Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHistoric Preservation Commission - MINUTES - 08/20/20258/20/25 – MINUTES Historic Preservation Commission REGULAR MEETING August 20, 2025 – 5:30 PM Council Chambers, City Hall 300 Laporte Ave Also via Zoom • CALL TO ORDER Chair Gibson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. • ROLL CALL o Commission Members Present –  Bonnie Gibson (Chair)  Margo Carlock (Vice Chair)  Jenna Edwards  Jeff Gaines  Jim Rose o Commission Members Absent –  Chris Conway  Aaron Hull  David Woodlee o Staff Members Present –  Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner  Heather Jarvis, Assistant City Attorney  Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner  Kai Kleer, City Planner  Melissa Matsunaka, PZC Admin o Guest(s) –  None • AGENDA REVIEW Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, reviewed the published agenda. • COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ON ITEMS ON OR NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW No items were pulled from consent. 8/20/25 – MINUTES • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JUNE 18, 2025. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 18, 2025 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Vice Chair Carlock made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Rose, to approve the Consent Agenda. Yeas: Carlock, Edwards, Gaines, Rose, and Gibson. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, noted the Historic Homes Tour, co-sponsored by the Poudre Landmarks Foundation and the City of Fort Collins, is September 13th. • COMMISSIONER REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • CONSENT AGENDA FOLLOW UP None. • DISCUSSION AGENDA 2. 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, highlighted a design review for 531 South College Avenue, the First Presbyterian Church. She noted the project involved the addition of an elevator tower and replacement of air conditioning window units with salvaged window sashes from the area where the elevator tower is being installed. Jones also highlighted some recent educational programs, including the Big Splash at the 1883 Water Works and the Juneteenth community celebration. Upcoming events include a pre-Historic Homes Tour lecture event and the Historic Homes Tour. Jones provided a reminder about the Historic Preservation newsletter. 3. SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING DEMOLITION NOTIFICATION – 1617 PERSON CT. 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 STAFF: Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner 8/20/25 – MINUTES STAFF PRESENTATION Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Planner, stated this item is a single-unit dwelling demolition notification for the property at 1617 Person Court. She noted these notifications occur for properties that are over 50 years old and are proposed for demolition, but are not otherwise subject to development review historic preservation regulations. She stated this usually occurs for single-unit dwellings that are proposed for demolition and replacement with a new single-unit dwelling, which is the case in this instance. Jones stated these notification processes involve the posting of a notice of demolition sign at the property, posting information on the Historic Preservation website and City newsletters, and HPC notification. She stated the Commission can acknowledge the demolition notification and take no further action or make a motion to initiate a landmark designation process against the wishes of the property owner. Jones showed photos of the site and discussed the limited history of the home. She also noted the staff report contains a summary of the exterior building permits that have been pulled for the property. Jones provided demolition metric estimates of the embodied energy, salvageable volume, and salvageable value of the existing home. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Carrie Kingery, applicant, stated the goal is to make the property more functional by constructing a single-family home that will internally connect to the existing two-story garage. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None. COMMISSION DISCUSSION None. Chair Gibson stated the Commission acknowledges the notification and will take no further action. 4. THE LINDEN, 360 LINDEN STREET – FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DESCRIPTION: the larger of which will be mixed-use. The project includes approximately 2,500ft2 of commercial space and a total of 160 housing units. Of those 160 units, a submitted affidavit indicates 20%, or 32 units, will be affordable. OWNER/ APPLICANT: STAFF: Realty Capital Residential (Spencer Long, representing) 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway, Ste 150 Irving, TX 75039 Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner STAFF PRESENTATION Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, stated this is a final development review for the project at 360 Linden, The Linden. He stated the role of the Commission is to provide a formal recommendation to the decision maker, which is the Community Development Director in this case. Bertolini outlined the proposed 5-story mixed-use project with office and commercial on the ground floor and apartments above. He noted 20% of the 160 units will be designated as affordable. 8/20/25 – MINUTES Bertolini described the historic area of adjacency and noted this project is largely about design compatibility as there are no historic resources on the development site. He noted the Union Pacific freight depot immediately abuts the site on Linden Street and the Harmony Mill abuts the site as it approaches Lincoln Avenue, and there are other nearby historic buildings. Bertolini provided renderings of the proposed site plan and building elevations. He outlined the applicable Code requirements and discussed the ways in which the plan meets those requirements. He noted the lap siding has been eliminated and replaced with cement stucco, though concerns remain about the extensive use of white stucco and Planning staff have recommended a different color. Additionally, he noted Planning staff have expressed concern about the lack of a recognizable building base and lack of cornice articulation. Bertolini noted there are interpretive panels on all four corners of the intersection; however, they are outdated and need some improvement. He noted they will likely be addressed by a City- funded project in the future. He also noted archeological monitoring will be required as the project site overlaps with the known location of the original Fort Collins military post. Bertolini provided some suggested discussion questions for the Commission and noted no public comments have been received on the project. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Lupe Cantu, Davis Partnership Architects, discussed design work that is being done to articulate the three dimensionality of the parapet sides and to address concerns about the base of the building. He noted the striation that created the previous checkerboard effect has been eliminated. He commented on the activation of the buildings on Linden and Willow and further discussed the articulation of the buildings. Cantu noted work is being done with the landscape team to ensure that elements that carry over within the buildings’ articulation may their way into the landscaping. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None. COMMISSION QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION Commissioner Gaines asked about the critical constraint on the brick massing width. Cantu replied the primary determination of the overall width is based on the height that is being articulated. He stated the goal is to provide a level of proportionality between the width and the height. He stated the Linden side treatment is in reference to the depot building. Chair Gibson commended the design changes and thanked the applicant for listening to the Commission’s feedback. Commissioner Rose asked about the upper cornice added element. Cantu replied they are continuing to work on that element and have worked through the two-foot difference between the higher parapets and the lower parapets to include an articulated channel. Commissioner Gaines commended the design changes and stated the building seems more orderly. He commented on an area of the elevation that he stated makes the brick mass feel flimsy and stuck on to the building. He suggested the brick mass could be widened to help give the building a stronger sense of base. He commended the idea of building in the planters along the building base and questioned the design of one of the building’s corners. Cantu commented on working through some of the design with Planning staff to make the brick stand out. He stated changes could be made with the stucco and brick. He also commented on the corner component and noted there is a photograph of the original fort showing soldiers sitting on the balcony and looking out, which the crow’s nest corner design is intended to mimic. He also noted there are four inches of pull in on the blue stucco above the brick, but stated the brick could be extended. Commissioner Gaines suggested bringing the brick further out so it has larger sense of mass extending out from the plane of stucco. Cantu replied there is a question as to how to programmatically make that work with the building and drainage plane. 8/20/25 – MINUTES Commissioner Gaines stated expressing a better sense of solidity would help with the building feeling less flimsy overall. Cantu replied he would be willing to do that above the step back; however, building the overall form larger would go against the current formality that is required for the overall bays and would be difficult to achieve. Chair Gibson stated staff has stated all applicable Code standards are met with the possible exception of fenestration. She asked Commissioners if there are any additional concerns about that. No comments were made. Vice Chair Carlock made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Rose, that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend to the decision maker approval of the two five-story buildings for housing and commercial uses, known as The Linden project at 360 Linden Street. This recommendation is based on review of the findings in the staff report, the applicant materials and presentation, and information received at this hearing. Specifically, the Commission finds that the project complies with the requirements under Land Use Code Section 5.8.1(F). Yeas: Carlock, Edwards, Gaines, Rose, and Gibson. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 5. 1000 W. PROSPECT ROAD – CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Development application at 1000 W. Prospect Rd to include adaptive reuse of the existing historic house (Landmark Eligible), relocation and incorporation of the historic garage, and construction of a new six story multi-unit residential building on the east half of the site. OWNER/ APPLICANT: STAFF: Kurt Basford (Design professional); Ezra H. Headrick South Dakota, LLC (owner) 1000 W Prospect Rd Fort Collins, CO 80526 Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner STAFF PRESENTATION Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, stated this item is a conceptual development review for the property at 1000 West Prospect Road. He outlined the proposed six-story apartment project that would retain the existing historic house to be used as an amenity space for the apartment project. Additionally, the project would relocate and incorporate the historic garage and retain and salvage some of the historic landscape features as practical. Bertolini discussed the area of adjacency noting there are no historic structures within 200 feet; however, the Sheely Drive Landmark District is just out of range down Prospect. He stated all design references for the new construction will relate to the historic house on the property. Bertolini noted the property lies within the high-density mixed-use neighborhood (HMN) zone and stated there is a goal to densify housing in the campus area. Bertolini showed images of the historic house and discussed the history of the property and its original owners. Additionally, he noted the garage is also historic as are some landscape