Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 04/07/1993Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 7, 1993 Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission voted to send a letter in support of the River Walk concept, incorporating historic resources along the River Walk. The Commission discussed plans for the Brown Farm. Sherry Albertson -Clark discussed the Neighborhood Compatibility Project and its relationship to historic resources. The City Facilities Department presented a conceptual review of plans for the Sugar Beet Factory. The Commission voted to approve a request to designate 103 North Sherwood as a local landmark. Conceptual review was held on a proposed addition to 402 W. Mountain. The March 23 City Council Work Session on the HRPP was discussed. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Chair Jennifer Carpenter called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Secretary Charlotte Plaut was absent. Staff member Carol Tunner called the roll. Commission members Richard Hill, Brian Janonis, Kirk Jensen, James Tanner and Ruth Weatherford were present. Bud Frick arrived during the meeting. Carol Tunner and Joe Frank represented staff. GUESTS: Suzanne Edminister, City Financial Policy Analyst, Brad Pace, prospective owner of the Brown Farm, Sherry Albertson -Clark, City Chief Planner, Dick Beardmore, CSU Stabilization Center, Joe Frye, Vaught Frye Architects, Jack Gianola, City Facilities Director, Rich and Nancy Lea, owners of 103 N. Sherwood, Greg Belcher, owner of 402 W. Mountain, and Susan Hoskinson, former LPC member, were guests. AGENDA REVIEW: Mr. Frank announced that the designation request for 230 Remington, the Abbot House had been withdrawn at this time. The owner decided the delay for state review to use the state tax credit would not meet his timetable for using the credit. DISCUSSION OF THE BROWN FARM DESIGNATION: Ms. Edminister reported that the City has been negotiating with the school district on the Brown Farm property. The City also intends to sell some of the property as private lots and pay off the debt on the property. Brad Pace is interested in buying the farm house portion. Ms. Edminister stated she is confident that City Council will approve this plan at the April 20 Council meeting. Landmark Preservation Commission April 7, 1993 Page 2 Mr. Tanner inquired if there had been meetings with the neighbors. Ms. Edminister responded that Mr. Pace had spoken with all of the neighbors and the City held a meeting with the neighbors last monday. All neighbors within 500 feet will receive letters informing them of the plans for the property. Mr. Frick arrived at this point. Mr. Pace discussed some of the pros and cons of designation. He stated that some parts of the house appear to have been added later than the original 1876 construction. He wants to keep the additions because he needs the space. Mr. Pace needs to know what kind of flexibility will be allowed in replacing the windows that have been destroyed by vandals. The Commission made suggestions for window replacement. Mr. Tanner inquired if the house is eligible for designation as it is now, with the additions. Ms. Tunner replied that the building is eligible for the National Register and Local Landmark designation. She stated that the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines do not discourage rear additions. Mr. Pace asked if he would be able to take the Colorado tax credit for restoration expenses incurred prior to designation. He was advised that he could take the credit only for expenses incurred after designation. Mr. Pace inquired if he could get conditional approval for work started before designation. Mr. Frick stated that, if Mr. Pace can supply drawings and estimates to the State, he will be eligible for the tax credit after he receives preliminary approval. Ms. Tunner stated that the designation process must be completed before Mr. Pace can submit any bills. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner reported that she is working on the 1993-94 CLG contract. The proposal will include an agricultural and Poudre River theme to fill out the existing six historic contexts that were chronological development periods as developed in an earlier CLG grant. IAndmark Preservation Commission April 7, 1993 Page 3 MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter asked for a letter from the LPC to Bruce Hendee, Chairperson of the River Walk subcommittee of Challenge Fort Collins, indicating support for the Poudre River river walk. Mr. Frick inquired if the walk is within the city limits or in the urban growth area. Ms. Carpenter replied that it is the area from Mulberry to College, basically the downtown corridor. Mr. Frick moved that the Commission send a letter to Bruce Hendee in support of the River Walk, incorporating historic resources along the River Walk. Ms. Weatherford seconded the motion. The motion passed, 7-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and Weatherford. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 3, 1993 AlViUTES: Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the March 3, 1993 minutes, as written. Mr. Janonis seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and Weatherford. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Albertson -Clark distributed a draft of information on the Neighborhood Compatibility Project and presented a brief background report on the project. She stated that there is an advisory committee of about 15 people. Two public workshops were held last year to give citizens the opportunity to discuss compatibility issues. Historic landmarks are in the section on community -wide issues. The project focuses mainly on neighborhood building issues. Ms. Albertson -Clark asked Commission member for questions or comments. Ms. Weatherford suggested that historic resources should be added to Neighborhood- Building/Site Design Issues under "Relationship to Natural Resources," as a separate item. Ms. Carpenter stated that historic resources should be included under Building/Site Design Issues from the start of the program so that developers will know that they must consider historic districts and landmarks in their plans. Ms. Albertson -Clark responded that this could be done, but the Commission must help develop it. Landmark Preservation Commission April 7, IM Page 4 Mr. Hill expressed a concern for "scrape -off and pop -ups," that is tearing down small homes to build larger ones or expanding a small home to a large home and the impact they have on the neighborhood. Ms. Albertson -Clark stated that these additions are currently handled through the building permit process and can present problems. She suggested including this issue in the current report. Ms. Carpenter suggested including this issue in the analysis section to discourage these kinds of changes. Ms. Albertson -Clark stated that she will work with staff to get something drafted to address this issue. ion and decisi Ms. Carpenter asked for a subcommittee to select the Friends of Preservation Awards. Ms. Carpenter, Mr. Frick and Ms. Weatherford volunteered. Sugar Beet Factory - ConccpWal review. City Facilities Department. Ms. Tuner distributed copies of the survey form on the Sugar Beet Factory. She stated that the property is not eligible for the National Register, but it is eligible for Local Landmark designation. Although the structure is not designated, the City Facilities Department presented their plans as a courtesy to the L.PC. She stated that this is an adaptive re -use of the structure, not a strict preservation project. Mr. Janonis did not participate in the discussion because of a conflict of interest. Mr. Frye stated that the eastern portion will be cleaned up and landscaped in Phase I. The next phase, to the west, contains two large brick original structures. He said that the site has had many different uses, and historic aspects have been significantly altered, especially the addition of new windows and bricking -in old windows. Mr. Frye stated they are trying to restore the building as much as they can. A new administrative office building of concrete block will be constructed on the east end of the largest building. An overhead door and a vehicle storage addition will be constructed on the south side of the building. Mr. Beardmore described historic reconstruction and preservation issues. He explained the incompatible alterations and how they plan to restore the building's historic character. They are Landmark Preservation commission April 7, l"3 Page S looking for matching brick and are considering replacing the windows with wood sash or metal - clad wood windows. Mr. Frye commented that the concrete copings will be replaced, and the stone sills will be maintained. Glazed accent tiles will be white, like the original white window sashes. A decorative picket fence will be built across the east elevation. Mr. Hill asked if there is an alternative design to deal with the problem of finding matching brick. He also expressed concern that a picket fence does not provide adequate security. Mr. Frye responded that the picket fence goes to the North -South property lines and continues as a chain -link fence for security. Mr. Tanner expressed concern that the architects were attempting to borrow something historic from other buildings. Mr. Frank cited the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines that, "Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier period shall be discouraged." Mr. Beardmore responded that they are not sure what the original was. Ms. Tunner cited Secretary of Interior's Guidelines #9 and #10, which address alterations and additions which do not destroy architectural or cultural material and the reversibility of alterations. Ms. Tunner presented slides of the site as it was two years ago and as it is now. Very few of the original structures remain. Ms. Tuner expressed concern for the historic lilacs along the railroad tracks when the chain link fence is installed. Ms. Weatherford commented that this is an exciting project. Mr. Hill complimented Mr. Frye, Mr. Beardmore and Mr. Gianola on their demonstration. Mr. Jensen commended the excellent tie-in of glass in the new design. Designation request for 103 N. Sherwood the Bakker/Harris House. Ms. Tunner introduced Mr. Lea and noted that he plans to take advantage of the state tax credit. Landmark Preservation Commission April 7, 1993 Page 6 Mr. Lea stated that the house needs upgrading on the interior, but he does not plan to change the exterior appearance at present. He is not yet certain what the house needs. He said he planned to eventually add a window and door on the north side hidden by evergreens. Ms. Tunner showed slides. Mr. Tanner noted the two picture windows that are clearly modifications and asked if the applicant has plans to replace the windows. Mr. Lea responded that funds are not available to restore the windows at this time. He explained that the windows were probably installed because the house is very dark in the interior. He noted that he will be repairing the unsafe back step and a sinking column on the front porch. Ms. Weatherford asked if the applicant will return the structure to a single family dwelling. Mr. Lea responded that he will leave the house in three units, as it is now. There was no citizen input. Mr. Hill moved to accept the application for the local landmark designation of 103 S. Sherwood. W. Frick seconded the motion. The motion passed, 7-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and Weatherford. Ms. Tunner introduced Greg Belcher and noted that he plans to use the house as a bed and breakfast and proposes a second floor addition to the 1981 addition. She stated that this is an important historic structure but is not designated. Mr. Hill did not participate in the discussion because of a conflict