Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/19/2021 - Historic Preservation Commission - AGENDA - Regular MeetingPage 1 Meg Dunn, Chair Location: Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair Michael Bello This meeting will be held Walter Dunn remotely via Zoom Elizabeth Michell Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Staff Liaison: Jim Rose Karen McWilliams Vacant Seat Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting May 19, 2021 5:30 PM Landmark Preservation Commission AGENDA Pursuant to City Council Ordinance 079, 2020, a determination has been made by the Chair after consultation with the City staff liaison that conducting the hearing using remote technology would be prudent. This remote Landmark 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://zoom.us/j/94284162189. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). Keep yourself on muted status. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to comment. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY PHONE: Please dial 253-215-8782 and enter Webinar ID 942 8416 2189. Keep yourself on muted status. For public comments, when the Chair asks participants to click the “Raise Hand” button if they wish to speak, phone participants will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Commission. When you are called, hit *6 to unmute yourself. Documents to Share: Any document or presentation a member of the public wishes to provide to the Commission for its consideration must be emailed to abrennan@fcgov.com at least 24 hours before the meeting. Provide Comments via Email: Individuals who are uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing comments to abrennan@fcgov.com at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If your comments are specific to any of the discussion items on the agenda, please indicate that in the subject line of your email. Staff will ensure your comments are provided to the Commission. Packet Pg. 1 Page 2 Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government (CLG) authorized by the National Park Service and History Colorado based on its compliance with federal and state historic preservation standards. CLG standing requires Fort Collins to maintain a Landmark Preservation Commission composed of members of which a minimum of 40% meet federal standards for professional experience from preservation-related disciplines, including, but not limited to, historic architecture, architectural history, archaeology, and urban planning. For more information, see Article III, Division 19 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:00 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php.  CALL TO ORDER  ROLL CALL  AGENDA REVIEW o Staff Review of Agenda o Consent Agenda Review This Review provides an opportunity for the Commission and citizens to pull items from the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Commission-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered before Discussion Items. Citizen-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered after Discussion Items.  STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA  CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 21, 2021. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the April 21, 2021 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Commission to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Agenda will be considered separately 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 Packet Pg. 2 Page 3  CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW UP This is an opportunity for Commission members to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.  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 Landmark 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. 140 N MCKINLEY AVE – FINAL DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to provide a final design review of a proposed rear addition to the City Landmark at 140 N. McKinley Avenue, the Robert and Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage. The owner is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness for their final designs. APPLICANT: Casey (Keith) Churchill (Property Owner) 4. 528 WEST MOUNTAIN - LANDMARK STATUS HEARING 1 DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council on Landmark designation of the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property at 528 W. Mountain Avenue. The nomination is not supported by the owners, Jason and Misha Green. APPLICANT: Mark Greenwald, Resident; Gina Janett, Resident; Robin Stitzel, Resident; William Whitley, Resident  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 Packet Pg. 3 1 Gretchen Schiager From:meg dunn <barefootmeg@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, September 1, 2020 4:54 PM To:Karen McWilliams; Gretchen Schiager Subject:[EXTERNAL] Extending our virtual meeting period Hi Karen, Given our ongoing COVID‐19 “Safer at Home” recommendation from the State, I think it would be prudent for us to continue to hold meetings virtually for the foreseeable future. Why don’t we set June 2021 as a cut off point to revisit this, with the option to revisit the issue sooner if somehow a vaccine is found and quickly disseminated early next year, and the Safer at Home recommendation is lifted. I know that P&Z is holding a mixed meeting soon, so I think we should be open to that should the need arise. So, to summarize: Let’s plan to continue our virtual LPC meetings until June 2021 with the understanding that, should the need arise, we would be willing to consider an alternative option on a one‐off basis. Given that the members of the LPC seem to feel that our virtual meetings have been going well, I don’t foresee this happening. But I would like to be flexible should an applicant or appellant feel the need for an in‐person setting. Thanks! ‐ Meg Packet Pg. 4 Date:Roll CallMike BelloWalter DunnKurt KnierimEizabeth MichellKevin MurrayAnne NelsenJim RoseVacant SeatMeg DunnVotex xxxxx x7 presentConsent Agenda: 1) MINUTES OF APRIL 21, 2021Mike BelloVacant SeatKurt KnierimKevin MurrayWalter DunnAnne NelsenJim RoseEizabeth MichellMeg DunnYes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes7-03) 140 N MCKINLEY AVE - FINAL DESIGN REVIEW - APPROVALVacant SeatKurt KnierimKevin MurrayWalter DunnAnne NelsenJim RoseEizabeth MichellMike BelloMeg DunnYes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes7-04) 528 W MOUNTAIN AVE - LANDMARK STATUS HEARING 1 - ELIGIBLEKurt KnierimKevin MurrayWalter DunnAnne NelsenJim RoseEizabeth MichellMike BelloVacant SeatMeg DunnYes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes7-0Roll Call & Voting RecordLandmark Preservation Commission5/19/2021 LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION THIS IS A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD Please contact Aubrie Brennan at 970-416-4390 or abrennan@fcgov.com if you inadvertently end up with it. Thank you! Visitor Log [This meeting was conducted remotely. The Secretary filled out the visitor log.] DATE: 5/19/21 Name Mailing Address Email and/or Phone Reason for Attendance Casey Churchill Applicant, Item 3, 140 N. McKinley Jordan Obermann Builder, Item 4, 528 W. Mountain Ave Ron Sladek Congratulating Karen McWilliams Gina Jannett Congratulating Karen McWilliams and Public Comment on Item 4, 528 W. Mountain Ave Mark Greenwald Mark_greenwald@me.com Applicant, 528 W. Mountain Ave William Whitley William.whitley@gmail.com Applicant, 528 W. Mountain Ave Kim Medina kimbakermedina@gmail.com Public Comment, 528 W. Mountain Ave Chet Wisner Public Comment, 528 W. Mountain Ave Landmark Preservation Commission Hearing Date: 5-20-21 Document Log (Any written comments or documents received since the agenda packet was published.) CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Draft Minutes for the LPC April 21, 2021 Hearing • Draft Minutes (Updated 5/13/2021) 2. Staff Design Review Decisions Report • None DISCUSSION AGENDA: 3. 140 N McKinley • Staff Report (Updated 5/10/21) • Staff Presentation (Updated 5/10/21 and 5/18/21) • Supplemental Information from Applicant (Added 5/10/21) 4. 528 W. Mountain • Citizen emails/letters: o Carole Hassan (Added 5/14/21) o Jim Wurz (Added 5/18/21) o Michelle Haefele (Added 5/18/21) o Dian Sparling (Sent to LPC in advance of hearing and added 5/20/21) o Kimberly Medina (Sent to LPC in advance of hearing and added 5/20/21) • Staff Report (Updated 5/10/21) • Staff Presentation (Updated 5/10/21 and 5/18/21) • Attachment 3, Resolution for Approval (Added 5/10/21) • Attachment 4, Resolution for Denial (Added 5/10/21) • Attachment 8, Hygiene Report from Owners (Added 5/18/21) • Attachment 9, Seller’s Disclosure from Owners (Added 5/18/21) EXHIBITS RECEIVED DURING HEARING: Item # Exhibit # Description: 4 A Applicant Presentation Agenda Item 1 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY May 19, 2021 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Aubrielle Brennan, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 21, 2021 REGULAR MEETING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the April 21, 2021 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. LPC April 21, 2021 Minutes – DRAFT Packet Pg. 5 DRAFTLandmark Preservation Commission Page 1 April 21, 2021 Meg Dunn, Chair This meeting was conducted Kurt Knierim, Vice Chair remotely via Zoom Michael Bello Walter Dunn Elizabeth Michell Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Jim Rose Vacant Seat Regular Meeting April 21, 2021 Minutes CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Mike Bello, Meg Dunn, Walter Dunn, Kurt Knierim, Elizabeth Michell, Kevin Murray, Anne Nelsen, Jim Rose ABSENT: STAFF: Karen McWilliams, Maren Bzdek, Jim Bertolini, Brad Yatabe, Aubrie Brennan, Gretchen Schiager 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 Mr. Bertolini reviewed the Agenda, noting Item 2, 528 W. Mountain Ave, would be moved from the Consent Agenda to Discussion Agenda after the last listed item, Item 6, 336 E Magnolia St. CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW No items were pulled from consent by the Commission. Mr. Murray requested Mr. Bertolini explain the Commission’s role regarding 501 Edwards St in the Consent Agenda. Mr. Bertolini explained the Landmark Preservation Commission ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 6 DRAFTLandmark Preservation Commission Page 2 April 21, 2021 Commission did not need to take action, but could elect to do so, that Single Family Demolition properties were on the Consent Agenda as notification to the public and the Commission.  STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None.  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None.  CONSENT AGENDA [Timestamp: 5:39 p.m.] 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 17, 2021 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the March 17, 2021 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. 2. SINGLE FAMILY DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 528 W. MOUNTAIN AVE 3. SINGLE FAMILY DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 501 EDWARDS ST Mr. Bello moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda of the April 21, 2021 regular meeting as presented. Ms. Nelsen seconded. The motion passed 8-0. [Timestamp: 5:41 p.m.]  DISCUSSION AGENDA 4. 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 Landmark 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. Commission Questions None. 5. 1306 W MOUNTAIN AVE, CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, REHABILITATION, ADDITION, AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES This item was not discussed, because it was continued to May 19, 2021 at the owner’s request in advance of the April 21, 2021 Regular Hearing. 6. 336 E. MAGNOLIA ST, NATIONAL REGISTER DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to complete a National Register Design Review of the applicant’s project, identify key conflicts with the Secretary of Interior’s Design Standards for Rehabilitation, and make recommendations as to whether the property would remain historic at the conclusion of the project. The applicant is proposing an addition onto the building’s North/rear elevation, including necessary demolition, as well as a full-width, partially covered replacement porch, including necessary demolition. APPLICANT: Ian Danielson ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 7 DRAFTLandmark Preservation Commission Page 3 April 21, 2021 Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the Staff Report. He discussed the role of the Commission on a National Register Review is to review proposed alterations and issue a report to the owner for properties designated as national, not local, landmarks. The report deals with whether the proposed changes meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Design Standards for Historical Preservation. Mr. Bertolini discussed the location of the property and the significance of its build date for the Laurel School Historic District, listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Proposed alterations included a two-story addition onto the rear of the home, including a deck and spiral staircase, a new front porch, expansion of the patio deck, and modification of the gable on the front of the residence. The Standards relevant to this project were Standard Two – Preservation of Overall Historic Character, Standard Three – Avoids a False Sense of History, Standard Five – Preserving Historic Features and Materials, and Standards Nine and Ten which deal with design, construction, and location of any additions, requiring them to be compatible, distinguishable, subordinate, and reversible. He clarified for the Chair the pictures of each elevation in the presentation were not to scale. Staff found the property was contributing to the Laurel School Historic District, and the proposed rehabilitation did not meet the Standards, rendering the property non-contributing due to the loss of historic integrity. Applicant Presentation Mr. Ian Danielson, homeowner, and Mr. Bud Danielson, project lead, gave the Applicant presentation. Mr. Ian Danielson read a letter written by project architect Mr. Stewart King. Mr. King stated he took the age of the house into account when designing the alterations, matching many design elements of the original home as closely as possible and matching original houses in the neighborhood. A second story working toward the front of the house was the only solution for an addition due to the 50% footprint rule. All elements were chosen to protect the original feel of the house and match the age of the house, making the addition indistinguishable from the original house. Mr. Bud Danielson thanked the Commission for their work and stated the alterations were to make Mr. Ian Danielson’s home livable. He offered to answer questions and looked forward to the Commission’s comments. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Mr. Bello asked to clarify the roles of the Danielsons in relation to the project. Mr. Bud Danielson stated Mr. Ian Danielson was the property owner, and Mr. Bud Danielson was supporting him as his father. The Chair suggested the Commission focus on the Draft report. Mr. Bud Danielson asked the purpose of the draft report. The Chair explained the report’s purpose is to comment on the alterations so the State can later decide if the property is still contributing to the National Register Landmark District for tax incentive purposes. The Commission’s role is to lend their thoughts on the alterations to the property owner, not approve or deny them. Mr. Murray commented he appreciated the architect’s desire to match the existing home, but size and volume of the alterations do not lend themselves to fitting the Standards. He understood the applicant’s need for more space, and the architect did a good job, but the Staff Report looks good. The Chair agreed the Staff Report is accurate, as to the alterations not meeting the Secretary of the Interior Standards and noted the report called out the faux sense of history on the alterations. The alterations change a minimal traditional home to a Victorian style home, which is important to note as a significant change to the structure because it changes the history and the time period of the home. She suggested adding language to the report that property owner was knowingly choosing to significantly alter the home, understanding he was removing himself from consideration for tax benefits and zero interest loans. The Chair did not see how the State could find property contributing to the historic district after the proposed alterations. It would be useful to explain to property owners in the future why they did not have access to financial assets that others within the district could access. Mr. Murray was concerned about singling out this one property for special language and suggested adding a standard paragraph to reports in similar situations. Mr. Rose agreed standard language should be added to all reports in this situation because the Commission has a responsibility to inform owners of the potential consequences of alterations. He asked if the Chair if he should make a motion to amend the Staff Report. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 8 DRAFTLandmark Preservation Commission Page 4 April 21, 2021 Mr. Yatabe said the Commission can adopt the report with explicit language or pass the report now, but request Staff draft general language and bring it to the Commission for approval. Mr. Murray did not want to delay the owners waiting on Commission approval of Staff’s new language to move forward with their project. The Chair wrote and read proposed language she had drafted, “The loss of contributing status will directly result in the loss of state and national tax credits, as well as interest free loans from the City of Fort Collins.” Mr. Bertolini made the correction owners would not be losing financial benefits from the City because the property is not a City landmark, benefits would only be lost in the form of national and state tax credits. The Chair read the corrected language, “The loss of contributing status will directly result in the loss of state and national tax credits.” Commission Deliberation Mr. Knierim moved the Commission approve the report as drafted by Staff, with the following modification: that there be a sentence added to the report that says, “The loss of contributing status will directly result in the loss of state and national tax credits,” with the finding that the proposed plans and specifications for the rehabilitation of the Christ Horst Property at 336 E Magnolia Ave as presented do not meet the Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the findings shall be conveyed to the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer to update the documentation on this property at an appropriate time. Mr. Rose seconded. The motion passed 8-0. Mr. Murray asked if the Commission needed to list the Standards not met. The Chair stated the Commission was adopting the draft Staff Report which addressed the Standards, and Mr. Yatabe clarified this was the case. Mr. Bud Danielson requested the report not be delayed based on additional language. Mr. Bertolini clarified the report will be issued as soon as modifications are made and it is signed by the Chair, which will release the City’s hold on permits for the property. Mr. Murray requested applicants review the report with their architect to consider making changes to the proposed alterations in order to retain tax credits. The Chair suggested the Commission could provide a letter in favor of a footprint variance to the 50 percent rule so the property could retain its historic character. Mr. Bud Danielson thanked the Chair and stated he and the property owner had already talked through the loss of incentives with their architect and could not afford a second cycle with the architect. The Danielsons had pursued a different variance and it was a lengthy process, and they could not afford another long delay. He appreciates Mr. Bertolini explaining the report to them and walking them through the process. [Timestamp: 6:18 p.m.]  CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW 2. CITY LANDMARK NOMINATION PROCESS – 528 W. MOUNTAIN AVE Mr. Bertolini presented staff report outlining the City of Fort Collins Single Family Demolition and Landmark Nomination process. The City had received a Landmark Nomination from three residents but the owner had not consented. There would be no discussion at the hearing and the nomination process would begin. There was no action for the Commission at present, Staff was merely providing an informational presentation about the process for next month’s hearing and the future. The main intent for the Single Family Demolition Process is to provide public notice to the neighborhood about the demolition of houses over 50 years old to be replaced by another single family home. If the property proposed for demolition is significant, the individuals outlined in the Code may nominate it for City landmark status. In this case, three citizens nominated the property and the owner did not consent to the designation, which means the designation will be considered at two LPC hearings tentatively scheduled for May and June. Mr. Yatabe stated because the Commission was taking no action at the current hearing and because landmark nomination was a quasi-judicial item, his recommendation was public comment would not be appropriate. The first step is for Staff to determine if the property meets landmark status. The public should not comment on the merits of landmark status until after Staff makes a recommendation at a hearing held to evaluate the merits of landmark status. Mr. Bertolini clarified the nomination would be considered at two regularly scheduled meetings, tentatively the May and June regular hearings. The ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 9 DRAFTLandmark Preservation Commission Page 5 April 21, 2021 Chair stated members of the public may comment at the May meeting. Mr. Yatabe noted permits for alterations to the property or demolition will be stayed until a determination on landmark status is made. The Chair asked if repairs to maintain the integrity of the house are excepted to the stay, and Mr. Yatabe stated exceptions are for health, welfare, and safety and should be run by Staff prior to any action. Mr. Murray noted members of the public that did not get to speak at the current hearing may submit written comments to Staff in advance of the hearing, and the Chair noted they could also wait for the posted packet on the Friday before the hearing in order to have more information. Ms. Nelsen found Mr. Bertolini’s presentation useful, but requested more guidance on the process in the future.  OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Murray requested emails in the packet be rearranged so replies can come after original emails. Mr. Bertolini agreed to rearrange. The Chair had an informational update Timberlane Farm in Loveland. The applicants requested the Loveland Historic Preservation Commission overturn the landmark designation on April 19. This is an issue the Commission should be watching regionally. The Loveland Commission continued the item to next month, because the applicants did not bring the Code-required data on why the property is no longer eligible. The Chair discussed an article she had written regarding a former resident of a home the Commission had looked at recently regarding a change to a rear garage, possibly 714 W Mountain. The article is in The Senior Voice and will be coming out in May. It is about the first female pilot in Fort Collins. In the early 1930s, Mary Ault, granddaughter of the man after which the town of Ault is named, lived in house and she was the first female pilot in Fort Collins The 1930s were around the time the City got a runway. She joined with a female pilot from Greeley and a female pilot from Denver to join the Betsy Ross flying Corps. The women had grown up during World War I and their goal was to deliver medical supplies during the next war. Unfortunately, the military did not officially recognize the organization and it ended in 1932, before World War II. Mary Ault later moved to Denver and sold aviation equipment.  ADJOURNMENT Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Minutes prepared and respectfully submitted by Aubrie Brennan. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on __________________. _____________________________________ Meg Dunn, Chair ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 2 Item 4, Page 1 STAFF REPORT May 19, 2021 Landmark Preservation Commission ITEM NAME STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES AND OTHER STAFF-ISSUED DECISIONS AND LETTERS, APRIL 8, 2021 TO MAY 5, 2021 STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner INFORMATION Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Landmark Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. Staff decisions are provided in this report and posted on the HPS’s “Design Review Notification” page. Notice of staff decisions are provided to the public and LPC for their information, but are not subject to appeal under Chapter 14, Article IV, except in cases where an applicant has requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a project and that request has been denied. In that event, the applicant may appeal staff’s decision to the LPC pursuant to 14-55 of the Municipal Code, within two weeks of staff denial. Beginning in May 2021, to increase transparency regarding staff decisions and letters issued on historic preservation activities, this report will include tables for 5G wireless facility responses for local permit approval, and comments issued for federal undertakings under the National Historic Preservation Act (also called “Section 106”). The report below covers the period between March 4, 2021 to April 7, 2021. There is no staff presentation this month. Staff Design Review Decisions & Reports – Municipal Code Chapter 14 Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision 712 Dartmouth Tr. Repaint wood trim, replace portion of backyard fence. City Landmark. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved April 13, 2021 144 N. College Ave Modification to window sign. Contributing property to Old Town Landmark District. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved April 19, 2021 206 E. Elizabeth St. New accessory dwelling unit at NW corner of lot (location of former garage). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 20, 2021 Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 2 Item 4, Page 2 519 Peterson St. Façade modifications including new entry and replacement of porch. Non-contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 20, 2021 824 Mathews St. Basement egress window installation. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 26, 2021 325 Garfield St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 26, 2021 314 Edwards St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 26, 2021 214 E. Mountain Ave. / 3 Old Town Sq. Tenant finish to include minor repair and repaint of storefront; Contributing property to Old Town Landmark District. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved April 27, 2021 226 Peterson St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved (report issued) April 28, 2021 201 Linden St. (Linden Hotel) Minor repair to southwest corner stone at base damaged during Linden Street project site work. Contributing property to Old Town Landmark District. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 3, 2021 Staff 5G Wireless Facility Comments 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) Proposed Facility Location Co-location w/ Existing Facility? Staff Comment Date Comment Issued 401 Linden St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 9, 2021 NW Corner of Mulberry St. & S. Grant Ave Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 16, 2021 206 N. Howes St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 16, 2021 NE Corner of Whedbee & Edwards St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 16, 2021 W. Lake St & Whitcomb St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 16, 2021 1600 Foxbrook Lane Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 16, 2021 500 Mathews St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 601 Stover St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 Packet Pg. 12 Agenda Item 2 Item 4, Page 3 SE corner of E. Prospect & Whedbee St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 S. Shields St. & Westward Dr. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 1116 Beech St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 2722 S. College Ave. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 23, 2021 Lakeridge & Constitution Ave. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 30, 2021 609 W. Prospect Rd. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 30, 2021 330 Park St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 30, 2021 702 Cherry St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 30, 2021 935 Peterson St. Yes Co-location – no outstanding concerns. April 30, 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. Lead Agency & Property Location Description of Project Staff Comment Date Comment Issued CDOT - Intersection of Trilby Rd. & College Avenue Road and intersection widening. Project includes right-of-way acquisition and demolition of properties in the project area, including the former Trilby School and Teacherage. Concurred that no affected properties were eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Requested reconsideration of demolition for Trilby School and Teacherage April 20, 2021 FCC – NW corner of N. Shields St. & Beech St. 5G Wireless Installation – replacement of street late Concurred – No Historic Properties Affected May 5, 2021 Packet Pg. 13 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 STAFF REPORT May 19, 2021 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 140 N MCKINLEY AVENUE (ROBERT AND ORPHA BUXTON HOUSE AND ATTACHED GARAGE) – REAR ADDITION – FINAL LANDMARK DESIGN REVIEW STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to provide a final design review of a proposed rear addition to the City Landmark at 140 N. McKinley Avenue, the Robert and Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage. The owner is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness for their final designs. APPLICANT/OWNER: Casey (Keith) Churchill (Property Owner) RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed plans meet the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness. COMMISSION’S ROLE: Design review is governed by Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV, and is the process by which the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) reviews proposed exterior alterations to a designated historic property for consistency with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (the Standards). In this hearing, the Commission shall conduct a final review of proposed plans and based on the provided information from the 1998 Landmark nomination, the applicant’s design review application, and any new evidence presented at the hearing. The Commission must use the Municipal Code 14, Article IV and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (the Standards) for its final review. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The property at 140 N. McKinley Avenue, the Robert and Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage, was designated as a City Landmark in 1998. It was built in 1945 as part of the 1910 Swetts Addition, one of several smaller neighborhoods platted along Mountain Avenue over the early- and mid-1900s. The owner is proposing a rear addition onto the building’s east elevation that would include two new bedrooms, a bathroom, utility room, and hall access between the historic house and the addition on the first floor, and a finished basement with a family room and storage. The property was Landmarked in 1998 for both its architectural importance (Standard 3) as an example of the Minimal Traditional house type common in the 1940s as a cheap option for young families buying new homes after the Second World War, and for its historical importance (Standard 1) as a “representative example of two significant American social trends, the first the development of affordable home ownership on a large scale, and the other the elevation of the status of the automobile as reflected in residential architecture.” The property’s character-defining features include its low-slung hipped roof, modest detailing limited to a boxed eave with a beaded cornice, simple lapboard siding, wood one-over-one sash windows or picture windows with three-light casement sidelights, enclosed hipped-roof entry and concrete stoop, and the attached side-gabled Packet Pg. 14 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 2 garage extension to the south. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Staff note: The original text has been modified to properly classify the building as the Minimal Traditional type, a common, simplified form used in the 1930s into the early 1950s to provide low-cost, quickly-built housing for working class families, and to respond to the housing shortage after the Second World War. Due to the comparatively early timing for nominating this post-war residence, classifications for this era of architectural history had not been well-defined. The 1998 nomination provides the following description: The Buxton Property’s architectural style can be characterized as a [Minimal Traditional-type cottage]. Overall, the interior and exterior of the house are in good condition. The home was constructed with an attached garage set back from the front of the house in the traditional style of homes built in [Old Town}. There is a gable over the garage. Original horizontal clapboard siding covers all sides of the house. Two 3' 5" x 4' windows adorn the front of the house. Each window is flanked by three 1' x 1'4" fixed pane windows. A mudroom is located at both the front and rear of the house. When doors were still mounted on the inner threshold of these rooms, they would have prevented heat loss when persons were entering or exiting the home. The home has two bedrooms, a kitchen, a living, dining, and laundry room, two mudrooms, a bathroom, and an attached garage. The total interior square footage (including garage) is 1,258 ft2. The interior of the house features recently refinished hardwood floors and original clear pine base trim for windows, doors and baseboards. The walls are untextured plaster. The house is currently heated with a gas-forced air system. Two 2' 6" x 2' original metal grates are inset in the floor in the space between the dining and living room, and the hallway joining the two bedrooms. These grates cover access holes to the crawl space beneath the house. They were once used as part of the original heating system. A Tudor style arch divides the living and dining room. Although the kitchen has been fully remodeled, it maintains the classic style of the rest of the house. ALTERATION HISTORY: The Fort Collins Museum of Discovery has two images from the Larimer County Assessor from their 1948 and 1968 city-wide assessments available and have been included here for reference: Left: 1948 image, 140McK48, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/7440; Right: 1968 image, 140McK68, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/7441 The property has been modified slightly since that time, including an undated addition and removal of an awning over the front (west) door and the undated addition of an awning over the rear (east) entry. Other documented Packet Pg. 15 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 3 exterior modifications are as follows: • 1948 – Insulation added • 1949 – Fence added to property • 1997 – Roof replacement (asphalt shingle) • 2012 – Roof replacement (asphalt shingle) • 2020 – Repainted HISTORY OF DESIGN REVIEW: This property has undergone Design Review on several past occasions. The two primary alterations were both staff-level reviews, approving the 2012 roof and the 2020 repaint. The current project received conceptual review at the Commission’s December regular meeting. HISTORY OF FUNDED WORK/USE OF INCENTIVES: The current owner began the development of the addition project in 2015, assisted with a $2,000 award from the City’s Design Assistance Program for historic properties in the Old Town area. Initial plans developed by Ms. Heidi Schuff were mostly in conformance with the Standards, but lacked a few key details, including no inset between the addition and the historic home, and little differentiation between the addition and the historic home. Those initial concepts were modified for conceptual review over 2020, and are now presented for final approval. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking a final review and approval for a proposed two-bedroom addition onto the rear of the property, to include a finished basement. The project plans are substantively the same as reviewed in December with the modification that the addition’s lapboard siding is specified as engineered wood siding 2” wider than the historic, the doors on the addition have been specified as wood, and windows for the addition have been specified as wood, one-over-one sash units. REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: • May 4, 2021 – staff requested details on material choice (product specification sheets) for windows and siding. That was received on Thursday, May 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY No formal public comment about this project has been received at this time. - On May 5, staff received one phone call from a neighbor in response to the yard sign. No specific concerns about plans were raised but wanted to make sure height and size of any proposed addition was not more imposing than the existing building. Staff directed them to the LPC website if they’d like to review plans, once posted and/or attend the meeting and make comments. STAFF EVALUATION OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: In general, staff found that most of the project elements for the proposed addition are consistent with the Standards for Rehabilitation. Of primary concern for additions and exterior alterations on historic properties are Standard 3 regarding distinguishability, and Standards 9 and 10 regarding compatibility, reversibility, and subordination. Staff analysis has focused there. Applicable Code Standard Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Standard Met (Y/N) SOI #1 A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships; The property is retaining its historic use. Y Packet Pg. 16 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 4 SOI #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. Elements of the property that will be altered, obscured, or removed by the addition are on the rear of the property and are not considered character- defining to the property’s architectural and historical importance. Y SOI #3 Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. The addition will have sufficient differentiated materials and window patterning to make it distinguishable from the historic building via simplified window configurations and an altered width to the lapboard siding on the addition, specifically being wood lapboard that is 2” wider than the historic (approximately 6” per lap). Y SOI #4 Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. There do not appear to be any character-defining features on the rear of the property, nor any later alterations that are historic in their own right. N/A SOI #5 Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. As noted above, the character-defining features of this property are predominantly clustered on the front and sides of the building. While historic materials will be removed as part of this project, including siding, three windows, a door, and a stoop, these rear-facing elements do not appear to be particularly character-defining in relation to the architectural and historical importance of the property. Y SOI #6 Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. N/A SOI #7 Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. N/A SOI #8 Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. While significant excavation is proposed to allow for a finished basement under the addition, based on the location of the site away from historical waterways, and based on the era in which the site was developed (after the use of outdoor privies was abandoned), the discovery of any significant archaeological materials is not expected. Y Packet Pg. 17 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 5 SOI #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. As noted above, while historic materials will be removed to allow for the proposed addition, these materials and features are located on the rear and are not apparently character-defining in relation to the significance of the property. Rear wall framing will remain generally intact allowing for reconstruction in the future if needed. The new addition is expected to be differentiated via simplified window patterns, an inset on the north elevation, and a different lapboard dimension (6-inch instead of the historic 4-inch). New windows and doors will be wood units, windows being a one- over-one sash configuration. In general, it appears compatible with the architectural features, scale, and massing of the property and its environment, being largely screened from view from McKinley Avenue by the historic portion of the house, the historic attached garage, and the historic-age property to the north. The project could improve its compatibility of size with reductions to the footprint. Y SOI #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The addition will be located on the rear of the property and does not appear to be removing any character-defining features that would be difficult to reconstruct if the addition were reversed in the future. Those include four one-over-one wood sash windows of varying sizes, a door and portico cover, and the lapboard siding. Aside from reconfiguration of the current laundry room, the east wall is remaining generally intact in the proposed new floorplan. Y INDEPENDENT EVALUATION SUMMARY N/A FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the proposed rehabilitation of 140 N. McKinley Avenue under Chapter 14, Article IV of Municipal Code, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The Robert and Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage is a City Landmark, designated by City Council on December 15, 1998. • The proposed rehabilitation of 140 N. McKinley Avenue, overall, meets the Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for this project. SAMPLE MOTIONS SAMPLE MOTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE AND APPROVE PROJECT: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work at the Robert & Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage at 140 North McKinley Avenue, because the work complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Chapter 14, Article IV of Municipal Code. Packet Pg. 18 Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 6 SAMPLE MOTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE AND APPROVE PROJECT WITH CONDITIONS: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work at the Robert & Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage at 140 North McKinley Avenue, because the work complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Chapter 14, Article IV of Municipal Code, subject to the following conditions: • [list conditions] SAMPLE MOTION TO DENY CERTIFICATE AND DENY PROJECT: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission deny the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work at the Robert & Orpha Buxton House & Attached Garage at 140 North McKinley Avenue, because the work does not comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Chapter 14, Article IV of Municipal Code. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Design Review application, revised 2021 project drawings and photographs 2. City images of property (2019) 3. 1998 Landmark Nomination form 4. Supplemental Materials from Applicant 5. Staff Presentation 6. Applicant Approval for Virtual Hearing Packet Pg. 19 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 1 Design Review Application Historic Preservation Division Fill this form out for all applications regarding designated historic buildings within the city limits of the City of Fort Collins. Review is required for these properties under Chapter 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. Applicant Information Applicant’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence)State Zip Code Email Property Information (put N/A if owner is applicant) Owner’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence)State Zip Code Email Project Description Provide an overview of your project. Summarize work elements, schedule of completion, and other information as necessary to explain your project. Reminders: Complete application would need all of checklist items as well as both pages of this document. Detailed scope of work should include measurements of existing and proposed. The following attachments are REQUIRED: ƑComplete Application for Design Review ƑDetailed Scope of Work (and project plans, if available) ƑColor photos of existing conditions Please note: if the proposal includes partial or full demolition of an existing building or structure, a separate demolition application will need to be approved. Additional documentation may be required to adequately depict the project, such as plans, elevations, window study, or mortar analysis. If there is insufficient documentation on the property, the applicant may be required to submit an intensive-level survey form (at the applicant’s expense). Keith Churchill 970-988-4758 970-988-4758 140 North McKinley Ave Fort Collins CO 80521 kchurchilljr@msn.com N/A We would like to add on to the back of our house. Part of this expansion is basement and part will be above ground. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 20 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 2 Detail of Proposed Rehabilitation Work (*Required) If your project includes multiple features (e.g. roof repair and foundation repair), you must describe each feature separately and provide photographs and other information on each feature. Feature A Name: Describe property feature and its condition: Describe proposed work on feature: Feature B Name: Describe property feature and its condition: Describe proposed work on feature: Use Additional Worksheets as needed. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 21 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 22 Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:04 AMA1.0COVER SHEETProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorCheckerGENERAL NOTES1. BY EXECUTING THE CONTRACT, THE CONTRACTOR REPRESENTS THAT THEY VISITED THE SITE, FAMILIARIZED THEMSELVES WITH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS, CODES, AND OWNER REQUIREMENTS UNDER WHICH THE WORK IS TO BE PERFORMED, AND CORRELATED THEIR OBSERVASTIONS WITH THE REQUIREMENS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THIS SHALL BE DONE PRIOR TO SIGNING THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION.2. PROSPECTIVE SUB-CONTRACTORS SHALL SECURE ALL DATA AT THE SITE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SUCH AS CONVENIENCE OF RECEIVING AND SORTING MATERIALS, STAGING AREAS, LOCATION OF PUBLIC SERVICES, AND OTHER INFORMATION WHICH WILL HAVE INFLUENCE ON MAKING THEIR PROPOSALS OR ON THE EXECUTION OF THE WORK. NO ALLOWANCES WILL BE MADE FOR FAILURE OF THE SUB-CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN SUCH ON-SITE INFORMATION PRIOR TO SIGNING THE CONTRACT.3. SHOULD EITHER THE DRAWINGS AND THE SPECIFICATIONS, OR ANY PARTICULAR SPECIFICATION, AND THE GENERAL CONDITIONS CONTRADICT EACH OTHER IN ANY POINT, OR REQUIRE CLARIFICATION, THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE SAME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT, AND A DECISION SHALL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO SIGNING THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION.4. THE CONTRACTOR AND EACH SUB-CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATION OF ALL MEASUREMENTS AT AND IN THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION BUILDING OR SITE OR SURROUNDINGS. NO CHARGE OR COMPENSATION SHALL BE ALLOWED DUE TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ACTUAL DIMENSIONS AND DIMENSIONS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. ANY SUCH DISCREPANCY IN DIMENSIONS WHICH MAY BE FOUND SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR PROCEEDS WITH WORK IN THE AFFECTED AREA.5. EACH CONTRACTOR SHALL CAREFULLY STUDY AND COMPARE THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT AND SHALL REPORT TO THE ARCHITECT ANY ERROR, INCONSISTENCIES OR OMISSIONS THAT MAY BE DISCOVERED, FURTHER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT PROCEED WITH ANY WORK WHICH THEY BELIEVE TO BE CONTRARY TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND PRACTICES AND SHALL NOT USE ANY SUBSTANDARD MATERIAL.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL FOLLOW SIZES IN SPECIFICATIONS OR DIMENSIONED FIGURES ON DRAWINGS IN PREFERENCE TO SCALE MEASUREMENTS AND FOLLOW DETAIL DRAIWNGS IN PREFERENCE TO GENERAL DRAWINGS.7. WHERE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT A DRAWING ILLUSTRATES ONLY A PART OF A GIVEN WORK, OR OF A NUMBER OF ITEMS, THE REMAINDER SHALL BE DEEMED REPETITIOUS AND SO CONSTRUCTED.8. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY THAT ALL EQUIPMENT AND FIXTURES ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO REPORT IMMEDIATELY TO THE ARCHITECT ANY EQUIPENT NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANAND SPECIFICATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO ASSURE THAT THE PLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT IS POSSIBLE BEFORE CONSTRUCITON OF ALL INTERIOR PARTITIONS ARE COMPLETED.9. THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INTENDED TO BE FULLY EXPLANATORY AND SUPPLEMENTARY. SHOULD ANYTHING BE SHOWN, INDICATED, OR SPECIFIED ON OENA DNNOT THE OTHER, IT SHALL BE DONE.10. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE NO CHANGES IN THE WORK WITHOUT A CHANGE ORDER SIGNED BY THE OWNER, OR A CONSTRUCTION CHANGE DIRECTIVE ISSUED BY THE ARCHITECT.11. IT WILL BE ASSUMED THAT EACH TRADE HAS ACCEPTED THE QUALITY OF THE WORK OF OTHERS UPON WHICH THEIR WORK MUST BE APPLIED, UNLESS THE ARCHITECT AND OWNER ARE INFORMED TO THE CONTRARY AT LEAST 24 HOURS BEFORE COMMENCING WORK.12. MINOR DETAILS NOT USUALLY SHOWN OR SPECIFIED BY NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER INSTALLATION OR CONFORMANCE WITH CODES OR STANDARDS LISTED OR DEPICTED HEREIN SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE WORK.13. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS ARE 2X6, INTERIOR WALLS ARE 2X4, UNO.14. VERIFY ALL TUB AND SHOWER SIZES BEFORE FRAMING WALLS.15. PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING PER CODES AND ALL STAIRS AND WALLS OVER 10' HIGH.16. WINDOW AND DOOR CALLOUTS ARE NOMINAL. VERIFY WITH MANUFACTURER FOR ROUGH OPENING AND EGRESS REQUIREMENTS. WINDOW CALLOUTS ARE IN FEET AND INCHES.17. EGRESS WINDOW -AT LEAST ONE WINDOW IN ALL BEDROOMS TO HAVE A CLEAR EGRESS OPENING OF 5.7 SQUARE FEET WITH MINIMUM DIMENSION OF 24" IN HEIGHT AND 20" IN WIDTH. SILL HEIGHT NOT GREATER WTHAN 44" ABOVE FLOOR.18. PROVIDE SOLID BLOCKING BEHIND ALL TOWEL BARS, VERIFY LOCATIONS WITH OWNER.19. ALL KNEE WALLS TO BE SECURED THROUGH FLOORS AT THEIR ENDS.20. THERE ARE MULTIPLE INSTALLATION POSSIBILITIES FOR THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM AND ITS COMPOENENTS. A LICENSED ELECTRICIAN SHALL ADAPT THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM TO THIS PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL CODE. 21. ALL CABINET LAYOUTS IN BATHROOMS AND LAUNDRY ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. OWNER TO ARRANGE FINAL LAYOUT WITH CABINET MANUFACTURER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.ABBREVIATIONSABANCHOR BOLTADJADJUSTABLEBOFBOTTOM OF FOOTINGBLDGBUILDINGBLKBLOCKBMBEAMBSBOTTOM OF STEELCABCABINETCIPCAST-IN-PLACECLGCEILINGCLRCLEARCMUCONCRETE MASONRY UNITCONCCONCRETECONT CONTINUOUSCONNCONNECTIONCSKSOUNTERSHINKDBLDOUBLEDFDOULAS-FIRDIADIAMETERDNDOWNDWGDRAWINGEAEACHEFEACH FACEEQEQUALESEACH SIDEEWEACH WAYFDFLOOR DRAINFDNFOUNDATIONFFFINISHED FLOORFLRFLOORFNFIELD NAILFTFEETGAGAUGEGLGLASSHHORIZONTALLGLONGLTLIGHTMBMACHINE BOLTMLMICRO-LAMMTLMETALNCNOT IN CONTRACTOCON CENTEROHCOVERHEAD CABINETPLTOP PLATE OR PROPERTY LINEPLFPER LINEAR FOOTPTPRESSURE TREATEDRADRADIUSR&SROD AND SHELFS&PSHELF AND POLESHSHELFSIMSIMILARSQSQUARESTLSTEELTOFTOP OF FOUNDATIONTOSTOP OF SLABTOW TOP OF WALLTSTUBE STEELTYP TYPICALUNOUNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEVVERTICALWDWOODWWFWELDED WIRE FABRICNOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATIONRELEASE OF THESE PLANS CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION AMONG THE OWNER, THEIR CONTRACTOR, AND THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND THEIR CONSULTATNS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION. COMMUNIATION IS IMPERFECT, AND EVERY CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY AMBIGUITY OR DISCREPANCY DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE PLANS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING AND INCREASES CONTRACTION COSTS. A FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY A SIMPLE NOTEICE TO THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT FROM REPSONBIILIEY FOR ALL CONSIEQUENCES. CHANGES MADE FORM TEH PLANS IWHT OUTH THE OCNSENT OF HTE ARCHITECT ARE UNAUTHORUSZED, AND SHALL RELIEVE THE ARTHICTE OF RESPONILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES ARISING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.PROJECT TEAMOWNER:CASEY CHURCHILL AND SHANNON ALTENHOFEN140 NORTH MCKINLEY AVENUEFORT COLLINS, CO 80524ARCHITECT:WHITNEY CHURCHILL, AIA2512 SHAVANO COURTFORT COLLINS, CO 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.comSHEET INDEXARCHITECTURAL: A1.0COVER SHEET A2.0SITE PLANS A3.0FLOOR PLANS A4.0 ROOF PLAN A5.0EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A6.0BUILDING SECTIONSSTRUCTURAL: S1.0STRUCTURAL NOTES S2.0FOUNDATION AND FRAMING PLANS S3.0STRUCTURAL DETAILSELECTRICAL: E1.0ELECTRICAL PLANSCHURCHILL/ALTENHOFEN RESIDENCE140 NORTH MCKINLEY AVENUE1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 23 DNDN0&.,1/(<$9(18((;,67,1*+286((;,67,1*$77$&+('*$5$*(FRONT YARD SETBACKREAR YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SET- BACK SIDE YARD SET- BACK 50' - 0" 30' - 0"20' - 0"110' - 0"19' - 6"15' - 0"80' - 0"15' - 0"4' - 6"15' - 0"5' - 0"40' - 0"5' - 0"129' - 6"0&.,1/(<$9(18((;,67,1*21(6725<+286((;,67,1*$77$&+('*$5$*(FRONT YARD SETBACKREAR YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SET- BACK SIDE YARD SET- BACK 50' - 0" 30' - 0"20' - 0"110' - 0"19' - 6"15' - 0"80' - 0"15' - 0"4' - 6"15' - 0"5' - 0"40' - 0"5' - 0"129' - 6"21(6725<$'',7,21Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:04 AMA2.0SITE PLANSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1" = 10'-0"1EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLANSITE NOTES1. ALL SURFACE WATER SHALL DRAIN AWAY FROM THE STRUCTURE AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL STANDARDS TO AN APPROVED RECEPTOR OR EQ.2. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY HORIZONTAL PLACEMENT AND FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS WITH OWNER AND ARCHITECT PRIOR TO EXCAVATIONS.3. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS, EASEMENTS, PROPERTY LINES, ETC PRIOR TO STARTING WORK. SHOULD ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR ERRORS OCCUR, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.4. (T.O.F.) INDICATES MINIMUM TOP OF FOUNDATION.5. SITE PLAN DRAWING AND ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING GRADES ALONG ADJACENT PROPERTY LINES. ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.6. WHERE DRAINS OCCUR, THE DRAIN SHALL BE RUN TO DAYLIGHT WITH A SLOPE OF AT LEAST 1/4" PLF. AS AN ALTERNATIVE, TEH DRAIN MAY BE RUN TO A SUMP, THEN PUMPED AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION.7. ALL EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK TO BE A MINIMUM 4" THICK 4,000 PSI CONCRETE WITH FIBER MESH OVER 2" THICK GRAVEL OR COMPACTED SAND BASE OVER PROPERLY COMPACTED GRADE. VERIFY FINISH WITH OWNER.8. ALL MATERIALS TO BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE ARE TO BE DISPOSED OF IN A LAWFUL LANDFILL AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS.9. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING UTILITIES PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.1" = 10'-0"2SITE PLAN1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 24 WDDWDNDNW/DDNDNDNUPLIVING ROOMDINING ROOMBEDROOMBEDROOM 1KITCHENGARAGEBATH1A6.02A6.029' - 1 1/2"1' - 0"LIVING ROOMDINING ROOMKITCHENBEDROOM 1ENTRYCOATSCLO. 1BATHGARAGE21' - 1"9' - 0 1/2"2' - 0"&/215' - 5"9' - 8"13' - 9 1/2"(;673$175<&$%,1(76EQUAL5' - 3"EQUAL2' - 0"4' - 5"1' - 10"3' - 9"2' - 10"11' - 5"206 SF0$67(5%('522010165 SF0$67(5%$7+10338 SF&/26(710218 SF7/7104145 SF+$//10094 SF%('52201051' - 0 3/4"3' - 8 3/4"3' - 9"6' - 4 1/2"14' - 2 1/2"9' - 2"6' - 5"3' - 11"5' - 7"10' - 2"2' - 7"7' - 11"3' - 3"5' - 2 1/2"8' - 0 1/2"9' - 9"3' - 3"3' - 7"/,1(11066' - 0"4' - 0" 3' - 7"2' - 7"3' - 6"6' - 7 1/2"WOOD PLANK FLOORING TO MATCH EXISTING OVER OSB SUB-FLOOR OVER WOOD JOISTS, TYP EXCEPT MASTER BATH AND TLTTILE OVER OSB SUB-FLOOR OVER WOOD JOISTS TYP AT MASTER BATH AND TLT2-82-02-62-62-62-64-02-82-6TRACK2-6POCKET5-01S3.013' - 4"6' - 2"13' - 2"364 SF)$0,/<5220001207 SF6725$*(002SEALED CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADECARPET OVER SLAB ON GRADE2-8Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:05 AMA3.0FLOOR PLANSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1/4" = 1'-0"1DEMOLITION PLAN - MAIN LEVEL1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED PLAN - MAIN LEVEL1/4" = 1'-0"3PROPOSED PLAN - BASEMENT1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 25 DN1A6.02A6.0(;,67,1*21(6725<+286((;,67,1*$77$&+('*$5$*(REAR YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SET-BACK 21(6725<$'',7,21OVER-BUILT WOOD TRUSSESWOOD TRUSSES @ 24" O.C.ASPHALT SHINGLES OVER 15/32" OSB SHEATHINGSIDE YARD SET-BACK OVER-BUILT WOOD TRUSSESSEAMLESS METAL GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS PER MANUFACTURER, PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12" 6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"1S3.0Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:05 AMA4.0ROOF PLANProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH1/4" = 1'-0"1ROOF PLANROOFING NOTESROOFING TO MATCH EXISTINGVERIFY WITH OWNER FOR ANY SPECIAL BLENDSROOF SLOPE TO MATCH EXISTINGUNDERLAYMENT TO BE ONE LAYER OF 30# FELT OR (2) LAYERS OF 15# FELTGUTTERS TO BE SEAMLESS SHEET METALALL SHEET METAL ROOF PENETRATIONS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH COLOR OF ROOFALL VALLEYS TO BE CLOSED TYPE INSTALLATIONPROVIDE ROOF VENTILATION AS PER CODE522))5$0,1*3(575866(1*,1((5ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 26 6" / 12"ASPHALT SHINGLES, TO MATCH EXISTING, OVER PLYWOOD SHEATHING, OVER WOOD JOISTWOOD SIDING 2" WIDER THAN EXISTING, PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING100' - 0"4' - 9" 6 " / 12 "6" / 12"6" / 12"100' - 0"2' - 4" 6" / 12"ASPHALT SHINGLES TO MATCH EXISTING OVER PLYWOOD SHEATING OVER WOOD JOISTSWOOD SIDING 2" WIDER THAN EXISTING, PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING100' - 0"4' - 9"Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:14 AMA5.0ELEVATIONSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1/4" = 1'-0"2WEST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"1SOUTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"3EAST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"4NORTH ELEVATIONOVERFRAME ROOF, SHINGLES TO MATCH EXISTINGOVERFRAME ROOF, SHINGLES TO MATCH EXISTINGWOOD SIDING 2" WIDER THAN EXISTING, PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 27 MAIN LEVEL100' -0"T.O. FOOTING(EXST-ASSUMED)97' -2 1/2"ROOF BRG.(ASSUMED)108' -0"4A6.0T.O. BASEMENTSLAB89' -4 1/2"3' - 0"0$67(5%('5220101&/26(71021S3.0MAIN LEVEL100' -0"EXISTING GRADE98' -2"ROOF BRG.(ASSUMED)108' -0"1A6.00$67(5%$7+103&/26(7102+$//100INSIDE CORNER WOOD TRIM, PAINTNEW EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLYEXISTING EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLYOUTSIDE CORNER WOOD TRIM, PAINTEXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLYProject numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.155/13/2021 11:42:58 AMA6.0BUILDING SECTIONSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH1/4" = 1'-0"1WEST - EAST BUILDING SECTION1/4" = 1'-0"4SOUTH - NORTH BUILDING SECTIONAIR BARRIER NOTESAIR BARRIER PER TABLE R402.4.1.1A. AIR BARRIER AND THERMAL BARRIER-CONTINUOUS AIR BARRIER AT BUILDING ENVELOPE-ALL BREAKS OR JOINTS SHALL BE SEALED-AIR-PERMEABLE INSULATION SHALL NOT BE USED AS A SEALING MATERIALB. CEILING/ATTIC-DROPPED CLG AND SOFFITS TO BE INSULATED AND SEALED-ACCESS OPENINGS, DROP DOWN STAIRS TO UNCONDITIONED ATTIC SPACEC. WALLS-CORNERS AND HEADERS TO BE SEALED-FOUNDATION AND SILL PLATE TO BE SEALED-KNEE WALLS TO BE SEALEDD. WINDOWS/SKYLIGHTS/DOORS-SPACE BETWEEN WINDOW OR DOOR JAMB AND FRAMING TO BE SEALEDE. RIM JOISTS-TO BE INSULATED AND INCLUDED IN AIR BARRIERF. FLOORS -STAIR NOTES1. MINIMUM STAIR WIDTH TO BE 36" CLEAR.2. STAIR RISERS TO BE PINE, SCREWED TO STRINGERS. RISE HEIGHT AND QUANTITY PER SECTIONS.3. STAIR TREADS TO BE 1 1/8" TREAD MATERIAL GLUED AND NAILED TO STRINGERS. TREAD = 10" NOSE TO NOSE.4. STRINGERS TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH (3) 2X12s AT EACH RUN.5. PROVIDE A MIN. 6'-8" CLEAR HEADROOM TO NOSING OF TREADS.6. ALL HANDRAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEC. R311.7.8 -2018 IRC7. ALL GUARDS TO COMPLY WITH SEC. R312 = 2018 IRC8. MAX. OPENING BETWEEN ALL PICKETS OF HANDRAILS TO BE 4".9. IF ANY STAIRS ARE FABRICATED OFF-SITE BY OTHERS, SHOP DRAWINGS ARE TO BE SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION.1 1/2" = 1'-0"2INSIDE CORNER TRIM, TYPICAL1 1/2" = 1'-0"3OUTSIDE CORNER TRIM, TYPICALITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 28 Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:16 AMS1.0STRUCTURAL NOTESProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHGENERAL NOTESCODES: ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE FOR ONE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS (IRC 2018) WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS AND/OR THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC 2018) WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS, AS REQUIRED BY THE GOVERNING MUNICIPALITY; AND THE AMERICAN FOREST AND PAPER ASSOCIATION/AMERICAN WOOD COUNCIL NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICATION (NDS) ASD/LRFD; AND PORTIONS OF THE LATEST EDITIONS OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (ACI) ACI301, ACI318, ACI332R; AND THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION (AISC) MANUAL OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION ASD/LRFD, AS APPLICABLE.SOILS: THIS PLAN IS BASED UPON THE SOILS REPORT BY: ASSUMED VALUESFLUID PRESSURE 35 PCFSPREAD FOOTING REQUIREMENTSUPPER SOILS:LOWER SOILS:MAX BRG = 2000 PSFMAX BRG =2000 PSFMIN DL = 0 PSFMIN DL = 0 PSFIT IS RECOMMENDED THAT AN OPEN HOLE OBSERVATION BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. OPEN HOLE OBSERVATIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO VERIFY THE EXPOSED SOILS CONDITIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE ASSUMED. SOILS CONDITIONS INCONSISTENT WITH ASSUMED MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL EVALUATION BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AND MAY REQUIRE A FOUDATION REDESIGN, AND SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BY THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ANY CONCRETE. ALL FOOTINGS, PADS, OR PIERS SHALL BEAR A MINIMUM OF 30" BELOW GRADE, OR DEEPER AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL CODE, AND SHALL BEAR UPON UNDISTRUBED NATIVE SOILS OR STRUCTURAL FILL ACCEPTABLE TO THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. THE NEED FOR AND EXTENT OF FOUNDATION DRAINAGE SYSTEMS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGEINEER AT THE OPEN HOLE OBSERVATION AND SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE ASSUMED SOILS OR OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS. ALL FLOOR SYSTEMS SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO BACKFILLING AGAINST ANY FOUNDATION WALL. AS AN ALTERNATIVE, THE CONTRACTOR/ OWNER MAY CHOOSE TO ADEQUATELY BRACE THE FOUNDATION WALLS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. DAMPROOFING ON THE EXTERIOR FACE OF THE FOUNDATION WALLS, PRIOR TO BACKFILLING, IS RECOMMENDED FOR ALL BELOW GRADE HABITABLE LIVING AREAS. BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED PER THE SOILS ASSUMPTIONS AND GRADED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION. BACKFILL SHALL NOT BE WATER SETTLED. BACKFILL ADJACENT TO THE FOUNDATION SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO SETTLE OVER TIME AND SHOULD BE MONITORED AND MAINTAINED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION. DESIGN LOADING: THIS PLAN IS BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING LOAD PARAMETERS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER TO NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IF LOADS EXCEED THOSE LISTED.ROOF LIVE LOAD = 20 PSFROOF DEAD LOAD = 15 PSFGROUND SNOW LOAD = 30 PSFFLOOR LIVE LOAD = 40 PSFFLOOR DEAD LOAD = 10 PSFWIND EXPOSURE = BVULT = 130 MPHSEISMIC ZONE = BSITE CLASS = N/ACONCRETE: SLABS-ON-GRADE: A SLAB-ON-GRADE DOES NOT CONSTITUE A SLAB-ON-GRADE RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROJECT. SLABS-ON-GRADE ARE NOT RECOMMENDED FOR HABITABLE LIVING SPACES PLACED UPON EXPANSIVE SOILS. THE TYPE OF FLOOR CONSTRUCTION AND POTENTIAL RISKS SHOULD BE DISCUSSED BETWEEN THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER AND THE APPROPRIATE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. SLABS SHALL BE ISOLATED FROM GRADE BEAMS, COLUMNS, PLUMBING, AND OTHER SUPPORT STRUCTURES BY USE OF MINIMUM 1/2" ISOLATION JOINT MATERIAL. PROVIDE MINIMUM 1 1/2" VOID SPACE BETWEEN ALL INTERIOR PARTITION WALLS AND THE FLOOR SLAB-ON-GRADE. THE PARTITION VOID SPACE SHALL BE MONITORED AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF HTE STRUCTURE. ANY AREAS WITH SLAB-ON-GRAD CONSTRUCITON, PLACED UPON POTENTIALLY EXPANSIVE SOILS, SHOULD NOT BE FINISHED FOR A MINIMUM OF 3 YEARS AFTER SUBSTATIAL COMPLETION OF HTE CONTRUCTION , OR IF EVIDENCE OF ACTIVE SOIL MOVEMENT IS APPARENT. EXTERIOR SLABS SUCH AS PATIOS, PORCHES, DRIVEWAYS, ETC. SHALL NOT BE DOWELED INTO THE FOUNDATION WHEN PLACED OVER EXPANSIVE SOILS. ANCHOR BOLTS: ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM F1554 GRADE 36 WITH A MINIMUM 1/2" DIAMETER AND A 12" MINIMUM LENGTH. ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN 12" FROM BUILDING CORNERS AND/OR SPLICES IN THE SILL PLATE, AND SHALL BE SPACED AT A MAXIMUM OF 4'-0" ON CENTER ALONG THE PLATE LINE, CENTERED. ADDITIONAL ANCHOR BOLT DETAILS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAN AND/OR THE APPLICABLE CODES.WOOD PRODUCTS: ALL WOOD PRODUCTS WHERE NOTED ON THE PLAN, OR AS SPECIFIED IN THE APPLICABLE CODES, SHALL MEET THE MORE RESTRICTIVE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THEIR APPLICATION. CONTACT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IF CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED.DIMENSIONAL LUMBER: ALL DIMENSIONAL LUMBER SPECIFIED ON THE PLAN SHALL BE HEM-FIR (HF) NO. 2 OR BETTER, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLAN OR IN THE APPLICABLE CODES, AND IS INTENDED FOR DRY USE UNLESS IT HAS BEEN PRESSURE TREATED (PT) WITH AN ACCEPTABLE PRESERVATIVE SOLUTION. MULTIPLE MEMBER CONNECTIONS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF TWO 16d NAILS AT 12" ON CENTER (OC) UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLAN.LIMITATIONS: THIS PLAN MAY INCLUDE LIMITED VERTICAL STRUCTURAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GRAVITY LOADS LISTED, WHICH MAY INCLUDE BEAMS, HEADERS, JOISTS, ETC. AS MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT, AS REQUESTED BY THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER. ALL FRAMING CONNECTIONS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS OF THE IRC, UBC, APPLICABLE REGULATORY AGENCIES, AND ADOPED STANDARDS AND CODES. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR/OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. BRICK LEDGES, FOUNDATION STEPS, INSETS, BEAM POCKETS, BASEMENT WINDOWS, UTILITES, ETC. MAY OR MAY NOT BE SHOWN, VERIFY ALL SUCH ITEMS WITH CONTRACTOR/OWNER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF CONCRETE. THIS FOUNDATION PLAN IS BASED ON THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER FURNISHED INFORMATION AND PLANS, AND THE ABOVE REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. ANY DISCREPANCIES OR CHANGES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. ANY CRAWL SPACE OR STRUCTURAL FLOOR CAVITY SHOWN ON THIS PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR THE CONTROL OF MOLD GROWTH OR MOISTURE LEVELS, THOSE SPACES SHOULD BE ADEQUATELY VENTILATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND ACCEPTED STANDARDS. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL PROVISIONS FOR ALL AREAS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR/OWNER. THIS PLAN AND ALL ASSOCIATED WORK PERFORMED BY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND MAY NOT BE USED BY ANY OTHER ENTITY WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT. CONTACT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IF CLARIFICATIONS OR ANY ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NEEDED.NOTES:1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL THOROUGHLY INSPECT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND SITE TO VERIFY DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, ETC. AND DETAILS THAT AFFECT THE WORK SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. ALL DISCREPANCIES, CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS THAT MAY AFFECT THIS DESIGN AND THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY UPON DISCOVERY. ALL ISSUES ARE TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION OR COVERING WORK.2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, EASEMENTS, AND SETBACKS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FINAL PLAT, GRADING PLAN AND COVENANTS FOR THE SITE. ALL NECESSARY APROVALS SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE GOVERNING AUTHORITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.3. ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS (2018 IRC), LOCAL CODES AND STANDARD CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.4. CONNECTORS INDICATED SHALL BE SIMPSON STRONG-TIE OR APPROVED EQUAL. ALL CONNECTORS AND FASTENERS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. ALL NAIL HOLES ARE TO BE FILLED WITH THE MAXIMUM SIZED FASTENERS SPECIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER.5. PLYWOOD AND ORIENTED STRAND BOARD (OSB) SHALL BE STAMPED WITH AN APA TRADEMARKED RATING. UNPROTECTED FLOOR, WALL AND ROOF SHEATHING SHALL BE EXTERIOR-GRADE OR EXPOSURE 1. PLYWOOD AND OSB ARE INTERCHANGEABLE WHEN PROPERLY INSTALLED. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, ALL FLOOR, WALL AND ROOF SHEATHING SHALL BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS:A. EXTERIOR WALL: 7/16" APA RATED SHEATHING (APPLY SHEATHING TO EXTERIOR FACE OF WALL), 24" ON CENTER SPAN RATING (24/16). INSTALL 8D COMMON OR GALVANIZED BOX NAILS AT 6" ON CENTER ALONG SUPPORTED PANEL EDGES AND AT 12" ON CENTER ALONG INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS. NAILS SHALL PENETRATE FRAMING A MINIMUM OF 1 1/2". 2" LONG, 16 GAGE STAPLES WITH A 1/2" CROWN IS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE, SAME SPACING.B. INTERIOR WALL: 1/2" MINIMUM GYPSUM WALL BOARD; INSTALL 5/8" TYPE X AS REQUIRED FOR FIRE PROTECTION (APPLY SHEATHING TO INTERIOR FACE OF EXTERIOR WALLS OR TO BOTH FACES OF INTERIOR WALLS). GYPSUM SHEATHING SHALL BE FASTENED TO PLATES AND STUDS WITH 1 3/4" LONG, 11 GAGE NAILS WITH 7/16" HEAD OR 5D COOLER OR WALLBOARD NAILS. #6 X 1 1/2" DRYWALL SCREWS ARE AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE. FASTENER SPACING SHOULD NOT EXCEED 7" ON CENTER ALONG SUPPORTED PANEL EDGES AND 10" ON CENTER ALONG INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS.C. FLOOR: 3/4" TONGUE-AND-GROOVE APA RATED STURD-I-FLOOR, 24" ON CENTER SPAN RATING (48/24). SHEATHING SHALL BE GLUED AND NAILED TO ALL SUPPORTS (JOISTS AND BEAMS). INSTALL 6D RING- OR SCREW-SHANK NAILS AT 6" ON CENTER ALONG SUPPORTED PANEL EDGES AND AT 12" ON CENTER ALONG INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS. NAILS SHALL PENETRATE FRAMING A MINIMUM OF 1 1/2". 8D COMMON NAILS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED IF RING-OR SCREW-SHANK NAILS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.D. ROOF: 7/16" MINIMUM (5/8" 40/20 RECOMMENDED) APA RATED SHEATHING, 24" ON CENTER SPAN RATING (24/16). INSTALL 8D COMMON OR GALVANIZED BOX NAILS AT 6" ON CENTER ALONG SUPPORTED PANLE EDGES AND AT 12" ON CENTER ALONG INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS. NAILS SHALL PENETRATE FRAMING A MINIMUM OF 1 1/2". 2" LONG, 16 GAGE STAPLES WITH A 1/2 CROWN IS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE. A 1/8" GAP IS RECOMMENDED AT ALL EDGE AND END JOINTS UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE BY THE PANEL MANUFACTURER.6. ALL TRUSSES SHALL BE DESIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH CURRENT COLORADO REGISTRATION. THE TRUSS MANUFACTURER SHALL SPECIFY OR PROVIDE ALL REQUIRED CONNECTION HARDWARE. THIS PLAN IS FOR ILLUSTRATION ONLY. THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF ANY CHANGES IN THE TRUSS BEARING LOCATIONS OR IF BEAM AND HEADER SIZES AND LOCATIONS ARE TO BE DIFFERENT THAN INDICATED.7. FOR UNIFORMLY LOADED HEADERS, THE TRIMMERS AND KING STUDS INDICATED ON ONE END ARE TYPICAL FOR EACH END, REFER TO THE PLAN.FLOOR JOIST NOTES: INSTALL AS INDICATED ON FRAMING PLANS. JOISTS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, SPAN TABLES AND INSTALLATION GUIDELINES. JOISTS SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OVER INTERIOR SUPPORTS (BEAMS) WHERE POSSIBLE. JOISTS SERIES MAY BE UPGRADED FOR IMPROVED DEFLECTION PERFORMANCE AT THE OWNER'S AND/OR THE CONTRACTOR'S DISCRETION.GENERAL NOTES: 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, EXISTING CONDITIONS, ELEVATIONS, UTILITY LOCATIONS, ETC. WITH THE FINAL APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS AND SITE PLAN PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ALL DISCREPANIES, CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS OT THIS DESIGN SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY UPON DISCOVERY. ALL ISSUES ARE TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.2. THE EXCAVATION AND FILL PLACEMENT FOR FOUNDATION AND SLAB ELEMENTS SHALL BE OBSERVED BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL (ENGINEER) TO ENSURE ADEQUATE SOIL BEARING CONDITIONS AND FOOTING WIDTHS PRIOR TO PLACING ANY FOUNDATION REINFORCEMENT, FORMS OR CONCRETE.3. ALL CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3,000 PSI AT 28 DAYS. CEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM C-150 TYPE I-II SPECIFICATIONS. CONCRETE SHALL BE AIR ENTRAINED BETWEEN 5% AND 8% NORMAL WEIGHT. AGGREGATE SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM C-33 SPECIFICATIONS. CONCRETE SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM A SINGLE SOURCE. WATER SHALL BE CLEAN AND POTABLE. SLUMP SHALL NOT EXCEED 5".4. REINFORCING SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM A-615 SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEFORMED TYPE GRADE 60 STEEL. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE ALIGNED AND LAPPED 24" MINIMUM AT ALL SPLICE LOCATIONS AND BE TIED WITH WIRE AT A MINIMUM OF (3) LOCATIONS. SPLICES SHALL BE KEPT TO A MINIMUM. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CONTINUOUS AROUND CORNERS.5. CONCRETE SHALL BE THOROUGHLY WORKED AROUND THE REINFORCEMENT, AROUND EMBEDDED FIXTURES AND INTO THE CORNERS OF FORMS.6. PROTECT FRESHLY PLACED CONCRET FROM PREMATURE DRYING AND DETRIMENTAL HOT OR COLD TEMPERATURE EXTREMES. COMPLY WITH ACI 305 "HOT WEATHER CONCRETING" AND/OR ACI 306 "COLD WEATHER CONCRETING". FORMS SHALL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL CONCRETE HAS SUFFICIENTLY CURED.7. ALL REINFORCING STEEL AND CONCRETE SHALL BE PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE (ACI 318).8. ALL FOOTINGS SHALL BEAR IN THE SAME NATIVE UNDISTURBED SOIL STRATUM, AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 30" BELOW FINISHED GRADE FOR FROST PROTECTION CONCRETE SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZEN SOIL. ALL FOOTINGS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 8". ALL LOOSE SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE FOOTING EXCAVATION PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE.9. ALL CONCRETE SLABS SHALL BE ISOLATED FROM FOUNDATION WALLS, COLUMNS, OTHER SUPPORT STRUCTURES, AND PIPES WITH 1/2" MINIMUM EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL.10. BEAM POCKETS, BLOCK-OUTS, BRICK/SLAB LEDGES, WINDOW/DOOR OPENINGS AND CHANGES IN ELEVATION ALONG THE FOUNDATION WALL MAY NOT BE SHOWN AND ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE AND INSTALL.11. BACKFILL SHALL NOT BE PLACED AGAINST BASEMENT FOUNDATION WALLS UNTIL THE FLOOR SYSTEM IS IN PLACE, UNLESS ADEQUATE BRACING IS INSTALLED. BACKFILL SHOULD BE PLACED IN EQUAL LIFTS ON EACH SIDE OF FOUNDATION WALLS WHERE APPLICABLE TO PROMOTE STABILITY. BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED BY MECHANICAL METHODS IN 8" MAXIMUM LIFTS. WATER SETTLING OR SOAKING IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE METHOD FOR CONSOLIDATING THE FOUNDATION BACKFILL.12. LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER (LVL) SPECIFIED ON THE PLAN SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM ALLOWABLE FLEXURAL STRESS (Fb) OF 2,600 PST, A MINIMUM MODULUS OF ELASTICITY (E) OF 1,900,000 PSI, AND IS INTENDED FOR DRY USE ONLY. MULTIPLE MEMBER CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PER THE MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLAN.13. BEAMS CONSTRUCTED USING DIMENSIONAL LUMBER SHALL BE HEM-FIR #2 OR BETTER AND SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM ALLOWABLE FLEXURAL STRESS (Fb) OF 850, FC OF 405, AND A MINIMUM MODULUS OF ELASTICITY (E) OF 1,300,000 PSI. MINIMUM BEAM BEARING AT WOOD FRAMED WALLS SHALL BE THE FULL BEAM WIDTH BY 3 1/2" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLAN. IF MULTIPLE STUDS ARE SPECIFIED TO SUPPORT THE BEAM, THE BEAM SHALL EXTEND OVER ALL SPECIFIED STUDS. MINIMUM BEAM BEARING AT CONCRETE WALLS SHALL BE THE FULL BEAM WIDTH BY 3" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLAN. MINIMUM BEAM BEARING SHALL ALSO BE PER APPLICABLE CODES AND MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 14. PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ALL FOUNDATION WALLS. AS A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION SLOPE FINISHED GRADE AWAY FROM ALL FOUNDATION WALLS AT A MINIMUM OF 10% FOR THE FIRST 10'. PROVIDE A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 2% THEREAFTER. ALL SURFACE WATER SHALL FLOW RAPIDLY AWAY FROM ALL FOUNDATION WALLS, OPENINGS AND EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLAT WORK.15. TO REDUCE CRACKING, INTERIOR NON-STRUCTURAL CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS SHOULD BE REINFORCED WITH #4 REBAR AT 3'-0" ON CENTER EACH WAY OR 6" X 6" W2.9 X W2.9 WELDED WIRE FABRIC PLACED IN THE MIDDLE THIRD OF THE SLAB DEPTH. SLABS SHOULD BE PLACED OVER A 4" THICK MINIMUM LAYER OF CLEAN GRADED GRAVEL. REINFORCEMENT IS RECOMMENDED IN NON-STRUCTURAL SLABS, HOWEVER INSTALLATION IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR.16. PROVIDE CONTROL JOINTS EQUAL TO 1/4 THE SLAB DEPTH. THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN CONTROL JOINTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 12' X 12' OR 144 SF. REINFORCEMENT IS TO BE CONTINUOUS THROUGH CONTROL JOINTS. CONTROL JOINTS SHALL BE TOOLED DURING SLAB PLACEMENT OR SAW CUT WITHIN 12 HOURS AFTER PLACEMENT OF THE SLAB.17. OPENINGS SHALL BE ENCIRCLED ON ALL SIDES WITH TWO #4 REBAR.ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 29 UP----(2) 1.75X11.8 LVL HEADER(2) 1.75X11.8 LVL11 7/8" TJI 210 JOISTS @ 24" OC1S3.011 7/8" TJI 210 JOISTS @ 24" OC(;,67,1*&5$:/63$&(13' - 4"6' - 2"13' - 2"8"x16" FOOTING W/ (2) #4 CONT.8" CONC WALL W/ #4 @ 18" OC, EA WAYEXISTING FOUNDATIONS TO BE SHORED DURING EXCAVATION8"X16" FOOTING W/ (2) #4 CONT364 SF)$0,/<5220001207 SF6725$*(0022S3.0Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:17 AMS2.0FOUNDATION ANDFRAMING PLANSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH1/4" = 1'-0"2MAIN LEVEL FRAMING PLAN1/4" = 1'-0"1FOUNDATION PLANITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 30 SIDINGWEATHER-RESISTIVE BARRIERFLASHINGRIM BOARDSTRUCTURAL EXTERIOR SHEATHINGTREATED SILL PLATEMAIN LEVEL100' -0"T.O. FOOTING(EXST-ASSUMED)97' -2 1/2"NEW WALL FRAMINGEXISTING WALL FRAMING(2) #5 CONT. @ TOP OF WALLEXISTING FOUNDATION WALLEXISTING FOOTING TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING FOOTING TO REMAIN(2) #5 DOWELS INTO EXISTING @ 16" O.C. (4" MIN EMBED)SOIL PINS BY SHORING DESIGNER1' - 0"1' - 0"8" CONCRETE WALL W/ #5 @16" O.C. E.W. DOWEL VERT INTO FOOTINGNEW BASEMENT SLAB ON GRADECONCRETE FOOTING W/ (1) #5 CONT.Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:17 AMS3.0STRUCTURAL DETAILSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH1 1/2" = 1'-0"1BEARING DETAIL1/2" = 1'-0"2FOUNDATION DETAILITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 31 F)$0,/<52200016725$*(002ACAC0$67(5%('5220101%('5220105+$//100&/26(71020$67(5%$7+1037/7104Project numberDateDrawn byChecked byWhitney Churchill, AIA2512 Shavano CourtFort Collins, Colorado 80525303-710-1937churchill.whitney@gmail.com90% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.17.15CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS03.30.154/19/2021 10:08:16 AME1.0ELECTRICAL PLANSProject Number140 N. McKinley AvenueFort Collins, ColoradoChurchill/AltenhofenResidence02.12.2021AuthorChecker1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH3/16" = 1'-0"1BASEMENT ELECTRICAL PLAN3/16" = 1'-0"2MAIN LEVEL ELECTRICAL PLANITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 32 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 33 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 34 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 35 1 Jim Bertolini From:Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Sent:Friday, December 11, 2020 4:10 PM To:Jim Bertolini Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: RE: RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Hi Jim, Here are the answers to the questions below. 1. Corner Treatments. The siding to the expanded part of the house will be different. We will need to fabricate metal protection similar to what we currently have on the house to match the current siding and a wider siding on the expanded part of the house. Something like this… Not quite sure on this one. I am still discussing with our architect. Do you have any suggestions on this? If the siding needs to be different, then what does one do in these situations? 2. Gable in the rear to match the gable in the south elevation of the house. No problem doing a hip roof there, however. Just thought it would match with the south side. 3. From our Engineer… “Placing the basement next to the existing will be a challenge no matter how deep you go. Not impossible, but a challenge. The contractor will just have to do the temporary shoring (piles or lagging) or shotcrete shoring as mentioned before during excavation. Something to consider during pricing to make sure that is included. For the foundation walls, we can design the wall to go deeper and take the pressure from the existing foundation wall system. This may increase the reinforcing in the wall, but not significantly.” 4. I purchased that 400 square foot chunk of land in the back a few years back from the neighbor to the south. I think that land used to be an old ally. All the folks in that area purchased the section of the ally and now it is gone. I bought it so that we had more land so we could possibly expand. Please let me know what else I can do to help move this along. Thanks for all your help so far, Jim. I am grateful. Sincerely, Keith (Casey) Churchill Liberty Common School Principal National Core Knowledge Consultant 970-482-9800 ext 1111 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 36 2 From: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:59 PM To: Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Subject: RE: RE: RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Keith, Thanks for attending the LPC Work Session last night. I’ll be able to respond to most of the LPC’s requests for more information. Just so you have them on file, here’s the questions that would be best for you to respond to in your remarks: 1. What will corner treatments be over the siding? (Nelsen) 2. Why gable form on rear addition rather than a hipped form? (Nelsen) 3. Any consultation with a structural engineer about feasibility/requirements of excavated basement next to crawlspace? (Nelsen) 4. Could the owner provide some information about why the parcel boundary is irregular? (Dunn) Everything else regarding the floor-area requirements in your Zone District, showing lot coverage after the proposed addition is completed, etc., I should be able to respond to. If you have questions, feel free to call. Cheers! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Tell us about our service, we want to know! From: Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 8:49 AM To: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in OK sounds great. I don’t have a presentation nor do I think that is needed. I will just comment on improvements and rationale for expanding. Thanks, Keith (Casey) Churchill Liberty Common School Principal National Core Knowledge Consultant 970-482-9800 ext 1111 From: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 8:46 AM To: Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Subject: RE: RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 37 1 Jim Bertolini From:Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Sent:Friday, December 4, 2020 8:39 AM To:Jim Bertolini Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Hi Jim, Not sure if you need any of this for your report and I will be sure to recap during the meetings this month, but here are the current updates we have done to the house. I think it would be important to highlight the updates that we have done so far since our purchase of this property. I consider the house currently finished for all updates. New roof (took off the shake shingles and T-lock shingles and replaced with plywood and asphalt shingles) New water heater New furnace New gutters New landscaping in the front and the back New irrigation system in the front and back of the house New front and back door New concrete driveway Newly painted the house Took out the old ceramic tile sewer line and replaced with PVC Replaced fir flooring in the back and replaced with red and white oak flooring to match the rest of the house and refinished all the wood floors. Got rid of all the galvanized piping in the house and replaced with Pex pipes Replaced the water line from the city to the house Thanks, Keith (Casey) Churchill Liberty Common School Principal National Core Knowledge Consultant 970-482-9800 ext 1111 From: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 6:41 PM To: Keith Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Subject: RE: Re: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Thanks Keith! That should work. For preparing for the 16 th, you are welcome to provide a presentation then if you’d like although it’s not required (any presentation materials need to be received no later than Monday, December 14 at 5pm). I’ll be covering your application before the LPC and they’ll have received everything you’ve submitted up to that point. The agenda will be posted later this week here: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark-preservation.php If you open the agenda for the Work Session (if you’re attending next week on the 9 th) and the Regular Meeting (on the 16th), the Zoom link is at the top. If you have other questions, please let me know. Cheers! ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 38 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 39 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 40 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 41 /.D,JOMFZ"WF (BSBHF MPPLJOHFBTUGSPN.D,JOMFZ ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 42 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 43 /.D,JOMFZ"WF QJDUVSFXJOEPXMFGUOPSUIPGFOUSZ MPPLJOHFBTU ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 44 City of Fort Collins Community Planning and Environmental Services Advance Planning Department LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 18, 1998 STAFF REPORT REQUEST: Local Landmark Designation of the Robert and Orpha Buxton House and Attached Garage, 140 North McKinley Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado STAFF CONTACT: Karen McWilliams, Preservation Planner APPLICANT: Jordan K. Radin, Property Owner. BACKGROUND: Staff is pleased to present, for your consideration, the local landmark designation of the Robert and Orpha Buxton House and Attached Garage. The building is significant architecturally, as an interesting example of Post World War II architecture in Fort Collins. The home also has hi storical value as a representative example of two si gnificant American social trends, the first the development of affordable home ownership on a large scale, and the other the elevation of the statu s of the automobile as reflected in residential arc hitecture. History -The Robert and Orpha Buxton House and Attached Garage was constructed in 1945. A simple one story hipped box, it is one of several modest homes built between Mountain and Laporte A ven ue s in the ten year period following the end of World War II. With mass- production techniques and materials developed during the war, homes were being built cheaply and quickly to s upply the many soldiers returning from the war with affordable hou sing. At the same time, uniquely American architectural styles were evolving, reflecting the automobile's displacement of earlier modes of transportation. Residences featured larger, fixed pane windows (precursors of the picture window), little if any exterior decorative elements, and often attac hed single car garages or carports. The Robert and Orpha Buxton House and Attached Garage exhibits many of these modern elements. Two 3'5" x 4' fixed pane windows adorn the front of the house, each flanked by 1' x4' vertical three-light fixed pane windows, the whole creating the impress ion of a broad, hori zontal expanse of glass. Also of interes t is the attached garage, an early example in Fort Collins of this architectural modification which was to become the standard. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving this request for Local Landmark designation of the Robert and Orpha Buxton House and Attached Garage, 140 North McKinley A venue, Fort Collins, Colorado, for its architectural and historical importance. 281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6376 FAX (970) 224-6111 • TDD (970) 224-6002 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 45 140 N. McKinley Ave Address: Prepared by: Date: APPLICATION FOR LOCAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION 140 N. McKinley Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521-2320 Jordan K. Radin (Property Owner) November 11, 1998 ARCHITECTUAL AND HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Page lof2 The house at 140 N. McKinley Avenue was constructed in 1945. Its architectural style can be characterized as a simple one-story, hipped box bungalow. Overall, the interior and exterior of the house are in good condition. The home was constructed with an attached garage set back from the front of the house in the traditional style of homes built in old town. There is a gable over the garage. Original horizontal clapboard siding covers all sides of the house. Two 3 '5" x 4' windows adorn the front of the house. Each window is flanked by three l' x l '4" fixed pane windows. A mudroom is located at both the front and rear of the house. When doors were still mounted on the inner threshold of these rooms, they would have prevented heat loss when persons were entering or exiting the home. The home has two bedrooms, a kitchen, a living, dining, and laundry room, two mudrooms, a bathroom, and an attached garage. The total interior square footage (including garage) is 1,258 tt2. The interior of the house features recently refinished hardwood floors and original clear pine base trim for windows, doors and baseboards. The walls are untextured plaster. The house is currently heated with a gas-forced air system. Two 2' 6" x 2' original metal grates are inset in the floor in the space between the dining and living room, and the hallway joining the two bedrooms. These grates cover access holes to the crawl space beneath the house. They were once used as part of the original heating system. A Tudor style arch divides the living and dining room. Although the kitchen has been fully remodeled, it maintains the classic style of the rest of the house. The bathroom has also been upgraded. There have been some minor changes to the interior and exterior of the house. An awning was once constructed over the front door, but has since been removed. There is an existing awning over the door at the rear of the house, but it's originality is unknown. The roof has asphalt t-lock shingles, and a large television antenna is mounted to the outer wall on the south side of the garage. The exterior of the house was originally painted white, but is now painted cream with teal trim. As stated previously, both the kitchen and bathroom have been recently upgraded. Kitchen upgrades include cherry cabinetry and modem appliances. Vinyl has been laid in the bathroom, kitchen, laundry room, and rear mudroom. The vinyl does not overlay hardwood flooring. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 46 140 N. McKinley Ave Page 2 of2 PERSONS LIVING IN THE HOME (1945-1980) Year Name Occunation Buxton, Robert A Bookkee=r; Dent. of Public Service Co. of CO 1945-1950 Buxton, Omha Clerk?; Montgomerv Ward & Co. I child Martin, C.harles C C 0 =nter; Abraham & Son 1952-1956 Martin, Edith Homemaker I child 1956-1959 Bruce, Stella F* (widow) Salad Ladv, Rockwell Hall; Colorado State Universitv Stumnf, Donald A Pressman; Don-Art Printers (1810 Lanorte St) 1959-1962 Stumnf, MarPsret L Homemaker 2 children 1963 VACANT 1964-1980? Klein, Amalie No enmlovment listed * See attached obituary of Ms. Stella Bruce ATTACHMENTS Local Historic Lanmark Designation Nomination Form Real Estate Appraisal Card (1948) Real Estate Appraisal Card (1969) Survey Form-Historic Designation Office (1986) Obituary of Ms. Stella Bruce (1974) Photographs taken September, 1998 SOURCES Field Guide to American Homes Fort Collins City Directory Appraisal Reports (1948, 1969) Fort Collins Coloradoan ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 47 Historic Preservation Office P.O.Box580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 (303) 221-6597 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date Determined 'Eligible' Ordinance# --------------- Application within last 12 months? Yes ___ No DateRecorded -------------- LOCAL HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOMINATION FORM Date: _ _,_,I o'-</f-'2.:3=./r-"1..cB,,_ __ Please tyµelprint all entries tq¢AJ;Io:rg Address: 140 t-J. Mc.J;:,\'\le-y Ave.. f+. &llil'ls • C.O Bos2.1-2:;2.o Legal Description: Lob 10 <Wl l \ 1 B loci< 1 1 S We;±:1-s , :fur+ C'.o // i V\S • Le.s.5 .s so f± ~ '" Ghr! Less 1J 5~ k-of so kts Property Name (Historic and/or ccmmon): l1'PRM\lf8.El>.All:Etrll:£if Namefl'itle: "Jordco, Ra.di!'\ Address: 140 )J , Mc.I::=, ti ~ Phone:@j224-ci5J / Relationship to Owner: Ave-- ti»'.NExt,iNtommt6M1 Name: Jov-cA.cv, Rctcli I-'\. Phone: 6_10) 2.2~-'tS3) Address: ll/0 tJ · r'lc..tc,'I\ leer Ave.- l!011)SljAnn;sf1Wl{);ljp.l,l;D.ESIGN'A\l)(qN: / Landmark (improvement only) __ Landmark District (improvement+ site/surrounding enviromnent) Further explanation of boundary determination: C:IHISTPRESIHIST DES.FRM Local Historic Landmark Designation Fonn Page 1 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 48 Category: VBuilding __ Structure __ Site _Object __ District Architectural: Ownership: __ Public ...l!:'.'.'Private Status: V Occupied __ Unoccupied Existing Designation: __ National Register __ State Register __ Represents work ofnoteworthy architect __ Possesses high artistic value -lLR.epresents a type, period, or method of construction Historical: __ Associated with significant persons __ Associated with significant event or historic trend __ Contributes to the significance of an historic district Geographical: __ Related to or part of distinctive area __ Unique location Present Use: __ Commercial __ Educational __ Religious VResidential __ Entertainment __ Government _Other: Further Comments: -~=.11:l\'---'·1',.,_0\ __,_l"l,_4::c>.,_, ----'-~-=--k,c:..:.;IJ:.:::5t."--...1.i c,_S_:f:y!-+i'p"-'1=.=,I_..._., l=-,..__M"<ll:..=.,_,1,__..,+.J...:.,:."<,.,_+ _ _,l.,.lerL-=-'==- p.., \ \'r .,_;,,-+ke e~ oF ww:u.. (Add continuation sheet if needed) Please attach a narrative of the historical significance of the property. Include a title search if the property is important for its association with a significant person. Further Comments: ~ .._,\+q~, C:\lllS11'RESIHIST DES.FRM Local Historic Landmark Designation Fann Page2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 49 ;ti:tRtki!1i;tJTl.t&tIB$ll£'.$1W$:TuiiiEslt,Itrtj;ftbN Construction Date: {°145 Architect/Builder: ---------------------- Building Materials: ~ :,:J:~ 1 we:,,...\ t,; M Architectural Style: 2 1 MP It-&,,'.~"II"'-' I l -5-11'>~'{ h,ppe.l b:s11 Special Features/Surroundings: ..,l-b-""'~""'-1L<5--=o..."-"'5'"'l"'"'""P'.::::'-:......:N.,.'fipr-J,f=---'Clr,.._11:w_, _te,,,\u=--=·=-es,___,~,:O..,_V::..;VOW::.__h:..:.<>1"=•'2'>=~:tii.;.q,.,_l __,c.:.:.W.;,.b""'-,J.. (Add a continuation sheet if needed. Please include lack and white photos of each elevation of the property.) REFERENCJ1nm§rti-01t!SQl!RCESl:i:lEiNEORMAT1bN fie.\J Gv,~e..--1-n ~C<vl ~> (Add a continuation sheet, if needed) 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: I. 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! 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 C:\HISTPRESIHIST_DES.FRM Local Historic Landmark Designation Fonn Page3 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 50 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 ifl 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. DA TED this q Pl day of M> J(JM bJy , 19 C/ tf Owner Name (please print) __ Property owner wishes to withhold consent to local historic designation . State of._--=.G_l:....o_~_~..:..cc:...t _o _____ -) L )ss. County of ___ tt...._V'....;.·l_trv_ef-=------') Subscribed and sworn to before me this O·Jh 19 q /3 Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires /!)-)/a -.2.CCJO 0k, ) f;. (h~~ N6tary Pubij C:IHISTPRESIHIST _DES.FRM Local Historic Landrnarlc Designation Form Page4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 51 REAL ESTATE ·APPRAISAL CARD---URBAN MASTER INDEX /( C.:;:>~::,·::'./Ln X OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS: -)) .'. . ; ' J.._:,{__J.;. c,,( J / (t--) C-{ •'.I~· · !~-,--~/-· --fjr .,,. .! -~- 140 N. IICKINL&Y FT. COLLINS, COLO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 10 AND 11 BLK l FT. COLLINS SWETT'S SD 5 L&SS S 50 FT 6 INCIJ&S AND L&SS N 56 FT OF so· LOTS _53// q //oL/--~-) ;(. () i/ t LOT OR ACREAGE DESCRIPTION i./f_ v LAND VALUE CALCULATION STREET OR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TOPOGRAPH~Y UNIT OEPTH,CORNl':R,OTHER FRONT FOOT I TOTAL. D ~ -· SIZI! OH ACRE~ YALUI( I OR VALUE PAVED SIDEWALK---LEVE TMILI. !'ACTOR ACRE VALUE D = HI-$ ZONING RESIDENTIA rn APARTMENl'. _______ o HARD SURFACE'.__ ~ D DRIVEWAY---STEEP OILED D CITY WATER__ SOI GRAVELDRSTONE~ WELLD SPRING LOW D I I I UNIMPROVED __ D $EWE~ I SLOPING ___ D CONDITION: D ' ' ' D ELECTRICITY__ HILLY ___ _ GOOD REGULAR LOTt;O, I ~ GAS RQCV D NET ADDITION % MOUNT SIZE . X fl O AVERAGE..__ IRREGULAR LOT SIZE PAVED ALLEY __ D D NET DEDUCTIONS % '"MOUNT • • PnoR )le ·· D D SPECIAL LAND NOTES: COMMERCIA D LIGHT INDUSTRIA 0 HEAVY INDUSTRIA D _______ D _______ D TOTAL $•-------- ADD OR DEDUCT TOTAL LAND VALUE "5 "? fl_ ___________________________________ ,BeA=SslS~OcF~AcDcD=ITcloOeNaS~OcR~OcEcD=UoCcTalO~N·c•c• ___________________________ _ SUMMARY ANNUAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OF LAND AND BUILDING VALUES DESCRIPTION DATE AMOUNT YEAR % REASON LAND IMPROVE-TOTAL FULL APPRAISED CHANGE MENTS VALUE $ /_.!,,,_,_~, ~~-· {,_ $ . hs' ,_. $ $ BUILDING PERMIT 19 ,-'·(IJ/t "· , ~ .S'.!-) ('-.'J~_Q...... 1. f So LAND ORIGINAL COST(IMPROVEMENT~) ··--·· ADDITIONS AND BETTERMENTS ..!21,j_ dti( (/i/,,., ~ ") 0 '{,.),:JI/a ,;l. 5irJ., I BUILDINGS AND IMPltOVEMENTfal . ' (THIIJ CARDI OWNER'S ESTIMATE OF VALUE 19 ; 19 CAltD NO. PRIVATE APPRAISAL --- INSURANCE 19 CARD NO. MORTGAGE 19 TOTAL PUil.DiNGS A>m .... ~.2 ~Q__ MONTHLY RENTAL 19 IMPROV!a:MENTB---~------- ADVERTISED FOR SALE 19 TOTAL ASSESSED LAND, s TRANSFERRED 19 BUILDING!;! ANO IMPROVEMENTS (' ,...~.,.,., 1 · 7-"!· 1/f ' C"'HF'rKi:-n nv a.,,, nOT<r/sS- ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 52 BUILDING DESCRIPT!ON AND VALUE CALCULATION CARO OF CARDS CLASSIFICATION No._L 'l. 1t1N BUILDING DESCRIPTION BLDG.No. GROUND PLAN SKETCH AREA--MAIN BUILDING {INOtCATI!: NUMBl!:R STORlE:Sl TYPE AND USE ROOFING D ATTIC AR~ 1 -FAMILY DWELLING ___ ill PREPARED ROL" FINISHED STAIRS D ,' ' I I I I I, I . . ' . I ' '. .. /Y X )0 _],, ___ 2-FAMILY DWELLING-D BUILT-UP ASPHALT---D . PERCENT OF GROUND A~A: _rx~ So Row Hous"' D SHINGLE:(U D FINISHED % UNFIN. % . ..K__x___].ic__ --z:-WOOD-ASPHALT_ _j_) ___ APARTMENT BUILDING __ D AseEsTos_D SLATE....._..... 0 PORCHES i X ,. . $( 3--V-D TILE, D D NUMBER: 0PEN--CL0SEO __ D METAL CEMENT CLAY e .. X / -Y fK TIN D COPPED D UNFINISHEO __ FJNISl-11::0 ___ ~ -' UNITS AND ROOMS ,----;a 1~ X INSULATED B TERRACES 'I tc:mo OF t,!UMSER OF e ,s . X UNITS UNIT• IUlDMII KIND 1i f /JUL I ~ e h, X 1-0 (f ), /':) HEATING '~ . }': 1/& BASEMENT STov-D ' AREA· D. D . D e . TOTAL 100% 76% 60% WARM AIR: PIPELESS ___ D , FOUNDATION 2So/c, __ o NONE-~ PIPED D f--REPRODUCTION COST AND FINAL VALUE POSTS OR PIERS D (o 1:' No FLOOR FORCED C!RCULATION_o -; MAIN BUILDING WALLS {:_.,,4-l.'l (!:.: m PLASTERED D PLASTERED D e CEILING_ WALL$ __ HOT WATER OR VAPOR._ D . ITEM I AREA OR l UNIT I TOT L D WALLS: KIND e NO. QUANTITY COST A STEAM D FINISHED ROOMS: BASE I I I EXTERIOR WALLS GAS STEAM RADIATOR$ __ D 1.3.,41LL,a .. £tl..17§1 1f: NO, % AREA Wooo FRAM O ·gj GAS FLOOR FURNACES No._b ; ) ' I I I NO SHEATH• FLOORS f-- SHEATHING ~ ING ___ SUBFLOOR IST-~ 20 UPD AIR CONDITIONING D \ -L ... . . _I __ I ____ I .. " SOLID MASONRY i;=i No SUBFLOOR 1ST 20 upD :: .. ADDITIONS (PLUS) AUTOMATIC BURNER OR STOKER __ 2---/L._ l,_11_,_fJ, __ QZ [ INSULATION; L&O % AREA CONSTRUCTION: o,'--0 GAs O coAL 0 WOOD JOOSTS ;7,-,trx1'1[] ,/aP __ 11~ rr _I, o_371 SIDING, ; .. B WOODBOARD •' CONCRETE ON GRADE__ D PLUMBING ..3.:,S_:-___ Lh....if_j_..Qfll BOARD AND BATTEN ___ D NONE...._ D WATER ONLY_ D e . . . I I , . .L'..:2...E. L----.L_IQ, __ _I SHINGLE: WOOD D FINISH FLOO~: BA THROOMS__L. TILED---FRONT .. L I I ... ~sPHlt_T D ASBESTOS D HARDWOOD SOFTWOOD D NUMBER OF FIXTURES: _____ I _____ I~-' STUCCO D TILE: SQ.FT. WASHSTANDS __ ,_ Tuss_l_ DEPRECIATION AND OBSOLESCENCE DEDUCTIONS (MINU!: BRICK VENEER:o FACED -o. FT. 'NATERCLOSETS_i SHWRS,_ A. AGE {NORMAL DEPRECIATION) ::, t. ~-II,. ,i:'_1_ o3} ___;;z_ -·r~ COM. _J~_l_,,r7 I STONE VENEER:o CUTO INTERIOR FINISH SHOWER STALLS B. PHYSICAL CONDITION .. % NATIVE WALLBOARD OR EQUAL....._ D AUTOMATIC WATER HEATER C1t C. MODERNIZATION ; J~ F-I J.-:, a I /, .1'./'I BRICK SOLID: D FACED {MINUS) .. % COM. ~-KITCHEN$ LAUNDRY [fl D. TOTAL DEPRECIATION _______ I _____ I ____ I D PLASTERED SINK_ .. .. % Tues __ __ [_ I ____ I CONCRETE BLOC"' WOOD PANELING: E. NET CONDITION {100-D) .. .. % D KIND: OTHER ITEMS \l SQ . FT, NATURAL F•REPL~ L ____ l __ l • SPECIAL OBSOLESCENCE BASE REPRODUCTION \ 2.J~ ROOF TILE WALLS: SQ, FT. GAS FIREPLACES -COST .. .. s TY•«o ~ 0 OUTSIDE CHIMNEYS{ F. LOCATION {AREA NO, ) .. % FLAT PITCQID LOW TRIM: HARDWD, RMS. MEDIUM---STEEP: __ o SOFTWOOD / G. OTHER .. .. .. .. .. .. % FINAL NET CONDITION RMS. STATE OF REPAIRS FINAL VALUE-• -H. TOTAL SPECIAL OBSOLESCENCE % .:2 J FRAM>NG, rn·L-D LIGHTING EXCELLENT D Gooo __ lS{) J. FINAL NET CONDITION (100-HJ x~ % MAIN BUILDING S ---- AVERAGE..._ DIFFICULT D ELEC. ~ GAsD NoNED FAIR D PooR-0 SUMMARY OF BUILDING \I DATE OF CoNSTRUCTOON I MA,DR ALTERATOONS oR AooonoNs I M"oR ALTERATOONS OR Aoo,m~~--- MAIN BUILDING $ ___ -· .:;J ::,I '~ATJr. -1-.,_':::' -1--.,-~OURCI!; DATE l AGE l DESCRIPTION ]P•m cun ~1~1 ' OESCRJPTJON IPER Cli:t<T GARAGE l'l'.1/) _/7 ,,,~;,/" .. ___ _, _____ it ~ R z :.l1L GARAGE AND MINOR BUILDINGS MINOR BUILDINGS CL ... 88 NO. SIZE AREA WALLS FLOOII 20 FLOOR REPRODUCTION OTHER WJOTl1 X DE:PTl1 ROOF HE:ATING LIGIITING PLUMBING ... OE:PAE:ClATIOtl NET VALLIE IMPROVEMENTS ------------------------·-------...... u,..-. co•T ------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------·------------------ -----1-----------·--~-. TOTAL Bu,Lo>NGS I ~ _j;., ,; 0 J AND ,. _.-----·-... ·-,--·.---.--IMPROVEMENTS SPECIAL BUILDING NOTES:-----------·---------·- ------· ----------------···----' --' -· - ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 53 �_o_u�_E_S_S========================== l>ARC:FI ... NUM8ER ___ _ YEAR AMALIE: KLP.IN, 140 N. FT. MCKINLS'l COLLINS f car.a. 9710•1-03-011 T.,0TS 10 AND 11 vr. COLL INS BLK 1 S\'/E:TT' S u:ss S 50 FT 6 INCHES 56 F'T OF SD LOTS SUB.JE Cl" :PROf'f U l '1' AND LE:SS N LANO VALU!;: CAlCtJt..AnOtf StH 01! ACRfS 50 X J/0 UNIT VALUE ADJUSTi.iENT FACTORS 8ASi 0.C:PTH _______ DEPTH CORN£R ; :;J. -c') () � 8' d (7$ CLASS I Fl CA_ T!ON. _N<,,j{Ift-· smoca llt.r11TS Tliioo.s ,_: TYPE US-E � Si�-�;� O��-l� �- f--i-""°"="e.sl-e ll_iK!).��_9--- ······ ... ��(ti IJr,,,:-1!:llia<.i 8i::::sidf!"n* 1 a L A,p-r __ �1.J __ LI I 1 __ _1_] 1 ) .1J_i_ SUMMARY --=,��--------<t----,·· ··-----· . l:_.HONT i-=" OOT SQtlti.Rt: FOOT ___ -�:!:�� _ --+---=A.::C.:.:.�_:c(___.cV.::AL�l�J [�· -I- 10TAL D.AT.E .APPRAlSEri ACtlJ.A_l. VA��-� · ��_E _____ -----+-L_ANO �ffiaiJEMENTS f(Jl'".A.L ------+--"/J_··�-----+ "''l---t----ll-----t---- :i"ONINO A SSE SSE a VA LUE LAN U !IMPROOEMENT' TO TA L 1---+--------+-----+--------l---+-----+----------A �..,. Pl'-(�i'.�-�.PL/'----' ----+/'l'h, . (1. ... .,..ec.:ml <,dl,.,..d,:,;, . ---,:: _;..f; __ ----+-;,_'�/·'--t-1.;;_•�'.--':,,'--·,-t.z-;[,' ----c·.1L·9 _:· �2.0 Y-7o .1, -----�-----�--�•----•I>------·· -···---·--· •·--·--· .7 ,l/t o 'f {, 1 a ----1----=t,'--->/"'----) ''-"'.J--+-2.-'J:....:..../'0---1....::Z::.....1._,_,_l___c,o'--------+. 6""----'7'----�� ----+----+-------1-----+-----+------+----+l-'-'?-'-7-'-b-+----310_0 --?(; 'i'A /t:J 79',=-;:1---1---1 ------+------If-----+-···-·-·----�----··-···-------------· ·----.. . ........ ________ _I/L'.>'---'?-'?-+---+1/'-'o'-'-�o_· � Jlf 8 :w 18 €So �ALf:'. S OATA tl:_,,11:.:,fc:;.,::.;A:.;�_:_;He_S:,._' -------------------------------------- -----------------------------------·----·-·· 5f'ECUL NOTES: ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 54 BUILDifiJG ___ DESCRIPTION ANb REPLACEMENT COST RECORD-----�R�E�S-ID_E_N_T_IA_L __________ _ i)·; ,�*;R��=�c-•�;-�i''.cO�l<�N�o�.==�=ccucc:,=,r=s-==/=======.-;,.=o'"o-'1_S _____________ p�'f'5tc ·�� ;:Nn�r��JCI 'tHi . DE SC�-P_T_,_o_u ________ G,_a_o_�--riO"" p"t.Mr�...:-fYCH�-------------.. --- CARO-----OF _____ C:AFiOS BL...0'3, N"o, EH(I.-'":,, .,, _______..=� 1!1 ifl'illol!' Mul 11 C11111•t1iu41 H,o-,Cd.-nh.QI Api::i:.rl��t __ ii o '8dd 'll•n-a,-a,-___+--+--=-G----!-Go_o__, ___ 1--_"'__:� ____ +-+ '.::.• ---+--+---'"-c.c<oco• _____ _,l_,_ll.....;;..,_.,1--".c.«cc•c.cl .cl'cc' ""-'--+---I-''"" . J_ !-'-' ,.I row __ DA_r_,_,,,._+-'"-+-f �- G :E (�' _ _F_�---'0---'0-R.::.S _ _,__ .. _,�F 1-! G :E ti I I PlU_M_B __ ,_NG _____ !-_N_o��---'UC..N_l.::.T-+_.::.co.,,;:;.s''-+-cc.coccscc.T-----i � _91��! I 111 -·l---l l ------,..:.::.l\ l---ll--ll-•....j..-W•· ;..J•:.;•:.;";....---l,---l·-+1 A,-,.Cj ----l----l"-A+B=-•cc•..:• _______ _ {___ -···�.'f Z,:cOc_•-------l e. Brod -·- _,_ ��!�!?-� . _ ____ IX --_ 8 1-J�•<�-'-"-'-"-'"----+--+---+----+-------j c. SM:1'1,f C. -I-'--- -- �- z 1,-t. B-Lllch:c ___ +--+---+----..+----..B,�!:'::� .. ·--�-1-_ -�: Sci!hirQl;l4 H,o. �otod:wc,ad flr-Q. .:c. Pl,e.r'!i )(: -- I :O::..J-.l;c••:.:c"c:.'":c'c.e'------:E >------"------· . . � -· --I:;, --Cof\o!: - .. fo&f.fl r ....,. -• ,[ --r-:__ - lDI I-at 1, -"-'1-"'=c:....----+---l------l---f'. :Mud SHl:1. F. fte-1iH""n.t Flrl}. _ _t .. .:.." .. i-.:S:.:o.:.:<S:::J"::.:":........_ ".c' '� _ Coi�'li�_n1- _________ ,_ ,-i-,- 9-1-- '..:'...:'..:.--+-+-+--!--C.. S.howllilif S t.:.ilt ___ _. __ , t4 Kll-c--h111,:i $11111: 1--.._----+-++-+..+---!!�l l�UUCJR flW'Sl-=, _ _,_____,___,__,_+'+·L_,o,,,-"-aJc,,._,_T'-'"'-'"'--------F-W ____ �__ �-•E°'><-"T.CCEccRc.;1 0;;.;R"'--'"-, �---l-12°'J'" - !J.-.!l•��- -••- _ ·-· '.:..'� !!.�d or SI'! S ,...___ ,., -)...:...Plc;:D..c"c:'c:.":;"::,_-l-l--l,i'('-'-- . -� �: G�t�(l(a� .. ?!_��--_i)J - �:_W_>!.;.':..:":..:'..:. ---1-_ --,-_ -l----+----J S f"r .A'l�!!LtO=t S � ��flNO ..B-. --��-�-�L- -- - --....!. Woci-d � �>-1--1-- _ · C ,Q,t-ci:tii-ci.tP 5P"t.o __ . .. ___ __ , __ D At.b��l(l!i �;r.,Q', -� _ Eli.HU Uo l"l1 -G ,_!_ -!!!!. G �lot@ -�- -�!!�-- --- - -t--i____,1-Hl------t Pf-11:[il-lHSd_ ��!!. J tn:aiiil -c: .. i:li,i,� --·-- Co.:npt<1l11!d By ----------<f'l:..i.T.. bir-.'ii" __ ,....., ____ ....................... _________________________________ ...i�!Hllfr,i a Cocihn� /bl4 � ·-------�- 5-r::{]l� l_ ,=:L?_i_ fl !f.: -- --•-:i-----,-- ---------C0:M:PUTATI-ON$---- - AR:f'.A-MAIN tHJI L Ol� ,0 A!UA -'.'. .:I __ x !:;,___ __2_'j_j____ _j..2__ ···-·· . X -· _2 __ _ X , _____ x -----·- --------------.J -- 11.(lil!I .... _L...__ TOTAL. :EU,1'-E AOJUS!MEN'f COMPUT.lJ:h:u•s AJU::A Otl O!UNrlTY -----·-- ---·· OOl.l At.i! AOJ:IJSTMEHl" COMPIJTATtON � -- ··f- · ·-- , _____ ,s t:��-- ��i -�;-�--. �-��tfJ'., f-V_o_;'-+-----'To-'-10;;1 ._ ·= ��!!!� �!_ -···��-��- ]��.ti�-��;; - ·_ ---� �•'-1-"'a.'•.c.'+---'Tccac.•occl:........--1 lq;: ;!__ '.,!fl_ JI...Si.L,1------11-- <------"••·-------· -·-····-- ·-- ----11----IC---+---- -----l---+---1-----1·- ·- ..... - 1-----.. . ----�z, -� _ _ __,_ __,_ __ _ _,_ __ _,__ .... ---- /./.Jri-, .... ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 55 I I I I I I SURVEY FORM HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Project Name ----------- / /,_.- ,J' 'c.-1/ • I Address '7 .> t-'f LCn 1 : , .• Historic Name ----------- Bldg. No.�-,56..:..,. ......... �;;;;,_--------- Style Original Location 2{_ Moved Materials Grd. Floor t.00od---------- Upper Floors --------- Architectural Features hf,.l"!c;ed tzX..t-P � an-P'llf nr I..() r t1 H;dfr htc/(}Cl �"";:1,t1,!0 .., Comments (;en,, Siro;/a t: --b ;44 H t,n Lr 1 , -I / n 'I; Subdiv Addn Name >\-'i 'lr..L! -5 Ad.ct,·+,·01.L- Block No. / ------------- Lot No • it) { I j ( '/3 6 p e.CL(JL) JC11r{· Use Current: �S /o:.u1C.� Hi st or i c: h:::5:.: #J"C� . ,<t--Condition: ______ excel ..·•'>-: X good ___ fair -.deteriorating Extent of Alterations: minor mod. --- ---major --- Describe: Stories/ Date( s) of move: Field Assessment-::&:.-Eligible ··t Not Eligible District Potential __ Yes � No__ Contributing _ Non-Contri�. Associated Buildings Yes Type ______________ _ Surveyed By: �flt}£& JJ. U,£ 0 Date: l1 I IS" l&ri I ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 56 •' - ·Co��-�nf Dy J,i<k . Gnodri£h • SUMMER!' ·---t... -J1ACATION-"' --==-- . ' ; II l! ti �rlou!I: lac� t'hor QO• ;,.tr - -- . '" oH obiot.l"!i oi,d dii1!unc·H. guaf, --------� -e-..-10 •�•-v•,y-y-obn9:-b�� Hm.d-•----- .... '1iiiH-i'i'rlbii90"f."'"lht1·1I ... ifdl,�oE 1-------------- ·, r 1h1t Ji'o,gic til the -< h 1-i d :, wor'kl a ..... o,ld ·_ iin . First, know -----------------tion , what , _______ y_QU_C or t Second, us1 phari ... �. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 57 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 58 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 59 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 60 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 61 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 62 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 63 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 64 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 65 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 66 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 67 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 68 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 69 5/17/2021 1 1 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission, May 19, 2021 140 N. McKinley Ave – Rear Addition Landmark Final Design Review 2 1 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 70 5/17/2021 2 Role of the LPC • Provide final design review of proposed addition •Do the project plans meet the Standards for Rehabilitation? • Issue or deny Certificate of Appropriateness under Municipal Code 14, Article IV 3 Property Background • City Landmark • Designated December 15, 1998 • Standards 1 and 3 • Period of Significance undefined ( likely 1945) • House & Garage constructed in 1945 4 3 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 71 5/17/2021 3 Proposed Project – Rear Addition 5 • Addition onto rear (east) elevation • Materials • Wood door • Wood windows • Engineered wood siding Proposed Alterations - Footprint 6 Existing Proposed 5 6 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 72 5/17/2021 4 Proposed Alterations - Floorplan 7 Existing/Demo Plan Proposed Proposed Alterations – Basement Floorplan 8 7 8 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 73 5/17/2021 5 Proposed Alterations – West Facade 9 Existing Proposed Proposed Alterations – North Elevation 10 Existing Proposed 9 10 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 74 5/17/2021 6 Proposed Alterations – South Elevation 11 Existing Proposed Proposed Alterations – East (rear) Elevation 12 Existing Proposed 11 12 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 75 5/17/2021 7 Proposed Alterations – Concept Sketches 13 Staff Analysis • Project is generally consistent with SOI Standards for Rehab • Appears to be: • Compatible • Distinguishable • Generally reversible (related to character-defining features) • Subordinate • Still could be improved with reductions to footprint 14 13 14 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 76 5/17/2021 8 Response to LPC Work Session ?’s • Joining methods between historic and new siding • Drawing A6.0 updated to show corner cladding • Are windows on addition to be wood or aluminum clad wood • Owner confirmed via email (5/14) - wood 15 Staff Recommendation • Approve and issue Certificate of Appropriateness 16 15 16 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 77 5/17/2021 9 Role of the LPC • Provide final design review of proposed addition •Do the project plans meet the Standards for Rehabilitation? • Issue or deny Certificate of Appropriateness under Municipal Code 14, Article IV 17 17 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 78 1 Jim Bertolini From:Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Sent:Tuesday, April 20, 2021 12:37 PM To:Jim Bertolini Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: RE: RE: RE: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Hi Jim, I consent to a virtual only hearing. Thanks for the information. Thanks, Keith (Casey) Churchill Liberty Common School Principal National Core Knowledge Consultant 970-482-9800 ext 1111 From: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 11:29 AM To: Casey Churchill <cchurchill@libertycommon.org> Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: 140 North McKinley Ave Expansion - photos & check-in Casey, The meeting will be on Wednesday evening, May 19, at 5:30 pm (with a Work Session the week prior on May 12 at the same time). You are welcome to make a presentation to the Commission of up to 15 minutes following the staff presentation. At present, the LPC is only meeting virtually. The agenda will be posted HERE once available. Please consider the following: Any person or applicant seeking a quasi-judicial decision from City Council, a City board or commission or an administrative hearing officer under the City Code or the City's Land Use Code, shall be notified in writing or by email of the intention to conduct a Quasi-Judicial Hearing using Remote Technology. Such person or applicant shall be entitled to request that the Quasi-Judicial Hearing be delayed until such time as the Hearing can be conducted in person. If you could reply to this email confirming whether or not you consent to a virtual-only hearing for this item, I’d appreciate it. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 79 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 1 A STAFF REPORT May 19, 2021 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME MOORE, SAMUEL AND JESSIE, PROPERTY, 528 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE - APPLICATION FOR FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mark Greenwald, Resident; Gina Janett, Resident; Robin Stitzel, Resident; William Whitley, Resident PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council on Landmark designation of the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property at 528 W. Mountain Avenue. The nomination is not supported by the owners, Jason and Misha Green. COMMISSION’S ROLE AND ACTION: Chapter 14 of Municipal Code charges the Commission with providing a recommendation to City Council on nominations for Fort Collins Landmark designation. Nominations that are not supported by the owner are processed under Sec. 14-33(b) and (c) of Municipal Code. This landmark designation review differs from those the Commission typically sees in that, when an application is brought forward without the support of the owners, the questions considered by the LPC are answered in two separate hearings rather than one. At this hearing, the Commission shall consider just the property’s significance and integrity and determine whether the property is eligible for designation based on the criteria for significance and integrity. The Commission’s decision regarding eligibility must be adopted as a written resolution. If the Commission finds that the property is not eligible for landmark designation due to a lack of meeting the criteria for significance and/or integrity, the application is denied. This is a final decision and is subject to appeal to City Council. If the Commission finds that the property meets the criteria for significance and eligibility and is eligible for landmark designation, then, at a subsequent hearing, the Commission would consider whether the designation will advance the policies and the purposes of Sec. 14-1 and 14-2 in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation without the owner’s consent. STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION: Staff has found that the nomination and supporting documentation are complete, appearing to support significance under Standards 2 and 3 and documenting sufficient historic integrity under the seven aspects of integrity. STAFF EVALUATION OF REVIEW CRITERIA Staff has determined that the application for Landmark designation for the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property is complete and that the property appears eligible under Standard 2 for Persons/Groups, and 3 for Design/Construction. An historic survey form for the property completed in June 2020 details significance and integrity of the property. The form has been attached by the applicant for the Commission’s reference. Staff supports the findings in the survey form determining the property as eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation. Packet Pg. 80 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 2 A FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request regarding whether the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property is eligible for landmark designation, staff makes the following findings of fact: 1. That four residents of the city have requested, in writing, that the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue be considered for Fort Collins Landmark designation and submitted a complete application on April 20, 2021; 2. That the owner of the property has not consented to the nomination via correspondence received on April 20, 2021; 3. That the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue appears to have significance to Fort Collins under Significance Standard 2 Persons/Groups and 3 Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the submitted nomination and attached historic resource survey form; 4. That the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue appears to have integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association to convey its significance as supported by the analysis provided in the submitted nomination. SAMPLE MOTIONS SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission adopt a resolution to be signed by the Chair, finding that: • The Samuel & Jessie Moore Property, 528 West Mountain Avenue, is eligible to be designated a Fort Collins Landmark; and • The property possesses significance to Fort Collins under Standard 2, Persons/Groups, and 3 Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the nomination document and attachments submitted by the applicant group on April 20, 2021; and, • The property clearly conveys this significance through integrity under all seven aspects of integrity in Municipal Code Section 14-22(b); and • A second hearing before this Commission should be scheduled consistent with Municipal Code Section 14- 33(c); SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission adopt a resolution to be signed by the Chair, finding that: • the Samuel & Jessie Moore Property, 528 West Mountain Avenue, is not eligible as a Fort Collins Landmark; and • This property lacks significance and/or lacks the ability to convey its significance through its loss of integrity; and • The designation process shall be terminated pursuant to Municipal Code Section 14-33(b)(2) and that the Commission’s decision is final; and • For a period of one year from this decision, no person or persons shall submit an application for designation pursuant to 14-31 that is the same or substantially the same as this application. ATTACHMENTS 1. Landmark Designation Application 2. 2021-5-3 Statement from Mark Greenwald (applicant) 3. LPC Resolution finding property Eligible - draft for possible adoption 4. LPC Resolution finding property Not Eligible - draft for possible adoption 5. Public comments received to date 6. Staff Presentation 7. Applicant Approval of Virtual Hearing 8. Hygiene Assessment from Property Owner 9. Seller’s Property Disclosure from Property Owner Packet Pg. 81 Historic Preservation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.4250 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation 1 Fort Collins Landmark Designation LOCATION INFORMATION Address: 528 W. Mountain Avenue Legal Description: Larimer County Parcel No. 97114-09-022 Property Name (historic and/or common): Samuel Moore House, Jessie Moore House OWNER INFORMATION Name: Jason and Misha Green Company/Organization (if applicable): Click here to enter text. Phone: Click here to enter text. Email: Click here to enter text. Mailing Address: 5820 Fossil Creek Parkway, Fort Collins, CO 80525-7114 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: Mark J. Greenwald Address: 1030 W. Mountain Avenue Phone: 312-576-1981 Email: mjgmd76@gmail.com Relationship to Owner: Neighbor DATE: April 13, 2021 TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES Individual Landmark Property Landmark District Explanation of Boundaries: ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 82 2 The boundaries of the property being designated as a Fort Collins Landmark correspond to the legal description of the property, above. The property (hereinafter the “Property”) consists of residence and grounds at 528 W. Mountain Avenue. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and INTEGRITY Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(a): Standard 1: Events This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events: a) A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or b) A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. Standard 2: Persons/Groups This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. This house was owned and occupied by members of the Moore family for most of the twentieth century. It was probably constructed in 1885 by building contractor Samuel E. Moore. His daughter Jessie Moore lived most if not all of her life in the house. She taught for 65 years in Fort Collins schools. Moore Elementary School on Orchard Place was named in her honor. Standard 3: Design/Construction This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. The Moore House is one of the oldest homes on Mountain Avenue, and is one of two in its block dating from the nineteenth century. It is in most respects typical of the era in which it was constructed, but has some unusual features, including a large bay window in the south-facing façade and a distinctive wooden triangular decorative element placed at the apex of the roof gable above the bay window. Standard 4: Information Potential ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 83 3 This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Click here to enter text. Period of Significance is the discrete chronological period (or periods) during which a historic property gained its significance. Additions or alterations to a property that have significance in their own right can warrant the extension of a Period of Significance. Period(s) of Significance: Constructed in the late nineteenth century; occupied by original owner’s family through most of the twentieth century. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(b): location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Standard 1: Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic or prehistoric event occurred. Unchanged from date of construction. Standard 2: Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a resource. Mostly unchanged since original construction. Standard 3: Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Setting refers to the character of the place; it involves how, not just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. Neighborhood quality has been well preserved since construction. The property contributes particularly well to its block (north side of Mountain, between Sherwood and Whitcomb): It is one of two original late nineteenth century homes that bookend the block, in the center of which are two good, if undistinguished, examples of mid-twentieth century construction, bracketed by two early twenty-first century buildings that harmonize nicely with the older units. Standard 4: Materials are the physical elements that form a resource. No major changes to materials since construction. Standard 5: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure or site. A good example of late nineteenth century home building. Standard 6: Feeling is a resource’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the resource's historic or prehistoric character. The Moore house definitely retains the feeling of the era in which it was constructed. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 84 4 An important part of what makes Mountain Avenue so appealing (virtually unique in my experience) is this: While it is lined with homes that are generally unpretentious, and in many cases quite modest, built by and occupied by working people (like the Moore family), it has for many decades maintained its stature as the most attractive and most desirable place to live in Fort Collins. Every time a home like the Moore house is replaced by a larger, more imposing one, there is harm to this legacy, which should be treasured and conserved as a tribute to American ideals, particularly those of the American West. Standard 7: Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or prehistoric resource. A resource retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. This undated image (late 19th-early 20th Century, from the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department, reproduced in document OAHP1403 re 5LR.8026—see reference list below) shows a gathering of women, believed to be teachers, in front of the house, nicely linking it to the era in which it was constructed. See document OAHP1403, Section V, for additional information. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 85 5 HISTORICAL INFORMATION See document OAHP1403, Section IV, for additional information. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 86 6 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION Construction Date: 1885 Architect/Builder: Samuel E. Moore (presumed) Building Materials: wood frame on concrete foundation, without basement Architectural Style & Type: single story, folk-Victorian style Description: See document OAHP1403, Section III, for additional information. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 87 7 REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION My information concerning this property comes almost entirely from the document titled Colorado Cultural Resource Survey: Architectural Inventory Form, further identified as OAHP1403, in reference to resource 5LR.8026, downloaded on April 6, 2021, from https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/files/site-form-528-west-mtn-ave-06-29- 2020.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 88 8 MAPS and PHOTOGRAPHS Photo of property made in April 2021. Recent photo of property (from OAHP1403; many more in the source document). ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 89 9 Map dated 1894 showing property location (from OAHP14030). ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 90 10 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 91 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++ ++ FIELD EVALUATION OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK ELIGIBILITY ☒ Individually Eligible ☒ Contributing to District ☐ Not Eligible ☐ Likely Eligible for State/National Register General Recommendations: I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5LR.8026 2. Temporary resource number: N/A 3. County: Larimer 4. City: Fort Collins 5. Historic building name: Samuel E. Moore House; Jessie R. Moore House 6. Current building name: None Official eligibility determination (OAHP use only) Date ____________ Initials ________________ ______ Determined Eligible- NR ______ Determined Not Eligible- NR ______ Determined Eligible- SR ______ Determined Not Eligible- SR ______ Need Data ______ Contributes to eligible NR District ______ Noncontributing to eligible NR District OAHP1403 Rev. 9/98 COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Architectural Inventory Form ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 93 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 7. Building address: 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 8. Owner name and address: Jason and Misha Green 5820 Fossil Creek Parkway For Collins, CO 80525-7114 II. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 9. P.M. 6th Township 7N Range 69W SW ¼ of SW ¼ of NE ¼ of section 11 10. UTM reference Zone 13; 4492952 m E; 492743 m N 11. USGS quad name: Fort Collins, CO Year: 1960; Photorevised 1984 Map scale: X 7.5' 15' 12. Lot(s): West 90 feet of Lot 10 Block: 61 Plat: Original Fort Collins town plat Platted: 1874 Parcel Number: 97114-09-022 13. Boundary Description and Justification: The site boundary corresponds to the recorded legal description/parcel limits of Larimer County Parcel No. 97114-09-022, which consists of the west 90 feet of Lot 10 in Block 61 of the original Fort Collins town plat. The rectangular lot is 90 feet wide and 115 feet deep, encompassing 10,350 ft² (0.24 acre) of land. The parcel is bounded on the south by the sidewalk paralleling West Mountain Avenue; on the west by the sidewalk paralleling North Whitcomb Street; on the east by 524 West Mountain Avenue (Parcel No. 97114-09-024); and on the north by 110 North Whitcomb Street (Parcel No. 97114-09-021). The subject parcel contains the single-family dwelling at 528 West Mountain Avenue as well as an associated two-car wood frame detached garage, a small sheet-metal clad storage shed, and what appears to be a long unused cylindrical concrete cistern, as well the surrounding yards and landscaping. The site boundary encompasses the area associated with its historic residential use beginning in 1885. III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Rectangular 15. Dimensions in feet: House: Length: 36 ft. x Width: 41 ft. Garage : Length: Approximately 26 ft. x Width: 20 ft. 16. Number of stories: 1.0 17. Primary external wall material(s): Wood-horizontal clapboard siding 18. Roof configuration: Gabled - Intersecting gables 19. Primary external roof material: Composition shingles 20. Special features: Porch, canted bay window 21. General architectural description: (Note: Please refer to the attached captioned photographs). The primary architectural feature on this parcel is a one-story, wood frame, Folk Victorian-style single-family dwelling that lacks a basement and rests on a concrete foundation. It encompasses 1,258 ft² of living space. The original portion of the clapboard-clad building consists of two perpendicular wings forming an T-shaped footprint, and the house is covered with a moderately-pitched intersecting gable roof. A shed-roofed open front porch extends across the ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 94 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins façade from the junction of the two wings. The building’s fenestration consists primarily of tall, narrow double-hung windows commonly found on houses erected in the late nineteenth century. All of the windows and doors placed on the original portion of the house – all but the full-width, shed-roofed rear porch, built in 1919 - have wide painted wood surrounds with decorative crowns typical of late 19th Century domestic architecture. Having been built later (1919), the full-width, shed-roofed rear addition is fenestrated differently with three windows, each a different size and type, including a small, fixed Craftsman-type window containing three narrow, vertically-oriented panes separated by thin muntins. The façade is composed of the prominent projecting, front-gabled west wing, to the right of which are the recessed side-gabled wing and attached full-width open front porch. The long front porch is covered by a shed extension of the side gabled roof, that is supported by plain, painted, squared wooden posts. A low wooden closed rail partially encloses the porch. The front-gabled portion of the façade, to the left (west) of the open front porch, has a moderately-pitched roof with a distinctive wooden triangular decorative element placed at the gable’s apex. A wide and tall canted bay window on the gabled portion of the façade is perhaps the dwelling’s most visually impressive element. The bay window is equipped with tall, narrow 1-over-1 double-hung wood frame windows framed by decorative wood moldings with recessed rectangular panels and paired decorative brackets placed beneath its crown. The front porch has a wooden deck (now temporarily covered by plywood), and the original porch ceiling material (probably beadboard) has been replaced by what appears to be narrow synthetic tongue-in-groove siding material attached to exposed rafters. The porch is partially enclosed by a low closed rail consisting of solid stretches of painted vertical wooden slats (not balusters) with top and bottom rails, and is attached to the roof support posts. Near its left/west end is an opening that allows access to the main entry/front door and to another, adjacent east-facing door on the side of the projecting west wing. The latter door provides access to the living room or parlor. Both entries are equipped with old, solid (no glazing), plain stained wooden doors and old painted wood frame screen doors that may be original features. Each door has a wide, painted board surround with a narrow, single pane transom light, and a decorative crown. To the right/east of the main entry are two windows, including a tandem set of double-hung, 2-over-2 sash windows separated by a wide mullion. Near the right/east end of the façade is a similar, solitary window. The house’s west elevation faces North Whitcomb Street. The elevation includes the original portion of the house as well as the west side of the attached shed-roofed rear addition. Two windows are placed on the original portion of the house, including one single and one tandem set of narrow, tall, 2-over-2 double-hung windows with original period surrounds. Near the north/rear end of the west elevation, on the side of the rear addition, is an entry within a very small, shed-roofed open porch. The porch measures approximately 6 feet wide by 4 feet deep. The porch’s roof is supported by plain triangular wooden knee braces, and the small deck is semi-enclosed by small lengths of low painted wooden closed rail. The entry within the west side porch is equipped with an unglazed and stained wooden door that is covered by a modern glazed metal storm door. The east elevation also includes the east end of shed-roofed, enclosed porch addition at the building’s northeast rear corner, which is attached to of the nearly full-width rear addition. The east side of the enclosed rear corner porch is clad with painted plywood and/or wood paneling. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 95 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins At its north end is an entry sealed by an unknown type of door covered by a modern glazed metal storm door. A rectangular dressed pale sandstone step is installed in front of the entry. The east elevation of the original east wing is covered by a fairly low-pitched gable roof and is fenestrated with two evenly spaced identical tall and narrow 2-over-2 double-hung windows. The rear elevation consists of the north side of the attached, full-width, shed-roofed rear addition and of the northeast corner enclosed porch addition. The clapboard-clad, north-facing gable on the back side of the home’s original west wing can be seen above the west end of the rear addition. Unlike the rest of the rear elevation (as well as the façade and side elevations) that are clad with clapboard, the north side of the northeast corner porch is covered with three painted plywood panels separated by vertical painted batten boards. Three dissimilar windows with plain painted wood surrounds are placed on this elevation; these include one large double- hung window; a tandem set of small double-hung windows, and between them, a small square fixed Craftsman-type window with three narrow vertically oriented glass panes separated by thin muntins. The east end of the rear elevation consists of the enclosed porch addition’s north wall. 22. Architectural style/building type: Folk Victorian/ single family dwelling 23. Landscaping or special setting features: The parcel is located on the northeast corner of West Mountain Avenue and North Whitcomb Street. It faces wide Mountain Avenue and its wide park-like median that carries the tracks of Fort Collins’ first streetcar (trolley) line, built in 1907, connecting downtown with Grandview Cemetery and City Park. Concrete sidewalks extend along the front and west sides of the property, and a path of wide cut flagstone slabs leads from the sidewalk to the front porch entry. While not verified, this flagstone path may be an original or early feature of the property. Unlike most of the other parcels on the block, the subject parcel is nearly square, measuring 115 feet N-S by 90 feet E-W. Being on a corner lot, the home’s façade is oriented south toward Mountain Avenue, while the garage faces, and is accessed from, North Whitcomb Street. The front yard and broad west side yard are not enclosed by a fence, and are attractively landscaped with a cropped grass lawn and a number of medium and large-sized deciduous trees which shade and partially obscure the house from view when bearing leaves. Abundant large deciduous (and some evergreen) trees are established all along the West Mountain Avenue corridor in residential lots and on the grass-covered strips between the sidewalk and the street, as well as in the wide median. The backyard is enclosed by a modern cedar picket privacy fence, with gates installed on the right/east side of the house, and another north of the house adjacent to the southwest corner of the detached garage. While in a state of deterioration when observed in June 2020, the backyard was partially paved with flagstone, although the eastern end of the yard is covered with grass and shaded by large deciduous trees. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: Two outbuildings and one historic feature (a cistern) are located on the property behind (north of) the house: Garage: Located near the north end of the property and built in 1937, this building is a single- story, wood-frame, two-car detached garage with a full-width shed-roofed rear addition. The original portion of the garage measures 20 feet wide by 20 feet long and is covered by a moderately-pitched front gable roof. The building’s exterior walls are clad with horizontal wood drop siding. Two large wooden (sliding?) vehicular access doors are placed on the building’s west elevation. Above the doors and beneath the gable peak is a large 1-over-1, double-hung ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 96 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins wood frame window. The garage’s south side, which faces the backyard, contains an entry near the front of the building that is now sealed with what appears to be a salvaged painted metal door from a school or other facility. The garage’s south elevation also contains a large, fixed, horizontally-oriented 12-light window. At the rear end of the garage is the attached, full-width, wood frame, shed-roofed addition; it is clad with synthetic horizontal drop siding and has hinged double wooden doors with cross-bracing boards that provide access from the backyard. This addition, which appears to have been constructed after 2006, was likely designed and used as a storage shed. Shed: Situated near the east end of the backyard, this small (approx. 8 ft wide by 6 ft deep) free- standing structure is clad with painted corrugated galvanized sheet metal, as is the extremely low-pitched shed roof. A weathered plywood door is attached with hinges to its front/west side. It was evidently built and used for storage. Its date of construction was not determined, but it likely is less than 50 years old. Cistern: This old concrete feature is located behind the dwelling in the backyard, adjacent to the modern privacy fence. The feature is a large concrete cylinder embedded in the ground; it measures approximately 4 ft in diameter and stands about three-feet tall. It is presumably hollow and had a lid, although now there is only an irregular hole from which opportunistic plants grow. It appears to be an abandoned/disused cistern for storing water for household use when Fort Collins did not have a fully developed municipal water system in the early years after the town’s founding. IV. ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY 25. Date of Construction (Dwelling): Estimate: Actual: 1885 Source(s) of information: Larimer County Assessor’s property records for 528 West Mountain (Parcel No. 97114-09-022); W.C. Willits’ map of Fort Collins, dated May 1894; 1884 Bird’s-eye view map of Fort Collins by Pierre Dastarac 26. Architect: Unknown Source(s) of information: No information found 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown (possibly Samuel E. Moore) Source(s) of information: No information found 28. Original owner: Unknown (possibly Samuel E. Moore) Source(s) of information: Insufficient information 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): The single-family dwelling at 528 West Mountain Avenue in Fort Collins was reportedly constructed in 1885, which fits with the available evidence. Comparison of the 1884 bird’s-eye view map of Fort Collins created by Pierre Dastarac and the May 1894 large-scale map produced by Denver-based civil engineer W.C. Willits indicates that the Moore House was built sometime after 1884 and before May 1894. The building footprint shown on the Willits map matches the shape and placement of the extant dwelling. The Willits map indicates that there were a total of four building on the lot, including the house with an T-shaped plan in the same location as the extant house; a very small structure located adjacent to the rear elevation of the dwelling’s east wing; and two rectangular-plan buildings to the east and northeast of the house. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 97 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map coverage of Fort Collins began in 1886 but was very limited in scope until the first decade of the twentieth century, when a population influx and building boom occurred following construction of the beet sugar processing factory. The first Sanborn map edition to cover the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue was issued in March 1906, and was repeated and updated in successive editions, including September 1909, December 1917, December 1925, and the October 1948 (updated December 1925) edition. Unfortunately, the 1925 and 1948 Sanborn maps could not be obtained or viewed online for this investigation due to access limitations. The 1906 Sanborn map reveals that major changes occurred to 528 West Mountain Avenue between May 1894 (when the Willits map was published), and March 1906. Sometime during this 12-year period a large, full-width rear addition was attached to the rear/north end of the original T-shaped dwelling. In order to enlarge the house it was necessary for the owner to remove the very small unidentified building shown on the 1894 Willits map locat ed directly adjacent to the house’s original rear/north elevation. Also during the period between mid-1894 and early 1906 a new small stone or concrete building with a full-width wood frame shed or porch addition was erected near the northeast corner of the enlarged home. The function of the stone and wood frame building is unknown. The two outlying wood frame buildings located in the eastern portion of the lot, which were depicted on the 1894 Willits map, were still standing in 1906. The Sanborn map from that year revealed that the northern outlying building was a 1½ story structure labeled with an address of 528 1/2, whereas the southern outlying building to the south was a single-story structure which was labeled as having a [peculiar] address of 528 1/3, suggesting they were being used as secondary residences or rentals. Sometime between March 1906 and September 1909, the southernmost of the wood frame buildings located on the eastern portion of the lot (528 1/3), was torn down. No changes to the property were noted on the Sanborn map edition published 8 years later, in December 1917, although on the latter map the address number 528 1/2 was removed. It is likely that the building that had been labeled 528 1/2 remained standing until c. 1939-1940, when Lot 10 was subdivided for sale and residential development, with the western 90 feet containing the extant 1885 dwelling and two-car garage and retaining the address number 528. The remainder of Lot 10 was divided into two dissimilar-sized residential lots; the larger easternmost of these new lots included half the width of a vacated alley that bisects Block 61 from north to south. In the 1940s, new houses were erected on these lots east of 528 West Mountain Avenue: the House at 520 West Mountain was built in 1940, while another at 524 West Mountain was erected in 1948 (razed and replaced in 2016 with a new 1.5-story house). The City of Fort Collins’ building permit log book entries identify other improvements to the property between c. 1919 and 1952. These improvements, in chronological order, include: 1919 - Owner and builder Samuel E. Moore obtained a building permit from the City of Ft. Collins (Permit No. 258, dated April 2, 1919); the description of the proposed work in the logbook states “porch on frame house, 6x24 [feet], Ruberoid roof”; this refers to the open front porch which was already in existence at that time. The 1919 building permit was likely for re-roofing this porch for an estimated cost of $60. Mr. Moore would do the work himself. 1928 - Owner Jessie Moore obtained a building permit from the City of Ft. Collins (Permit No. 2153, dated August 8, 1928), for unspecified remodeling, for an estimated cost of $700. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 98 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 1937 - Owner Jessie Moore obtained a building permit from the City of Ft. Collins (Permit No. 5083, dated December 6, 1937), to “Build new two car garage of frame, 20x20 [feet], cement foundation, wood shingle roof, paint exterior, to be on rear [north] half of lot,” for an estimated cost of $250. 1943 - Owner Jessie Moore obtained a building permit from the City of Ft. Collins (Permit No. 7548, dated October 1, 1943), to “Reroof stone cellar,” for an estimated cost of $160. This is curious, because the dwelling rests on a concrete foundation, and no exterior cellar stairwell entry was observed when the property was surveyed in June 2020. 1952 - Owner Jessie R. Moore obtained a building permit from the Ft. Collins city government (Permit No. 12899, dated August 19, 1952), to install a “New comp[osition] roof on residence,” for an estimated cost of $236. Of the recorded improvements to 528 West Mountain Avenue from 1919 to 1952, only one was for new construction: the building, in 1937, of a new two-car garage near the parcel’s northern boundary. This detached garage is still extant, but a shed-roofed addition was placed on the rear/east end of the garage sometime after 2006 (based upon the garage footprint sketches on the Larimer County Assessor’s 1968, 1979 and 2006 property cards for this parcel). The northeast corner addition is an enigma. All of the Sanborn maps as well as the 1968 and 1979 Assessor’s property records present building footprints indicating that the extant full- width rear addition to the house (41 feet long x 10 feet wide) was constructed sometime between 1895 and 1906, and consistently show that the rear addition extended the full-width of original 1885 house. However, the 1968, 1979 and 2006 Assessor’s card sketches indicate that a 9 foot-long section of the east end of the rear addition area is an enclosed porch. This was verified by visual inspection in June 2020 (see attached photographs), but is confusing, since its construction materials differ from the rest of the façade (e.g., it lacks clapboard siding), and there is a clear break in the foundation. Visually this corner porch presents a more modern appearance than the rest of the house. Perhaps the rear addition was remodeled sometime between 1952 (last building permit entry) and 1968 (earliest Assessor’s property card available) to convert the northeast corner into an enclosed porch. Finally, the age of the small, plain, shed-roofed open porch on the dwelling’s west elevation (west side of rear addition) is undetermined, but its materials and simple design suggest it may have replaced an earlier, original porch, or that it may have been built sometime post-1952 to improve a pre-existing side entry that lacked a porch. Curiously, the small porch is not depicted on building footprint sketches included with Assessor’s property cards from 1968, 1979, or 2006. However, it is not clear if the porch was built after 2006 or if it was considered too minor a feature (dimensions are approximately 6 feet wide by 4 feet deep) to be included on these older, retired property cards. 30. Original location ___X____ Moved _______ Date of move(s): N/A V. HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS 31. Original use(s): Residential – Single Family Dwelling 32. Intermediate use(s): None ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 99 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 33. Current use(s): Residential – Single Family Dwelling 34. Site type(s): House 35. Historical background: This modest historic residence was reportedly constructed in 1885, a little more than a decade after the platting of the Fort Collins town site. The house was erected near the corner of West Mountain Avenue and North Whitcomb Street, although at that time it occupied all of Lot 10 in Block 61 of the Fort Collins original town plat. The house’s 1885 construction date appears to be correct based upon its architectural design as well as comparison of historic hand-drawn maps of Fort Collins. It is not depicted on the detailed and accurate bird’s-eye view map of the city produced in 1884 by Pierre Dastarac. However, the building’s footprint is clearly shown on the detailed large-scale May 1894 map of Fort Collins produced by Denver-based civil engineer W.W. Willits. At the opposite, east end of the 500 block (north side) of the block another single family dwelling was reportedly also built in 1885 on the corner of West Mountain Avenue and North Sherwood Street, and has an address of 103 North Sherwood Street. Like 528 West Mountain Avenue, the 1885 house at 103 North Sherwood Street is still extant. The 1894 Willits map as well as 1906 and later Sanborn fire insurance maps show the “Fort Collins Irrigation Canal” following a sinuous course through the City’s northwestern quadrant, and cutting through the northwestern corner of Lot 10 in Block 61 and crossing West Mountain Avenue beneath a bridge. This canal is either no longer extant or has been replaced with a buried pipeline. The house at 528 West Mountain Avenue was constructed during the 1880s – a period of early settlement and urban development of Fort Collins - when its population grew by nearly 50% from 1,356 residents in 1880, reaching a total head count of 2,011 by 1890. According to the City of Fort Collins’ Central Business District Development and Residential Architecture Historic Contexts (1992), considerable real estate subdivision activity occurred during the 1880s, when no fewer than seven new residential subdivisions were platted, including four on the City’s west side (west of College Avenue). 528 West Mountain Avenue is not located within any of these 1880s subdivisions, but they reflect the population influx and prospects of the town soon after it was connected to other Front Range communities and Denver by the Colorado Central Railroad in 1877. Still, by 1894, when the Willits map was published, there w ere very few dwellings standing west of Whitcomb Street. Bounded on the west by Whitcomb Street, the home at 528 West Mountain Avenue was at this western edge of residential development in the mid-1890s. Construction of a massive sugar beet processing factory in 1903 on the northeastern outskirts of Fort Collins resulted in an unprecedented population influx and building boom. As the city grew outward to the south and west, and residents lived farther and farther away from the urban core, streetcar lines were constructed to provide access to/from down and surrounding residential areas, the cemetery, and recreational sites like City Park and Lindenmeier Lake. The first streetcar line to be built was the Mountain Avenue Line, which extended west from downtown (“Old Town”) Fort Collins along the centerline of the street all the way to City Park and Grandview Cemetery which were then on the western outskirts of town. For most of its length the Mountain Avenue Line passed through wide, attractively landscaped medians, including along the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue. While the home at 528 West Mountain Avenue was constructed more than 20 years prior to its installation, it provided a very useful and convenient means of local transportation for the residents who lived there prior to the ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 100 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins demise of the streetcar system in the 1950s. Ironically, the streetcar system was still in operation in 1937 when the home’s owner had a two-car garage built on the parcel. As of 1902 (when the earliest available Ft. Collins city directory was published), there were only four houses on both sides of the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue. On the north side were 528 West Mountain Avenue and 103 North Sherwood Street. On the opposite, south side of the avenue were pre-1902 houses with addresses of 519 and 529 West Mountain Avenue. Unfortunately, the original owner of the house at 528 West Mountain Avenue was not identified, nor was the home’s builder, due to time constraints for conducting archival research. The earliest known occupants, based on the 1902 Fort Collins city directory, were building contractor Samuel E. Moore, his wife Edith, and their grown unmarried daughters Pearl L. Moore and Jessie R. Moore. A building contractor by trade who was 30 years old in 1885, it is unverified but possible that Samuel Moore built the West Mountain Avenue house that his family would live in for many years. The Moore family owned and occupied the home from at least as early as 1902 until c. 1968-69, when the last Moore family member to occupy the house passed away. Samuel Moore was born in 1855, and had married Edith Tedmon, who was the sister of prominent early Fort Collins resident and businessman Bolivar "Bob" Seward Tedmon. Like other prominent and successful people profiled in Ansel Watrous’ 1911 book, History of Larimer County Colorado (Fort Collins: Courier Printing and Publishing Co.). As a testimonial to his prominence, Bob Tedmon’s biography and photo appears in Watrous’ encyclopedic book among those of other noteworthy and influential residents of Fort Collins and Larimer County. While living at 528 West Mountain Avenue, Samuel and Edith’s daughter Pearl was employed in various capacities for the City of Fort Collins school system. She was a teacher and evidently served a brief stint as Superintendent of Schools c. 1909-10. It appears that in the early 1920s she worked as a special education teacher. Exactly which Fort Collins school(s) she taught at during her career could not be readily determined. Pearl lived in the Moore family’s West Mountain Avenue home from at least as early as 1902 until c. 1923-24, when she either married, moved away from Fort Collins, or died. Sadly, Mrs. Edith Moore passed away in 1904 at the young age of 47; she is buried in Fort Collins’ Grandview Cemetery. She was outlived by 23 years by her husband, Samuel E. Moore. He continued to live at 528 West Mountain Avenue with his daughters until his death in 1927 at 72 years of age. He was interred alongside his wife in Grandview Cemetery. The home was occupied by Miss Jessie R. Moore from at least as early as 1902 until her death c. 1968-1969. She spent most, if not all her life living at 528 West Mountain Avenue. Jessie was employed for at least 65 years as a teacher for the City of Fort Collins’ school system and spent most of her teaching career several blocks from home at Laporte Avenue School. The monumental Laporte Avenue School building (700 Laporte Avenue; razed in 1975) was designed by noteworthy early Fort Collins architect Montezuma Fuller and built in 1907. In addition to her teaching role at the Laporte Avenue School, Jessie Moore was reportedly a beloved teacher at the Rockwood School (also known as “Andersonville School”), which was built c. 1908 to serve the children of German-Russian sugar factory workers near the small, relatively isolated ethnic residential enclave of Andersonville. Further historical information about both the Laporte Avenue and Rockwood schools and the wider history of the Poudre R1 School District ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 101 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins are presented in a City-sponsored historic context document titled In the Hallowed Halls of Learning, The History and Architecture of the Poudre R1 School District Historical Context (2004). The number of Moore family members dwindled in the 1920s. Sometime between 1922 and 1925, Pearl Moore either got married, moved away, or died. Then, in 1927, 72-year-old patriarch and early Fort Collins resident Samuel E. Moore passed away. He was interred alongside his wife in Grandview Cemetery. From that time forward, the only Moore family member occupying the house was Jessie Moore. Within a year or two of her father’s death (c. 1928- 1929), Jessie Moore was sharing the West Mountain Avenue home with fellow Laporte Avenue School teacher Eva L. Armour and her mother Mrs. Louisa J. Armour (widow of William Armour). Originally from Illinois, Eva moved to Fort Collins in 1921, where she taught school for 56 years, until her retirement in 1952. Sometime around 1933-34, it appears that her mother, Louisa Armour, either passed away or moved away from Fort Collins. Eva Armour continued to live with Jessie Moore at 528 West Mountain Avenue until 1936, when she married Fort Collins optometrist Dr. Fred Evans and left to live with her husband in a residence located at 228 West Magnolia Street. Dr. Evans passed away in either 1951 or 1952. By the latter year, his widow, Eva, returned to 528 West Mountain Avenue to live again with her friend and fellow teacher Jessie Moore. Jessie Moore retired from teaching c. 1949, and about the same time Mrs. Evans moved to another residence at 319 South College Avenue. Following Jessie Moore’s death in 1968 or 1969 the house remained under the ownership of the Moore’s extended family, specifically Thelma M. and Duane C. Bartels who were relatives of Pearl L. Moore’s husband, Clyde Bartels. The Bartels owned it at least until 1979 (based on 1968 and 1979 Assessor’s property cards). City directories indicate that it sat vacant for several years, until 1976. Reflecting a city-wide trend, from 1976 until 1987, 528 West Mountain Avenue was used as a multi -tenant rental property primarily occupied by students attending Colorado State University. The property was sold to current owners Jason and Misha Green in May 2020. At an undetermined date in the late 20th Century, three Fort Collins elementary schools built in the mid-1950s were renamed in honor of beloved educators, including Jessie R. Moore. Formerly called Western Elementary School, Moore Elementary School at 1905 Orchard Place serves as a memorial to her many decades of dedication and service to public education and the community of Fort Collins. 