Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 06/11/2008LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting June 11, 2008 Minutes Council Liaison: David Roy (407-7393) Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376) Commission Chairperson: Earen Russell SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission discussed the Commercial Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program and reviewed three applications for funding. City Planner Clark Mapes presented the Downtown Wayfinding Plan Concepts. The Commission recommended to Council the Landmark designation of 621 S. College, the Warren House. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission called to order by Chairperson Earen Russell with a quorum present at 5:30 p.m. at 281 N. College Ave., Fort Collins, Colorado. Earen Russell, John Albright, Terence Hoaglund, Alan Ballou, Bud Frick, and Ian Shuff were present. Karen McWilliams, Preservation Planner, and Timothy Wilder, Senior Planner, represented City Staff. GUESTS: Audrey Diggins, CSU Student; Austyn Mull, CSU Student; David Harrison, Contractor for 619 S. College; Clark Mapes, City Planner, for the Downtown Wayfinding Plan. AGENDA REVIEW: Landmark Designation of the Warren House, 621 South College, was added to the agenda. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. McWilliams discussed the Preservation Month proclamation, presented to Ms. Russell by Mayor Hutchinson on June 2. Her acceptance comments were well received by the mayor and other attendees. Ms. McWilliams also mentioned that the LPC’s Friends of Preservation Award was presented to 3 recipients, and, additionally, the mayor recently recognized the 100th Anniversary of the City Water Works Building. The public stakeholders meeting on the Mason Corridor MAX BRT project, which affects the Public Service Company Building, will be held Wednesday. The Landmark Preservation Committee is a consulting party. Ms. McWilliams stated that this is an important opportunity for the Landmark Preservation Committee to provide input as a party of interest. COMMISSION MEMBER’S REPORTS: Chairperson Russell did not attend the DDA meeting last week, but does have the packet. PUBLIC INPUT: Chairperson Russell asked if anyone present wished to discuss any item not on the agenda. There were no items discussed. COMMERCIAL LANDMARK REHABILITAION LOAN PROGRAM: Mr. Wilder discussed the background of the commercial Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program. Last year, money was applied for and received from the State Historic Fund to provide more funds for commercial projects in the Landmark Loan Program. There is Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 2 - $24,000 to be allocated amongst different projects. The availability of additional funds for commercial projects was announced in January, and the program did receive applications for both residential and commercial projects. However, the program had sufficient funds to cover the requested amounts, so it was decided to reopen the commercial program for additional applications. This was done via announcements to historic commercial property owners, notices in the newspapers and City News, as well as an announcement on the City’s website. Ms. McWilliams and Mr. Wilder met with six applicants, three of whom submitted applications. Program regulations make sure that applicants meet state requirements and the required design review sign-off. There is a different time frame for these projects. These projects will have a completion date of Oct. 2009. Mr. Wilder discussed the three applications. None of the applicants were able to attend tonight’s meeting. Mr. Wilder presented staff’s recommendation. He mentioned that the process would distribute funding to the best projects and elements for funding, because there is no $5,000 limitation. Montezuma-Fuller House: The owners have begun painting the house, but realized that they must redo the wood shingle roof on the main house and front porch. The flat roof portion over the porch also needs to be replaced. Also, during a previous roofing job, nails went through the crown molding, so those must be removed and the molding repaired. In addition, there is a need to paint the rear of house including the trim, lattice, and other woods. Finally, the project requires a tuck point of the interior of the rear wall and areas on the building’s exterior. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $24,200. Mr. Wilder pointed out that the crown molding repairs received a high bid of $8,000 so it may not be included in the funds; however, all elements of work are eligible for funding. 146 N. College, Commercial Bank and Trust: Mr. Wilder mentioned that this building received funding in 2006, but the work did not proceed, and the application closed. The building has since sold, and the new owners are applying for the same work previously funded, as well as additional work. The brick/stone façade is in need of repair. It contains areas with graffiti, needs tuck-pointing work, and requires damaged corners to be filled. The windows need restoration work including repairing and repainting the wood. The stained glass above the windows needs to be reset. All mortar joints must be repointed. The owner is asking for funds for the beams in the rear deck, which need to be enhanced. This rear deck is not historic. Also, the sidewalk is buckling; thus, foundation work may be involved. This may not qualify for the loan program unless the sidewalk damage is due to foundation