The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/17/2024 - Historic Preservation Commission - AGENDA - Regular MeetingPage 1 Jim Rose, Chair Location: Bonnie Gibson, Vice Chair This meeting will be held Margo Carlock In person at Chambers, 300 LaPorte Chris Conway And remotely via Zoom Jenna Edwards Jeff Gaines Aaron Hull Staff Liaison: David Woodlee Maren Bzdek Vacant Seat Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting July 17, 2024 5:30 PM Historic Preservation Commission AGENDA Pursuant to City Council Ordinance No. 143, 2022, 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 hybrid Historic Preservation Commission meeting will be available online via Zoom or by phone and in person. The online meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:00 p.m. Participants should try to join online or in person at least 15 minutes prior to the 5:30 p.m. start time. IN PERSON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to queue at the podium to indicate you would like to speak at that time. You may speak when acknowledged by the Chair. ONLINE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: You will need an internet connection on a laptop, computer, or smartphone, and may join the meeting through Zoom at https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/98864384557 . (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 98864384557. 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 preservation@fcgov.com at least 48 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 preservation@fcgov.com at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. If your comments are specific to any of the discussion items on the agenda, please indicate that in the subject line of your email. Staff will ensure your comments are provided to the Commission. Packet Pg. 1 Page 2 Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government (CLG) authorized by the National Park Service and History Colorado based on its compliance with federal and state historic preservation standards. CLG standing requires Fort Collins to maintain a Historic Preservation Commission composed of members of which a minimum of 40% meet federal standards for professional experience from preservation-related disciplines, including, but not limited to, historic architecture, architectural history, archaeology, and urban planning. For more information, see Article III, Division 19 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:00 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php. • CALL TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW o Staff Review of Agenda o Consent Agenda Review This Review provides an opportunity for the Commission and citizens to pull items from the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Agenda and considered separately.  Commission-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered before Discussion Items.  Citizen-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered after Discussion Items. • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA • COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MAY 15, 2024 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the May 15, 2024 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. 2. SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 1105 W. MOUNTAIN AVE. 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 3DFNHW3J Page 3 3. SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 516 N. GRANT AVE. • 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 4. REPORT ON STAFF ACTIVITIES SINCE THE LAST MEETING Staff is tasked with an array of different responsibilities including code-required project review decisions on historic properties, support to other standing and special work groups across the City organization, and education & outreach programming. This report will provide highlights for the benefit of Commission members and the public, and for transparency regarding decisions made without the input of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). 5. 724 MARTINEZ STREET (CHAVEZ/AMBRIZ/GONZALES PROPERTY) – LANDMARK DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property at 724 Martinez St. APPLICANT: Monica Gonzales, Santiago Gonzales, Celina Maldonado, and James Gonzales STAFF: Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner 6. 201 LINDEN STREET (LINDEN HOTEL) – DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: Alterations to the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street to include complete replacement of the historic windows. APPLICANT/OWNER: Linden Street Treehouse, LLC vy OneSeven Advisors, LLC 148 Remington Street, Ste 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524 STAFF: Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager • 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 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 1 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY JULY 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission STAFF Melissa Matsunaka, Sr. Project Coordinator SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 15, 2024 REGULAR MEETING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the May 15, 2024 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. HPC May 15, 2024 Minutes – DRAFT Packet Pg. 4 Page 1 Jim Rose, Chair Location: Bonnie Gibson, Vice Chair Council Chambers, 300 Laporte Margo Carlock And remotely via Zoom Chris Conway Jenna Edwards Jeff Gaines Aaron Hull Staff Liaison: David Woodlee Maren Bzdek Vacant Seat Historic Preservation Manager Regular Meeting May 15, 2024 Minutes •CALL TO ORDER Chair Rose called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. •ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chris Conway, Jenna Edwards, Jeff Gaines, Bonnie Gibson, Aaron Hull, Jim Rose, David Woodlee ABSENT: Margo Carlock STAFF: Maren Bzdek, Heather Jarvis, Jim Bertolini, Yani Jones, Melissa Matsunaka •AGENDA REVIEW Ms. Bzdek reviewed the published agenda. •CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW No items were pulled from consent. •COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Ron Sladek announced an upcoming Historic Larimer County event at the Mallaby Store on Meldrum. Gwen Brooks expressed interest in purchasing a historic building and in learning about potential implications of such a purchase. Historic Preservation Commission '5 $ ) 7 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Page 2 • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 17, 2024. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the April 17, 2024 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Vice Chair Gibson moved, seconded by Commissioner Conway, to approve the April 17, 2024 minutes as written. Yeas: Conway, Edwards, Gaines, Gibson, Hull, Woodlee, and Rose. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 2. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 1703 W. MULBERRY ST. Commissioner Conway moved, seconded by Commissioner Hull, to approve the consent agenda for the May 15, 2024 meeting as presented. Yeas: Conway, Edwards, Gaines, Gibson, Hull, Woodlee, and Rose. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Ms. Bzdek provided an update on the timeline and three Historic Preservation offers for the 2025-26 budget cycle: a core ongoing offer for continuing work at current levels with enhanced funding for revised outreach priorities, an enhancement offer for Historic Preservation Code and policy updates to ensure more explicit alignment with equity and climate resilience goals, and an offer for a deconstruction program feasibility study. • DISCUSSION AGENDA 3. REPORT ON STAFF ACTIVITIES SINCE THE LAST MEETING Staff is tasked with an array of different responsibilities including code-required project review decisions on historic properties, support to other standing and special work groups across the City organization, and education & outreach programming. This report will provide highlights for the benefit of Commission members and the public, and for transparency regarding decisions made without the input of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner, discussed some of the staff activities that have occurred since the last meeting, including an event and luau at CSU for the Asian Pacific American Cultural Center’s 40th anniversary celebration. Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, provided information about a conceptual review for a multi-family mixed-use project at 360 Linden Street. Mr. Bertolini noted staff did recommend the applicants come before the Commission for additional conceptual review. Ms. Jones also provided a reminder about the Historic Preservation newsletter. '5 $ ) 7 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Page 3 4. PROGRESS REPORT – WILLIAM ROBB HISTORIC CONTEXT DESCRIPTION: The City of Fort Collins is completing a historic context study about William Robb, one of the area’s most influential and prolific mid-20th architects. This project is being sponsored by the City's Historic Preservation Services division, with grant funding support from the State Historical Fund. The goal of the project is to provide an historical overview and analysis to help City staff and community members understand the importance of Robb’s influence on the city’s built environment. Robb practiced in Fort Collins from the 1950s through the 1980s and is responsible for a sizeable percentage of the city’s most prominent architectural works from that time period, including many of our larger institutional buildings, local schools, office towers, etc. As the majority of mid-20th century construction in Fort Collins is now over fifty years of age, this context report will help distinguish what projects in Robb’s body of work should be preserved as significant examples of his contributions to the built environment of the city. PRESENTOR: Ron Sladek of Tatanka Historical Associates, Inc. STAFF: Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, stated this presentation relates to a grant- funded historic context that is currently being completed related to William Robb’s contributions to the city’s built environment over the latter half of the 20th century. He noted Ron Sladek was hired to complete the work. Ron Sladek, Tatanka Historical Associates, Inc., noted he previously served on the Commission. He stated the presentation is a product of the Bill Robb Architectural Legacy Study which was sponsored by the City and funded by the City and State Historical Fund. Sladek noted Robb’s architectural firm is now known as RB+B Architects on East Mountain Avenue. He discussed Bill Robb’s upbringing in Pueblo and Durango, service in the U.S. Army Air Force in World War II, education in engineering and architecture in Boulder and MIT, and relocation to Fort Collins. He further discussed the evolution of Robb’s architectural practice and beginning of what is now the Historic Preservation Commission. Sladek showed photos of and discussed some of Robb’s projects, including many commercial buildings, private residences, schools, public buildings such as the current City Hall and the Larimer County Courthouse north annex, buildings on the CSU campus, various places of worship, multi-family residential projects, Scotch Pines Village, Steele’s Market, and the Stewart Professional Park. Sladek commented on the architectural legacy of Bill Robb noting he passed away in 1999. Vice Chair Gibson asked if there are next steps for this research. Sladek replied the study concludes by talking about how to proceed with the knowledge and the need for potential landmarking of buildings designed by Bill Robb. Sladek suggested possibly starting with the School District to determine if it would consider landmarking, and also contacting the Robb- designed churches. He noted a missing piece is the single-family houses designed by Robb as they were identified by the owners’ last names rather than by addresses. He also noted all of the drawings that were done on paper are gone from the current RB+B firm so seeking out those plans could be a valuable project. Commissioner Gaines stated he works at RB+B and is a Poudre School District parent. He commented on the potential for school closures. Sladek stated many of the school buildings could be eligible for local or national landmarking. (**Secretary’s Note: Bzdek requested Item No. 6 be moved up in the agenda) (**Secretary’s Note: The Commission took a brief recess at this point in the meeting.) DR A F T ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 7 Page 4 5. 426 E. OAK ST. (HOTTEL/HOFFMAN HOUSE AND ASH PIT) – CONCEPTUAL LANDMARK DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to provide a conceptual review of a proposed new carriage house for the City Landmark at 426 E. Oak St., the Hottel/Hoffman House and Ash Pit. The proposed new 2 bed/2 bath building would be 746 square-feet and 1.5 stories in height. The owner is seeking initial feedback regarding their concept designs and their consistency with the US Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation prior to commissioning construction drawings and seeking final approval from the HPC. APPLICANT/OWNER: Katherine Herr STAFF: Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner STAFF REPORT Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner, discussed the location of the City Landmark at 426 East Oak Street and noted the Commission’s role is to provide a conceptual design review of a proposed new structure on the site. Jones noted this project is a revision of one that was reviewed and approved in November of 2023 and reflects the current land use and zoning standards for the site. Jones outlined the proposed project for a new carriage house and demolition of a non-contributing accessory building. Jones showed elevations of the proposed structure and discussed its design features and proposed materials. Jones stated staff believes the project shows consistency with the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation as it appears to be compatible with the existing house, distinguishable, reversable, and subordinate. Jones addressed questions that were discussed at the work session, including showing images of the previously approved design, noting that the proposed new building would be 746 square feet whereas the existing non-contributing outbuilding proposed for demolition is about 350 square feet, and providing additional information on the ash pit on the site. Jones noted staff is recommending a condition of approval that a plan of protection be submitted prior to building permit issuance in order to minimize risk to the ash pit during construction. COMMISSION QUESTIONS Commissioner Conway asked about the cost and delay associated with the formation of a plan of protection. Jones replied there is no associated cost and staff provides a template document. Jones stated the intent is to make the location of the ash pit apparent and known to the contractor managing the site; therefore, there should be no significant impact to the timeline. Commissioner Conway asked if the ash pit is in an area that will be heavily trafficked due to the construction. Jones replied it is unlikely the ash pit would come into conflict with construction equipment, but the recommendation for the plan of protection is out of an abundance of caution given the ash pit is part of the historic designation. Christopher Herr, project architect and likely general contractor, stated the ash pit is not close to areas that are going to be excavated or trafficked, though he would have no issues with putting a plan of protection in place. Additionally, Herr noted the redesign was necessary due to the Land Use Code changes and discussed the design approach. He stated he would like to move forward to final review if deemed appropriate by the Commission. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Vice Chair Gibson noted she was supportive of the project in November and stated it is unfortunate that square footage had to be lost due to the Land Use Code requirements. She stated the new design is appropriate and concurred with staff’s findings, including the requirement for a plan of protection. She recommended moving forward to final review. Commissioner Edwards concurred with Vice Chair Gibson. DR A F T ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 8 Page 5 Chair Rose stated this iteration is more compatible as a carriage house and would have been an appropriate ancillary structure for the home in terms of its vintage. He commended the applicant’s work on the main house. Vice Chair Gibson made a moved, seconded by Commissioner Woodlee, that the Historic Preservation Commission proceed to final review of the proposed work on the Hottel/Hoffman House and ash pit at 426 East Oak Street. Yeas: Conway, Edwards, Gaines, Gibson, Hull, Woodlee and Rose. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Vice Chair Gibson moved, seconded by Commissioner Edwards, that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the certificate of appropriateness for the proposed work on the Hottel/Hoffman House and ash pit at 426 East Oak Street because the work complies with the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation and Chapter 14, Article 4 of the Municipal Code, subject to the following condition: the applicant shall submit a plan of protection for the historic resources on site prior to building permit issuance, specifically the ash pit. Yeas: Conway, Edwards, Gaines, Gibson, Hull, Woodlee and Rose. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 6. EDUCATION WORKSHOP – ASIAN AMERICAN HISTORY PRIMER DESCRIPTION: Staff will provide a brief summary of known history and historic places related to the Asian American History in Fort Collins from the 1860s and beyond. This presentation is being given at a regular meeting as opposed to a work session to benefit the attending public. May is Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the United States. STAFF: Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, noted May is Historic Preservation Month as well as Jewish American Heritage and Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Bertolini provided a brief summary of the known history and historic places related to Asian American history in Fort Collins pre-1940. He focused on Chinese and Japanese immigration and work in the agricultural industry. He commented on three early Chinese business owners in Fort Collins and noted Japanese labor, in particular, helped build some of the early irrigation ditches that made farming possible in northern Colorado, including the Grand River Ditch which is still in operation. Bertolini discussed a boarding house on Jefferson Street that was believed to have served primarily Japanese workers. Bertolini outlined the next steps in this work which relate primarily to post-1950 research, including looking at CSU students and professors. He stated the work to research historically marginalized populations in Fort Collins includes talking about intangible stories and is an effort to address social inequity through places and stories. • CONSIDERATION OF CITIZEN-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS None. • OTHER BUSINESS Bzdek stated the Friends of Preservation awards are next Tuesday at the Avery House. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Rose adjourned the meeting at 8:27 p.m. '5 $ ) 7 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission ITEM NAME SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 1105 W. MOUNTAIN AVE. STAFF Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner INFORMATION Single-unit dwellings that are at least fifty years old and that are proposed for demolition to clear a property for a new single-unit dwelling are subject to the demolition notification process administered by the Historic Preservation staff and the Historic Preservation Commission. Demolition notification in this circumstance provides an opportunity to inform residents of changes in their neighborhood and to identify potentially important historic, architectural, and cultural resources, pursuant to Section 14-6 of Municipal Code. Community members receive notice about that demolition through a posted sign on the property, the City’s weekly newsletter “This Week in Development Review” and monthly “Historic Preservation Matters” newsletter, and on the City website at https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/demolition-review. City staff initiates the notification process after receiving a request for approval to demolish a single-unit dwelling through either a demolition permit or written request from the owner accompanied by current photos of the property proposed for demolition and confirmation that the proposed new construction would be another single-unit residence. The property is included in the next available consent agenda at a meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Community residents can contact staff or attend the HPC meeting either to provide information about the property and/or nominate the property as a City Landmark under the provisions of Section 14-31 of Municipal Code if they believe it is eligible as a City Landmark. The code allows for three or more residents of the City, the Historic Preservation Commission (by motion), or any City Councilmember (by written request) to initiate the process for landmark designation. As part of the Single-Unit Dwelling Demolition Notification process, City staff placed a Notice of Demolition sign at this property on June 26. On July 5, staff noticed the sign leaned against the side of the house and communicated that to the property owners. The property owners offered to ask their renter to put the sign back up in front of the house, but staff declined the offer stating that someone from the City would put the sign back up. Staff replaced the sign on July 6. 1105 W. Mountain Ave. Historical Background The property at 1105 W. Mountain Ave. was built in 1922 for Edmund Griffith, who owned a cigar store. Edmund and his wife, Hilda, lived at this house for just a couple of years before moving down the street to 814 W. Mountain Ave. The longest tenants of 1105 W. Mountain Ave. were Samuel L. and Ida L. Meyer. Samuel Meyer was a Jewish immigrant from Poland who came to Colorado in the 1890s. In 1916, Samuel was named honorary vice president of a Denver relief association that aimed to collect funds to help the “persecuted and distressed Jews” in Europe during World War I. The Meyers lived at this location from about 1925 until 1952, according to City Directories. Samuel owned the Meyer Store, a dry goods store. The Meyer Store was located at 222 Linden St. from 1905 until 1911, and then it moved to 132 S. College Ave., the Secord Block, which was later renamed the Meyer Building. By 1948, Samuel had left the dry goods business to start his own real estate/insurance agency, which also operated from 132 S. College Ave. He and Ida moved to Denver in 1953. There is no detailed survey record for this property, but a reconnaissance-level survey was completed in 1998 by Jason Marmor that found the property eligible for Landmark designation; that survey is attached. Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 2 The proposed demolition includes the single-unit dwelling and garage. Staff have received 8 email or phone inquiries about the demolition notification for this property, 2 of which included requests for the non-owner-supported Landmark nomination application materials. 2 of these people also wrote in comments related to this item, which are attached. Construction History DATE PERMIT # NAME DESCRIPTION 4/13/1922 968 Ed. Griffith 6-room brick bungalow, $5,000 3/27/1925 986 Sam Meyer Brick addition to residence, $2,000 8/6/1948 10718 Sam L. Meyer Reshingle Garage 8/8/1949 11342 Sam L. Meyer Repair Porch 6/1/2009 B0903079 BJI LLC Reroofing 8/2/2011 B1104208 Chad A. Williams Reroofing Residents YEAR NAME(S) NOTES 1925-1940 Samuel L. and Ida L. Meyer (o) The Meyer Store (dry goods - moved from Linden to College 1911) 1948 Samuel L. and Ida L. Meyer (o) Real estate 207 Meyer Building (132 S College - Secord Block) 1950-1952 Samuel L. and Ida L. Meyer (o) Samuel L. Meyer Agency (real estate and insurance, 132 S College) 1954-1970 Walter Lyal and Nellie T. Smith (o) retired 1971-1984 No information or not listed 1986 Helen Clovis Nelson (o) retired 1948 Tax Assessor Photo Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 3 1967 Tax Assessor Photo 1994 Tax Assessor Photo ATTACHMENTS 1. Current Photos 2. 1998 Reconnaissance Survey 3. Public Comments Packet Pg. 12 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 13 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 14 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 15 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 16 From:barefootmeg To:Yani Jones Subject:[EXTERNAL] Letter to be added to the Agenda for this week Date:Monday, July 15, 2024 10:12:22 AM Hi Yani, Please add this to the agenda item for 1105 W. Mountain. I know there’s no way to save this property. But I’d at least like there to be some public record that there were local residents who felt like it was a waste of resources to throw away such an intact building. The amount of resources and energy it will take to rip out the solid hard wood and other irreplaceable materials, haul it to the landfill, mine and harvest replacement materials, haul the replacement materials, and then install those replacement materials will do absolutely nothing towards getting Fort Collins closer to its climate goals. If anything, even if the new house is built at a LEED certified level, it will take decades to just break even in terms of energy consumption. And it's not like this scrape and replace will do anything to alleviate our housing crunch either. This single- family home is going to be replaced with a larger single-family house. Clearly the square footage regulations added during the last round of code updates has done nothing to keep folks from scraping our history and replacing it with vinyl-laden veneered behemoths. This scrape and replace will erode the character, history, climate action goals, and community good will in Fort Collins. It’s a shame that the City allows it. And it’s a shame that we, as a community, stand by and let it happen. - Meg Dunn, District 6 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 17 1 Jim Bertolini From:Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, July 10, 2024 2:55 PM To:Emily Francis Cc:Historic Preservation; Sarah Kane; Susan Gutowsky Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Fwd: 1105 W Mountain Demolition Hi Emily, Thank you for getting back to me so promptly. While I understand the city council has worked to alter the city land use code to address gentrification, housing affordability/availability, and density, I'm still not connecting the dots on why the city council hasn't initiated the landmark nomination process. I know it's not typical for council to initiate the landmark process but, the proposed demolition and construction does not aid in increasing community affordability, density, or sustainability in any real way. Per the initial email thread from Historic Preservation Services, "1105 W. Mountain is currently undergoing the Single-Unit Dwelling Demolition Notification process because the property owners intend to demolish this single-unit dwelling and replace it with another single-unit dwelling". No net improvement in any of these categories will result. The demolition of the historic structure will further increase gentrification on Mountain and doesn't address affordability or increase density. Trading out a single-unit dwelling for another is a blatant waste of resources and doesn't advance sustainability efforts either. The private business responsible for this demolition "TIMOCK FAMILY RENTALS LLC" as found under the online city parcel map needs to be held responsible for this type of inappropriate development behavior and I hope the council takes action to right this inequity. Thank you, Liam Myers On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 6:14 PM Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com> wrote: Hi Liam, Thank you for your email and reaching out. For your historic preservation questions, I have included staff who can help provide an answer as to why this was not marked as historic as well as how historic designation impacts demolition. As to altered neighborhood comment. As you may be aware, a new land use code went through multiple iterations to address topics such as density as well as the look and feel of areas such as Mountain Ave. The land use code that was ultimately adopted does try to address some of your concerns, such as limiting the size (based on sq ft) a house can be in that area of town. Additionally, we moved to more of form based code which takes into account the design, look, and feel of surrounding structures for any new development. This is different than our previous land use code which had no form based components. While it is extremely difficult to curb/stop gentrification it is to important to ensure sustainability and affordability as we move forward. Thank you, Emily ,7(02$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J1 2 From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2024 12:25 PM To: Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com> Cc: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: 1105 W Mountain Demolition Good afternoon, I’m curious to learn more about your efforts on anti-gentrification, historical preservation, and sustainability in light of the scheduled demolition of 1105 W Mountain within your district. The citizen enacted landmark designation process very rarely ceases demolition and I’m eager to hear why city council has not taken action on this historic structure and countless others. The systematic gentrification of Mountain is very alarming and has altered the neighborhood for the worse. The demolition and subsequent new construction on this parcel and others does not aid city sustainability/efficiency efforts, housing affordability, and increased density. I’d appreciate your help understanding why this hasn’t been addressed? Thank you. Liam Myers 971-270-7324 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 12:03 PM Subject: 1105 W Mountain Demolition To: <preservation@fcgov.com> CC: <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Hi there, In seeing that 1105 W Mountain is scheduled for demolition, I’m curious about the citizen enacted petition process. The historic preservation website alludes to a process, but doesn’t show the necessary steps and forms in an easily accessible format. Any help would be much appreciated. The gentrification of Mountain is becoming increasingly alarming and I’m very frustrated