36. Sources of information: Beier, Harold 1958 Fort Collins, History and General Character. Research and Survey Report, Part 1. Prepared by Harold Beier, Community Development Consultant, Fort Collins, Colorado, for the City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board, April 1958. City of Fort Collins Building Permit information for 528 West Mountain Avenue, derived from Log of Building Permits, c. 1919 – c. early 1950s, in collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Available through the Fort Collins History Connection website. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 102 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Fort Collins City Directories, for the years 1925 through 2018 (with gaps). From the collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Fort Collins Coloradoan 1978 Obituary of Eva Armour Evans, dated January 29, 1978. From the obituaries collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Larimer County Assessor 2020 Property information record for 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (Parcel No. 97104-14-022). Larimer County Assessor’s website, accessed online, May 3, 2020. Larimer County Assessor 2006 Property record card for 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (Parcel No. 97104- 14-022). From the collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Larimer County Assessor 1978 Property record card for 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (Parcel No. 97104- 14-022). From the collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Larimer County Assessor 1969 Property record card for 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (Parcel No. 97104- 14-022). From the collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. Simmons, R. Laurie and Thomas H. Simmons 1992 City of Fort Collins Central Business District Development and Residential Architecture Historic Contexts. Prepared by Front Range Research Associates, Inc. for the City of Fort Collins Panning Department, November 1992. Watrous, Ansel 1911 History of Larimer County, Colorado. Fort Collins: Courier Printing and Publishing Company Willits, W.C. 1894 [Map of] Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. Prepared in May 1894 by Civil Engineer W.C. Willits of Denver. From the collection of the Fort Collins Discovery Museum Local History Archive. VI. SIGNIFICANCE 37. Local landmark designation: Yes ____ No __X__ Date of designation: Not Applicable Designating authority: Not Applicable 38. Applicable Eligibility Criteria: ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 103 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins National Register Fort Collins Register ☐ A. ☐ 1. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; ☐ B. ☒ 2. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; ☐ C. ☒ 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or ☐ D. ☐ 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. ☐ Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) ☐ Does not meet any of the above criteria Needs additional research under standards: ☐ A/1 ☐ B/2 ☐ C/3 ☐ D/4 39. Area(s) of significance: Education, Architecture 40. Period of significance: 1885 – c. 1968-69 41. Level of significance: National _____ State ______ Local __X___ 42. Statement of significance: Previous Evaluation: The Moore House (528 West Mountain Avenue) was included in a 1998- 1999 City of Fort Collins-sponsored reconnaissance survey of all historic age (≥ 50 years old) properties in the “Westside neighborhood area” which extended west from Mason Street and north of Prospect Road. Abbreviated documentation and preliminary significance evaluations (for both NRHP and Local Landmark eligibility) were made of each property. 528 West Mountain Avenue was assigned site number 5LR.8026 and was evaluated in June 1998 by historian Jason Marmor as potentially individually eligible for Local Landmarking and as contributing to a potential but undefined historic residential district. Current Evaluation: The Moore House embodies both historical and architectural significance in accordance with Fort Collins Register Criterion 2 for association with a person of importance in our past, and with Criterion 3 for embodying the distinctive characteristics of a Late 19th Century Folk Victorian single-family dwelling in Fort Collins. The property is not associated with a significant trend in Fort Collins history per Fort Collins Register Criterion 1; for example, it was built during a decade of growth (the 1880s) that was large in terms of the percentage increase (48%), but consisted of only 655 newcomers. Fort Collins Register Criterion 4 is irrelevant with respect to this property. In terms of Fort Collins Register Criterion 2, the residential property at 528 West Mountain Avenue was the long-term, if not life-long, home of Miss Jessie R. Moore, who spent a long career as a teacher in Fort Collins. Her career spanned many decades, from at least as early as 1902 and almost certainly earlier, until c. 1949, when she retired. Miss Moore spent an undetermined amount of time teaching at the Rockwood School, educating the children of German-Russian farm laborers living at the ethnic enclave of Andersonville. However, Jessie spent most of her teaching career at the Laporte Avenue School in the westside residential area of Fort Collins, not far from her home on West Mountain Avenue. In addition to having her long ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 104 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins career as an educator of young people in Fort Collins during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Jessie Moore was beloved by students and teachers alike. In recognition of her contributions to the school district and community, the City of Fort Collins renamed the West Side School (built in 1956) in her honor as Moore Elementary School. Although the significant work (teaching) that Jessie Moore performed took place in schools including the Rockwood School and the Laporte Avenue School, her West Mountain Avenue home was the long-time residence of a locally significant and beloved person in Fort Collins history. Additionally, Jessie Moore’s home ,is situated in the neighborhood that was populated with a succession of her pupils at the Laporte Avenue School. In terms of Fort Collins Register Criterion 3, the residence at 528 West Mountain Avenue is a relatively well-preserved and locally rare example of a modest, wood frame Folk Victorian house built in the mid-1880s. While not architecturally elaborate, it exhibits clear traits of the style including a prominent and ornate canted bay window on the façade; a gable with decorative apex elements; and tall but narrow double-hung wood sash windows. The garage, built in 1937, is unusual as a two-car type built in the 1930s during the Great Depression in a modest residential area. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: The Moore House exhibits a high level of architectural integrity, including the original core of the building as well as exterior modifications that are ≥50 years old. It was originally built as a T-shaped structure in 1885, but by 1906 it had been enlarged with a full-width or nearly full-width rear addition that resulted in its current shape. Non-historic (post-1970) changes to the house include replacement of the original front porch ceiling and closed rail, and dismantling of the wood porch deck. The other major change concerns the northeast corner enclosed porch which appears to have been added or altered substantially. This corner porch is sided crudely with painted plywood, and has a modern door and storm door on its east end. Nevertheless, this rear corner porch is barely visible from the street and does not detract from the property’s historic appearance and character. VII. NATIONAL AND FORT COLLINS REGISTER ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT 44. Eligibility field assessment: National: Eligible ☐ Not Eligible ☒ Need Data ☐ Fort Collins: Eligible ☒ Not Eligible ☐ Need Data ☐ 45. Is there district potential? Yes ☒ No ☐ Discuss: A potential historic district analysis was beyond the scope of the investigation. If there is district potential, is this building: Contributing ☒ Non-contributing ☐ 46. If the building is in existing district, is it: Contributing ☐ Non-contributing ☐ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 105 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins VIII. RECORDING INFORMATION 48. Photograph numbers: 5LR.8026-#1-74 Negatives or digital photo files curated at: City of Fort Collins, Development Review Center (Current Planning) - Historic Preservation Department, 281 N. College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524 49. Report title: No report produced 50. Date(s): June 28, 2020 51. Recorder(s): Jason Marmor 52. Organization: RETROSPECT 53. Address: 332 East Second Street, Loveland, CO 80537 54. Phone number(s): (970) 219-9155 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 106 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins +Location of 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (5LR.8026), shown on a portion of the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5’ Fort Collins, Colorado topographic quadrangle map (1960; Photorevised 1984). ▪ 528 W. Mountain Avenue 5LR.8026 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 107 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Portion of 1884 Bird’s-eye view map of Fort Collins produced by Pierre Dastarac. Arrow points to location where 528 Mountain Avenue was built not long after the map was completed. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 108 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Portion of large-scale map of Fort Collins created in May 1894 by Civil Engineer W.C. Willits of Denver. Arrow points to the dwelling at 528 West Mountain Avenue. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 109 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Closer view of portion of large-scale map of Fort Collins, created in May 1894 by Civil Engineer W.C. Willits of Denver. Arrow points to the dwelling at 528 West Mountain Avenue. Note three other structures depicted on parcel (Lot 10) prior to Lot 10 being split into three contiguous but dissimilar- sized parcels now occupied by houses at 520 and 524, as well as the earlier home at 528 West Mountain Avenue. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 110 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Portion of Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map of Fort Collins (Sheet 6), March 1906, showing the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue including the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue (arrow added). The 1906 Sanborn map edition is the earliest edition to include coverage of the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 111 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Close-up of 528 West Mountain Avenue as shown on March 1906 Sanborn fire insurance map of Fort Collins (Sheet 6). Note: yellow colored structures are wood-frame construction while blue indicates stone construction. All of the buildings are single story except for the northernmost, which is a 1.5-story structure. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 112 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Portion of Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map of Fort Collins (Sheet 6), September 1909, showing the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue including the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue (arrow added). Curiously, this 1909 map was not updated to show the new Mountain Avenue streetcar line built in 1907 along the street’s centerline. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 113 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Close-up of 528 West Mountain Avenue as shown on September 1909 Sanborn fire insurance map Of Fort Collins (Sheet 6). Note the disappearance of a small wood frame building shown and labeled “528 1/3” on the March 1906 Sanborn map edition. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 114 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Portion of Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map of Fort Collins (Sheet 6), December 1917, showing the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue, including the property at 528 West Mountain Avenue (arrow added). Despite its existence for a decade by December 1917, this Sanborn map edition still omits the Mountain Avenue streetcar line. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 115 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Close-up of 528 West Mountain Avenue as shown on December 1917 Sanborn fire insurance map of Fort Collins (Sheet 6). No building removals or new construction have occurred on the lot in the 8-year time span following publication of the previous (September 1909) edition of Sanborn’s fire insurance atlas for Fort Collins. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 116 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Sketch map of 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins (5LR.8026), based on field examination in June 2020. Trees not shown. N 90 feet Backyard Unpaved driveway Corner addition Shed-roofed addition Porch/Entry Bay Window Detached garage 115 feet WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE NORTH WHITCOMB STREET Storage shed driveway Concrete cistern Front Porch Addition Privacy fence Sidewalk Window ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 117 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 1968 Larimer County Assessor property card photograph of 528 West Mountain Avenue, Ft. Collins, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 118 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 1979 Larimer County Assessor property card photograph of 528 West Mountain Avenue, Ft. Collins, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 119 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Recent undated photo of property when trees are dormant, provided by the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department. View looking northwest. Note the low white picket fence extending from the house’s east elevation, that was replaced by a 6 ft-tall cedar picket privacy fence. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 120 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, looking northeast. 528 West Mountain Avenue, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 121 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, façade, looking north. 528 West Mountain Avenue, left/west portion of façade, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 122 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, bay window on west side of façade, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 123 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, close-up of ornate brackets on bay window. 528 West Mountain Avenue, front porch, looking west-northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 124 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, front porch entry, looking north. 528 West Mountain Avenue, front porch, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 125 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, original front door, looking north. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 126 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, tandem window on façade, to right of main entry to dwelling. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 127 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, solitary window on façade, within front porch. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 128 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, second, east-facing entry within front porch, looking west. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 129 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, synthetic tongue-in-groove ceiling of front porch. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 130 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, interior of front porch, looking west. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 131 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, flagstone walkway and dressed stone steps to front porch entry, looking north. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 132 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, close-up of front porch steps. 528 West Mountain Avenue, rear and west elevations, looking southeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 133 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, entry with porch near rear end of west elevation, looking east. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 134 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, west entry and porch, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 135 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, tandem windows on west elevation. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 136 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, single original window on west elevation. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 137 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue east elevation, looking west-southwest. 528 West Mountain Avenue, original windows on east elevation. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 138 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, single original window on east elevation. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 139 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, northeast corner addition, looking southwest. 528 West Mountain Avenue, northeast addition and east elevation, looking south-southwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 140 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, northeast addition with east-facing entry, looking west. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 141 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, carved sandstone step at entry to northeast addition. ` 528 West Mountain Avenue, juncture of rear elevation and northeast elevation. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 142 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, rear view, looking south-southeast. 528 West Mountain Avenue, rear/north elevation, looking southwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 143 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, rear/north elevation, looking southwest. 528 West Mountain Avenue, eastern portion of rear/north elevation, looking south. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 144 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, western portion of rear/north elevation, looking SSW. 528 West Mountain Avenue, rear/north elevation, looking southeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 145 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, west end of rear/north elevation, looking south. 528 West Mountain Avenue, gable on rear/north elevation, looking south. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 146 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, tandem windows at west end of rear/north elevation looking south. 528 West Mountain Avenue, small fixed window on rear/north elevation looking south. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 147 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, large window near east end of rear/north elevation, looking south. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 148 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, large window near east end of rear/north elevation, looking south. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 149 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, detached two-car garage, looking east. 528 West Mountain Avenue, detached garage, looking east. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 150 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, detached garage, looking east. 528 West Mountain Avenue, detached garage, looking east. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 151 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, gable on front/west elevation of garage, looking ENE. 528 West Mountain Avenue, one of two garage doors on west elevation, looking east. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 152 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, south side of detached garage, looking north. 528 West Mountain Avenue, wide window on south side of garage, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 153 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, north side entry to detached garage, looking south. Door is non-original. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 154 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, close-up of wide fixed window on south side of garage, looking north. 528 West Mountain Avenue, SE corner of detached garage, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 155 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, sheet metal-clad shed in backyard, looking northeast. 528 West Mountain Avenue, sheet metal-clad shed in backyard, looking southeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 156 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, sheet metal-clad shed in backyard, looking east. 528 West Mountain Avenue, backyard, looking southwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 157 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, backyard, looking southwest. 528 West Mountain Avenue, looking northeast (garage in distance). ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 158 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, rustic fire ring and flagstone paving in backyard. 528 West Mountain Avenue, northwest corner of backyard with modern deck, looking NW. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 159 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 528 West Mountain Avenue, old concrete cistern in backyard, looking west-northwest. 528 West Mountain Avenue, close-up of concrete cistern. In backyard. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 160 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Undated (late 19th-early 20th Century) image of women, possibly teachers in Fort Collins schools. Provided by the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department. ------- ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 161 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Laporte Avenue School, 700 Laporte Avenue, where Jessie R. Moore was employed from at least as early as c. 1915 until the mid-1930s. The building was designed by prominent Fort Collins architect Montezuma Fuller and built in 1907. It was razed in 1975. Rockwood (Andersonville) School, which was located on the east side of Lemay Avenue between Lincoln Street and Vine Drive. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 162 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Appendix: Analysis of the Architectural Character of the 500 Block of West Mountain Avenue The following is a brief discussion of the architectural character of the north side of the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue. The word “block” is used here in a non-legal sense, and refers to the row of properties along one side or end of a platted block adjacent to a roadway. Due to the wide paved travel lanes and a wide, crowned/slightly elevated and thoroughly landscaped median forming the West Mountain Avenue corridor, 528 West Mountain Avenue is primarily visible to pedestrians from short stretches of the sidewalks along the north side of West Mountain Avenue and North Whitcomb Street, and to motorists and bicyclists traveling westbound on West Mountain Avenue. The property’s visibility is improved greatly during the late fall and winter, when deciduous trees that partially obscure the house from view have shed their foliage. Because of its relative visual isolation, this analysis will focus entirely on the north side of the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue. Block 61 of the 1874 Fort Collins town site plat was originally bisected by a north-south oriented alley, and divided into ten large, rectangular parcels arranged with five contiguous lots on each side of the central alley. The north side of the 500 Block of West Mountain Avenue was composed of two of these lots: Lot 1 east of the alley, and Lot 10 west of the alley (note: Lot 10 contains 528 West Mountain Avenue). Circa the late 1930s, Lots 1 and 10 were subdivided and the southern portion of the alley was vacated and incorporated into two of the newly defined residential lots. It is likely that at that time the “Fort Collins Irrigation Canal” was also abandoned or piped underground to accommodate home construction. The block contains six (6) contiguous residential properties containing single-family houses and duplexes built from 1885 to 2016. All of these dwellings are of wood frame construction, and include three 1-story, one 1.5-story, and two 2-story buildings. The following table provides information about the residential properties in the north side of the 500 block of West Mountain Avenue, based on field observations as well as Larimer County Assessor’s online property records. Residential properties in the 500 Block (north side) of West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Address Stories Roof Type Wall Material Year built/ Remodeled Architectural Style and/or Form 103 N. Sherwood St. 2.0 Hip Wood Frame 1885/No Foursquare variant/Side- by-Side Duplex 508 W. Mountain Ave. 2.0 Hip Wood Frame 2000/No No style; pseudo-Victorian 516 W. Mountain Ave. 1.0 Hip Wood Frame 1951/No Ranch/Over-Under-Duplex 520 W. Mountain Ave. 1.0 Gable-side gable Wood Frame 1940/No Minimal Traditional 524 W. Mountain Ave. 1.5 Gable-front gable Wood frame 2016/No No Style 528 W. Mountain Ave. 1.0 Gable- intersecting gable Wood frame 1885/No Folk Victorian ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 163 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins As shown in the table above, four of the six residences on the north side of the 500 block of West Mountain, including one with the primary elevation facing North Whitcomb Street, are more than 50 years old at this time (June 2020), while the other two are modern, 21st Century buildings. The dwellings reflect the block’s pattern of development. At the east and west ends of the block are residences (103 North Sherwood Street and 528 West Mountain Avenue, respectively) built in 1885, both of which retain very good to excellent architectural integrity. In the central portion of the block are two contiguous properties with very well-preserved historic homes constructed in 1940 and 1951. Both of these 20th Century houses are excellent examples of modest Minimal Traditional and immediate Post-World War II Ranch-style domestic architecture. Located between the 1885 residences and the 20th Century homes discussed above are fairly large (1.5 and 2-story) dwellings built in 2000 and 2016. The large 2-story house at 506/508 West Mountain Avenue was designed as a faux-19th Century house with numerous period decorative details and a very prominent two-story turret with a steep conical roof. Despite the presence of two modern residences on the block, the remaining buildings clearly show the episodic history of homebuilding and architectural stylistic differences from different time periods in the City’s history. It contains two very well-preserved but architecturally dissimilar Late 19th Century (1885) wood frame houses, including the single-story subject property at 528 West Mountain Avenue and a two- story duplex at 103 North Sherwood Street. While not verified for this analysis, both houses likely are rare surviving examples of residential architecture from the time period 1877 to 1900, which is defined in the City of Fort Collins’ Central Business District Development and Residential Architecture Historic Contexts (1992), as “The Railroad Era, Colorado Agricultural College, and the Growth of the City.” The block’s historic buildings all retain very good to excellent architectural integrity, and convey historical and architectural character that is both consistent with the surrounding Westside residential area of Fort Collins and contains two surviving very early Fort Collins residences. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 164 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE STREETSCAPE AND INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES OF THE NORTH SIDE OF THE 500 BLOCK OF WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE IN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Images Are Arranged from West to East Beginning with Streetscape Views Followed by Photos of Individual Properties North Whitcomb Street North Sherwood Street West Mountain Avenue 103 528 508 516 520 524 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 165 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins West end of 500 Block of W. Mountain Ave., with 528 W. Mountain Ave. in center, looking north. West end of 500 Block of W. Mountain Ave., with 528 W. Mountain Ave. at left, looking ENE. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 166 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins West end of 500 Block of W. Mountain Ave., with 528 W. Mountain Ave. at left, looking NE. West end of 500 Block of West Mountain Avenue, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 167 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins Middle of 500 Block of W. Mountain Ave., looking west-northwest. 524 West Mountain Avenue, looking north. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 168 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 520 West Mountain Avenue, looking northwest. 516 West Mountain Avenue, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 169 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 508 (or 506) West Mountain Avenue, looking northeast. 103 North Sherwood Street showing south elevation facing West Mountain Avenue, looking northeast. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 170 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.8026 – 528 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins 103 North Sherwood Street, looking northwest. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 171 I am a nearly retired ophthalmologist from Chicago. When my wife and I first visited Fort Collins in 2015 (with her daughter, an established resident of Colorado), we saw immediately that it would be a perfect retirement destination for us. We discovered Mountain Avenue on our first day here, and it was literally love at first sight. Soon we became the first buyers in the planned townhome group near the intersection of Shields and Mountain. We completed our move in the summer of 2019. From the beginning of my acquaintance with Mountain Avenue, I pictured myself walking frequently along it into Old Town Center, and that is in fact now my custom nearly every morning. Over the past couple of years I have become familiar with all the homes that line the street, and still delight in their diversity, their warmth, and the fact that most look quite unpretentious. Mountain Avenue is truly unique in my experience for being both the most attractive and desirable place to live in its community, and home to many people who appear to work for their daily bread, rather than just the upper crust. And an impressive (if dwindling) number of its structures were built long before I was born, making the boulevard a wonderful reflection of the city’s heritage from its days as a bastion of the burgeoning American West. I took particular notice of the unoccupied little house at the northeast corner of Mountain and Whitcomb. Apart from its sadly run-down state, it seemed a fine example of the kind of home that makes the street so special and appealing. I noted that it was sold last summer (for a very low figure, by Mountain Avenue standards), then continued to languish. When I saw a recently posted sign announcing it was to undergo historical review, I decided to get involved, in part because my daughter (living with us since she graduated from college in late 2018, and now working for the city of Fort Collins) had begun looking to purchase a home of her own in the neighborhood, ideally the exact size of this one. Restoring the property, if it could be acquired at a cost near its recent sale price (and proved to be structurally sound) would be a project she and I would be eager to undertake. An excellent document posted on-line at fcgov.com/historicpreservation taught me a great deal about the house, including that it was believed to have been built in the late 19th century and occupied by a single family, the Moores, through most of the 20th. Jessie Moore, one of the builder’s daughters, was a much loved and honored public-school teacher for more than 60 years. A century-or-more-old photo from the Fort Collins Historic Preservation Department, reproduced in the on-line review, shows what is thought to be a sizable gathering of teachers in front of her home. More than anything else, in my opinion, this image supports the case for historic preservation. I have never met the current owners; all I know about them is their present address (in a newish development south of Harmony Road). I understand they have applied for a demolition permit, presumably with intent to rebuild on a larger scale. I imagine, without confirmation, that they were aware, when they bought, that landmark designation was a possibility which might require modification of their plans. I, and my neighbors who have joined me in nominating 528 W. Mountain Avenue for preservation, would be fully satisfied if they were to opt for renovation of the existing structure in a historically sensitive manner. Mark Greenwald April 25, 2021 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 172 RESOLUTION 1, 2021 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING A FINDING THAT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 528 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO IS ELIGIBLE FOR DESIGNATION AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, pursuant to the Code of the City of Fort Collins (“City Code”) Section 14-31, four residents of Fort Collins initiated the Fort Collins landmark designation procedure for the property located at 528 West Mountain Avenue (the “Property”) by submitting an application to City Historic Preservation staff (“Staff”); and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property, Jason and Misha Green (the “Owners”), do not consent to or support designating the Property as a Fort Collins landmark; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 14-31(a)(1), Staff has determined the application to be complete and that the Property is eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the Property’s significance to Fort Collins under STANDARDS 2 PERSONS/GROUPS and 3 DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION contained in City Code Section 14-22(a); and retaining historic integrity of all seven aspects, as described in City Code Section 14-22(b); and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission held a hearing pursuant to City Code Section 14-33(b)(1) on May 19, 2021, to determine whether the Property is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has determined that the Property meets the criteria of a Fort Collins Landmark as set forth in City Code Section l4-22 and is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission is adopting this written resolution as required by City Code Section 14-33(b)(1). 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 is more particularly described as located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: WEST 90 FEET OF LOT 10, BLOCK 61, FORT COLLINS ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 173 City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution No. 1, 2021 2 ALSO KNOWN BY STREET AND NUMBER AS 528 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO Section 3. That based upon the information and testimony provided for and at the May 19, 2021, hearing and the Commission discussion, the Property is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with City Code Chapter l4 for the following reasons: 1. That the Property is significant under Standard 2, Persons/Group, for its association with Jessie Moore, a long-time educator in the Fort Collins area between 1902 and 1949; and 2. That the Property is significant under Standard 3, Design/Construction, as this property is a rare and well-preserved example of the Folk Victorian style constructed in the 1880s; and 3. That the Property retains a strong preponderance of integrity in all seven aspects: Location, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Setting, Feeling and Association. Section 4. That due to the Owners’ objection to this nomination, a second hearing will be scheduled pursuant to City Code Section 14-33(c) at a regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission to determine if such designation would advance the policies stated in City Code Section 14-1 and the purposes stated in Section 14-2 in a manner and extent to justify the requested designation without the Owners’ consent. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins held this 19th day of May, A.D. 2021. ATTEST: X Meg Dunn Chair X Secretary/Staff ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 174 RESOLUTION 1, 2021 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING A FINDING THAT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 528 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DESIGNATION AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROCESS IS TERMINATED WHEREAS, pursuant to Code of the City of Fort Collins (“City Code”) Section 14-31, four residents of Fort Collins initiated the Fort Collins landmark designation procedure for the property located at 528 West Mountain Avenue (the “Property”) by submitting an application to City Historic Preservation staff (“Staff”); and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property, Jason and Misha Green (the “Owners”), do not consent to or support designating the Property as a Fort Collins landmark; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 14-31(a)(1), Staff has determined the application to be complete and that the Property is eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation for the Property’s significance to Fort Collins under STANDARDS 2 PERSONS/GROUPS and 3 DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION contained in City Code Section 14-22(a); and retaining historic integrity of all seven aspects, as described in City Code Section 14-22(b); and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission held a hearing pursuant to City Code Section 14-33(b)(1) on May 19, 2021, to determine whether the Property is eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission has determined that the Property does not meet the criteria of a Fort Collins Landmark as set forth in City Code Section l4-22 and is not eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the Landmark Preservation Commission is adopting this written resolution as required by City Code Section 14-33(b)(1). 