consist of central corridor hallways and stairs as well as a laundry room and tenant storage lockers. The corridors were modified around 1975. At that time open stairwells were walled off to create floor by floor fire separation. Self-closing doors were installed at the bottom of each stairway and a fire alarm system was installed in conduit run along ceilings and walls. Original apartment doors were replaced with fire rated slab doors and grocery delivery doors into each apartment were removed and covered with drywall. The existing public space is in good condition. Walls are plastered solid masonry, floors are carpeted, and ceilings are lath and plaster. None of the original light fixtures remain. Both the storage lockers and laundry room remain mostly unchanged. Photo Numbers 29,30,31,32,33,41,42,43,44,45,46,47 Drawing Numbers 6-9 existing, 6-9 proposed Describe work to feature The public spaces will remain in their current overall layout with the exception of the following: The addition of the aforementioned vestibule. The aforementioned incorporation of 3rd floor hall space into apartments 11 and 12. The aforementioned incorporation of some storage space into apartment 14. The existing laundry room will be converted into a bicycle storage room for tenants The existing coal room adjacent to the existing boiler room will be converted into additional tenant storage space. New, period appropriate light fixtures will replace the existing fixtures. New carpeting will be installed. Existing trim will be repaired as needed. Construction will involve removing existing lath and plaster ceilings to facilitate installation of new mechanical systems in the hallways. Once mechanical rough in is complete exposed ceiling cavities will be covered with sheetrock, existing flooring will be replaced, existing trim will be repaired and painted, and existing plastered interior masonry walls will be repaired and painted. Where appropriate, the covered-up grocery delivery doorways will be recessed and trimmed out to indicate where they had originally been. Number 10 Feature Garage Date of Feature 1924,2010 Describe existing feature and its condition The five-car garage received a major rehabilitation around 2010, when the building's current owner converted the structure into a wood shop for personal use. At that time, a PackefP�8 28� ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO new roof structure replaced the severely deteriorated original. Three roof skylights were installed, the new roof deck was covered with a TPO membrane roof, and brick parapet walls were capped with sheet metal flashing. Existing wood framed and sheathed interior partition walls were removed, and a new concrete floor slab was installed. A 200-amp electric service was added. Four of the five existing garage doors were fixed in place in their original frames. The fifth door was removed and repurposed in the workshop's interior. The vacated entry was framed, sheathed, and a new entry door was installed. All original windows were fixed in place. New exterior wood shutters were fixed in place in the original window frames. Brick walls received minor tuckpointing and repair as needed. The rehabilitation was reviewed and approved by The City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission prior to construction. Photo Numbers 6,7,8,49 Drawing Numbers Describe work to feature No new work is planned for the garage. Number 11 Feature Site Date of Feature 1924 Describe existing feature and its condition The existing site is made up of poured concrete sidewalks and driveways, trees, and turf grass. The site is in good condition with the exception of some deteriorated concrete sidewalks. Photo Numbers 1,50 Drawing Numbers plot plan Describe work to feature The site will remain mostly as it is. Deteriorated sidewalks, mostly on the buildings north side, will be replaced. Turf grass and irrigation system damaged during construction will be repaired or replaced as needed. Number 12 Feature Steel Fire Escape Date of Feature 1975 Describe existing feature and its condition In 1975 exterior steel fire escape stairs were installed across the west and east facades of the building. These provide secondary egress from the 2nd floor corridors and the 3rd floor apartments. In addition, steel railing was also installed on top of the brick parapets that surround the flat roofs at both the west and east ends of the building. These systems are sturdy and in good condition. The red color paint is faded. Photo Numbers 2,4,5,6,9,10,27,51 Drawing Numbers Packef V�9 240 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Historic Property Name The Scott Apartments NPS Project Number Property Address 900 South College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO Describe work to feature The stairs and railings will remain in place. They will receive a new coat of oil-based enamel paint. Add Item Delete Item Packef V�1024'1° ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICTION APPLICATION PART 2—DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION NOTICES Privacy Act Statement Authority: 26 U.S. Code§47-Rehabilitation credit; 26 U.S. Code§ 170-Charitable,etc.,contributions and gifts. Purpose: To enable the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate the historic significance of structures and whether the rehabilitation of such structures preserves their historic character. The primary use of this information by the Secretary of the Interior will be to certify to the Secretary of the Treasury that the applicant is eligible for Federal tax incentives for historic preservation.This application is used by the Internal Revenue Service to confirm that applicants for the tax incentives have obtained the certification concerning historic structures and historic rehabilitations that are required by law. Routine uses: The information will be used by the National Park Service and the State Historic Preservation Offices and disclosed to the Internal Revenue Service to determine if the applicant is eligible for Federal tax incentives. Disclosure:Voluntary, however,failure to provide the requested information may prevent or impede you from receiving consideration for the requested benefit. Information Regarding Disclosure of Your Social Security Number Under Public Law 93-579 Section 7(b): Your Social Security Number(SSN)is needed to identify records unique to you.Applicants are required to provide their social security or taxpayer identification number for activities subject to collection of fees and charges by the National Park Service. Failure to disclose your SSN may prevent or delay the processing of your application.The authority for soliciting your SSN is 31 U.S.C. 7701.The information gathered through the use of the SSN will be used only as necessary for processing this application and collecting and reporting any delinquent financial obligations. Use of the SSN will be carried out in accordance with established regulations and published notices of system of records. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement We are collecting this information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act(44 U.S.C. 3501)through the State Historic Preservation Officer in order to enable the Secretary of the Interior to gain the benefit of the State review of applications for Federal tax incentives for historic preservation by owners of historic properties. Information collected on this form, including names and all written comments, is subject to disclosure.All applicable parts of the form must be completed in order to receive consideration for the requested benefit.A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor,and a person is not required to respond a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has approved this collection and assigned it control number 1024-0009. Estimated Burden Statement Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 51 hours per response including the time it takes to read, gather and maintain data, review instructions and complete the form. Direct comments regarding these burden estimates,or any aspects of this form, to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Mail Stop 242, Reston,VA 20192. Please do not send your form to this address. Records Retention Statement Permanent.Transfer all permanent records to NARA 15 years after closure. (NPS Records Schedule, Resource Management and Lands(Item 1.A.2)(N1-79-08-1)) FOR APPLICANT RECORDS ONLY—THIS PAGE DOES NOT NEED TO BE PRINTED FOR APPLICATION Packet Pg. 242 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 D SIGN BY CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT goo 5.College Ave. FER5FECTIVE FROM N.W. P 43 aCI( P ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 F rH 9; 1 ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ LE GN BY CE FTSMMEE N BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT 11128/2' 9oo 5.College Ave. t� EAST ELEVATION PacKe't'P 44 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 flmmml ❑ ❑ 0:ED] [11 ❑ m m L ® EoRp ❑ ❑ ❑ DESIGNBY CRAFTS MEN BUILDERS y Scott Appartments 11128@1 goo 5.College Ave. PackWP 45 SOUTH ELEVATION ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ULI ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑D SIGN BY ❑ CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT 900 5.College Ave. Pack'P 46 WEST ELEVATION ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DESIGNBY CRAFTS MEN BUILDERS y Scott Appartments 900 5.College Ave. PackPP . 