HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 08/09/2006LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
281 North College Avenue — First Floor Conference Room
Regular Meeting
August 9, 2006
Council Liaison: David Roy (47-7393)
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376)
Commission Chairperson: Angie Aguilera (377-4217)
SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC heard a Conceptual and Final Design Review for
Renovation of Back Porch/Sunroom at 309 E. Mulberry; a Demo/Alteration Review
Preliminary Hearing on Alterations Proposed for 417 S. Whitcomb; and held a
discussion on developing a policy for "Ghost Signs."
CALL OR ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission called to order by
Chairwoman Angie Aguilera with a quorum present at 5:30 p.m. at 281 N.
College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Those present: Angie Aguilera, Alan
Ballou, Agnes Dix, Heather Donahue, Alyson McGee, and Ian Shuff. Earen
Russell was an excused absence. Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams
represented City staff.
GUESTS: Linda Bova (owner), Kevin Murray of Empire Carpentry for 309 E.
Mulberry; and John and Vicki Lambert, owners, and Dick Anderson, architect, for
417 S. Whitcomb.
AGENDA REVIEW: No changes
STAFF REPORTS: None
COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The June 14, 2006 minutes were approved with the
notation to change the name on the last page of the minutes from Heather Dix to
Heather Donahue. Ms. McGee moved to approve the revised minutes, Heather
Donahue seconded the motion. Motion approved.
PUBLIC INPUT: None
DISCUSSION ITEM:
309 E. Mulberry, Conceptual/Final Review on Rehab of Back Porch
Linda Bova, owner, and Kevin Murray, Empire Carpentry, contractor.
Ms. McWilliams reported that the owner intends to renovate the porch to open
some of the areas that are historic. The work would consist of a new foundation
for the porch; replacing the leaking roof; removing plywood and other non -historic
siding as well as the little amount of remaining historic siding, and replacing all
siding with a 4" profile cedar siding; replacing the non -historic windows; insulating
the floors, roof and walls; replacing a deteriorated oval -window door with one
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 9, 2006 Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 4
built to match; rebuilding the basement staircase; demolishing the non -historic
rear deck, and building a handrail to match the front porch's handrail.
Applicable Standards: Rehabilitation Standard 6 — the deteriorated historic
features will be repaired rather than replaced. Replacement of missing features
will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. Rehabilitation
Standard 9 — None of the proposed changes or additions will destroy historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.
Rehabilitation Standard 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 impaired.
Staff recommends approval of the rehabilitation of the back porch/sunroom for
the Meyer house, 309 Mulberry Avenue, for Conceptual and Final Design
Review. The proposed work meets the criteria and standards in Section 14-48 of
the Municipal Code.
Discussion of the property and changes followed. Mr. Murray stated there are
three additions to the rear porch, and the oldest one has older windows. The
walls on the east side are 2x2, and quite a bit of structural work is being done
inside to support the existing foundation. On the outside, when you pull off the
old siding, it is inconsistent in style and materials, as well as age. It was never
put up very well, so the idea is to cover the whole with siding and give it a
uniform feel. The owner would like to put in grid windows, to match the originals.
It will make the summer porch a year round useable space.
Ms. Aguilera asked about the new roof, and Mr. Murray responded the roof line
will not change. It is a peer and grade beam. Ms. McGee asked about the grid
windows. Mr. Murray replied that the grid work will be different than the ones
now on the non -historic windows and on back porch. The Commission felt that
these would be acceptable. Ms. Bova asked about what the limitations on color
choice might be. Ms. McWilliams responded she can pick any colors from the
approved color book. The Commission directed that the style and appearance of
the new front door can be staff approval, unless Ms. McWilliams has concerns.
MOTION APPROVAL: Mr. Shuff made a motion to approve the remodel of the
back porch/sunroom at 309 E. Mulberry based on Rehabilitation Standards 6, 9
and 10, and also a proposed option of using window grid in windows. Ms. Dix
seconded the motion. Motion approved 6-0.
Demolition/Alteration Review Preliminary Hearing
417 S. Whitcomb —
John and Vicki Lambert, property owners and Dick Anderson, architect were
present
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 9, 2006 Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 4
This home was constructed circa 1905. An architectural field survey of the
property was completed in September 2004, and evaluated this property as
individually eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation, with potential to also
be individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The owners
propose a two-story addition to the rear of the building that would alter the
character of the original. These alterations may impact this home's eligibility,
potentially reducing the property's eligibility from "individually eligible" to "not
eligible."
