HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 04/14/1999LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Meeting Minutes
April 14, 1999
Council Liaison: Scott Mason (226 - 4824)
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221 - 6376)
Commission Chairperson: Per Hogestad (303 - 292 -1875)
UMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC determined that the below ground home a
147 N. Roosevelt was eligible for local landmark designation (4-1). The LPC
approved final plans for 210-218 Walnut (Silver Grill) and 127 N. Howes (St.
Joseph's Church School). The LPC reviewed conceptual plans for 308 S. Howes
and 518 Peterson, and options for the development of the Cal Johnson/Jessup
Farm. Porch work and re -roofing was approved for 630 Peterson. Exploratory
emolition was approved for 1601 Sheely Drive. The LPC approved changes to
he fagade restoration of 160 N. College.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Mr. Hogestad called the meeting to order at 5:37
p.m., at 281 North College Avenue. Commission members James Tanner, Rande
Pouppirt, Bud Frick, Angela Milewski, and Angie Aguilera were present. Janet Ore was
absent. Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams represented staff.
GUESTS: Richard Beardmore, A-E Design Associates, Jonathon Harshaw and Marie
Lock, Shaw Sign, Silver Grill; Randy and Jo Luttrell, owners, and Kevin Murray,
contractor, 630 Peterson; Rick Hattman, Hattman Associates, Architect, and Ron
Kechter, Nieman Company, Contractor, for 127 North Howes; Steven and Kathryn
Malers, 518 Peterson; Ted Zibell, 160 North College Avenue; Matt Baker, Street
Oversizing Manager, Jason Stutzman and Eileen Salmon, Engineering Department,
Troy Jones, Current Project Planner, and Jennifer Carpenter for Rigden/Cal Johnson
Farm.
AGENDA REVIEW: Ms. Tunner added the discussion of conceptual plans and
exploratory demolition for 1601 Sheely Drive. Ms. McWilliams added a complimentary
review of 308 South Howes under other business.
STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner encouraged the Commission members to attend the
program entitled, "Strengthening Board Effectiveness" on April 30, 1999, presented by
Jon Carver.
COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The March 10, 1999 LPC meeting minutes was accepted
as submitted.
Landmark Preservation Commission
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 2
CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW:
Mr. Frick declared a conflict -of -interest and left the Commission for this discussion. Mr.
Beardmore gave a presentation and update on the exploratory demolition and final
plans for the buildings. He showed early photographs of the fagades. Most of the
fagade details of 216 were destroyed and will need to be entirely reconstructed. The
original awning on the fagade of 214 Walnut was low hanging and a shorter awning
may need to be used today because of the current codes. The photograph provided
good details of the kickplates. The copper mullion is historic to the fagade. Mr.
Beardmore said that from the kickplate up they would be able to repair the historic
fabric. The photo -documentation would be used to reconstruct what was there from the
kickplate down. They will also repair or rebuild the door, which would serve as the main
entrance to the Silver Grill. They were not able to find the details of 212, but a
photograph showed that the belt cornice was in line with 210 and 214. They were able
to confirm transom heights and the jamb for the storefront. He said that 210 was all
bricked in with the Miami stone, but you could see the original beam and jamb. All
three storefronts also had a similar recessed upper panel. Mr. Beardmore said that the
construction drawings were included in the packet with all of the details. Many of the
details were similar to that of the fagade of the Linden Hotel, which was used as a
reference. They tried to create a design for all of the storefronts that reflects what the
building looked like between 1938 and 1940. He added that the dimensions of the
storefronts would be brought back to the original proportions and finish dimensions. On
218, the entrance after 1940 was not recessed and was a solid color. According to the
Secretary Standards, they are using historic photo -documentation to create the fagade
as it appeared then.
Mr. Beardmore presented the proposed colors, awnings and signs, and was seeking
approval for these items too. The paint was picked to match the brick base of the
buildings. They would try to strip the softer sand brick on 218 Walnut. The other brick
buildings were done in the pressed sharp edge brick and were red -orange in color. He
said that 210 Walnut would need to be rebuilt. He presented the awning colors in
Dubonnet Tweed (#4606) and Hemlock Tweed (4605). Detail colors included the belt
cornice in Craftsman Brown, Sherwin Williams #2835, with a glossy finish. Rockwood
Terra Cotta was proposed for the metal cap and would match the brick color. The door
of 214 would be painted to match the awning with a high gloss finish with a custom mix
color. They would also try to refurbish the copper. The section of the awning on 218
would have a projecting valence to create a little more mass. The awnings also would
fit within the pilasters, instead of being attached to the brick. When the consolidation of
the buildings is finished, the address will be 218. Mr. Beardmore reviewed that they are
not using the green, black cherry or quartersawn oak colors on the fagades and by
using a simplified lighter color scheme, would like for the shadow lines of the
architectural details to come through. Mr. Pouppirt inquired about signage. They
proposed a sign over the entry, with a reverse panel and back lighting. Ms. Lock
Landmark Preservation Commission •
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 3
explained that the lighting was a 4500 neon that would shine out from behind. The
details of how the signage would be attached where provided. There is signage on the
windows of the other addresses. The wire mesh in the upper panels of 210, 212, 216,
and 218 has been eliminated. There will only be mesh in 214. Mr. Hogestad asked if
there was any citizen input, and there was none.