features, including a bird bath, stone outdoor fireplace, and a rock wall. He stated staff would like the Commission to provide preliminary feedback about any concerns related to the difference in scale and protection of the historic resources. Bertolini noted one of the major constraints of the site is fire access which will need to be taken along the east property line and is required to be 24 feet in width, thereby pushing the proposed new building to the west closer to the existing house. He discussed previous iterations of designs for the property and discussed staff’s preliminary analysis of applicable Land Use Code provisions. Bertolini outlined the requests from the Commission regarding a site plan, distance between the new building and the historic house, more specificity on the exterior materials, and anticipated 8/20/25 – MINUTES unit count. He also noted there was a mention that archeological monitoring might be appropriate and provided some suggested questions for the Commission to consider. APPLICANT PRESENTATION Kurt Basford, lead design professional, discussed the existing site context and noted the current intent is to retain the historic home at its existing location. He commented on the materiality of the existing home and stated the plan is to turn it into the amenity space for the student housing apartments, including study lounges, a game room, and fitness space. Basford showed one preliminary site plan and noted an analysis of the trees on the site has been completed with Forestry. He stated the plan would be to relocate the garage to be adjacent to the north side of the building and to convert it to another amenity space such as bike parking. He commented on key features that are planned for retention and relocation, including the bird bath, and outdoor fireplace. Basford showed a second site plan option that has more of an articulated east façade, and still relocates the garage, bird bath, and outdoor fireplace. He noted both site plans have a small setback between the historic home and the new building and discussed the plan to ensure the home does not get damaged during construction. Basford stated the plan is for the new building to utilize a precast concrete construction which helps with fire access and eliminates the need for scaffolding to be placed to apply exterior finishes. He stated the planned unit count is between 50 and 60 with a bed count between 100 and 135 and a parking ratio of 0.2 to 0.3 per bed. Additionally, ten to twenty percent of the units will be affordable, which grants the ability for the sixth story. Basford outlined the proposed exterior materiality for the new building that will be part of the precast concrete panels. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None. COMMISSION QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION Commissioner Gaines asked what is required for fire access. Basford replied the site can be fully accessed from the south and the preferred option would be for two points of access allowing for entry on the east side and exit on the west, though that may not be feasible. He noted fire access would still work from a single point of access. Chair Gibson asked where the 22 to 41 parking spaces would be located. Basford replied they would be below the building with five stories of apartments above at-grade parking. Chair Gibson asked about the distance between the historic home and new building. Basford replied the plan is for two to three feet of separation. Commissioner Carlock asked about the step back of the upper stories. Basford replied they are working on the articulation of the southern façade and noted Poudre Fire Authority has requested a stair core as close to where their apparatuses would locate as possible, which would require a continuous six-story stair core at either the southwest or southeast corner of the building. The south façade would be articulated to work with the precast structural system, therefore it would be a continual vertical plane of six stories without a step back. Commissioner Rose expressed concern about the lack of step backs and the fact that the mass of the new building would dwarf the historic home. He stated visibility of the home would be impossible unless one is coming from the west. He suggested more articulation of the mass and respect of the existing building by including step backs would be necessary. He also stated he could not support modifications of standard given the design at this point. Chair Gibson concurred and stated the design feels as though wedging a six-story building into the space would create a self-imposed problem requiring modifications of standard. She 8/20/25 – MINUTES expressed concern about the integrity of the property in regard to the landscape features. She stated she is not supportive of the design as presented, nor of modifications of standard. Commissioner Gaines stated the proposal does not leave room for designing the relationship between the historic home and the new building in an appropriate manner. He questioned whether the zoning setback on the east side of the property could be decreased to allow for more separation between the buildings and provide a plaza or courtyard for emergency access and outdoor usable space. Commissioner Carlock stated the current design seems to wedge a building onto a site that is not appropriate. She acknowledged a sufficient number of units need to be included to make the project financially feasible, but stated that goal may not coincide with the current site. Commissioner Gaines stated it could be beneficial to do some research as to other projects that included a historic home and a new building of this mass. Bertolini commented on the Apex Haven project that is a few blocks down Prospect, though the main difference is that that property is larger. Chair Gibson stated she would want the requirement for archeological monitoring if the landscape features were to be removed and would also want a plan of protection for the house. • OTHER BUSINESS None. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Gibson adjourned the meeting at 7:06 p.m. Minutes prepared by and respectfully submitted by Melissa Matsunaka.