Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 01/14/1997• U, LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting January 14, 1997 Council Liaison: Gina Janett Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (22"960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC designated the following structures as Local Landmarks: 148 Remington, the Forest Service Garage; 301 South Loomis St., the David E. Watrous House and Garage; 321 Garfield St., the Emerson H. Kirkpatrick House; 220 East Laurel St., the Long Apartment Complex; 808 West Mountain Ave., the Clippinger House. The LPC approved the proposed Interior renovation of the Anna B. Miller House at 514 East Elizabeth for the State Tax Credit Program with the exclusion of the proposed gas insert for the fireplace and new heat registers. New awnings with signs were approved for Saltillo's Grill. The LPC conditionally approved the sign band for Linden's. The applicants will meet with the Design Review Sub - Committee with detailed drawings of the sign and its installation. The LPC added Tim Simmons to the list of consultants for the Design Assistance Program. Ms. Lawrie presented an overview of this years applications for the Local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson called the meeting to order 5:40 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Ruth Weatherford, Bud Frick, Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman, James Tanner and Diana Ross were present. Joe Frank, Carol Tunner, Karen McWilliams and Leanne Lawrie represented Staff. GUESTS: Ken Smith, owner, 301 South Loomis Street, the David E. Watrous House and Garage; Donald and Vicki Mykles, owners, 321 Garfield Street, the Emerson H. Kirkpatrick House; Neva Lawton, owner, 808 West Mountain Avenue, the Clippinger House; Margie Marshall, owner, 514 East Elizabeth Street, ,the Anna B. Miller House; Erin Dando, General Manager, Saltillo's Grill, 100 W. Mountain Avenue; Tommy Short, business owner, 208/214 Linden Street, Bill Warren, Contractor, Larry Drasin, designer and representative for Bohemian Brewers Co., Louis Skelton, architect for Bohemian Brewers; and Kristen Krueger/Tom Kalert of Architecture Plus for the Linden's renovation. AGENDA REVIEW: Local Landmark Designation of the Coy/Hoffman Barn, 1103 East Lincoln, was postponed until January 28, 1997 at the request of the applicant. STAFF REPORTS: None. Landmark Preservation Commission Minutes January 14,1997 Page 2 COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter reported that the City Plan Land Use Code included a section which addresses historic preservation. She requested that Commission members review the document, which will not be returning to the LPC for further commentary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATIONS: 148 Reminaton Street. the Forest Service Garage (Lenz Construction Co.. Brad Lenz Ms. McWilliams reported that the Forest Service Garage is significant for its history and architecture and is individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It was described as a noteworthy example of Art Deco public architecture. Ms. Weatherford moved to recommend designation of 148 Remington Street for Local Landmark Designation. Ms. Kuliman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 301 South Loomis Street the David E. Watrous House and Garage (Ken Smith and Suzanne Coughlin -Smith) This property is significant for its historical and architectural importance. The Watrous house was described as a vernacular Queen Anne. Mr. Hogestad moved to recommend designation of 301 South Loomis Street. Ms. Weatherford seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 321 Garfield Street the Emerson H. Kirkpatrick House (Donald and Vicki Mvkles) The Emerson H. Kirkpatrick House is significant for its Plains Cottage style of architecture. The front door of the house had been moved from the north to the west side of the porch. Mr. Frick moved to recommend designation for 321 Garfield Street, the Emerson H. Kirkpatrick House. Mr. Hogestad seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 220 East Laurel Street the Lona Apartments and Garaae Complex (Sonia and Howard Nomes, and Eleanor and Richard Anderson) The Long Apartments and Garage Complex is significant for its architectural importance and was considered a "thoroughly modern" residence at the time of its construction in 1922. Thirteen one bedroom apartments share the same floor plan and Landmark Preservation Commission Minutes January 14, 1997 Page 3 one two bedroom apartment exists. Each apartment has its own bath. A one story addition was added in 1925, expanding one of the apartments. Ms. Weatherford moved to recommend designation of the Long Apartment Complex at 220 East Laurel Street. Mr. Frick seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 808 West Mountain Avenue the Clippinger House lNeva Lawton) The same family has lived in the Clippinger House since its construction in 1898 and the structure remains unaltered. Ms. Lawton recently installed light switches in the upstairs of the house, when her daughter moved in. The house is significant for its Queen Anne style of architecture. Ms. Kullman moved to recommend designation of the Clippinger House, 808 West Mountain Avenue. The motion was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (7-0) OTHER BUSINESS: The Commission discussed including Tim Simmons on the list of design professionals for the Design Assistance Program. Ms. Weatherford moved we include Tim Simmons on the list for the Design Assistance Program. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kullman, which passed unanimously. (7-0) CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: 514 East Elizabeth Street the Anna-B. Miller House (owner Margie Marshall) Part I for State Tax Credit Staff explained the interior work proposed for the Anna B. Miller House. The work included removing and replacing the furnace, adding an air filter and humidifier, converting a wood fireplace to gas, removing the carpet and refinishing the original oak floors, installing bookshelves along side the fireplace, repairing broken windows and installing wood frame windows and replacing the storm door. The wood mantle would also be stripped in order to determine if the piece was original, in which case it would be refinished. Another option would be to build a new oak mantle in the original design. The heat registers were also proposed to be replaced with either brass or wood. Mr. Frick asked if it was a gas insert which would be added to the fireplace. Mr. Tanner asked if the conversion to a gas fireplace was covered under the State Tax Credit Program. He said that it was not part of an overall rehabilitation project. Mr. Frick said that fixing the flu would qualify for the program. Ms. Tunner added that an electric fireplace was not historic preservation. Mr. Tanner said that it was more of an element of redecoration. Ms. Tunner commented that it was an element of comfort and Landmark Preservation Commission Minutes January 14,1997 Page 4 commented that the bookcase was not known to be originally there. Ms. Carpenter explained that the two small windows which existed adjacent to the fireplace were typically part of the Craftsman design. Ms. Weatherford added that they could not be sure that shelves had not existed there. Mr. Tanner commented on replacing the heat registers with brass. Margie Marshall, applicant, explained to Ms. Carpenter that the heat registers were functional. Mr. Frick asked if they were originally brass and Ms. Marshall did not know. Ms. Carpenter said that it was not eligible for restoration for State Tax Credit. Mr. Hogestad and Mr. Frick requested details for the proposed mantle. Mr. Frick explained that they needed dimensions of the height, width, depth, a cross section, construction drawings, whether the mantle was adjustable or fixed and the dimensions relative to the windows and fireplace. Mr. Tanner suggested using the Design Review Sub -Committee and Ms. Carpenter accepted his suggestion. The Commission explained to Ms. Marshall that items #2 (the gas insert) and #9 (the brass heat registers) could be completed, but were not eligible to receive State Income Tax Credit. Ms. Marshall asked for the Commission's opinion about choosing a new front door. The LPC recommended a full front door. Mr. Tanner moved that we approve the proposal for preliminary design review and similarly be reacted. The motion was seconded by Ms. Weatherford, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 107 North College Avenue Saltillo's (Erin Dando. General Manager) - Approval of Awninas with Sianaae Saltillo's Grill had painted the awning frame black and the windows panes red and pink. The applicant now proposes to recover the awnings and would like to change the selected awning color from black to red. Erin Dando said that they would like to install the awnings on both sides of the building with one on College Avenue and three on Mountain Avenue. Mr. Frick requested that the applicant address the window painting. Ms. Dando explained that when the awnings are installed the windows would then be covered. They are appealing to City Council February 4, 1997 to leave the paint on the windows. Mr. Frick explained that they would only be discussing the awnings at present. Ms. Dando said that they could not give a date for the installation of the awnings. Ms. Weatherford said that could be a problem because currently the windows are painted. Mr. Frick said that they typically request a time frame from the applicant in order to bring the issue to a closure. Ms. Carpenter asked if the temporary signs would be removed. The applicant explained that they had not ordered anything yet because they were waiting for approval. Ms. Carpenter explained that there was a time line for temporary signage, according to City Code. Mr. Tanner moved to approve the proposal for the awning recover in Jockey Red With awning signage and strike the window painting part of the proposal. The motion was seconded by Ms. Weatherford, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Landmark Pmscrvation Commission Minutes January 14, 1997 Page 5 208/214 Linden, the Mercer and Bemheim Block's fLinden'sl Final Design Review Ms. Tunner presented the background for this application and explained Staffs recommendation to not approve the proposed I-beam sign on 208 Linden because it would cover architectural details on the building and that was not in compliance with the guidelines for Historic Old Town. Ms. Tunner added that the LPC could not require a restoration of the storefront, which had been removed in December 1996 because of structural damage, but it would be desirable to do a restoration. Tom Kalert of Architecture Plus then introduced the