HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 11/26/1996LANDMARK PRESERVATION
Regular Meeting
November 26, 1996
Council Liaison: Gina Janett
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank
Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (22"960)
SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC approved part 2 of the interior renovation of
the Anna B. Miller House, 514 East Elizabeth for Colorado State Tax Credit.
The awning and signage changes to C-19, Suite 137 Old Town Square
(Martell's) were reviewed and approved. The LPC reviewed and approved the
list of pre -qualified consultants for the Design Assistance Program. The
eligibility of At's Newsstand, 177 North College Avenue as an historic structure
in the Central Business District was discussed and it was determined that it
was considered as a contributing structure. The LPC discussed the proposed
move of the World War I cannon located in City Park to the American Legion
facility.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson
called the meeting to order 5:36 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Nicole Sneider,
Secretary called the roll. Commission members Ruth Weatherford, Bud Frick, Per
Hogestad and Diana Ross were present. Mr. Tanner and Ms. Kullman arrived late.
Karen McWilliams and Joe Frank represented Staff.
GUESTS: Maggie Marshall, owner, 314 East Elizabeth; Maryanne Martell, owner
Martell's, C-19, Suite 137 Old Town Square;
AGENDA REVIEW: Ms. Carpenter requested that a discussion regarding the
Demolition Delay ordinance be added in reference to 1111 Remington Street.
STAFF REPORTS: Ms. McWilliams explained that the World War I cannon in City Park
may be moved to the American Legion facility located at Overland Trail and route 287.
Children have been playing on the cannon, which is not safe. The cannon originally
belonged to the American Legion, who gave the cannon to the City. It has always been
located in City Park. A meeting has been planned for local Veteran groups and an LPC
member was invited to attend. Ms. McWilliams will attend the meeting.
Ms. Kullman arrived 5:40 p.m.
Landmark Preservation Commission
Regular Meeting -
November 26,1996
Page 2
COMMISSION MEMBERS REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter mentioned the article in the
newspaper regarding the Harmony School. Staff has contacted the school and has
been in touch with the real estate broker handling the property to encourage Local
Landmark Designation. A meeting has been scheduled.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None.
CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW:
514 East Elizabeth, Anna B. Miller House - Colorado State Tax Credit Part 2
Review for Interior Renovation
Ms. McWilliams presented the interior renovation for State Tax Credit review. The LPC
reviewed the application which was complete. Ms. Carpenter asked Maggie Marshall,
the owner, if the corner cupboard was attached. Ms. Marshall explained that it was
screwed into the wall.
Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the applicant's request for Colorado State
Tax Credit. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kullman , which passed
unanimously. (6-0)
Ms. Marshall asked the Commission about some concerns she had regarding the next
tax credit project which she planned for her home. She explained that built-in shelves
adjacent to the fireplace was of a typical Craftsmen style, although she did not know
that shelves had been there originally. She explained that she wanted a simple oak
mantel and shelves. Ms. Carpenter asked if any photo -documentation existed. Mr.
Hogestad said that they would need more information. He suggested examining the
construction of the current mantle and explained that he would not feel comfortable
filling in something that had not already existed. Ms. Weatherford suggested using free
standing shelves. Mr. Hogestad asked about the windows around the mantle. He
explained that it was typical to have small square windows at the top of the wall with
bookshelves underneath. He also suggested examining the plaster of the wall for
evidence of shelves. Mr. Frick asked how far the fireplace came out. Ms. Marshall said
that she would look under the rug, on the wood floor for evidence as well. Mr.
Hogestad also suggested looking around town to find an original Craftsmen style
fireplace and bookshelf to model her renovation after.
C-19. Suite 137 Old Town Square. Martell's - Awning and Slanage Change
Ms. Martell brought photographs of the off white awning, speckled with red and gray
paint, as well as the signage she installed. Ms. Weatherford asked who did the
awning. Ms. Martell explained that the awning had already existed and was already
splattered with some paint so, she decided to cover the paint stains up. The LPC
Landmark Preservation Commission
Regular Meeting
November 26, 1996
Page 3
thought that the marbleized awning was contemporary, but considered it reversible.
