Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 03/13/2002L LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 13, 2002 Minutes Council Liaison: Eric Hamrick (225-2343) Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376) Commission Chairperson: Per Hogestad (416-7285) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. Commission members Angie Aguilera, Agnes Dix, Per Hogestad, Janet Ore, Carole Stansfield and Myrne Watrous present. W.J. "Bud" Frick was absent. Timothy Wilder and Carol Tunner represented staff. GUESTS: Doug Moore, Environmental planner, Sue Kenney, Environmental Education and Public Involvement Coordinator, both of the Natural Resources Dept., City of Ft. Collins. AGENDA REVIEW: Discussion item added: Nix west farmhouse rehabilitation plans for stucco rehabilitation. In Other Business, the Friend of Preservation award procedures to be initiated. STAFF REPORTS: Carol — Information on Board & Commission training classes by the City Clerk's Office handed out for March 7th and March 18th training opportunities. LPC members were asked to please respond to the clerk's office if they wish to participate. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Watrous attended the DDA meeting. She reports that she heard a good presentation by Mr. Wilder on the Old Fort Site Cultural Survey Project. Items of interest to the LPC included a discussion on 334 E. Mountain Ave., where extensive renovations are being planned including changes to the outside appearance (from white stucco to brick and wrought iron), and the addition of a patio. This property will be used for a jazz/comedy/blues club, to open in May 2002. In these renovations, the designers are trying to make the building blend in. This property is not a historic property, having been built c. 1958. A sign will be put in place, to be lit from the front. The DDA still wants to build a play area in Old Town, located in Old Town Square just north of Colorado Classics. The inclusion of this play area would require the removal of a planted area as well as a pedestrian walkway. This will have to come under LPC review. Regarding the redevelopment of the old downtown Steele's Market, it is controversial in the neighborhood. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 23, 2002 MINUTES: On page 4, change "CSU representative' to "LPC representative to the Historic Building Review Board." Ms. Aguilera moved to approve the January minutes as amended. Seconded by Ms. Dix and approved unanimously, 6-0. CURRENT REVIEW: 1745 Hoffman Mill Road, Nix Farm. Conceptual Landscape Plan (Sue Kenney and Doug Moore) . The City has plans for a wildlife habitat garden Landmark Preservation Commissiio March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 2 • around the west farmhouse building, which makes use of the area for educational purposes, and also for Art in Public Places. The Nix Farm is not just a maintenance facility with offices for the maintenance personnel, but will also be used for educational purposes. Ms. Kenney and Mr. Moore are working with the Art in Public Places Board for the design of the backyard. The road will fork off and go around the garden which will include a pond with a fountain with a mountain/wetland background, a butterfly garden, a buffalo grass/prairie section, a hidden habitat section, and a patio for outdoor meeting space, which will also have a small bubbling water basin. A drawing was shown, but a few changes will be made to it. No deck will be included. Instead, what was labeled as a deck will be flagstone patio. The overall design will also be less formal than drawn. An abandoned well is on the property but City water will probably be used for the landscaping. Ms. Dix asked if it will need as much water, if native species will be used, as shown in the plan. Ms. Kenney replied that not at much will be needed once the landscaping is mature, but until then, it will require quite a bit of water. Ms. Watrous asked where the silhouette lenses will go? She was shown on the model where the tubes run through the patio rockwork planter, and the lenses will be placed on one of the openings of these tubes. Ms. Kenney and Mr. Moore are concerned with upkeep and vandalism, however, and the idea has not yet been adopted. The stone in the patio area will be real stone, laid out as a dry stack stone. The stones opposite the sitting area will be larger, flat stones and will hopefully be used for sitting on. The paths through the area will be colored concrete and crusher fines, but will not be in loops or braids, as shown in drawing. They will be accessible to the handicapped. Ms. Stansfield asked if there are many transient people in the area. The City is concerned about that, but there will be people working there 7 days a week. Hr. Hogestad asked if the water feature shown at the northwest corner will be similar to the other water feature? A biofeature sculpture may be used to filter the water, but the final design of this feature has not yet been determined. Biofeature sculptures need to bubble to aerate the water, and they're not sure they want this there. This will be in a later phase in their budget, and so they have not put as much time into the design of it. Ms. Stansfield asked if dogs will be allowed there? She was told that people will be discouraged from bringing their dogs. Ms. Stansfield replied that it's a feature that people will be drawn to, and therefore they will be bringing their dogs. She was told that this is an issue, and it will have to be monitored. Mr. Hogestad asked if there is a lot of wildlife there? He was told that yes, this is one of the attractions of the area. There are skunks, and with the water, a lot more raccoons may move in. Landmark Preservation Commissi March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 3 Ms. Dix asked if Mr. Moore and Ms. Kenney would elaborate on the plans for classroom space. In response, the LPC was told that inside the building is a conference room that will be suitable for classes. There will also be room for a bus, but they don't think this will be a big fieldtrip destination. Ms. Tunner had 5 points she wanted to mention: 1) This is a conceptual review, as the whole plan has not been determined. 