problems. Mr. Wilder mentioned that the Commission will have to talk about the funding for the foundation. He also mentioned that there is a question of whether or not to fund the back patio area. This depends on whether or not it is part of the original facility. Additionally, the beams need to be replaced. Mr. Wilder said that, potentially, all except beams could be eligible, but the loan program will need to gather more info from the applicants to determine which elements are eligible. The estimated cost of this project is $26,000. College Plaza: Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 3 - Mr. Wilder commented on this building’s nice landscaping and the aerial on top of the house. The work need would include installing screen doors. This is because it did initially have screen doors based on hardware previously used for screens. There are three sets of screen doors to be replaced. The rear door requires hardware installation where it is missing. The front of the building requires stucco repair. Mr. Wilder maintains that the stucco is not in bad shape, but it needs repair. The front entry way includes the resurfacing of the front door and installation of the screen door. Mr. Harrison said that the practical use of screen door is to keep insects out while allowing air movement. There are two sets of wrought iron railing – one in front and one in the upper gallery—both need replaced. Some areas have rust so they need refinished and repainted. One area is broken and needs re-welded, as mentioned by Mr. Harrison. These railings are believed to be part of structure by Ms. McWilliams and Mr. Wilder. Feature F requires that window panes be repainted and repaired. Feature G requires work on the basement windows and concrete emplacements. There are three windows where the cement needs repaired and the window panes need repaired. Feature H requires replacing windows that may be lacking. Two to three can be replaced under possible costs right now, but that leaves about eight windows that have been covered up at one point in time. Mr. Wilder mentions that a match element is replacing the furnaces. He recommends prioritizing the work elements out of the suggested elements. The estimated cost of this project is $22,400 Recommendations: Montezuma-Fuller House: Mr. Wilder recommends that we fund all elements unless the molding is too expensive. The loan program will allocate $10,000 to be matched with $14,220 for a total of $24,220. Commercial Bank: Mr. Wilder recommends that we fund A-D, and leave out rear patio beams and sidewalk work due to unknowns. The loan program will give $8,000 to be matched by $8,000 for a total of $16,000 College Plaza: Mr. Wilder mentions that the windows are the highest priority, followed by back door restoration, front stucco, entryway work, window panes and basement window encasements. Additionally, the screens will probably be included since they were original. The program will give $6,000, and be matched by $13,600 for a total of $19,600. Mr. Wilder mentions that the program would apply additional conditions to funding. 621 S. College must sign its designation form to make sure it is designated. Approval of the project is required by the State Historical Fund Staff. Substantial completion of projects is additionally required. The target date is April 1, 2009. This is due to the fact that if the program does not use the money, it will be lost. Therefore, it must be used on a project at some point. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Russell asked for commission discussion/comments. Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 4 - Mr. Albright commented that he understands if fully. Mr. Shuff said that this outline is well established. Mr. Albright moves that they follow the recommendations of staff on all three projects. Mr. Ballou seconds this motion. Mr. Wilder comments that we should hear from Mr. Harrison on priorities of repair on the College Plaza. Mr. Harrison mentions that street presentation is important. There are many holes in the front. Also, the front railing should be fixed where it is broken at the top and bottom, especially because this could also be a safety issue. He mentioned that the owner wants the Plaza to look its best. Repairing and restoring is important and this program helps to offset costs with aid. He agrees that windows would be a great opening up of the building. He also mentioned that we don’t know what’s behind the stucco, and there are things to discover. Mr. Russell asks that if wrought-iron railing is not funded as proposed in the recommendations if the owner of the Plaza would still go along with the restoration. Mr. Harrison believes so. Ms. McWilliams comments that windows being replaced are on the side and back. Chairperson Russell also mentioned that the Plaza would have to decide which windows to replace. Mr. Harrison agrees. Chairperson Russell reminds the council that we have a motion on table. She asks for all in favor to say “aye.” The group is unanimously in favor Chairperson Russell says that the motion carries. Downtown Wayfinding Plan Concepts – Clark Mapes: Mr. Mapes discusses the subject of his presentation—a downtown way finding plan. He mentions that the Downtown Business Association has been interested in this project which will create a schematic design for a sign system. This does not have to be signage necessarily, but is primarily about a sign system, Mr. Mapes comments. He also mentions that a similar project was done in 1988 as shown in the packet. It lists