Mr. Tanner moved to approve the final proposal for 210 — 218 Walnut. Ms.
Aguilera seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (5-0)
OTHER BUSINESS:
215 Linden. Update on Progress
Mr. Beardmore reported that they are about 80% through the structural stabilization of
the second floor. They have enough existing line evidence that they can tell where the
kick plates were. They also found one of the original iron columns intact, and that the
upper sashes have been refurbished and primed. Mr. Beardmore explained that they
would be able to duplicate the column.
Northern Hotel, Update
Mr. Beardmore reported that more historic photos were found of the Northern Hotel.
The photos showed the difference between the 1924 and the 1936 design and it also
showed the details of 160 and 164 N. College. He passed around updated drawings,
with the in -fill addition and a copy of the grant. The photos will also sere as photo -
documentation for the reconstruction of the hotel lobby. He added that the dome in the
restaurant is indirectly lit and is not a skylight. Mr. Beardmore also explained the
timeline of the project.
Ms. Tunner explained that some of concerns of the Commission at the last presentation
included the shape of the windows on the addition, which might not be sympathetic to
the shape of the original windows. The other concern was that the courtyard would be
very small. Mr. Hattman discussed the shape of the windows. He tried to give the
windows more vertical dimensions by pulling them apart. They also reduced the height
of the building by approximately two feet, which helps it be more sympathetic to the
existing building. He also reduced the height of the interior wall in the courtyard on the
addition, which reduced the width to height ratio of the courtyard space. They also
decreased the amount of landscaping in the courtyard area. More shade tress would go
on the west side and more foundation planting would go around the building. Mr.
Pouppirt asked about changes to the east elevation. Mr. Hattman said that it would no
longer be the library, as originally planned, so that allowed the height of the building to
come down and the fagade was simplified. Mr. Tanner asked if the mechanical louvers
would be blended in. Mr. Hattman said that they would paint them to match the brick.
He passed the color and sample material board around to the Commission. Mr.
Hattman reviewed where the different colors and materials would be used on the
building and how they were compatible with the existing historic structure. Mr.
Landmark Preservation Commission
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 4
Hogestad asked about the deep brown color of the window units. Mr. Hattman said that
the existing windows are black and that was the best match with a low maintenance
material as well. Ms. Milewski asked about the existing trees in the courtyard. All but
one is Siberian elm, which is considered to be a nuisance tree. Mr. Hogestad asked
where the split -face CMU will be used. Mr. Hattman said it will be used as a sill and
accent lines and headers. Mr. Pouppirt asked if the existing building had window
headers. The Commission checked the drawings and it did not. Mr. Hattman explained
that the sill was sand stone on the original building. Mr. Pouppirt asked why they would
want to accentuate the headers on the new building. Mr. Hattman said that it helped
define the windows and make up for the difference in floor height. Mr. Hogestad asked
if there was any public input, and there was none.
Mr. Tanner moved to approve final review of two additions to 127 North Howes.
Ms. Milewski seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (6-0)
OOV rUU2UUU11, AUUIC n. UCVVII nVUSC - rVIVII nC-IVVIIIIW InOlIUV aIIU JV LUIIICII/
Ms. Tunner said that this project had applied to the Colorado Historical Society for State
Tax Credit, and passed around color photos. She pointed out the hole in the porch
fascia board and the quarter -round porch, where the roof was leaking. The porch
currently has asphalt shingles and new shingles to match the rest of the house will be
installed. The sandstone foundation also needs repointing. Mr. Kevin Murray,
contractor, gave a presentation of the re -roofing proposal. He planned on using
modified bituminous roofing, which is flexible enough to be installed on the porch roof
and will allow it to last up to thirty years. Then they could work on the inside ceiling,
which has been damaged. He passed around his mortar mix specifications for
repointing the sandstone foundation. Mr. Hogestad asked if there was any public input,
and there was none. Mr. Frick asked if they would paint the house the same color. Mr.
Murray said that they would not repaint the whole house at this time. One board would
be replaced and painted the same color as existing. He added that the brick in the
chimney was in bad repair and needed to be repointed or reset on the top three layers.