2) She has looked at historical writings, and around the Nix Farm were many trees and gardens in the past, including a big cottonwood tree and Chinese elms. When the Nix's took over, the trees were badly overgrown, so they were taken out, and the Nix's put in extensive gardens. School buses used to come out to the farm — all the second graders in town would visit. 3) The plans described so far are all reversible. 4) Public education — public benefit from this property makes it easier to write grants for the work. 5) Plans for the signage are not complete. The City will be coming in with the plans in the future and will speak with Ms. Tunner, who will deal with them administratively. Mr. Hogestad asked if the site is designated, and Ms. Tunner said that yes, the whole site has been designated. Ms. Ore mentioned that this kind of landscaping is perfectly suited to a Craftsman house, and conceptually fits very nicely. Mr. Hogestad agreed that it is a very attractive design. Ms. Aguilera asked if an earlier landscape master plan was seen by the LPC. She was told that there was a landscape plan originally, but the LPC did not see it. Ms. Tunner asked Ms. Kenney to bring a copy of the overall master plan back to the LPC when she brings the wildlife gardens in for final review. OTHER BUSINESS: Old Fort Site Cultural Survey Project Final Review (presented by Timothy Wilder, City Planner and Project Manager) At the last meeting, Jason Marmor presented Old Fort Site Historical Context and survey forms for the properties. Mr. Wilder agreed to provide to the LPC the additional comments that have been received since the last meeting. A write-up of all substantive comments was handed out. Ms. Ore had had some comments about how this fits into the larger historical context. Mr. Wilder intends to add additional language about the important historical movements around the country and how they are reflected in the local landmarks. The final comment is from Joan Day regarding 224/226 Willow St. The Survey Report now has page numbers and is sorted by address. • Landmark Preservation Commission March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 4 A copy of Div. 3.4 standards was handed out, showing the specific land use standards for historic resources. The standards state that protection of historic structures is required when a development proposal is being considered. Mr. Wilder is seeking approval of the historical contexts report and architectural inventory forms. Ms. Watrous said that the Fort area is outlined, but asked how properties on Vine Drive got "into this mix." The City was required to survey a specific number of properties, but could not identify enough buildings to survey in the Old Fort area as had been promised, so they went into the nearby areas to survey additional properties. This is justified as they had to consider the theme of community development and those properties fall into that theme. Ms. Watrous asked about 411 Linden St., The Burlingame house. She couldn't find anything on it, but the report suggests that it is eligible. She was told that 411 Linden was surveyed earlier, as was the Giddings Building and Poudre Feed Supply Building. They were surveyed and are all eligible. Ms. Watrous said that the LPC cannot designate the whole area, but asked if is it possible to designate mini -districts? Poudre Feed and Supply and the Union Pacific Freight Depot -- could these be designated as a mini -district? Mr. Wilder responded that they want consistency in the district. Perhaps Ms. Watrous is talking about multiple property listings? Ms. Ore responded that "multiple property" would be buildings of the same use or similar use, and buildings of a genre. Ms. Watrous asked if historic properties need to be in a district. Ms. Ore said that because they are individually eligible, then they have the same protection as they would for a district — or perhaps more protection as individually eligible properties. Ms. Watrous asked if the four Quonset huts should be in a district. Ms. Ore said that this is an instance where you might want to use the multiple property designation. Mr. Hogestad said that he thought they all used railroad loading docks. The multiple property designation could be used here. The open door mission is also a railroad building. Railroads were probably used for freight at the time they were built, as opposed to trucks. Someone added that putting a district together is a difficult thing. A railroad -based district might be more workable than a district involving the Quonset huts. The district would include the freight depot, and would have to have the consent of the property owners. The Quonset huts may be eligible for a potential district, and would therefore have the protections of a district. Mr. Wilder suggested that further research is needed on the Quonset huts. Landmark Preservation CommissidPS • March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 5 Ms. Ore added that with a district the LPC would have to reevaluate quite a few buildings, especially if the thread was the relationship with the railroad. They also need to consider the Hispanic neighborhoods and the sugar -beet industry. Evolving into Hispanic neighborhoods was a major change in the context of the area. Mr. Hogestad asked if it is it a matter of identifying a certain type of property that we need information on? Mr. Wilder replied that, as staff, he'd only be comfortable with seeking more information on the Quonset huts. Looking at more than that will delay the eligibility determination of the buildings. Ms. Watrous asked if a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance had ever been considered? Mr. Hogestad replied that yes, there is an ordinance like that, but it is not usually anything that will keep an owner from doing what they want with their property. Ms. Tunner added that this is a minimum maintenance section that was written in the landmark ordinance to prevent what happened to the Linden Hotel from happening ever again. Ms. Watrous asked about the Sears Trostle Building. Mr. Hogestad replied that it was condemned, and the ordinance only applies