Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 11/08/2000LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting November 8, 2000 Minutes Council Liaison: Scott Mason (226-4824) Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376) Commission Chairperson: Per Hogestad (303-292-1875) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The September 27, 2000 minutes were approved as corrected. A second conceptual review was held on the proposed Old Town Transfort Kiosk. The Commission commented on plans for 103 East Mountain Avenue. The 2001 LPC workplan was unanimously approved as amended. The LPC heard about a proposed Old Town Survey Report. The LPC adjourned to a study session to discuss landmark eligibility of the Sears Trostel Building, 351 Linden St. Ms. McWilliams will form a sub -committee to evaluate the issue and present their findings at the next meeting. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Per Hogestad called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m., at 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Per Hogestad, Angela Milewski, Bud Frick, Agnes Dix, Rande Pouppirt, and Janet Ore were present. Angie Aguilera was absent. Carol Tunner, Karen McWilliams, Timothy Wilder, and Joe Frank represented staff. GUESTS: Linda Dowlen, Smart Trips Coordinator for the Kiosk; Carr Bieker, Jeff Errett, and Glenn Konen of The Architect's Studio, for 103 E. Mountain; Alyson McGee and Myme Watrous, citizens. AGENDA REVIEW: None. STAFF REPORTS: None. Ms. Tunner passed out copies of an article from the June issue of Old House Journal about how to bring projects before a review board. She raised changing the November 22 meeting because of the Thanksgiving holiday; the LPC decided to move it to November 15. Timothy Wilder showed a brochure for a preservation Revolving Loan program, which he said, had recently been approved by City Council as a replacement for the Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program. He has had requests for loan applications already, so he feels it is a good sign that people want to use it. The application deadline is January 16, 2001. There is a maximum of $5,000 per residential as well as commercial properties. Applications are available both on the web site and in the Advance Planning office. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: None. Landmark Preservation Commission November 8, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Angela Milewski moved to accept the September 27 minutes with the change of "shared" to "chaired" on page 2. Ms. Dix seconded and the minutes were approved 6-0. CURRENT REVIEW: OLD TOWN PLAZA KIOSK (Linda Dowlen, Smart Trips Director) Ms. Tunner presented a redesigned sketch of the proposed Transfort Kiosk in Old Town Plaza. The kiosk is proposed for the Old Town Plaza in front of Building #11. Ms. Milewski noted that the DDA hadn't yet seen the new design. She feels that it is funny looking. The awning looks tacked on and is in a bad location. Mr. Hogestad said it is a bad design, and would rather not tinker with the current design. Mr. Frick asked how permanent the kiosk would be, and that it looks more permanent than temporary. Mr. Hogestad noted that there are several elements and none mesh. Ms. Milewski suggested making the shade part of the machine, smaller, simple, and contemporary. Ms. Dix said it looks like it belongs in a theme park, it looks like a slot machine, and is inappropriate for the location. Mr. Hogestad said the bigger question is how does it fit in; he doesn't have a problem with contemporary elements in a traditional setting, but that the elements of the design don't mate well together. Mr. Frick elaborated on the disparate elements, and commented on its permanence. Mr. Hogestad summed up the objections as the non -meshing elements rather than being contemporary. They generally preferred the original kiosk design presented at conceptual review only with the smaller canopy. Ms. Dowlen summed up what she heard; that the Commission preferred the first square version simplified and smaller definitely with a smaller canopy. The LPC comments will be forwarded to the DDA. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 103 EAST MOUNTAIN AVENUE -NEW INFILL BUILDING (Carr Bieker, Glenn Konen, and Jeff Effort of The Architect's Studio) Ms. McWilliams, the staff liaison for this project, introduced the applicants. Mr. Bieker presented the proposal for reworking 103 East Mountain Avenue and a new infill building to be attached to the west, where a parking lot now exists. He brought drawings that had been revised after an LPC sub -committee review. This is a Complimentary Review. The property is located across the street from the Old Town District and adjacent to a Landmarked building. The two properties have one owner, East Mountain Properties. The first floor is proposed as retail, a restaurant, and Trust Bank. The second will be the Stryker -Short offices. The top floor is to be loft units. Mr. Bieker said they are looking for a restrained, formal, dignified approach, as this will be a comer building. They tried to be compatible with the color of the Kissock Block next door. The base of both buildings will be granite or sandstone. Between the buildings will be a second level patio plaza, which currently exists. As for compatibility, they were sensitive to the Land Use Code and LPC guidelines in terms of materials, colors, form, massing, shapes, scale, window treatment, and entries. In order to encourage Landmark Preservation Commission November 8, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 3 downtown residential, a fourth floor is allowed by the code if it is to be used for residential. Mr. Hogestad said the proportion and detailing on the corner building is good. He commented that round windows are not seen in Old Town. Mr. Frick noted that round windows are generally used as accents rather than in repetition. Mr. Bieker said that historic buildings are known for variety. He looked at the Masonic Temple in town for his inspiration. Mr. Hogestad noted that context is everything, and he is concerned about the round windows in the context of Old Town. Mr. Hogestad generally likes the parapet on the corner building as shown in the reworked plan view rather than in the model or elevation. Mr. Hogestad asked if there is a first floor arcade or have the windows moved forward. Mr. Bieker said that the windows could be moved