Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 02/17/1994LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Special Regular Meeting February 17, 1994 Council Liaison: Gerry Horak Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Demolltion/Delay Ordinance and comments were heard. The Commission agreed to be the nominating group for Evadene Swanson for an AASLH Lifethne Award. The Commission moved approval of landmark designation for the Frank Miller Stagecoach and moved to accept the application for eligibility of the Bungalow Store at 329 South Sherwood. The LPC also agreed to write a letter suggesting saving the Frank Miller painting at the current location and exploring other options as a second choice. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Chair Jennifer Carpenter called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Secretary Diane Slater called the roll. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Bud Frick, Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman, and Ruth Weatherford were present. Members Dick Hill and Jim Tanner were absent. A quorum was present. Joe Frank and Carol Tunner represented staff. GUESTS: Blair Leist, City Planner; Steve Porter, Coloradoan Reporter; Spike Hoffman, Demex; Richard Lea, owner, landmark building at 102 North Sherwood; Mitch Busteed, owner, VanderWaack Block; Carl Glaser, architect; Sally Ketcham, Poudre Landmarks Foundation; Jim and Doris Greenacre, Pioneers and citizens; Chip Steiner, DDA Director; Rheba Massey, Local History Coordinator; Karin Fberhart, Curator of Collections Museum; Bill Coulson, owner, 329 S. Sherwood. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes. STAFF REPORT: None. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: None. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DEMOLITION ORDINANCE: Ms. Carpenter introduced the topic and noted that the proposed ordinance is currently scheduled to go before City Council for a first reading on April 5 and a second reading on April 19. Mr. Frank reviewed material from the packet for the public, highlighting important information, Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes February 17, 1994 Page 2 including the milestones that brought about the current proposal. Ms. Carpenter then opened the discussion for public input. First to speak was Richard Lea, owner of a landmark building at 102 N. Sherwood. He asked if a building must be both 50 years old and meet the standards to be affected and how building owners would find out if their building is 50 years old or older. Mr. Frank replied that the information on the age of the building would be available from the Building Inspection Dept. If the age of the building is not known, then the Planning Dept. would check with the County. Mr. Lea was concerned that owners know which buildings meet the criteria. He went on to say that he is also interested in how the ordinance would affect private property rights. He feels that over -regulation is detrimental. He thinks that the $50 fee is more reasonable than $200 and that four reports is burdensome. He questioned asking for a plan for development. He closed by saying that he would like to see a viable demolition ordinance that doesn't step on anyone's toes and stated that he is not speaking against the ordinance. The second speaker was Mitch Busteed of M&M Investments. He said he thought the minimum maintenance ordinance is mostly good and doesn't think it applies to many buildings. He mentioned that he has invested over $50,000 in his Jefferson Street buildings and feels that the damage he has repaired occurred because of excessive traffic and that the community is also responsible for traffic and graffiti on buildings. He said that pollutants are eating away at the lime and sand base of the buildings, and excessive acids in exhaust are causing deterioration of the brick and mortar. He feels that the ordinance helps to protect buildings but the owner is being held responsible and not being protected. Ms. Carpenter agreed that the traffic situation is intolerable and that it would not be fair to ask owners to be held accountable if the city does not protect the buildings by rerouting truck traffic. Carl Glaser, architect, of Glaser Associates at 215-217 Jefferson, was the third speaker. He said that he bought the building I 1 years ago with the understanding that traffic would decrease but traffic has tripled because the City is facilitating truck traffic on Highways 287 and 14. He recommends that the City draft an ordinance to inhibit traffic. The bypass now lies outside the UGA. He has seen trucks carrying hazardous materials on Jefferson Street, which is against City ordinance. He feels that the City must make Jefferson Street not an easy way to bypass I-25. He said that a current study, the US 287/Hwy 14 Access Control Plan, has the objective of encouraging truck through -traffic and discouraging local traffic, which is bad for business and will make the area more inhospitable because of increased truck traffic. He also asked for clarification on the phrase "maintained in an appropriate condition" and asked if the minimum maintenance ordinance would include landmark districts. In addition, he feels: the ordinance needs better definitions; it is too restrictive; the fees are onerous; the reports are a barrier; and the City can enact an ordinance to restrict traffic by making it inconvenient. Mr. Frank replied that regarding Section 14-57, he would welcome suggestions on how to make it more specific and that yes, landmark districts are included in this section on minimum maintenance. 9 10 Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes February 17, 1994 Page 3 Rheba Massey, Local History Coordinator at the Public Library, spoke in favor of the ordinance. She said she is glad to see this attempt at an ordinance. She mentioned the blighted area around CSU that happened because no development plans were required when buildings were demolished. She would like to see a redevelopment plan to help protect the property rights of neighbors and allow neighbors to have input because property values are not improved by adding more parking lots. She noted that the ordinance will affect all area of the city in addition to Jefferson St. She suggested that Section 14-57 could be clarified by determining threats to Old Town, but if damage is caused by environmental threats or earthquake then the owner would not be responsible and it would be a joint problem. The LPC also has incentives to help with maintenance and this need was identified in the Eastside and Westside Neighborhood Plans. HUD money is also available, as