to see this beautiful historic home on the chopping block for the gain of a private business. Thank you for your time and the important work you all do. Liam Myers 971-270-7324 ,7(02$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J1 1 Jim Bertolini From:accessfortcollins=fcgov.com@mg.comcate.com on behalf of Sarah Jackson <accessfortcollins@fcgov.com> Sent:Wednesday, July 10, 2024 1:05 PM To:Jim Bertolini Subject:[EXTERNAL] New Comcate eFM case: Historic Preservation>Review Processes (you are collaborator) Case ID#: 82475 Case Detail page: hƩps://email.mg.comcate.com/c/eJxMjTuOrDAQAE_TDlF_jDGBgych7tE2DfiJGRBYc_7VbLRRBVVSLSkUk1GcJRoYg0QhcntC T4tnKtpHESpeguKaLcSi4leNriZG9jgQ0og9hm4YUHOPWXKORqrg8bV15XwVbfalO9Le2vWA_AOegedyVHu3528DPN92PV- pj03WtB7dtV8gs24gE_UIHOoCMjF5z2N0d_qf7W7nUd8VPK5lOz-_u0_inwAAAP__CuZBcg Topic>Subtopic: Historic PreservaƟon>Review Processes Case LocaƟon: Fort Collins, CO 80524 AcƟon that triggered this email: Add Collaborator Customer: Francis, Emily Owner: Sarah Jackson Date case was created (Days outstanding): 07/10/2024 (-0) Details of iniƟal customer request (only first sentences): From: Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 11:04 AM To: Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com>; Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Cc: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; SAR Admin Team <SAR-Admin-Team@fcgov.com>; Kelly DiMarƟno <KDIMARTINO@fcgov.com> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: 1105 W Mountain DemoliƟon Hello Mayor Pro Tem Francis, Councilmember Gutowsky and Liam Myers, Thank you for this opportunity to respond. Your email has been received and forwarded to staff. We will respond to your comments and requests shortly via the Service Area Request system. Thank you, Sarah Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sarah Kane ExecuƟve Assistant to Mayor & City Council City of Fort Collins 970-416-2447 office From: Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 6:14 PM ,7(02$77$&+0(173 3DFNHW3J2 2 To: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Cc: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: 1105 W Mountain DemoliƟon Hi Liam, Thank you for your email and reaching out. For your historic preservaƟon quesƟons, I have included staff who can help provide an answer as to why this was not marked as historic as well as how historic designaƟon impacts demoliƟon. As to altered neighborhood comment. As you may be aware, a new land use code went through mulƟple iteraƟons to address topics such as density as well as the look and feel of areas such as Mountain Ave. The land use code that was ulƟmately adopted does try to address some of your concerns, such as limiƟng the size (based on sq Ō) a house can be in that area of town. AddiƟonally, we moved to more of form based code which takes into account the design, look, and feel of surrounding structures for any new development. This is different than our previous land use code which had no form based components. While it is extremely difficult to curb/stop gentrificaƟon it is to important to ensure sustainability and affordability as we move forward. Thank you, Emily ________________________________________ From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2024 12:25 PM To: Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com> Cc: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: 1105 W Mountain DemoliƟon Good aŌernoon, Iâ€™m curious to learn more about your efforts on anƟ-gentrificaƟon, historical preservaƟon, and sustainability in light of the scheduled demoliƟon of 1105 W Mountain within your district. The ciƟzen enacted landmark designaƟon process very rarely ceases demoliƟon and Iâ€™m eager to hear why city council has not taken acƟon on this historic structure and countless others. The systemaƟc gentrificaƟon of Mountain is very alarming and has altered the neighborhood for the worse. The demoliƟon and subsequent new construcƟon on this parcel and others does not aid city sustainability/efficiency efforts, housing affordability, and increased density. Iâ€™d appreciate your help understanding why this hasnâ€™t been addressed? Thank you. Liam Myers 971-270-7324 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 12:03 PM Subject: 1105 W Mountain DemoliƟon To: <preservaƟon@fcgov.com> CC: <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> ,7(02$77$&+0(173 3DFNHW3J21 3 Hi there, In seeing that 1105 W Mountain is scheduled for demoliƟon, Iâ€™m curious about the ciƟzen enacted peƟƟon process. The historic preservaƟon website alludes to a process, but doesnâ€™t show the necessary steps and forms in an easily accessible format. Any help would be much appreciated. The gentrificaƟon of Mountain is becoming increasingly alarming and Iâ€™m very frustrated to see this beauƟful historic home on the chopping block for the gain of a private business. Thank you for your Ɵme and the important work you all do. Liam Myers 971-270-7324 You can also access your account by going to the employee home page and entering your username and password. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL. NOBODY WILL RECEIVE THE EMAIL. ,7(02$77$&+0(173 3DFNHW3J22 From:Liam To:Emily Francis; Susan Gutowsky Cc:Kelly Ohlson; Tricia Canonico; Historic Preservation; Sarah Kane Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Re: 1105 W Mountain Demolition Date:Monday, July 15, 2024 6:17:23 PM Hi there, Respectfully, I think you're misinterpreting what I’m trying to ask and have not answered my original question. I understand the pertinent municipal code and the three processes in which a landmark designation occurs. I'm hoping to gain insight on why the council hasn't utilized their third of the designation process. It's fully within your scope and authority. I first made contact over a week ago on July 4th. I'm a resident and I've made it pretty clear about my request to the council. Sure it’s not common, but that's not a good reason to allow this degree of gentrification to go unchecked. Why not save a historic home with a rich architectural and cultural background? What are you waiting for? What is the hold up? Thank you, Liam Myers On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 5:02 PM Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com> wrote: Hi Liam, As outlined in staff's response there are three ways to have a building considered for designation. The City did not receive any resident requests and the property owner did not inquire. Demolition requests do not come before City Council and to my knowledge City Council rarely is the first one to enact historical designation. Thank you, Emily Francis Pronouns: She, Her, Hers City of Fort Collins Mayor Pro Tem, District 6 970-556-4748 With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private. ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 23 From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2024 10:09 AM To: Emily Francis <efrancis@fcgov.com>; Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Cc: Kelly Ohlson <kohlson@fcgov.com>; Historic Preservation <preservation@fcgov.com>; Sarah Kane <SKane@fcgov.com>; Tricia Canonico <tcanonico@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 1105 W Mountain Demolition Good morning Councilmember Gutowsky, Thank you for getting back to me. I'm still hoping to hear more on the initial question I posed to Councilmember Francis over a week ago that hasn’t fully been answered. Why has city council not initiated the landmark nomination process for 1105 W Mountain? This dwelling holds historical significance both in the cultural and architectural context. The citizen-enacted process rarely results in any substantial action and this avenue of intervention is not intuitive nor appropriate to fall solely on the action of the public. The municipal code clearly states that involuntary landmark nominations are within the scope and authority of the city council. City council should strongly consider utilizing this process to curtail runaway gentrification within our community in light of this potential demolition and many others. Additionally, you should be aware that the city "Notice of Demolition" sign was moved out of view on the 1105 W Mountain property during the extended 4th of July weekend. Below I'm attaching photos from 7/6 showing the city notice placard disturbed from its initial position. Thank you, Liam Myers On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 7:45 AM Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> wrote: Hello Liam—Thank you for your email regarding the preservation of our beautiful historic homes on Mountain Ave. I definitely share your concerns and I will continue to work diligently to protect the unique character of these neighborhoods. I noticed you cc’s me on your email. I had the privilege of being the City Council liaison to the Historic Preservation Commission for several years. That assignment has now been transferred to Councilwoman Tricia Canonico and I believe she would appreciate being included re: any further preservation concerns you may have. Thank you for your continued involvement in the very important community issue. Susan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Susan Gutowsky Pronouns: she/her Councilmember, District 1 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J City of Fort Collins City Hall (300 Laporte Ave., Bldg. A) 970-294-2575 mobile sgutowsky@fcgov.com -- With limited exceptions, emails and any files transmitted with them are subject to public disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To promote transparency, emails will be visible in an online archive, unless the sender puts #PRIVATE in the subject line of the email. However, the City of Fort Collins can’t guarantee that any email to or from Council will remain private. -- From: Liam <lmyers.personal@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, July 4, 2024 at 12:04 PM To: Historic Preservation <preservation@fcgov.com> Cc: Susan Gutowsky <sgutowsky@fcgov.com> Subject: 1105 W Mountain Demolition Hi there, In seeing that 1105 W Mountain is scheduled for demolition, I’m curious about the citizen enacted petition process. The historic preservation website alludes to a process, but doesn’t show the necessary steps and forms in an easily accessible format. Any help would be much appreciated. The gentrification of Mountain is becoming increasingly alarming and I’m very frustrated to see this beautiful historic home on the chopping block for the gain of a private business. Thank you for your time and the important work you all do. Liam Myers 971-270-7324 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission ITEM NAME SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 516 N. GRANT AVE. STAFF Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner INFORMATION Single-unit dwellings that are at least fifty years old and that are proposed for demolition to clear a property for a new single-unit dwelling are subject to the demolition notification process administered by the Historic Preservation staff and the Historic Preservation Commission. Demolition notification in this circumstance provides an opportunity to inform residents of changes in their neighborhood and to identify potentially important historic, architectural, and cultural resources, pursuant to Section 14-6 of Municipal Code. Community members receive notice about that demolition through a posted sign on the property, the City’s weekly newsletter “This Week in Development Review” and monthly “Historic Preservation Matters” newsletter, and on the City website at https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/demolition-review. City staff initiates the notification process after receiving a request for approval to demolish a single-unit dwelling through either a demolition permit or written request from the owner accompanied by current photos of the property proposed for demolition and confirmation that the proposed new construction would be another single-unit residence. The property is included in the next available consent agenda at a meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Community residents can contact staff or attend the HPC meeting either to provide information about the property and/or nominate the property as a City Landmark under the provisions of Section 14-31 of Municipal Code if they believe it is eligible as a City Landmark. The code allows for three or more residents of the City, the Historic Preservation Commission (by motion), or any City Councilmember (by written request) to initiate the process for landmark designation. 516 N. Grant Ave. Historical Background The property at 516 N. Grant Ave. was built c. 1908. Byron Rooker, a laborer, and his wife, Helen, lived there at the time. Joe Cienfuegos and his wife, Teresa, lived in this house briefly from 1945 until 1948 (based on title records). It was around this time that Joe was trained under Bill Hawley in auto upholstery at Hawley’s Auto Top Shop at 247 Linden St., and, according to an interview from Joe’s son, Richard Cienfuegos, he purchased the business from Hawley soon after; the 1954 City Directory first shows the business name change to Joe’s Auto Upholstery. Joe and Teresa moved to 326 Wood St. in 1952, and they lived there for twelve years, after which their son, Richard, and his wife, Ruby, moved in. Some of the longest-term residents of 516 N. Grant Ave. were Charles Allen and Hattie Whallon, who resided in this house for more than a decade. Charles worked as a plasterer, according to City Directory records. There is no detailed survey record for this property. The proposed demolition includes the c. 1908 house. Construction History DATE PERMIT # NAME DESCRIPTION 5/19/1924 465 C.A. Whallon Frame addition, 12x16, 1 story, concrete foundations, drop siding, shingle roof Packet Pg. 26 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 2 DATE PERMIT # NAME DESCRIPTION 5/25/1943 7382 C.A. Whallon Repair porches 4/26/1946 9082 Joe Cienfuegos Reshingling; repairs 10/14/1976 26402 Sadie Hubbard Repair porches 12/7/1990 902558 Ron Hubbard Reroof Residents (to 1975) YEAR 516 N. Grant Ave. NOTES 1908-1909 Byron and Helen Rooker Byron - laborer 1909-1910 W.A. and Amanda J. Diamond 1910-1911 Vacant 1913-1914 Henry and Ethel Kennedy Henry - laborer 1917 Charles F. and Nanie Wilt Charles - laborer 1919 Harry V. and Margaret Summerton Harry - driver Union Delivery Co. 1922 Charles Allen and Hattie Whallon 1925 same Charles - plasterer 1927 same no emp listed 1929 same Charles - plasterer 1931 same no emp listed 1933 same 1934 same 1936 same; Mrs. Goldie Lathrum Goldie - waiter at Thomann Café 1938 Charles A. Whallon; Goldie Lathrom (wid. Andrew) no emp listed 1940 Goldie Lathrum Waitress at Dunigan's Café 1948 Joseph C. and Teresa M. Cienfugeos Joe - upholstery apprentice Hawley Auto Top Shop 1950 Al and Mary Lucero Al - emp. GW Sugar Co. 1954 Albert M. and Arvilla Buckendorf Albert - odd jobs 1956 James and Sadie R. Valdez James - emp Cheyenne Wyo res 1957 John Y. Martinez 1959 James and Sadie R. Valdez James - hod (?) carrier 1960 same Sadie - dishwasher; James - same 1962 NL 1963 James M. and Mary E. Valdez bed? Carrier Halbert Construction Co. 1964 Cecelia E. Mondragon no emp listed 1966 Barbara A. Valdez and Ronald W. and Sadie R. Hubbard Barbara - student; Ronald - cook Walgreen Drug 1968 same 1969 same; Felix Valdez no emp listed 1970 same (minus Barbara); Josephina Valdez Josephina - Four Seasons Nursing; Felix - First National Bank; Ronald - Pipeline construction City of Fort Collins; Sadie - janitor (?) First National Bank Packet Pg. 27 Agenda Item 3 Item 3, Page 3 1971 same (minus Felix) Same; Josephina - aide Four Seasons Nursing Center 1972 same (minus Josephina) same 1973 same 1975 same; Felix Valdez 516 N. Grant Ave. – 1948 Tax Assessor Photo 516 N. Grant Ave. – 1968 Tax Assessor Photo ATTACHMENTS 1. Current Photos Packet Pg. 28 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 29 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission ITEM NAME STAFF ACTIVITIES SINCE THE LAST MEETING (COVERING MAY 2 TO JULY 3) STAFF Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Rebekah Schields, Historic Preservation Specialist Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager INFORMATION Staff is tasked with an array of different responsibilities including code-required project review decisions on historic properties, support to other standing and special work groups across the City organization, and education & outreach programming. This report will provide highlights for the benefit of Commission members and the public, and for transparency regarding decisions made without the input of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). For cases where a project can be reviewed/approved without referral to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) through the issuance of 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 are also posted on the HPS’s “Design Review Notification” page. Notice of staff decisions are provided to the public and HPC for their information, but are not subject to appeal under Chapter 14, Article IV, except in cases where an applicant has requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a project and that request has been denied. In that event, the applicant may appeal staff’s decision to the HPC pursuant to 14-55 of the Municipal Code, within two weeks of staff denial. Beginning in May 2021, to increase transparency regarding staff decisions and letters issued on historic preservation activities, this report will include sections for historic property survey results finalized in the last month (provided they are past the two-week appeal deadline), comments issued for federal undertakings under the National Historic Preservation Act (also called “Section 106”), and 5G wireless facility responses for local permit approval. There is a short staff presentation this month highlighting recent items and events. Packet Pg. 30 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 2 Education & Outreach Activities Part of the mission of the Historic Preservation Services division is to educate the public about local, place- based history, historic preservation, and preservation best practices. Below are highlights from the last month in this area. Program Title Sponsor-Audience- Partner Description # of Attendees Date of Event/Activity Oregon-California Trail Association field work support OCTA Accompanied OCTA volunteers and Natural Areas staff to help identify potential trail sections on City-owned Natural Areas lands 8 May 15 & 29, 2024 Friend of Preservation Awards City of Fort Collins (HPC) Annual awards for preservation activities 50 May 21, 2024 Poudre School District Summer Institute Poudre School District & CSU History Dept. DEI-related training for social studies teachers to incorporate hyper-local stories about historically marginalized people (Black, Hispanic, Women, LGBTQ, Asian, etc.) into social studies curricula at appropriate levels. 25 June 4-5, 2024 Juneteenth Juneteenth Committee (includes CSU, City of Fort Collins, Cultural Enrichment Center, and others) Community celebration of Juneteenth, or “Freedom Day,” memorializing the end of chattel slavery in the United States. Included screenings of City-produced videos, tabling, popup black history exhibit, educational scavenger hunt for kids, and staff accompaniment on the Juneteenth bike ride. Approx 100 HPS table visits June 14-16, 2024 Planning Academy City of Fort Collins (summer training series) Full series takes “students” through different aspects of city planning and development review. Staff attended a session on development “input” teams, such as Historic Preservation, Environmental Planning, etc. 12 June 17, 2024 Summerfest Historic Larimer County Re-opening of Emma Malaby Store to community, with related history events and tabling. Approx 60 HPS table visits June 22, 2024 Packet Pg. 31 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 3 Staff Design Review Decisions & Reports – Municipal Code Chapter 14 Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision 259 S. College Ave. (Armstrong Hotel) Rooftop work platform for duct access. City Landmark and designated on State Register and National Register. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 2, 2024 714 Mathews St. (714 Mathews St.) Garage demolition and replacement, window replaced with door. Project does not meet Standards, but compliance is not required (NRHP). Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 2, 2024 450 N. College Ave. (Power Plant) New EV charging station in parking lot. City Landmark. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 6, 2024 115 Linden St. (Avery Block) Replacement of damaged entry slab. City Landmark and designated on State Register and National Register. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 23, 2024 627 Whedbee St. (O.V. Adams House) Rear sliding door replacement and sun tunnel. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV and Land Use Code 5.8.1. Approved May 24, 2024 430 N. College Ave. (Power House) Benches made from recycled wind turbine blades. City Landmark. Reviewed by HPC under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved May 29, 2024 222 Whedbee St. (C.M. Harris/Walsh House) Reroofing flat roof. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV and Land Use Code 5.8.1. Approved Jun 4, 2024 628 Peterson St. (Hardinger House) Screened porch rear addition. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 10, 2024 250 N. Mason St. (Colorado & Southern Depot and Docks) Reroofing (EPDM section to TPO), installation of overflow scupper and downspout assembly, parapet masonry rehab. City Landmark. Reviewed by HPC under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 11, 2024 523 Peterson St. (S.P. Aldrich Residence) Rear addition. Contributing property to Laurel School Historic District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 13, 2024 Packet Pg. 32 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 4 255 and 261 Linden St. (Stover Building, North and South) Painting cornice/trim only (2022 COA included paint removal from brick and repainting - repainting no longer within scope). Contributing property to Old Town Historic District (Landmark and NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 13, 2024 1109 W. Oak St. (Vandewark House) In-kind replacement of gutters and deteriorated soffit and fascia board, repainting to match existing. City Landmark. Reviewed by HPC under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 14, 2024 214 Linden St. (Bernheim Block) Sign. Contributing property to Old Town Historic District (Landmark and NRHP). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 14, 2024 1111 Remington St. (J.L. Van Horn Residence) Installation of new vents (2 rooftop, 1 rear through wood decorative shingling). Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 20, 2024 132-140 N. College Ave/118 Trimble Ct (Trimble Block/Evans- McEwan Building) In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle); 118 Trimble Ct (132 N College) - compatible liquid membrane roof. Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 20, 2024 238 E. Mountain Ave. New Sign. Contributing property to Old Town Landmark District. Subject to Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Approved Jun 24, 2024 Selected Staff Development Review Recommendations – Land Use Code 3.4.7 Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision / Recommendation 513-531 S. College Ave (First Presbyterian Church) Conceptual Development Review: Education Wing expansion to include a new elevator tower, dormer additions, and potential window replacement; Property is Landmark-Eligible and is currently pursuing listing on the State Register. Guidance on windows; elevator tower seems to meet Rehab Stds; dormers may not May 9, 2024 2000 Giddings Rd (west side) Development Review (BDR): Montava Phase D (Downtown & Detention) Historic survey cleared; no Preservation concerns May 15, 2024 200 Mathews Minor Amendment: Carnegie Library – Lighting updates to meet City dark sky requirements Meets SOI Standards May 17, 2024 4305 E. Harmony Rd Preliminary Design Review: New Gas Station to demolish existing buildings; floodway conflict Historic survey required for existing farmhouse & gas station May 22, 2024 Packet Pg. 33 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 5 Historic Property Survey Results City Preservation staff frequently completes historic survey for properties for a number of reasons, usually in advance of development proposals for properties. The table below includes historic property survey for the reporting period for any historic survey for which the two-week appeal period has passed. Address Field/Consultant Recommendation Staff Approved Results? Date Results Finalized 2000 Giddings Rd (west side) (farm complex) Not Eligible Yes May 10, 2024 411 S. Bryan, City Park Nine Golf Course Barn Eligible Yes May 31, 2024 366 E. Mountain Avenue Not Eligible Yes June 6, 2024 425 S. College Ave (Safeway/Lucky’s) Eligible Yes July 2, 2024 National Historic Preservation Act – Staff Comments Issued The City of Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government, which provides the Historic Preservation Services division and Landmark Preservation Commission an opportunity to formally comment on federal undertakings within city limits. This includes actions that are receiving federal funding, permits, or have direct involvement from a federal agency. Note: Due to changes in how Preservation staff process small cell/5G wireless facilities, staff does not provide substantive comments on those undertakings (overseen by the Federal Communications Commission) and do not appear in the table below. 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 None Staff 5G Wireless Facility Summary Note: Co-locations with existing street infrastructure, usually traffic lights, is considered a co-location and not subject to denial due to proximity to properties that meet the City’s definition of historic resources (Sec. 14-3) Due to recent changes in how Preservation staff reviews small cell/5G towers, co-located towers no longer receive substantive review except where historic resources would be impacted directly by the tower’s installation. These types of direct impacts would include potential damage to archaeological resources and/or landscape features throughout the city such as trolley tracks, carriage steps, and sandstone pavers. This report section will summarize activities in this area. Within this period, staff processed a total of 0 5G/Small Cell tower requests total, with 0 seen for the first time. Packet Pg. 34 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 6 ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Presentation Packet Pg. 35 Headline Copy Goes Here April 17, 2024 Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation PlannerYani Jones, Historic Preservation PlannerRebekah Schields, Historic Preservation SpecialistMaren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager Historic Preservation Commission Staff Activity Report Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Design Review Highlight 255 and 261 Linden St. (Stover Buildings) • Paint removed from masonry • Re-painting cornice and trim only 1 2 ,7E0 4 A77ACH0EN7 1 Packet Pg Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Education/Outreach Highlight Historic Larimer County’s Summerfest – June 22 Juneteenth Community Celebration - Weekend of June 14 Headline Copy Goes HereHistoric Survey Highlight – City Park Nine Golf Course Barn 4 • Eligible, Standard 3, surviving example of a Transverse Frame Barn • Surviving barns anywhere in Fort Collins are exceedingly rare • Early history murky, but likely dates from the 1920s • Adapted into golf course maintenance building in 1940s • Survey requested by City Park Nine (Parks Department) for guidance & fundraising assistance. 3 4 ,7E0 4 A77ACH0EN7 1 Packet Pg Headline Copy Goes HereJoin Our Newsletter! 5 • Get monthly updates and information from Historic Preservation Services directly in your inbox such as: • Upcoming events/activities • Historic Preservation Commission agenda overviews • Notification of historic surveys in progress and completed • Notification of single-family residential demolitions • Local preservation financial support program open/close notifications • Landmark spotlights • And more! • Scan the QR Code, or go to https://www.fcgov.com/subscriptions/#group_id_2, to sign up by toggling on the “Historic Preservation Matters” newsletter! 5 ,7E0 4 A77ACH0EN7 1 Packet Pg Agenda Item 5 Item 5, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME CHAVEZ/AMBRIZ/GONZALES PROPERTY AT 724 MARTINEZ ST. - APPLICATION FOR FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION STAFF Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION APPLICANT: Monica Gonzales, Santiago Gonzales, Celina Maldonado, and James Gonzales PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property at 724 Martinez St. COMMISSION’S ROLE AND ACTION: One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to provide a recommendation to City Council on applications for the designation of a property as a Fort Collins Landmark. Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code provides the standards and process for designation. At the hearing, the Commission shall determine whether the following two (2) criteria are satisfied: (1) the proposed resource is eligible for designation; and (2) the requested designation will advance the policies and the purposes in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation. Following its review, and once the Commission feels it has the information it needs, the Commission should adopt a motion providing its recommendation on the property’s Landmark eligibility to City Council. STAFF EVALUATION OF REVIEW CRITERIA STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY The Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales property is significant under Standards 1 (Events/Trends) and 3 (Design/Construction). The property is associated with the early sugar beet industry in Fort Collins as well as with social history and the Fort Collins Hispanic community. It is one of the rare remaining examples of adobe brick construction in the city. This house also has a frame addition associated with the 1970s effort from the City to leverage Community Development Block Grant funds to rehabilitate residences in the Tres Colonias area. Originally constructed in 1923 by the Great Western Sugar Company to house beet workers and their families, this site is closely associated with the sugar beet industry and industrial agriculture of the early twentieth century. The property is also connected to Fort Collins’s Hispanic community, extending to the present with the Gonzales family, who have lived in this home since the early 1960s. The location of the home in Alta Vista, formerly known as the “Spanish Colony,” near Dry Creek and the former location of the sugar factory, also speak to the occupants deep roots in Fort Collins and the legacy of geographic discrimination they faced. The home’s location along a paved street with no sidewalk and the addition on the building’s southeast corner speak to the beginning of the City’s efforts to address the lack of infrastructure and outdated housing conditions in the neighborhood in the 1970s and 1980s as well as the tension between such objectives and the lived experiences of people in the neighborhood. For instance, Community Development Block Grant rehabilitation funding led to the construction of the 1976 frame addition and extension of sewer service to this property, but, at the same time, the City demolished this house’s adobe addition, which was built by the Gonzales family in the early 1960s; this suggests the complexity of the social history reflected here. Finally, this house is one of the rare remaining examples of adobe construction in Fort Collins. It includes both an adobe addition built sometime prior to 1949 as well as the 1976 CDBG-associated frame addition, and its U-shaped plan is typical of a linear plan adobe house. Packet Pg. 39 Agenda Item 5 Item 5, Page 2 Character defining features include the house’s adobe brick material, linear construction, limited ornamentation, frame addition, and its location and setting within the Alta Vista neighborhood. This property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its significance. Location and setting, key aspects of integrity for this property, are retained. Feeling and Association, also important for conveying this property’s historical associations, are similarly strong due to the house’s retention of its primary materials, additions, and location, which all make it feel like an early twentieth-century residence and speak to the association of the house with its history. Integrity of workmanship, materials, and design are also retained through the original adobe construction and the later additions and alterations; although the building has changed over the last hundred years, including some loss of materials or changes to design, these changes support the property’s significance under Standards 1 and 3 because they reflect the owners’ investment of time, money, and labor to improve their living conditions within a historical context of discrimination and changing attitudes toward Hispanic people from others within the community and from the City as an organization. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY CODE AND PURPOSE The designation of historic properties and the work of historic preservation promote the policies and purposes adopted by City Council for the City of Fort Collins. Designation furthers the City’s goals of environmental, economic, and social sustainability. By ensuring the continued use of an existing building and preserving the embodied energy of its existing materials, landmark designation is environmentally sustainable. The designation of historic properties also contributes to the City’s economic standing directly, through property, use, and sales taxes and revenues, and indirectly, through the promotion of heritage tourism. Furthermore, historic designation encourages the continuation of private property ownership. The City’s cultural standing is also upheld because the preservation of the built environment helps residents and visitors tangibly gain a better understanding of our history and the diversity of people who shaped Fort Collins. Landmark designation enhances and perpetuates significant resources in the City through the protection and acknowledgement of those historic properties as well as through the financial incentives offered to landmark owners. Finally, the designation of historic properties also maintains and enhances the City’s aesthetics through the protection and recognition of significant local architecture and history, contributing to the promotion of good urban design and fostering civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past. Taken together, these benefits of landmark designation help strengthen Fort Collins’s community and support our vision of a livable, sustainable city. (Municipal Code 14-1 and 14-2; City Plan) FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request for a recommendation to City Council regarding landmark designation for the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property at 724 Martinez St., staff make the following findings of fact: 1. That all owners of the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property have consented in writing to this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation of the property; 2. That the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property has significance to Fort Collins under Standard 1, Events/Trends, and 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report and accompanying nomination form; 3. That the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property has integrity of Location, Setting, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association sufficient to convey its significance as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report; 4. That the designation will advance the policies and purposes stated in the code in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation, as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission adopt a motion recommending to Council the landmark designation of the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property. Packet Pg. 40 Agenda Item 5 Item 5, Page 3 SAMPLE MOTIONS SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission adopt a written resolution recommending that City Council adopt an ordinance to designate the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property at 724 Martinez St. as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is eligible for its significance to Fort Collins under Standard 1, Events/Trends, and Standard 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the staff report and Landmark nomination materials, and that the property clearly conveys this significance through integrity of Location, Setting, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association to a sufficient degree; and finding also that the designation of this property will promote the policies and purposes of the City as specified in Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission adopt a written resolution recommending that City Council does not adopt an ordinance to designate the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property at 724 Martinez St. as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is not eligible because of a lack of significance and/or the failure of the property to convey its significance through its integrity, and/or finding that the designation of this property will not promote the policies and purposes of the City as specified in Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. ATTACHMENTS 1. Landmark Designation Application (Nomination, Character-Defining Features Worksheet) 2. 2024 Survey 3. Owner Acknowledgement 4. Draft HPC Resolution 5. Staff Presentation Packet Pg. 41 Historic Preservation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.224.6078 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation 1 Fort Collins Landmark Nomination LOCATION INFORMATION Address: 724 Martinez St. Legal Description (https://www.larimer.gov/assessor/search#/property/): LOT 18, ALTA VISTA, FTC Property Name (historic and/or common): Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property OWNER INFORMATION Name: Santiago, Monica, and James Gonzales, and Celina Maldonado Company/Organization (if applicable): Phone: 970-426-3600 Email: monica.gonzales2@uchealth.org Mailing Address: PO Box 927, Wellington, CO 80549 FORM PREPARED BY Name and Title: Same, with Yani Jones, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services Address: Phone: Email: Relationship to Owner: Date: 4/24/2024 ATTACHMENTS For owner-initiated Landmark nominations: Completed Character-Defining Features Worksheet Signed and notarized Owner Landmark Agreement OPTIONAL: A Colorado Architectural Inventory Form 1403 for the nominated property with valid certification or re-certification from Historic Preservation Services staff (this documentation will otherwise be provided by staff) For nonowner-initiated Landmark nominations: Completed Character-Defining Features Worksheet Signed and notarized Nonowner Landmark Petition A Colorado Architectural Inventory Form 1403 for the nominated property with valid certification or re-certification from Historic Preservation Services staff ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 42 Historic Preservation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.224.6078 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation 2 LANDMARK BOUNDARIES Individual properties nominated for Landmark designation typically have boundaries that correspond to the legal description of the property. If you are proposing a Landmark boundary that is different than the legal description of the property: 1. Specifically describe the proposed boundary or include a map. 2. Explain why you chose this boundary. If there are multiple, related properties within a boundary, this is called a historic district. Please contact preservation@fcgov.com for assistance with nomination. REASON(S) FOR LANDMARK NOMINATION You may check more than one box, if relevant. This place is important because of historic events or patterns that happened here or are reflected here. 1. Please describe below. Over the years, there have been changes to the scenery. It tells a story related to the history of the sugar factory. It shows Hispanic history in the area. 4 generations of the family in the house. This place is important because of its cultural associations. 1. Please describe below. This property is associated with Hispanic history. This place is important because it is associated with an important person or group of people. 1. Please describe below. Maria Celina Gonzales lived here with her 8 kids. She worked for the school district in the kitchen, Water Pik/Taledyne making toothbrushes, showerheads, etc., and Wendy’s when she retired. Fidel Gonzales worked for the sugar factory as a laborer in the factory, then for the pickle factory, for the school district as a custodian. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 43 3 This place is important because of its architecture or type of construction, or because of its association with an important architect or builder. 1. Please describe below. This house is an adobe building, one of the oldest in the neighborhood. There are only a few other adobe houses in the neighborhood. There was once a garage, and a bedroom addition that was added in the early 60s – Those were removed in the 70s by the City for adding in sewer line. This place is important because it has archaeological significance or is likely to yield other types of historical information. 1. Please describe below. There was an outhouse on site, and there is consistent flooding bringing objects onto the property from the nearby fields. HISTORICAL INFORMATION What do you know about the history of this place and the people who lived or worked here? If possible, please state where you learned this information. If you have submitted a completed survey form, please include only information not found in that document. If you have any historic photos or other related documents you would like to include, please either insert them in this section or attach them. Maria worked hard to take care of this house, her dream house that she loved. It was her pride and joy. The yard, especially; you could hear music in the wind, crickets, like being up in the mountain. It should be preserved in her honor. Santiago worked for the pickle factory, for Weber, Poudre, Lesher, Boltz, Academy on Mountain, the Forest Service during the Big Thompson flood. Working for the Forest Service, he helped build trails and cleared the trash. He lived in this house since he was five years old. He loved the neighborhood – It was a community, working together, and also keeping each other’s privacy. People would have barbecues and get togethers. The neighborhood was called the Spanish Colony once, the Colony, and Alta Vista after annexation. There was once another park on the northwest side of the neighborhood, on the other side of the houses behind the current park. BUILDING INFORMATION If you don’t know the answer to a prompt, you can write “unknown.” Construction Date: unknown Architect/Builder: unknown Building Materials: Adobe with stucco, frame addition Architectural Style and/or Type: Adobe residence ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 44 4 What do you know about changes that have been made to this place over time? For instance, were there any additions? Were certain windows or other materials replaced? Are there any accessory buildings, like sheds or garages, and when were they built? Are there any important landscape or surrounding features? If you have submitted a completed survey form, please include only information not found in that document. Adobe house, garage built before early 60s, then bedroom addition early 60s. Garage, bedroom, and kitchen demolished in the 70s, and bathroom/laundry also added. Fence also added in 80s. The trees on the fence-line were planted around the 60s. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Is there anything else you would like to add? FOR STAFF USE ONLY Reviewed By: HPS Staff Date: 6/26/2024 Notes: Staffs supports eligibility under Standard 1 (agriculture, social, and Hispanic history) and Standard 3 (architecture) based on the information above and the information in the attached historic survey. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 45 Historic Preservation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.224.6078 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation Character-Defining Features Worksheet Address: 724 Martinez St. Date: April 24, 2024 Completed By: Monica, Santiago, and James Gonzales, and Celina Maldonado What physical features are important to telling the story of this place and/or conveying its significant design/construction? These elements are “character-defining features.” Character-Defining Features From Afar What is important to the character of this place when viewed at a distance? Consider elements such as the roof form (e.g., gabled, hipped, etc.), the building plan, or shape, and height (e.g., 2-story, square, asymmetrical, etc.), the type of materials (e.g., wood shingled roof, brick, wood siding, etc.), any important structural components (e.g., porches, carports, decks, etc.), site layout, etc. The depth of the lot, the view on the corner (location), adobe material, gabled roof From Up Close What is important to the character of this place when viewed up close? Consider elements such as the window types and materials (e.g., double-hung wood windows, brick sills, stone lintels, etc.), the doors and their materials, any decorative features (e.g., types of molding, decorative brickwork, turned posts, gable-end shingles, etc.), any masonry patterns, siding style, etc. Texture of the walls, locations of the windows Associated Buildings/Structures/ Landscape/Setting Are there any associated buildings, structures, landscape features, or elements of the surrounding area that are related to the important story of this place and/or reflect its significant design/construction? If yes, list them here, and identify their character-defining features in the same manner as above. Rich soil, the location is important in the Alta Vista neighborhood and sugar factory FOR STAFF USE ONLY Reviewed By: HPS Staff Date: 6/26/2024 Notes: Staff concurs with the applicants. Character defining features include: adobe brick material, linear construction, limited ornamentation, 1976 frame addition, and its location and setting within the Alta Vista neighborhood. It should be noted that because the period of significance of this property extends to the present due to ongoing associations with the Hispanic community, flexibility should be extended when considering alterations to this property. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 46 Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.224.6078 preservation@fcgov.com fcgov.com/historicpreservation Historic Preservation Services OFFICIAL DETERMINATION: FORT COLLINS LANDMARK ELIGIBILITY Resource Number: B3003 (City); 5LR.10643 (State) Historic Building Name: Spanish Colony #18 / Ambriz-Chavez-Gonzalez Property Property Address: 724 Martinez Street Determination: ELIGIBLE Issued: July 2, 2024 Expiration: July 2, 2029 Monica, Santiago, & James Gonzalez, & Celina Maldonado 724 Martinez Street Fort Collins, CO 80524-2317 Dear Property Owner: This letter provides you with confirmation that your property has been evaluated for Fort Collins landmark eligibility, following the requirements in Chapter 14, Article II of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, and has been found eligible for landmark designation. An intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form was completed by a City staff historian in order to provide the information that serves as the basis for an evaluation of a property’s historic and/or architectural significance and its integrity, both of which are required for landmark eligibility as per Article II, Section 14-22. Staff has made the following findings regarding the information and evaluation of significance, integrity, and landmark eligibility provided by the historian in the attached form. Significance Historian’s evaluation: This site has been evaluated against the City of Fort Collins Significance Standards and is found to be significant in the areas of Agriculture, Social History/Hispanic Ethnic History, and Architecture under Standards 1 and 3. Under Significance Standard 1, the site is significant for its association with early sugar beet agriculture and with the city’s Hispanic residents. Originally constructed by Great Western Sugar to house beet workers and their families, this site is closely associated with the sugar beet industry and industrial agriculture of the early twentieth century…. The site is also significant under Standard 1 in the area of social history and Hispanic ethnic history for its association with Fort Collins’ Hispanic community. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 47 -2 - Under Standard 2, the site is associated with the Ambriz and Gonzales families. Although the members of these families are known and members of the Gonzales family played a part in addressing educational discrimination through the Poudre School District’s Mexican American Parent Advisory Commission, none have made specific, documented contributions to the history of the community. The site is recommended not eligible for local landmarking under Standard 2. Under Standard 3, the site is significant for its vernacular adobe construction and for its distinctive 1970s addition constructed with the support of HUD grant funds. Staff agrees with the historian’s conclusions regarding the property’s significance under Standards 1 and 3, based on the following findings. •The property’s statement of significance is supported by a discussion of historical context and a comparative analysis that is appropriate for the property. Relevant context reports have been referenced and cited. •Each significance criterion is addressed in the statement of significance, even if not applicable. •For eligible properties, a period of significance is provided and justified based on the available records. Integrity Historian’s evaluation: This site is significant in the areas of Agriculture, Social History, and Architecture for its association with early sugar beet agriculture, association with the city’s Hispanic community, and as a rare remaining example of adobe-brick construction. As such, the site’s character defining features are its adobe brick material, linear construction, limited ornamentation, 1976 frame addition, yard surrounded by chain link fence, and its location and setting within the Alta Vista neighborhood. The site retains integrity of location and setting. The building remains in the spot where it was originally constructed within the Alta Vista neighborhood. Although the streets were paved and some nearby residences constructed in the 1980s and 1990s, the neighborhood retains its residential character and many elements of its origins as a Hispanic community constructed by the sugar factory, including narrow street right-of- ways, minimal street setbacks, and no sidewalks. Integrity of workmanship, materials, and design is retained through the original adobe construction and the later additions and alterations. Although the building has seen changes over the last 100 years (including an adobe addition between 1923-1949, the likely replacement of a flat roof with a side gable roof in the 1920s, a wood frame addition in 1976, and replacement of all windows in 1976) these changes support the site’s significance under Standards 1 and 3 as they reflect the property owner’s financial investment in improving living conditions over time as their budget allowed and the financial support provided by the City of Fort Collins as it grappled with changing attitudes towards Hispanic communities in the 1970s. Integrity of feeling and association remain intact; the size of the residence, its materials, additions, and location provide a direct connect to the site’s history and association with Hispanic beet laborers. The site is clearly identifiable as an early ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J - 3 - twentieth century residence. The site retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic associations. Staff agrees with the historian’s conclusions regarding the property’s integrity based on the following findings. • Essential physical features are identified in the integrity analysis and related to period of significance. • Discussion of integrity relates to the property’s most relevant aspects of integrity per its significance. • Discussion of integrity focuses on the property’s essential physical features, and relates to period of significance. • Discussion and conclusion responds directly to previous conclusions and assessments of the property, whether in opposition or in agreement. Statement of Eligibility: This property is considered Eligible for Landmark designation under City Standards 1 and 3 as outlined in Municipal Code 14-22 and is considered an “historic resource” as defined in Municipal Code 14-3. Per Article II, Section 14-23 of the code, any determination made by staff regarding eligibility may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant, any resident of the City, or owner of property in the City. Such appeal shall be set forth in writing and filed with the Director within fourteen (14) days of the date of the staff's determination. If you have any questions regarding this determination, or if I may be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. I may be reached at preservation@fcgov.com, or 970-224-6078. Sincerely, Jim Bertolini Senior Historic Preservation Planner Attachment: Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 1403, dated May 2024. ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 1 OAHP1403 Rev. 9/98 COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Architectural Inventory Form 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 Field Evaluation of Fort Collins Landmark Eligibility ☒ Individually Eligible ☒ Contributing to District ☐ Not Eligible ☒ Likely Eligible for State/National Register General Recommendations: The site is recommended eligible for listing as a local landmark under Significance Standards 1 and 3 in the areas of Agriculture, Social History/Ethnic History-Hispanic, and Architecture for its association with early beet farming, the Hispanic community, and as a rare remaining example of adobe brick construction. The site is recommended eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C for the same reasons. If a historic district were established in the Alta Vista neighborhood, this site would be a contributing property. I. Identification 1. Resource number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 2 2. Temporary resource number: Click here to enter text. 3. County: Larimer 4. City: Fort Collins 5. Historic building name: Spanish Colony #18 / Elizabeth Ambriz Property / Chavez Property 6. Current building name: Gonzales Property 7. Building address: 724 Martinez Street 8. Owner name and address: Monica Gonzales, Santiago Gonzales, James Gonzales, Celina Maldonado, 724 Martinez Street, Fort Collins, CO 80524 II. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 7 N Range 69 W SE ¼ of SW ¼ of SE ¼ of SE ¼ of section 1 10. UTM reference Zone 13; 494895 mE 4494019 mN 11. USGS quad name: Fort Collins Year: 2022 Map scale: 7.5' ☒ 15' ☐ Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): 18 Block: # Addition: Alta Vista Year of Addition: 1974 13. Boundary Description and Justification: The site boundary does not exceed the legal property boundary described by the Larimer County Tax Assessor as, “Lot 18, Alta Vista, Fort Collins.” III. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): U-plan 15. Dimensions in feet: Length 45 x Width 30 16. Number of stories: 1 17. Primary external wall material(s): Adobe, Stucco, Horizontal Wood Siding 18. Roof configuration: Cross Gabled 19. Primary external roof material: Asphalt 20. Special features: Fence 21. General architectural description: The site consists of a single-story, U-plan residence originally constructed in 1923, with an addition to the east end in 1976. The east portion of the house rests on a concrete foundation, the foundation was not visible on the remainder of the building. The majority of ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 3 the building is composed of adobe brick with stucco exterior cladding; the southeast leg of the U-shaped plan is clad in horizontal wood siding. The roof is cross-gabled and clad in asphalt shingles. The façade faces east and the primary entrance is located at the south end of the elevation, within the 1976 addition. The entry is a paneled vinyl door with nine inset lites. To the north is a one-by-one lite sliding metal window set in a wood surround with a lipped lintel. Above, in the gable peak, is a louvered wood vent set in a wide, simple wood surround. The north elevation has a one-by-one lite sliding metal window set in a simple wood surround. An open metal pipe emerges from the exterior cladding near the intersection of the east-west roof and north-south roof. An electrical box is attached to the exterior near the northwest corner. The west elevation has a one-over-one lite hung metal window set in a wood surround at the north end of the elevation. It appears that another opening near the south end has been closed and covered over with stucco. The south elevation of the west leg of the U-shaped plan has a one-over-one lite hung metal window set in a wood surround with a lipped lintel. Above, in the gable peak is a louvered wood vent set in a wide, simple wood surround. The east elevation of the west leg of the U-shaped plan has no fenestration. The central portion of the south elevation has a six-lite wood window set in a wood surround with a lipped lintel. The west elevation of the east leg of the U-shaped plan has a small, one-by-one lite sliding metal window. The south elevation of the east leg of the U-shaped plan has a one-by-one lite sliding metal window. 22. Architectural style/building type: No Style / Cross Gabled 23. Landscaping or special setting features: The site is located on a corner lot within the Alta Vista neighborhood of Fort Collins. Martinez Street extends along the south and west site boundaries and a gravel drive leads from the street to the east elevation of the building. A chain link fence surrounds a portion of the property and a concrete path leads from the fence gate to the primary entrance. Tall cottonwood trees shade the lot and small bushes are present along the north and south elevations. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 52 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 4 The surrounding neighborhood is generally composed of 1 and 1½ story residences with shallow setbacks. Tall cottonwoods and willow trees are located throughout, and Dry Creek extends along the south boundary of the neighborhood. A small park is east of the site, near the neighborhood entrance. 24.Associated buildings, features, or objects: N/A IV. Architectural History 25.Date of Construction: Estimate: #### Actual: 1923 Source of information: City of Fort Collins, Hang Your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000, Historic Context by Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental Consultants, 2003, p6. 26. Architect: Great Western Sugar Company Source of information: City of Fort Collins, Hang Your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000, Historic Context by Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental Consultants, 2003, p6. 27. Builder/Contractor: Felipe and Pedro Arellano Source of information: City of Fort Collins, Hang Your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000, Historic Context by Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental Consultants, p6. 28.Original owner: Great Western Sugar Company Source of information: Quit Claim Deed, Book 942, Page 12, recorded December 20, 1952. 29.Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): This site was constructed in 1923 as a two-room, rectangular, adobe brick residence. It is likely that the building was constructed with a flat roof and was probably modified with a gable roof to prevent excessive water damage soon after its construction; a side-gabled roof is visible in the Tax Assessor photograph taken in 1949. An addition to the northeast corner of the residence was constructed at an unknown date between 1923-1949. At this point, the original primary entrance on the west elevation was moved to the southeast corner of the addition. A garage was added to the site in 1959 and demolished in 1976. In the 1960s, an L-plan portion was added to the east elevation of the previous addition. Planning documents at the city list this addition as a kitchen, bedroom, and bathroom. A significant remodel occurred in 1976 in association with a housing rehabilitation grant (see Figure 5). During this remodel, the secondary L-plan addition was demolished and the entrance to the addition at the north end of the east elevation was infilled with a ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 5 metal horizontal sliding window. A new addition encompassing a bathroom and utility room was added to the southeast corner, an existing window on the south elevation was infilled with drywall and an existing exterior opening was enlarged and the door removed. The addition supported two metal, horizontally sliding windows. Windows on the west and north elevation and on the west leg of the south elevation were replaced with one-over-one lite hung metal windows. The roof was repaired and reshingled; a chimney hole over the central portion of the house was patched and drip edges, rake rafters, fascia, and gutters were installed and painted. Cracks and holes in the exterior stucco were patched, larger repairs to the exterior included wire netting attached with ring shank nails.1 In addition to the exterior alterations, the interior also saw significant changes. A new sink and cabinets were added to the kitchen, new drywall was installed on the ceiling, the walls were painted, and new linoleum was added over the top of the older patched and repaired floor covering. Closets were added to the bedrooms and both bedrooms were painted. 30. Original location ☒ Moved ☐ Date of move(s): #### V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic – Single Dwelling 32. Intermediate use(s): Click here to enter text. 33. Current use(s): Domestic – Single Dwelling 34. Site type(s): Residence 35. Historical background: Context Fort Collins’ Hispanic/Mexican American History 2 The early history of Hispanic settlement in Fort Collins was closely tied to farming and ranching. Mariano Modena is known as the first European settler in Larimer County. In 1858, Modena moved his family to the Big Thompson River Valley to what is now the Loveland area in southern Larimer County. Other Hispanic families joined him and took advantage of the Homestead Act after its passage in 1862 to solidify land claims. Among the early arrivals to the Fort Collins area was José de Jesús Aragón and his family who arrived in Fort Collins with a group from New Mexico. Over the late-1800s and early- 1900s, more Mexican Americans and new immigrants from Mexico lived as seasonal 1 “Maria Gonzales Residence – 724 Martinez Street.” Planning document and schematics, 1976. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. 2 The following section is excerpted from “Latinx History in Fort Collins,” webpage, City of Fort Collins, https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/latinx. ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 6 labors or as new settlers in the Fort Collins area, where they worked on farms, ranches, on railroad crews, in sandstone and limestone quarries, and in the sugar beet industry. By the 1900s, the Mexican American community was well-established with many businesses owned by, or catering to, the needs of these residents. However, between 1910 and 1930, factors in both northern Colorado and in Mexico and the southwest United States compelled more Hispanic families to move to Fort Collins. A civil war in Mexico, known as the Mexican Revolution, between 1911-1920 destabilized the country and compelled many Mexican families to move north to the United States. Jobs in the United States, frequently in agriculture and manufacturing, provided the hope of a more peaceful and prosperous life. Nearly a tenth of Mexico’s total population migrated to the United States and Canada during this period. Those that chose Fort Collins were drawn by available jobs for, and active recruitment by, the agricultural industry that was booming in northern Colorado at the time. One of the significant recruiters of Mexican Americans to Fort Collins was the Great Western Sugar Company which had purchased the beet sugar factory on East Vine Drive in 1904. Many Hispanic families initially found work in the factory’s limestone operation at Ingleside, which became a sizeable lime quarrying facility for Great Western Sugar that supplied processing lime for most of the company’s operations throughout the west. As the community grew, they found jobs working at the factory itself and on the sugar beet farms in the region that supplied Great Western Sugar. Other families worked on area farms that were growing livestock or produce for the surrounding region. Fort Collins’ beet sugar industry had relied on labor from the ethnic Germans from Russia for most of the first decade of production, but the First World War cut off immigration from Europe, and the ethnic Germans moved on to less intensive and better paying work. This led to a labor shortage that Mexican immigrants filled. Approximately ninety percent of new migratory laborers Great Western Sugar brought to Larimer and Weld Counties between 1910-1930 were from Mexico. Early Hispanic residents in Fort Collins were largely single men working as migrants on area farms and staying in farm shanties, bunkhouses, or hotels and boarding houses in town. However, as Mexican immigrants became a dominant source of labor for Great Western Sugar in the late-1910s, whole families moved to the area. The sugar beet work itself was intense, as sugar beet farming relied on hand laborers well into the 1950s, despite advances in agricultural equipment and technology. Similar to the Germans from Russia before them, Mexican families that relocated to Fort Collins to work in the sugar beet industry adapted to an economic system designed to exploit cheap immigrant labor. In order to keep the beet sugar industry profitable, companies like Great Western Sugar ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 55 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 7 paid farmers to grow beets – farmers who typically relied on contract labor at per-acre prices. To make a living wage, most laborers would commit to tending more acres of beets than they could possibly work themselves. This often meant that full families, including children, were expected to work the fields alongside their parents. It also meant that farm laborers frequently were provided very simple dwellings in order to save on costs. Alta Vista Neighborhood In the 1920s, Great Western Sugar realized they needed to offer an incentive to migrant workers if they were to remain in Fort Collins year-round. The company planned to build affordable, comfortable housing for their workers and in 1922, thirteen adobe- brick homes were erected near the Fort Morgan sugar factory.3 The following year, Great Western erected six, two-room adobe homes on company owned land in Fort Collins, within walking distance of the sugar factory. Hispanic laborers and their families could purchase one of these homes on a 50x85 foot lot through the company’s installment plan: residents paid nothing the first year, $40 per year over the next three years, and in the fifth year paid $25-$50 for the lot.4 In addition, Great Western paid the property taxes for the first five years and did not charge interest on the loan.5 Prospective residents were screened, “to select the best workers” and character references were required; because the homes were privately owned by the company, residents could be ejected if misconduct was perceived or illegal activities occurred.6 Originally known as the “Spanish Colony”, the subdivision was officially platted and named “Alta Vista” in 1927, residents referred to the area as “la Colonia Española” or “la Colonia”. The plans submitted to Larimer County depict 41 lots organized along the north-south A and B Streets (now Alta Vista and Martinez Streets, respectively) and the east-west Main Street, Dry Creek forms the south boundary (see Figure 1).7 Great Western Sugar continued to construct residences and sell them to local laborers through the 1940s, although later homes were not constructed with adobe.8 As the Great Western Sugar plant in Fort Collins scaled 3 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 5; some homes were also relocated from urban redevelopment sites in downtown Fort Collins, such as 732 Alta Vista, relocated from 222 N. Meldrum in the mid-1970s to make way for a new City Hall Building. 4 Evadene Burris Swanson, Fort Collins Yesterdays, George and Hildegarde Morgan: Fort Collins, CO, 1975, 63. 5 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 6. 6 Swanson, Fort Collins Yesterdays, 63. 7 “Map of Alta Vista Subdivision.” Plat plan, 1927. Document on-file with Larimer County Recorder’s Office. 8 Alta Vista Neighborhood, Draft Historic Cultural Landscape Form, Colorado Cultural Resources Survey, 2017. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 56 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 8 back and closed in 1955, many Hispanic workers shifted to other agricultural and industrial work, service work, or joining the construction crews on the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, a massive project to divert Colorado River water to the Colorado Front Range, initiated in 1947 and lasting into the 1950s. Alta Vista, along with its earlier counterparts of Buckingham and Andersonville that together are known as the Tres Colonias, is located on the east side of the Poudre River, which kept laborers within walking distance of the company factory and beet fields but was also designed with the intent of segregating foreign-born families from Anglo- American neighborhoods west of the river. Claimed by neither Larimer County nor the City of Fort Collins, the neighborhood lacked critical infrastructure like paved roads and sewer connections until the 1970s and 1980s. The City had operated sewers south of the Poudre River since the 1880s and began paving streets south of the river in the 1920s, but this investment in public infrastructure for wealthier whiter neighborhoods did not extend to Alta Vista. Local resident Elvira Ortega notes in an oral history interview in 1983, “When we first moved in there was no sewer system. I personally was raised with outside toilets and woodburning stoves until I was fourteen years old…There were no street names. We were just a colony, a cluster”.9 In order to improve their neighborhood, residents of Alta Vista took it upon themselves to advocate for and make the needed changes. As Adam Thomas notes in Hang Your Wagon to a Star, “A few years after the first adobe homes rose … Alta Vista residents began electing “mayors” to one-year terms.”10 Although these grassroots leaders were not officially recognized by the City or County, they worked to maintain and improve their neighborhood. One such mayor, Charlie Martinez, collected a dollar from each family in the neighborhood to purchase gas for the trucks that brought in sand and gravel to level the dirt streets.11 In the 1970s, pressure and increased activism from the national Chicano political movement and local Hispanic leaders spurred city officials to improve conditions within Hispanic neighborhoods. Fort Collins’ Housing Authority, established in 1971, submitted a grant request for housing rehabilitation to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in 1975.12 The city received a $200,000 Community Development 9 Elvira Ortega, Oral History Interview with Ellen T. Ittelson, November 17, 1983. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/oh/id/1420/rec/4. 10 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 9. 11 Ibid., 10. 12 “Housing authority discussion planned.” Coloradoan, February 25, 1971, pg 2. “Housing rehabilitation program moves forward.” Coloradoan, November 20, 1975, pg 1. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 57 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 9 Block Grant (CDBG); as noted by City Council in November 1975, “The housing rehabilitation grant program is the first step in a multi-year plan [to] alleviate health, safety, and substandard housing problems, and to provide basic facilities and services to the neighborhoods of Andersonville, Atla Vista, and Buckingham.”13 A portion of the grant paid for sewer hookups after the City completed a related Capital Improvement Project to extend sanitary sewer service to Andersonville and Alta Vista; the remainder of the funding was used to rehabilitate individual homes.14 Residents of these neighborhoods helped to devise disbursement guidelines alongside the Housing Authority and Human Relations Commission.15 Only owner-occupied homes could be funded for rehabilitation and each home received $4,000, up to $5,000 for “extraordinary circumstances”; City Council later increased this amount to $7,500.16 According to Thomas, the City invested more than $1.5 million in Alta Vista improvements and infrastructure between 1975- 1980.17 Although the city had good intentions for its housing improvement program, some residents had negative experiences. Portions of homes deemed unsafe by city officials were demolished, removing the work residents had put into their properties during the previous decades.18 In 1978, residents of nearby Buckingham were expected to cover the cost of sewer hookups and assessments when the city finally extended sewer service to the neighborhood.19 Other unintended consequences of the program did not become clear until decades later. Increases in land and home values lead to an increase in property taxes which made it difficult for residents on fixed incomes to repair or upgrade their homes.20 “City Council to hear reports on housing projects, finances.” Coloradoan, November 19, 1975, pg 1. 13 “Hearings slated on Community Development Fund.” Coloradoan, November 17, 1975, pg 3. “City planning task forces, NIA organizing, preparing for work.” Coloradoan, October 23, 1975, pg. 3. “Fort Collins Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program, Program Guidelines.” City Council Minutes, November 18, 1975. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. 14 “Housing rehabilitation program moves forward.” Coloradoan, November 20, 1975, pg 1. 15 “First NIA meeting scheduled Wednesday.” Coloradoan, October 21, 1975, pg 2. 16 “Housing rehabilitation program.” Coloradoan, November 20, 1975, pg 3. “Street controversy tabled after criticism by residents.” Coloradoan, January 21, 1976, pg 3. 17 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 10. 18 “Notice to Public,” Coloradoan, July 11, 1976, pg 43. 19 “City fees hardship for some Buckingham residents.” Coloradoan, February 5, 1978, pg 11. 20 Clayton A. Hurd, “Fort Collins Sustainability and Social Inclusion Research Project: Report of Phase I Preliminary Findings,” Prepared for the City of Fort ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 58 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 10 Adobe Homes Adobe has been used as a building material for thousands of years across the world. Indigenous peoples of the American Southwest used adobe as a mortar between stones or shaped the material to form walls. Adobe is the ideal building material for hot, dry climates; during the day, it absorbs the heat of the sun, allowing the interior to remain cool and in the evening, it releases the stored heat, warming those sleeping inside.21 In addition, adobe is made from naturally occurring resources that require no refinement and returns to the state in which it was found if the structure is abandoned. Spanish colonists to the Americas in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries brought with them rectangular molds to form the adobe into standard sized bricks which could be used to construct bigger and more complex structures; the Spanish had learned this technique from the Moors who brought the technology from North Africa to Spain during their occupation of the territory in the eighth through fifteenth centuries.22 Spanish colonists and their descendants made use of adobe construction, using both Spanish and indigenous methods, in a variety of ways, constructing homes, barns, commercial buildings, churches, and schools from the material. As Robert Adams describes in his book The Architecture and Art of Early Hispanic Colorado, “Adobe buildings were popular first because they were cheap and pleasant to live in. Fires which plagued wooden frontier towns were almost unknown, rats and mice found few hiding places in the solid walls and floors, and the sounds of neighbors…were modulated by the thick walls.”23 Although the building material was versatile, it did limit the size and shape of structures. Timber for roof beams was in short supply in the dry American Southwest, so rooms had to remain narrow enough to be spanned by the shortened logs.24 Because of this limitation, when families added new members by birth or marriage, they constructed additional rooms in a linear manner, end-to-end with previous rooms. These linear combinations of one-room units could form L- or U-plan homes or eventually, a Collins, 2015, 25. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. 21 Peter Nabokov, “Adobe: An Ancient Folk Technology,” Music and Crafts of the Southeastern United States, Festival of American Folklife Program, (Smithsonian Institute, 1981), 25. https://folklife-media.si.edu/docs/festival/program-book- articles/FESTBK1981_08.pdf 22 Robert Adams, The Architecture and Art of Early Hispanic Colorado, (Colorado Associated University Press and State Historical Society of Colorado, Denver, CO, 1974), 34-35. 23 Adams, Early Hispanic Colorado, 34. 24 Ibid., 36. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 59 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 11 completely enclosed square with a central courtyard, known as a hacienda.25 In some locales, adobe structures included gabled roofs; this variation was due to differing climate conditions, availability of and access to materials, or interactions with neighboring cultures. 26 In northern climates, gable roofs were frequently added to shed rain and snow which is damaging to adobe bricks. Site History As noted in previous site forms, this site was constructed in 1923 for use as a residence for sugar beet laborers. The first known occupants are the Chavez family; members of the family resided here from c. 1935-1959. Chavez Family Eulogio Chavez was born in the San Luis Valley in 1863.27 He married Cleofás Carrillo in 1897 and the pair came to Fort Collins in 1903; by 1910, the family was residing on Cherry Street. Eulogio supported his large family through his work as a farm laborer, he and Cleofás had thirteen children together. It appears that the Chavez family moved into this residence c. 1935; Eulogio and his sons, Lloyd and Donald are noted in the newspaper as residing at #18 Spanish Colony in the late 1930s and 1940s.28 Sadly, Cleofás and Eulogio both died in the late 1930s, they are buried near each other in Grandview Cemetery. Ambriz Family The 1940 census indicates Elizabeth Ambriz (née Chavez, born to Eulogio and Cleofás in 1916) lived here with her husband, Mike Ambriz, whom she had married in 1939. The census taker noted they had resided in the same house in 1935. In 1952, Great Western Sugar sold this site to Mrs. Elizabeth Ambriz. It appears that there was some issue with the property title – two additional deeds retrieved from the Larimer County Recorder’s Office note the transfer of Lot 18 in Alta Vista to Elizabeth Ambriz, from her 25 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 12. 26 Chris Wilson, “Pitched Roofs Over Flat: The Emergence of a New Building Tradition in Hispanic New Mexico,” Perspectives in Vernacular Architecture, Vol. 4, 1991. 27 “Pneumonia Causes Death Of Eulogio Chavez, 76.” Express-Courier, September 26, 1939, pg 2. 28 “Passenger Hits, Kills Man Here.” Coloradoan, August 23 ,1948, pg 1. “1,561 Residents of County Draw Pension Checks.” Express-Courier, March 22, 1940, pg 8. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 60 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 12 brothers Donald S. Chavez and Lloyd A. Chavez. In addition, Elizabeth had Great Western Sugar summoned to civil court to adjudicate the property rights related to this site in January 1953.29 A decree recorded with the Larimer County District Court in February 1953 declared Ambriz the true legal owner of Lot 18 and stated she had been, “in actual, open, exclusive and notorious adverse possession” of the property and paid all property taxes for the previous seven years.30 Elizabeth retained ownership of the site through 1959, when she sold it to L. P. Starkey. The Ambriz’s then purchased a home at 214 N. Meldrum and continued to reside there through 1976 when that property was demolished for a new City Hall building; the 1960 city directory notes Mike’s employment at the Ideal Cement Plant.31 Elizabeth passed in 1998 and Mike in 2000, they are buried beside each other at the Grandview Cemetery (see Figure 2). Gonzales Family Fidel and Sally Gonzales first appear as residents in the 1963 city directory, where their occupations are listed as employee of the Dreher Pickle Company and employee at the Ideal Café (218 Linden), respectively. Fidel was born in Mesilla Park, New Mexico in 1929; Maria Celina (also Sally) was born in 1933 in Cimarron, New Mexico.32 The pair married at an unknown date and came to Fort Collins together in 1960. For a time, the family lived at 117 Linden, but by 1963, Fidel, Sally, and their eight children were residing on this site.33 Gonzales worked for several farms, the Dreher Pickle Company and later in life for the Poudre School District as a custodian while Sally worked for Teledyne/Waterpik. In his obituary, Fidel was described as a “responsible, hardworking man, who loved his family. He loved to take his family on Sunday drives, work on cars, dance, and shop the Flea Markets”.34 The Gonzales children attended Fort Collins schools and in 1970, Fidel and Sally were appointed to a resource committee for the Poudre School District’s Mexican American Parent Advisory Commission.35 The commission’s function was to, “advise the Poudre School District R1 … of ways and means of providing maximum education 29 “Summons in Civil Action.” Coloradoan, January 7, 1953, pg 4. 30 Decree, Civil Action #11264. Book 944, Page 219, Larimer County Recorder’s Office. Recorded February 17, 1953. 31 “Norbest Turkey Winners.” Coloradoan, March 17, 1976, pg 36. “Realty Transfers.” Coloradoan, November 29, 1955, pg 5. 32 ““Maria Gonzales.” Coloradoan, September 13, 2020, pg A11. 33 “At the Hospital.” Coloradoan, August 8, 1961, pg 2. 34 “Fidel Gonzales.” Coloradoan, February 25, 2015, pg C7. 35 “Students get on-the-job- experience from DE program.” Coloradoan, June 6, 1973, pg 13. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 61 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 13 opportunities for the Mexican-American youngsters”.36 Sally and Fidel divorced in 1974; Fidel later remarried Rosalia (Rosie) Maria and moved to Arizona.37 In 1976, the property was transferred to Maria Celina Gonzales from the First National Bank.38 In 1976, property owner Maria Gonzales received a $7,500 grant from the City of Fort Collins for rehabilitation work on the residence. The monies were a part of a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Included within the description of work to be performed was repair to the east wall, construction of a new bathroom and utility addition, installation of new windows and screens, interior and exterior painting, repair of the exterior stucco, and re- shingling the entire roof.39 In addition to this work, the entire neighborhood, including this residence, was connected to the city’s sewer line for the first time. Also in 1976, residents of Alta Vista petitioned the Planning and Zoning Board to rename the neighborhood streets from A Street and B Street to Alta Vista and Martinez Streets, respectively.40 Finally in 1979, Martinez Street was included in the city directory’s street and avenue guide, although 724 Martinez was not listed. In 1990, Maria added her son, Santiago Gonzales, to the title as a property owner; Santiago had resided in the house since the age of five. Maria Celina passed in 2020. Her obituary offers a heartfelt description of her life, “She was a strong independent person who worked hard to provide for her family… On special occasions, she would make her famous green or red chile with tortillas, beans, and fideo for her family. She enjoyed going to Rummage sales on Saturdays, spending time with her children and grandchildren at family gatherings and holidays”.41 After Maria’s death the property passed to Santiago Gonzales and his children Monica Gonzales, Celina Maldonado, and James Fidel Gonzales. The site is currently owned and occupied by the Gonzales family.42 36. Sources of information: 36 “Poudre R-1 board to set election date.” Coloradoan, July 14, 1970, pg 1. 37 “Public Notice.” Coloradoan, September 30, 1974, pg 17. “Rosalia “Rosie” Maria Gonzales.” Coloradoan, September 20, 2008, pg 25. 38 Quit Claim Deed, Book 1742, Pg 7. Reception #177495. Document retrieved from Larimer County Recorder’s Office. 39 Agreement, Book 1777, Page 900. Reception #200085. Document retrieved from Larimer County Recorder’s Office. 40 “Zoning board to weigh Alta Vista street names.” Coloradoan, January 4, 1976, pg 4. 41 “Maria Gonzales.” Coloradoan, September 13, 2020, pg A11. 42 Quit Claim Deed, Reception #20200078102. Recorded August 25, 2020. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 62 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 14 Adams, Robert. The Architecture and Art of Early Hispanic Colorado. Colorado Associated University Press and State Historical Society of Colorado: Denver, CO, 1974. Alta Vista Neighborhood. Draft Historic Cultural Landscape Form, Colorado Cultural Resources Survey, 2017. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. City of Fort Collins. Hang Your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000. Historic Context by Adam Thomas, SWCA Environmental Consultants, 2003. Coloradoan “At the Hospital.” Coloradoan, August 8, 1961, pg 2. “At the Hospital.” Coloradoan, September 11, 1946, pg 2. “City Council to hear reports on housing projects, finances.” Coloradoan, November 19, 1975, pg 1. “City fees hardship for some Buckingham residents.” Coloradoan, February 5, 1978, pg 11. “City planning task forces, NIA organizing, preparing for work.” Coloradoan, October 23, 1975, pg. 3. “Fidel Gonzales.” Coloradoan, February 25, 2015, pg C7. “First NIA meeting scheduled Wednesday.” Coloradoan, October 21, 1975, pg 2. “Hearings slated on Community Development Fund.” Coloradoan, November 17, 1975, pg 3. “Housing authority discussion planned.” Coloradoan, February 25, 1971, pg 2. “Housing rehabilitation program.” Coloradoan, November 20, 1975, pg 3. “Housing rehabilitation program moves forward.” Coloradoan, November 20, 1975, pg 1. “Maria Gonzales.” Coloradoan, September 13, 2020, pg A11. “Norbest Turkey Winners.” Coloradoan, March 17, 1976, pg 36. “Notice to Public,” Coloradoan, July 11, 1976, pg 43. “Passenger Hits, Kills Man Here.” Coloradoan, August 23 ,1948, pg 1. “Poudre R-1 board to set election date.” Coloradoan, July 14, 1970, pg 1. “Public Notice.” Coloradoan, September 30, 1974, pg 17. “Realty Transfers.” Coloradoan, November 29, 1955, pg 5. “Rosalia “Rosie” Maria Gonzales.” Coloradoan, September 20, 2008, pg 25. “Street controversy tabled after criticism by residents.” Coloradoan, January 21, 1976, pg 3. “Students get on-the-job- experience from DE program.” Coloradoan, June 6, 1973, pg 13. “Suit Asks Legal OK on Gas Pumps.” Coloradoan, April 7, 1961, pg 1. “Summons in Civil Action.” Coloradoan, January 7, 1953, pg 4. “Zoning board to weigh Alta Vista street names.” Coloradoan, January 4, 1976, pg 4. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 63 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 15 Express-Courier “1,561 Residents of County Draw Pension Checks.” Express-Courier, March 22, 1940, pg 8. “Pneumonia Causes Death Of Eulogio Chavez, 76.” Express-Courier, September 26, 1939, pg 2. Fort Collins City Directory Collection, 1901-1980. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, https://history.fcgov.com/collections/directories. “Fort Collins Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program, Program Guidelines.” City Council Minutes, November 18, 1975. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. Gullett, Poppie, Maggie Jones, and Ben Lee. Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2017. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. Hurd, Clayton A. “Fort Collins Sustainability and Social Inclusion Research Project: Report of Phase I Preliminary Findings.” Prepared for the City of Fort Collins, 2015. Document on- file with City of Fort Collins. “Maria Gonzales Residence – 724 Martinez Street.” Planning document and schematics, 1976. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. Nabokov, Peter. “Adobe: An Ancient Folk Technology,” Music and Crafts of the Southeastern United States, Festival of American Folklife Program. Smithsonian Institute, 1981. https://folklife-media.si.edu/docs/festival/program-book-articles/FESTBK1981_08.pdf Ortega, Elvira. Oral History Interview with Ellen T. Ittelson, November 17, 1983. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/oh/id/1420/rec/4. Property Records Database. City of Fort Collins Public Documents Portal. https://records.fcgov.com/WebLink/. Swanson, Evadene Burris. Fort Collins Yesterdays. George and Hildegarde Morgan: Fort Collins, CO, 1975. SWCA Environmental Consultants. Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2003. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins and Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Title Index Collection. Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Fort Collins, CO. United States Census Collection. 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950. Ancestry.com. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. USGS, Aerial Photo Single Frame Series, 1937, 1950, 1956, 1966, 1984. Images on-file with City of Fort Collins and geo-referenced by City of Fort Collins Geographic Information Services. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 64 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 16 Wilson, Chris. “Pitched Roofs Over Flat: The Emergence of a New Building Tradition in Hispanic New Mexico,” Perspectives in Vernacular Architecture, Vol. 4, 1991. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes ☐ No ☒ Date of designation: #### Designating authority: N/A 38. Applicable Eligibility Criteria: 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: Agriculture; Social History/Ethnic History - Hispanic; Architecture 40. Period of significance: Agriculture: 1923-1952 Social History / Hispanic Ethnic History:1923-present Architecture: 1923 and 1976 41. Level of significance: National ☐ State ☐ Local ☒ 42. Statement of significance: Previous Evaluations of Significance This site has been previously documented on two occasions, the first of which occurred in 2003. SWCA Environmental Consultants evaluated the site as eligible for listing as a local landmark noting, “This property is significant under Criterion A for its association with the early development of the Alta Vista neighborhood, with the sugar beet industry, and with Hispanic settlement in Fort Collins. It is significant under Criterion C because it is an example of adobe brick construction – a component in one of the northernmost collection of these buildings in North American. However, the combined levels of historical significance, architectural importance, and physical integrity ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 17 are not to the extent that his property would qualify for Individual listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. Nonetheless is should be considered individually eligible for Fort Collins landmark designation, and a contributing resource within any potential national, state, or Local Landmark historic district.”43 The site was documented again in 2017 by a group of three Colorado State University students, Poppie Gullett, Maggie Jones, and Ben Lee. They found the site to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A and C, on the State Register of Historic Properties under Standards A and C, and as a Fort Collins Landmark under Standards A and C. In their statement of significance, Gullett, Jones, and Lee stated, “724 Martinez Street qualifies under Criterion A for Agriculture from 1923-1960, as well as for Social History from 1923-1967, in accordance with the National Register of Historic Places 50-year rule. As one of the adobe brick homes originally constructed to house field workers for the Great Western Sugar Company, the house is deeply connected to the history of industrial agriculture, specifically the cultivation of sugar beets, in Fort Collins. Beyond its association with agriculture, this residence is also tied to the social history of Fort Collins’s Hispanic population, due to the fact that “La Colonia,” (today, Alta Vista) was established to incentivize Hispanic field workers to reside permanently in the Fort Collins area in order to provide a stable, experienced pool of field labor for the beet industry. As an example of Hispano adobe-brick construction, this residence is also significant under Criterion C for Architecture from 1923-1967, in accordance with the National Register of Historic Places 50-year rule. Adobe brick is a particularly Hispanic building material, and the organic growth of these homes (reflected in 724 Martinez Street’s additions), and their use of locally abundant, inexpensive materials in their expansions is typical of the 43 SWCA Environmental Consultants, Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2003. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins and Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 66 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 18 neighborhood’s vernacular architecture. In the neighborhood, residents, including the owners of 724 Martinez Street, expanded their homes from a two room, hall-and-parlor plan with a wood frame addition in order to increase the home’s interior space and reflect the community’s changing stylistic preferences and architectural influences from the surrounding area.”44 Current Evaluation of Local Landmark Significance The site was revisited in 2024 and additional research was conducted leading to a reevaluation of the site’s significance as whole. This site has been evaluated against the City of Fort Collins Significance Standards and is found to be significant in the areas of Agriculture, Social History/Hispanic Ethnic History, and Architecture under Standards 1 and 3. Under Significance Standard 1, the site is significant for its association with early sugar beet agriculture and with the city’s Hispanic residents. Originally constructed by Great Western Sugar to house beet workers and their families, this site is closely associated with the sugar beet industry and industrial agriculture of the early twentieth century. Discussion in both McWilliams and McWilliams’ Agriculture in the Fort Collins Urban Growth Area 1862-1994 and Adam Thomas’ Hang Your Wagon to a Star: Hispanics in Fort Collins, 1900-2000, note the importance of Mexican American and Hispanic labor to the development and success of Northern Colorado’s sugar beet industry. The period of significance for the site’s association with agriculture extends from the date of construction in 1923 through 1952, when Great Western Sugar sold the property to the Ambriz family. The site is also significant under Standard 1 in the area of social history and Hispanic ethnic history for its association with Fort Collins’ Hispanic community. Although the earliest residents of this home have not been discovered as of 2024, it seems reasonable to assume they were Mexican-American or Hispanic based on the neighborhood’s association with Great Western Sugar beet laborers. In addition, the site housed members of the Chavez, Ambriz, and Gonzales families from c. 1935 through the present day. The site’s location within Alta Vista, near Dry Creek and the former location of the sugar factory speak to the occupants’ deep roots within our city and the geographic discrimination that kept these families segregated on the east side of the Poudre River. In addition, the home’s location along a paved street with no sidewalk and the addition to the southeast 44 Poppie Gullett, Maggie Jones, and Ben Lee, Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2017. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 67 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 19 corner speak to the beginning of the city’s efforts to address the lack of infrastructure in the neighborhood in the 1970s and 1980s. The period of significance for the site’s association with social history extends from 1923, when the home was constructed for occupation by a Hispanic beet worker family, through the present, as the residence continues to be occupied by a member of the Hispanic community and the site’s significance and association with these historic themes is ongoing. Under Standard 2, the site is associated with the Ambriz and Gonzales families. Although the members of these families are known and members of the Gonzales family played a part in addressing educational discrimination through the Poudre School District’s Mexican American Parent Advisory Commission, none have made specific, documented contributions to the history of the community. The site is recommended not eligible for local landmarking under Standard 2. Under Standard 3, the site is significant for its vernacular adobe construction and for its distinctive 1970s addition constructed with the support of HUD grant funds. The original portion of the residence was constructed from adobe brick in 1923 as part of Great Western Sugar’s program to incentivize migrant Hispanic laborers to stay in Fort Collins year-round. As families expanded and their economic prospects increased, residents of some adobe homes in Alta Vista added one-room units reminiscent of traditional, linear adobe building techniques, while others added wood frame additions, representing a transition to Anglo building materials. Buildings constructed from traditional adobe bricks require frequent maintenance, the application of wood siding over adobe or wood frame additions to adobe buildings was both an example of cultural hybridization and a practical choice related to annual adobe repair requirements. This residence supports both types of additions: an adobe addition added to the original two-room portion between 1923-1949 and a frame addition added with CBDG funds in 1976.45 As Thomas describes in Hang Your Wagon to a Star, “The results were structures that were not entirely Hispanic or entirely Anglo. These houses, then, represent in microcosm the evolution of the Fort Collins’s Hispanic community”.46 The site is an expression of multiple building techniques that represent the span of Hispanic history in Fort Collins. In addition, this site is one of twelve identified adobe brick homes remaining within Alta Vista. Outside of Alta Vista, only 45 The Gonzales family also constructed an adobe brick bedroom and kitchen addition in the 1960s that was demolished by the City of Fort Collins in 1976. The addition was torn down without the family’s permission. 46 Thomas, Hang Your Wagon to a Star, 13. ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 20 one other residence in the city, the Romero House (425 10th Street, locally landmarked in 2001), is known to be constructed from adobe. The site is also indicative of the changing attitudes of the City of Fort Collins in the 1960s and 1970s regarding Alta Vista and the city’s Hispanic community. Only through the efforts of local and national advocates did the federal government and subsequently, the City of Fort Collins, begin to address the decades of racial disparity through infrastructure improvements and housing rehabilitation. It is worth noting that use of CDBG funds and alterations made by the 1976 housing rehabilitation program were viewed by previous architectural historians as detractions from the significance and integrity of the site. It is only within the last few years that the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Service has considered these elements to be contributing to the site’s significance because they better capture the full history of the neighborhood’s evolution to its characteristic hybrid state of original adobe design and wood frame modernization efforts. The period of significance under Standard 3 is 1923, the date of original construction and 1976, the construction date of the CDBG addition. The site’s architecture and design clearly exhibit the changing attitudes of the City of Fort Collins towards its Hispanic community over the course of the nineteenth century and the building’s original portion is an exceedingly rare example of adobe construction. For these reasons the site is recommended eligible for listing as a local landmark under Standard 3. The site is unlikely to yield information important to history or prehistory and is recommended not eligible for local landmarking under Standard 4. Current Evaluation of NRHP Significance This site has also been evaluated for eligibility against the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Criteria. Requirements for listing properties on the NRHP are set by the National Park Service and differ from those used to evaluate significance and eligibility at the local level; a property may be eligible under one set of criteria and not the other. The site is recommended eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C for its association with sugar beet agriculture, Hispanic history, and for its rare adobe construction. Under Criterion A, the site is significant in the area of agriculture for its association with industrialized sugar beet farming and in the area of Hispanic Ethnic Heritage for its association with Fort Collins early Hispanic community. In the early twentieth century, Great Western Sugar required the labor of thousands of individuals to grow sugar beets; despite advances in agricultural equipment and technology, sugar beet farming relied on hand laborers well in the 1950s. Similar to the ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 69 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 21 Germans from Russia before them, Mexican families that relocated to Fort Collins to work in the sugar beet industry adapted to an economic system designed to exploit cheap immigrant labor. In order to keep migrant workers in Fort Collins year-round, Great Western Sugar constructed several two-room adobe buildings to house their workers. This site represents both the early agricultural history of Fort Collins and the early history of Hispanic residents, many who came to the city as beet workers for the sugar factory. Research found no association with historically significant individuals under Criterion B and the site is recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP under this Criterion. Under Criterion C, the site is recommended eligible for listing on the NRHP in the area of architecture as an exceedingly rare remaining example of adobe brick construction in the Fort Collins area. Although the site has seen several additions over the last 100 years, these expansions are a reflection of the owner’s financial investment in improving living conditions as budgets allowed and are reflective of the ongoing Hispanic-owned influence for this property and neighborhood. In addition, this site supports both an adobe and a wood frame addition, displaying a combination of Hispanic and Anglo building influences. The site is unlikely to yield important information in reference to research questions under Criterion D. 43.Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: This site is significant in the areas of Agriculture, Social History, and Architecture for its association with early sugar beet agriculture, association with the city’s Hispanic community, and as a rare remaining example of adobe-brick construction. As such, the site’s character defining features are its adobe brick material, linear construction, limited ornamentation, 1976 frame addition, yard surrounded by chain link fence, and its location and setting within the Alta Vista neighborhood. The site retains integrity of location and setting. The building remains in the spot where it was originally constructed within the Alta Vista neighborhood. Although the streets were paved and some nearby residences constructed in the 1980s and 1990s, the neighborhood retains its residential character and many elements of its origins as a Hispanic community constructed by the sugar factory, including narrow street right-of- ways, minimal street setbacks, and no sidewalks. Integrity of workmanship, materials, and design is retained through the original adobe construction and the later additions and alterations. Although the building has seen changes over the last 100 years (including an adobe addition between 1923-1949, the likely replacement of a flat roof with a side gable roof in the 1920s, a wood frame addition in 1976, and replacement of all windows in 1976) these changes support the site’s significance under Standards 1 and 3 as they reflect the ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 22 property owner’s financial investment in improving living conditions over time as their budget allowed and the financial support provided by the City of Fort Collins as it grappled with changing attitudes towards Hispanic communities in the 1970s. Integrity of feeling and association remain intact; the size of the residence, its materials, additions, and location provide a direct connect to the site’s history and association with Hispanic beet laborers. The site is clearly identifiable as an early twentieth century residence. The site retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic associations. 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: Previous recorders of this site supported the possibility of a historic district within Alta Vista. In 2003, SWCA noted: The Alta Vista neighborhood retains a high concentration and continuity of buildings and structures, linked historically and aesthetically, which collectively posses sufficient integrity and significance to qualify as a National Register Historic District, as well as a Fort Collins Landmark District. The neighborhood is significant for its association with the sugar beet industry and its labor practices in northern Colorado, and with the Hispanic community in Fort Collins. The neighborhood is also architecturally significant for its collection of vernacular dwellings. Of special notes is Alta Vista’s concentration of adobe-brick structures – one of the northernmost groupings of domestic adobe-brick architecture in North America – many built by Great Western Sugar Company and purchased under the company’s employee installment plan. Alta Vista also contains a significant collection of historic outbuildings. These include barns, garages, chicken coops, summer kitchens, and privies, many of which cannot be found elsewhere in Fort Collins.47 47 SWCA Environmental Consultants, Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2003. Document ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 23 In 2017, Colorado State University students, Poppie Gullett, Maggie Jones, and Ben Lee stated: 724 Martinez Street is a contributing property to the Alta Vista Historic Landscape District that is locally significant under Criterion A for Agriculture from 1923 to 1960 and Social History from 1923 to 1967. Great Western Sugar Company in Fort Collins, Colorado developed the Alta Vista neighborhood to house the company’s permanently settled Hispanic workers. Because of its physical and social isolation from the City of Fort Collins, the community remained primarily Hispanic field workers until the closing of the factory in 1960. The neighborhood provides an excellent example of the insular and isolated history of Hispanic sugar beet workers in the region. This agricultural history spans from their permanent settlement near Fort Collins in 1923 to the closing of the sugar beet factory in 1960 while the community’s social history spans from 1923 settlement to 1967 in accordance with the NRHP fifty-year rule. The Alta Vista Historic Landscape District is also locally significant under Criterion C from 1923 to 1967 as an excellent example of adobe-brick construction and newer forms of vernacular architecture. The organic growth of the district’s vernacular structures is a key feature of traditional Hispanic building forms, and illustrates how Hispanic residents modified these buildings to suit their changing needs and stylistic preferences. The vernacular architecture here uses readily available and inexpensive local materials for modifications that often reflected the influence of styles popular throughout the United States. Alta Vista residents turned to hybrid building forms to accommodate changes in their living space needs. The period of significance under Criterion C is from 1923, when the first adobe-brick home was constructed in the neighborhood, to 1967 in accordance with the NRHP fifty-year rule.48 on-file with City of Fort Collins and Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 48 Poppie Gullett, Maggie Jones, and Ben Lee, Colorado Cultural Resource Survey, Architectural Inventory Form for 5LR.10643, 724 Martinez Street, 2017. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 72 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 24 The Alta Vista neighborhood continues to exhibit its connections with Fort Collins’ early agricultural history, Hispanic history, and vernacular architecture under local Significance Standards 1 and 3 and National Register of Historic Places Criterion A and C. If the area were to be evaluated as a historic district, it is recommended that the reviewer use a historic cultural landscape approach. A historic cultural landscape form would capture additional important information regarding the site’s topography, vegetation, land use patterns, and cultural traditions in addition to information about the historic buildings and structures within the neighborhood. If there is district potential, is this building: Contributing ☒ Non-contributing ☐ 46. If the building is in existing district, is it: Contributing ☐ Non-contributing ☐ VIII. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: 101120-102827 Negatives filed at: City of Fort Collins 48. Report title: N/A 49. Date(s): May 2024 50. Recorder(s): Rebekah Schields, Historic Preservation Specialist 51. Organization: City of Fort Collins – Historic Preservation Services 52. Address: 281 N College, Fort Collins, CO 80524 53. Phone number(s): 970-224-6137 NOTE: Please include a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad map indicating resource location, and photographs. History Colorado - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 25 Site Photos and Maps Figure 1: Alta Vista subdivision plat map, 1927. Image retrieved from Larimer County Recorder’s Office. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 74 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 26 Figure 2: Elizabeth Chavez Ambriz, photo uploaded by Robert Copeland. Retrieved from Find a Grave, Memorial ID#64938760. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/64938760/elizabeth-ambriz Figure 3: 724 Martinez, Larimer County Tax Assessor photograph, 1949. Image ID# 724MART49. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/52707/rec/3. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 75 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 27 Figure 4: 724 Martinez, Larimer County Tax Assessor photograph, 1977. Image ID# 724MART77. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/52711/rec/4. Figure 5: “Maria Gonzales Residence-724 Martinez Street.” Schematic indicating the location of changes to be made during the 1976 remodel. Document on-file with City of Fort Collins. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 76 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 28 Figure 6: 724 Martinez, unknown date (post-1976), unknown creator. Image on-file with City of Fort Collins. Figure 7: 724 Martinez, site overview, view west (Image #102011, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 77 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 29 Figure 8: 724 Martinez, east elevation, view west (Image #101921, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). Figure 9: 724 Martinez, south and east elevations, view northwest (Image #101907, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 78 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 30 Figure 10: 724 Martinez, east end of south elevation, view northeast (Image #101230, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). Figure 11: 724 Martinez, central portion of south elevation, view north (Image #101234, R. Schields. 5/14/2024). ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 79 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 31 Figure 12: 724 Martinez, west end of south elevation, view northwest (Image #101251, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). Figure 13: 724 Martinez, west and south elevations, view northeast (Image #101315, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 80 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 32 Figure 14: 724 Martinez, north and west elevations, view southeast (Image #102135, R. Schields, 5/14/2024). ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 81 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 33 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 82 Resource Number: 5LR.10643 (State); B3003 (City) Temporary Resource Number: Click here to enter text. Address: 724 Martinez Street 34 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 83 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 84 RESOLUTION 1, 2024 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE CHAVEZ/AMBRIZ/GONZALES PROPERTY 724 MARTINEZ STREET, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WHEREAS, it is a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects, and districts of historic, architectural, archeological, or geographic significance, located within the city, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this city cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historic, architectural, archeological and geographical heritage of the city or by ignoring the destruction or defacement of cultural assets; and WHEREAS, the cultural, historic, architectural, archaeological, and geographic heritage of Fort Collins is recognized within, and in some instances helps to illuminate, a broad historical context that includes Native American use of and residence on this land as well as the systems that authorized their forced removal and permitted Euro-American acquisition of western lands, which preceded the establishment of the Fort Collins community; and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has determined that the Chavez/Ambriz/Gonzales Property, located at 724 Martinez Street in Fort Collins and as more specifically described in the legal description below (the “Property”) meets the standards of significance and integrity required to be a Fort Collins landmark as set forth in City Code Section l4-22 and is therefore eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Property nominated the Property and consent to landmark designation; and WHEREAS, the Property is significant to Fort Collins under Standard 1 – Events and Standard 3 – Design/Construction, contained in City Code Section 14-22(a); and the Property retains sufficient historic integrity, as described in City Code Section 14-22(b). NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins as follows: Section 1. That the Historic Preservation Commission adopts and incorporates the foregoing recitals as findings of fact and: ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 85 City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. #, 202# 2 1. That the designation of this Property will advance the City of Fort Collins’s Policies and Purposes for Historic Preservation; and 2. That the property is significant under Standard 1, Events/Trends, for its association with early sugar beet farming in Fort Collins from 1923-1952 and for its association with social/ Hispanic history from 1923 until the present, and Standard 3, Design/Construction, as a rare example of adobe construction in Fort Collins and for its Community Development Block Grant addition; and 3. That the Property retains a preponderance of integrity to convey its significance under the following aspects: Location, Setting, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association; and 4. That the owners’ desire to protect this historic Property and its resources will be furthered by the Property’s status as a Fort Collins Landmark and the accompanying protections and review mechanisms that designation confers. Section 2. That the Property located in the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado, described as follows, to wit: Lot 18, Alta Vista, Fort Collins also known by street and number as: 724 Martinez Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 assessor's schedule or parcel number: 9701405018 be designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in accordance with Chapter l4 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. Section 3. That the criteria contained in Chapter 14, Article IV of the City Code will serve as the standards by which alterations, additions and other changes to buildings and structures located upon the above-described Property will be reviewed. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Fort Collins held on July 17, 2024. ____________________________ Jim Rose, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________ Secretary/Staff ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4 Packet Pg. 86 Application for Fort Collins Landmark Designation – Chavez/Ambriz/ Gonzales Property (724 Martinez St.) 7-17-2024 Yani Jones Historic Preservation Planner 2Role of the HPC Chapter 14, Article II of the Municipal Code, “Designation Procedures:” • Determine if property meets the criteria of a Fort Collins landmark • Must possess both significance and exterior integrity Sec. 14-33(a): If all owners consent in writing and a majority of Commission approves: • Commission may adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council the designation 1 2 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 87 3Location and Historic Photos 4Historic Photos Tax Assessor Photo – 1949 Tax Assessor Photo – 1977 3 4 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 88 Significance– Standard 1 (Events/Trends) 5 Great Western Sugar Factory, c. 1910 (photo from FCMOD) Great Western Sugar Interior, c. 1966 (photo from FCMOD) “Hand Topping Beets on Preston Farm,” c. 1920 (photo from FCMOD) Association with early sugar beet farming in Fort Collins and social/Hispanic history • Sugar beet factory built in 1904 on East Vine Drive. • Local sugar beet farming and processing initially relied on labor from Germans from Russia in the community, but this began to change around 1910. • From 1910-1930, about 90% of the new migratory laborers Great Western Sugar brought to Larimer and Weld Counties were from Mexico. Significance– Standard 1 (Events/Trends) 6 Alta Vista Subdivision Plat, 1927 “Prize Beet Workers,” c. 1926, Eulogio Chavez top row, 2nd from left (photo from FCMOD) Eulogio Chavez (photo from Shonie L. Kelly, Ancestry.com) Association with early sugar beet farming in Fort Collins and social/Hispanic history (cont.) • To incentivize workers to remain in Fort Collins year-round, in 1923, built 6 2-room adobe homes on company land that could be purchased on an installment plan by “the best workers.” • Jose Eulogio Chavez, his wife, Cleofás, and children came to Fort Collins in 1903 (Fort Collins Coloradoan, May 5, 1938). They were the first known residents of what is now 724 Martinez St. • The company platted Alta Vista, also known then as the “Spanish Colony,” in 1927 in an area on the outskirts of town in proximity to the sugar factory. 5 6 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 89 Association with early sugar beet farming in Fort Collins and social/Hispanic history (cont.) • Elizabeth (Chavez) Ambriz gained ownership of the property in 1952 after settling several title claims among family members and the Great Western Sugar Company. The adobe addition was constructed during the Chavez/Ambriz ownership of this home. Ambriz sold the property in 1959. • The Gonzales family moved to 724 Martinez St. in the early 1960s and are responsible for many of the improvements that have been made to the home over the years. Maria Celina Gonzales raised her eight children here, including one of the current owners, Santiago. Maria passed away in 2020. 