They also discussed the City's sign allowance code. Ms. Weatherford said that Poudre
Properties, formerly Foxfire Properties, should have known about the code and the
necessary review by the LPC. Ms. Martell apologized for not going about redesigning
the storefront in the proper way. She added that she was interested in Historic
Preservation and that the color red which she chose for the paint on the awning and the
signage was compatible with the red banners in Old Town Square. A photograph from
a distance showed that the awning looked white. Mr. Hogestad asked the applicant
which piece of the existing signage would be omitted if necessary in order to meet
code. Ms. Martell said that she would omit the repetition of Martell's alongside the
entrance. Mr. Frick suggested that she remove the large band from the bottom of the
display window, allowing for more merchandise to be seen in the window. Mr.
Hogestad and Ms. Ross would rather see the side panels removed because they said
the design was very contemporary.
Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the awning and concept of the signage as is,
conditioned on It meeting the City of Fort Collins zoning signage code. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (6-0)
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Design Assistance Proaram - Pre- Qualified Consultant's List
Mr. Frick declared a conflict of interest and left the room for the discussion regarding
the list of Pre -Qualified Consultants for the Design Assistance Program. Ms. Tunner
had changed the first line of the application form to include the property owner or
tenant as the applicant. Ms. Carpenter instructed the Commission members to review
the applications one by one. Ms. Tunner had questioned whether the LPC wanted to
accept people throughout the year. Ms. Carpenter thought it should be done once a
year. Mr. Hogestad said that the bigger the pool of participants the more opportunities
there would be for the DAP applicants. The workshop was recorded on video tape to
be reviewed in the future. The LPC would like to see how the program goes and then
make changes to the program if necessary. For now, consultants will be accepted
throughout the year if they submit a letter of interest, have preservation experience,
and view the workshop video.
CBD Survey - Eligibility of Al's Newsstand, 177 North Colleae
Mr. Frick pointed out that the building had been used as a newsstand continuously.
Ms. McWilliams added that the building had been clearly altered from its original early
twentieth century storefront. Historically, business had been conducted through a
window. Today, the building has no integrity and does not portray any sense of an
early newsstand. There is no feeling of once walking up to a newsstand to conduct
Landmark Preservation commission
Regular Meeting
November 26, 1996
Page 4
business transactions through a window. Mr. Hogestad asked how many other
businesses in town have been in continuous use for over fifty years with no turnover.
Ms. McWilliams explained that eligibility was based on significance and integrity and
asked the Commission to compare the 1949 and 1987 photographs, where it was also
quoted, "in early years customers didn't use the front door'. Ms. Carpenter asked what
percentage of the original building existed. Ms. McWilliams explained that even the
back of the building had been altered extensively, when a seventy-two foot addition
including a bathroom was added. The front was altered in 1947 and then again in
1987. Mr. Frick said that the building still continues to be a newsstand in the same
location. The LPC discussed other newsstands which may have existed in Fort Collins,
but agreed that this was probably the only one with a walk up window, which was very
unique. They agreed that the facade was not intact because major renovations had
taken place. Ms. Weatherford said that maybe in the future it would be considered
contributing after someone restored it. The LPC discussed that the building did still
have the mass, shape and form of a newsstand, not unlike other commercial
businesses in the Central Business District. Mr. Hogestad added that certain
commercial uses have historically been located in the CBD.