messages for regulatory, information, attractions, etc. and has a drawn map. Mr. Mapes comments that holes, colors, and typography are used in creating signage. This was once implemented at Oaken College with colors, and custom street signs. The idea sat after a pilot project and, in 2004, came up again for implementation. Mr. Mapes is showing conceptual plan ideas, which he mentions are being seen for the first time here. These conceptual plans were done by a consultant with graphic design and urban landscape architecture experience. The signs show a theme of colors, poles, and electronic information kiosks, which are generating a lot of discussion. He comments that the electronic kiosks will give more detailed maps, but is not sure what age groups will use them. An issue that Mr. Mapes mentions is with parking in terms of directional arrows, lots, and identification. There is also an issue of clarity for pedestrian way finding, even for those who have found a place to park. Mr. Mapes mentions that the parking symbol is based on international symbol for P. However, people need to know what hours are free. Mr. Mapes also presents ideas for Oak Street. Transit stops have poles that allow for a medallion at the top for a mason’s symbol, river district sign, civic area sign, or other text. He questions if the downtown is big enough to Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 5 - mark those. Mr. Mapes also mentions that temporary event signs would be included in the signage system. There will also be Wi/Fi web info systems, which could help with walking tours, or work as mentioned by Chairperson Russell. Mr. Mapes mentions that Universe City Connections has a director. Way finding was one of the things they needed to identify. This company wants to mix way finding with interpretation, such as stories or broadcast information about tours. Next discussed by Mr. Mapes is Materials of Parking signs. They are made of metal mesh and have a 3D look. Mr. Hoaglund says that anything to make parking garages more noticeable will be helpful. Mr. Mapes answers that they did a test drive with someone who did not know the downtown area. He mentioned that Mulberry Road through him for a loop, because the Historic area of Fort Collins is quite far down the road. Mr. Mapes then discussed Destination/Directional Sign Concepts. He said that there would be a limit of five horizontal signs on a larger sign for legibility and size. Details they are working on include how to make arrows legible and readable on the signs. Ms. McWilliams asks for an explanation of the screened image concept and color scheme comparison shown on Mr. Mapes’ presentation board. Mr. Mapes says that the mesh panel could be on back side. These would be images of what they think is historic. Mr. Frick asks if this means that this occurs only if there is a directional image on one side. Mr. Mapes replies that this is true. Mr. Mapes mentions that if there are arrows pointing to street or sidewalk, that they will be on the street side. Next Mr. Mapes discusses the Identification of Attractions: The Alley Gateway project is shown, but they would like to enhance additional alleys as well. Mr. Shuff says that the alley sign is big, and Mr. Mapes says that it is horsy. Mr. Mapes also mentions that Tremble Court did have something like this historically. Chairperson Russell said that it was in the original plan to put up alley sign, but it cost too much and Ms. McWilliams said that it would cost too much if it needed to be done in areas that may never have had historic signs. Also, she mentioned that we do not want people to think that all these areas once had signs if they did not. She also commented that another option was to use historic wall painted finger signs. Chairperson Russell said she will give pictures to Mr. Mapes of these signs from the 1920s to 1930s. In addition, Mr. Frick mentions that he likes the idea of capturing the beginning and end of an alley. Mr. Mapes mentions that when parking in the Civic Center structure, it only tells you where the opera galleria is, and so there is a problem if someone wants to find something else. He comments that signs in the alley could point to attractions or what businesses can be accessed in rear (possibly in a “you are here” map). Mr. Hoaglund notices that there is no continuity in character among the signs. Chairperson Russell worries that the trail access signs could be dated quickly. Mr. Hoaglund wonders if river district signs have different character for some reason. He and Mr. Shuff also notice that there is a blaring difference in way finding signs. Chairperson Russell is worried that the historic area might become too heavily cluttered with signs, so she cautions the locations and placements of signs, especially those with conflicting styles. Mr. Shuff says to strategically place the signs in accordance with what Chairperson Russell said. Chairperson Russell asks Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 6 - about a potential location for art in public places. Mr. Mapes answers that the sign poles would serve as way finding if the art had meaning. The National Association of Interpretation looked at the art and sings. When the interpreters viewed the ideas, they asked what it meant. Mr. Mapes told them that there is a transportation theme, but also marks civic projects. He also points out that way finding signs must be able to communicate. Concerning the River Trail sign Mr. Mapes mentioned we must be more careful about bringing it into whole scheme. He