design and business team to the LPC. Bill Warren, contractor, Tommy Short building owner, Larry Drasin, designer for Bohemian Brewers, Louis Skelton, architects for Bohemian Brewers were all present at the meeting and participated in the presentation and discussion of the proposed I-beam sign and historic storefront restoration. They stressed that they would like to continue the atmosphere and character of the Old Town Plaza and invite pedestrians from the plaza down to the newer areas of Old Town. The I-beam sign was used to create an image, concept and theme of their other corporate restaurants. Mr. Skelton presented photo -documentation of similar signage. Mr. Kalert explained that they planned to re- create the historic facade based on photo -documentation and other storefronts in the area. Mr. Drasin explained that they are in a position where they could restore the storefront and do something substantial for the building, but it needs to be done in a timely manner. Mr. Short stressed that they needed to reach an agreement before opening February 20, 1997. Mr. Short and Mr. Drasin discussed bringing in final plans for the January 28, 1997 LPC meeting in order to seek final approval. Mr. Frick and Ms. Carpenter suggested that they may need more time to gather historic photo documentation and asked that the LPC Design Review Sub -Committee discuss details. Mr. Skelton then explained that the proposed I-beam sign matched the manufacturing theme of the restaurant and brewery inside. Mr. Skelton explained that the storefront reconstruction was a good restoration opportunity and said that an accurate restoration would come from adequate photo -documentation or physical evidence, otherwise the restoration would be speculative. There was an indication that a drain pipe existed on the front facade of the building, from a photo on the cover of the Design Guidelines. He pointed out that the drain on the building formed a sheet metal column. The stairs on the right of building #208 were not original and were added around 1910. Mr. Skelton said that he planned to do more research because there were too many unknowns about the building. At the City's Assessors office a picture from the Golden Ram around 1970-1972 did show a ten degree pitch sign band on the building. Mr. Skelton also explained that the steel and rivets shown in a photo board of Fort Collins downtown and Denver were also being incorporated into the design of the sign band. The sign should be set away from the building in order to protect the historic fabric on the facade. He said that they drew a sight line up under the sign which created a view of the building details for the pedestrian down below. He explained that if they lowered Landmark Preservation Commission Mmuhs January 14,1997 Page 6 the sign band another six inches then the architectural details could be seen from across the street as well. Mr. Drasin added that the sign band was aligned with the corbel detail of the building. Mr. Hogestad asked how the sign band was proposed to be mounted. Mr. Skelton explained that two bolts into the mortar would be attached to a cantilever and cables would keep the band from buckling in the middle. He proposed to use a real steel channel beam as opposed to faux steel. Mr. Warren commented that the sign was removable and would not harm the original structure. Mr. Skelton explained that the sign could come down with the removal of just six bolts. He said that the sign was totally reversible and was designed to preserve the historic architecture. Mr. Drasin said that a lot of work went into designing the sign, while protecting the historic details and minimizing any impact on the building. Mr. Hogestad inquired about lighting. Mr. Drasin explained that he would like to see accent lighting directed at the building, similar to what exists across the street. He would also like to bring the sign band away from the building and introduce accent edge lighting. He used the Oxford Hotel in Denver as an example of the feel he would like to portray. Ms. Weatherford asked how they would propose to do the lighting. Mr. Kalert explained that this was a conceptual presentation of the lighting and added that the lighting would be hidden behind the sign band. He also added there was a distinction between an I-beam and the currently proposed sign band. The sign band was thinner and would appear to float away from the building. Mr. Drasin explained that they were still working on determining where to marry the two signs on each building, because the buildings were different heights. Mr. Warren referred to Guideline #19 which addressed visual continuity across storefronts. Mr. Drasin commented that sometimes there could be a broad interpretation of the guidelines and in this case they would like to be creative in their design and establish their corporate identity. Ms. Krueger, also of Architecture Plus, added that they would like to unite the buildings without destroying their individuality. Mr. Kalert explained that they would have no neon and no spot lighting, but just a simple wash of light over the building, which would highlight the building at night. Mr. Skelton said that they need more time to complete the historic research of the facade and to plan the lighting. Mr. Short commented that there were signs across the street from his business which had been mounted directly into the building. Ms. Krueger said that they would like to present the signage and then the lighting later. Ms. Carpenter explained that the addition of lighting makes a difference and she needs to be able to get a sense, to create a picture of what it is going to look like. Mr. Short said that they were only prepared to discuss the sign tonight. Mr. Frick explained that the lighting would affect the sign. Mr. Hogestad stated that there was no lighting included in the proposal which they were reviewing. Mr. Drasin said that they had received a recommendation from the LPC during an earlier conceptual design review, which encouraged a sign band and indirect lighting. He stated that an ambient glow of light was proposed before and that lighting could be addressed later. The building on the left was not as historic and Landmark Preservation Commission Minutes January 14,1997 Page 7 could therefore accommodate signage and lighting, but the building on the right was more pure and intact. Ms. Weatherford explained that the proposed sign band was different from the I-beam which was approved December 10, 1996. Ms. Carpenter suggested that they discuss the application as a whole, instead of reviewing it piecemeal. Mr. Kalert said that they were trying to compromise with the LPC to get the sign band approved. Now they were presenting a light weight steel channel and at a future date would come back for lighting. Mr. Short felt that he was entitled to a sign and was anxious to get the sign up and open the business, so he only wanted approval for the items included in the application packet. Mr. Skelton explained the changes which were presented this evening. The sign was dropped down to the lowest possible level and was brought out a bit in order to avoid covering historic details of the building. Mr. Tanner said that he had a problem with the sign's compatibility with that street and the amount of signage. He suggested installing the sign on the left building and not on the right building. Mr. Short felt that it would deny the right building from looking like it was part of the business. Mr. Short explained that there were two facades on what was one business on the inside. One side was planned to be the brewery and the other Linden's restaurant. The important features on the inside which integrated the two sides needed to be carried to the outside of the buildings as well. He also described the compatibility of materials in the area. There were a number of steel structures along Linden Street which were compatible with the proposed real steel sign band. Mr. Frick mentioned other businesses which expand along several storefronts, but do not share the same theme throughout each building on the inside. Ms. Carpenter discussed the angle and depth which the sign band was proposed to stick out. She said that three feet out may appear obtrusive. Ms. Krueger pointed out that awnings commonly stick out six feet. Ms. Carpenter explained that the awning was an historic element in Old Town. Mr. Hogestad said that three feet was acceptable and that he preferred the steel channel to the faux I-beam. He explained that he was still concerned about the lighting and how it would be installed later. Mr. Short said that they have to make sure that they are meeting with any energy compliance before they plan the lighting, which has a low priority. Mr. Hogestad explained that a retrofit never looks as good as a planned installation. He also explained that at this point the concept may look appealing, but when lighting is added it may not be. Mr. Warren explained that it was a removable sign, so they could take it down in order to install the lighting. The Commission members discussed the measurements of the sign band which they considered approvable. Mr. Frick pointed out that they needed dimensions of the proposed sign band on the drawings. Mr. Tanner suggested that the applicants submit dimensions and details administratively to the LPC Design Review Sub - Committee or Staff. Mr. Skelton added that he would like the letters to be back lit on the sign band. He described the color of the sign band as a gun metal color, which was part of the Bohemian image. Ms. Weatherford said that she felt that they had reached a compromise, but the details of the proposed sign was missing. Mr. Hogestad Landmark Preservation commission Minutes January 14,1997 Page g explained that the proposed sign band was light weight and would appear more like an awning piece than a huge steel beam. Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the sign band as proposed for #208 and #214 Linden Street with the sign band to be constructed of steel channel approximately sixteen Inches high and with a three feet projection from the wall on both buildings. Conditional on the Design Review Sub -Committee reviewing details and if not sufficient, returning to the Landmark Preservation Commission for further review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kullman, which passed unanimously. (7-0) (Yeas:Carpenter, Weatherford, Frick, Hogestad, Kullman, Ross, Tanner) (Nays:none) DISCUSSION ITEMS: Ms. Lawrie, City Planner gave an introduction to the applications, for the Local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program. She presented a slide of each property and listed the work which was proposed to be done. The meeting-adjoumed 9:20 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.