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 is more particularly described as located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 175 City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission Resolution No. 1, 2021 2 WEST 90 FEET OF LOT 10, BLOCK 61, FORT COLLINS ALSO KNOWN BY STREET AND NUMBER AS 528 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO Section 3. That based upon the information and testimony provided for and at the May 19, 2021, hearing and the Commission discussion, the Property is NOT eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with City Code Chapter l4 for the following reasons: [The Commission should articulate why the Property is NOT eligible] Section 4. That pursuant to City Code Section 14-33(b)(2) the landmark designation procedure is terminated because the Property has been determined to be ineligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins held this 19th day of May, A.D. 2021. ATTEST: X Meg Dunn Chair X Secretary/Staff ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 176 1 From: Mark Greenwald <mark_greenwald@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 9:56 PM To: BuildingServices <buildingservices@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] 528 W. Mountain Avenue I spoke by phone this morning with a gentleman from your office whose name I didn’t catch, about the property at 528 W. Mountain now undergoing historic review. My understanding is that the current owner wishes to demolish the existing structures at this address and build anew, unless a decision is made that they must be preserved because of historic significance. I currently live at 1030 W. Mountain, and have become very familiar with the overall character and individual appeal of the West Mountain Avenue housing. I think it would be very unfortunate to lose one of the oldest extant homes on the street, especially at such a key location as Mountain and Whitcomb. The 500 block of Mountain, north side, is particularly appealing in its current state, given that it is bookended by late 19th century buildings, with two typical if rather undistinguished mid-20th century houses in the center, bracketed by early 21st century structures that harmonize nicely with the older housing stock. I have reviewed the very informative document concerning the property in question at https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/files/site-form-528-west-mtn-ave-06-29-2020.pdf , which I think nicely makes the case for historic preservation; I have nothing to add personally to this assessment. I do, however, wish to register my preference that demolition not take place, and expect that at least two of my neighbors will join me in this. We will of course accept and respect any official determination made at or after the scheduled community hearing on the matter, which I was informed would take place on April 21. If the house is given status that will prevent its destruction, and if the current owners do not wish to proceed with restoration, I am interested in acquiring it for that purpose if possible. I have a relative who is an architect specializing in restoration of historic homes (mainly in the Northeastern US) with whom I would develop a rehab plan, and would turn to Alan Strope of Savant Homes in Fort Collins, who constructed the townhouse in which I now live, for general contracting services. My daughter, currently employed by the city of Fort Collins, would occupy and maintain the restored house. I was not able to identify an online source for forms to officially recommend landmark status, nor a calendar listing for the April 21 meeting time and location. Will appreciate your directing me to those resources. One final request: How might I arrange to view the interior of the house? Thanks for your attention! Mark Greenwald Mobile phone 312-576-1981 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 177 1 Jim Bertolini From:Historic Preservation Sent:Monday, April 12, 2021 7:26 PM To:Vicky McLane Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] Preservation of 528 West Mountain Vicky, Thank you for your email. This information will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark-preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. As a point of clarification, City Code grants limited authority to the Commission in this matter. The LPC cannot approve or deny the demolition of the property since the property is a single-family home and not designated as historic. The notification of proposed demolition is meant to inform members of the public about pending changes in their neighborhood, and to inform both members of the public and the Commission about the options they have under Municipal Code (Chapter 14, Article III), to nominate historically significant properties for protection prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Such a nomination requires the written request of any Councilmember, motion of the Landmark Preservation Commission, or the written request of any three or more residents of the City. If such nomination is received prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, preferably in advance of the April 21 LPC meeting, than no permits can be issued for the property consistent with Municipal Code 14-32 until the matter is resolved. If you have other questions or would like to offer further comment, please feel free to contact this office. JIM BERTOLINI Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Visit our website! “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” From: Vicky McLane <vmhmclane@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 4:02 PM To: Historic Preservation <preservation@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Preservation of 528 West Mountain Commission members - I am writing to ask you to turn down the demolition request for 528 West Mountain. While the home is in very poor shape, it remains an important part of Fort Collins history. And perhaps more importantly, it remains an integral part of the appealing character of Mountain Avenue. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 178 2 Its 1885 construction in a folk Victorian style makes it a rarity among Mountain Avenue's many historic structures. Its association with Jessie Moore, after whom Moore school is named, adds to its luster. While it will take a lot of money to rehabilitate the home, it is worth every penny in terms of landmark preservation. Please turn down the demolition request. Vicky Mclane 1607 Ticonderoga Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 179 1 Jim Bertolini From:Historic Preservation Sent:Tuesday, April 13, 2021 3:39 PM To:Robert Viscount Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] 528 West Mountain -- Historically Significant Property Attachments:FILLABLE FORM Landmark Designation Form- Revised 2-5-20.pdf; FILLABLE FORM Landmark Designation Form- Revised 5-28-20.dotx Robert, Thank you for your email. This information will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark-preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. As a point of clarification, City Code Chapter 14, Article III allows for residents to nominate a property without the written consent of the property owner, but places some requirements on how that nomination must be made. Such a nomination requires the written request of any Councilmember, motion of the Landmark Preservation Commission, or the written request of any three or more residents of the City . If such nomination is received prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, preferably in advance of the April 21 LPC meeting, than no permits can be issued for the property consistent with Municipal Code 14-32 until the matter is resolved. Please note the following requirements for applications for historic designation from City residents: Sec. 14-31 (a)(1) -All applications for designation submitted by the owner(s) or City residents shall include: (1) A comprehensive architectural or archeological description of each resource proposed for designation or as contributing to a proposed district; (2) A detailed statement of how each resource or district meets the criteria for eligibility for designation in § 14-22; and (3) An explanation why the boundaries of each resource or district proposed for designation should be determined as described in the application. Staff shall reject incomplete applications and provide a description of the information necessary to complete such application and any such rejection is not subject to appeal. Upon receipt of a complete application, staff may require a current intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of having such a survey generated by a third-party expert selected by the City. Regarding the Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form, this form was already generated in 2020 and is online, here: https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/demolition-review . Since you have expressed interest in nominating the property, I’ve attached the form that is typically completed for Landmark nominations in both Word template and PDF formats. If you have other questions or would like to offer further comment, please feel free to contact this office. JIM BERTOLINI Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Visit our website! ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 180 2 “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” From: Robert Viscount <rrviscount@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 3:11 PM To: Historic Preservation <preservation@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] 528 West Mountain -- Historically Significant Property Landmark Preservation Commissioners -- I nominate 520 West Mountain Avenue be designated a Historically Significant Property. I am writing you to ask you to preserve 528 West Mountain Avenue, the Moore House. We should preserve buildings that have been part of the historic fabric of Fort Collins for more than 130 years. For several years I was a motorman on the Fort Collins Municipal Railway, running car number 21 along Mountain Avenue from City Park to Howes. For the passengers, seeing the historic homes along Mountain Avenue adds significantly to the experience on the trolley. The character of the street is diminished each time one of the old buildings is replaced by something larger and “more modern.” Speaking to that point, in 1977 my wife and I bought a brownstore home in Brooklyn, New York. It had been built in 1873 on a plot of land 20 feet wide and 100 feet deep. The house was in terrible shape, having been used as a rooming house for decades and no major maintenance done. We recognized early that we did not “own” the building. Rather, we were guardians and caretakers. We spent 13 years living in the house, first replacing all the plumbing, heating and electrical systems, the windows, the doors, and much more. We also installed new bathrooms, kitchens, closets, cabinets, and a rear deck. But we honored the history of the building by preserving or restoring as many of the original interior features as we could. A similar process could be followed with 528 West Mountain Avenue, keeping the original building but adding an addition in the rear. It is a more expensive option, but it would help preserve the historic cityscape that we now have. Bob Viscount Fort Collins, CO 80525 rrviscount@yahoo.com 970-223-5975 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 181 1 Jim Bertolini From:John Spurgin <johnspurgin@me.com> Sent:Friday, April 16, 2021 9:08 AM To:Jim Bertolini Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: HP-20 - 528 W Mountain Ave Jim, Thank you so much for the wealth of information you have provided. We are next door neighbors & have watched the degradation of the property. We are hopeful that, after the appropriate process is completed, demolition will be approved. Best to you, John Spurgin 524 W Mountain Ave. On Apr 16, 2021, at 8:52 AM, Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> wrote: Mr. Spurgin, Thanks for contacting us about the property at 528 W. Mountain Avenue. That property is posted because the owner has indicated they plan to demolish the existing single-family dwelling and construct a new single-family dwelling. They’ve submitted preliminary plans consistent with the City’s requirements for demolition notification on properties over fifty years of age. The demolition notification process, and information about this property in particular, are available on our website, here: https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/demolition-review This property is on the consent agenda for the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) at their upcoming April 21st meeting (virtual via Zoom, starting at 5:30 pm). The agenda is posted here: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark-preservation.php If you would want to speak on the item, the chair of the Commission will ask if anyone wants an item pulled from the consent calendar so it can be discussed. You would raise your hand in Zoom or hit *9 on your phone to indicate that and request the item be pulled for discussion. Once the Commission reaches that item, you’d have an opportunity to provide any comment. Please note that the Commission is not approving or denying the demolition or the proposed new construction. The notification period is provided so that a member of City Council, the LPC via motion, or three or more residents of Fort Collins, can choose to exercise the option in Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article III to nominate the property if they feel that the property is eligible as a City Landmark and should be preserved. If any of those parties were to request designation at or before the meeting, permits would be held until the matter is resolved as outlined in Code. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me directly. JIM BERTOLINI Historic Preservation Planner ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 182 2 Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Visit ourwebsite! <image001.png> “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” -----Original Message----- From: BuildingServices <buildingservices@fcgov.com> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 6:03 AM To: John Spurgin <johnspurgin@me.com>; Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] HP-20 Good morning Jim, Can you help Josh with the status of the project mentioned below? Thank you! Best Regards, Kiana Carter Lead Building & Development Review Technician Planning & Development Services 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 970.416.2886 |kcarter@fcgov.com Tell us about our service, we want to know! Starting Monday, August 31, 2020, the 281 N. College Ave. building will be closed between 12:00PM – 1:00PM. Building hours will be: Monday – Thursday, 9:00AM – 12:00PM and 1:00PM – 4:00PM. “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” -----Original Message----- From: John Spurgin <johnspurgin@me.com> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 1:19 PM To: BuildingServices <buildingservices@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] HP-20 I am inquiring as to the status of HP-20 528 W. Mountain Ave. John Spurgin 524 W. Mountain Ave. Fort Collins ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 183 Carol P. Tunner 1400 Wimbledon Court Fort Collins, CO 80524 (970) 484-3957 caroltunner@msn.com 4/19/2021 Landmark Preservation Commission City of Fort Collins Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, It is with great sadness that I learn of the proposed demolition of 528 W. Mountain Avenue. Estimated built date of 1885 makes it one of the oldest houses on W. Mountain, the Avery House being built in 1879. It is associated with Jesse R. Moore, educator, whom Moore Elementary School is named after. Its Folk Victorian Architecture is significant because, believe me, so little is left in Fort Collins. It’s condition as a rental has taken a toll, but it is totally restorable from available historic photographs. I’ve been involved with worse, for instance, the abandoned Linden Hotel once had four inches of pigeon dung on each floor. 528 W. Mountain is a contemporary and similar age and architecture to the Linden Hotel. I support the non-consensual designation. I would have signed until one person put fear in our heads of a possible lawsuit. Many more backed down. I feel this is a disservice to historic preservation and goes against everything we work for. Saving significant historic properties is our legal right and our Landmark Code is the legal means to historic preservation. Without it we would have no Historic Old Town, and remember how bad that was in the 1970s. Courageous and accurate restoration of Old Town has been an accomplishment that has put us on the tourist map. I’m proud to have had a part. Historic house restoration and re-installation of the 1907 trolley line have caused property values on W. Mountain to skyrocket beyond the rest of the city. I’m proud of that too, but it wasn’t easy. I was sued for compensatory and punitive damages for restoring the trolley; I and my family could have lost everything and been out on the street. Fortunately, we won and this didn’t happen. After 20 years’ experience as the City’s Historic Preservation Planner, I believe 528 W. Mountain contributes to the historic character of the street, and with a sensitive owner dedicated to restoration, it would be a gem. I understand there are people willing and waiting to do just that. Sincerely, ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 184 1 Aubrie Brennan From:William Whitley <william.whitley@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, April 21, 2021 6:36 PM To:Aubrie Brennan Subject:[EXTERNAL] LPC: 528 W Mountain Ave Aubrie, I had planned to comment on 528 W Mountain Ave during this evening’s LPC hearing, but since public comment was prohibited by City Legal Counsel, I am forwarding my comment to you for delivery to City Staff and the Landmark Preservation Commission: Regarding the proposed demolition of 528 W Mountain Ave: I believe the demolition of 528 W Mountain Ave would be detrimental to the city of Fort Collins. As one of a handful of remaining late 19th century homes in the city, the modest scale of this structure is intrinsic to the charm of one of our most scenic avenues. The direct historical connections to the working class origins of Fort Collins and Mountain Ave are irreplaceable, and demolishing this house for a large newly‐constructed Victorian reproduction will not improve the city. I fear the pleasant scale of our neighborhood streets is in danger of being lost forever, and I urge you to deny this demolition request, and instead consider it’s designation as an historic landmark. Thank you. Bill Whitley 618 W Mountain Ave Fort Collins CO ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 185 1 Aubrie Brennan From:Jim Bertolini Sent:Friday, May 14, 2021 9:02 AM To:MerryRun Cc:Aubrie Brennan Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as a Historic Landmark Carole, Thank you for your email. Your comment will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark‐preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com From: MerryRun <merryrun@toadaway.net> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 9:15 PM To: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as a Historic Landmark I am asking the Landmark Preservation Commission to designate the house on 528 W Mountain Avenue as a Historic Landmark. Thank you, Carole Hossan merryrun@toadaway.net ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 186 1 Aubrie Brennan From:Jim Bertolini Sent:Monday, May 17, 2021 11:05 AM To:jimwurz@startmail.com Cc:Aubrie Brennan Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as Historic Landmark Jim, Thank you for your email. Your comment will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark‐preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com From: jimwurz@startmail.com <jimwurz@startmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 4:41 PM To: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as Historic Landmark Dear Mr. Bertolini: I’m strongly in favor of Historic Landmark designation for the house at 528 W Mountain (NE corner of Mountain and Whitcomb). My family and I have admired this house for decades for its connection to the history of our community. Both its architecture and human history make it important for preservation. Best wishes, Jim Wurz Jim Wurz 425 N Sherwood St Fort Collins CO 80521 (970) 484‐4648 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 187 1 Aubrie Brennan From:Jim Bertolini Sent:Tuesday, May 18, 2021 10:01 AM To:Michelle Haefele Cc:Aubrie Brennan Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as Historic Landmark Michelle, Thank you for your email. Your comment will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark‐preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Visit our website! “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” From: michelle.a.haefele@gmail.com <michelle.a.haefele@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 9:54 AM To: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as Historic Landmark Members of the Landmark Preservation Commission, I’m writing to express my support for the designation of 528 W. Mountain Ave as a Fort Collins Historic Landmark. I believe that it is important to preserve our irreplaceable historic structures. The character of Old Town is part of what attracts new residents and retains lifelong residents to Fort Collins, and specifically to this part of town. This building is significant for both its architecture and the historic events and people associated with it. It was the home of Jessie R. Moore, who was a much‐loved teacher in Fort Collins for decades and for whom Moore Elementary School is named. The house itself is one of two remaining late 19th Century Victorian homes on Mountain Ave. Demolition of this house would be devastating to the local cultural and historical treasure that Old Town represents. Thank you for your consideration of this very worthy and well‐researched Landmark Designation. Michelle Haefele “The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” –Plato ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 188 1 Aubrie Brennan From:Jim Bertolini Sent:Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:18 PM To:Dian Sparling Cc:Aubrie Brennan Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as a Historic Landmark Dian, Thank you for your email. Your comment will be shared with the Landmark Preservation Commission ahead of their regular meeting Wednesday evening. Additionally, if you would like to attend Wednesday’s meeting, a link to the agenda is located on this webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/landmark‐preservation.php Instructions for joining the virtual meeting are on the first page of the agenda. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com Visit our website! “The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. We acknowledge the role of local government in helping create systems of oppression and racism and are committed to dismantling those same systems in pursuit of racial justice. Learn more.” From: Dian Sparling <diansparling1@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:15 PM To: Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Designate 528 W Mountain as a Historic Landmark The home at 528 W Mountain deserves to be designated and preserved as a historical landmark. It has maintained its exterior structural integrity and has historical significance in our city. In fact, my children attended Moore school in kindergarten before it was renamed Polaris. Miss Moore was a beloved teacher who called 528 W Mountain her home throughout her life. After officially retiring from teaching, she performed community service by teaching English to the children of the German/Russian beet farmers who lived in Andersonville. I live in old town near City Park and highly value the history of Ft. Collins. And I believe one way to preserve its history is to preserve its historically important structures including 528 W Mountain. Dian Sparling 324 Jackson Ave. Packet Pg. 188-1 To: Landmark Preservation Commission Re: 528 Mountain Avenue This morning the first article I read from the Coloradoan was Barbara Fleming’s article “In praise of teachers past in Northern Colorado.” What a timely piece as someone proposed to demolish 528 Mountain Avenue. I cannot conceive of a property more appropriate for Landmark status than 528 Mountain Avenue. Yes, it is rare architectural find in Fort Collins, truly unique and the only one left of its kind in our city. True, it is the oldest house left on what should be a historical street. It meets every criteria for a landmarked property. But most importantly, that house and the people who lived there represent the history of working women in Fort Collins, and of teachers. As the daughter of two teachers, and a former student of Moore Elementary School (1968) I was thrilled to read the history of this little house. I live in the Old Town area and grew up in Fort Collins. I have passed by that little house so many times, and each time I see it I feel like I am taken back in time. Now that I know it was a place where teachers gathered I imagine them meeting there, planning their lessons, and preparing to educate future generations of Fort Collins residents. I also now know that women lived there alone, without the company of men, not an easy task in those days. We need to do a better job of remembering the everyday, working people who make up our history. We should not just honor the rich and famous by preserving their homes, but should honor people like teachers and strong, independent women, and preserve their history as well. I understand the difficulty of your job when the owner of a property is not in favor of historic preservation. But as our city grows, and property becomes more valuable your work will become more difficult and more controversial. However, we trust you to put up the fight for properties that are truly deserving of landmark status, and this is one of them. I am in support of preserving this property as a Landmark Property. If the owners only want to tear it down, perhaps the City could save it and one day it could be a museum or a learning center where we could learn about the history of teachers and working women in our community. Thank you Kimberly B. Medina 128 N McKinley Ave Fort Collins, CO 80521 Packet Pg. 188-2 5/17/2021 1 528 West Mountain Avenue Landmark Designation Hearing 1 - Eligibility Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner Role of the Landmark Preservation Commission •Provide Recommendation to Council by Resolution •Owner does not support Landmark designation •Process requires 2 public hearings before the Commission • LPC Hearing #1 – determination if property meets requirements of Chapter 14, Article II • If no, process terminated and decision is final (subject to appeal) • If yes, process continues to 2 nd hearing; decision is not final 2 1 2 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 189 5/17/2021 2 Role of LPC – 1 st Hearing Determine whether criteria of 14-22 are satisfied: • Is the proposed resource eligible for designation? • Significance • Integrity Adopt a motion for a written resolution either: • Recommending the property is eligible and moving to the 2 nd hearing; or • Recommending the property is not eligible, ending process (subject to appeal). 3 Process (cont.) If LPC adopts a resolution finding the property eligible: • LPC Hearing (2 nd) – does designation uphold Sec. 14-1 & 14-2 “in a manner sufficient to justify the requested designation without the consent of one (1) or more of the owners…” • Requires at least 6 affirmative votes to pass resolution • If no, process terminated; decision is not final • If yes, process continues; decision is not final • Resolution transmitted to Council within 15 days • Council hearing scheduled • Council hearing (within 75 days) • Quasi-judicial; new evidence allowed • Council determines if both criteria are met: -Property is eligible for designation -Nomination would advance Sec. 14-1 & 14-2 4 3 4 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 190 5/17/2021 3 • Constructed c.1885 • Jessie Moore residence, 1902-1949 • Historic survey completed June 2020 • Demolition notification process initiated by owner/contractors on March 5, 2021 • Posted on LPC’s April 21 regular agenda for notification • Nomination from four residents received April 20, 2021 • Nomination for building and grounds 5 Background Maps 6 528 West Mountain Avenue 5 6 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 191 5/17/2021 4 7 528 West Mountain Avenue 1968 Larimer County Assessor image. 1917 Sanborn Insurance Map of property. 8 528 West Mountain Avenue South façade and east elevation, looking northwest. South façade, looking northeast. 7 8 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 192 5/17/2021 5 9 528 West Mountain Avenue West elevation, looking southeast.East and north (rear) elevations, looking southwest. 10 528 West Mountain Avenue Garage, south elevation, looking north.Garage, west façade, looking east. 9 10 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 193 5/17/2021 6 Questions for LPC to Consider •Does the property have sufficient significance to Fort Collins history to be a Landmark? •If so, does it have sufficient integrity under enough aspects of integrity to qualify? 11 Staff Recommendation • Nomination is complete • Four supporting Fort Collins residents • 3 required under 14-31(a) • Application meets minimum requirements 12 11 12 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 194 5/17/2021 7 Role of LPC – 1 st Hearing Determine whether criteria of 14-22 are satisfied: • Is the proposed resource eligible for designation? • Significance • Integrity Adopt a motion for a written resolution either: • Recommending the property is eligible and moving to the 2 nd hearing; or • Recommending the property is not eligible, ending process (subject to appeal). 13 13 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Packet Pg. 195 1 Jim Bertolini From:Mark Greenwald <mark_greenwald@icloud.com> Sent:Monday, May 3, 2021 10:09 AM To:Jim Bertolini Cc:William Whitley; Gina Janett; r.stitzel@comcast.net Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: : 528 W. Mountain Avenue - LM nomination process No problem from my/our end with virtual hearings. (Any need for more formal notification?) I have written a ~600 word rather personal statement containing my thoughts on preservation of 528 W. Mountain. Would it be appropriate for me to send to you now, or wait and read it at the May LPC meeting? Mark On Apr 30, 2021, at 8:58 AM, Jim Bertolini <jbertolini@fcgov.com> wrote: Mark, Just a bump on the permission for a virtual hearing. If you/the group could respond to me by Tuesday (May 4) at 5pm, I’d appreciate it. Thanks! JIM BERTOLINI Pronouns: he/him/his Historic Preservation Planner Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue 970-416-4250 office jbertolini@fcgov.com From: Jim Bertolini Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 2:37 PM To: Mark Greenwald <mark_greenwald@icloud.com> Cc: William Whitley <william.whitley@gmail.com>; Gina Janett <ginaciao@frii.com>; r.stitzel@comcast.net Subject: RE:: 528 W. Mountain Avenue - LM nomination process Mark, Thanks for sending this and for attending the LPC meeting last night. My apologies for causing confusion regarding public comment. As you likely saw, the demolition notification item was pulled since we have received a nomination from you and the other three residents of the requesting the property be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark. We are initiating the hearing process outlined in Municipal Code 14, Article III. Since the owner is not supporting the nomination, that will include two hearings, one to determine if the property is eligible, the other to determine if designating the property would meet the policies and purposes of Municipal Code 14-1 and 14-2, respectively, to a sufficient degree to justify doing so without the ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 7 Packet Pg. 196 Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. 185 Bounty Hunter’s Lane, Bailey, Colorado 80421 Phone: 303-903-7494 www.forensic-applications.com Industrial Hygiene Assessment Resulting in the Discovery of an Illegal Drug Laboratory Located at: 528 West Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, CO Prepared for: Jason Green, DO 5820 Fossil Creek Parkway Fort Collins, CO 80525 Prepared by: Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. 185 Bounty Hunter’s Lane Bailey, CO 80421 May 17, 2021 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 197 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 2 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 3 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 4 ASSESSMENT PROTOCOLS........................................................................................... 5 Sampling Protocol........................................................................................................... 5 Wipe Sample............................................................................................................... 5 Quality Assurance – Quality Control (QA/QC).............................................................. 6 Field Blanks.................................................................................................................... 7 Field Spikes..................................................................................................................... 7 Analytical Method .......................................................................................................... 8 Cross Contamination....................................................................................................... 8 Sample Results................................................................................................................ 8 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................. 9 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................... 9 Appendix A: Laboratory Report Appendix B: Consultant's SOQ Appendix C: Discussion of Regulatory Status ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 198 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 3 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of the registered owner of the property, a state of the art Industrial Hygiene assessment was performed by personnel with Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. (FACTs) for the determination of the presence of methamphetamine at the residence located at 528 West Mountain Ave., Fort Collins, CO (the subject property). On May 5, 2021, FACTs performed a standard "basic methamphetamine survey" and collected samples in full compliance with all rules and regulations for the State of Colorado, and pursuant to scientifically valid Standard Industry Practices and established Industrial Hygiene procedures. According to the Senior Assistant State of Colorado Attorney General for the Natural Resources and Environment Section, a "basic methamphetamine survey" is not subject to any regulatory constraints 1 and no person in the State of Colorado is "certified" to perform a "basic methamphetamine survey" and no such State certification or certification list exists. FACTs collected ten samples from the residence resulting in two 5-part composite samples for quantitative analysis of methamphetamine by gas chromatography- mass spectroscopy (using a modified NIOSH 9109 Method). The sample results indicates the presence of profoundly elevated concentrations of methamphetamine contamination in the residence. The concentration of methamphetamine in the residence exceed the regulatory cleanup threshold for the State of Colorado by a factor of about 170 times, and exceeds the toxicologically significant concentration by about 60 times. Based on the results of the samples taken by FACTs, an "illegal drug laboratory," as defined in Colorado Revised Statutes §25-18.5-101(8) has been discovered at the subject property. Pursuant to CRS §25-18.5-104(1), entry into the property is restricted to those meeting the regulatory training requirements found in 29 CFR 1910.120 and the restrictions found in 6 CCR 1014-3. Pursuant to CRS §25-18.5-104, prohibition of entry into the subject property from this point forward extends to the current occupant, future occupants, the registered owner, Real Estate agents, perspective buyers, owners of personal property in the residence, construction personnel, maintenance personnel, Home Inspectors, and any and all other personnel, except on-duty law enforcement personnel and personnel meeting the requirements of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910.120(e). According to Colorado Revised Statutes §38-35.7-103(3)(a), if a property is contaminated or otherwise identified as a "methamphetamine affected property," and subsequently put up for sale, the seller is required to disclose to any potential buyer, in writing, the fact that the property is a contaminated illegal drug laboratory ("methamphetamine affected property") that has not been remediated according to regulations. 1 The term “basic methamphetamine survey” was coined by Daniel S. Miller, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources and Environment Section, State of Colorado Department of Law, February 2, 2015. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 199 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 4 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave According to 6 CCR 1014-3, Section 5, no personal items in the subject property may be removed from the property except as conducted by a Contractor in good standing and removal must be overseen at all times by a Decontamination Supervisor. To achieve compliance according to State Regulations and State Statutes, the owner must either: o demolish the property, or o hire an untrained, (but State certified), consultant 2 to perform a Preliminary Assessment, (and subsequently try to bring the property into compliance) or o sell the property under full disclosure of noncompliance If the property is sold as is, the new owners are required to notify, in writing, the Governing Body of the purchase and bring the property into compliance within 90 days of closing. Due to problems involving criminal activities by a regulator within the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 3 if the owner hires a State certified consultant, the work by the untrained (but State certified) consultant will almost certainly be invalid, and it is probable the work will be invalidated by the Colorado Courts in the near future. As discussed later, the Larimer County Department of Health has a long standing history of ignoring the State regulations for properties in Fort Collins, and relying on the (now discredited) regulator from the CDPHE for advise on regulatory compliance. Contrary to misconceptions held by State certified consultants, any second testing performed by the owner (or others) cannot be used to refute these findings, since “Discovery” and “Notification” has already occurred; pursuant to CRS §25-18.5- 103(1)(a).4 According to State Regulation 6 CCR 1014-3, any cleaning and/or remediation and/or decontamination is strictly prohibited, except pursuant to a valid Preliminary Assessment conducted by a State certified consultant. INTRODUCTION On May 5, 2021, at the request of the owner of the property, personnel from Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc (FACTs) performed a standard “basic methamphetamine survey” for the presence of methamphetamine at 528 West Mountain Ave, CO. 2 In January 2019, the Colorado Courts ruled that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) unlawfully withheld FACTs license and fallaciously and without merit falsely claimed FACTs had violated State regulations. The Courts ruled the CDPHE abused its power and rejected all allegations against FACTs and ordered the CDPHE to reinstate the certifications held by FACTs. As of this writing, the CDPHE is still ignoring the court order, and presently the only personnel who are "certified" for regulatory compliance sampling are untrained consultants who have been granted licenses as personal favors by Ms. Coleen Brisnehan with the CDPHE. 