7Significance– Standard 1 (Events/Trends) Elizabeth (Chavez) Ambriz (photo from Robert Copeland, Find-a-Grave Index) Maria Celina Gonzales (photo from Fort Collins Coloradoan, September 13, 2020) Significance – Standard 3 (Design/Construction) • Rare remaining example of adobe construction in Fort Collins • Includes both a pre-1949 adobe addition and a 1976 frame addition • 1976 addition constructed using CDBG funds; second adobe addition removed at time of construction. • Character-defining features include the adobe material, linear construction, limited ornamentation, the frame addition, and the location and setting in Alta Vista • Integrity • Location, Setting, Feeling, Association, Workmanship, Materials, Design • Changes the property has undergone contribute to its significance 8 • Carports • Concrete slab floors • Inside-outside walls • Central hearths 7 8 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 90 Site Overview (looking west)9 East Elevation 10 9 10 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 91 South Elevation, East Side 11 South Elevation, Center 12 11 12 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 92 South Elevation, West Side 13 West and South Elevations 14 13 14 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 93 North and West Elevations 15 16Work Session Requests for Information 1. Are there financial incentives for repair that could be leveraged by the property owners if a property is designated as a Landmark? • Yes. Should a property become a Landmark, financial incentives available for rehabilitation include: -0% Interest Landmark Rehabilitation Loans (City of Fort Collins) – Matching zero-interest loans up to $7,500 per Landmark per year -Design Assistance Program (City of Fort Collins) – Mini grants for project planning for historic properties typically up to $2,000 using qualified professionals -State Tax Credits (State of Colorado) – Income tax credits for qualifying rehab projects, typically 20-30% of qualifying costs 15 16 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 94 17Work Session Requests for Information 2. Would you clarify why the two additions are not considered detractions? • Both built within Period of Significance associated with social and Hispanic history, 1923 – Present; additions support the property’s significance under Standards 1 and 3. • Reflect property owners’ financial investment in improving living conditions within the context of changing attitudes toward Fort Collins’s Hispanic community from the City. • Earlier addition built using adobe techniques likely by the Chavez/Ambriz family to expand the 2-room house built by sugar factory. • Within context of pressure from the national Chicano movement to improve conditions in Hispanic neighborhoods, City applied for a Community Development Block Grant. Council stated in 1975, “The housing rehabilitation grant program is the first step in a multi- year plan [to] alleviate health, safety, and substandard housing problems, and to provide basic facilities and services to the neighborhoods of Andersonville, Atla Vista, and Buckingham.” • Later frame addition was intended to improve conditions by extending sewer service to the house, but at the same time, the City demolished an adobe addition against the wishes of the property owner. Plan from 1976 remodel of 724 Martinez St. 18Summary of Findings • Construction: 1923 original adobe house; pre-1949 adobe addition; 1976 frame addition • Significance under Standard 1: Events/Trends • Association with early sugar beet industry • Association with social/Hispanic history • Significance under Standard 3: Design/Construction • Rare example of adobe construction • CDBG addition • Exterior Integrity: Location, Setting, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association 17 18 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 95 19Role of the HPC Chapter 14, Article II of the Municipal Code, “Designation Procedures:” • Determine if property meets the criteria of a Fort Collins landmark • Must possess both significance and exterior integrity Sec. 14-33(a): If all owners consent in writing and a majority of Commission approves: • Commission may adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council the designation Application for Fort Collins Landmark Designation – Chavez/Ambriz/ Gonzales Property (724 Martinez St.) 7-17-2024 Yani Jones Historic Preservation Planner 19 20 ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5 Packet Pg. 96 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 1 STAFF REPORT July 17, 2024 Historic Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 201 LINDEN STREET (LINDEN HOTEL) – DESIGN REVIEW STAFF Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Alterations to the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street to include complete replacement of the historic windows. APPLICANT/OWNER: Linden Street Treehouse, LLC vy OneSeven Advisors, LLC 148 Remington Street, Ste 100 Fort Collins, CO 80524 RECOMMENDATION: TBD—Staff does not have sufficient information at this time to make a recommendation. COMMISSION’S ROLE: Design review is governed by Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV, and is the process by which the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviews proposed exterior alterations to a designated historic property for consistency with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (the Standards). The HPC should discuss and consider the presented materials and staff analysis. For City Landmarks and properties in City Landmark Districts, the Commission is a decision-maker and can choose to issue, or not issue, a Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA). Issuing a CoA allows the proposed work to proceed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request to replace the exterior windows of (between 38 & 41 windows) the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street. City Council individually Landmarked the Linden Hotel in 1974 (Ordinance 1974-44), but the property was also later included as a contributing building in the Old Town Landmark District, designated by City Council in 1979 (Ordinance 1979-170, and subsequent 1998-102 and 1998-124). The hotel was additionally listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1978 as part of the Old Town Historic District – the Hotel is listed as “the central anchor for the district” (see page 7-4). The proposal before the HPC is to replace the exterior windows of the property. Staff cannot provide specific details about which windows will be replaced, or the dimensions or specific design of a replacement window product, because the materials provided by the applicant’s contractor only provide general replacement information. Based on discussion, it is likely the applicant intends to replace upper-level (2nd and 3rd story) windows but this is typically confirmed via a window study, which has not been completed. Staff has engaged an expert to perform a window study, which is anticipated to be complete the first week in August 2024. Packet Pg. 97 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 2 Alterations to City Landmarks are subject to the approval process in Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV. Contributing properties to the Old Town Landmark District are subject to the same approval process, with more specific approval standards adopted by City Council in the Old Town Design Standards. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Nomination documents may describe character-defining features, or those features critical to maintain when approving projects in order to retain an historic property’s essential character and reasons for being designated historic. The National Register nomination approved in 1979 includes the following description of the Hotel (page 7-4): “[The Linden Hotel]…is a three-story brick structure and is one of the more architecturally significant buildings in the area. The structure has a mansard roof at the cornice, aureole windows at the corner, and a tower with a mansard roof above the aureole windows at the corner. Both the Walnut and Linden Street facades of this building have been treated architecturally with a series of protruding ornamental brick pilasters and recessed window bays. The façade is not symmetrical for the number of windows in each bay varies. The first story has been altered considerably, in places the original window openings can still be seen. The window openings have segmental arch lintels of stone. The second story windows are treated differently architecturally. These windows have half-arch stone lintels. The third story windows have flat stone lintels. The cornice below the mansard roof is quite elaborate and is of pressed tin. The building has a flat roof and is rectangular in plan, except for the diagonal at the corner. The diagonal is the most significant part of the building as it responds quite favorably to the corner and is the location for the rather ornamental aureole windows and the tower.” Based on this description, and the 1974 individual Landmark ordinance for the property, this property would be considered historic for both its historic (Standard 1) and architectural (Standard 3) importance. The three-story red brick and native sandstone structure has several notable architectural details, including the prominent corner entry with its double oriel windows. According to previous surveys, there are a total of 51 windows on the second and third floors. Each oriel contains three double-hung wood sash windows, in wood surrounds, with ornate carved decorative wood details. Other than the oriel, the second-floor windows are surrounded with pointed half-arch stone lintels and stone sills. Third floor windows have flat stone lintels and stone sills. Windows on the second and third floors are historic double hung wood windows. Four windows on the west wall of the second floor are non- historic replacement windows; the original windows were lost during the collapse of the west wall associated with the 1994 rehabilitation. Several features of the building’s exterior would be considered “character-defining,” including: - The sandstone and brick exterior, including door and window sills and lintels of varying shapes (arched and segmented arch); - Metal (historically wood) decorative trim features, including brackets, mullions, and pilasters; - Wood, inset storefront assemblies on the ground floor; - Mansard roof at the cornice, now comprised of standing-seam metal - The prominent aureole windows on the 2nd and 3rd floor at the corner of Linden & Walnut Streets; - 1-over-1 wood windows on the 2nd and 3rd floor ALTERATION HISTORY: Building History The historic 1882 “Linden Hotel” building at the northwest corner of Walnut and Linden Streets, originally owned by Fort Collins pioneers’ Abner Loomis and Charles B. Andrews, was designed by prominent Denver architect William Quayle and constructed by John F. Colpitts just nine years after Fort Collins was incorporated as a town. Until 1917, its first floor housed the Poudre Valley Bank, the oldest banking institution in Larimer County. Other primary uses in its early years included the post office, the Masonic Lodge, a tavern, and the Linden Hotel. Packet Pg. 98 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 3 Known alterations of the property to date include: - 1917 – Remodel & repair (Permit 87) - 1923 – install 5x14 coal platform - 1936 – after-the-fact permit for a new 5ft door cut in north wall; 1 30” door in south wall for entrances to 201 & 207 Linden St. - 1937 – roof of boiler room reinforced with concrete - 1945 – Remodeling (Permit 8169 & 8361) - 1945 – Asphalt roof - 1946 – Remodeling (Permit 9267) - 1952 – hang neon sign over 12’ above sidewalk (200lbs) - 1994-1995 – Rehabilitation o Comprehensive, including restoration of storefronts, interior remodel, elevator addition, stair tower addition, roof replacement, new fire suppression system - 1999 – Remodel of 3rd floor (interior?); lighting and mechanical modifications - 2016 – Interior rehabilitation w/ rooftop patios - 2018 – Stone pilaster repair - 2018-2019 – Windows o CoA not issued by interpretation of CDNS Director; project shifted to repair/modification - 2021 – Corner stone repair (from Linden Alley accidental damage) - 2023 – Wood trim & storefront window repair and temporary safety measures (plexiglass covering) for 2nd and 3rd floor exterior windows HISTORY OF DESIGN REVIEW: - 1993 – Preservation Leadership Training Institute Assessment o the Linden Hotel was selected as the study site for the week-long Preservation Leadership Training Institute sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the National Park Service, which brought experts from around the country to examine the structure’s rehabilitation needs and its relationship to the revitalization of the historic downtown towards the river beyond Old Town Square. - 1994-1995 – Major Rehabilitation o Comprehensive, including restoration of storefronts, interior remodel, elevator addition, stair tower addition, roof replacement, new fire suppression system o Public-private effort, which included a State Historical Fund grant, Downtown Development Authority funding and City Historic Preservation Fund monies totaling $450,000. The National Park Service approved the project’s full compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and praised the extensive effort, noting that “local support by the community and the City of Fort Collins make this project unique among the many rehabilitation projects we review within a 16-state region.” o In 1995, the City of Fort Collins recognized building owners Dave Veldman and Mitch Morgan of Veldman Morgan Commercial with a “Friend of Preservation” Award for their “courageous effort” to rehabilitate the building. - 2005 – Window Assessment (Edge Architecture) o Owner proposed replacing some of the wood windows. In response to that request, a window survey and assessment of 51 windows was conducted by Angie Aguilera, Edge Architecture. The report noted that windows were in relatively good condition for their age and provided three repair and performance improvement options along with two comparative estimates for replacement. o Subsequently, the owner neither repaired nor replaced any of the windows. - 2018 – Interior rehabilitation w/ rooftop patios Packet Pg. 99 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 4 - 2018 – Stone pilaster repair on ground floor facade - 2018-2019 – Windows o Change of use from offices to residential on the second and third floors. o At that time, the owner indicated an intention to clean and re-glaze the historic windows. As there were no plans for additional work to the windows at that time, the cleaning and re-glazing would comply with the definition of normal maintenance and repair (Ch. 14, Sec. 14-52). o The information did not include a request to change the lift system and add extra panes to the windows, which required channeling out significant portions of wood from the sash. This was completed without approval and Preservation staff was made aware on August 22, 2018, by the windows contractor. This included a request to review options for next steps including replacement of the historic windows with a product that the contractor had shared with the architect and owner’s representative. o Staff accompanied an LPC Design Review Subcommittee to a site visit at the building on September 4, 2018 to examine the condition and operability of the reinstalled historic windows and to examine four windows on the second floor of the west alley elevation. These four windows were installed in association with the reconstruction of the west wall, which collapsed during the 1994 rehabilitation project. Three of the four windows were modern replacements, and the fourth was a historic window with details, sections, shape, and cut lites that indicated it was moved to this location. On October 21, 2018, the applicant received administrative approval to replace those four windows  The subcommittee provided a recommendation of approval for the administrative design review regarding replacement of the four windows on the west wall due to their lack of significance, but the subcommittee members directed the matter of the building’s historic windows to the full Landmark Preservation Commission for a design review hearing. In referring the matter to the full Commission, the subcommittee members noted that the prior work on the windows had resulted in operability issues and each had concerns about the suitability of the rehabilitation approach that the applicant’s contractor had used and the fact that the work had been performed without prior review and approval. They also noted that the historic windows could be further adjusted to improve operability and performance. At the request of the LPC to provide independent analysis of these comments, staff ordered a third-party analysis of the current condition and repairability of the historic windows from Barlow Cultural Resource Consulting, LLC. That report was dated November 29, 2018, and is an attachment. Note: This study indicated that the removal of the weight-and-pulley system that was done without approval had damaged them, specifically cutting a groove on the vertical sides of each window sash (the stiles) to house a new spiral balance system, making weatherstripping impossible. It was also indicated that a groove was cut in each sash to install a second pane of glass. Ultimately, the finding of this report was that the window sashes could be brought back into function with a full restoration program. o CDNS Director waived requirement for Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed restoration plan, determining that the modification to the windows was classified as “normal maintenance” (Municipal Code 14-56) and not subject to a CoA approval; noting that if “individual owners of the residential units want to replace the windows in the future, review by the Landmark Preservation Commission and a Certificate of Appropriateness will be required.” - 2021 – Corner stone repair (from Linden Alley accidental damage) - 2023 – Wood trim & storefront window repair HISTORY OF FUNDED WORK/USE OF INCENTIVES: Since 1978, the property has received significant public investment of approximately $ ($ in City and $ in State) to preserve its historic features, including: 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 5 - 1994-1995 – Federal Historic Tax Credit o 20% of total rehabilitation costs; - 1994-1995 – Multiple funding sources for comprehensive rehabilitation o State Historical Fund, $100,000 o Downtown Development Authority & City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Fund, $250,000 - 2011 – DDA Façade Restoration Program, $68,555 o column and stone base repair - 2017 – Design Assistance Grant for rooftop modifications DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness under Municipal Code 14, Article IV for the following items: The applicant is seeking replacement of the windows on the building. The applicant did not provide specific details about which windows, or dimensions & details of replacement product. It seems likely that the applicant intends to replace upper floor (2nd and 3rd story) windows but this is not stated explicitly in the application. REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Upon review of the original application, staff has asked the applicant to provide more detail on the following items: - At a meeting on November 9, 2023, the applicant requested to revisit the question of window replacement based on an updated, independent assessment of their current condition. This assessment was intended to be filled by a new 3rd party contractor without prior involvement in the previous design review process (initiated in 2018). The applicant ultimately chose to provide a brief overview from the contractor who worked on the windows in 2018 instead; therefore staff has engaged a 3rd party with Design Assistance Program funds to perform the study following the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Properties, including specific window guidance attached to this packet, which is anticipated to be complete the first week in August 2024. The following changes were made to the proposed work since the last HPC meeting: - N/A - TBD PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY No public comment about this project has been received at this time. STAFF EVALUATION OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Staff notes that Standard 6, regarding repair before replacement, is of key concern when replacement of character-defining historic material is concerned. Old Town Design Standards The Old Town Design Standards (OTDS) have been adopted by the City of Fort Collins (via City Council) as the basis for exterior project review on buildings within the Old Town Landmark District, which includes the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street. These Standards are not a substitute for the City’s adopted general standards, the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, but rather provide more specific guidance on what can be approved on historic buildings based on the district’s and building’s specific, defining historic features. Windows are covered on pages 50-54 of the OTDS. Below is an analysis of the current application based on each of the window-related standards in the OTDS: Packet Pg. 101 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 6 Relevant Standards in OTDS 3.8 – Maintain & Repair Historic Windows - Preserve historic window features including the frame, sash, muntins, mullions, glazing, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation, and groupings. - Repair and maintain windows regularly, including trim, glazing putty, and glass panes. - Repair, rather than replace, frames and sashes. - Staff Analysis: Without documentation (i.e., a Window Study) confirming that window units are beyond repair, staff cannot assess whether this Standard is met, since it is not clear that repair is not possible, and the applicant’s window evaluation (Colorado Sash & Door) suggests repair is possible: “If the sash[es] are to be left in place, a wood support block running from the sill up to the bottom of the upper sash could be installed…” presumably also with replaced, reinforced, meeting rails (Assessment p. 7). In the event repair is possible, Standard 3.8 must be met and alternatives that repair, reinforce, and modify the windows based on subsequent standards is required. Staff cannot determine if Old Town Design Standard 3.8 is met due to insufficient information. 3.9 – Replace a Historic Window with a Matching Design if Repair is not Possible - Replace with the same material. - Match the appearance of the historic window design (i.e., if the historic is double-hung, use a double- hung replacement window). - Maintain the historic size, shape and number of panes. - Match the profile of the sash, muntin, and its components to the historic window, including the depth of the sash, which may step back to the plane of the glass in several increments. - Use clear window glazing that conveys the visual appearance of historic glazing (transparent low-e glass is preferred). - Do not use vinyl and unfinished metals as window replacement materials. - Do not use metallic or reflective window glazing. - Do not reduce a historic opening to accommodate a smaller window or increase it to accommodate a larger window. - Staff Analysis: Without documentation (i.e., a Window Study) confirming that window units are beyond repair, staff cannot assess whether this Standard is met, since it is not clear that repair is not possible. In the event repair is possible, Standard 3.9 does not apply and Standard 3.8 must be met. Staff does not have sufficient information to determine if Old Town Design Standard 3.9 is met. 3.10 – Use Special Care when Replacing a Window on a Primary Façade - Give special attention to matching the historic design and materials of windows located on the façade. - Also, match the historic design when replacing a window located on a secondary wall. - Staff Analysis: Without documentation (i.e., shop drawings) confirming that replacement window units are both necessary, and would match the existing windows, staff cannot assess whether this Standard is met, due to insufficient information. Typically, shop drawings (i.e., a cross-section of the proposed window as well as the historic window to be replaced) is included in a replacement request. - 3.14 – Enhance the Energy Efficiency of Historic Windows and Doors - Make the best of historic windows: keep them in good repair and seal all the leaks. - Maintain the glazing compound regularly. Remove old putty with care. - Place a storm window internally to avoid the impact upon external appearance. - Use storm windows designed to match the historic window frame if placed externally. - Staff Analysis: With energy performance being cited as a reason for replacement, staff would note that wood windows (sashes and frames) provide higher insulation, when kept in good repair, than most replacement products. With large panes such as these, energy efficiency improvement meeting current International Energy Conservation Code requirements, is possible but can be, and has often been, Packet Pg. 102 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 7 successfully achieved without wholesale replacement. More common treatments are interior or exterior storms, and ensuring good insulation around the window frame inside the wall. Call-out Box: Alternate Window Material (OTDS, p52) - If it is not possible to match the historic design and materials of a window, then an alternative design may be considered in the following locations: o On a non-primary façade, accessory building or addition o On a primary façade if no other option is available - Alternative window designs shall: o Match the general profile and details of the historic window. o Use materials that match the historic appearance in dimension, profile and finish. - Staff Analysis: Without shop drawings, which are typical in window replacement requests, it is unclear if the proposed aluminum-clad wood windows would match the profile, dimensions, and finish of the existing windows. While aluminum-clad wood windows are a common replacement type, confirmation of the need for replacement, and if so, matching dimensions and profile in the replacement, are typically required to meet the Standards, specifically OTDS #3.8 and Rehabilitation Standard #6 (see below). Staff cannot determine if the Alternate Window Material guidance in the OTDS is met. Applicable Code Standard Summary of Secretary of the Interior Standards Required under City Code 14-54 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 upper floors are currently residential units. Residential use for historic hotel space is generally a compatible new use. Y 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. As noted above, the windows on the Linden hotel, including the upper floor, 1- over-1 wood sash windows, are a character defining feature and must be retained to meet this standard. This Standard, along with Standard 6, would allow for in- kind replacements, if required. At this time, staff does not have drawings, sketches, or a description of a specific replacement product and cannot definitely assess if Standard 2 is met. The requested detailed report from Deep Roots Craftsmen is intended to provide enough information to provide appropriate findings for consideration of this Standard. TBD SOI #3 Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. Based on the proposed work description, it does not appear that Standard 3 applies to this project. N/A Packet Pg. 103 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 8 SOI #4 Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. The proposed scope, relating to window replacement, does not appear to be affecting any historic alterations to the property. 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 one-over-one wood sash windows are a character-defining feature. It is not clear from the application materials whether the windows have deteriorated beyond repair, or what the proposed replacement product would be if so. Staff does not have sufficient information to make an assessment of whether this standard is met. The requested detailed report from Deep Roots Craftsmen is intended to provide enough information to provide appropriate findings for consideration of this Standard. TBD 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. It is not clear from the provided materials that wholesale replacement of the upper floor windows is necessary. While deterioration is certainly noted, wood windows such as these are regularly repaired and improved to a level that meets, or comes close to meeting, modern International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and International Existing Building Code (IEBC) requirements. The latest window study on the property (developed in 2018) indicates that repair is possible for these windows with some modifications. The applicant’s own window assessment (2024, Colorado Sash & Door) indicates that repair is possible, with some modifications for stabilization. Energy performance and operability, via modifications like interior storm windows, piggy-back storm windows, window inserts, etc., are all options that have been used to retain historic material, meet energy performance and functionality needs, and avoid landfilling valuable, old-growth building materials that are typically highly repairable compared to products currently on the market. Staff does not have sufficient, current, information to make a recommendation for this Standard. The requested detailed report from Deep Roots Craftsmen is intended to provide enough information to provide appropriate findings for consideration of this Standard. TBD 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. It does not appear that chemical or physical treatments are proposed. In cases where wood windows are retained and repaired, gentle surface preparation (light sanding) and repainting with hydrating, breathable paint is recommended. N/A Packet Pg. 104 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 9 SOI #8 Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. No excavation is proposed as part of this project. N/A SOI #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. As noted above, the one-over-one wood windows are a character-defining feature of this property. It is not clear if the historic windows are repairable and should be retained, nor is it clear exactly what type of replacement is proposed. Staff does not have sufficient information to make an assessment regarding this standard. The requested detailed report from Deep Roots Craftsmen is intended to provide enough information to provide appropriate findings for consideration of this Standard. TBD SOI #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. N/A Packet Pg. 105 Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 10 Additional Guidance used by Staff Staff regularly uses available guidance from the National Park Service that helps interpret the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties (the Standards). Regarding window repair vs. replacement related to Rehab Standard 6 and documentation requirements, the following guidance is relevant (by staff’s judgement), with annotations regarding relevancy in this matter. Each has also been included as an attachment: - NPS Preservation Brief #9, The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-09-wood-windows.pdf o Includes call for “…careful evaluation of existing physical conditions on a unit-by-unit basis.” This is the reason the City typically requires a window study (frequently funded in whole or in part by the Design Assistance Program), prior to approving replacement. o Develops classification system for window condition:  Repair Class I: Routine Maintenance; often light sanding and repaint  Repair Class II: Stabilization; some decay in wood, treated with waterproofing and wood putty  Repair Class III: Splices and Parts Replacement; some replacement of rotted window parts, etc. involved.  