Ms. McWilliams also explained that the purpose of today's meeting is for the
applicants and the Commission to discuss requirements, standards and policies
that apply to the property, with the goal of identifying mutually acceptable
solutions that retain the property's significance and integrity. If an agreeable
solution is found, that is the end of the review process. If the Commission and
the applicant do not reach an agreement that the Commission believes retains
the building's individual level of eligibility, then the application would proceed to
the Final Hearing, as described in Chapter 14-72 of the Municipal Code.
The architect, Mr. Anderson, made a presentation. The master bedroom with
bathroom and walk-in closet forced them to project about 1-2 feet from the side
of the building. Also, on the north side of the home there would be a slight
extension. The west elevation shows how the one story shed roof projects out
from the north face of the building. There will also be a utility room with a guest
bathroom on the main level and the function of extending the home to the west
was problematic and thus they had to come out beyond the face of the building.
Ms. Aguilera stated that the Commission needs to determine if the addition helps
maintain local landmark status. Her opinion is the proposed changes detract
from the original building. The standards prefer to not have additions project out.
Most troubling is the big projection on the south side with the exterior balcony
between the two bays that overshadows the original detail of the house. Ms.
McGee suggested if the walls stepped in from the old part and then came back
out, it would be better and that the new house would not be wider than the
original house. Where it connects to the existing house, it could come in on both
sides to help it from the front facade. Mr. Lambert asked how that would affect
the stairs, and that was discussed. Ms. Aguilera and Mr. Shuff have concerns
about the exterior deck --it hurts the facade of the existing house. The gables are
so prominent and the facades are very visible from the street and would detract
from the house. The Commission suggested that the applicant should consider
changing the deck to the west (rear) elevation. Ms. McGee explained the rear
elevation has the most area that is not visible by the public and that is where they
would prefer to see the changes.
Ms. McWilliams summarized the process
discuss the Commission's comments. M
with the Commission again and was told
, and the owners and their architect will
r. Anderson asked when he could meet
he could come to the
meeting on the
Landmark Preservation Commission
August 9, 2006 Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 4
23rd. Mr. Shuff asked him to bring a front elevation to the next meeting. Mr.
Anderson will work with Ms. McWilliams prior to the meeting with any proposed
changes.
DISCUSSION ITEM:
Ghost Signs: Ms. Tunner reported on the proposed policy for ghost signs.
Adam Thomas is available and been hired to do a survey/context on ghost signs
in Fort Collins. It will take approximately 40 working days. Two books have been
purchased with leftover CLG grant money, and she passed them around. Signs
become part of the patina of the old buildings. She distributed the final draft for
developing a ghost sign policy proposed to go to City Council before the end of
the year but completion of the survey work may delay that timeline. Ms. Tunner
went through the proposal to develop a policy on Ghost Signs. There are a
number of questions to answer, such as are they mentioned on surveys or not,
and are they on individually landmark eligible buildings? Those are some of the
first things to determine. She would like to have a brochure for tourists where
they could go around town and view these signs.
Ms. Tunner reported legal questions need to be addressed —such as how these
would be protected by the Land Use Code; how much protection is realistic and
what are the legal protections for signs now; could the City individually designate
a ghost sign, voluntarily or involuntarily, and independently of the building it is on;
could the City designate ghost signs as a multiple properties nomination? The
group then discussed ways to make these work. Ms. McGee suggested
Planning and Zoning helping with these questions.
Ms. Tunner stated that economic questions will also need to be addressed. The
signs in the Old Town Historic District are presumably protected. For ghost
signs, would you restore the signs? Ms. Tunner said that you can restore them,
but not to look brand new. She is going to do a public outreach process including
tours and an open house. Ms. McGee suggested if owners could get tax-
deductible easements they might be more interested in preserving them. We
need to determine what are the legal rights to preserve them, and what are
incentives to saving them? Ms. Tunner asked the group to review her materials
and continue discussion at the next meeting.
Historic Windows: Ms. McGee distributed an article on how to replace
historical windows. It can be good information to use for public resources.
Video by Illinois History Preservation Agency: Not shown due to problems
with the equipment.
OTHER BUSINESS: None
Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Donna Mastbergen, Temporary Secretary