Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 10/30/2002LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Special Meeting October 30, 2002 Council Liaison: Eric Hamrick Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376) Commission Chairperson: Per Hogestad (416-7285) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission approved the rehabilitation of the second floor windows and installation of exterior storms on the Welch/Woolworth Block, 107 North College. The Commission also discussed proposed changes to Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code and to Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Mr. Per Hogestad called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. at 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Agnes Dix, Myrna Watrous, Per Hogestad, Carole Stansfield, Janet Ore, and Bud Frick were present. Angie Aguilera was absent. Carol Tunner, Karen McWilliams and Joe Frank represented staff. GUESTS: Mikal Torgerson, architect, Steve Taylor, owner of 107 N. College Avenue. 107 N. COLLEGE AVENUE — DISPOSITION OF SECOND FLOOR WINDOWS FOR FINAL REVIEW. Mr. Torgerson began his second floor window proposal with a discussion and sample presentation of three window options that they were considering for the twenty-five second floor windows of the WelchANoolworth Block at 107 N. College Avenue. Option number 1 was to repair the existing windows and install interior storms. He said that the National Trust preferred exterior storms and that is historically where they would have been. Mr. Torgerson felt that regardless of how good the window restoration was, they would get dirt, rain, and dust between the two panes creating a problem of maintenance that the proposed tenant didn't want to accept. He showed a custom exterior storm window sample by CSD and he offered this solution given the denial of replacing the sashes at the last LPC meeting. The storms would be solid wood and painted. Then he showed a sample for option number two which was a replacement window with true divided lites. He felt it looked best, but wouldn't allow for exact match to the window muntins. Option three was a replacement window without true divided lites, but applied wood muntins inside and outside of the window. This window was more visibly not historic, but Mr. Torgerson contended that it would be indistinguishable from the street below. It also allowed for more exact window muntin duplication. Mr. Hogestad asked how the exterior storm windows would be mounted. Mr. Torgerson said they would be hung on hooks fitted against the stop and sitting back from the brick Landmark Preservation Commissiilll October 30, 2002 Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 • mold. The rail and styles would be the same dimensions as the historic windows and have a cross bar. Mr. Frick added that the storms could be fit with felt weather stripping, as would be the historic windows if they were repaired. Ms. Tunner added that Mr. Torgerson had said the historic windows would be fixed in place and not operable. Mr. Hogestad asked how they would be fixed in place. Mr. Torgerson said that Mark Wernimont of Colorado Sash and Door would do the work. Mr. Hogestad asked if the stops would not be removed and Mr. Torgerson said yes. Ms. Ore asked if the historic windows are fixable. Mr. Torgerson said they were, but they need a storm window. He regrets doing it this way and would prefer to replace the windows. The building has little character but for the windows, and he felt it was a shame to cover them. Mr. Taylor added that when they investigated repair versus replacement, the answer they got from everyone was to replace. Mr. Hogestad brought the Commission back to the proposal at hand, which was for exterior storms. Mr. Torgerson said they would be willing to donate the windows or store them if they ever needed to be replaced on the building. Ms. Dix asked if the window frame would stay in place and Mr. Torgerson answered yes. Mr. Hogestad commented that there are three options on the table, but the Commission didn' t have the background information to consider replacement. The Commission had forgone the field trip to the site before the meeting, because they had been led to believe the windows would be saved and exterior storms installed. The window assessment report that was requested by the LPC at the last meeting was not forthcoming either. Ms. Watrous asked if the exterior storms would be permanent, would the storms just be a frame around the window and not mimicking the nine over one lites of the historic windows? Mr. Torgerson said this was correct. Ms. Ore summarized by saying that windows are classic preservation issues since the beginning of the preservation movement. There have been technical briefs, conferences on windows, and many articles. The basic question is are they repairable, do they meet our criteria of the Secretary's Standards? We have been consistent on denying others to replace repairable windows. She said that she has seen people remove them and had nothing but problems with replacement materials; they shrink, water gets in, they warp, etc. It is better to repair what has worked for so long. Ms. Dix asked how much wood will be stabilized