HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 02/03/1993Landmark Preservation Commission
Regular Meeting Minutes
February 3, 1993
Council Liaison: Loren Maxey
Staff Liaison: Joe Frank
SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission approved the December 2, 1992
minutes, as submitted. The Commission voted unanimously to draft a letter to City
Council, supporting Colorado State University's proposal for adaptive re -use of the
Old Power Plant. A final proposal to rehabilitate the building facade of 112 S.
College Avenue was approved, with conditions.
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 called the roll. Commission members Jennifer
Carpenter, Richard Hill, Brian Janonis, Kirk Jensen, James Tanner and Ruth Weatherford were
present. Bud Frick was absent. Carol Tunner and Joe Frank represented staff.
GUESTS:
Richard Beardmore, Reviewing Consultant for the Downtown Development Authority, Bob
Nasten, Construction and Service Manager for the City of Fort Collins Light and Power
Department, and Rheba Massey, Local Historian, were guests. Glenn Konen, of The
Architect's Studio, presented a proposal for 112 S. College.
APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 2, 1992 MINUTES:
Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the December 2, 1992 minutes, as submitted. Mr. Hill
seconded the motion. The motion to approve the December 2 minutes, as submitted, passed
5-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Hill, Janonis, Jensen and Weatherford.
Mr. Tanner arrived after the motion to approve the December 2 minutes passed.
CURRENT ITEMS:
Recommendation to City Council on the Old Power Plant
Bob Nasten, Construction and Service Manager for the City of Fort Collins Light and Power
Department, reported on the Request for Proposals for adaptive re -use of the Old Power Plant.
One proposal was submitted by Fort Collins Alternative Development to use the building for
volleyball and rock climbing. The other proposal was submitted by Colorado State University
to use the building to house and test engines. Mr. Nasten reported that the interview committee
voted unanimously to recommend the Colorado State proposal to City Council. The Colorado
State proposal best preserves the historical use of the building and is a compatible new re -use.
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 2
Mr. Nasten asked if the LPC would write a letter to City Council supporting the Colorado State
proposal. City Council will consider the two proposals on February 16.
Ms. Weatherford made a motion to draft a letter of support for the Colorado State
proposal. Mr. Hill seconded the motion. The motion to draft a letter of support for the
Colorado State proposal passed, 6-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and
Weatherford.
CHANGE IN AGENDA - OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Tunner distributed copies of a Denver Post article about historic structures in Denver that
are being moved to make room for a new hospital in Denver.
Ms. Carpenter informed the Commission that there will be a meeting on Monday to discuss the
National Trust Preservation Leadership Conference, to be held June 12 through June 19, 1993,
in Fort Collins.
Ms. Weatherford suggested that Ms. Tunner present staff reports to the Commission at the
beginning, rather than the end, of the meeting.
Ms. Weatherford also requested that Commissioners and staff discuss a cooperative coordination
with the school district on the next agenda.
CURRENT ITEMS:
112 South College Avenue: Rehabilitation of the Building.
Ms. Tunner introduced Glenn Konen, architect for The Architect's Studio, representing 112 S.
College Avenue. Mr. Konen and his client, Dr. Michael Fangman, owner of the building, are
in the process of applying for the state tax credit for rehabilitating the structure.
Ms. Tunner reminded the Commission that a conceptual review of this proposal was presented
to the Commission on August 5, 1992. At that time, the Commission voted to approve the
designation of 112 South College Avenue, contingent on restoration following the Secretary of
Interior's Standards.
Ms. Tunner stated that Mr. Konen has made changes in the proposal since the August meeting.
f
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 3
Mr. Konen noted that he had just obtained an old photo of the building that was not available
in August. He presented the new material and a discussion followed.
The applicant reported that the original wood -frame windows on the side elevation are covered
by a false wall that belongs to the bank next door.
Ms. Tunner asked if the original wood windows will be reopened.
Mr. Konen replied that they will. However, he stated that what happens with the windows will
depend on what the bank will agree to. He noted that the bank has been sold to NorWest, and
the owner will discuss the wall with Norwest.
Mr. Konen stated that he proposes to use a hollow metal system for the storefront and provided
details of the system and the requested storefront section as part of the new submittal.
Ms. Tunner noted that the original proposal was for a wood storefront and that a slanted sill was
included.
Mr. Konen asked the Commission to advise him on the minimum acceptable slant for the sill.
Mr. Tanner asked how much recess is being proposed for the storefront.
Ms. Tunner responded that the storefront will be recessed less than 2 inches. She noted that the
original purpose of the recess was to keep water off the storefront.
Mr. Tanner stated that the recess should not be any greater than the original recess.
Ms. Tunner stated that the applicant should be required to provide a plan view that shows the
detail of the recess. The drawing should indicate that the recess will be the same as the original.