Anything beyond Repair Class III would be a candidate for replacement. - NPS “Evaluating Historic Windows for Repair or Replacement,” https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-evaluating.htm o This item lays out a requirement to document deterioration, and consider each window in context of how important it is to the historic character of the building (i.e., not every window is necessarily a character-defining feature, such as windows on a secondary elevation, etc.). - NPS “Documentation Requirements for Proposed Window Replacement,” https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-documentation-for-replacement.htm o This item lays out a requirement of clearly photographing existing windows (to show condition), and providing drawings showing existing and proposed windows. - NPS “Replacement Windows that Meet the Standards,” https://nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-replacement-meet-standards.htm o Includes guidance for measuring historic significance of windows in context, and notes on how close of a match a replacement needs to be depending on where it is located on a building and how important it is to the character of the building. HPC REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (FROM JULY 10, 2024 WORK SESSION) 1. FOR STAFF: Does the City consider cost of repair vs. replacement? o Not typically; The City does not consider economic hardship when considering compliance with most land use/municipal code requirements, although there are some grounds identified for a Waiver of Conditions/Modification of Standard. A Waiver of Conditions in Chapter 14 is very limited to exceptional physical hardship not of the applicant’s making, or nominal & inconsequential deviations from standard practice. o While data is pre-COVID, generally window repair on wood sash windows has been more cost-effective, long-term, than replacement, due to long-term repairability, and cost of new window units, including with modest energy upgrades (storm windows, weatherstripping, caulking around the frame, etc.). Significant energy performance upgrades would likely be more expensive than replacement, but is also usually not necessary since heat/cooling loss through windows only accounts for roughly 15% of a building’s potential energy loss, and is usually lost through or around the frame, not through the glazing (although that may be less true in this case since the windows are fairly large). o Financial incentives are available at the local and state level to help offset any additional costs related to labor, custom materials, etc. The City offers 0% interest matching loans up to 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 11 $7,500 (on $15,000 of project costs), and the State of Colorado offers a commercial 20-35%, transferable, state income tax credit on projects over $20,000. In both cases, projects must meet the federal preservation standards in order to qualify. 2. FOR STAFF: Is it typical to specify window treatments on an elevation plan or similar? o Generally yes, although something as detailed as elevation drawings are usually not necessary; a clear plan (via a table, marked up photo, etc.) is usually sufficient, provided information on condition is clear and justifies the treatment proposed, for each window (i.e., Class I – Routine Maintenance, Class II – Stabilization, Class III – Splices and Parts Replacement, or full replacement) 3. FOR STAFF – Provide summary on how window treatments were handled on first floor during 1994- 1995 rehab for comparison to current request (research needed) o Upper floor windows were not modified in the same way the street level was, so a greater degree of reconstruction was needed in 1995; upper floor windows were serviced at that time to bring them into working order. o Lower floor windows in the same configuration (1/1 wood sash) were a mix of in-place and repairable, or missing entirely and infilled. The missing 1/1 windows were replaced in-kind using the surviving windows as a template. 4. FOR STAFF & APPLICANT: Please address information on window quote from June in packet; Is this the proposed replacement? (on the assumption that the window quote included in the applicant packet is the proposed replacement material, staff will provide some comments on appropriateness relative to the federal Standards & Guidelines). o Existing Windows: From previous documentation, the existing window sashes are generally of 38”x98” rough opening (according to 1994 rehab drawings), with window parts of 1.375” width/thickness for stiles and rails. o Assumed Replacement Proposal: In the applicant’s materials, they do refer to a new window unit, the Ultra Clad Sterling XL 1.75” Sash. This product is a double hung window, dual glazed with low-E glass, and pine wood materials clad in aluminum with a fluoropolymer finish (similar to Teflon). The window unit would fit a rough opening of 36.5”x95 9/16”. Specific unit dimensions relative to existing historic windows appear to be close. As noted in the Applicant’s window assessment, the existing windows have a 1 & 3/8 inch part width, while the proposed replacement uses 1.5” parts. o Staff Assessment: As noted by the Applicant, staff would agree that aluminum clad wood windows are in common use in the historic preservation community, and have been approved on projects across the country and in the region as a reasonably in-kind replacement for upper floor windows. From staff’s experience, the aluminum-clad units have been approved by local, state, and/or federal historic preservation specialists for the following reasons:  Qualified Preservation specialists have determined that none, or most of, the historic windows are not in a condition to be repaired so a wholesale replacement, or at least a wholesale replacement on a certain building level or elevation, is warranted; and  Replaced windows are on upper floors away from close view by the public, and the design of the aluminum cladding replicates the historic closely, including any special design features such as beading (not applicable in the Linden Hotel case); and  The combination of metal cladding and wood cores combines the thermal performance of wood with the durability and weather performance of the aluminum. However, staff would note that moisture trapping under the aluminum cladding is a known issue. While less of a concern in a dry climate like northern Colorado, and in a multi-story masonry building like the Linden Hotel, it is possible that aluminum clad wood may deteriorate faster than a well-maintained all-wood or all-metal window. Considering the prominence of the building in question, wood replacements, potentially of a harder wood species than original (due to loss of density with newer- growth lumber harvests), might be more advisable. 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 12 Based on the current information, Staff would generally conclude that we don’t have evidence that windows are beyond repair at this time. The 2018 window study indicated they could be repaired to, or close to, current energy performance requirements. The Applicant’s window assessment seems to reinforce that repair is possible on the windows in their current condition. Staff would wait until the revised window study, currently underway by Deep Roots Craftsmen, is complete before determining whether the windows need replaced or not. It seems likely that repair is possible along with energy performance upgrades, at least for most units. If that is the case, then any windows in need of replacement should be replaced in-kind with matching wood windows with dual glazing. IF the historic windows are beyond repair, then the proposed solution may be acceptable with an adjustment to material (wood only). Staff would likely recommend an all-wood replacement instead, due to the easier repairability in the future, ability of the windows to be painted to match any other trim features should the color scheme of the building be revised, and to ensure a closer preservation of the building’s prominent elevations on Walnut and Linden Streets. Furthermore, at this time, the Old Town Design Standards to which this building is subject do not currently allow for substitute materials. 5. FOR APPLICANT: Any more specific information on proposed replacements (dimensions in comparison to historic, material, etc.) and why those are being selected would be appreciated. 6. FOR APPLICANT: What do residential units sell for? • Staff would caution the HPC against using any information about unit cost/list price in decision-making; even if a request for a Waiver of Conditions is made, MC 14-5 restricts how staff/the HPC can issue those to: • “exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations…not caused by the act or omission of the applicant”; and/or • “will not diverge from the [Chapter 14] except in nominal and inconsequential ways…” 7. GENERAL DISCUSSION: Consideration of, if the HPC determines there insufficient information and decides to continue the item, what the procedure is for that. INDEPENDENT EVALUATION SUMMARY Staff is seeking an independent opinion from a qualified historic window repair specialist, Deep Roots Craftsmen, at this time. FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request for the 201 Linden Street window replacement, staff makes the following findings of fact: • The property at 201 Linden Street, known as the Linden Hotel, is a City Landmark, designated individually in 1974 and included in the Old Town Landmark District in 1979. • Exterior alterations to the Linden Hotel are subject to Preservation approval under the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 14, Article IV, and the Old Town Design Standards, adopted by City Council on July 15, 2014 (replacing the 1981 Standards for the same). Staff cannot make further findings of fact regarding the application, because it is unclear, based on the information provided, that the windows are beyond repair. The information provided suggests that repair, including improvements for energy performance, are possible. RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not have a recommendation at this time due to insufficient information in the application. 3DFNHW3J Agenda Item 6 Item 6, Page 13 SAMPLE MOTIONS SAMPLE MOTION TO PROCEED TO FINAL REVIEW: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission move to Final Review of the proposed work to replace the windows at the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street. SAMPLE MOTION FOR FINAL REVIEW APPROVAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the plans and specifications for the window replacement [on the second and third floors?] to the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street as presented, finding that the proposed work meets the following U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: ____________. SAMPLE MOTION FOR FINAL REVIEW DENIAL: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission deny the request for approval for the plans and specifications for the window replacement [on the second and third floors?] to the Linden Hotel at 201 Linden Street as presented, finding that the proposed work does not meet the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. SAMPLE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE: I move that the Historic Preservation Commission continue this item to the next meeting scheduled August 21, 2024 in order to seek additional information regarding whether the proposed work meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application for Design Review (including all attachments) 2. Ordinance 1974-44 and subsequent, designating the Linden Hotel as a City Landmark 3. Excerpt from the Old Town Design Standards (pages 50-53) 4. U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 5. 2018 Barlow Window Study 6. NPS Preservation Brief #9, The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-09-wood-windows.pdf 7. NPS “Evaluating Historic Windows for Repair or Replacement,” https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-evaluating.htm 8. NPS “Documentation Requirements for Proposed Window Replacement,” https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-documentation-for-replacement.htm 9. NPS “Replacement Windows that Meet the Standards,” https://nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/windows-replacement-meet-standards.htm Packet Pg. 109 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 1 Design Review Application Historic Preservation Division Fill this form out for all applications regarding designated historic buildings within the city limits of the City of Fort Collins. Review is required for these properties under Chapter 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. Applicant Information Applicant’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence) State Zip Code Email Property Information (put N/A if owner is applicant) Owner’s Name Daytime Phone Evening Phone Mailing Address (for receiving application-related correspondence) State Zip Code Email Project Description Provide an overview of your project. Summarize work elements, schedule of completion, and other information as necessary to explain your project. Reminders: Complete application would need all of checklist items as well as both pages of this document. Detailed scope of work should include measurements of existing and proposed. The following attachments are REQUIRED: □Complete Application for Design Review □Detailed Scope of Work (and project plans, if available) □Color photos of existing conditions Please note: if the proposal includes partial or full demolition of an existing building or structure, a separate demolition application may 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). Linden Street Treehouse, LLC vy OneSeven Advisors,LLC 970.420.8897 148 Remington Street, Ste 100, Fort Collins, CO 80524 CO 80524 david@onesevenadvisors.com 201 Linden Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524 201 Linden Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524 201 Linden Avenue is a Fort Collins designated landmark property. The Owners request permission to replace the buildings windows which are one-hundred and forty-two years old, and have begun to fail, sending glass planes crashing to the sidewalk below. The Owners have taken great care to hire an expert who has authored a report (the Wernimont Report) who will replace the windows with materials and in a manner so that the replacements appear virtually identical to the original windows. Please see more details in the attached letter and report. ,7(0 $77$&+0(17 3DFNHW 3J 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. Please see attached Wernimont Report Please see attached Wernimont Report. ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 111 City of Fort Collins Design Review Application Page 3 Required Additional information The following items must be submitted with this completed application. Digital submittals preferred for photographs, and for other items where possible. At least one current photo for each side of the house. Photo files or prints shall be named/labeled with applicant name and elevation. For example, smitheast.jpg, smithwest.jpg, etc. If submitted as prints, photos shall be labeled Photos for each feature as described in the section “Detail of Proposed Rehabilitation Work.” Photo files or prints shall be named or labeled with applicant name and feature letter. For example, smitha1.jpg, smitha2.jpg, smithb.jpg, smithc.jpg, etc. Depending on the nature of the project, one or more of the following items shall be submitted. Your contractor should provide these items to you for attachment to this application. Drawing with dimensions. Product specification sheet(s). Description of materials included in the proposed work. Color sample(s) or chip(s) of all proposed paint colors. □Partial or full demolition is a part of this project. Partial demolition could include scopes such as taking off existing rear porches to create space for a new addition or removing an existing wall or demolishing a roof. If you are taking away pieces of the existing residence, you are likely undergoing some partial demolition. Signature of Owner Date ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J. Claire N. Havelda Attorney at Law 303.223.1194 direct chavelda@bhfs.com www.bhfs.com Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 303.223.1100 main 675 Fifteenth Street, Suite 2900 Denver, Colorado 80202 June 24, 2024 SENT VIA EMAIL 201 LINDEN AVENUE: WINDOW REPLACEMENT Ms. Maren Bzdek Historic Preservation Manager City of Fort Collins 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 mbzdek@fcgov.com Ms. Heather N. Jarvis Assistant City Attorney City of Fort Collins 300 Laporte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 hjarvis@fcgov.com Dear Ms. Bzdek & Ms. Jarvis: I am contacting you on behalf of my Client, the owner of the Linden Hotel located at 201 Linden Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 (“Linden Hotel Owners” or “Owners”) to request approval of their proposed window replacement plan and the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness . As one of the windows has now failed and a portion fell from the second story to the sidewalk below, the Owners seek this review of their proposed window replacement strategy. Given the long and complex history of this project, the purpose of this letter is to : 1) provide a clear background of the window replacement request to date; 2) more fully respond to the City’s November 27, 2023 “Legal Memorandum,” which contained several factual errors; and 3) supplement the Owner’s application request to replace the windows of the building in conformance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards as further described in the attached Colorado Sash and Door, Inc.’s (“Wernimont Report”) expert report. Bottom Line: The recommendations of the Barlow Report were not sufficient to overcome the fundamental flaws in the windows’ original design that the size of the components are too small and thus, never appropriate for the size of the window openings.1 As such, window failure, inferior 1 Wernimont Expert Report p. 6. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 2 weatherization and energy performance, inoperability and unsustainably expensive maintenance issues have now resulted. At this time, the only solution that meets the goals of safety, operability, energy performance, preservation of historic aesthetics and manageable maintenance costs i s replacement with products discussed in the Wernimont Report attached hereto. The replacement product is designed to be virtually visually identical to the original windows, and have the added benefit of safety, operability, robust thermal performance, energy efficiency and sustainable maintenance costs. The proposed changes result in only a one-half inch (or less) difference in the checkrail as the only visible change from the original windows; a modification that would be visually undetectable on second and third story windows. 1. Background. The Owners of the Linden Hotel have been in conversation with the City of Fort Collins (the “City”) for many years seeking to appropriately replace what are windows that do not appropriately function and do not provide the level of safe operability and weatherization performance their residence needs. To date, they have not been able to resolve the matter with the City. On October 21, 2023, part of a second story window dislodged from the second-floor window of the Linden Hotel and crashed to the sidewalk below. The Poudre Fire Authority was called to respond and aid in securing the windows as they now constituted a safety hazard for all foot traffic below.2 The City was also immediately contacted to attempt to reach a resolution. A meeting was held with the City’s Historic Preservation Staff (“HPC Staff”) on November 9, 2023, to attempt to determine a path forward to replace the windows as soon as possible. HPC Staff toured the building in late 2023. HPC Staff provided the name of a number of contractors for Owners to contact. After months of attempting contact, those who returned Owner’s contact advised that they could not timely inspect the windows or provide a report including considerations of safety, operability, and acceptable performance for the windows. 2. Historical Context. The Linden Hotel was established in 1882. The majority of windows in the Linden Hotel are believed to be original, and thus, over one-hundred and forty-two years old (142). These windows have not functioned in an acceptable manner since at least 2005 (or almost 20 years). It bears mentioning, that prior to its Landmark designation, the Linden Hotel was in a state of complete and utter disrepair. Tens of thousands of dollars in combined private money has been spent by the owners to r ehabilitate 2 See Poudre Fire Authority Incident Report October 21, 2023. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 3 the building. Rehabilitating the building was such a monumental feat that the then owners of the building were awarded the City’s “Friend of Preservation” Award for “courageous effort” to re store it. The Linden Hotel was in such disrepair that in 1994, four of the Linden Hotel windows were replaced when the west wall collapsed during the rehabilitation project.3 In 2005, (19 years ago) a window assessment was completed in 2005 which documented the inoperability of the windows and noted that repairs such as adding inner glass storm windows would make all windows inoperable. That same year, the former building owners proposed replacing some of the then one-hundred- and twenty-three-year-old (123) windows. However, this was never approved by the City. In 2018, the Linden Hotel was remodeled to change from office use to residential use, on the second and third floors. During that approval process, the current Owners informed the City that they intended to clean and re-glaze the windows.4 In August of 2018, Mr. Wernimont of Colorado Sash and Door, Inc. (the Owner’s Window Expert), contacted the then director of the City’s Historic Preservation Department (the “Director”). In his August 22, 2018, email correspondence to the Director, he notes multiple areas in which he had concerns regarding the design of the windows and the ability of the balance system to accommodate their weight.5 He also specifically requests time to meet with the City to discuss these matters. In September of 2018, the Landmark Preservation Commission’s Design Review Subcommittee provided a recommendation of approval for the administrative design review regarding replacement of the four windows on the west wall “due to their lack of significance.”6 In November of 2018, City Staff ordered a historic windows report from Barlow Cultural Resources Consulting, LLC (the “Barlow Report”). However, the entire focus of this report was focused on restoring the appearance of the windows, not on the combined objectives of safety, performance, sustainability and operability of the windows. The closest the Barlow Report comes to addressing functionality and safety of the windows is to say: The existing windows do not perform up to the energy efficiency or noise reduction standards desired. The fact that historic windows do not meet modern standards is not a valid argument for replacement. There are acceptable treatments that can be applied to meet the desired goals while still adhering to historic preservation guidelines.7 3 See December 2018 Staff Report, Items 3. P.3. 4 See December 2018 Staff Report, Item 3 p.3 5 See Email Correspondence from M. Wernimont to Karen McWilliams, August 22, 2018. 6 See December 2018 Staff Report, Items 3. P.3. 7 Barlow Report, p. 21. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB D SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 4 However, the solution proposed is to add storm windows on the inside of the building. Nowhere in that Barlow Report is the issue of operability of the windows, sustainability or the safety ramifications such inoperability satisfactorily addressed. The Owners expressed grave concerns and objected that the Barlow Report was inaccurate and did not address their very real safety, operability and performance issues. The Owner’s expert’s opinion that its proposed plan to replace the windows met the Standards for Rehabilitation in 36 Code of Federal Register Section 68.3 because the “existing window frames and sills are severely deteriorated,” was rejected. Instead, City Staff recommended denial of the request to replace the Linden Hotel windows, citing the Barlow Report. 3. Correcting the Facts: “Onset” of Window Failure Disputed. On November 27, 2023, Assistant City Attorney Heather Jarvis issued a legal memorandum (“Legal Memorandum”) that contained a number of factual errors and accusations of misconduct on the part of the Owners. The City’s Legal Memorandum’s claim that the “third-party professional historic window expert the City hired in the autumn of 2018’s” observation of the deteriorated condition attributing the “the onset” of the deterioration to repair work done in early 2018, which wholly ignores the fact that the windows were then 136 years old and had not functioned appropriately for at least 20 years prior. Next, the damage and destabilization to the 142-year-old windows the Legal Memorandum references was not the result of work performed in the Spring of 2018. This is an erroneous statement that essentially makes a legal conclusion as to a violation of City Code Section 14-51 without the due process protections of a full hearing on the matter as required by the Fort Collins’ Municipal Code (“Code”). It also disregards the fact that the windows were then 136 years old. In all fairness, there was 136 years’ worth of weather damage done and design inefficiencies in place before the current maintenance efforts ever began. To discount this is wildly inappropriate, and any “expert opinion” that says otherwise stretches the bounds of common sense. The Barlow Report states vaguely that it reviewed the 2018 corrective measures and “suggested corrective measures that would meet the standards while also meeting the stated goals of easier operation with improved energy efficiency.”8 But it does not address the heart of the matter, that the windows do not operate at a level of safety, operability and performance appropriate for a residential dwelling. 8 July 11, 2019, Letter from Phillip Barlow to City of Fort Collins, pg. 1. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 5 3.a. Reliance on the Outdated 2018 Barlow Report. The Legal Memorandum’s claim that the Linden Hotel Owners’ failure to follow the recommendations of the 2018 Barlow Report somehow caused the 2023 window failures (where a portion of the second floor window fell to the sidewalk below) misrepresents the facts. The 2018 Barlow Report states that its entire evaluation consisted for “deconstructing one window to determine the scope of the previous repairs and alterations, and examining all windows visually to determine if conditions were consistent around the building.”9 The Barlow Report further misidentifies the goals of the repairs as being to “meet the goals of energy efficiency and sound reduction,”10 while completely ignoring goals of operability, sustainability and safety. The Barlow Report then goes on to state that its recommendations are meant to further to Secretary of the Interior’s Goals for Rehabilitation.11 Yet, in many instances, the Barlow Report found that the Secretary of Interior Standards were not met because the proposed window rehabilitation measures did not “address retention of historic materials.” What is concerning about this statement is that the “historic materials” that fail to function acceptably are largely located on the interior of the building and replacement of both interior and exterior “historic materials” would have no impact on the appearance of the windows from the outside. The Barlow Report also fails to address the fact that the design of the windows was fundamentally flawed from the beginning.12 Subsequently, Mr. Barlow was asked to review mitigation work completed after the 2018 Hearing . Again, the focus of the 2019 Barlow Review of the 2018 work was never to address safety, operability, sustainability and performance issues. Rather, it focused its commentary on prior work completed on the windows and how that work impacted the interior aesthetics of the windows and removing glass panes that were used to improve insulation. Since the time of the 2018 Barlow Report, six additional years of heavy snow, moisture, extreme cold and a global pandemic (making maintenance extremely difficult) have occurred. Further, additional window restoration was completed in October of 2018 and September of 2019. 9 Barlow Report, dated November 29, 2018, Summary of Findings. (No page numbers identified – Agenda Packet Item 3 Attachment 13 p. 132). 10 Id. and page. 152. 