47 NORTH ELEVATION ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 41 r —..—..—..—.. .. ..—..—..—..—..— —..—..—..—.. .. ..—..—..—..—..—� �6 an d 3 � K E S11 0 rt lv QE 3'-0 1116" (3p ED� n100m N & 11`W'11 3 N 8 (0 a �� 135 ri IQ � AMaNf1 V'I LAUNDRY p CLOSET ae: "9 0- rn o� — x to e m N m(p 6 n (D i3 'o 11 N m 16'4 sib° D SIGN BY CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT goo 5.College Ave. Pack�P . 48 GARDEN LEVEL ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 6 6 �a a s O O s 91 lll � rt A W Ezd eb¢E 8 F F 4 3 350T0 "-a Nn,i 135010 EO AJQN(Ib1 _ ry r� CLO EST CLOSET 3 3 SU � N € iO 3 rt (D .3i 6 4 gF k� $ 6 P 0. O 0 D SIGN BY O � � CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT 900 S.College Ave. Packee 49 15T FLOOR ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 5 g 91 � O � N CP rt O 1 -��- 86x1E 2_q £ 3 rI 3'i 9/16" 3�p 3 j lfl �AMONItV� Nc70 — ry y P LAUNDRY U GLOEET CLOSETL05ET F � n — 3 S1 J P i 3 Q t0 3 P 3b 0 D SIGN BY 'g t9s p4 v a 8 d 11 8 O � CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT 900 5.College Ave. cam, 2ND FLOOR Pack'g 50 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 �. -- ----- ---------- - Y- ,� I I o � 3-6�� ��y'E❑ 2Z c o I ct, � I ❑ N 2 3+ z I I O I I r ;o �o x wT xT s l �N I N us I I U O I I I O I N I I I m0 I XO I I 3 I Zs r= ❑3,�T ir Z O � El cz I .3« ❑ I I _ outg I D SIGN BY I I CRAFTSMEN BUILDERS y 5cott Appartments CRAFT 9oo 5.College Ave. PackP 51 3RO FLOOR ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 1 if 9 i k f 1 1 � i J 3 4 � r� t, 1 5t l r�a J tt X L^� 3/ 'W 1 r)dO W Sot 5 F'k SCCA 10 Packet Pg. 252 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 51—t Grp w ,/ sry� Packet Pg. 253 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs I y� \y t +- r� � }p _- i°` .. I is �,�?!�• Photo 1 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: Ariel Ariel site view of building, garage, and lot Photo taken 4/16/2021 1 Packet Pg. 254 Y. 7'_ •S L ✓ s.. yr s ar f` ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs ,z IL I F' t 1 Photo 3 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south North building facade Photo taken 4/16/2021 3 Packet Pg. 256 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs sn-nwea•s.. --f Photo 4 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: east West building facade Photo taken 4/16/2021 4 Packet Pg. 257 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs -= I IRS T-iil - r -' MW/ Photo 5 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north South building facade Photo taken 4/16/2021 5 Packet Pg. 258 ITEM I ATTACHMENT I The Scott Apartments Before Photographs X111- 1 h� It F� �v ■ • I �gJ K • • facadeThe Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Garage east Photo 8/9/2021 • Packet • 259 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 7 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Garage north facade Photo taken 4/16/2021 7 Packet Pg. 260 ITEM I ATTACHMENT I ScottThe Apartments Before Photographs �r Photo ScottThe Apartments, 9/1 South College • • CO View: east Garage west • north facades Photo taken 4/16/2021 Packet P• 261 IA 14 qx ;, � c` �ry " 'l• — , fit__ '�' �� V. ' '^ .��. �'�t�:M► ,, �+ f � `+; 1, � � �[`` wir, c t �14k IL � w `7 'TTT 1 ! I is A �� �_ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs ol _r s,• `r-- ,t ONLY SSING 31NG )PERTY ij n I Photo 10 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Shoddy mortar repair on northeast corner Photo taken 10/5/2021 10 Packet Pg. 263 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs r •• r r 'ice � ^ r♦,....+,,,,�, • II Photo 11 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Detail showing missing mortar on the east facade Photo taken 10/5/2021 11 Packet Pg. 264 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Ilk R .r a r _ r !1 j r U ' ; Oka lll♦ ,-f w11`` N 1rY J ,r y Photo 12 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Detail showing west stair wall deterioration (note bulge in brick on outer side of wall) Photo taken 10/5/2021 12 Packet Pg. 265 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs hill I I 1 F s S,WL 'e i VNI I, ,i T� I if il• � d +i F 1 Photo 13 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: east Detail of bulging brick area on west stair wall (note bulge is hard to notice in this view) Photo taken 10/5/2021 13 Packet Pg. 266 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs �I I' 'i I'II II I I II I � I I'. I I I lip.���I •II i f'I I I i. I II iQl II IIIIIIIIVIIII.�illl IIII Illillalll all ull,�aflllllolll h'il H � IIII �NrNN IVIBII Il✓�Illu�l��� ✓I I �� I lu I�Ala aII I � I ,I I I ilI111 IIII iil. 9' IIIII Illlill�III I I I�,I I I I I 'ICI I III I I 'III Ili II II:.III III III "IIdI C I. IIIII I I I a III III i'�I IIII II I I I IIIII I,I I I I I I IIuiIII hI'IIiPI I I f I 111111 nlll il�ll IIII III I I IIII I ��I III IIIII ii t li 'II ljlllll�;l'�IIIIIII�I.I.I Ill;ilhlllllh � I . I ��� 61i • a0 -;,,Jwl.uu�I giaintl'ullli Ilu�i li i itllll I�16 i I i Photo 14 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Large window in living room (note warped meeting rail) apartment 6 Photo taken 8/1/2021 14 Packet Pg. 267 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs e Photo 15 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Exterior view of large window in living room (note sagging meeting rail) apartment 6 Photo taken 11/16/2021 15 Packet Pg. 268 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs r -sz Photo 16 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Typical exterior window condition apartment 12 Photo taken 10/5/2021 16 Packet Pg. 269 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs l r ,I i I I Photo 17 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Typical Exterior window screen apartment 6 Photo taken 11/16/2021 17 Packet Pg. 270 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs NT awl y II �► Its � tti lwl J.,I �n 's y a Photo 18 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Bathroom window typical (proposed location for apartment ventilation) apartment 1 Photo taken 11/16/2021 18 Packet Pg. 271 PAZ I�il '„I, (�.-�.LC: Q -..:I I►1{'.',: c r� :_i� �i, .�.., -. �I ( tH l _' r;.� IflIII. 1 15�411tGrr �,�_ �.i' n Tlil III j' Imo. i, '�'- 115s� i vu 1 Ki1_j' I�t_, I �r � x � I ;' i{ r ILL i t 1b z.. I IlE i �� i' tIF I� 1 I ) !�;qpA�' i� IA lip - 1 IlIG1 I ,19 Y t. �" — �� I'rt d' S 0111 IFJ • r ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs L=1 r _-- ' - - - ----'fir= -- --"----- --- -------. .. _.---- ---- ------ ---. - wN[ t•I�I-I:.B&1LGiyiY'Y2Y. ' `'ff-�- _ tl�_ �V Photo 20 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Garden level and first floor fenestration Photo taken 11/16/2021 20 Packet Pg. 273 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 5 � A,L 1 iI i • i� ,I - i 1 a1 I a i i Photo 21 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west First floor entry door and sidelights Photo taken 7/27/2021 21 Packet Pg. 274 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs ti 1 a� N 1>� `- ;. Photo 22 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Garden level apartment entrance door apartment 14 Photo taken 4/15/2020 22 Packet Pg. 275 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs I W, - �tF-. '6Tf"f«� ''�-'f;_'y �'�i!F,-n ,,,u.,"m�•n tiZ I �1e+. .lit,_J,;�i '�Yf�iil J, .44 1� .yss i Photo 23 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Garden level entrance door Laundry Room Photo taken 8/1/2021 23 Packet Pg. 276 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs -_ II q , Photo 24 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Garden level apartment hall egress door Photo taken 8/1/2021 24 Packet Pg. 277 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 25 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Pitched roof dimensional shingles Photo taken 10/5/2021 25 Packet Pg. 278 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs r ` I 1 Photo 26 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Flat membrane roof and flashing Photo taken 10/5/2021 26 Packet Pg. 279 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 27 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Wooden deck over flat roof outside apartment 12 Photo taken 10/5/2021 27 Packet Pg. 280 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs _ �„ • PO ,r— n N Y` °0s779 e C a - 9, { /-,: r Photo 28 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Existing natural gas water heater and steam boiler garden level Photo taken 10/5/2021 28 Packet Pg. 281 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 1 D4r-- sawl Photo 29 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Existing electric service garden level corridor Photo taken 10/5/2021 29 Packet Pg. 282 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 17117 ' a � I ,1 I moo I Photo 30 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Existing natural gas supply manifold to individual apartments (note ghosting of prior electric meters above) garden level corridor Photo taken 10/5/2021 30 Packet Pg. 283 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 17 Photo 31 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Existing fire alarm panel first floor corridor Photo taken 10/5/2021 31 Packet Pg. 284 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs • T a a' a • a - • ti a s" `a F I =r I Photo 32 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Existing phone system demarcation garden level corridor Photo taken 10/5/2021 32 Packet Pg. 285 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs r t/o/4 � x Photo 33 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Existing steam radiator(note tenant mailboxes above)first floor corridor Photo taken 11/18/2021 33 Packet Pg. 286 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 34 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west East facade portico Photo taken 10/5/2021 34 Packet Pg. 287 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs l r q Y r I, V _ M / Photo 35 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Typical existing bathroom apartments Photo taken 7/27/2021 35 Packet Pg. 288 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 1k Photo 36 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Typical existing kitchen apartment 5 Photo taken 7/27/2021 36 Packet Pg. 289 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs - t - l Photo 37 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Typical existing living room apartment Photo taken 7/27/2021 37 Packet Pg. 290 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs t I' I y„ Photo 38 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Typical existing bedroom aportment5 Photo taken 7/27/2021 38 Packet Pg. 291 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs I Photo 39 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Typical existing large closet apartment 6 Photo taken 5/5/2021 39 Packet Pg. 292 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs - _ i JL a 0 Q V Q y Photo 40 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Kitchen apartment 12 Photo taken 11/12/2021 40 Packet Pg. 293 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs c- I I a•; - t r , r Photo 41 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Living room apartment 12 Photo taken 11/12/2021 41 Packet Pg. 294 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs t Photo 42 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: east First floor corridor Photo taken 10/5/2021 42 Packet Pg. 295 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 43 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Stairwell first floor down to garden level Photo taken 10/5/2021 43 Packet Pg. 296 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs Photo 44 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Storage lockers Photo taken 10/5/2021 44 Packet Pg. 297 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs 1 • 1 3 ti 1 M r Photo 45 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Laundry room Photo taken 7/27/2021 45 Packet Pg. 298 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs k. � II Photo 46 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: east Garden level corridor Photo taken 7/27/2021 46 Packet Pg. 299 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs • I Photo 47 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: north Typical apartment entrance door Photo taken 7/27/2021 47 Packet Pg. 300 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs �,[ Y ,^� Photo 48 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Detail of grocery delivery door location Photo taken 10/5/2021 48 Packet Pg. 301 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs m J Photo 49 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Interior of 5 car garage Photo taken 7/27/2021 49 Packet Pg. 302 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs �i 1�fit" tO a r t gMW Ct" ' dkle� y. UoY 1>a;, Photo 50 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: south Detail of deteriorated concrete sidewalk Photo taken 11/16/2021 s0 Packet Pg. 303 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 The Scott Apartments Before Photographs i !N!PK �t �7- - t .2'yr �A u I �IL .J+h 1 �`- Photo 51 The Scott Apartments, 900 South College Ave., Fort Collins, CO View: west Steel fire stairs east facade Photo taken 8/1/2021 51 Packet Pg. 304 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Scott Apartments Masonry Review 900 S College Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Empire Carpentry and Maycroft Construction were asked by City Visions Inc. to review and analyze the exterior masonry of the Scott Apartments on July 3011 of this year. Our on-site review included the Owner and City Visions that day. Empire Carpentry returned to photograph exterior conditions on a later date. This analysis involves the Apartment Building only and does not include the garage/shop found on the site. The Owner pointed out conditions that concern him as we walked around. Gene Maycroft (Maycroft Construction) and Kevin Murray (Empire Carpentry) then met to analyze and suggest methods for remediation; to meet Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Overall: The Scott Apartment Exterior is in good condition, considering age. After observation, significant concerns involve: • Mortar deterioration • Replacement brick • Exterior Porch deterioration including: o Concrete cap deterioration o Bulging brick wall. o Leaning brick wall o Concrete landing deterioration • Color deterioration of mortar • Moisture intrusion near foundation • Broken sidewalk Description: For ease of consideration, the exterior brick work will be broken into three groups: main body, front entry and back entry. In general, the building exterior consists of a raked brick of deep red/brown color. This brick is unique, and finding replacement brick will be very hard, if possible. The brick is of reddish brown with a deep rake finish. Originally the mortar was a color close to lamp black. This has lost its darkness and turned grey in normal weathering. You can still see the depth of the original color in the inset of the back door, on the east side of the building, where there is less environmental affect. • Main Body:The main body of the Apartments is in good condition. The northeast corner shows mortar erosion and some repair with incorrect mortar. Deterioration is probably from leaking downspout. Some mortar is missing.This seems to happen close to the ground. Near stair landings, some mismatched brick can be found. It is not known if these are replacement brick or exposed commons caused by landing settling. The Packet Pg. 305 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 sidewalks and other concrete along the exterior of the building has been caulked to minimize moisture intrusion close to the foundation. Most of this is old and will need to be replaced. There is some broken pieces of sidewalk needing replacement; especially either side of the front entry stairway. • Front Entry:The front entry shows the most deterioration. The exterior wall shows settling; causing the wall to lean towards the west. This wall shows bulging caused by fill and moisture pressure behind the brick. Above, the upper landing has cracked where parts have moved away with the settling west wall and stairs. The crack, as well as others, allow moisture to enter the backfilled system. The tapered concrete caps (on the brick half walls) while in decent shape, have cracked in many places to allow moisture into the wall systems. It is assumed that these caps can be salvaged and rehabilitated. • Back Entry:The back entry is a copy of the front entry system. However, the location away from the persistant weather and foliage, has helped to minimize problems. The eastern (exterior) wall has not leaned out too bad, nor has the bulge found in the western wall of the front entry. Above, the upper landing has cracked where parts have moved away with the settling west wall and stairs. The crack, as well as others, allow moisture to enter the backfilled system. The tapered concrete caps (on the brick half walls) while in decent shape, have cracked in many places to allow moisture into the wall systems. It is assumed that these caps can be salvaged and rehabilitated. Treatment: A treatment plan for the existing brick exterior includes many variables to help with stabilization and rehabilitation. The treatment plan includes certain assumptions directed by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. These include: • Concrete caps of half walls are salvageable. • Original brick will be salvaged, if possible, to use in place. • Caulk treatment along the foundation is expected. • Period of Significance is not significant to this work. Suggested Treatments are noted below: • General: Full mortar analysis be done on original mortar for color, hardness and mix. • Main Body: o Treat deteriorated mortar to NPI Preservation Brief#2 Standards. o Crack between flatwork and the building will be rehabilitated to minimize moisture. o Sidewalk either side of Front entry stairs be replaced at correct height and angle. Broken section of sidewalk on SW side be replaced (5'x4'). • Front Entry: • Open west wall to allow support of stair landing. Support temporarily. • Tear down west wall and clean brick for re-installation. • Place concrete footer or piers to support rebuilt west wall. Packet Pg. 306 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 • Rebuild west wall and connect stair system for support • Back Entry: o Install four helical (or push) piers under the east wall to stabilize. o Grind out concrete cap cracks to allow caulking with a one part urethane caulk. Costs for Work: Estimated costs for work described above: • General: Mortar Analysis $2,000.00 • Main Building: Remove and reinstall mortar as needed. Caulk area between building and flatwork. Replace sidewalk on southwest side where broken and at bases of front entry stairs. $20,470.00 • Front Entry: Deconstruct and rebuild brick retention. Demolish and replace