of interest. The applicant proposes that the west palladian window and medallions will be moved out to the front of the second floor addition. The west roof dormer will be opened up to a door to a deck on the new roof. He will install gas f t-eplaces in the suites, and small vents will protrude through the roof. He will repaint the house in the same color as it is and no other changes will be made in the appearance of the exterior of the structure. He will replace rotted balusters with redwood ones in the same architectural style. Landmark Preservation Commission April 7, 1993 Page 7 The applicant stated that he has scraped, sanded and refinished the floors and doors and is trying to preserve the historic interior of the house. He stated that the small front window in the proposed second floor addition may be changed. Mr. Frick agreed that the small window should be changed. He also noted there appears to be a break between the existing porch and the 1981 addition porch roof. Mr. Frick said there appears that there should be a recess to provide a break from the addition to the original house. The applicant responded that he will recess the addition 12 inches. Ms. Tunner cited Secretary of Interior's Guidelines #9, #10 and //22, which address alterations and additions which do not destroy architectural or cultural material, the reversibility of alterations and preserving distinguishing qualities of a building, and discourages the removal of historical material. She talked to the National Park Service and they would have a problem with taking the historic window and moving it to the new addition. Ms. Carpenter noted that it is important, as a bed and breakfast, to get National Register designation because designation would be good for business. Ms. Carpenter asked for citizen input. Mr. Beardmore commented that he felt the NPS would have a problem with the roof solution and would not want the historic roof -line disturbed. Ms. Tunner announced that the house next door is going through the National Register process now and said that the entire block would be eligible as a historic district. HRPP Review of 3/23/93 City Council Work Session. The Commission discussed City Council's wish for a list of historic resources and the estimated costs of preserving these resources. Mr. Frank stated that the Commission must do more work on outcomes. Council wants to know what the end result will be. Ms. Weatherford added that economic benefits need to be stressed. She suggested that historic contexts can provide the framework for Council to grasp preservation issues. Mr. Frank said that the HRPP must focus on and identify the more critical areas, such as South College, the areas around Colorado State University, Laurel School neighborhood and other Landmark Preservation Commission April 7, 1993 Page 8 geographically threatened areas. He again stressed a focus on outcomes, that is, how many designations and rehabilitations are anticipated, etc. Mr. Jensen expressed a concern that if numbers set forth in the plan are not attainable, Council would take money away if the numbers are not met. Mr. Frank suggested that the numbers be presented as objectives. Mr. Tanner suggested that the Commission present Council with a comparison of the cost of making direct acquisitions of several properties with the cost of protecting those properties by means of the HRPP process. He stated that Council may see the economic benefit of the process approach. Ms. Carpenter asked for citizen input. Ms. Hoskinson noted that the public relations part of the HRPP was "band aid cosmetics." Mr. Beardmore commented the Commission needs to give Council more facts. He believes that the Commission does not ask Council for enough funding to acquire properties. He quoted economic statistics that demonstrate the economic contributions of preservation to the community. Mr. Frank suggested that the LPC determine what needs to be done and then look for the time component. Mr. Hill suggested that case studies would add focus to the program. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Hoskinson, a member of the Larimer County Parks Task Force, said she would like to see the County and City work together on preservation issues, especially the agricultural context and the Poudre River. Ms. Weatherford observed that there is a need to coordinate everything that is going on in the community and bring together all of the involved parties, such as the City, the County, the Parks Department and the School District. She suggested that a resolution on cooperation with the County Parks Board should be written. Ms. Tunner noted that the developer of a portion of Overland Trail will dedicate their portion of the Fossil Ridge to the City. She reported that she had a conversation with Leslie Bryson of Parks and Recreation and had informed Ms. Bryson that the Spring Canyon stage station is on Landmark Preservation Commiagon April 7, 1999 Page 9 County Road 38. Ms. Bryson told Ms. Tunner that Parks and Recreation has been looking for a way to access the City -owned property there. Ms. Tunner noted that this is an opportunity to coordinate efforts of the LPC the County Parks Department. Ms. Carpenter asked that cooperation with the County Parks Planning group be placed on the agenda for the next LPC work session. Mr. Beardmore requested a design review for the Avery Carriage House repainting at the special meeting on April 21, so that the work can be done before the CSU students leave. Ms. Carpenter agreed to Mr. Beardmore's request and noted that the Brown Farm designation is scheduled for the April 21 session, as well. ADJOURN: Mr. Janonis moved to adjourn the meeting. M. Weatherford seconded the motion. The motion passed, 7-0.Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and Weatherford. Ms. Carpenter adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Prepared from tapes and submitted by Charlotte Plant, Secretary.