also commented that like in 1988, oak with pink, no one wants contemporary style. He stated that we want a more traditional look with a harmonious feel rather than creating a new identity for the signs. Some of the alternatives that Mr. Mapes mentioned are that you could use the standardized brown, blue, and green signs. He wonders you can adapt those to be the most simple and universal system. He also states that Pueblo uses traditional signs, especially in their downtown projects. Mr. Ballou asks about maps, and Mr. Mapes discusses the idea of districts; there are 8. He stated that we may want to make medallions on top of signs different colors in order to identify districts. He also commented that the obvious and worthwhile thing to do is to identify the River District. Mr. Hoaglund notices that people don’t know difference between Old Town and Downtown. He mentions that what is worth communicating will help. Mr. Hoaglund says that Old Town, civic, and other districts can break up the Mason Corridor. Chairperson Russell asks if that will go south. Mr. Frick comments that we should simplify area and that people won’t care whether it’s Old Town or Downtown. Mr. Mapes asks if the committee likes the bronze markers in the historic area. Mr. Shuff comments that they don’t draw attention. Mr. Mapes responds that he can’t find where he is on some maps because the triangle is not pointed in a logical direction. Ms. McWilliams mentions that the commission might want to consider the opportunity to identify the historic area and set it apart. Mr. Mapes questions if the bronze objects are just neat and wonders a person who looks at them thinks. Chairperson Russell wonders about the districts on the map and if these are roughly the boundaries on area. Mr. Mapes responds that there are currently signs in place with CDOT and there are no boundaries to these. Mr. Hoaglund suggests a billboard on I-25 to incorporate the ideas of signage into the billboard. Mr. Mapes says that this is a definite idea as long as there is harmony with color. He also mentions that Vail has neat European style signage which leads you into town. He says that it is a low key project. Additionally he mentions that UCC wants to pull CSU and downtown together a little better. Ms. McWilliams asks if there are any questions. Mr. Ballou asks if the overhead street signs are a priority. Mr. Mapes says that they haven’t talked about it, but the city is replacing all signs due to a new standard that they must meet. Ms. McWilliams asks about the time frame of the project. Mr. Mapes answers that they are working closely with DBA and have completed about 40% of the project. He also mentions that the pace is going about right, and they the will probably be finished by September with the plan. Then they will talk to DDA and downtown GDI about implementation. They are being funded with leftover money from department used to hire consultants. Landmark Preservation Commission June 11, 2008 Meeting - 7 - Chairperson Russell asks if they posted the document on the on city’s website. Mr. Mapes says that they need to post plans right now. OTHER BUSINESS: Landmark Designation of 621 College Ave.: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Warren House, 621 South College Avenue. The property has significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standards (2) and (3). The property is significant for its association with Nathan C. Warren, an early Fort Collins businessman and president of the Moody-Warren Commercial Company, which provided produce and agricultural supplies to the local and regional markets. The property is also significant as a good example of the Italian Renaissance Style of architecture that was popular in Colorado during the 1920s. Representative elements of that style embodied by the Warren House include the low hipped roof, smooth stuccoed walls, numerous arched entrance and windows, and wrought iron balconet and trim. Ms. McWilliams says that this is a little unusual because we do not have a signed nomination form because the owners are in China right now. The loan money says that the nomination form needs to be signed and become official within a week. In the mean time, the property owner asked to bring the project forward in order to expedite the process. Once signed, it will go to City Council. Staff recommends approving the request for Landmark Designation of the Warren Residence, 621 South College Avenue, under Standards (2) and (3) for its association with prominent early businessman Nathan C. Warren, and for its good representation of the Italian Renaissance architectural style in Fort Collins. Mr. Frick questions why according to chamber of commerce brochure, it contains valuable and compressive stock. He wonders what compressive stock is. Ms. McWilliams responds that it may be a typo but that she thinks it is quoted correctly. Chairperson Russell asks if there are commission comments. Mr. Ballou asks why the house is refereed to as 621 S. College and then 619 S. College. Mr. McWilliams answers that 619 is the mailing address and 621 is the physical address of the house. Mr. Frick moves that we should approve this under the recommendations of the staff and that this is contingent on the owners signing the form. Chairperson Russell asks in the public has any input. She then asks for a second. Mr. Albright seconds the motion. Chairperson Russell says that the motion carries unanimously. Meeting is adjourned at 6:46 PM. by Chairperson Russell. Respectfully submitted by Lisa Markle, Secretary