forward instead of having the arcade, even though code allows it. Mr. Hogestad said it holds the corner better if it is moved forward. He likes the liveliness of the "eroded" comer. Mr. Frick said the fourth floor is not brick, and he likes it that the stucco breaks it up. Mr. Hogestad noted that it helps the engineering. Mr. Frank asked if the building's top story could be set back further and Mr. Bieker said no due to restrictions. Mr. Hogestad discussed the size of the fourth floor and said that the notch on top breaks up the mass better. Mr. Hogestad asked for public input. Ms. Watrous asked if the color of the brick, glass and stone colors would blend together. Mr. Bieker said that red sandstone lintels would be used and they would blend. Ms. McGee asked if stone would be used on the parapet, and Mr. Bieker said yes, and the stone base of the building will be substantial. Ms. Milewski said she liked the changes submitted, and that overall it looks wonderful. She likes seeing more stone and she feels it will integrate well. Mr. Bieker commented that they tried to integrate the stone so it has permanence. Mr. Frick said he would prefer square windows, no arcade, and more sandstone details. Mr. Bieker thanked everyone for his or her comments. OTHER BUSINESS: 2001 LPC WORK PLAN Ms. Tunner introduced a draft of the 2001 LPC Work Plan. She noted that 1. b. and 1. c. are new additions. Mr. Wilder suggested changing the title of 1. c. to Downtown River Corridor Historic Building Survey. This will be going to City Council for approval. Mr. Hogestad asked for public input. There was none. Ms. Ore made a motion to accept the 2001 Work Plan as corrected; Mr. Frick seconded the motion that passed 6-0. OLD FORT SITE SURVEY Mr. Wilder announced that the Advance Planning Dept. has proposed to apply for a grant for an Old Fort Site Survey. They planned to look at a larger area, but concentrate on Linden/Willow. Some surveys have been done but some are outdated or incomplete, and some buildings have not been done at all. There are probably less Landmark Preservation Commission November 8, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 4 than fifty properties in the entire area. The survey will be combined with preliminary archaeological research. Ms. Dix said that on Jan. 2 the Fort Collins Historical Society meeting would feature Bob Burgess, the fellow that did the excavation ten years ago at Willow and Lemay. He is now in New Ulm, MN, where he is the museum director. Mr. Hogestad adjourned the meeting to a study session at 7:03 p.m. STUDY SESSION: DISCUSSION ON LANDMARK ELIGIBILITY AND THE SEARS TROSTEL BUILDING, 351 LINDEN STREET Ms. McWilliams said a subcommittee is proposed to discuss changes to Chapter 14 of the City Code. No distinction is currently made between structures that are "individually" eligible and those that are "contributing" to a potential district. She referred to a memo that was distributed to the LPC. This change would have no affect on how designated properties are treated. Staff is asking for direction on the proposed changes. Staff feels that more flexibility is needed to distinguish between properties and to not put developers through hoops for marginal buildings. Mr. Frank added that when the code was written, staff was thinking of individual landmarks. But, development applications are standard and require that you do a modification of equal to or better than. This policy has created ill will and uncertainty. Citizens have been questioning the quality of what is being saved and where are the LPC's priorities. Ms. Ore said that being contributing might not be the appropriate cutoff. At the national level, contributing buildings are included in federal projects. Mr. Frank said that the national level is only a review process but City Code stops development by requiring that a contributing building be saved. He said that the question might be what treatment to apply to a contributing property? Ms. McWilliams said an evaluation should be of the importance of the contribution and the building itself, but not to ignore contributing buildings. Mr. Frank pointed out that the importance of the Sears Trostel Building is based on it being a lumberyard, which is going to disappear when that use goes away in the near future. He suggested that possibly incentives should be offered to the owner to save the lumberyard. Mr. Hogestad said he is concerned about the contributing buildings in an area with the potential to form a district. He wants to be sure that there is truly the potential to be a district. Mr. Frank said that they should be more careful when saying "potential district." He suggested that they look at the reality of creating a district, and then look at how incentives could be applied. Mr. Hogestad suggested that a sub -committee be appointed to look into this question more closely. Mr. Frank asked the LPC to consider: 1.) if this is an issue worth working on, 2.) the Sears Trostel building can't wait very long, 3.) this issue needs to be decided soon. In regards to the Sears Trostel building, 0 Landmark Preservation Commission November 8, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 5 Ms. McWilliams said that the LPC could either determine the earlier survey (making the building eligible as a contributing building in a potential district) was in error, or that there is a changed condition. Mr. Frank would like to bring this to the next meeting so the developer can move forward. Mr. Hogestad asked about the documentation of changes to the building. Ms. McWilliams said that the Native American symbols removed from the Sears Trostel Lumberyard in 1948 looked like a reverse swastika. The other change was the dormers, added in 1976. Ms. McWilliams said she would like to have the building thoroughly recorded if it is to be demolished. This should be the responsibility of the property owner. Mr. Frank asked if this item should be on the next agenda and Mr. Hogestad said yes, with more accompanying information. Mr. Frank said looking at changing the Land Use Code would probably take five to six meetings over the next four to five months. Ms. McWilliams said she would bring an update on the Sears Trostel Building at the next meeting. Anyone interested in being on the sub -committee should let Ms. McWilliams know. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Meeting minutes taken by staff, Carol Tunner and transcribed by secretary, Diane Slater.