failed concrete landing. Add support as needed. $73,800.00 • Back Entry: Four helical supports installed; Brick and concrete cap rehabilitation. Concrete landing rehabilitation. $21,200.00 • General Conditions and Profit:To cover permits, profit and other general conditions required, costs of 25%should be added to the overall costs. Other work:The suggested work does not include rebuilding of exterior stairs, but just the upper landings and the retention walls as needed. This extra work may be required at a future time. Windows and doors were not included in this survey either. There is surely maintenance that should be done on these features. Future work may include garden level flood protection. Kevin Murray Empire Carpentry Ilc September 291" 2021 Packet Pg. 307 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Scott Apartments Empire Carpentry Ilc Photo Attachment PO Box 245 September 2021 Bellvue, Colorado - �.lei i ` i r , +iF 1 k � t; Figure 1:NE corner of Apartments showing incorrect mortar,lower mortar deterioration and wall-to-flatwork failure. Packet Pg. 308 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 ,a+ -aft jW 1 ' Figure 2:Crack in exterior stair wall.Crack is filled with caulk seal. Packet Pg. 309 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 1 Figure 3:Rear stair system showing failing concrete and redone mortar caused by outside wall movement. Packet Pg. 310 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Ar , , 1 4 s t r r b s Figure 4:Deteriorating concrete steps. Packet Pg. 311 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 UP- .13L { N. N: a' } Figure 5:Replaced brick in stair wall. Packet Pg. 312 tn.• Packet .g �� J y _. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 .t },litLA I fit y .•'• � '-d���b`.� r ,•., `; �, r �. y • v , 1 ' t ti ' .Lila t r' • � 1' P ± C ,�n , •11 ! 1 � ` t , Figure 8:West(Front)stairwell wall showing bulge. Packet Pg. 315 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 t4 f. as , Af, .43r I t uAa. Figure 9:Front Stairwell showing stair and brick wall deterioration. Packet Pg. 316 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 r Figure 10:Wrong colored replacement brick and failing mortar found on main building. Packet Pg. 317 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 • � - ! wr Vim I. Figure 11:Overall view of rear stairwell. Packet Pg. 318 .s � 1, . r �!!'_ t �t`� +��� ►" r fi � � •'a r�`�:'�, . ::� _fit.-- x =L -- §: ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Jim Bertolini From: Steve Levinger <smlevi@msn.com> Sent: Monday,January 10, 2022 10:23 AM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:The Scott Apartments - Federal HTC &City Review Attachments: Scott apartments, proposed 3rd remodel.1 2r.pdf, MUZ-FH09NAH-1-specifications.pdf Hi Jim, I'm attaching a drawing of the top floor that shows the proposed location for 6 vrf condensers that will provide heating and cooling for the 2"d and 3rd floor apartments. The individual condensers are 12" deep and 32" wide. Heights will vary between 24"to 36" depending on the demand. We've just started mechanical engineering and do not have equipment specified yet. However, pretty sure we'll be using the Mitsubishi units. It will be at least 6-8 weeks before I have exact designs on the equipment and support structure. The location on the drawing is correct and I have verified with the engineer that the location is acceptable. There will be 7 other outdoor condensers that will be placed at grade next to the building in inconspicuous places (possibly on the south side between the our building and the Best Western. I've not asked anybody from my team to attend the meeting in person at this time. I'm fine with it going all virtual. Steve Sent from Mail for Windows From:Jim Bertolini Sent: Wednesday,January 5, 2022 10:51 PM To: Steve Levinger Subject: RE:The Scott Apartments- Federal HTC&City Review Steve, Thanks so much! I'm wrapping up my report and caught one detail that would be good to clarify for the 191h. Could you either send me information addressing, or plan to address in your presentation,the following question: • Regarding the exterior condenser units for the climate control system, can you specify at this time where they would be installed,what their dimensions are, and how the rooftop units will be anchored to the building? If you're able to send that by the end of next week(1/14) 1 can get that into the packet so the HPC sees it ahead of time. Otherwise I think everything's addressed in the info you provided. Staff is recommending approval with a condition that the above condenser item be addressed before the building permits are issued for the project. Let me know if you have questions. Cheers! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office ibertolini(cDfcgov.com 1 Packet Pg. 320 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 � � j \ E § \ � § Km �- ❑ E ®i � 2 e 2 b Ia � ! / \ UJ & m 4 CD 14- 14- HME # tn m 2 t f % z m | ( ` § \� G # ! © § m " \ . © / \ \ % _ E p \ L K( , Lo m= $ \� ❑\ g : ; & e ff ff \ \ ff k - Packet Pg. 321 SUBMITTAL DATA: 1 ' 1 • • M 4, ATTACH ttt BTU/H WALL-MOUNTED HEAT PUMP SYSTEM Job Name: System Reference: Date: Electrical Power— 208/230V, 1-Phase,60 Hz Requirements Minimum Circuit Ampacity(MCA) I Indoor Unit:Tv8Z FM9NA Indoor/Outdoor A %eless Remote Controller Outdoor Unk:M_7,FHD9X4I Indoor Unit ACCESSORIES: Blower Motor(ECM) FLA 0.67 Indoor Unit Blower Motor Output w 30 ❑ Condensate Pump(BlueDiamond X87-711/721;115/23OV) SHF/Moisture Removal 0.92/0.6 pt./h ❑ Condensate Pump(Sauermann S130-115/230;115/23OV) Field Drainpipe Size O.D. rn.(—) 5/8(15) ❑ Replacement Platinum Deodorizing Filter(MAC-3000FT-E) ❑ Replacement Anti-allergy Enzyme Filter(MAC-2330FT-E) Outdoor Unit Outdoor Unit Compressor DC INVERTER-driven Twin Rotary The outdoor unit is delivered with the base pan heater factory installed. Fan Motor(ECM) FLA 0.50 ❑ Air Discharge Guide(MAC-881SG) ❑ Drain Socket(MAC-860DS) Airflow Rate(Lo-Med-Hi-Super Hi-Powerful) Controls Indoor DRY 137-167-221-304-381 ❑ Wireless Controller(MHK1) (Cooling) WET 117-143-190-261-328 ❑ Wired Remote Controller(PAR-33MAA;req.MAC-3331F-E) ❑ Wireless Temperature and Humidity sensor(PAC-USWHS003-TH-1) Indoor CFM ❑ Thermostat Interface(PAC-US444CN-1) (Heating) DRY 140-167-225-325-437 SPECIFICATIONS: Outdoor 1,150/ 1,280 ConditionsRated . Cooling' BrA/w 9,000/560 Cooling 20-23-29-36-40 Heatingat 47°F2 > /w 10,900/710 Indoor Heating 20-24-29-36-42 V&A) Capacity Cooling 48 Outdoor LIM Cooling' BWh 1,700 12,000 Heating 49 Heating at 47°Fz BftA 1,600 18,000 External Dimensions Heating at 17°F3 Btn/h - 12,200 12+ 11/16 x 36-7/16 x 9-3/16 Indoor(H x W x D)Heating at 5°F° 13b,/h - 10,900 (305+17 x 925 x 234) 'Cooling I Indoor:80'F(27°C)DB/670 F(19°C)WB;Outdoor:95'F(35°C)DB/75'F(24°C)WB' Outdoor(H x W x D) 21-5/8 x 31-1/2 x 11-1/4 3 Heating at 47T I Indoor:70'F(21°C)DB/60°F(16°C)WB;Outdoor:47'F(80 C)DB/43°F(6°C)WB' (550 x 800 x 285) 3 Heating at 17'F I Indoor:700 F(21°C)DB/60°F(16°C)WB;Outdoor:17'F(-8°C)DB/15'F(-9°C)WB' 4 Heating at 5°F I Indoor:70'F(21°C)DB/60°F(16°C)WB;Outdoor:5°F(-15°C)DB/5°F(-15°C)WB 'Rating Conditions per AHRI Standard: Net Weight Operating Indoor 29(12) Ibs.(kg) Cooling5 90°F(32°C)DB/67°F(19°C)DB Outdoor 81 (37) Heating 80°F(27°C)DB/70°F(21°C)DB External Finish Operating (Outdoor Indoor Munsell 1.OY 9.2/0.2 Cooling5 115°F(46°C)DB/14°F(A0°C)DB Outdoor Munsell No. 3Y 7.8/1.1 Heating 75°F(24°C)DB/-13°F(-25°C)DB** - .- . R410A;2 Ib. 9 oz. 'Applications should be restricted to comfort cooling only;equipment cooling applications are not recommended for low ambient temperature conditions. Refrigerant Piping -• System cuts out at-180 F(-28°C)to avoid thermistor error and automatically restarts at-140 F(-26°C). Liquid(High Pressure) 1/4(6.35) AHRI Efficiency Ratings Gas(Low Pressure) 3/8(9.52) SEER/HSPF 30.5/12.5 Max.Total Refrigerant COP at 47°F/17°F 4.5/2.73 Pipe Length(Height Diff.) 40(12) Ft(m) • Yes Max.Total Refrigerant 65(20) Pipe Length(Length.) ENERGY STAR products are third-party certified by an EPA-recognized Certification Body. Packet Pg. 322 Specifications are subject to change without notice. ©2017 Mitsubishi Electric US,Inc. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 DI • ► 1 • • : 1 • • MSZ-FH09NA Unit: inch 7/16 x 1-1/I6 Oblon hole 7/16 x 13/16 Obi ong hole Installation late 4-I/16 8-7/8 4-I/16 � 36-7/16 — M O 35-5/8 3/8 0 I 7' — aO 8-1/8 3/ — M � Indoor unit 2-5/8 15-9/16 14-11/16 3 9/16 9-3/16 Airn iin Wall hole 43 3/16 Installation late o, 2 1 1-9/16 t 124 n hose 2-3/8 27 11/16 6-5/16 4 2-3/��_ I� Air out 4-5/8 5-3/16 o, 2 5/8 2-II/16 (MSZ-FH06/09/12NA) Insulation dl-1/I6 OA Li Those ne bl/4 19-11/I6 (Flared connection 4114) Ge b3/8 16-15/16 (Flared connection 43/8) Drai Insulation 41-I/8 Connected parf 05/8 0.1) MUZ-FH09NAH unit:tncn REQUIRED SPACE •1 4 in.(100 mm)or more when front and sides of the unit are clear �ml o(100 d 0.o 15-3/4 Alr In Drain hale 01-21/32 ar>zFcn 11111q ,in hole 01-5/16(M¢-�A2x 4 •z When any 2 sides of left,right 1-9/16 and rear of the unit are clear ntr ow 2xhole 3Bx13116 7/8 1116 Service one[ MITSUBISHI Hondle _ .. ELECTRIC Liquid refrigerant pipe joint Refrigerant pipe(flared)o 114 COOLING & HEATING Gas refrigerant pipe joint r Refrigerant pipe(flared)a 3/8 11 1 1 11_29/3 s-1v3z 1340 Satellite Boulevard-Suwanee,GA30024 -15/1 19-11/16 6-23/32 ToR Free:800-433-4822 wwwmehvac.com Bolt pitch for installation 31-1/2 2-3/4 L C E�I U3 FORM#MSZ-FH09NA—MUZ-FH09NAH-201712 Packet pgte949� Specifications are subject to change without notice. ©2017 Mitsubishi Electric US,Inc. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Jim Bertolini From: Steve Levinger <smlevi@msn.com> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 11:36 AM To: Jim Bertolini Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:The Scott Apartments - Federal HTC &City Review Attachments: Portico wall detail.pdf,work plan r12.docx Hi Jim, Thanks for the heads up. Bumping to February would not be an issue for me. I expect you'll keep me posted. Regarding the two questions; I am attaching a detail I provided for the tax credit application. I may have failed to include this when I sent you material earlier. The door and sidelights will be painted wood similar to the existing entry. Infill panels will be vertical beaded wood. I have made some changes to the work plan for 1-10. Thus, I won't be using the small bathroom window for venting. It will remain a functioning window with glass and receive similar rehabilitation treatment as the other windows. I'm including the updated work plan that addresses that. Sorry I did not get this to you. FYI I submitted my Fed 1 &2 about 3 weeks ago. I spoke with Joe Saldibar the other day. He felt pretty positive about the submittal but did request some additional info regarding the interior insulation and how it will affect interior window trim. In addition, it's possible they may nix the vestibule. However, he was thinking it was proposed for the buildings front entrance. I'll keep you posted and will cc you on info I send him. Let me know if you need more information or clarification for LPC. Thanks, Steve Sent from Mail for Windows From:Jim Bertolini Sent: Friday,January 14, 2022 10:57 AM To: Steve Levinger Subject: RE:The Scott Apartments- Federal HTC&City Review Thanks Steve! As a caution,while I think we should have quorum for your item on Wednesday,there's a small chance we may not and would have to bump to February(we've got several vacancies and are expecting at least one absence next week). We did get some questions from HPC members for your application. If you could plan to either email me responses to the below by 5pm Monday(1/17) or just address these in your comments on Wednesday evening,that would be excellent: - On rear/east entry enclosure, could you clarify materials and design? (Staff's read of the plans was that you're effectively replicating the existing entry with the new vestibule enclosure, but if you could confirm/correct/clarify,that should address this question). - On plywood infill of bathroom windows for ventilation, can you provide any example images to help visualize? i Packet Pg. 324 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 We got a few other questions but they're answered by your application so staff will direct commissioners to the correct materials. Cheers! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office ibertolini(cDfcgov.com From: Steve Levinger<smlevi@msn.com> Sent:Thursday,January 13, 2022 7:14 AM To:Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:The Scott Apartments- Federal HTC&City Review Jim, I'll make some brief comments regarding my overall goal for the project and commitment to preserving the property as well as being subject to state and federal oversight. I think with your presentation and staff support I don't need to take too much of LPC's time with a presentation. Of course I'll be available for any questions. Thanks for your help. Steve Sent from Mail for Windows From:Jim Bertolini Sent: Wednesday,January 12, 2022 4:48 PM To: Steve Levinger Subject: RE:The Scott Apartments- Federal HTC&City Review Steve, Thanks so much, and understood on the details not being finalized—mechanical in particular is usually a late-game item anyway.This works and I'll get the staff report/presentation updating accordingly. I'll check with Maren tomorrow but I think we can shift our staff recommendation to approval with no conditions. If there's any requests from the HPC from tonight's Work Session, I'll pass those on (you're, of course,welcome to attend via Zoom tonight if you'd like). Will you be making a presentation next week or just available to answer questions? Cheers! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development&Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office ibertolini(d_)fcgov.com From: Steve Levinger<smlevi@msn.com> Sent: Monday,January 10, 2022 10:23 AM To:Jim Bertolini <ibertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:The Scott Apartments- Federal HTC&City Review Hi Jim, 2 Packet Pg. 325 4 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 C Cr a w E 3 I (4-- �4J It d { 3 cL i ..W .;p 4) L C Lj 3 �-= � •� o � C2. �� �! CL Packet Pg. 326 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Architectural Feature 1. The Scott Apartments Existing Feature and Condition The Scott Apartments is a 3-story brick apartment building located on the southeast corner of south College Avenue and Locust Street in Fort Collins Colorado. In addition to the apartment building, there is a one story 5 car garage on site that was constructed at the same time, or shortly thereafter, as the building. The building and garage have been minimally altered since their original construction in 1924. Steve and Missy Levinger(Levinger Properties, LLC), have owned and managed the property since 2002. Work/Impact on Feature The overall goal of this project is to give another century of continued residential apartment service to this nearly 100-year-old building. This requires sensitive treatment of the most visible and important historic features of the building to preserve its integrity and longevity while updating elements related to everyday living of the residents who occupy individual apartments to give them a comfortable and efficient home that meets their expectations. The "project"will involve replacing all the buildings mechanical systems (plumbing, electric, & HVAC). Most of the apartments will retain their existing layouts and nearly all their existing historic fabric. Some individual apartments will have interior spaces reconfigured to provide new kitchen and bath spaces that use existing space more efficiently. Thermal insulation and interior storm window will be added to improve comfort and energy efficiency. Common areas will be renovated as well with the goal of preserving the existing historic fabric and maintaining the overall historic integrity of these spaces while improving safety and security for building tenants. The building's exterior will receive a comprehensive rehabilitation of the existing brick structure and original wood windows and doors. Site details such as sidewalks will also be repaired or replaced. The 5-car garage was rehabilitated in 2011. No additional work will be done to this structure. Photo no. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 Drawing no.1-9 existing & PG, P1, P2, P3 Architectural Feature 2. Exterior Brick Existing Feature and Condition The structures exterior walls are constructed with two colors of wire cut brick laid in a running bond. A darker brownish color brick extends up from grade one story. A reddish color field brick is used above this point with the brown brick being used for accent. The existing brick is in good condition with the exception of one location on the west fagade stair wall that has suffered from moisture infiltration resulting in a bulge in the wall. There are a few(less than a dozen) bricks missing in a variety of locations. The original mortar is dark black and struck with a raked joint. The existing mortar is in fair condition. Weathering has leached out the original dark black pigment leaving the mortar more brownish in color except in two porticos that have been largely protected from the weather. In addition, there are many places where mortar is missing or deteriorated. Evidence of shoddy mortar repair appears is several locations as well. At the buildings west end there is a substantial amount of Hedera Helix vine that covers much of the fagade. Work/Impact on Feature The brick on the entire building will be restored in the following manner: 1 Packet Pg. 327 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 1. Treat deteriorated and shoddy mortar to NPS Preservation Brief#2 standards. Note; Limeworks.us,Telford, PA will provide mortar analysis, matching, and mix for mortar repair. 2. Remove all Hedera Helix vine and destroy plant roots. 3. Replace missing or deteriorated brick in kind with closely matched salvage brick 4. Repair bulge in step wall as follows; Provide temporary stabilization to the east side of this wall (step side). Provide temporary stabilization to soldier course of brick above the bulge Carefully remove face brick in and around the bulge area and clean this brick for salvage. Remove moisture deteriorated clay tile area of wall that caused the bulge. Replace clay tile with new brick or cmu material mortared into existing non-deteriorated clay tile wall. Re-lay salvaged face brick over replaced clay tile wall with appropriately matched mortar. Remove temporary stabilization. Gently clean repaired area with clean water and bristle brush. Photo no. 3,4,9,10,11,12,13 Drawing no. Architectural Feature 3. Windows Existing Feature and Condition There are 139 windows in the building. Nearly all are the original wooden sash double hung windows. They remain intact and serviceable and in relatively good condition with the exception the very large ones in the living rooms of apartments 1-10, & 14. Unfortunately,these windows were poorly designed at the time of original construction. The overall width of the window frames is simply too wide for the dimensional size of the window frame rails to hold up structurally. Thus, meeting rails of these sashes have all warped because they are over-spanned. They are also bind when opening or closing. This is caused when the wide sash wracks in the frame. To operate them effectively one must exert equal upward or downward pressure at either end of the sash to keep it from binding. This one window in each apartment is the only one large enough to meet current building code egress standards. It is important that this window, in particular,functions smoothly. Over the years a variety of solutions have been employed to mitigate the poor function of these windows. Silicone caulk seals glass where it no longer touches a swayed rail. Sash locks have been shimmed so the windows can still be locked and window stops have been loosened to prevent binding. However,these fixes are only marginally effective. These windows remain very leaky and difficult to operate. The rest of the original windows are mostly functional and have only minor issues such as broken sash cords etc. There are 4 windows in the building that replaced the original double hung units. These are 2 casements at either end of the second-floor hall and one casement in each of apartment 11 and 12. These were replaced in 1975 as part of a building egress upgrade. These casement windows are in good condition. Nearly all the existing windows have wood frame screens installed on the building's exterior. The screens and frames vary in their condition from relatively good to poor. 2 Packet Pg. 328 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Work/Impact on Feature All the original windows with some exceptions will be retained, re-painted, and rehabilitated to single hung function to NPS Preservation Brief#9 standards. All the original windows with some exceptions will be fitted with Larsen Comfort Seal functional single hung interior storm windows. Storm windows will install inside existing window jambs with no impact to existing window jambs or sashes. Existing interior window stops and pulls will be replaced to facilitate the storm window installation. Exceptions: The large living room units in apartments 1-10 and 14 will be replaced in kind with new Marvin Magnum wooden block frame units. This will involve removing existing damaged sashes and window stops. Existing window jambs, sills, and exterior brick molding will remain. New units will be secured within the existing window jamb and painted to match the original windows. Existing screens will be re-installed in their original location within the existing brick molding. Screens; Each existing screen frame will be removed. Its condition will be assessed. Each screen will be repaired, or replaced in kind as needed. All screen frames will be repainted. Photo no. 14,15,16,17,18,19,20 Drawing no. 10, 11 Architectural Feature 4. Exterior Doors Existing Feature and Condition There are 8 exterior doors on the structure. With the exception of one steel door and frame that serves as an exit from the garden level corridor(installed around 2010) all the doors are 15 pane divided light wooden doors. 4 doors serve as entrances to individual apartments on the garden level.These doorways are also fitted with simple wood frame screen doors One additional door on the garden level enters into the shared laundry room. There are 2 doors that serve as entrances to the first-floor corridor from the porticos at either end. All the doors are in good serviceable condition and remain in use. However,they all need some amount of repair. Some door hardware is worn and poorly functioning. Most doors are not weather tight. One is significantly warped. The screen doors are reaching the end of their serviceable life. Work/Impact on Feature Each door will be assessed individually and the following repairs may be made as needed: Install appropriate weatherstripping and thresholds to improve weather tightness. Re-install loose hardware and ensure it is securely fastened. Replace any missing or broken glass. Re-paint The one severely warped door will be replaced in kind with a new door to match the existing. Apartment entrance door hardware will be replaced with new RFID compatible door locks and latches to function with new tenant entry system. New RFID compatible door latches will be installed on both first-floor entry doors to function with new tenant entry system. The one steel door will remain in place. 3 Packet Pg. 329 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Photo no. 21,22,23,24 Drawing no. Architectural Feature 5. Roof Existing Feature and Condition The structure has a 6/12 pitched gable roof over most of the structure. The roof is covered with dimensional asphalt shingles. It was replaced in 2008. At both the east and west end of the main structure there is a flat roof system over what was originally considered the "Sun Parlors" of Apartments 1-10. These roofs are accessible from apartments 11 and 12 and have been used as outdoor decks by tenants in these apartments. These roofs are covered with EDPM rubber membrane. They were replaced in 2014. There is a wooden deck structure constructed above the east side flat roof. Framing for this deck bears directly on top of the brick parapet wall at its eastern edge and is through bolted onto the exterior brick wall on its western edge. Bolt holes in the exterior walls penetrate through mortar joints. The decks construction does not impact the historic fabric of the building and is reversable. Work/Impact on Feature No new work is planned for the roofs. The existing wooden deck will be repaired or rebuilt as needed. A similar wooden deck will be constructed over the flat roof on the west end directly outside apartment 11. Photo no. 25,26,27 Drawing no. P3 Architectural Feature 6. Building Mechanical Systems Existing Feature and Condition The existing plumbing system consists of a galvanized steel water supply system, a steel gas supply system, and a cast iron and lead drain/waste/vent system. A central gas fired water heater supplies hot water to all 13 apartments. The water service line is a 1 W galvanized steel supply. The sewer is a 4" clay tile line. The existing water supply and DWV plumbing system are in poor condition and nearing the end of their serviceable life. The existing gas supply system is in good serviceable condition. The existing high voltage electrical system consists of a 260-amp 240-volt single phase electric service into the building. Individual meters for apartments were installed around 2015. Each apartment has one 15amp circuit that powers lights and outlets for each individual apartment. The building wiring is mostly the original "knob and tube" system with some conduit and "Wiremold"that runs along walls and ceilings. The existing meters and service entrance are in good condition. The remainder of the electrical system is serviceable but outdated and nearing the end of its serviceable life. The existing low voltage electrical system consists of a fire alarm system that was installed around 1975. Control wires are all run in%" EMT conduit throughout the main corridors. It Is in good serviceable condition. However,the fire alarm control panel is outdated. The original telephone system is cloth insulated copper wire that is fully encased in the building walls and floor. A demarcation point is located 4 Packet Pg. 330 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 in the garden level main corridor. The cable tv system consists of coaxial cable strung haphazardly around the building's exterior. There is a demarcation point located near the southeast corner of the building. The existing heating system is a one pipe steam heat system. A natural gas fired steam boiler is located on the garden level. It was installed around 1970. Each individual apartment has between 3 and 4 cast iron radiators located along exterior walls. These radiators are connected to the central boiler via a network of steel pipes. The system is controlled by one thermostat located in apartment#9. In addition, radiators are fitted with thermostatic air vent valves that allow tenants some control of the temperature in their apartments. The system is in fair condition, is serviceable, and functional. There is no system for apartment cooling. However, many tenants use window air conditioners to provide some cooling in their apartments. Work/Impact on Feature None of the existing plumbing system will be retained. Existing DWV and supply lines will be removed or abandoned in place. A new 1 1/4" copper supply will be installed to the same location as existing. The water meter may remain or be moved to an outdoor vault to be determined by the City of Fort Collins. New water supply will be a combination of copper and cross-linked polyethylene pipe. Each apartment will have an individual electric hybrid water heater installed in the unit. A new PVC DWV system will be installed. The Existing sewer line will be replaced with a new plastic one. Existing gas piping system will be retained and rerouted as needed to facilitate new range locations in individual apartments and removal of the central water heater and boiler. A new 240-volt (amperage TBD) single phase electric service will be installed. Most of the existing high voltage electric system will be replaced. The existing meters and service entrance will be retained provided they are compatible with the new higher amperage service. New 240-volt (amperage TBD) circuit breaker panels will be fed to each apartment. All apartment circuits will be replaced with new wire,junction boxes, and fixtures. All the existing apartment electrical components will be removed. Some existing original light fixtures may be reused provided they can be safely used. All existing public space electrical systems will be removed and replaced. All existing surface mounted electrical conduit both interior and exterior will be removed. All exterior lighting circuits will be fed from wire routed inside the building to metal boxes mounted on the existing brick walls. The existing low voltage electrical system will be entirely replaced. This includes communication systems, keyless entry systems, and the building fire alarm systems. In addition, provisions will be made for future systems that may be installed at a later date. A new fire panel will be located in the entry vestibule (see Architectural Feature 7). A new low voltage demarcation room will be created in an existing closet located on the garden level under the stairway. Each apartment will have coaxial cable and cat 5e cable routed from the demarcation to wall outlets located in each apartment. In addition, 1" plastic conduit will be fed from the demarcation to a location in each apartment to facilitate new low voltage wiring in the future. 