Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 01/13/1997LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting January 13, 1997 Council Liaison: Scott Mason Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225-0960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC heard a presentation from John Daggett, Transportation Planner on the reuse of the C & S Depot as a multi -modal transportation center. The Hunter/Hill House, 122 Jackson Avenue, was designated as a local landmark. Re -roofing, painting and the rehab/replacing of doors were approved for State Tax Credit Part 1, 214-216 Pine Street. The Northern Hotel, Part 2 State Tax Credit was approved for re -roofing. Conceptual designs for the renovation of the Silver Grill, 214-222 Walnut Street were presented. The LPC nominated recipients for the Outstanding Historic Renovation Award (Annie the Dog's Grave) and the Friend of Preservation Award (Harmony School, Trimble and Barkley Block, Phil Walker and the Coy/Hoffman Barn). Ms. McWilliams discussed the Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties and the Process for District Designation. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Per Hogestad, commission Co -Chairperson called the meeting to order 5:33 p.m., at 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Bud Frick, Rande Pouppirt and Stephen Short were present. Jennifer Carpenter arrived 6:15 p.m. Angela Milewski and James Tanner were absent. Carol Tunner, Joe Frank, Timothy Wilder and Karen McWilliams represented Staff. GUESTS: John Daggett, Transportation Planner 11; Norman and Joan Miller, owners of 122 Jackson Avenue, the Hunter/Hill House; Les Sunde, owner of 214 — 216 Pine Street; John Amolfo, owner of the Silver Grill, 214 — 222 Walnut Street PRESENTATION: C & S Freight Depot as Site of a Multi Modal Transportation Center John Dagger Transportation Planner 11 Mr. Daggett reported that a Committee had been formed to study the C & S Freight Depot site for a Multi -Modal Transportation Center. This site was one of two potential sites that were selected during this feasibility study. The other site selected was on the LaPorte/America lot, but the parking garage planned for that site would adversely impact the transportation center. Bus exhaust fumes may become trapped in the structure. Therefore, the freight depot was selected for the center. Monies to improve the Transit Corridor in this region will be available for the depot. Mr. Daggett explained that the proposed center will be multi -modal, which would serve bikes, carpools, vanpools and the City Transit System. The architecture of two new buildings proposed for the comers of the block would be designed after the old former passenger C & S depot on Mason and Landmark Preservation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 2 LaPorte Avenue. They would like to recreate the old depot and photos of it were passed around. They would renovate the old freight depot for offices in the back and a front waiting room with counter for ticket sales. Ms. Tunner suggested that they add the trolley to the plans. Mr. Daggett explained that they are very early in the process. He assured the Commission that they would protect Annie the Dog's Grave. He explained that they would utilize a pulse system with transfer among buses and maybe Greyhound buses, too. A Kiss-N-Ride area would be created as a drop-off point for commuters. Bike lockers would be installed for bike storage. They would like to include the LPC on both the exterior and interior design of the depot. Mr. Short asked why diagonal parking was not planned for the site. Mr. Hogestad said that ninety -degree parking provides more spaces. Mr. Daggett explained that the buses will be parked in a saw -tooth pattern, for ease of movement. The LPC asked who would utilize the proposed office space on the north side of the depot. Transportation Planning and some transit personnel would occupy the space. Mr. Hogestad was concerned about the lack of windows for office space. Mr. Daggett mentioned the proposed a skylight for the office space. Ms. Tunner asked how the overhead doors would be treated in the design. Mr. Pouppirt asked about the loading dock. Mr. Daggett said that they do not have plans for the dock yet. They plan to go ahead with the Kiss-N-Ride while the parking garage is being built. Buses are already entering the area. They also discussed the design of an arcade, a series of archways to buffer the street away from the facility. Mr. Daggett concluded that they are not far along in the design phase yet. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes. STAFF REPORTS: Mr. Wilder provided binders which contained fourteen applications for the 1998 Local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program and requested that Commission members review the material prior to the January 27 LPC meeting. Mr. Pouppirt asked if there would be presentations given by the applicants. Mr. Wilder said that he will present additional information and show slides when necessary. Forty thousand dollars in funding have been requested, while only twenty thousand is available. Ms. McWilliams explained the presentation of the Standards and Guidelines for Historic Districts Designation Process. A public meeting will be held in the near future. Ms. Tunner introduced Rande Pouppirt, new LPC member. Ms. Tunner also shared with the Commission cards they had received from Don Woeber and Empire Carpentry. They discussed moving the LPC meetings to another day of the week because of the conflict created by Tuesday Council meetings. Ms. Tunner passed a list around to note evenings when LPC and staff members were free. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Mr. Frick reported that at the latest DDA (Downtown Development Authority) meeting, no issues regarding the LPC were discussed. 0 Landmark Presentation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The November 11, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as submitted. The November 25, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as submitted. The December 9, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as submitted. CONSENT AGENDA: Local Landmark Designation of the Hunter/Hill House 122 Jackson Avenue for its historical and architectural importance 214 — 216 Pine Street - Re -roofing Painting and door Rehabilitation for Part 1 of the State Tax Credit (Les Sunde) 172 North College Avenue Northern Hotel Re roofing for Part 2 of the State Tax Credit (Bill Starke Mr. Frick moved to approve the consent agenda. Mr. Short seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (4-0) Mr. Frank suggested that the consent agenda be scheduled before Staff Reports and Commission Members' Reports, so that Commission members will have an opportunity to say something about an issue on the consent agenda. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: 214 — 222 Walnut Street Silver Grill — Fagade Rehabilitation for Conceptual Design Review. State Tax Credit Part 1 Local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant (JohnJohnArnolfo) Mr. Frick abstained from the discussion because he is the applicant's architect. Mr. Amolfo explained that they are very early in the design process. He would like to reconstruct the facade of his five buildings. The Silver Grill has been expanding since 1979, and in 1995 the applicant purchased the Sportsman, at 210 Walnut Street. First he remodeled the inside of the building. The availability of photo -documentation of the front exterior of the buildings is somewhat limited. There is no good picture of 210, but the facade was probably similar to 218. The applicant would like to stay with the Old Town colors of green and burgundy. A sign with new logo was shown and will be presented for approval later. Ms. Carpenter arrived, 6:15 p.m. Mr. Amolfo explained that he is flexible and that the history of the buildings is important to him. He pointed out some issues with the building code, like the doors can not swing out. Ms. Tunner asked the applicant to describe the different storefronts and the different treatments for the different facades. 218 Walnut was the original Silver Grill. The building Landmark Preservation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 4 is original above the transom cap and the brick is in poor repair. They would like to strip paint and bring the brick back. Below the transom line is new, but in the late 1940s stucco was installed. 216 Walnut is very much the same as 218 Walnut. Mr. Frick added that the stucco on these buildings was done at the same time. 214 Walnut is the building that is most historic. It has the original windows and copper mulleins. Mr. Amolfo said that the fagade was bowing out, so fifteen years ago a structural seal was installed. 212 Walnut has many original features but is in the worst shape. The fagade of 210 Walnut is covered in Miami brick. They do not know what exists behind it. From the attic, you can see an inside row of bricks, but not the outer row. Mr. Hogestad asked if the face of the Miami brick building aligns with 212 Walnut. Mr. Frick said that it looks like they removed the face brick to install the Miami brick face. Ms. Tunner explained that the project is being reviewed for Local Design Review, State Tax Credit and the local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant. Mr. Short asked if they would paint the existing brick if they had problems restoring it. Mr. Frick said that all of the brick is painted now. Mr. Short asked if they planned to re- use the glass and transoms for 216 — 218 Walnut. On 214 Walnut they will need to redo the kick plates but the basic framework is still there. The copper glazing system on 214 will remain the same. The Commission discussed the one bar left of patterned steel, which exists on 218 Walnut. Until the Miami stone is removed, they will not know what to do with 210 Walnut. They do have good photo documentation of 218 Walnut. The historic fabric will be replicated on 212 Walnut and the bad elements will be rebuilt. If more grant funding becomes available, the aluminum storefront windows on 210 will be replicated like those of 216-218 Walnut. Mr. Arnolfo explained that the transom bar, signage and awnings of all the buildings will match. Mr. Short said that they can still maintain the definition of the different building by having each painted with different colors. Mr. Frick said that they will probably be painted with the same colors, but they hope to be able to preserve the brick on the buildings. They will wait and see what condition the brick is in. The applicant would like to create the impression of the same store and plans to use the same color awning across the storefronts. The Commission discussed approving exploratory demolition, so they can see just what they are dealing with. Ms. Carpenter explained that they can either go back to the 1940s storefront or the original storefront. She pointed out the octagonal pattern of one window and said it would be missed when it was removed. They also discussed how they used to serve the food out of a slider window. Mr. Short suggested that they keep some subtle distinction, while remaining homogeneous in the design. Ms. Carpenter agreed that it is important to keep a distinction, because they are separate buildings. 210 Walnut was the last fill in building and exists on an odd size lot. 212-214 Walnut share an attic space. Mr. Hogestad discussed the construction of the buildings. Mr. Hogestad asked what was planned for 210 Walnut if nothing exists under the Miami brick. He suggested the option to restore this fagade as the 1940s storefront and tie it in with awnings. Mr. Amolfo said that they would like to maintain the old look for the business. The awning will be set out a little bit on the middle building, so it reads as an entrance. Their new sign will need bigger letters. An eleven -inch lettering sign band with a green mesh material was proposed. This would help tie the buildings together. A gooseneck light over top is also proposed, which is more in line with Old Town and would provide illumination at night. Mr. Frick said that there is no Landmark Preservation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 5 need for the mesh material, because the awnings and sign with gooseneck light will probably be good enough. Ms. Carpenter stated that mesh is not an historic fabric. Mr. Frank asked if the awning was canvas. The applicant would like to start demolition right away. They would like to remove the stucco and the Miami brick. They also need this information in order to apply for an Historical Society Grant. The application is due April 1 and they would like to select a contractor. Mr. Frick said that he will prepare a statement, which explains what demo work they will do, and how they plan to do it. The Commission said that the proposed sign can be reviewed administratively. The wood around the storefront will be painted green and the paint scheme will depend on whether the storefront brick will be painted or not. Mr. Pouppirt said that the appearance of the storefronts is fun because of the differences. The restaurant is a busy, fun place. It should look neat and tidy, but not too much. He suggested using different colors for the awnings and the woodwork. Mr. Arnolfo explained the history of the Silver Grill, how it evolved piece by piece, and how the scope and complexity of the project has changed over time. Ms. Tunner presented the Secretary of the Interior's Standard #4, which addressed the character of the different facades. Mr. Amolfo reported some information about the creator of the Miami brick, who moved to Fort Collins from Florida. His factory was where the Sundance Saloon is today on E. Mulberry. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Outstanding Historic Renovation Awards for 1997 Selection Slide Show Carol Tunner. Preservation Planner Ms. Tunner showed before and after slides of each of the projects which are eligible for the awards. The Outstanding Historic Preservation Award is given to projects that have gone through design review, and is generally considered for smaller projects. The Friend of Preservation Award is given for larger projects. These projects do not have to go through design review. Ms. Tunner reviewed each of the projects and asked the LPC to make recommendations for the award nominees. The LPC discussed the different projects and considered Annie the Dog's Grave for the Outstanding Historic Renovation Award. They discussed giving the award to the City for the fencing and brick pillars around the gravesite or the mason who worked on Annie's headstone. For the Friend of Preservation Award, the LPC nominated the Harmony School, the Trimble and Barkley Block, radio personality Phil Walker who is the author of Visions Along the Poudre, and the Coy/Hoffman Barn Project. Mr. Frick moved to nominate Annie the Dog's Grave site for the 1997 Outstanding Historic Renovation Award. Mr. Hogestad seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (5-o) Mr. Frick moved to nominate the Harmony School, the Coy/Hoffman Barn, the Trimble and Barkley Block and Phil Walker for the 1997 Friend of Preservation Award. Mr. Short seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (5-o) Landmark Preservation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 6 Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties and Process for District Designation — Karen McWilliams Preservation Planner Ms. McWilliams explained that these proposals are expected to go to Council February 3 and she encouraged LPC members to attend the meeting. Ms. McWilliams presented a history of this issue. The Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties document was developed out of concerns over demolition and pop-up housing. This document applies to landmarked properties. Mr. Frank added that Design Guidelines and Standards were adopted through zoning. Ms. McWilliams discussed how some properties may not be considered individually eligible, but are still contributing to a district. She explained how a property's eligibility is decided. She stressed that neighborhood involvement is a large part of the process. She reviewed Ordinance #14 of the City Code, which considers buildings, structures, objects and sites as eligible for designation. Their eligibility is based on significance and integrity. The significance can be related to architectural, geographical or historical importance. There are three levels of eligibility: individually eligible, contributing or non-contributing. Ms. McWilliams then reviewed the process for District Designation. The process begins with its initiation by a citizen or citizens or a LPC member. The LPC then issues an opinion on the proposed designation. Neighborhood meetings are then scheduled and citizens' opinions are sought. A public meeting is then held and the Commission may adopt a resolution. More neighborhood meetings are then scheduled and thirty -day advance notification is provided to property owners in the area. The LPC may then recommend to Council to accept the designation. The City Council then meets to discuss the designation and ten days after the second reading, if accepted by Council, the property is designated. The LPC discussed the minimum maintenance ordinance for landmarked structures. It basically requires the building owner maintain a structurally sound state of the building. The LPC wanted Ms. McWilliams to clarify the definition of a district. She gave examples, the Avery House and Old Town, and explained that the Laurel School District is a National Register District, but not a Local Landmark District. The Commission discussed the amount of dollars that were granted to the Historic Old Town District because of its district status. Mr. Pouppirt said that they need to stress protection and property value. They also discussed that some people may feel restricted in what they can do to their property or that their taxes may go up with increased property values. Mr. Short asked about the time line for the process. Ms. McWilliams said that the district designation process may be completed in as little as two months, but will typically take four to six months. The Commission also discussed that citizens in the same proposed district may have conflicting opinions about designation. Ms. McWilliams explained that Council makes the ultimate decision. Mr. Frank asked how the Standards and Guidelines fit into the process. The LPC asked if the Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties will apply to Historic Old Town. The LPC may use this document as a tool, as well as the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the HOT Guidelines. The Standard and Guidelines for Historic Properties would apply to all designated structures. The LPC reviewed the code, which addresses I * 0 Landmark Preservation Commission January 13, 1998 Page 7 what criteria the LPC may use when making decisions. The LPC has already adopted criteria documented in the Historic Old Town Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. As a housekeeping item, the LPC would like Council to adopt these documents as well. The LPC also discussed revisions and updates that have been made to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. Ms. Tunner will research this issue so the LPC can consider adopting the most recent Secretary's Standards (1992). OTHER BUSINESS: None. The meeting adjourned 8:50 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary