HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 08/11/2004LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
August 11, 2004 Minutes
City Council Liaison: David Roy (407-7393)
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376)
Commission Chair: W. J. "Bud" Frick, Jr. (484-1467)
SUMMARY OF MEETING: LPC heard a conceptual review for an addition and
fence at 610 Cherry St., Rev. Joseph P. Trudel House and constructing a
garage and porches at 601 W. Mountain Ave., Aaron Kitchel House. LPC also
discussed proposed Code changes.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission called to order with a quorum
present by Chairman Bud Frick at 5:35 p.m. at 281 N. College Ave., Fort Collins,
Colorado. Agnes Dix, Per Hogestad and Ian Shuff were present. Angie Aguilera and
Janet Ore were excused. Joe Frank, Karen McWilliams and Carol Tunner represented
City staff.
GUESTS: Joshua and Kriisten Beck, owners, and daughter Mia, for 610 Cherry St.;
Elizabeth Mitchell, Advance Planning intern, and daughter Kiri; Bethany Kohoutek,
Rocky Mountain Bullhorn.
AGENDA REVIEW: An amended agenda including a conceptual/final review of 730 W.
Olive was distributed.
MINUTES: The minutes of June 23 were corrected to read, "installed with bolts and
wing nuts from below." on the first line of the second page. Ian Shuff moved the LPC
accept the minutes as amended. Agnes Dix seconded, and the motion carried
unanimously, 4-0.
STAFF REPORTS: Carol Tunner announced various upcoming conferences: Colorado
Preservation Inc., Sept. 10-12 in Burlington; City of Littleton Preservation Camp, Sept.
23, for staff and board members from around the state, co -sponsored by the National
Alliance of Preservation Commissions; and the Interior Decorator in America conference
in September. She also shared a request from CPI to host a local gathering in honor of
the organization's 20th anniversary.
COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS: None. Bud Frick noted a replacement liaison to
the DDA is needed.
CURRENT REVIEW
1. 601 W. Mountain Ave., Aaron Kitchel House — Conceptual Review,
Reconstruct Porches and Build Garage, — W.J. Frick, Jr., architect, acting for
owner Sue Walker; introduced by Carol Tunner. Mr. Frick completed a Conflict of
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 11, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 2
Interest form to be filed with the City Clerk's Office and relinquished the chair of
the LPC to Per Hogestad.
The owner would like to reconstruct two porches that were on the house
originally, but despite much research, no historic pictures are available. Sanborn
maps and building permit records show there was a larger front corner porch and
a smaller back corner porch. Clear evidence in the house's stone foundation
shows the location and the extent of the porches. Mr. Frick is preparing
compatible porch designs based on the style of the house and similar aged
corner entry homes in Fort Collins. He has found another home in town with a
porch design that would fit perfectly on this foundation configuration. A variance
is required for the front setback.
Ms. Walker is also asking for a variance for a setback in the back and side yard
to replace the current shared garage. Although she and her neighbor have
agreed to tear it down, it is still standing and falling apart.
Mr. Frick discussed his design ideas generally, to get a sense from the LPC if
they were headed in the right direction. The front porch should be made of wood
with simple round columns, not too ornate, in keeping with the period. Ian Shuff
felt Trex material would be okay on the back porch for maintenance, but would
look foreign on the front. Mr. Frick had no direction from the owner regarding the
back porch. The roof will be metal with a minimal slope.
The LPC felt the design was on the right track, with a wood tongue and grove
floor and wood columns on the front porch and a possibly a metal roof.
2. 610 Cherry St., Rev. Joseph P. Trudel House —Preliminary Conceptual
Review, Install Front Fence and Addition — Joshua and Kriisten Beck, owners,
introduced by Carol Tunner.
This property was landmarked in 2002. The owners would like to make some
changes to the 750-square-foot, two bedroom one -bath house and small lot to
accommodate their growing family. The property was part of the original Holy
Family Church, serving first as the school for the church and later as the
Reverend's home when the church was removed and a larger building built
diagonally across the street.