Mr. Frick moved to include Al's Newsstand as a contributing structure due to the
fact it was used continuously as a newsstand for over fifty years and is very
representative of early twelve and one half feet storefronts. The motion was
seconded by Ms. Weatherford, which passed unanimously. (6-0)
OTHER BUSINESS: Demolition Delay The LPC discussed the Demolition Delay
Ordinance and the demolition of a garage at 1111 Remington. Ms. Weatherford
reported that Steve Whitall would like to tear down an old garage. Mr. Whitall is a
builder and was interested in building a duplex on the property in order to receive a
better return for his investment. Mr. Whitall felt that the system was not working, it was
too bureaucratic and not user friendly. Ms. Carpenter said that they need to have the
opportunity in some way to make the decision as to whether the citizen needs to
perform the research on the structure in question. Mr. Frick said that they will need to
change the ordinance in order to have the full Commission investigate whether the
structure was significant. Ms. Carpenter said that now, the Commission does not make
that decision. It is only the Commission Chairperson and the Advance Planning
Department which review the proposed demolition. Ms. McWilliams explained that in
1996 approximately thirty-six properties were reviewed, and every structure which was
over fifty years old and not considered dangerous is potentially eligible. Ms. Carpenter
said that in this case they can not determine eligibility without more research and the
property is located in a National Register District as well. Ms. Weatherford explained
that if Mr. Frick or Mr. Hogestad could have visited the property, they would have seen
how altered the structure was. Mr. Hogestad asked what was necessary to be included
6
Landmark Preservation Commission
Regular Meeting
November26, 1996
Page 5
in the report. Mr. Frick reviewed the report which contained the history of the house,
and the neighborhood. Mr. Frick said that a fire in the hay loft may have occurred and
after 1939 a new roof was installed and the front was altered. The two doors on the
alley were original, but the three bay doors were added. Ms. Weatherford said that the
process may be simplified by providing a checklist of the information needed to
determine the history of the structure. Ms. Carpenter suggested that the entire LPC
help to determine eligibility of the structure and when determined eligible, the
Demolition Delay process would then be initiated. Ms. McWilliams summarized the
description of the garage at 1111 Remington. She explained that the structure was a
three bay garage. Very few three bay garages exist, but they do not know for sure if
the structure had been altered and the alley entrance had been blocked off. It was
recommended that the LPC members visit the property and that a sub -committee
possibly be formed to discuss this issue. It also needs to be determined what triggers
the Demolition Delay, which is hard to define and may need to be continued to be
reviewed on a case by case basis. Mr. Hogestad suggested that the applicant submit a
photograph early in the process, prior to any report, for the LPC to examine. It was
agreed that it would be best if the LPC could determine the eligibility before any
decision was made regarding the demolition delay. Mr. Hogestad said that the property
owner should be required to do a minimal amount of work. Ms. McWilliams explained
that there could be inherent conflict because the applicant's report may be biased since
they would want to demolish the structure. She said that in many respects the process
was working. For instance, the Good House was designated and the owners were then
able to take advantage of programs and are now doing work on the house sensitively to
the historic features. Mr. Frick asked at what point the 1111 Remington garage had
been altered. Mr. Hogestad said that there were better examples of garages which
existed. The LPC agreed that the East Side/West Side Design Standards and
Guidelines needed more teeth because they currently served only as guidelines.
City Park Cannon: It was discussed that the cannon was placed in City Park in 1932.
Ms. Ross explained that the playground in the park had been re -done, which changed
the surroundings of the cannon. The LPC discussed the eligibility of the cannon as a
Local Landmark. They agreed that the setting had been changed, it no longer stood as
a World War I memorial but was used more as a children's toy in the playground, and
the cannon itself was never used by any Fort Collins artillery or battalion. Through the
American Legion, Army W.W.I items were distributed to American cities after the war.
Although the cannon has been in City Park since 1932, re -locating the cannon to the
American Legion building would be returning it to an armed forces setting. It was
suggested to place the cannon with the Vietnam War Memorial at Edora Park. Ms.
Carpenter said that the cannon should be at the American Legion building because it
was not serving as a war memorial now and it was originally brought to Fort Collins
because of the American Legion.
Landmark Preservation Commission
Regular Meeting
November 26,1996
Page 6
The meeting adjourned 7:10 p.m.
Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.