and how much epoxying will be used. Mr. Torgerson said that all bottom sash are in worse shape, upper windows here and there. They can repair the windows, but to be occupied space, they need storms. Ms. Ore noted that storms were outside historically. Mr. Hogestad took exception and said that he was not convinced of that. He's never seen evidence of exterior storms on commercial buildings; people just were not concerned about energy saving in the past. But he said storms are reversible. The issue here is whether the LPC will allow historic fabric to be removed. Mr. Torgerson said they would be willing to remove the windows and save them somewhere. Mr. Hogestad said that wasn't a good solution; things have a way of being misplaced. This never works and they would never go back in the building. Stockpiling isn't the answer. Mr. Hogestad added that the proposal for exterior storms and window repair is a pretty good middle ground solution in his mind. Landmark Preservation CommissidlT • October 30, 2002 Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 Ms. Dix made a motion to approve repairing the windows with storms added to the outside in a reversible manner. Ms. Ore seconded the motion. In discussion on the motion, Mr. Frank suggested she add to the motion that the applicants provide appropriate drawings and documentation of the work. Ms. Dix and Ms. Ore agreed to this. Mr. Torgerson added that they wanted to replace the sills and slope clad the replacements. Ms. Tunner recalled that this was approved by the LPC on the Northern Hotel windows. Mr. Hogestad asked the applicants to bring back more details on all of the work, including cladding the sills. There was no public input. The motion passed 6-0. CHANGES TO CITY CODE AND THE LAND USE CODE: Ms. McWilliams discussed the proposed changes the Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code. If the proposed City Municipal Code changes concerning the review of individually eligible buildings are adopted, then the LUC will need to also be changed to bring it into compliance. Additionally, because the word "block" has different meanings to different people, the language in 3.4.7 of the LUC will be changed to "block face," and a definition of block face will be included. This commission was very supportive of these changes. Ms. McWilliams then discussed additional proposed changes to Chapter 14 of the City Code. At its August 28th meeting, the Commission had expressed interest in including Criterion D of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards into the city's proposed standards for landmark designation. Criterion D refers to properties "that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history." Staff recommends that Criterion D not be included at this time. There is less likelihood of discovering significant archaeological finds within the Fort Collins city limits because virtually all of the ground has been previously disturbed through construction or agricultural practices. Additionally, historic preservation staff does not have the qualification to determine the significance of archaeological artifacts. Staff recommended that this item be investigated further. The commission decided to recommend that Council adopt the Secretary of Interior's Standards Criteria A, B, and C, but at this time, not D. A discussion related to adopting Criterion D will be put onto the Commission's 2003 work program. Ms. McWilliams discussed a section of the existing code which gives the Commission the ability to review any changes to the land surface of a designated property. The Commission was not aware of this review, and it has not been a problem in the past. Ms. McWilliams reported on a conversation she had with Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman. The code could potentially be narrowed to define land changes as topographical in nature rather than vegetative. However, the addition of a thick hedgerow or a windbreak of large trees, which would not be reviewed, could have a far greater impact on a designated property than the addition of a raised garden bed, which would require review. The commission, decided to recommend that Council Landmark Preservation CommissidT • October 30, 2002 Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 delete the language concerning the review of land changes to designated properties from the code. The Commission was concerned that, if a significant resource is to be altered or destroyed, there be adequate documentation of the property before work commences. The Commission determined that some of the documentation requirements they were recommending to Council would serve a better educational purpose, while still documenting the resource, if they were included within the report requirements, rather than in the mitigation requirements. Staff was directed to work with Paul Eckman to effect this change. Ms. McWilliams reminded the Commission that the proposed code changes would be heard by City Council at its November 19 and December 3rd meetings. The presence and support of Commission members at these meetings will be important. Members wishing to attend should contact Ms. McWilliams. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Minutes submitted by staff.