HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 08/27/1996City Clerk
LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
August 27, 1996
Council Liaison: Gina Janett
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank
Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225-0960)
SUMMARY OF MEETING: Brick repair work was approved for the
Rehabilitation Grant Program for 229 Jefferson Street. 261 Linden
Street exterior painting was approved. The Central Business District
Survey was reviewed by the LPC.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson
called the meeting to order 5:40 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Nicole Sneider,
Secretary called the roll. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Ruth Weatherford,
Jean Kullman, James Tanner, and Diana Ross were present. Bud Frick arrived 5:45
p.m. Per Hogestad was absent. Joe Frank, Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams
represented staff.
GUESTS: Mitch Busteed, co-owner of M&M Investments, 229 Jefferson Street and
Jason Marmor from Retrospect, Consultant for the CBD Survey.
AGENDA REVIEW: None.
COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter reminded the Commission that
the LPC Policies and Procedures sub -committee will meet August 28, 1996 at 8:00
P.M. She also invited people to register for the Community Initiated Development
workshop hosted by Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation on October 1, 2,
and 3, 1996.
Ms. Carpenter said that they had discussed the silo proposal for Coopersmith's Brewing
Pub at the DDA meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The July 23, 1996 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as
submitted.
STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner reported on the last two LPC Policies and Procedures I
sub -committee meetings and provided copies of minutes from the second of the two
meetings to date. This provided information on issues which were discussed, people's
opinions and consensus on certain topics.
Ms. Tunner showed a letter, dated July 18, 1996, from Colorado Preservation
Incorporated which outlined their successful programs and accomplishments. The
letter mentioned the Property Tax Initiative which proposes to tax real property
belonging to non-profit organizations. Ms. Tunner discussed some of the implications
which the proposed state bill may have on historic structures that are owned by non-
profit organizations.
CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW:
229 Jefferson Street, Vanderwark Block - Local Landmark and Rehabilitation
Grant Review of Brick Repair and Exterior Re -Stucco - Mitch Busteed, Co -Owner
Mitch Busteed, Co -Owner M&M Investments, explained the damage to the brick on the
building. The property received a grant under the Rehabilitation Grant Program. The
work proposed was to re -stucco after performing brick repair work on the back of the
building. The stucco will be painted and color samples were provided to the LPC,
although painting was not part of the grant application. Mr. Busteed explained that the
roof leaked when they bought the building and no gutter system was in place. The
damaged brick supports the headers in the building. Fired brick instead of a soft brick
will be installed and the paint will help protect from further water damage. Diamond
Vogel Elastomeric paint will be used. All of the downspouts have been rerouted to the
storm water sewer system, so the drain goes across part of the building. Mr. Frick
asked if they were going to stucco the side of the building. Mr. Busteed said no and
explained that they were going to seal the exposed brick. He said that they would try to
scrap off the existing stucco and apply the new stucco with a uniform texture. Mr. Frick
suggested that they leave the tie rod stars exposed on the building where they exist.
Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the application for 229 Jefferson Street. Mr.
Frick seconded the motion which passed unanimously. (6-0)
Mr. Busteed wanted to discuss some other issues with the LPC. He said that he felt
that the third story addition on the Salvation Army was very obtrusive and felt that it
took away from the ambiance of Old Town. Ms. Carpenter explained that the design of
the addition was decided by the National Park Service. Mr. Frick explained that the
addition is supposed to look new. Ms. Carpenter added that the addition should still be
compatible with the older part of the building and discussed how guidelines can be
interpreted for historic or contemporary new design. Mr. Busteed was concerned that
such a structure could open the door for others like it.
OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Weatherford reported that a six foot fence had been installed
at the corner of Mulberry and Loomis, which was blocking the sign to a bed and
breakfast and the Pope's Tax business. Ms. Tunner will look into the matter.
Mr. Frank, Ms. McWilliams, and Ms. Carpenter have held several meetings recently to
discuss the Demolition Delay of the Good House on Howes Street. The house is a
wide bungalow with flared steps in front. The owners would like to install a handicap
ramp which would change the side wall of the porch. Mr. Frank explained the
demolition delay ordinance. He said that as it was written, the demolition delay
ordinance applied to demolitions of the building or any portion thereof, including any
alteration. Mr. Frick explained that if they had to demolish a part of the building in order
to install the ramp and it was not just an addition, then the ordinance may apply.
As the ordinance was written, just about any work other than a new coat of paint could
be delayed for sixty days. Mr. Frank explained the criteria for the demolition delay
ordinance. The property had to be at least fifty years old, it meets all the requirements
or it doesn't meet all of the requirements, or the structure has been so altered that it has
lost its historical integrity. Mr. Frank and Ms. Carpenter agreed that the ordinance has
to be amended. Ms. Carpenter would like to see the opportunity created to investigate
whether the structure falls under the ordinance when they do not have much
information on it. Mr. Frank also suggested removing the initial fifty dollar fee for the
demolition review because it serves as a disincentive to file for the review. Ms.
Weatherford would like to see stiffer penalties added to the ordinance. Mr. Frank
explained that the statement' demolish any portion thereof...' applies to anything on the
exterior of the house. The Good House, at 223 S. Howes Street, did receive a permit to
install the handicap ramp, but did not receive a permit to tear through the porch wall.
Ms. Carpenter said that the ordinance needs to better accomplish and communicate the
Commission's goals. The Commission discussed having the Building Inspection
Department send all applicants to the LPC staff. This practice would increase the
workload of staff tremendously and would not be an efficient way of reviewing
demolition permits.
CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW CONTINUED:
261 Linden Street, Stover Building - Repainting Building
Ms. Tunner presented the application to repaint the Stover Building. The building is
located at the corner of Linden and Jefferson. The building next door (the Bosworth
Building) will also be repainted the way it exists. Color paint chips were provided with a
color elevation of the paint scheme. The paint that will be used is from Kelly Moore and
is called, Rip Tide #OW28 and Pine #S19-3 for the trim.
Mr. Frick moved to approve the application for repainting the Stover Building, 261
Linden Street, Kelly Moore Rip Tide #OW28 and Pine #S19-3. Ms. Weatherford
seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (6-0)
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Central Business District (CBD) Survey - Review and Approval of Survey Karen
McWilliams. Staff and Jason Marmor. Consultant
Ms. McWilliams explained that Mr. Marmor designed the criteria which was used to
determine the eligibility of over one hundred buildings in the Central Business District.
A description of each category was provided, whether the structure was residential or
commercial, individually eligible for the National Historic Register, contributing to a
National Historic Register district, or not contributing. The LPC reviewed the
recommendations which Mr. Marmor concluded from the survey. Mr. Marmor
explained that the criteria was designed after reviewing criteria used in other cities and
follows a similar approach. The Evaluation Criteria for Fort Collins Central Business
District Cultural Resource Inventory Project written by Mr. Marmor was reviewed by the
Commission. Ms. Carpenter addressed the statement, first page, second paragraph
under Criteria for Evaluating Commercial Buildings in Fort Collins, " The relative rarity or
commonness of a given architectural style or design was generally not addressed,
since at present a complete inventory of Fort Collins buildings by style or design has not
been undertaken." She said that they do not know how many rare examples of a
particular architecture or building style exists in the city and would like to see such
properties identified. Mr. Marmor said that he had provided the addresses of rare
structures and identified if the features or design were relatively uncommon. Ms.
Carpenter and Mr. Marmor discussed that other uses like public utilities and agricultural
uses were not identified as a separate criteria, but were included in the commercial
properties.
The LPC reviewed the survey and set aside several properties to discuss their eligibility
status at the next meeting. Ms. McWilliams presented the surrey of the properties.
8:40 p.m. Mr. Frick left the meeting.
Ms. Weatherford moved that all of the properties other than the ones which the
LPC has set aside for further discussion, have been accepted as recommended
in the CBD District Survey. Ms. Ross seconded the motion, which passed
unanimously. (5-0)
The meeting adjourned 8:52 p.m.
Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.