Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 04/03/1995LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Special Meeting April 3, 1995 Council Liaison: Gina Janett Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC heard a presentation by Winter and Company, consultants on the Eastside/Westside Design Guidelines. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Chairman Jennifer Carpenter called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Staff, Carol Tunner, called the roll. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Carl McWilliams, Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman, James Tanner, and Ruth Weatherford were present. Bud Frick was absent. Council liaison, Gina Janett was present. Joe Frank and Carol Tunner represented staff. GUESTS: Nore' Winter and Bob Matatall of Winter and Company and Leslie Bethel of R.N.L. of Denver were present. Rheba Massey, Local History Coordinator at the Public Library, Karla Oceanak, who is on the Citizen's Steering Committee and Bob Blanchard, Current Planning Director were present. Normal reports were dispensed with for this special review meeting. EASTSIDE/WESTSIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES: Mr. Winter introduced his team and explained some hand-outs that he distributed - information on enforcement of the standards and guidelines. He explained the general standard guidelines that they are proposing and then a definition of conservation districts where the same guidelines would apply. He said that they were recommending that specific local historic districts be designated: Laurel School, Holy Family, and West Mountain Avenue. These areas cover half of the east side and a fragment of the west side neighborhoods. This is an interim effort to get some review control, but intended not to overwhelm people. The goal is to maintain traditional historic character in the neighborhoods. Changes or additions of more than 25% floor area would trigger review. This is for all buildings that are not historic outside designated local historic districts. Mr. Winter stated that he would like the Commission to give him an answer to three questions: 1. Your comments on the guidelines. 2. Your feeling about designating those proposed districts with direction on size and boundaries. and 3. When to designate the districts? The whole process is on a very short time line and new construction and alley houses are an issue that needs to be addressed immediately. He explained that conservation districts give enforcement without any benefits to the homeowner. He does not intend, however, for the whole notion of districts to bog down the guidelines. Bob Blanchard noted that the moratorium on secondary structures will be rescinded in May and the old standards that allowed more intense development on a lot will be back in affect. Council member, Gina Janett, said that Council sees this item as clean-up work in that guidelines were recommended by the Eastside Plan years ago, but were never implemented. Mr. Winter asked if there was a problem with splitting the project into two tracks: 1. New construction (changes of floor area ratio of 25% or more) and secondary structures, and 2. 60 days later going after designating historic districts. Ms. Carpenter brought up that a lack of available staff time is a problem. Mr. Frank added that these districts would add a great deal to the stock of potential design review projects - and increase in workload from the current 80 or so designated buildings to over a thousand. But Mr. Winter pointed out that he has seen support for landmark districts. Ms. Janett said that there are other historic houses outside the districts which would not be under design review and some new non-contributing buildings in the districts would be under review. This sounded to her like geographic distinctions instead of building distinctions. Mr. Winter replied that historic districts could always be added. Ms. Carpenter commented that the LPC has been on record as wanting historic residential districts. Mr. Tanner commented that rushing designation of districts as soon as possible might generate resistance by going too fast. Ms. Janett said that it is very important to flag the increased staffing requirement. Mr. Frank mentioned that there may need to be a fee for residential design. Mr. Winter countered with the observation that it sounded like they should recommend designation, but the question was just how fast to do it. Ms. Massey stated that designations were the most important work of the Commission. Ms. Janett said that if the process is divided into two phases or rounds, it should be made clear what is covered in each round and a schedule prepared. Mr. Winter then went into a discussion on the content of the draft guidelines. He answered several questions. Ms. Carpenter asked what type of roof shingles would be compatible with historic structures. Mr. Winter recommended low profile asphalt shingles in brown or grey tones. He explained that grant monies can help to make up the cost of the more expensive materials that should be used to maintain an historic appearance. Mr. Hogestad is agreed with low profile shingles and said he approves of a higher profile architectural shingle. The Commission recommended that the specific recommendation on roof shingles (7-20) be left out. The last paragraph on page 3 should read "moved (as a last resort) to a site." Mr. Winter explained that picture examples will be labeled appropriate (+) or not (-). He asked for detailed comments on the draft guidelines to be provided to him by Friday, April 7. Summing up, Mr. Winter said that the consensus he was hearing was to adopt new structures and historic structures guidelines and work on the local districts by going through the formal process later. Step 1. Submit the entire package (May) Step 1. Submit the entire package (May) Step 2. Council adopts package (May): A. All standards B. Ordinance for special review (change of use, etc.) For new construction and changes to buildings of 25% FAR. C. Resolution to pursue landmarking Step 3. LPC Recommends Districts (date?) Sept 4. Council Adopts Districts Ms. Janett cautioned that it needs to be very explicit about what is at risk during the time period before final adoption of districts. Concern is that there could be wholesale demolitions or changes to historic buildings that are not designated. Discussion ensued about setting up interim conservation districts. Ms. Carpenter felt very strongly that the LPC should not be regulating painting of houses. The consultants spoke to the design review procedure in other cities and assured the Commission that this level of review is indeed done elsewhere. Ms. Kullman suggested making color and other such items voluntary but giving lots of educational materials to applicants. The meeting adjourned at 6:40 pm. Submitted by Carol Tunner, Staff.