2" plastic conduit will be provided for telephone and cable services from the demarcation room to the outside utility connection location. One additional 2" conduit will be provided for any future needs. Wiring for wireless access points, keyless entry systems, etc. will all be installed during rough-in so there will be no wire or conduit visible in the public spaces. All existing low voltage wire and conduit will be completely removed. 5 Packet Pg. 331 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 The existing gas heating system will be replaced with electric heat pump "mini-split" heating and cooling systems for each individual apartment. Outdoor condensing units for apartments 7-12 will be placed on structural framework installed over the existing flat roof areas above the 2nd floor apartments. The remainder of outdoor condensing units will be placed at grade in locations that are inconspicuous. All refrigerant lines will be run through interior walls to minimize any impact to the exterior facades of the building. Interior heat exchangers will be installed in locations that will not obstruct existing doors or windows. All refrigerant lines will be routed inside wall and ceiling cavities. Most of the existing one pipe steam system will be removed. However, pipes and radiators located in public space hallways will be retained as non-functional reminders of the original system. Electric baseboard heaters will be installed in individual apartments and in some public space areas to supplement the heat pump systems during the very coldest times of the year to ensure tenant comfort year-round. Photo no. 28,29,30,31,32,33 Drawing no. Architectural Feature 7. East Portico Existing Feature and Condition The east portico is the covered entryway at the top of the east steps. It is approximately 9'-6" long by 7' wide. It is open to the east and has exterior brick walls on its north and south sides. The floor is concrete and the ceiling is lath and plaster with a rough texture. The west side is formed by the exterior 15 pane hall entry door with 5 pane sidelights on either side. The entry door is fitted with a keypad entry door lock. The portico is in good condition. Work/Impact on Feature A portion of the east portico will become an interior entry vestibule. This will be accomplished by installing new exterior wall that will enclose the portico space. This wall will form the eastern edge of the vestibule and will be 42" west of the eastern edge of the existing portico. The wall will include a 15- pane wooden entry door with two 5 pane sidelights similar to the existing entry door. None of the existing entry door or any other existing entry portico walls will be removed or altered in any way. All the new construction necessary to create the vestibule will have minimal impact to the existing exterior walls of the portico. The construction will be reversible. The portico could be returned to its original state at any time in the future with no damage to the existing historic fabric of the building. The vestibule will house a new tenant mailbox apparatus, a new fire alarm panel, and a new entry intercom system. Vinyl plank flooring will be installed over the existing concrete landing inside the vestibule. Appropriate lighting and a baseboard electric heater will be installed into the vestibule. Photo no. 34 Drawing no. 7existing, P1 Architectural Feature 8. Individual Apartments Existing Feature and Condition The Scott Apartments building houses 12 one-bedroom apartments and 1 studio apartment. The layouts of these 13 apartments remains unchanged from their original construction in 1924. Each apartment has received some degree of updating over the years. This includes flooring replacement, kitchen counter replacement, removal of some kitchen cabinetry, replacement of plumbing fixtures, 6 Packet Pg. 332 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 electrical system upgrades that include lighting and additional outlets, removal of some cast iron radiators, and normal painting and floor refinishing. Nearly all the original doors, cabinetry,trim, and hardware remain as do the original oak flooring in the living and bedroom spaces. The overall condition of the individual apartments is fair. Most things like doors and drawers are functional but not easy to operate. 100 years of constant service has taken its toll. Furthermore, the original construction materials and techniques of the cabinetry was not high quality. Overall,the original apartments are livable but lacking the comfort and convenience today's tenant's demand. Work/Impact on Feature Layouts 1-10 Apartments 1-10 have nearly identical layouts. The overall wall layouts and doorways of these units will remain unchanged. One new kitchen cabinet will be installed adjacent to the existing cabinetry to facilitate installation of a dishwasher. In addition, minor modifications to the existing sink base cabinet may be required to facilitate installation of a new sink. There is a pantry that exists in some kitchens that will be removed to provide space for a refrigerator. a new 27" vanity cabinet will replace an existing pantry in the bathroom. Connections for a small washer and dryer will be installed in the large closet area. Layouts 11, 12, &14 Apartments 11 and 12 are located on the top floor of the building and share a similar layout. These apartments will be redesigned to better utilize current space. In addition, some of the existing 3rd floor corridor space on this floor will be incorporated into these apartments. Existing original balustrade in this corridor will not be affected and it will be retained in its entirety. Both these apartments have access to flat roofs that are over the second-floor apartments. There is a wooden deck constructed over the flat roof just outside apartment 12. This deck may be repaired or replaced and a new one will be constructed just outside of apartment 11. Apartment 14 is the only studio apartment. It will be redesigned to better utilize the existing space. In addition, space that is now occupied by storage and the boiler room will be incorporated into the redesigned apartment 14. Construction: Demolition 1-10 Demolition in apartments 1-10 will be limited to removal of existing lath and plaster ceilings throughout and wall covering inside the bathroom area and the closet area. Flooring in the bathroom, kitchen, and dinning nook areas may be removed depending on its condition. Aforementioned existing pantry cabinets will be removed. All existing mechanical systems will be removed or abandoned with the exception of the existing natural gas plumbing. Demolition 11,12, & 14 Demolition in apartments 11, 12, and 14 will include removal of all lath and plaster wall and ceiling coverings. The removal of some wall framing. The removal of all kitchen and bath fixtures and cabinetry. The removal of all existing mechanical systems. New Construction All exterior masonry walls will be furred with 1%"framing to facilitate installation of a new electrical system and closed cell foam insulation. Existing baseboards some trim on these exterior walls will be removed to facilitate the installation of insulating walls. Existing windows will not be removed or 7 Packet Pg. 333 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 altered with the exception of extending the existing window sills beyond the new walls and replacing interior window trim as needed to facilitate interior insulating wall installation. Soundproofing measures will include sound insulation in joist cavities, sound decoupling metal hat channel attached to joist bottoms and sound proof specific drywall ceilings installed onto hat channel. New cabinetry, countertops, and fixtures will be installed into apartments 11, 12, and 14. In apartments 1-10 the existing cabinetry will be restored to proper function. This may include rebuilding and or repairing existing doors and drawers as needed. New countertops will be installed.The existing cast iron pedestal tubs will be rehabilitated and retained. All other existing bath fixtures will be replaced. Original oak flooring in all the apartments will be repaired and refinished where feasible. Fortunately,this encompasses a significant number of floored areas