3 Ms. Coleen Brisnehan 4 Ms. Brisnehan has attempted to reject this provision, however, the Colorado Courts have ruled that Ms. Brisnehan is not qualified to make such determinations. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 200 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 5 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave The assessment was performed pursuant to, and in full compliance with all Colorado regulations, rules and statutes. Pursuant to standard, science-based, accepted Industrial Hygiene practices and protocols, FACTs collected samples for the quantitative determination of the presence of methamphetamine. The sampling theory used for the project is the same protocol that Mr. Connell developed when he wrote the original assessment protocols for the mandatory State regulations "6 CCR 1014-3" and is referred to as "authoritative, judgmental, bias sampling." A total of ten locations were sampled throughout the property, and composited into two standard 5-part composite analyses. ASSESSMENT PROTOCOLS Sampling Protocol During the “basic methamphetamine survey,” the hypothesis was made that the property contained concentrations of methamphetamine above a specified limit of reporting, and data would be diligently collected to support the hypothesis. As such, the data quality objectives were not designed to meet any regulatory requirements or quantify or characterize the extent or degree of contamination, but rather to test the statement: Methamphetamine is present on property components above specified levels. For this project, FACTs was following the same scientifically valid sampling protocols Mr. Connell developed for the original State Regulations (6 CCR 1014-3). FACTs established “data quality objectives” (DQOs) prior to the sampling. Our DQOs were such that we selected a total sampling area and an project reporting limit (0.3 µg) that would result in a reportable quantity limit of not greater than 0.5 µg/100cm2. That is, unless the concentration of the methamphetamine in the sample(s) exceeded 0.5 µg/100cm2, the analytical laboratory would merely report the concentration as "below reportable limit." Our testing produced results that supported the hypothesis and therefore, we must conclude: Methamphetamine is present in the property above specified levels. Wipe Sample The wipe sample media was commercially available cotton Johnson & Johnson™ brand gauze pads. Each gauze material is assigned a lot number for quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) purposes and recorded on a log of results. Each pad was moistened with reagent grade methyl alcohol. Each batch of alcohol was assigned a lot number for QA/QC purposes, and recorded on a log of results. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 201 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 6 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave The sampling media were prepared off-site in small batches in a clean environment. The sample media are inserted into individually identified single-use polyethylene centrifuge tubes with screw caps and assigned a unique sample identifier. Quality Assurance – Quality Control (QA/QC) QA/QC is a major consideration in all environmental sampling. The Industrial Hygienist for this project, Mr. Connell, has extensive experience in establishing QA/QC protocols for laboratories, field assessments and regulatory work. Mr. Connell was a bench chemist for a US EPA CLP Laboratory (Colorado School of Mines Research Institute – Analytica), wherein Mr. Connell was responsible for ensuring that QA/QC protocols met the US EPA SW846 QA/QC criteria for several methods including ion chromatography as well as atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Mr. Connell also has extensive experience in US EPA SW 846 data validation and field assessments using US EPA SW 846 methodologies. Mr. Connell was an original author of the QA data quality objectives for the State of Colorado Regulations 6 CCR 1014-3, and remains, to our knowledge, the only consulting Industrial Hygienist in Colorado with documented training from legitimate organizations in the assessment of illegal drug laboratories. The laboratory report contains some of the internal QA/QC data for the current analysis suite. According to the laboratory, their internal QA/QC was within acceptable tolerance; and the QA/QC also are within the FACTs DQOs. The laboratory QA/QC tells us the following: Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 4 Note 5 Note 1) The laboratory’s internal detection limit is 0.05 µg. This would ensure that the laboratory was capable of meeting our desired reportable limit of 0.3 µg. Note 2) The laboratory ran an analytical blank called a matrix blank. The matrix blank is designed to determine if any of the laboratory reagents, or the handling of the sample in the laboratory, resulted in the inadvertent introduction of methamphetamine into the sample. The “Matrix Blank” for this analysis suite indicates that no methamphetamine was introduced into the sample suite by the laboratory (BRL means “Below Reportable Limit – in this case below the analytical detection limit specified above); this is a negative control and ensures that any methamphetamine that has been reported was not the result of laboratory contamination. Note 3) The laboratory also ran a “matrix duplicate” which is a check of precision (that is, the laboratory’s ability to consistently recover known amounts of methamphetamine). In this case, the laboratory recorded a relative percent difference - (RPD) of 3% between the duplicate and the original spike. This speaks to the precision of the analysis suite and the precision is generally regarded as "good" when the RPD is no greater than 5%. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 202 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 7 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave Note 4) The laboratory also “spiked” an in-house blank with a known amount of methamphetamine to see if they could proficiently and accurately recover the known amount of methamphetamine. In this case, the laboratory reports they recovered 103% of the known standard. The acceptable range for recovery is 85% to 115%. Therefore, the recovery was within normal tolerance. Note 5) The laboratory also included a "Laboratory Control Sample" (LCS). The LCS is a laboratory prepared "sample" that is carried through the entire extraction and analysis process just like a real sample. The LCS contains a known amount of methamphetamine, and the laboratory determines how close their results is to the true amount. In this case, the laboratory reports they recovered 106% of the known standard. The acceptable range for recovery from a LCS is 85% to 115%. Therefore, the recovery was within normal tolerance. Field Blanks To guard against false positives (that is, reporting the presence of methamphetamine when it isn’t actually there), FACTs regularly challenges the laboratory in a surreptitious manner by surreptitiously submitting samples that contain no methamphetamine and other surreptitious samples that contain known amounts of methamphetamine – these are called “field blanks” and “field spikes” respectively. FACTs maintains a database of QA/QC data that we have been accumulating for the last 17 years of performing this kind of sampling. Currently, FACTs has over 7,250 samples in our database representing approximately 770 assessments, since January, 2003. To date, FACTs has submitted a total of 358 field blanks for analysis to challenge the laboratory and check for false positives. For this sample suite, the last field blank was submitted within the last two analyses for which the laboratory reported "BRL" indicating that the materials used by FACTs and our handling procedures do not introduce methamphetamine contamination. Our data log indicates an alcohol Lot # A17Ø1 <MDL for n=10; and Gauze Lot # G19Ø1 <MDL for n=14. Field Spikes Whereas blanks are negative controls, “spikes” are positive controls. As part of our general QA/QC protocol, FACTs regularly submits surreptitious spikes to the analyzing laboratory. “Spiked” samples consist of randomly selecting sample materials that are submitted to a third party independent laboratory for the inclusion of known amounts of d-methamphetamine 5 into the selected sample media. The spiked samples are then surreptitiously submitted with normal project samples to the analyzing laboratory. To ensure the integrity of the spikes, analyzing laboratory personnel are unaware of the presence or nature of the spikes. The spikes allow FACTs to determine the adequacy of 5 S(+)-methamphetamine, S,S(+)-pseudoephedrine, 1S,2R(+)ephedrine ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 203 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 8 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave the laboratory in recovering known amounts of methamphetamine from the samples. Sample results reported are then corrected to the spike recovery. The pooled spike recovery from all previous projects indicates an exceptionally good methamphetamine is present, the laboratory has a documented ability to properly identify and quantify the analyte. Analytical Method Samples were hand-delivered to the analyzing laboratory, Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. (REI). REI is a respected laboratory, and Mr. Connell has been using REI for approximately 30 years. REI is accredited for the analysis of environmental matrices by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program, Lab Certification #E871030. REI is also currently proficient in the in-house PAT Program. REI analyzed the samples using a gas chromatography mass spectrometry equipped with a flame ionization detector. The method is essentially the same as the method validated by the US National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 9109 Method, Methamphetamine. Mr. Connell was an expert peer reviewer for the NIOSH method. The NIOSH 9109 method is both sensitive to, and specific for, methamphetamine. Contrary to misinformation intentionally provided by Ms. Coleen Brisnehan 6 with the CDPHE, there are no contaminants with a reasonable probability of false positives. Cross Contamination Prior to entering the residence, FACTs personnel donned disposable gloves and booties, thus ensuring that contamination is not introduced into the residence. Immediately following each sampling project, all equipment used in a property (such as the ladder used at this property) is decontaminated in the field before being brought to a new location. FACTs performs checks on our equipment including wipe samples from our field equipment (such as our step-ladder) and those QA/QC samples have never had reportable concentrations of methamphetamine. Sample Results The values in the accompanying laboratory report are not concentrations. The values in the laboratory report expressed as absolute mass of methamphetamine in the samples. The actual methamphetamine concentrations found in the samples taken at the subject property are not within our stated data quality objectives and are not germane to this discussion. Nevertheless, FACTs has calculated the concentrations and reported those 6 In January 2019, the Colorado Courts ruled that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) was unlawfully engaged in false and capricious regulatory actions against FACTs, Inc. and Mr. Connell. The Colorado courts ruled that Ms. Brisnehan is not qualified or competent to make any technical criticisms regarding sampling and analysis. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 204 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 9 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave concentrations below. The laboratory report contains a typographical error – the column identified in the report will be “Sample Area”, states “0” and that is due to a problem with the laboratory reporting system and should read “Not Provided;” the total sampling area for each composite was 61.2 cm2 (the laboratory is currently unable to change its format which is geared to provide results to untrained, (but state certified) consultants). The table below summarizes the results of the sampling performed at the property. Sample Locations Sample ID Sample Location Sample Results µg/100 cm2 MBMS050521-01A Parlour ceiling fan 85.5 MBMS050521-01B Entrance ceiling fan MBMS050521-01C Kitchen top of N window MBMS050521-01D E bedroom ceiling fan MBMS050521-01E E bathroom back of door panel MBMS050521-02A Shed interior 10.4 MBMS050521-02B Dining room top of light fixture MBMS050521-02C Larder top of door frame MBMS050521-02D N bathroom top of door frame MBMS050521-02E Garage electrical junction box Table 1 Results of Methamphetamine Samples The results conclusively indicate widespread elevated methamphetamine contamination throughout the structure. CONCLUSIONS Based on our objective sample results collected during our assessment, the subject property contains elevated methamphetamine contamination in excess of our reporting thresholds and in excess of the regulatory clean-up threshold. A methamphetamine affected property exists at the subject property. RECOMMENDATIONS Contrary to common belief, virtually all properties can be adequately cleaned, and virtually no properties need to be demolished or "gutted" to achieve compliance. Usually when such actions are taken, it is due to either financial realities or to poor information being provided to the property owner. In this case, the 2,158 square foot property, built in circa 1885, is in poor condition. Whereas the property can be cleaned, it is likely that a contractor may be unwilling to decontaminate the property, and may encourage the demolition of the three structures (residence, garage and shed). ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 205 Industrial Hygiene Assessment FACTs, Inc. Page 10 of 10 528 West Mountain Ave Under the circumstances, that may be the most prudent, since the normal cleaning process may further degrade the various structural members in the residence and the garage. Furthermore, the costs associated with a legitimate cleaning as the decontamination choice would likely be on the order of $40,000 (including the Preliminary Assessment and the final clearance assessment). These costs do not include the renovation of the residence and garage following a successful decontamination. According to 6 CCR 1014-3, “Demolition” means the complete deconstruction and removal of all of a structure, including all framing and permanent structural components other than foundations or slabs. Although materials that are removed or demolished in lieu of decontamination must be disposed of at a solid waste landfill, those materials are otherwise not subject to regulation under Part 1 of 6 CCR 1014-3. That is to say, if the property is demolished no Preliminary Assessment is required, none of the remediation requirements apply, and no final sampling and clearance sampling is required. Although FACTs personnel have been performing assessments of methamphetamine properties for approximately 20 years, this is only the third time we have recommended demolition of a property. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 206 Appendix A: Laboratory Report ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 207 May 12, 2021 Sincerely, Robin Klover Vice President Subcontractor Number: Laboratory Report: RES 493008-1 Project #/P.O. #: West Mountain Project Description: West Mountain Caoimhin Connell Forensic Applications 185 Bounty Hunter Ln. Bailey CO 80421 Dear Caoimhin, Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. is an analytical laboratory accredited for the analysis of Environmental matrices by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program, Lab Certification #E871030. The laboratory is currently proficient in the in-house PAT Program. Reservoirs has analyzed the following sample(s) using Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) / Gas Chromatography Flame Ionization Detector (GC/FID) per your request. The analysis has been completed in general accordance with the appropriate methodology as stated in the analysis table. Results have been sent to your office. RES 493008-1 is the job number assigned to this study. This report is considered highly confidential and the sole property of the customer. Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. will not discuss any part of this study with personnel other than those of the client. The results described in this report only apply to the samples analyzed, as received by the customer. This report must not be used to claim endorsement of products or analytical results by NVLAP or any agency of the U.S. Government. This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval from Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. Samples will be disposed of after sixty days unless longer storage is requested. If you have any questions about this report, please feel free to call 303-964-1986. by Ryan Ellerby 05/12/202105/12/202105/12/202105/12/2021 Reservoirs Environmental, Inc Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual Effective October 09, 2020 Q:\QAQC\Lab\Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual.pdf (303) 964-1986 (866) RESI-ENV www.reilab.com https://clients.reilab.com 5801 Logan St, Suite 100, Denver, CO 80216 Page 1 of 3 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 208 Laboratory Sample IDLaboratory Sample IDLaboratory Sample IDLaboratory Sample ID SampleSampleSampleSample AreaAreaAreaArea ReportingReportingReportingReporting LimitLimitLimitLimit METHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINE CONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATION ReportingReportingReportingReporting LimitLimitLimitLimit METHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINEMETHAMPHETAMINE CONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATIONCONCENTRATION Client ID NumberClient ID NumberClient ID NumberClient ID Number (cm²) (µg)(µg)(µg/100cm²) (µg/100cm²) 493008 -493008 -493008 -493008 - MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1 0 0.30 51.6 -------- 493008 -493008 -493008 -493008 - MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2 0 0.30 6.3 -------- * The Reporting Limit for this job has been set to 0.3µg per customer request * Unless otherwise noted all quality control samples performed within specifications established by the laboratory * Unless otherwise noted sample analysis have not been blank corrected Analyst Reservoirs Environmental, Inc Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual Effective October 09, 2020 Q:\QAQC\Lab\Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual.pdf RES Job Number: Client: Client Project/P.O.: Client Project Description: Date Samples Received: Analysis Type: Turnaround: Date Samples Analyzed: TABLE: I ANALYSIS: METHAMPHETAMINE BY WIPE RES 493008-1 Forensic Applications West Mountain West Mountain May 06, 2021 REI CHEMISTRY SOP / NIOSH 9109-M Standard May 11, 2021 RESERVOIRS ENVIRONMENTAL, INC NVLAP Lab Code 101896-0 AIHA LAP, LLC. LAB ID 101533 NA = Not Analyzed NR = Not Received ND = None Detected BAS = Below Analytical Sensitivity BRL = Below Reporting Limit (303) 964-1986 (866) RESI-ENV www.reilab.com https://clients.reilab.com 5801 Logan St, Suite 100, Denver, CO 80216 Page 2 of 3 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 209 Quality ControlQuality ControlQuality ControlQuality Control BatchBatchBatchBatch Reporting LimitReporting LimitReporting LimitReporting Limit (µg) Matrix BlankMatrix BlankMatrix BlankMatrix Blank (µg) Matrix DuplicateMatrix DuplicateMatrix DuplicateMatrix Duplicate (%RPD) Matrix SpikeMatrix SpikeMatrix SpikeMatrix Spike (% Recovery) Laboratory Control SampleLaboratory Control SampleLaboratory Control SampleLaboratory Control Sample (% Recovery) 050621-4050621-4050621-4050621-4 0.05 BRL 3 103 106 * Unless otherwise noted all quality control samples performed within specifications established by the laboratory Analyst Reservoirs Environmental, Inc Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual Effective October 09, 2020 Q:\QAQC\Lab\Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual.pdf RES Job Number: Client: Client Project/P.O.: Client Project Description: Date Samples Received: Analysis Type: Turnaround: Date Samples Analyzed: TABLE: I ANALYSIS: METHAMPHETAMINE BY WIPE RES 493008-1 Forensic Applications West Mountain West Mountain May 06, 2021 REI CHEMISTRY SOP / NIOSH 9109-M Standard May 11, 2021 RESERVOIRS ENVIRONMENTAL, INC NVLAP Lab Code 101896-0 AIHA LAP, LLC. LAB ID 101533 NA = Not Analyzed NR = Not Received ND = None Detected BAS = Below Analytical Sensitivity BRL = Below Reporting Limit (303) 964-1986 (866) RESI-ENV www.reilab.com https://clients.reilab.com 5801 Logan St, Suite 100, Denver, CO 80216 Page 3 of 3 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 210 Company:Forensic ApplicationsCompany:Forensic ApplicationsAddress:185 Bounty Hunter Ln.Address:185 Bounty Hunter Ln. Bailey, CO 80421 Bailey, CO 80421Project Number and/or P.O. #:West MountainProject Description/Location:West MountainContact:Caoimhin ConnellPhone:(303) 903-7494Fax:Cell:Final Data Deliverable Email Address:admin@forensic-applications.com (+ 1 ADDNL. CONTACTS)PLM / PCM / TEMAir = ABulk = BDust = DFood = FPaint = PSoil = SDust*PRIOR NOTICE REQUIRED FOR SAME DAY TATSurface = SUSwab = SW Tape = TWipe = WMetalsDrinking Water = DW Waste Water = WWOrganics *STANDARD**ASTM E1792 approved wipe media only**Viable Analysis****TAT DEPENDENT ON SPEED OF MICROBIAL GROWTH Medical Device Analysis Mold AnalysisSpecial Instructions:Special reporting limit 0.3 µg, use "no area reported"MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1X0W 1MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2X0W 1PLM - Short Report, Long Report, CARB 435TEM - AHERA (+/- or Quantified), Microvac (+/- or Quantified), Wipe (+/- or Quantified), NIOSH 7402, Yamate Level II, ISO 10312, ISO 13794, Chatfield, Drinking Water, Waste Water, Bulk +/-, CARB Modified AheraPCM - 7400A, 7400B, OSHADUST - Total, RespirableMETALS - Analyte(s) Lead Only (7082, 7420, Waste Water, Foodware), Multi Metals (7303,6020A, 200.8, Waste Water, Foodware, OSHA ID-125G), pH (Liquid or Non-Liquid), TCLP, RCRA 8 Scan, Welding Fume Scan, Full Metals ScanORGANICS - Methamphetamine (NIOSH 9109)VIABLES - Campylobacter, Bacillus, Salmonella (Culturable or 1-2), Listeria, E.coli O157:H7, E.coli/Coliforms - Plated, S.aureus, Yeast & Mol, Aerobic Plate Count, Coliforms/E.coli - (State Water, Drinking Water, Non-Drinking Water, +/-, Quantification), Lactic Acid, Viable Microbial Count (wo/ID or w/ID), Enterococcus (+/- or Quantification), Legionella (P, NP, C)MEDICAL - Bioburden, LALMOLD - Spore Trap, Bulk Mold, Particulate IdentificationSample Volume (L) / AreaLength(or Aliquots) x Width(or Area per Aliquot)Matrix Code# of ContainersDate Collectedmm/dd/yyTime Collectedhh:mmASBESTOS CHEMISTRY MICROBIOLOGYREI will analyze incoming samples based on information received and will not be responsible for errors or omissions in calculations resulting from the inaccuracy of original data. By signing, client/company representative agrees that submission of the following samples for requested analysis as indicated on this Chain of Custody shall consitutean analytical services agreement with payment terms of NET 30 days. Failure to comply with payment terms may result in a 1.5% monthly interest surcharge.Relinquished By:Caoimhin ConnellDate/Time: 05/05/2021 11:30:44Sample Condition: AcceptableReceived By:Sophia IngramDate/Time: 05/06/2021 11:12:13Carrier: HandReservoirs Environmental, IncReservoirs Environmental QA ManualEffective October 09, 2020Q:\QAQC\Lab\Reservoirs Environmental QA Manual.pdf(303) 964-1986(866) RESI-ENVwww.reilab.comhttps://clients.reilab.com5801 Logan St, Suite 100, Denver, CO 80216 Page 1 of 1ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 211 Client Sample IDSample NoteQuantity Sampler(s)MBMSØ5Ø521-Ø1No Area Provided Use RL=0.3 µg1cpcMBMSØ5Ø521-Ø2No Area Provided Use RL=0.3 µg1cpcRES #:Project Number and/or P.O. #:Project Description/Location:493008West MountainWest MountainForensic Applications Sample Notes Page 1 of 1ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 212 Appendix B: Consultant's SOQ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 213 Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. 185 Bounty Hunter’s Lane, Bailey, Colorado 80421 Phone: 303-903-7494 www.forensic-applications.com Consultant Statement of Qualifications FACTs project name:West Mountain Form # ML15 May 17, 2021 Caoimhín P. Connell, has been involved in clandestine drug lab investigations and assessments since 2002 and meets the Colorado Revised Statute §24-30-1402 definition of an “Industrial Hygienist.” He has been a practicing Industrial Hygienist since 1987. Mr. Connell is a recognized authority in drug-lab operations and is a Certified Instructor in Meth- Lab Safety through the Colorado Regional Community Policing Institute, CRCPI (Colorado Division of Criminal Justice) and was the lead instructor for the CRCPI through the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, providing over 260 hours of methlab training for over 45 Colorado Law Enforcement Agencies, federal agents, probation and parole officers throughout Colorado judicial districts. He has provided meth-lab lectures to the US Interagency Board, US Air Force, the National Safety Council, and the American Industrial Hygiene Association (of which he is a member and served on the Clandestine Drug Lab Work Group and for whom he conducted the May, 2010, Clandestine Drug Lab Course, and is a coauthor of the AIHA methlab assessment publication.) Mr. Connell is a member of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, the Occupational Hygiene Society of Ireland, the Colorado Drug Investigators Association, an appointed Member of the National Fire Protection Association, and the ASTM International Forensic Sciences Committee, (where he was the sole sponsor of the draft ASTM E50 Standard for the Assessment of Suspected Clandestine Drug Laboratories). From 2009, Mr. Connell served as the Industrial Hygiene Subject Matter Expert on the Federally funded Interagency Board (Health, Medical, and Responder Safety SubGroup), and was elected full member of the IAB-HMRS in 2011 where he now serves. He is the only private consulting Industrial Hygienist in Colorado certified by the Office of National Drug Control Policy High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Clandestine Drug Lab Safety Program, and P.O.S.T. certified by the Colorado Department of Law. He has received over 194 hours of highly specialized law-enforcement sensitive training in drug lab operation, and under supervision of the US DEA, he has manufactured methamphetamine using a variety of street methods. He has received highly specialized drug lab assessment training through the Iowa National Guard, Midwest Counterdrug Training Center and the Florida National Guard Multijurisdictional Counterdrug Task Force, St. Petersburg College, Rocky Mountain HIDTA, as well as through the US NHTSA, and the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance (US Dept. of Justice) and he is currently ARIDE Certified. Mr. Connell is a current sworn law enforcement officer who has conducted clandestine laboratory investigations and performed risk, contamination, hazard and exposure assessments from both the law enforcement (criminal) perspective, and from the civil perspective in residences, apartments, motor vehicles, and condominia. Mr. Connell has conducted over 770 assessments of illegal drug labs in CO, SD, NE, OK, and collected over 7,250 samples during assessments. He has extensive experience performing assessments pursuant to the Colorado meth-lab regulation, 6 CCR 1014-3, and was an original team member on two of the legislative working-groups which wrote the original regulations for the State of Colorado and he was the primary author of Appendix A (Sampling Methods And Procedures) and Attachment to Appendix A (Sampling Methods and Procedures Sampling Theory) of the original Colorado regulations. Mr. Connell strongly objected to the unscientific, unfounded and inappropriate amendments now found in regulation. Recommended by the US NIOSH as Peer Review Expert for the NIOSH 9109 Method, Methamphetamine,he has been admitted as a drug lab expert in Colorado, and an Industrial Hygiene Expert in Colorado in both civil and criminal courts as well as Federal Court in Pennsylvania. He has provided expert testimony in several criminal cases including Grand Jury testimony and testimony for US Bureau ATF and he testified before the Colorado Board of Health and Colorado Legislature Judicial Committee regarding methlab issues. Mr. Connell has provided services to private consumers, Indian Nations, Sate Investigators, and Federal Investigators, and provided Expert Witness testimony regarding criminal activities of Coleen Brisnehan at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 214 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 215 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 216 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 217 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 218 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 219 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 220 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 221 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 222 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 223 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 224 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 225 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 226 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 227 Appendix C: Discussion of Regulatory Status ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 228 Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. 185 Bounty Hunter’s Lane, Bailey, Colorado 80421 Phone: 303-903-7494 www.forensic-applications.com Regulatory Status Appendix On April 21, 2004, then Colorado Governor Bill Owens signed into law Colorado HB 04- 1182. This act required the Colorado Board of Health to establish State regulations regarding clandestine drug laboratories as environmental considerations. Mr. Connell with FACTs, was the original author of the assessment portions of those regulations 1 which were eventually promulgated as mandatory standards:2 and at the request of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Mr. Connell testified before the Colorado Board of Health on the promulgation of those standards.3 The regulations were exceptionally well written science-based regulations which were subsequently adopted by at least three other states in one form or another. The regulations were codified as 6 CCR 1014-3 and became effective on March 30, 2005. The regulations required assessments of known and potential clandestine drug laboratories to be performed solely by a statutorily protected professional known as an “Industrial Hygienist” (CRS §24-30-1402). Unfortunately, almost immediately, Colorado began to see abuses and violations of these new regulations. Some of the violations were the result of incompetent Industrial Hygienists 4,5,6 who, in violation of the professional Codes of Ethics, were engaging in work for which they had no qualifications. Most of the violations were being committed by people who were not even Industrial Hygienists as required, and, in violation of Colorado Criminal statutes (CRS §18-5-113), were falsely identifying themselves as “Industrial Hygienists” even though many of them could not even define the term “Industrial Hygiene”7,8,9,10 1 See a copy of the original document here: http://forensic- applications.com/meth/DRAFT_sampling_protocol.pdf 2 These regulations were codified in the Code of Colorado Regulations as 6 CCR 1014-3 a copy of which may be viewed here: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Coloradoregs.pdf 3 January 19, 2005, at the request of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Proposed Regulations Pertaining to the Cleanup of Methamphetamine Regulations (HB-04-1182) 4 See for example, 24018 Deer Valley Road Golden, CO:http://forensic- applications.com/meth/DVRCriticalReview.pdf 5 See for example, 1170 Garrison Street Lakewood, Colorado 80215:http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Censored_Compliance_Audit.pdf 6 See for example, 4690 West 76th Ave., Westminster:http://forensic- applications.com/meth/DimickCriticalReview.pdf 7 See for example: 4893 S Johnson Street, Denver http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Johnson_Critical_review.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 229 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 2 of 14 The new regulation (6 CCR 1014-3) was a Colorado Board of Health Regulation and was under the auspices of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). CDPHE was in a position to provide appropriate guidance to jurisdictions, and help in enforcement actions regarding this new regulation which addressed the assessment and remediation of illegal drug laboratories. However, in violation of Colorado Revised Statutes, §24-50-117, Ms. Colleen Brisnehan, the primary regulator with the CDPHE who was immediately involved in the overseeing of this new regulation, began serving as a Director on the Board of Directors of a commercial group of pseudoprofessionals called the “Colorado Association of Meth and Mold Professionals (CAMMP)” in approximately 2007. Colorado Revised Statutes §24-50-117 reads: 24-50-117. Prohibited activities of employees No employee shall engage in any employment or activity which creates a conflict of interest with his duties as a state employee. The board shall promulgate general rules on incompatible activities, conflicts of interest, and employment outside the normal course of duties of state employees. In her dual capacity, Ms. Brisnehan was actively helping members of her commercial group hide regulatory violations being committed by her fellow CAMMP Directors 11 and CAMMP membership. In fact, not only was she actively hiding the regulatory violations, Ms. Brisnehan was actually going out into the field while an employee of the CDPHE and she was personally assisting unauthorized members of her private organization collect illegal samples 12 and then helping the consultant prepare falsified Real Estate documents 13 and even lying to law enforcement personnel.14 This illegal 8 See for example, 5571 E. 66th Way Commerce City, CO 80022 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/E66th_PA_regulatory_audit_HUD.pdf 9 See for example, 9210 Race Street, Thornton, CO 80229 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Critical_review_Race.pdf 10 See for example: 1410 Maxwell Street, Colorado Springs, CO http://forensic- applications.com/meth/CriticalReviewMaxwell.pdf 11 See for example: 4690 West 76th Ave., Westminster http://forensic- applications.com/meth/DimickCriticalReview.pdf 12 See for example: 4893 S Johnson Street, Denver http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Johnson_Critical_review.pdf 13 See for example: 100 W. Spaulding Street, Lafayette, Colorado http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 14 See for example letter from Colleen Brisnehan, to Joan Whittemore (CSPD) and Sgt. Harrell (CSPD) regarding Citizen Request #4967 (Tuesday, September 4, 2012 4:00 pm) From:,WHITTEJO@ci.colospgs.co.us to FACTs, Inc. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 230 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 3 of 14 activity continued into 2018 when, during trial (HE 20150023) Ms. Brisnehan entered into evidence two fraudulently prepared property assessments, falsely claiming the documents were the original assessment documents.15 The CDPHE's star witness during the trial (Ms. Deanne Kelley with the Tri-County Health Department) further complicated the matter for Ms. Brisnehan, when after having been caught committing perjury under oath, admitted that she and the Tri-County Health Department was assisting in the falsification of real estate documents at the request of Coleen Brisnehan. Furthermore, the Larimer County Department of Health was similarly taking is directions from Ms. Brisnehan, and was (presumably still is) permitting the falsification of property assessments. See for example: 728 Cherry Street, Fort Collins, Colorado http://forensic-applications.com/meth/CEH_Cherry_PA_RA.pdf 3016 - 3018 Sumac Street, Fort Collins, Colorado http://forensic-applications.com/meth/CEH_Sumac_PA_RA.pdf 3400 N Glade Rd, Loveland, Colorado 80538 http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Glade_Rd_PA_RA.pdf Starting in at least 2009, using taxpayer’s monies, the State of Colorado hired CAMMP membership to perform environmental evaluations at identified methamphetamine affected properties (clandestine drug lab assessments) pursuant to Colorado Regulations. One of those consultants, during 2009, was hired by the State of Colorado with federal Brownfields Fund money to perform an assessment at the property located at 4690 West 76th Ave., Westminster, Colorado. The consultant in question was a fellow Board Member with Ms. Brisnehan on CAMMP. A family moved into that property and became ill. On February 8, 2010, Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc (FACTs) was asked, by the home owner, to independently review documentation associated with the 4690 West 76th Ave., Westminster, Colorado property. FACTs determined that not only was virtually no aspect of State regulations followed, but the consultant, in their report to the State of Colorado's CDPHE, knowingly falsified the real estate documentation in their assessment; falsely claiming the work they performed at the property was compliant with State regulations. Again at the request of the home owner, FACTs wrote a regulatory review regarding the work performed at the West 76th Avenue property. 16 15 FACTs had the bone fide originals and had performed regulatory compliance audits on the two properties: 690 South Lincoln St. Denver, CO (http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Woellner_Lincoln_Clearance_RA.pdf ) and 4383 Tennyson Street, Unit 3A, Denver, Colorado 80212 (http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/FEI_Tennnyson_SA_CA_RA.pdf ) 16 A redacted version may be found here: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/DimickCriticalReview.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 231 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 4 of 14 The property owner provided the State of Colorado with a copy of the FACTs regulatory review. Ms. Brisnehan, in her employment as the de facto information officer for 6 CCR 1014-3 and representing the CDPHE, issued a vitriolic ad hominem defense of the initial fraudulent assessment, but entirely failed to address any of the specific regulatory violations identified in the FACTs review of this initial report. Nowhere in her defense of the unlawful work, did Ms. Brisnehan mention her duel - and unlawful – role as State regulator and Director on the Board of the organization to which the consultant who originally performed "an assessment" of this property, belonged. (As of November 2015, the web-page for the Colorado Association of Meth and Mold Professionals still identified Ms. Brisnehan, in violation of State statutes, as a Director for CAMMP). This incident, regarding the review of the initial illegal assessment report for the West 76th Avenue property, began a series of events, wherein Ms. Brisnehan and Mr. Joe Scheifflin (also with CDPHE) consistently and knowingly developed an objectively demonstrable history of engaging in covering up illegal environmental assessments involving methamphetamine affected properties,17 fraudulent real estate documentation, and 18 actively lying to Colorado's citizens regarding the authenticity of submitted assessment reports to the CDPHE by unauthorized consultants regarding the same.19 Many of the unlawful activities occurred in the local Colorado jurisdiction of the Tri- County Health Department (TCHD)20,21,22,23 and the Boulder County Health Department (BCHD). At the behest of Ms. Brisnehan, the TCHD and the Boulder County Health Department 24,25,26,27,28,29,30 ignored regulatory violations and actively covered up illegal 17 See for example, http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 18 See for example 7351 Krameria Street, Commerce City, CO http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/GHP_Audit_Krameria.pdf 19 See the review at http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Johnson_Critical_review.pdf 20 See for example: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Critical_review_Race.pdf 21 See for example: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/E66th_PA_regulatory_audit_HUD.pdf 22 See for example: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/GHP_Audit_Krameria.pdf 23 See for example: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/164thCriticalReview.pdf 24 2330 Wedgewood Ave., Building 7, Longmont, CO 80503 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Boatman_Screening_Wedge7_RA.pdf 25 1815 Regal Ct., Unit B, Louisville, CO 80027 (Preliminary Assessment) http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Boatman_Regal_PA_RA.pdf 26 502C West South Boulder Road, Louisville, CO 80027 (PA) http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Boatman_502C_PA_RA_Redacted.