11 Id. 12 Barlow Report, at packet pg. 137-140 H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 6 3.b. City’s Mischaracterization of the 2019 Certificate of Appropriateness Procedures and Review. The Legal Memorandum then leaps ahead to February of 2020 wherein it claims a Certificate of Appropriateness for window repair was issued by the City based on recommendations of the 2018 Barlow Report. In reality, the Linden Hotel Owners had been in ongoing communication with the City regarding requested repairs to/replacement of the windows since 2018. There appears to be some confusion as to whether the general contractor (Dohn Construction) obtained appropriate permissions from the Landmark Preservation Department before engaging Colorado Sash and Door to complete window restoration work in October of 2018. However, in May of 2019, the former Historic Preservation Manager, Ms. Karen McWilliams, was contacted in an effort to get approval for “sample window” work to be performed which needed the Landmark Preservation Commission’s approval as a condition precedent to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy. In July of 2019 she was contacted again.13 Ms. McWilliams notified the Owners that the request would need to be approve by the Landmark Preservation Commission (the “LPC”) at their next meeting in June. However, Ms. McWilliams never scheduled the matter for June of 2019 and the meeting was cancelled for lack of quorum. In his follow-up email to her to check on the status of approval on July 2, 2019, Mark Wernimont (Owner’s Window Expert) resent the proposed scope of work outlined for the windows based on feedback from the City and its experts. In her email apologizing for the confusion Ms. McWilliams stated that “it appeared that the work likely meets the Standards and is straightforward enough that it could be revised at the staff level, rather than at an LPC meeting. I’ll be able to confirm this later this week.”14 On July 12, 2019, Ms. McWilliams completed the review and approves the work via email.15 For its part, the Barlow group, upon review of this work stated, “Following its review, BCRC (“Barlow”) believes that all the scope items either comply with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards or had previously been recommended as a reasonable compromise.”16 On July 15, 2019, the HPM issues a Certificate of Appropriateness (“COA”) for “Approval of Plans dated July 1, 2019, to Restore and Rehabilitate 2nd and 3rd Floor Historic Windows, Linden Hotel, 201 Linden Street” and Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The entirety of the COA is quoted 13 Letter from Mark Wernimont to Karen McWilliams dated 7/1/2019. 14 7/10/2019 email from Karen McWilliams to Mark Wernimont. 15 7/12/2019 email from K. McWilliams. 16 7/12/2019 Staff Report re: 201 Linden Street, Linden Hotel Windows – Design Review. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 7 below. Nowhere, does it reference the COA as being conditioned upon further modifications outlined in the Barlow Report. Rather, it states in its entirety: Dear Mr. Wernimont, This Certificate of Appropriateness provides you with confirmation that the proposed work to restore and rehabilitate the 2nd and 3rd floor historic windows in the Linden Hotel, 201 Linden Street, has been reviewed and approved by the City’s Historic Preservation Division staff. Staff finds that the proposed work meets the criteria and standards in Chapter 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, including the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Old Town Historic District Design Standards. Please note that all ensuring work must conform to the approved plans. Any non - conforming alterations or changes to the plans are subject to stop-work orders, denial of Certificate of Occupancy, and restoration requirements and penalties. If the approved work is not completed prior to the expiration date noted above, you may apply for an extension by contacting staff at least 30 days prior to the expiration. Extensions may be granted for up to 12 additional months, based on a satisfactory staff review of the extension request. If you have any questions regarding this approval, or if I may be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. I may be reached at kmcwilliams@fcgov.com or 970-224-6078. Sincerely, Karen McWilliams Historic Preservation Division Manager Subsequently, the Owners engaged in rehabilitation and maintenance work to ensure the windows safety. In an abundance of caution, the City and the Owner’s representative met to discuss the repairs that were undertaken. The former Community and Neighborhood Services Director for the City of Fort Collins, Mr. Tom Leeson, clarified to the manager of 201 Linden Street that a Certificate of Appropriateness was not required for the repair work the Owners had engaged in. His exact words were: H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB E SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 8 I interpret this to mean that if you are not proposing to “replace” the windows, that a Certificate of Appropriateness is not required. Therefore, a Certificate of Appropriateness is not required, and you may proceed with the alterations to the windows as proposed.17 Thus, for the City to insinuate that the Owners failed to comply with minimum maintenance requirements and thereby violated City Code section 14-7 and 14-51(d) is inaccurate and unnecessarily hostile. 3.c. Early 2020 to Early 2023. It is worth pointing out that from early 2020 until early 2023, the City of Fort Collins, (along with the rest of society), was largely shutdown or had greatly reduced productivity due to the COVID -19 Pandemic. (It bears mentioning that the City itself had approximately thirty -percent staff turn-over during this time and development projects and historic reviews were backlogged for extensive periods.) Even if the Linden Hotel Owners had wanted to move forward with additional repair to the windows, it would have been virtually impossible to do so in that time frame. 3.d. Correcting the City’s Inaccurate Statements. The City’s Legal Memorandum engages in an inaccurate recitation of the facts and blames the Linden Hotel Owners for the failure of the windows is inappropriate and prejudicial. To argue in the Legal Memorandum that there was “no change in circumstance” because the Linden Hotel Owners did not undertake action in exact conformance with an outdated 2018 Barlow Report is nonsensical. The Barlow Report never addressed the fundamental design flaw that has caused the majority of the resulting safety, operability, and performance issues the one-hundred and forty-two-year-old windows are now exhibiting. For the Legal Memorandum to take that claim a step further and argue that the Linden Hotel Owners failed to comply with the International Property Maintenance Code and use this as a pretense to deny their request to move forward with addressing very real safety, operability and performance claims in their building is a clear violation of the Linden Hotel Owners’ due process rights. 4. The Wernimont Expert Report: Moving Forward. The Linden Hotel Owners received a list of proposed City experts to provide the City with guidance as to how the matter should best proceed with repair or replacement of the dangerous condition th e 17 Email communication from Tom Leeson, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director of February 26, 2020. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 9 current windows may present if not addressed. After months of attempting to reach these experts, none of these proposed experts could take on the project in a timely fashion and none would sufficiently consider the operability, performance and resident safety needs of the windows in their analysis. The Linden Hotel Owners and the residents of the building simply cannot wait any longer to have this matter resolved. Therefore, they reengaged Mark Wernimont to provide a study and assessment in the hopes of finally resolving this matter. The Owners attempted to have the matter heard in June, but the Historic Preservation Commissions schedule could not accommodate this hearing until July 2024. Mr. Wernimont’s expert report takes into account historical relevant Secretary of Interior Standards as well as operability, environmental and safety concerns, which the Barlow Report failed to do. It is also important to note that the Secretary of the Interior Standards (“SOIS”) put forth guidelines intended to promote responsible preservation practices. However, the SOIS website notes that its standards “cannot, in and of themselves, be used to make essential decisions about which features of the historic building should be saved and which can be changed. But, once a treatment is selected, the Standards and Guidelines provide a consistent philosophical approach to the work.”18 Due to the fundamental design flaws of the windows and the very real safety, operability and performance risks they present, as outlined in the Wernimont Report, replacement of the Linden Hotel windows is the appropriate course of action. 5. Secretary of the Interior Standards. According to the SOIS website, when replacement of portions of historic buildings is necessary, “replacement material must match the old . . . with the exception of hidden structural reinforcement.” 19 The Wernimont Report meets this objective by selecting materials and replacement that are visually indistinguishable from the originals. All told, the only visual change to the windows would be a one-half (or less) increase to the chair rail of the windows, which will be visually undetectable on these second and third story windows from the street below. Even the SOIS “Restoration” standards and the Barlow Report acknowledge that “when 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.”20 This is exactly what the Owners are attempting to achieve. 18 https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historic-properties.htm 19 https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/treatment-guidelines-2017-part1-preservation-rehabilitation.pdf. Introduction P. 28. 20 Id. and Barlow Report, at packet pg. 133. See Exhibit 1 H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 10 With regards to window specific rehabilitation, the SOIS Treatment Guidelines21 provides that: • “Replacing in kind an entire window that is too deteriorated to repair using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documentation. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered.” Additionally, the SOIS recommends replacing all components of the glazing system if they have failed because of faulty design or materials that have deteriorated with new mater that will improve the window performance without noticeably changing the historic appearance. Finally, where replacement is necessary for the entire window, the SOIS recommends using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. It acknowledges that if using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. T he new work may be unobtrusively dated to guide future research and treatment.” 22 6. City Goals and Policies. 6.a. Historic Preservation. The replacement windows meet the City’s stated Historic Preservation goals of building safety, environmental, sustainability, performance, operability and long-term sustainability of historic resources. The City’s stated policy declaration for the Historic Preservation Committee states: (a) It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects and districts of historic, architectural, archeological, or geographic significance, located within the City, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people. (b) It is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this City cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architectural, archeological and geographical heritage of the City and by ignoring the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets.23 21 https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/treatment-guidelines-2017-part2-reconstruction-restoration.pdf. See Exhibit 2. 22 Id. See Exhibit 3. 23 Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-1. ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 11 Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-2 outlines purpose of Historic Preservation governance as being to: • stabilize or improve aesthetic and economic vitality and values of such sites, structures objects and districts; • promote the use of important historical structures; • promote the use of architectural sites and structures for the education, stimulation and welfare of the people of the City; • promote and encourage continued private ownership and utilization of such sites, structures, objects or districts now so owned and used; and • Promote economic, social and environmental sustainability through ongoing “use” of existing buildings.24 Further, replacement of the windows has only a minimal exterior visual impact on the historic character of the building. A less than one-half inch deviation in the chair rail, not visible from the street in the second and third floor windows cannot be credibly claimed to n egatively impact the historic architectural character of the building. The same can be said of replacement materials that are visually indistinguishable from original materials. The architectural style, arrangement and perceptible texture of the street facing materials in maintained. The replacement windows would in no way change or destroy the exterior characteristics of the building, but rather would serve to retain the visual integrity and prevent further exterior deterioration. The proposed work, as discussed above meets the SOIS for warranted replacement of historic materials. Approving the replacement windows meets all of the listed Historic Preservation purposes. To require repair of windows with fundamentally flawed design undermines these polic ies and ignores other equally important City policies related to life/safety concern, sustainability, private property owner control and maintenance of property, and long-term preservation of historic buildings. A narrow interpretation of the SOIS regarding the priority of replacement of historic materials without consideration of the City’s (and property owners’) other equally important goals serves only to undermine the longevity of the City’s goal to “promote economic, social and environmental sustainability through use of historic buildings.” Simply put, if the City refuses to view needed replacement work to landmarked properties in the appropriate context of serving multiple City and property owner goals, it will continue to 24 Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-2 ,7(0$77$&+0(17 3DFNHW3J SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 12 have a chilling effect on private property owners stepping forward to take on the colossal task of preserving these buildings. 6.b. Safety and Sustainability Goals. It is critical to recognize that the Historic Preservation Goals do not exist in a vacuum and other, equally important City goals and policies must also be considered in making decisions that impact other City priorities. Specifically, safety and building code compliance, support of private property rights, and climate goals must be taken into account. Common sense building safety would prioritize residential buildings with operable and functioning windows. Requiring repair of the Linden Hotel windows over replacement does not account for this. The International Code Council section 403.1 that provides guidance on the International Property Maintenance Standards requires that every Habitable Space has at least one openable window. The total openable area of the window in every room shall be equal to at least 45 percent of the minim glazed area.25 When a private property owner wishes to provide operable windows in its residential buildings to support the buildings long -term utilization, this is a factor that the City should weigh heavily as a recognition of private property owner rights. The same can be said of factoring in the City and private property owners’ sustainability goals. Turning to larger scale sustainability goals, the City of Fort Collins Our Climate Future adopted policy documents recognize that “[a]cting on climate change is urgent and we recognize it will take our community actively working together to address the challenge. . . Our Climate Future expresses our unwavering commitment to mitigating climate change with a systematic approach that is centered in people and community priorities.”26 One of the clearly stated objectives of the Climate Future policy document is to have “Efficient, Emissions Free Buildings.”27 The City espouses similar goals in the creation of a Fort Collins “Our Climate Future Action Guide” of reducing home and business carbon emissions and improving energy efficiency. 28 The buildings in Fort Collins compromise over two-thirds of its carbon emissions to provide for heating, cooling, lighting etc.29 Demanding strict adherence to the SOIS 25 International Code Council’s International Property Maintenance Standards of the International Property Maintenance Code p. 4. The City has largely adopted the International Residential Building Codes, but only minor edits to the body of that document are available within the Code or on the City’s website. Thus, such regulations spec ifications are inaccessible to average residents. 26 City of Fort Collins, Our Climate Future Plan p. 4. 27 Id. at p. 25, 42-43. 28 City of Fort Collins, Our Climate Action Guide p. 7 29 Our Climate Future Plan p. 42. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 13 Rehabilitation over Replacement standards defeats these goals. The Owners support the City’s commitment to these climate action goals and seek to further them through replacing windows at 201 Linden with those that have far superior energy efficiency but are visually virtually indistinguishable from the originals. Additionally, the replacement windows meet the City’s 2024 adopted International Building Codes: • Item 1015.8 for Window Opening operability for windows 72’’ from exterior grade; • Item 1609.3 Wind Loading. This standard established a required wind loading capability of 140 mph ultimate for sural performance of all exterior items; • Item 3603.2 Sound Control. This requires the exterior wall assembly meet an STC 39 when within 1,000 feet of an active train line – which the Linden Hotel is; and • the Dessing Pressure rating for the windows. The replacement windows serve to protect, enhance and perpetuate the use of the 201 Linden Street property as a residential building. The investment in quality replacement also significantly decreases the ongoing maintenance needs required by the current windows, which, frankly, are unsustainable. The Owners posit that if the City carefully weighed all applicable City policy goals and objectives and private property owners’ rights together, it would conclude that replacement of the 201 Linden Hotel windows is appropriate and far more supportive of the City’s long-term goals than never-ending piecemeal rehabilitation efforts. 7. Conclusion. The Linden Hotel Owners request that this letter be made part of the packet for the Historic Preservation Commission’s review and further request a combined Conceptual and Final Review pursuant to Section 14-5430 of the City Code, the approval of their proposed window replacement and the issuance of a new Certificate of Appropriateness. At this time, for reasons of safety, operability, and performance, the one-hundred- and forty-six-year- old windows in at 201 Linden Street must be replaced. The Owners are committed to the 30 The Owners will leave it to Staff’s discretion whether HPC review or Staff review is appropriate under Section 14-53. H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB D SENT VIA EMAIL Ms. Maren Bzdek Ms. Heather N. Jarvis June 24, 2024 Page 14 preservation and maintenance of the entire 201 Linden Street property and the proposed window replacements meet the purpose and policies of the Landmark Preservation and the City as a whole. To require conformance with the SOIS on rehabilitation for windows that have fundamentally flawed design, when replacement meets the City goals of historic preservation, safety and environmental performance, is poor public policy. The Historic Preservation Commission is encouraged to review the situation wholistically taking into account the City’s building standards for safety, operability of windows, weatherization and environmental performance standards and the feasibility of maintaining 201 Linden Street for the next one-hundred years. Sincerely, Claire N. Havelda cc: David Diehl 29722449.1 H7(0 $77$F+0(17 3MFNHP 3JB ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 127 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 128 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 129 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 130 Colorado Sash & Door, Inc, 4521 Endeavor Drive, Unit C Johnstown, Colorado 80534 Window Assessment For: 2nd and 3rd Floor Windows At 201 Lindon Street For Collins, Colorado 80521 Wood Window Restorations 1993/1994 2019/2020 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 131 201 Linden Building Window Information, Past Repairs and Proposed Replacement 201 Linden was built 1n 1882, and the windows have been worked on many times over the years. Prior work that we are aware of was in 1997/1998 where it is not clear if more work was done on them other than scrape or paint. In 2018/2019 a full restoration of the window sashes was completed. At this time the intent was to replace any damaged window parts, make the windows more energy efficient, better sound control and better able to keep air, dirt and insects out of the build- ing. At that point roughly 30% of the upper sash check rails had to be replaced due to sagging and deterioration. What was making these parts fail were the 1 3/8” thickness and very narrow check rail size.. All of the components used in this building were the same as windows in modest homes of the same time. However the openings in this build- ing are lager than doors in those same structures. The majority of the windows in this project have a 39” x 98” masonry opening. If the components would have been done with 1 3/4” thickness and of larger size, which we have found in simi- lar sized commercial building, the failure of the check rail most likely would have not happened. After the assessment of the current window conditions, I will provide a drawing that shows what the component sizes used in this building are along the size com- ponents in other similar structures as well as the sizing for the replacement win- dow requesting to be used to replace the existing windows. ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 132 201 Linden Window Conditions May 2024 We were asked to go in and review the cur- rent conditions of the windows. Since the renovation work was completed, the win- dows on both floors had an acrylic panel in- stalled to the inside that did not fill the opening to the top as 8’ sheets were used. I was told that this was to help control air in- filtration and keep dust down. To facilitate this, the metal recessed sash lifts had been removed and a wood stop installed on the sills. Sill Stop with New Acrylic Panel Acrylic Panel Removed Sash Screwed Together Just prior to our site visit the interior sections of acrylic were removed, believing that we would be able to operate the windows. However, we found that there were no windows that we could operate. In some locations both sash had been screwed together. All of the windows on the 2nd floor were caulked shut and the windows on the 3rd floor were at least painted shut if not caulked shut as well. A few Openings on the 3rd floor had hinged interior Storm Windows installed. ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 133 We found that 30% plus of the upper window sash were not fully up in the frame. The meeting of the upper and lower sash did not happen. There were a few gaps be- tween the upper sash and the window frame. On around 10% of the window sash the RDG panel was not attached to the lower sash. It was Leaning against the acrylic panel or sitting on the sill. The tabs and screws that held them in place were not engaged. In a few spots an additional screw were added in the center of the bot- tom which seemed like a good solution. The interior of all the window were painted black and this was mostly in good condition. There was some paint removed with taking down the acrylic panels but did not show much issue. However on the exterior the sills in a lot of loca- tions the sills did show paint failure down and including the primer on the frames. A few locations showed failure of the paint on the sash. We were not able to do a full assessment on the exterior with the exterior acrylic in place and needing to close the sidewalk for a lift to get to these windows. However we were able to photos of most of the surfaces prone to failure. Upper Sash Sitting Below the Lower Sash at the Check Rail Correct Fitment of Upper Sash Tab Not Engaged, RDG is Loose Added Screw for RDG, ,7(0 $77$&+0(17 3DFNHW 3J Exterior sill paint failing on all these. Note the exterior acrylic panel in place and in the photo below the interior acrylic panel is still in place. ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 135 The one section we did key in on was the upper sash check rail. The check rail is the bottom of the upper sash and top of the low- er sash where the two sash meet. We were told that one of the window parts came off and hit the sidewalk. We have photo of this sash and the missing part. With the restora- tion in 2019/2020 rough- ly 35% of these parts were replaced. Replaced Check Rail Failing Check Rail Part That Fell Sash With The Missing Check Rail ,7(0 $77$&+0(17 3DFNHW 3J These sections are very thin for a window of this size. You can see the parts that were replace in the photos. In the photos attached you will see that there are 1 or 2 rails that show some signs of failing. We are not sure how similar these are to the one that failed but we are almost a year later. These are on the same side and just a few windows away from the one that failed. Around these sash where the check rail is failing are several that had been re- placed with the restoration. These still look in good condition today. If the sash are to be left in place, a wood support block running from the sill up to the bottom of the upper sash could be installed. They would sit in the pocket where the upper sash would have moved down. At the same time the upper sash should be moved fully up in the frame so that the check rails may meet and provide the seal as they were designed. Along with this work, the exterior needs to be cleaned scraped primed and painted again. This process will most likely need to be done every 5 or so years based on the dark color and amount of sun light these windows are exposed to. I had believed and stated with the window survey done in 2016 prior to the last work, that the compo- nent sizes on these windows were sized for use in windows of much smaller openings. I still be- lieve this today. These openings are larger than windows just restored in the Carnegie Building here in Fort Collins for the City, but all of the components are thicker and wider than what is in the 201 Linden Building. A replacement window system that was used on the alley windows had been proposed. This rep- licated the window dimensions including the daylight openings with in a 1/4” except at the check rail, which is the part that is failing. Along with this all wood option with a factory paint that carries a 10 year warranty, we can rep- licate the sash, frame and trim in aluminum clad wood. These windows have the same profiles as the all wood units.. The gloss of paint is also the same as painted wood but it provides the owner with a 30 year warranty on the finish. Examples of these are in buildings following. This is a small sample of Historic Approved Buildings with replaced windows. Sample Replacement Window in Storage ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 137 Insert Window Replacement Information Pro Quote on Window Options Information on Ultra Clad Windows Specifics for Ultra Clad Sterling XL Double Hung Windows Sections and Special Trim for Windows Wind Facts Information for Wind Loading ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 138 Th Tivoli Building was replicated with an all metal exterior so painting was not needed. This including the exterior of the sash, frame, brickmould, sills, mull co- vers and decorative trim blocks. All of this matched the original profiles. Simu- lated divide lights were done to match the original. This included some sash that had none. ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 139 The Windsor Mill was re- placed with aluminum clad wood windows. Similar brickmould as this project. The heavy timber sill was rep- licated as well as the radius trim. The different color top was done to note the section removed by the tornado but the window details are the same. This project has simu- lated divided lights to match the true divided lights of the original building ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 140 Existing Sash Set for Rope and Weight Dash Line Represents Wood Removed Sash With Prep For Spiral Balance and Interior RDG Note That All Work is On The Interior Nothing Shows on the Exterior 201 Linden 24008 3 of 3 Prep for RDG and Spiral Balance . 201 Linden Street Fort Collins, Colorado .. . . 06/15/2024 Full SizeMJW REVISION: 3 2 1 DRAWN BY FIRST ISSUE DATE SCALE ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR PROJECT TITLE OF DRAWING DRAWING NO. PROJECT NO. Colorado Sash & Door, Inc. 4521 Endeavor Drive, Unit C Johnstown, Colorado 80534 ph (970) 226-1460, Cell (970) 402-2623 office@colosash.com ITEM 6, ATTAC+MENT 1 Packet Pg. 141 11 4" 13 4"21 4" 2116" Existing Checkrail Commercial Checkrai Replacement Checkrail 201 Linden 24008 2 of 3 Check Rail at Upper and Lower Sash . 201 Linden Street Fort Collins, Colorado .. . . 06/15/2024 9" = 1'-0"MJW REVISION: 3 2 1 DRAWN BY FIRST ISSUE DATE SCALE ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR PROJECT TITLE OF DRAWING DRAWING NO. PROJECT NO. Colorado Sash & Door, Inc. 4521 Endeavor Drive, Unit C Johnstown, Colorado 80534 ph (970) 226-1460, Cell (970) 402-2623 office@colosash.com I7EM 6, $77$C+ME17 1 3acket 3g. 142 13 4" 21 4" 13 8" 2" 201 Linden 24008 1 of 3 Sash Side and Head . 201 Linden Street Fort Collins, Colorado .. . . 06/15/2024 9" = 1'-0"MJW REVISION: 3 2 1 DRAWN BY FIRST ISSUE DATE SCALE ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR PROJECT TITLE OF DRAWING DRAWING NO. PROJECT NO. Colorado Sash & Door, Inc. 4521 Endeavor Drive, Unit C Johnstown, Colorado 80534 ph (970) 226-1460, Cell (970) 402-2623 office@colosash.com I7EM 6, $77$CHME17 1 3acNet 3J. 143 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 144 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 145 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 146 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 147 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 148 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 149 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 150 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 151 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 152 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 153 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 154 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 155 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 156 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 157 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 158 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 159 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 160 ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 161