in the apartments. Where necessary, in kitchens and bathrooms new vinyl plank and/or tile flooring will be installed. New trim, doors, and hardware will be installed in apartments 11, 12, and 14 and as needed in apartments 1-10. All doors in apartments 1-10 will be repaired and retained. Photo no. 35,36,37,38,39,40,41 Drawing no.6-9 existing, PG, P1, P2, P3 Architectural Feature 9. Public Spaces Existing Feature and Condition The buildings public spaces consist of central corridor hallways and stairs as well as a laundry room and tenant storage lockers. The corridors were modified around 1975. At that time open stairwells were walled off to create floor by floor fire separation. Self-closing doors were installed at the bottom of each stairway and a fire alarm system was installed in conduit run along ceilings and walls. Original apartment doors were replaced with fire rated slab doors and grocery delivery doors into each apartment were removed and covered with drywall. The existing public space is in good condition. Walls are plastered solid masonry,floors are carpeted, and ceilings are lath and plaster. None of the original light fixtures remain. Both the storage lockers and laundry room remain mostly unchanged. Work/Impact on Feature The public spaces will remain in their current overall layout with the exception of the following: The addition of the aforementioned vestibule. The aforementioned incorporation of 3rd floor hall space into apartments 11 and 12. The aforementioned incorporation of some storage space into apartment 14. The existing laundry room will be converted into a bicycle storage room for tenants The existing coal room adjacent to the existing boiler room will be converted into additional tenant storage space. New, period appropriate light fixtures will replace the existing fixtures. New carpeting will be installed. Existing trim will be repaired as needed. Construction will involve removing existing lath and plaster ceilings to facilitate installation of new mechanical systems in the hallways. Once mechanical rough in is complete exposed ceiling cavities will be covered with sheetrock, existing flooring will be replaced, existing trim will be repaired and painted, and existing plastered interior masonry walls will be repaired and painted. Where appropriate,the covered-up grocery delivery doorways will be recessed and trimmed out to indicate where they had originally been. Photo no.29,30,31,32,33,41,42,43,44,45,46,47 Drawing no. 6-9 existing, PG, P1, P2, P3 8 Packet Pg. 334 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Architectural Feature 10. Garage Existing Feature and Condition The five-car garage received a major rehabilitation around 2010,when the building's current owner converted the structure into a wood shop for personal use. At that time, a new roof structure replaced the severely deteriorated original. Three roof skylights were installed, the new roof deck was covered with a TPO membrane roof, and brick parapet walls were capped with sheet metal flashing. Existing wood framed and sheathed interior partition walls were removed, and a new concrete floor slab was installed. A 200-amp electric service was added. Four of the five existing garage doors were fixed in place in their original frames. The fifth door was removed and repurposed in the workshop's interior. The vacated entry was framed, sheathed, and a new entry door was installed. All original windows were fixed in place. New exterior wood shutters were fixed in place in the original window frames. Brick walls received minor tuckpointing and repair as needed. The rehabilitation was reviewed and approved by The City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission prior to construction. Work/Impact on Feature No new work is planned for the garage. Photo no. 6,7,8,49 Drawing no. Architectural Feature 11. Site Existing Feature and Condition The existing site is made up of poured concrete sidewalks and driveways,trees, and turf grass. The site is in good condition with the exception of some deteriorated concrete sidewalks. Work/Impact on Feature The site will remain mostly as it is. Deteriorated sidewalks, mostly on the buildings north side,will be replaced. Turf grass and irrigation system damaged during construction will be repaired or replaced as needed. Photo no. 1,50 Drawing no. plot plan Architectural Feature 12. Steel Fire Escape Existing Feature and Condition In 1975 exterior steel fire escape stairs were installed across the west and east facades of the building. These provide secondary egress from the 2nd floor corridors and the 3rd floor apartments. In addition, steel railing was also installed on top of the brick parapets that surround the flat roofs at both the west and east ends of the building. These systems are sturdy and in good condition. The red color paint is faded. 9 Packet Pg. 335 7. Scott Apartments Work Plan ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Work/Impact on Feature The stairs and railings will remain in place. They will receive a new coat of oil-based enamel paint. Photo no. 2,4,5,6,9,10,27,51 Drawing no 10 Packet Pg. 336 1 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner City of Historic Preservation Commission—January 19, 2022 �.Fort Collins Is VA 0 /we�e�}arm,+. � _+t ♦'•a � '. _ niry�� \Fa.. _ r� ,. 3 - ►Qy."��r;ti` 4,_ �� 1. - r . - ,ta. ieel f 900 S. College Avenue Landmark Design Review— Final 900 S College Avenue—Scott Apartments & Garage (NRHP) h �noq'e Earth f7 - Maps 2 1/18/2022 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 City of Role of the HPC Fort, • Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation • Pass motion under Municipal Code 14, Article IV to approve, approve w/ conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness. 6M N •0i . . - • Construction: • 1924-1925 Left:Image of S. • Fort Collins Apartment Co. College Ave c.1930 • Gustav Lundborg-(likely) architect • Herman Schroeder-builder • Applicable NRHP Criteria: J • A—Community Planning& Development Adaptation of residential < housing for working class professionals • C—Design w' Early 20th Century Apartment _ _ .. s t 40 • City Landmark in 2002 4 Packet Pg. 338 2 1/18/2022 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 memo City of 900 S College Avenue—Scott Apartments & Garage (NRHP) r 1 i 5 Proposed Project 1. Full rehabilitation of exterior masonry consistent with NPS Preservation Brief#2 2. Rehabilitation of most of the 139 windows and their screen units on the property; details to include: o Installation of interior storm windows on most window units o Replacement of large living room windows in units 1-10 and 14 with Marvin Magnum wooden block frame units to accommodate fire ingress/egress. o Modification of bathroom windows to facilitate exhaust systems. 3. Rehabilitation of exterior doors,with one due for replacement due to damage 4. Repair of non-historic deck on flat roof section on east end and installation of matching wood deck on west flat roof section. 5. Upgrade of most mechanical systems in the building to include exterior condenser units on the flat rooftop sections or on grade on the building site. 6. Partial enclosure of the east portico into an entry vestibule. 7. Replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalks M 0 Packet Pg. 339 3 1 Proposed Alterations — West facade • � �I�I.I.Is ICI . Proposed Alterations — East Elevation ( ...... MF. PC,_ h Mrs- 8 1 Proposed Alterations — North Elevation O V ,= -------------- • . _ l. 9 Proposed Alterations — South Elevation M I 10 1 1/18/2022 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 mown City of Proposed Alterations — Site • Other t . ! Ll 11 Staff Analysis - Overall • Project meets applicable Rehab Standards • Standards respond to project in relation to building's "character- defining features." • Key Standards are: • 2 — Preserve historic character • 5 — Preserve character-defining features • 6 — Repair or, if necessary, replace in-kind • 7 —Avoid damage to historic materials i12mm Packet Pg. 342 6 1/18/2022 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 ME r . Staff Analysis — • , • • 2 — Preserve historic character —met • No changes or disruptions to overall historic character • Standard 5 — Preserve character-defining features — met: • Character-defining features are being retained. 6M 13 403W Analysis Standards • • 6. Repair or, if necessary, replace in-kind • Most aspects clearly meet this Standard • Replacement of large living room 1/1 sash windows is not ideal, however, is an in-kind replacement 7. Avoid damage to historic materials • Predominantly pertains to masonry — treatment plan appears sound based on DAP grant product & description imm Packet Pg. 343 7 1/18/2022 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 mown City of HPC Requests for • . • • Clarify design of vestibule enclosure on east/rear entry • Applicant provided drawing (Attachment 7) • Bathroom window modifications • Applicant has modified project — no longer proposing modifications 15 Staff rat_f� Recommendation • Staff Recommends approval of the project 16 Packet Pg. 344 8 1 Role of the HPC Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation Pass motion under Municipal Code 14, Article IV to approve, approve w/ conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness. 17 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner City of Historic Preservation Commission—January 19, 2022 Fort Collins _ �,�,.'':;-.�,'.`- hit• *} •,• `�`` , � - � 900 S. College Avenue Landmark Design Review— Final