Mr. Konen agreed, but stated that, at this time, he does not know the exact dimensions of the
original recess.
Mr. Frank asked the applicant how a 4-inch recess would affect the plan.
Mr. Konen responded that a 4-inch recess would not affect the plan.
Mr. Frank noted that the drawings of the sill that had been submitted for conceptual review were
accepted by the Commission in August.
Ms. Tunner stated that the sill should be wider and have a slope to provide horizontal relief.
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 4
Mr. Tanner inquired how wide the sill should be.
Mr. Konen suggested that the sill could be 6-inches wide.
Mr. Hill stated that the leading edge of the sill should come out to the leading edge of the brick.
Mr. Konen stated that he would like to use a 4 3/4-inch hollow metal storefront system including
the sill.
Because it is impossible to see the sill plate on the photo, Ms. Carpenter asked whether the
proposal will meet the Secretary of Interior's standards if documentation can be provided that
the plan is representative of that era.
Ms. Tunner replied that this is the case.
Mr. Hill suggested that the applicant use 4 3/4-inch metal frame, but use 5 3/4-inch frame for
the window sill, if necessary. Mr. Hill noted that, with today's materials, a drip line is probably
not needed, but a drip line is traditional.
Mr. Tanner suggested that hollow metal is acceptable, but it should be as unobtrusive as
possible.
Ms. Tunner inquired if the Commission will require chamfering.
Ms. Carpenter responded that chamfering is not a required, and the applicant can do it either
way.
Mr. Konen stated that he will use a square edge, if necessary because of economic and
availability.
Ms. Tunner commented that chamfering looks more like wood. She cited Secretary of Interior's
Standards #5 and #6.
Ms. Tunner stated that the drawing needs a note, explaining that the second story windows will
be repaired and repainted as the original. She also stated that the drawing needs a note
specifying what materials and colors will be used for the "tile" roof.
Mr. Konen showed the Commissioners printed information on the tile material and stated that
the color will be Slate Grey.
k
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 5
Mr. Konen informed the Commission that the sidewalk will have to be rebuilt; it is the structural
roof for the basement. He suggested that when the sidewalk is rebuilt, he could run new
concrete back into the recessed entry.
Ms. Tunner inquired if the building will provide handicap access.
Mr. Konen stated that it will.
Mr. Jensen noted that handicap access is a good reason to use concrete rather than sandstone,
because concrete can be beveled to accommodate any elevation change.
Ms. Carpenter stated that the applicant must make a note indicating what the entry flooring final
choice will be.
Mr. Konen said he will include paint colors and window repair on the working drawing and give
the drawing to staff.
Ms. Tunner asked what material will be used for the narrow side light windows.
Mr. Konen stated the side light will be made of glass.
Mr. Hill asked if the right wall at the entry will be stripped.
Mr. Konen replied that the wall will be stripped to the brick.
Ms. Carpenter inquired what material will be used for the door.
Mr. Konen responded that both doors are glass. He will use a hollow metal or wood frame that
will be hand painted.
Mr. Konen noted that the ventilators below the upper cornice will not actually be ventilators;
currently, they are just holes. He will install a wooden plate behind them and paint the plate
a darker grey than the band below the upper cornice.
Ms. Tunner instructed the applicant to note that on the drawing.
Mr. Hill noted that the photo clearly shows that there were closely spaced dentals on the band
below the ventilators.
Ms. Carpenter inquired if the applicant will use dentals.
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 6
Mr. Konen said that he can.
Ms. Tunner instructed Mr. Konen to note the dentals on the drawings.
Mr. Konen stated that they will not sandblast the bricks, window and sills and stone caps. He
will test different chemical products to determine what will remove the materials that are on the
building. He will try Peel -Away first.
Ms. Tunner suggested that the applicant add a note to the drawings indicating that he will do a
patch test, not sandblast the brick, sills and caps and will use the gentlest means possible to strip
the building. She asked the applicant to inform staff when he determines what products will be
used.
Ms. Carpenter stated that, from the photo, it is impossible to tell if there was an exposed beam
or a sign band below the belt cornice.
Mr. Konen responded that he must do more exploration to determine if the beam exists and if
it was exposed. If it does not exist, a beam will have to be installed. If it does exist, but is too
ugly, then it will be a sign band, not an exposed beam.
Mr. Konen stated that, one way or the other, there will be a band there with a shadow line.
Ms. Tunner stated that the future business tenant can use a sign band or window signs for
signage, as long as the signs conform to the sign code.
Ms. Tunner reminded the applicant to include details on the drawings for the north elevation
windows (head, sill, and jamb).
Mr. Konen stated that he will include details of the head, sill, and jambs of the north elevation
windows on the drawings.