to buildings with a landmark designation. Ms. Ore said that it must be initiated through a complaint. Mr. Hogestad said that the ordinance is usually called into play when safety issues are of concern. If something is going to fall down and hurt someone, then the owner must fix it. This doesn't apply to all that many structures. Ms. Tunner read the applicable regulations from City Code, section 14-57. In the Survey Project Review, page 243, the LPC members questioned his determination of eligibility for 224 Willow St. This is a classic cottage, run down, but intact. Mr. Hogestad said that this property would be given a designation if the owner came in before the LPC. However, on the survey form, the building is listed as not eligible. Mr. Wilder replied that it does not have architectural significance, and is not a unique building. Ms. Ore replied that it doesn't have to be. Mr. Wilder answered that there are other examples of buildings of this type in the area — it is not individually eligible. Mr. Hogestad said, again, that if this came to the LPC, it would be designated. Ms. Ore said that the LPC does not have sufficient information, so the survey form should also reflect that. Mr. Wilder disagreed, saying that there is sufficient information, and strongly disagrees that this would be an eligible building. Ms. Ore replied that if all individual working class houses are to be ineligible, then what we are doing is neglecting the entire working class history of our town. Mr. Hogestad said that there are several of those small working class cottages that have been designated. He asked Mr. Wilder why this house shouldn't be included? Ms. Ore said that if they'll only consider the best ones, then this one won't be included. Mr. Hogestad said that this could be one of the best ones, as it hasn't been altered. Landmark Preservation Commisso • March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 6 Mr. Wilder read the City Code criteria for historical significance. Ms. Ore asked if laborers, don't contribute to a community? Mr. Wilder answered, "For this structure the occupants did not have strong influence on society." Ms. Ore asked, "Is there another reason that this one isn't eligible?" Mr. Wilder replied that he recognizes that the LPC must make a determination based on the significance criteria. However, being on top of contamination is a problem. It renders future use of this property questionable. He explained that there is plume of contamination running under that property. Ms. Ore agreed that health and safety problems override historical concern. If there is a plume of contamination under that property, then that is a consideration. Mr. Hogestad suggested that perhaps more information is needed on this property. There appears to be some middle ground here. The LPC members agreed that they want to give this property at 224 Willow Street further deliberation. Ms. Watrous asked if Mr. Wilder had sent letters out to property owners, and if so, which ones? Mr. Wilder replied that letters were sent to all of them. Ms. Ore moved that the LPC approve the Old Fort Site Cultural Survey Historic Context Report and Architectural Inventory Forms for final review with the following stipulations: • make an evaluation of insufficient data on all the Quonset -type huts on Jefferson and Vine, and on the property at 224 Willow Street. • accept context report for the Old Fort Site with addition of more historical context included. The LPC asks that they include a broader historic context than just the local. Seconded by Ms. Aguilera. The report must include broader relevance. The LPC may be able to convince people of the importance of their building when it's part of a larger historical movement. Regarding Camp Collins, a paragraph is needed to explain that there was a whole series of camps, this was not just an individual camp existing on its own. The Quonset huts should also be seen in a larger context. This is important to the way we determine significance — is this representative of a broader genre in history? If you can tie the structure to that, then it gains significance. No public input. Approved unanimously, 6-0. ADDED OTHER BUSINESS: Nix Farm. (Craftsman Style house stucco rehabilitation plan handed out by Ms. Tunner.) At the February 27 LPC meeting, it was decided that the West Farm House on the Nix Farm, 1745 Hoffman Mill Road, should be completely restuccoed. Ms. Tunner was directed to administratively approve the final plans in consultation with the LPC • Landmark Preservation Commissio March 13, 2002 Meeting Minutes Page 7 • Design Review Sub -Committee. She just received the plans so the LPC can comment on them. Referring to the drawing, on the west elevation, the chimney looks stuccoed up above. Ms. Dix asked, why, on the north elevation, is the chimney showed as brick above the roof? This appears to be an error on the drawing. The drawing correctly shows that the building has 3/8" expansion joints as discussed. Ms. Tunner was informed that there should be a notation on the drawing that the front porch wall is not to be restuccoed, but repaired and serve as a control. Friend of Preservation Award. The LPC would like to consider the following properties/developers/owners for the award: Northern Hotel 208/214 Peterson Street — developer Mr. Smith for his alley house design. Nelson Milkhouse Street Railway car barn on North Howes St. A decision will be made by the LPC at the next meeting. Letters of Support are needed from the LPC for grants. For the State Historical Fund, Ms. Tunner presented a request for a letter of support for a grant to restore the Franz - Smith cabin at the museum in Library Park. Regarding the Nix East farmhouse, she would like one letter of support for a grant to restore the historic wood roof and half - round gutters, and another letter for a Historic Structures Assessment grant for the barn, loafing shed and East farmhouse. Ms. Ore moved that the LPC direct Ms. Tunner to write letters of support for the Nix Farm and for the Franz -Smith cabin. Seconded by Ms. Dix, and approved unanimously, 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Submitted by Connie Merrill, Secretary.