The applicants would like to discuss building an addition on the back of the
house on the northwest corner, replacing a poorly constructed shed addition that
current houses a laundry room and the back entrance to the house. They are
considering making it one story with a loft inside, but they need as much room as
possible. Bud Frick had suggested they could make this a two-story inside the
roof by adding a south and west elevation dormer to match the one on the
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 11, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 3
original house, and a shed dormer on the north elevation. This would allow the
roofline on the addition to reasonably maintain the height of the original house.
The other change involves extending the existing fence around the back and side
yards to enclose the front yard as well in order to provide living and play space
that will be consumed by the addition in the back. The current fence is 6-foot-tall
board -on -board; the proposed front fence would be 4-foot-tall stucco to also
serve as a noise barrier. This fence would not be connected to the house and is
reversible.
Mr. Frick added that one idea proposed for the house addition, that of a bi-level,
would not be in keeping with the house, but putting the addition on the rear,
keeping it subservient to the front, is a good idea. The owners liked the idea of
using dormers to maximize the interior space, and Mr. Frick suggested they
mimic the small dormer on the south elevation and add a larger shed dormer on
the back, where it would not impact the look of the house but would provide a lot
of space.
The owners said that, financially, the addition is a ways down the road; the fence
is their first priority. They would like to use the thickness of stucco to dampen the
sound of the big rigs coming down Cherry St. on their way to the city utility
service center. The LPC felt the material would be incompatible with the house.
Ian Shuff pointed out that a four -foot fence would do little to kill the sound; Per
Hogestad added that a hard surface like stucco would cause the sound to
bounce around. He also noted that while a wall is limited in height, a hedge can
grow to ten feet tall. Bud Frick suggested some quick -growing vegetation planted
on an earthen berm sloping up from the sidewalk as a possible alternative. Mr.
Shuff added the possibility of planting on top of a wood box, but also felt that
stucco would be incompatible with the neighborhood. Joshua Beck ruled out use
of chain link, and asked if that wasn't also a non -historic material. Mr. Hogestad
thought that, covered in a hardy vine, it would be less obtrusive than stucco.
Carol Tunner reminded the owners that the yard site is not designated, so these
are simply suggestions from the Commission.
Kriisten Beck asked whether no -interest loans would be available for repair work
on the foundation, which is sandstone rubble. Joshua added that an engineer
has suggested jacking up the house. Karen McWilliams suggested contacting
Timothy Wilder in Advance Planning to determine the particulars, but said it
would be possible for the owners to apply each year to complete various parts of
a big project. Mr. Frick pointed out that there is usually competition for the no -
interest loans, and the amounts available vary.
Joshua said they wanted to take the roof back to wood -- it currently has two
levels of shingles over shake — and add half -round gutters. Ms. Tunner reminded
the owners that the Design Assistance Program is also available annually to help
with questions about colors and materials. Mr. Frick advised them to check with
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 11, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 4
the City Building Department on current regulations on wood -burning stoves
within the Fort Collins city limits.
Kriisten asked if updating the electrical system would qualify for the state tax
credit. Ms. Tunner will give them information on all the incentives and application
forms.
On the subject of maximizing the living space with the addition, Mr. Shuff
suggested in addition to dormers, they should explore adding a basement with an
egress window, which could triple the interior square footage. Ms. Tunner will
provide the owners with the list of pre -qualified consultants of the Design
Assistance Program.
3. 730 W. Olive St., Winslow/Guard House — Conceptual/Final Review, Front
Railing and Steps Replacement — Cheryl and Ralph Olson, owners, not
present. Introduced by Carol Tunner.
Ms. Tunner explained that redwood oil is bleeding through the paint on the
railings and columns of the porch, which was rebuilt with a 2000 grant from the
Landmark Preservation Fund. Because this house is part of the upcoming Avery
House historic home tour, the owners would like to rebuild the affected parts and
this time apply Kilzit before painting as soon as possible. Commission members
advised Ms. Tunner that Kilzit can be applied directly to the painted surfaces, so
rebuilding should not be necessary. Ms. Tunner will contact the owners.
The front steps are also of different heights and unsafe. The owners would like
to rebuild them of concrete and faced with stone runs and brick risers. The
Commission asked to see a photo of other steps done like this and a submittal
request which the owners were supposed to supply if they had attended this
meeting.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Code Changes, Continuing Discussion — presented by Karen McWilliams.
The Commission discussed proposed changes to the City Code and to the Land Use
Code. The changes were based on previous LPC discussions, and summarized in a
memo distributed to members. Ms. McWilliams indicated that she had also reviewed the
issues with Paul Eckman of the City Attorney's Office. After extensive discussion, the
LPC reviewed each issue and the changes proposed to address them.
By consensus, the LPC supported revisions to both the Land Use Code and the
Municipal Code to allow for relocation or recordation and demolition as preservation
options.
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 11, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 5
By consensus, the LPC supported revising Article IV of Chapter 14 of the Municipal
Code (the Demolition/Alteration Review Process) to apply only to designated National
and State Register single family properties (all other property types would continue to
be reviewed under the Demolition/Alteration Review Process). The Commission also
supported revising Section 3.1.1 of the Land Use Code ("Applicability") to eliminate the
requirement that single family dwellings, which would otherwise be subjected only to
basic development review, must comply with the standards contained in Section 3.4.7.
This would result in the Land Use Code standards in Section 3.4.7 applying only to
properties proposed for development or redevelopment, to all properties, including
single family dwellings that are designated on the National and State Registers.
By consensus, the LPC supported a revision to the Land Use Code and to the
Commission's function in the Municipal Code to allow staff to seek comments from the
Commission on projects involving individually eligible properties reviewed under the
Land Use Code. These comments would be forwarded along with staff comments to the
Hearing Officer or Planning and Zoning Board.
By consensus, the LPC supported and strongly recommended an increase in the funds
available for the City's two existing preservation incentive programs, the zero -percent
interest loans and the Design Assistance Program, which have proven to be very
effective. Mr. Frank suggested doubling the total amount of loan money for 2005 to
$40,000. Staff will also explore a sales tax waiver or rebate as an additional financial
incentive to encourage voluntary landmark designation.
Issues not yet resolved include a mechanism for notifying property owners when historic
surveys have been completed; the opportunity for owners to challenge the findings of
surveys; giving the LPC the authorization to prepare guidelines for a Review Board, and
ways to make a local landmark designation more prestigious.
The LPC also strongly encourages the preparation of contexts and surveys to identify
significant historic properties and preservation issues, and an increase in education
outreach through a variety of means. Ian Shuff suggested, as the number of reviews
coming before the Commission decreases, Commission members can become more
involved in the educational effort. Ms. Tunner suggested providing funds to send LPC
members to educational conferences and events.
Other ideas proposed, although not Code issues, included bringing back the
Preservation Mixers; reinstituting Certificates of Designation, and revisiting the Plan of
Action contained in the HRPPP.
These proposed changes will go before the Planning and Zoning Board for comments
on Friday; staff will forward all comments to Council. After Council gives direction on
Aug. 24, staff will begin drafting actual language.
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 11, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 6
Mr. Frank confirmed that LPC members are invited to the Council study session and will
be seated at the staff table to give their perspective. LPC Council liaison David Roy will
attend the next LPC meeting on August 25.
In a related matter, Ms. McWilliams reported that the Rules are in negotiations to donate
their buildings to Crossroads Safehouse for administrative offices. They would like the
City to donate the land, preferably near the Northside Atzlan facility, and staff is
investigating options. There is some question over the issue of City land being put to a
non-public use, however.
OTHER BUSINESS
Carol Tunner announced the City is applying for a grant from the Transportation
Enhancement Program to restore the brickwork along the trolley tracks on E. Mountain
Ave. from College Avenue to Peterson St. The $134,500 will be used by the
Engineering Department to take up the concrete to expose the brickwork and clean,
replace, repair and restore it and other exposed brickwork as needed. A letter of support
from the LPC, signed by Bud Frick, was provided as part of the grant application.
Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Kate Jeracki, Recorder
August 25, 2004
C