Mr. Konen proposed that the original door opening on the second level north elevation should
become a window. He wants to use a thin hollow metal frame with a horizontal bar across the
window.
Ms. Tunner expressed concern for the use of a metal frame; she stated that it should look like
a wooden frame to match all the other windows on the building.
Mr. Konen stated that he wants the old door opening to be a discussion point. People will
wonder why this opening exists, and they will be reminded of the old entry to the bank. Using
new modem materials will do this.
C�
•
landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 7
Ms. Carpenter asked for public comment.
Mr. Beardmore, Reviewing Consultant for the Downtown Development Authority, stated that
he likes the window placement for the old door.
Mr. Konen noted that many applicants for the state tax credit have given up on the process
because of the time required to apply.
Ms. Carpenter asked for a motion on the proposal.
Ms. Weatherford moved to accept the proposal to [Side 5, C 200] rehabilitate 112 S.
College with the following changes:
Sill: A sill will be installed under the large display windows on the west elevation, as shown
on the conceptual drawings approved at the August meeting. A hollow metal storefront is
acceptable and the applicant may change the hollow metal specifications, but he will advise staff
of his decision.
Recess: The storefront will be recessed 2 inches from the pilaster, as per the historic photo, and
the applicant will make the appropriate changes on the drawings.
Storefront and Hollow Metal Chamfering: The applicant will provide typical dimensions for the
hollow metal storefront. The applicant will have the option to use chamfering or not use
chamfering, at the owner's discretion. He will get staff approval prior to issuance of a building
permit.
Existine Second Story Window: The applicant will note on the plans that the existing second
story windows will be repaired to reflect original appearance.
"Tile" Roofing: The applicant will note on the drawings color and material specifications for
metal "tile" roofing. The color will be slate grey.
Entrance Way Flooring: The applicant will note on the drawing if the flooring for the entrance
way will be concrete or sandstone.
Entry Door: The entry door material may be hollow metal or wood. The applicant will provide
a plan view of the storefront, indicating that the entryway will be recessed the same as the entry
approved at conceptual. The applicant will state the finish treatment of the entryway right wall.
Narrow Side Lights: The applicant will note that the material of the narrow sidelights will be
glass.
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 8
Ventilators: The applicant will note that the ventilators under the new upper cornice will be
closed with wood. The ventilators will be painted a darker grey than the band below the upper
cornice.
Sandblasting: The applicant will note that brick, sills, and stone caps will not be sandblasted.
The applicant will test cleaning materials to determine the gentlest means possible for
cleaning. If none of the materials are satisfactory, the applicant will consult with staff. If
painting is the only solution, Commission approval will be required.
Exposed Beam: The applicant will do exploratory demolition to determine if the original
exposed beam below the belt cornice still exists and if it was an exposed beam. If the beam
exists and if it was exposed, it will be restored as an exposed beam. If the beam was not
exposed, it will be covered and used as a sign band.
Color Palette: The applicant will note color names, numbers and placement on the drawing.
Window to Replace Door: The applicant will indicate that the proposed new window on the
north elevation, which will replace the original door opening on the second level, will be of plate
glass with a minimum metal frame. There will be some kind of bar barrier installed on the
inside. The applicant will provide more detail on the head, jamb, and sills of the original
windows to be exposed.
Mr. Tanner seconded the motion to accept the proposal, with changes. The motion to
accept the proposal to rehabilitate the building facade of 112 S. College Avenue, with
changes, passed, 6-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Hill, Janonis, Jensen, Tanner and Weatherford.
Mr. Konen stated that he needs to install an awning on the first floor, west side to block the sun.
Mr. Tanner responded that an awning is acceptable, but advised the applicant that he will need
to return to the Commission to discuss the details of color, material and shape.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Because the review for 112 S. College took so much time, the Commission decided not to
discuss the HRPP, as scheduled.
Mr. Frank suggested that the Commission meet on Monday, February 8, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30
p.m. to discuss the Draft Historic Resources Preservation Program.
r
Landmark Preservation Commission
February 3, 1993
Page 9
The Commission agreed to meet at the suggested time at Rheba Massey's office in the city
library.
Ms. Carpenter instructed the Commissioners to have comments prepared before the meeting.
Ms. Carpenter noted the difficulty applicants have with the state tax credit application process.
She asked for suggestions to make the process easier and faster for applicants.
Ms. Tunner stated that most Certified Local Governments do the applications locally. She
explained that the applicant pays a fee to apply. The Commission can use part of that fee to hire
someone to do the process for the applicant.
Mr. Frank suggested that this suggestion should be included in the HRPP.
Ms. Tunner announced that, in response to her request for proposals, Cultural Resource
Historians (Karen and Carl McWilliams) were selected to do two designations.
ADJOURN:
Ms. Carpenter adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
Submitted by Charlotte Plaut, Secretary.