well as neighborhood improvement funding. Spike Hoffman, of Demex, said that the ordinance is not a problem. He thinks it is not fair to put costs on property owners and that most demolition he does is because the property is in poor repair. He disagrees with the plan for redevelopment. He thinks the salvaging of artifacts is a problem due to liability and asked if the city would accept liability or would the owner be responsible. He feels that retrieval is good but is concerned about the owner's liability. He asked how the city will respond if an owner is told to make repairs and fails to comply. Mr. Frank said that violations will go to City Court and up to a maximum of $1,000 a day in fines may be assessed, as the Judge rules. Sally Ketcham, Poudre Landmarks Foundation, said she supports Ms. Massey's remarks and sympathizes with the Jefferson Street owners. She feels that this ordinance will help the City, and that the requirement of a Plan of Development is not out of line. She noted that it is expensive to tear down a building and if notice is given then there is an opportunity to work it out. Chip Steiner, DDA Director, asked if the Council dates are set and Ms. Carpenter said that the LPC would like to proceed. Ms. Weatherford said that other areas of the city would also be protected against pollution. Mr. Glaser agreed that a plan for development is important and the plan should be implemented. He feels the ordinance is restrictive because it doesn't allow a building to be torn down if it is sound and might discourage people from owning historic buildings. Ms. Carpenter corrected this misunderstanding and pointed out that the ordinance specifically does not prevent demolition but is a delay ordinance. Doris Greenacre, Pioneer and citizen, spoke about her sense of loss over the large amount of buildings which have already been lost. She supports the ordinance and spoke of her recent shock at seeing the building on Magnolia Street go down overnight. She stated that the other Pioneer families also support the ordinance. Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes February 17, 1994 Page 4 Ms. Carpenter asked if there was any further input and seeing none, closed this section of the meeting to public input. She asked if Commission members had any remarks and Ms. Weatherford said that she sees private property ownership as a comparatively brief time in the life of a building and sees property ownership as a form of stewardship. Although not all buildings are worth saving, she feels that it is important to protect the buildings that are worth saving. LANDMARK DESIGNATIONS: Karin Eberhart, Curator of Collections for the Fort Collins Museum, said that although the stagecoach is currently in Ordway for restoration, it will be returned to the Museum as part of the permanent collection. The restoration is for stabilization and consists of replacement of necessary parts so it won't collapse. It will preserve what's there and not return it to a new state. She is also applying for a mini -grant through the Colorado Historic Society and the stagecoach must be a designated landmark in order to be eligible for the grant. After some discussion, it was decided to say that the stagecoach is "currently located at 200 Mathews St." in the event that the Museum changes location. Ms. Tuner clarified by noting that a structure is an item not for human habitation. A building is for human habitation and objects are larger items. Ms. Weatherford moved approval of landmark designation for the Frank Miller Stagecoach and Mr. Frick seconded the motion. The motion passed, 5-0. Ms. Tunner reviewed the record of building permits for the property, which include adding the porch in 1942 and doing porch work in 1949. She said that the tin shingles will be replaced and showed slides. Mr. Frick noted that aluminum style tiles are available. Mr. Coulson, building owner, said that he has seen new tin tiles damaged by had and thought he could replace them with concrete tiles. The LPC did not feel that would be in keeping with the original look. Mr. Coulson said that the concrete porch is original but has been re -surfaced. He is putting a new roof on the front porch and adding two side porches. He found 4 or 5 original windows on the south side that have been bricked in and the new windows will be close to these locations. The roof needed additional strength in the first two-thirds of the building and the back third was finished off with blocks instead of brick. Ms. Tunner, in reviewing historical significance, noted that it is one of very few buildings built at that time (1929), as well as contributing to the early development of the family -owned, small Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes February 17, 1994 Page 5 grocery store business located on neighborhood corners all over Fort Collins. Guidelines state that brick window infill is reversible and therefore not a problem. The windows can be recessed or not. Air circulation is a consideration. Mr. Frick said it would be best to try to duplicate the muntin pattern with 6 panes. Ms. Tunner noted that the transoms will remain intact. Mr. Hogestad asked what the original porch looked like and Ms. Tuner said it isn't known but feels that the new porch is sympathetic because the bungalow style often has a low porch. However, Mr. Hogestad feels it is more residential and obscures the columns on the corners. Ms. Carpenter said she feels that the Bungalow is of historic importance and would like the see the tin tiles replaced with tin and it is cheaper. Mr. Frick said that all the window changes are reversible and the Bungalow store is worth preserving. Ms. Weatherford moved that the LPC accept the application of eligibility for designation of the Bungalow Store and W. Frick seconded the motion. The motion passed, 5-0. Loll 45_ _ A IW Mr. Frank introduced Mr. Blair Leist, the new long-range City Planer. Ms. Tuner mentioned three buildings which will need to be monitored for possible threats --the Masonic Building; the "Good" House, a bungalow; and the Preston Farm. Historic Fort Collins, Inc. has asked the LPC to make a recommendation to the Colorado Historical Society regarding the Frank Miller painting. It is located in the Linden Hotel space to be rented by Nature's Own Imagination. They would like to move it. Ms. Kullman made a motion that the LPC write a letter recommending saving the painting in its current location as a first choice and looking at other options as a second option. Ms. Weatherford seconded the motion. The motion passed, 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm. Submitted by Diane Slater, Secretary.