Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 01/09/1985LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 1985 The meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. in the Council Information Center of New City Hall. Members present included Dick Beardmore, Wayne Sundberg and Michael Ehler. Members absent included Glenda McCall and Carol Tunner. Staff present included Sherry Albertson -Clark, Edwina Ecchevarria and Kayla Ballard. Applications Ace Liquors - 238 E. Mountain Avenue Request - Approval for 3 existing additional beer signs Applicant: Sung-Im Jang beer signs (in the window) and 2 Sherry Albertson -Clark spoke regarding questions brought up at the December 19th meeting relating to signs of a temporary nature, current sales signs, including paper signs and metal signs with plastic numbers. She stated that in checking with Pete Barnes all these signs are considered temporary and therefore, are not regulated. All signs that Ace Liquors is proposing are within the sign allowance and the other signs are not within LPC regulations. Dick questioned if temporary meant that it is limited as to when the sign is to be taken down. Sherry replied that it is considered temporary when they are changed on a frequent basis. Michael questioned if the only proposals considered at this time are the 3 neon signs. Dick responded yes. Sherry stated that the past application that the Commission approved was dealing with the "Ace Liquor" sign. The neon signs were never really dealt with. Michael questioned what the two new signs would be. Sherry replied that they would be similar to the "Bud" sign or the "Lite" sign and would be the maximum 20" X 18" sign and would be neon. They would probably be advertising a different brand of beer. She stated that Pete Barnes had no problem with granting the permit for the two signs. Michael questioned the opinion of the Commission regarding Guideline 53 which reads "Select a sign design that is compatible in color and material with your facade and the street as a whole." Wayne stated he assumed that Guideline 53 referred to the primary signage. He stated that he isn't sure that there is a guideline that covers the neon signs. Michael stated that in his opinion it is a primary sign because of the visibility. Dick stated that the temporary signs caught his eye more than the neon signs and that the windows seem to be cluttered with the paper signs. Michael questioned that if a similar -type store were to be located on the Linden Street side, would the Commission view it any differently. Dick stated that personally he would, but it would depend upon whether it was on a contributing historic building and upon the date of the building. Wayne moved to approve the application as presented. Michael seconded. Motion passed 3-0. Michael felt that the issue of interpretation of "temporary" signs should be explored. Other Business Sherry spoke regarding Paul Wagner and 111 Linden. She stated that in regards to the storefront colors, Paul had no intention of doing anything different. She stated that she needs to talk with one of the City attorneys regarding the colors of the building if the Commission wished to pursue the situation. She added that colors have always been a difficult thing to enforce because a building permit is not required to paint a building, even in the downtown historic district. It is very difficult to keep control over this. We have to rely on people to come through the Commission for painting of buildings. The guidelines are intended to regulate the colors but, in this case, there are several factors to consider. One is the fact that the Commission has drawings that demonstrate certain colors to us and the paint that is different than what was demonstrated. She stated that she does not recall seeing the paint chips on the night of the first review but Paul claims they were present. She also stated Felix Lee of Building Inspections is very reluctant to get involved in pursuing the issue of color due to the fact that it is not required by Building Inspections to have a permit. Dick questioned the construction on the roof of 111 Linden. , Sherry replied that John Slavik of Building Inspections had not been contacted by Paul Wagner. John told Sherry that he would be happy to go and check it out anyway. Sherry stated Paul said he would pursue an application within 10 days of December 18th. She has not seen him as of yet and the time has expired. Dick stated that there is a meeting of Colorado Preservation Inc., Friday, January 18, with tours in the afternoon, complimentary theatre tickets for that evening, and bed and breakfast arrangements for anyone who is staying over. Dick felt that maybe this statewide affair will bring the commissions closer. Dick stated that he talked with Jim Reidhead who is working with Old Town Associates on a contract basis. Dick stated that Jim will be presenting most of the signs to the Commission and will probably have something to present at the next LPC meeting. Sherry stated that in the December 19th packet, she had included a draft of submittal requirements for applications, trying to clarify some things for the people who we deal with. She asked the Commission if they had anything they would like to add to this. Dick suggested that colored renderings be added to color chips or samples as a requirement on an application. He also suggested that this be brought up at the next meeting so Carol and Glenda could have a chance for some input on this matter. The next regular meeting will be January 23, 1985 at 5:30 p.m. in the CIC Room. Meeting adjourned at 6:23 p.m.