Mr. Frick moved to approve the request for the porch reroofing and related roof
repairs, sandstone foundation repointing, and chimney repair. Mr. Tanner
seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (6-0)
518 Peterson, B. F. Avers House - Conceptual Review of Rear Addition (Steven
and Kathryn Malers)
Mr. Frick declared a conflict -of -interest because he is the architect on the project. He
helped the applicants present the proposal for the rear addition and second story
windows. Mr. Frick said that they have tried to create an addition that would meet the
needs of the family and would still be subservient to the main structure. The existing
second story windows would be replaced with Marvin windows, like the ones on the first
floor. Mr. Tanner asked about where the addition would meet the roofline of the original
house. Mr. Frick said that the addition was set back about six inches. He explained
that they basically took the line from the north wall and continued it out. Mr. Tanner
asked about the configuration of the three windows in the master bedroom. They are
Landmark Preservation Commission
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 5
high to let the morning light in. The Commission talked about a laundry shoot from the
closet down to the laundry room. Mr. Hogestad asked about the siding. Mr. Frick
proposed a cottage lap siding with a cove in the top to match the existing siding. Mr.
Hogestad asked about the exposure. Mr. Frick said that he knows that five inches lap
siding is available. The existing siding is three and one -quarter inch lap. He and Mr.
Hogestad agreed that it would be a fairly narrow exposure, but it would still be different
from the original structure. Ms. Malers wanted to make sure that the addition structure
extending out to the south would be acceptable. Ms. Tunner mentioned that similar
additions exist along Mountain Avenue on Foursquares.
Five Minute Break
Ms. Tunner said that the fagade was already approved, but Mr. Zibell needed to make
some changes. A 1916 photograph was used to rebuild the brick cornice. Mr. Zibell
reported that the kickplates in 160 North College appeared to have been glass. In a
discussion with James Stratis, Mr. Zibell was told that the glass may have been a way
to get natural light into the basement. Mr. Zibell said that he would be worried from a
security standpoint about the glass. He has revised the 160 N. College plan with
paneled kick plates, that are set back, like in the photograph. Ms. Tunner said that it
would be best to go to something as close as possible, because a State Historical Fund
grant was being used. Mr. Zibell said that these buildings have been through many
fagade changes through the years. Mr. Frick asked for a revised plan with the columns
in the storefront. Ms. Tunner asked if he would incorporate the steel post into the
mullein at the storefront edge. Mr. Zibell said that the structural steel I-beam that goes
across the front would not affect the tin ceiling and would not be visible. The building
department required this beam for a high wind load. It was not a structural original part
of the building and a wood beam would not carry as much of a load as steel. A thin
plate will be welded along the length of the beam that they could fasten trim to. Mr.
Pouppirt noted that the backside of the parapet was supported with wood, which may
not meet building code. Mr. Zibell said he would talk to the contractor about it. Mr.
Hogestad asked if the steel column was in the same location as the wood columns on
the previous plan. Mr. Tanner said that structurally it was a better idea. Mr. Hogestad
asked if there was any public input, and there was none. Mr. Frick said that he spoke
with James Stratis and a precedent has already been set concerning the addition of
structural elements to an historic storefront. The Commission discussed how the style
and details of the storefront may have changed over the years and which year this
storefront was being taken back to and just how much information they could get out of
the photo -documentation.
Mr. Pouppirt approved changes to the approved facade renovation due to
structural considerations for 160-164 North College Avenue. Mr. Frick seconded
the motion and amended that the modified storefront kick plate design of 160 N.
College Avenue be approved. Mr. Pouppirt approved the amendment. The
motion passed unanimously. (6-0)
Landmark Preservation Commission
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 6
Determination of Eligibility for Local Landmark Designation:
147 North Roosevelt
Ms. McWilliams said that she wanted to include under the agenda review, the
determination of eligibility of the basement house at 147 N. Roosevelt. The house was
built circa 1925 and is one of three known basement houses in Fort Collins. It has been
determined to have high significance because it is relatively rare. The new property
owner is interested in designating the basement home, if he could get a variance from
the Zoning Board of Appeals to build a second single family home on the remainder of
his 9600 ftz lot. If the variance is granted, he will designate the basement home. The
garage is not being considered for designation at this time. Staff is going to the Zoning
Board of Appeals with the opinion of the Commission regarding the home's eligibility.
Mr. Hogestad asked how much of the exterior was original. The entry way may be an
early addition. The owner would like to turn it into a conforming use, with egress
windows. To do so, the owner would rebuild the roof structure about one foot higher.
Mr. Hogestad said there would be less impact on the building if he built a window well.
He asked if there was any public input, and there was none.