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 232 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 5 of 14 drug laboratory assessments and defended their actions by stating these actions were following the advice provided to them by Ms. Brisnehan with the CDPHE. (See trial testimony of Deanne Kelley, Case HE 20150023, 2018). As a result of independent regulatory audits of assessment reports by unauthorized consultants being performed by FACTs (which are uncovering thousands of regulatory violations of 6 CCR 1014-3), on November 6, 2012, FACTs alerted the State Attorney General’s Office 31 of the fraud occurring in the State of Colorado. Based on our report to the State Attorney General, the State asked Mountain States Employers Council, Inc. to review the complaints. On March 25, 2013, at the request of the Mountain States Employers Council, Inc., Mr. Connell, Senior Industrial Hygienist with FACTs, was asked to provide sworn oral testimony regarding Ms. Brisnehan’s, and Mr. Schieffelin's illegal activities. The State of Colorado continued to ignore the corruption and criminal behavior in their ranks (including the illegal expenditure of federal Brownsfields monies to produce fraudulent environmental assessments to the benefit of the members of the CAMMP). The result was a plethora of falsified real estate documents being filed with local jurisdictions claiming that properties were being assessed, cleaned and verified pursuant to State regulations – when in fact, said properties remained contaminated illegal drug laboratories. Below is a small and incomplete list of properties for which fraudulent work has been performed, and for which falsified real estate documents have been filed with several jurisdictions; and these properties are now occupied by unsuspecting innocent people: 1170 Garrison Street Lakewood, Colorado 80215 32 24018 Deer Valley Road, Golden, Colorado 33 4893 S Johnson Street, Denver 34 2745 S Hooker Street, Denver, CO 35 1170 Garrison Street, Lakewood, CO 36 27 767 West Cleveland Circle, Lafayette, Colorado 80026 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/FEH_Screening_Cleveland_RA.pdf 28 1815 Regal Ct., Unit B, Louisville, CO 80027 (Screening Assessment) http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Boatman_Screening_Regal_RA.pdf 29 731 Excelsior Place, Lafayette, CO 80026 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Boatman_Excel_PA_Redacted.pdf 30 100 W. Spaulding Street, Lafayette, Colorado http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 31 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Response_to_CDPHE_2012.pdf 32 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Censored_Compliance_Audit.pdf 33 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/DVRCriticalReview.pdf 34 See: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Johnson_Critical_review.pdf 35 See:http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Critical_review_Hooker.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 233 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 6 of 14 3251 S. Elati St., Englewood, CO 37 673 Shooks Lane, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 38 7465 Cabin Ridge Drive, Fountain, Colorado 39 1410 Maxwell Street, Colorado Springs, CO 40 9210 Race Street, Thornton, CO 80229 41 2045 Farnsworth, Colorado Springs, CO 42 1299 Vondelpark Drive, Unit C, Colorado Springs, CO 43 5571 E. 66th Way Commerce City, CO 80022 44 1812 164th Place, Thornton CO 45 4690 West 76th Ave., Westminster 46 539 Shady Crest Circle, Colorado Springs, CO 80916 47 16275 Mt. Vernon Road in Golden, CO 80401 48 131 South Benton Street Denver, CO 49 100 W. Spaulding Street, Lafayette, Colorado 50 FACTs has documented hundreds of other affected addresses constituting hundreds of thousands of regulatory violations of 6 CCR 1014-3. For most of those other addresses, and all of the above addresses, the regulatory violations associated with submitted fraudulent documents were known to staff at CDPHE, TCHD and Boulder County Public Health. Eventually, the problem became so serious, a couple of local TV news channels became aware of the situation and produced news segments,51 highlighting the problem. Colorado State Senator Lois Tochtrop asked FACTs Inc. to help her office correct the problem of fraud associated with the proper conducting 6 CCR 1014-3. In response, FACTs helped Sen. Tochtrop's office prepare Senate Bill SB13-219. The intention of this bill was to dissuade unauthorized consultants from performing assessments of illegal drug laboratories (methamphetamine) and levy severe penalties on these unauthorized consultants. The bill passed, was signed into law by Gov. Hickenlooper and became effective December 15, 2014. The bill allowed the imposition of a $15,000 per violation per day fine for violators of the regulations and required regulatory oversight by the CDPHE. Inexplicably, the State of Colorado CDPHE assigned the task of revising this regulation 36 See: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Censored_Weecycle_review.pdf 37 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Regulatory_audit_CEH_Elati.pdf 38 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Shooks_DS_regulatory_audit.pdf 39 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Critical_review_Cabin_Ridge.pdf 40 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/CriticalReviewMaxwell.pdf 41 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Critical_review_Race.pdf 42 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Farnsworth_Critical_Review.pdf 43 See:http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Vondelpark_audit_censored.pdf 44 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/E66th_PA_regulatory_audit_HUD.pdf 45 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/164thCriticalReview.pdf 46 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/DimickCriticalReview.pdf 47 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Reg_audit_shady_crest.pdf 48 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/ReviewofQuestreportdelivery.pdf 49 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/censoredcriticalreview.pdf 50 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 51 Two news videos can be viewed here: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/coloregs.html ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 234 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 7 of 14 and its enforcement to the very two people who helped created the associated problem in the first place - Ms. Brisnehan and Mr. Schieffelin. (All assessment, remediation and clearance reports associated with methamphetamine affected properties are now sent directly to Ms. Brisnehan at the CDPHE, supposedly for review and acceptance/rejection). The new regulations required State licensing and a demonstration of proficiency in order for consultants to perform work on methamphetamine affected properties (language changed from "illegal drug laboratory" in original version). The new regulation permitted interim authorization (from December 15, 2014 to June 15, 2015) to continue to perform assessments exclusively for those meeting the statutory definition of “Industrial Hygienist ” in Colorado, and who were in compliance with the old (prior to December 15, 2014) regulations. The "new" regulations read: 6 CCR 1014-3 Part 2 3.0 Interim Authorization 3.1 Persons who, as of the effective date of this Part 2 of these regulations, are performing assessment or decontamination activities subject to these regulations may continue to perform such activities, as long as they comply with the requirements of this section 3. Yet, in violation of the new regulations, Ms. Brisnehan (CDPHE) granted “interim authorization” to the very consultants who had been performing the fraudulent assessments and to each of the members of her “CAMMP organization” who had been previously performing the illegal assessments of methamphetamine affected properties. Ms. Brisnehan (CDPHE), ultimately, in violation of the regulations, granted full state “certification” as personal favors. In spite of regulations, these consultants still could not produce proof of any documentable training, and who could not demonstrate eligibility in this particular field. (Unfortunately, these “certified” consultants are the ones a property owner must now hire to perform an assessment at a contaminated property.) Virtually immediately, (literally on the effective date of the new regulations), the fraudulent consultants, now under the “protection” of Ms. Brisnehan, have continued to violate State regulations knowing they can now operate with impunity and continue with deceptive trade practices. Similarly, with the guidance and assistance of the CDPHE, the Boulder County Health Department and the TCHD continued to ignore the regulations, and with the assistance of CDPHE, members of the TCHD moved from passively ignoring the regulations to actively assisting in fraudulent assessment of properties 52 Starting in January 2015, the CDPHE began to involve Mr. Michael Richen with the Boulder County Public Health (BCPH) in actively hiding contaminated property from 52 See for example: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Weecycle_audit_censored.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 235 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 8 of 14 public view. For the previous years from 2005 to 2015, Boulder County Public Health passively ignored fraudulent property assessments, stating they would not get involved as long as the CDPHE was not taking actions against fraudulent consultants. However, on their county web site, BCPH actively promoted the services of CAMMP consultants engaged in fraudulent activities. For example, on January 14, 2015, Ms. Melanie Del Hierro, with the Denver Investment Group, Inc. contacted FACTs and stated that she had purchased a property located at 100 West Spaulding Street, Lafayette, CO (Boulder County) and had been informed that the property had been a contaminated meth-lab but had been cleaned “according to all EPA regulations.” Ms. Del Hierro provided FACTs with a copy of the “clearance report” and asked us to review the document for compliance with State regulations. FACTs reviewed the document and found the work had been performed by a member of the CAMMP with a very long history of fraudulent assessments, and falsified reports. Our review found no fewer than 143 regulatory violations and that virtually no aspect of State regulations had been followed. At the request of the property owner, FACTs issued our audit 53 and found that the property had never been cleaned and was never verified as required by Statutes and Regulations. On January 23, 2015, Mr. Michael Richen with the Boulder County Public Health sent FACTs a letter stating that the BCPH had, in association with CDPHE, determined there were no violations at the 100 West Spaulding Street property. On February 9, 2015, Mr. Schieffelin (CDPHE) issued a letter 54 regarding the Spaulding Street property which falsely laid out straw-man arguments against FACTs, and stated that our findings regarding the Spaulding Street property were invalid, and the later work performed at the property (performed by a CAMMP member) was performed in accordance with State regulations. The knowingly false assertions made by CDPHE were provided to a variety of recipients including Ms. Melanie Del Hierro, effectively falsifying the regulatory status of the property. In their letter, CDPHE failed to mention they had no authority, at that point in time, to comment on the work, which had occurred under the old regulations (prior to December 15, 2014); and CDPHE also failed to mention that the consultant who had performed the invalid work at this property had a long history of fraudulent work, and was a fellow CAMMP member on a board which Ms. Brisnehan served as a Director (a conflict of interest on her part). On March 16, 2015, in violation of Colorado Criminal Code CRS 18-8-404 First degree official misconduct and in violation of 6 CCR 1014-3 Part 3 §3.2, as retaliation for Mr. Connell’s (FACTs) March 25, 2013, testimony against her, Ms. Brisnehan, in her regulatory role with the CDPHE, capriciously and with malice, refused to grant Mr. 53 Regulatory Audit, 100 Spaulding, Lafayette: http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 54 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/Schieffelin_spaulding_2015.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 236 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 9 of 14 Connell the State mandated authorization to continue to perform work regarding the regulatory assessment of methamphetamine affected properties in Colorado (in spite of the fact that Mr. Connell is the only consulting Industrial Hygienist in Colorado with documentable training in this field, and was the primary author of the assessment section of the original regulations). In her action, Ms. Brisnehan (CDPHE) alleged that FACTs had committed regulatory violations, but, in violation of mandatory State regulations, Ms. Brisnehan refused to comply with the State regulations that required her to provide an explanation of the alleged violations. In retaliation for the FACTs independent regulatory audit of the Spaulding Street property, and in violation of Colorado criminal code CRS 18-8-404, more recently Mr. Richen with Boulder County Public Health, knowingly fabricated allegations against FACTs that culminated with three separate letters.55,56,57 In these three letters Mr. Richen knowingly provided false information to our client, the Boulder County Housing Authority, BCHA, (which receives Federal Funding) regarding work conducted by FACTs at three properties managed by this organization. FACTs filed suit against CDPHE, who responded by falsely claiming that FACTs had been violating the regulations and therefore CDPHE was authorized to withhold certification. However, CDPHE was unable to actually identify ANY actual violations, and claimed that they did not have to specify which regulations were violated, it was good enough to just claim violations occurred. The CDPHE desperately tried to stop the law suit, and claimed that a citizen in Colorado has no right to challenge the CDPHE in court. The courts ultimately disagreed with the CDPHE and cleared the way for a trial. The Attorney General's Office tried to stop the law suit claiming that the situation was so bad and now involved so many properties, that if the Colorado public learned about the situation, the resulting class action law suit against the CDPHE could potentially bankrupt the State of Colorado. The courts nevertheless allowed the law suit to proceed. In retaliation against the judge, the Attorney General's Office filed a personal law suit against the Judge, who then required the AG's Office to defend her against their own law suit. 55 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/BCDH_Secure/Richens_401rejection_letter.pdf This is a secured folder and requires the following case sensitive passwords for access: Username: DeptJust Password: DoJ_01 56See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/BCDH_Secure/Richens_Cleveland_rejection.pdf This is a secured folder and requires the following case sensitive passwords for access: Username: DeptJust Password: DoJ_01 57 See: http://forensic-applications.com/meth/BCDH_Secure/Richens_rejection_letter_Wedge.pdf This is a secured folder and requires the following case sensitive passwords for access: Username: DeptJust Password: DoJ_01 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 237 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 10 of 14 The portion of the AG's office that was defending the judge issued a motion against the portion of the AG's office that was suing the judge and in that motion noted that the AG's office was not only violating state law, but the actions against Mr. Connell and FACTs were equally illegal. Finding itself in an untenable position of fighting itself, the AG's office dropped their law suit against the judge, and the matter went to trial in November 2018. During the November 2018 trial, the CDPHE called one of its most important witnesses, Deanne Kelley with the TCHD. Under oath Ms. Kelley testified that she and her colleagues with the TCHD had identified numerous regulatory violations committed by FACTs, in our various reports, and therefore the TCHD had rejected the FACTs reports, and reported the violations to Ms. Brisnehan with the CDPHE. Under oath, Ms. Kelley testified on the nature of the various alleged violations. Ms. Kelley was given a copy of a FACTs report that she had rejected for the alleged violations, and asked to show the judge where within the FACTs report, the violations had occurred, as the basis for her rejection and testimony. After a very awkward time of silence as Ms. Kelley thumbed through the FACTs report, she admitted she was unable to identify a single violation that she claimed had existed. She was then given a copy of the regulations and asked to show the judge, where within the regulations the provisions that she had identified in her testimony actually existed. Again, after an awkward pause as she thumbed through the regulations, Ms. Kelley had to admit to the judge that nowhere in the regulations did the provisions she claimed were requirements actually existed. Miss Kelley, representing the TCHD had committed perjury under oath and attempted to fool the judge, who was already fully aware of the dishonesty that was occurring. Ms. Kelley then told the judge that she and TCHD had merely fabricated the alleged violations at the direction of Coleen Brisnehan. That is Ms. Kelley, representing the TCHD lied under oath, regarding the regulations and the compliance status of properties to please the personal satisfaction of Coleen Brisnehan. Ms. Brisnehan had instructed TCHD to pretend that the sampling performed by FACTs was unlawful. Ms. Kelley testified that she was unaware of the fact that Ms. Brisnehan was entirely unqualified to opine about such sampling. The courts ruled: “The ALJ finds Mr. Connell’s professional judgment, based upon his assessment of the many a variables in the given circumstances more credible than Ms. Brisnehan’s in these instances. Ms. Brisnehan is not qualified to be an Industrial Hygienist and was not present to do a personal assessment of the properties for which Mr. Connell conducted his reports”. It is now known that at the behest of Ms. Brisnehan, Deanne Kelley and Lisa Oliveto and other members of the TCHD have been assisting unlawful consultants in the preparation of fraudulent compliance documents for hundreds of properties in Adams, Douglas, and ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 238 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 11 of 14 Arapahoe Counties. According to Ms. Kelley, the fraudulent work has been at the direction of Ms. Brisnehan (who also committed perjury while under oath). At this point in time, neither Ms. Kelley nor Ms. Brisnehan have been held accountable for their actions. Although the courts ordered the CDPHE to reinstate the credentials of FACTs, and Mr. Connell, Ms. Brisnehan has refused to comply with the court orders. The courts rejected all CDPHE allegations against FACTs and against Mr. Connell and determined Ms. Brisnehan, (whom the court identified as being duplicitous), had abused her power and authority. During the trial, it did not go unnoticed by the courts that Ms. Brisnehan introduced into evidence two reports that had been altered and falsified for the purposes of the trial (one for the contaminated property at 690 South Lincoln St. Denver, CO and one for the contaminated property at 4383 Tennyson Street, Unit 3A, Denver, Colorado 80212). To date, FACTs has performed 48 regulatory audits of reports prepared by State Certified (but otherwise untrained and/or fraudulent consultants) under the new regulations (6 CCR 1014-3 (2014), and we have identified no fewer than 15,025 (thirteen thousand, and twenty five) regulatory violations. In violation of 6 CCR 1014-3 Part 3, Section 3.0 Notification and Imposition,Ms. Brisnehan (CDPHE) is helping to hide these violations and is failing to perform her lawful duty of enforcing the regulations to protect the citizens of Colorado. A complete list of the audits performed by FACTs can be found at: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/coloregs.html By ignoring the violations, the CDPHE is allowing the continued falsification of real estate documents falsely presented as affirmation of compliance with State regulations. The expenditure of federal Brownsfields funds for invalid assessments directed to fraudulent consultants has continued with the advent of the new regulations, and as recent as June 4, 2015, the State of Colorado hired a CAMMP consultant with an extended history of fraudulent assessments 58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65 to perform an evaluation at the 58 See for example: 131 South Benton Street Denver, CO http://forensic- applications.com/meth/censoredcriticalreview.pdf 59 See for example: 100 W. Spaulding Street, Lafayette, Colorado http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Spaulding_Regulatory_audit_Redacted.pdf 60 See for example: 4893 S Johnson Street, Denver http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Johnson_Critical_review.pdf 61 See for example: 788 W. Lois Ct., Louisville, CO 80027 62 See for example: 1138 West 32nd Street, Unit 201, Denver, CO http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Addendum_2_Woellner_1138_32_St.pdf 63 See for example: 410 Garfield Avenue, Carbondale, CO 81623 http://www.forensic- applications.com/meth/Addendum_4_Woellner_410_Garfield.pdf 64See for example: 8347 S Reed Street, Unit 2 Littleton CO 80128 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Addendum_6_Woellner_Reed2_Redacted.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 239 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 12 of 14 property located at 11767 Grant Street, Northglenn, Colorado 80233 (located in the jurisdiction of the Tri-County Health Department). FACTs review 66 of that report indicated no fewer than 113 regulatory violations that were subsequently hidden from the property owner by TCHD and the CDPHE. The property owner was initially a client of FACTs, and she has now been harmed and victimized by both TCHD and the CDPHE. FACTs has first-hand knowledge and objective documentation that, in violation of multiple Colorado statutes, including criminal statutes and environmental statutes, Ms. Coleen Brisnehan and her manager Mr. Joe Schieffelin (CDPHE) have knowingly engaged in activities that are in violation of those codes and in violation of ethical considerations. The actions by the CDPHE employees have been performed in conjunction with at least two employees of the Tri-County Health Department and one member of the Boulder County Public Health (who also testified during the November trial, and who also failed to identify any actual violations in our work). The actions have resulted in harm to hundreds of owners of properties in those jurisdictions in Colorado. These actions by State (CDPHE) and local (TCHD and BCDH) employees has placed property owners (and any home buyer in general) in an intractable position since home owners are now forced to hire one of Ms. Brisnehan’s (CDPHE) otherwise fraudulent, incompetent and untrained consultants to perform work that is ultimately in violation of the regulations. As a result, the statutory liability immunity as defined by CRS 25-18.5- 103(2)(a) is jeopardized since the work being performed is invalid. This statute reads: (2) (a) Except as specified in paragraph (b) of this subsection (2), once a property owner has received certificates of compliance from a contractor and a consultant in accordance with section 25-18.5-102 (1) (e),or has demolished the property, or has met the clean-up standards and documentation requirements of this section as it existed before August 7, 2013, the property owner: (II) Is immune from a suit brought by a current or future owner, renter, occupant, or neighbor of the property for health-based civil actions that allege injury or loss arising from the illegal drug laboratory. There now have been hundreds of properties for which invalid assessments have been performed, resulting in thousands of regulatory violations, hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on invalid assessments resulting in falsified real estate documents, and, most disturbingly, people moving into properties still contaminated with methamphetamine. Yet however flawed, the Colorado regulations nevertheless become applicable when the owner of a property has received “notification” from a cognizant authority that a property is or may be noncompliant, or methamphetamine may be present, or there is a potential 65 See for example: 11767 Grant Street, Northglenn, Colorado 80233 http://forensic- applications.com/meth/Grant_Regulatory_review.pdf 66 See: http://www.forensic-applications.com/meth/Addendum_7_Woellner_11767_Grant.pdf ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 240 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 13 of 14 for contamination. The discovery upon which the notification is based may be from a peace officer “…or when a “drug laboratory” is otherwise discovered .”67 For some properties, in an effort to gain unlawful benefit for her friends, Ms. Brisnehan with the CDPHE has intentionally lied to property owners and claimed that “discovery” can only occur if the sampling has been performed pursuant to State screening regulations.68 However, on other properties, Ms. Brisnehan has claimed that discovery occurs if the sampling has been performed by one of her favored consultants, even when the sampling has not been performed pursuant to any State regulations. Although Ms. Brisnehan constantly changes her interpretation of the regulations to gain an unlawful benefit for her friends, the State statutes and State regulations are otherwise very clear about the “discovery” process and explicitly state the following: State Statutes C.R.S. §25-18.5-103. Discovery of illegal drug laboratory - property owner - cleanup - liability (1) (a) Upon notification from a peace officer that chemicals, equipment, or supplies of an illegal drug laboratory are located on a property, or when an illegal drug laboratory is otherwise discovered and the property owner has received notice, the owner of any contaminated property shall meet the clean-up standards for property established by the board in section 25-18.5-102; except that a property owner may, subject to paragraph (b) of this subsection (1), elect instead to demolish the contaminated property. Similarly, State regulations explicitly state: Colorado Regulation 6 CCR 1014-3 REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE CLEANUP OF METHAMPHETAMINE-AFFECTED PROPERTIES 1.2 Applicability - The requirements of this Part apply: 1.2.1 When an owner of property has received notification from a peace officer that chemicals, equipment, or supplies indicative of a methamphetamine-affected property are or have been located at the property. 1.2.2 When a methamphetamine-affected property is otherwise discovered, and the owner of the property where the methamphetamine-affected property is located has received notice. State statutes and regulations are clear in their language on this matter and nothing in State law supports Ms. Brisnehan’s changing personal interpretations. The work performed by FACTs for this property and others is completely lawful and applicable and is in complete compliance withal State of Colorado Regulations and Statutes. Our protocols are scientifically valid, and neither the State of Colorado, nor anyone else has been able to show any deficiency in our work. 67 CRS §25-18.5-103 68 See for example, the documentation associated with 3731 South Uinta Street, Denver, CO ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 241 Regulatory Status 2021 v1 FACTs, Inc. Page 14 of 14 This document has been prepared by Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc., pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. 18-8-115 Duty to report a crime - liability for disclosure. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 8 Packet Pg. 242 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 243 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 244 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 245 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 246 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 247 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 248 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 249 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 250 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 251 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 252 7KH*URXS,QF0DLO)ZG6LJQHG'RFXPHQWV KWWSVPDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPWKLG WKUHDGI$&PVJI$« ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 9 Packet Pg. 253 5/20/2021 1 528 W. Mountain Avenue The Case for Landmark Designation Prepared by Mark Greenwald 1030 W. Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado May 2021 LANDMARK DESIGNATION IN FORT COLLINS •Action of local, state, or national government •Based on historic and/or architectural significance •Inclusion in a historic district, or as an individual property •More than 1000 properties since 1971 1 2 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-1 5/20/2021 2 LANDMARK DESIGNATION IN FORT COLLINS •May provide significant tax benefits and/or support for restoration and maintenance •Requires essential preservation of external appearance HISTORIC DISTRICTS •Old Town (national 1978, local 1979) ‐73 properties, mostly commercial, late 19th and early 20th centuries •Laurel School (national 1980) – 710 properties, mostly residential, late 19th and early 20th centuries •Sheely Drive (local 2000) – 11 homes, mid‐20th century •Whitcomb Street (local 2013) – 13 homes, late 19th and early 20th century 3 4 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-2 5/20/2021 3 INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES •National 22 •State 39 •Local 163 •Some within historic districts, most not •Avery House, 328 W. Mountain, was first in 1972 LOCAL LANDMARKING PROCESS •Municipal Code Chapter 14 •Initiated by owner (large majority), or by petition of 3 or more city residents •Following review and recommendation by Landmark Preservation Commission, involving resident input, effected by city council •Recent change from legislative to quasi‐judicial 5 6 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-3 5/20/2021 4 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE •26 residential properties designated landmarks •Most between 1991 and 2019 •More than any other street in Fort Collins •Adjacent to Old Town and Whitcomb historic districts WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE LANDMARK HOMES •Diverse in size and style •Some houses are rather imposing •Others quite modest •Unique among urban grand boulevards in having many residences built by and for working‐ and middle‐class people 7 8 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-4 5/20/2021 5 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE LANDMARK HOMES •Diverse in size and style •Some houses are rather imposing •Others quite modest •Unique among urban grand boulevards in having many residences built by and for working‐ and middle‐class people WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE LANDMARK HOMES •Diverse in size and style •Some houses are rather imposing •Others quite modest •Unique among urban grand boulevards in having many residences built by and for working‐ and middle‐class people 9 10 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-5 5/20/2021 6 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE LANDMARK HOMES •Diverse in size and style •Some houses are rather imposing •Others quite modest •Unique among urban grand boulevards in having many residences built by and for working‐ and middle‐class people WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE LANDMARK HOMES •Diverse in size and style •Some houses are rather imposing •Others quite modest •Unique among urban grand boulevards in having many residences built by and for working‐ and middle‐class people 11 12 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-6 5/20/2021 7 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE •Remains in keeping with egalitarian nature of America’s westward expansion during the city’s formative years •Given recent property value trends, economic pressure to replace smaller with larger and less affordable homes is substantial 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •Constructed 1885 •6 years after Avery House 13 14 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-7 5/20/2021 8 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •One of very few 19th century homes remaining on W. Mountain •Oldest W. Mountain residence that is not already designated as a landmark 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •Home for most of her life to Jessie R. Moore •Lifelong Fort Collins resident •Graduated from Fort Collins High School in 1900 15 16 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-8 5/20/2021 9 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •A teacher for nearly 50 years of the early 20th century in Fort Collins Public Schools •Much loved by students and the community 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •Taught mainly at LaPorte Avenue School, 3 blocks from her home •Many students lived nearby •School building designed by prominent local architect Montezuma Fuller •Built in 1907, razed 1975 17 18 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-9 5/20/2021 10 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •Miss Moore honored in naming of local elementary school •Built in 1956 at 1905 Orchard Place 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Historical Significance •School building now houses popular Polaris magnet program •Surrounding neighborhood continues to be known as Moore 19 20 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-10 5/20/2021 11 528 WEST MOUNTAIN Architectural Significance •One of very few remaining examples of late 19th century Folk‐Victorian style •Well ‐preserved typical external features, including bay window and roof trim CONCLUSION •528 W. Mountain is an important part of the historic and architectural legacy of Fort Collins •It embodies qualities central to the appeal of its neighborhood •For the benefit of all present and future residents of Fort Collins, it should be preserved 21 22 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-11 01 - My name is Mark Greenwald. I have lived full time in Fort Collins, on Mountain Avenue, for about two years. The basis for my personal interest in this matter is described in a brief document submitted to the LPC prior to this meeting, and included in the agenda as Item 4, attachment 2, pages 171-172. 02 - Over the past 50 years, Fort Collins, like many other cities, has become increasingly intent on protecting local properties, both residential and commercial, that reflect its historical and architectural heritage. Landmark designation, which may be done by city, state, or national government, is the principal means to this end. 03 - Action by the city in particular provides significant tax benefits to landmark property owners. Designation by any jurisdiction limits the ability of owners to modify the external appearance of the property, in the interest of preserving its historic or architectural value for the community. 04 - Most of the protected properties in Fort Collins sit within the boundaries of two historic districts, both east of College Avenue. Named for Old Town and Laurel School, they were created by the federal government in 1978 and 1980 respectively. Some of the properties in these neighborhoods also have received state or local landmark designation. 05 - A substantial number of properties outside the historic districts have been individually designated as landmarks, mostly by the city. The first of these was the Avery House, built in 1879 and designated a national, state, and local landmark in 1972. 06 - Individual landmark designation in a large majority of cases is initiated by a property’s owner, but nomination by any 3 or more city residents can set this process in motion, as is the case in the current situation. Ultimately the decision is made by city council, following review by the Landmark Preservation Commission, as is now taking place. 07 - West Mountain Avenue, judged by many in Fort Collins to be the city’s most coveted address, is the site of 26 individually-designated landmark residences, more than any other local street. 08 - The homes on West Mountain Avenue were built mostly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and are quite diverse in size and style. 09 - Some are fairly large and imposing. 10 - Others are small and modest. 11 - In contrast to grand boulevards in most towns, 12 - Mountain Avenue has many residences that appear to have been built by and for working- or middle-class people. ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-12 13 - Mountain Avenue thus still seems very much a product of the era of American westward expansion, with its egalitarian ideals. This state is unfortunately endangered by pressure to replace smaller houses with larger and less affordable ones, as property values in the neighborhood rise. 14 - 528 West Mountain Avenue is one of those modest homes. It was constructed in 1885, just 6 years after the Avery House. 15 - As is evident from this map dating from 1894, there were few other residences on the street when it was built. To the best of my knowledge, it is the oldest home on Mountain Avenue, and one of the oldest in the city, that does not currently have landmark status. 16 - From the time it was built through most of the 20th century, this house was home to members of the Moore family. One of them was Jessie Moore, who lived most of her life at this address. 17 - Miss Moore became a teacher in Fort Collins public schools, where she worked for nearly half a century. This photo, more than 100 years old, shows what is believed to be a gathering of teachers in front of her home. 18 - She taught mainly at LaPorte Avenue School, just a few blocks from where she lived, in a historic building, now lost, designed by a leading local architect. 19 - Such was the esteem in which Jessie Moore was held that one of several new elementary schools built by Fort Collins in the 1950s was named in her honor. 20 - The neighborhood surrounding the school is still identified as Moore. 21 - Despite its small size, 528 W. Mountain is an excellent example of the architectural style known as Folk-Victorian. The prominent bay window facing Mountain and an unusual adornment of the pediment above it are typical features of this style. 22 - In conclusion, based on the foregoing observations, it seems clear that this property contributes significantly to the historic and architectural fabric of its neighborhood and the city. Its loss would considerably diminish the appeal of the block and the street on which it sits. For the benefit of all present and future residents of Fort Collins, it should be preserved under the protection of landmark designation. Mark Greenwald May 19, 2021 ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 253-13