Ms. Milewski moved to determine 147 North Roosevelt eligible for local landmark
designation. Mr. Tanner seconded the motion that passed. (5-1) Mr. Pouppirt said
nay, stating that in his opinion, rarity is not grounds for designation.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Rigden/Cal Johnson Farm
Ms. Carpenter presented three options. She presented an aerial photograph of the site
showing the Jessup and Johnson farms, and the Bank Barn. Ms. McWilliams went over
the importance of historic agricultural properties. She reviewed the three properties that
Ms. Carpenter would be addressing at the meeting. All three of these properties have
high significance. The Bank Barn in particular, has tremendous significance because it
is one of only two known in Northern Colorado. It's in great shape and has very
unusual architecture. It is associated with a large farm complex with good integrity, and
with Harvey Johnson, a pioneer in water development in Northam Colorado. The other
properties are associated with the Jessup family. Since then the Johnson brothers and
sisters have bought up all of the property. Ms. Carpenter said that the Johnson farm
has only had three owners. One option was to move the Cal Johnson/Rigden Farm
across Drake, in between the other two farms. Ms. McWilliams reported that all of the
buildings were determined to be significant and would be moved. This option would
keep the buildings together in their same relative proximity and with the same compass
orientation. Mr. Hogestad added that the farms would have enough space that they
would remain distinct. Option two was to move the Cal Johnson/Rigden Farm to the
center of the proposed Rigden Farm housing development, to create a community
center. Again, all of the buildings would be moved under this scenario. These would
be some community gardens. Ms. Carpenter discussed proposed uses for the house,
such as day care, a coffee shop and meeting rooms. Option three would be moving the
Cal Johnson Farm buildings further back on the same site, where they would be
Landmark Preservation Commission •
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
t Page 7
surrounded by commercial redevelopment. Ms. Carpenter said that if the structures
were being moved, why not move it to a better site and off a very valuable corner.
Troy Jones, Current Planner, discussed the Rigden Farm Overall Development Plan.
Ms. Carpenter asked for comments on these three options. She wanted to take back
opinions to Wheeler Realty. Mr. Hogestad explained that they had made a motion to
move the house, but never recommended where. Ms. Carpenter hopes to come back
soon with some options and said that the developer has been very cooperative. Ms.
McWilliams reported that Wheeler Realty would pay to move and build foundations for
all five buildings. Ms. Carpenter said that if the second option did not go through, the
developer is still interested in building a new bam and farmhouse for use as a
community center. Ms. Tunner asked if it were possible for the City to own the Cal
Johnson Farm and Bank Barn and then have the Cal Johnson Farm moved to become
the community center, which would be a combination of option one and two. Ms.
Milewski asked Mr. Baker, Street Oversizing Manager, about the impact of widening
Timberline on the Jessup Farm. He said that they have not gotten that far yet, but they
may have to cut the hill back, and that may affect the property.
Mr. Pouppirt left at 8:15 p.m.
OTHER BUSINESS:
308 South Howes — Conceptual Review
Ms. McWilliams presented a statement of significance. The buildings are not
architecturally or historically noteworthy enough to be individually eligible for the
National Register. They do however reflect the pattern of neighborhood development
and would be eligible for National Register designation as contributing buildings.
Located next to the Peter Anderson home, it is a very significant property. The home is
currently the Delta Construction office, and they are proposing an addition. The owner
is interested in local landmark designation, if the LPC likes the proposed addition. Ms.
McWilliams pointed out the garage that is very interesting and unusual. From an
historic perspective it shows how the location of garages changed throughout the years,
from being located in the back alley to being attached to the house. She provided plans
of the proposed addition. The owner is proposing a patio walkway between the original
garage and the addition, in order to limit the impact on the garage. Mr. Hogestad liked
the more transparent design of the connection between the house and garage, given
the constraints of the site. He said that the front elevation would be unchanged and
you would not see the addition from the front. Mr. Tanner commented that the addition
should be subordinate in mass to the main house. Ms. Milewski agreed that the
massing is not smaller than the main house. Mr. Frick said that he liked the concept,
but they need to create something smaller. Mr. Hogestad and Ms. Aguilera agreed that
the addition details looked very much like the house. Ms. McWilliams said that she
encouraged a lower profile with a Craftsman style, with dormer, to create more interior
space. Mr. Hogestad said that maybe too many details were picked up from the original
house. The Commission discussed some alternative configurations.
Landmark Preservation Commission
April 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 8
Mr. Hogestad declared a conflict -of -interest as a Commission member. He is also the
applicant and explained that he needed to determine some structural things in order to
prepare drawings for submittal. He wanted approval to perform some selective
demolition of the underside of the porch and decking. He also needs to determine the
condition of the rim joists and said that he would replace rotten parts in -kind.
Mr. Frick moved to approve that the occupant/owner be allowed to do selective
exploratory demolition for review of the existing structure. Mr. Tanner seconded
the motion, which passed unanimously. (4-0)
The meeting adjourned at 8.48 p.m.
Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary and transcribed from the tape of the
meeting.