HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/14/2015 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Regular MeetingLandmark Preservation Commission Page 1 January 14, 2015
Ron Sladek, Chair
Doug Ernest, Vice Chair City Council Chambers
Maren Bzdek City Hall West
Meg Dunn 300 Laporte Avenue
Kristin Gensmer Fort Collins, Colorado
Per Hogestad
Dave Lingle Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Alexandra Wallace on the Comcast cable system
Belinda Zink
Laurie Kadrich Karen McWilliams Josh Weinberg Gino Campana
Staff Liaison, CDNS Director Preservation Planner Preservation Planner Council Liaison
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
Regular Meeting
January 14, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
DISCUSSION AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 10, 2014 REGULAR
MEETING.
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the December 10, 2014 regular meeting of the
Landmark Preservation Commission.
2. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - UTILITY ADMIN BUILDING AND CREAMERY LABORATORY
BUILDING
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Update on Utility Administration Building and Old Creamery Laboratory
Building (Butterfly Building) – 222 LaPorte Avenue
APPLICANT: Brian Hergott, Facilities Project Manager
Landmark
Preservation
Commission
City of Fort Collins Page 2
3. FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE COLLAMER/MALABY HISTORIC DISTRICT
AT 303, 305, 313, AND 315 NORTH MELDRUM STREET
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Collamer/Malaby
Historic District at 303, 305, 313, and 315 North Meldrum Street. The district
has significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standards B
and C.
APPLICANT: James and Carol Burrill
4. FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE KRAMER/BARRAZA PROPERTY AT 520
NINTH STREET
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Kramer/Barraza
Property located at 520 Ninth Street. The property has significance to Fort
Collins under Landmark Preservation Standards A and C.
APPLICANT: Henry and Sylvia Barraza
5. FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE LONGYEAR PROPERTY AT 719
REMINGTON STREET
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Longyear Property
located at 719 Remington Street. The property has significance to Fort Collins
under Landmark Preservation Standards B and C.
APPLICANT: James Danella, Property Owner
6. FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE HOLMES/MANGES PROPERTY AT 1202
LAPORTE AVENUE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Holmes/Manges
Property located at 1202 Laporte Avenue. The property has significance to
Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standard C.
APPLICANT: Sharon Manges, Property Owner
7. FINAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority is seeking a final design
review from the Commission on the proposed renovation project of Old Town
Square, within the Old Town Historic District.
APPLICANT: Matt Robenalt and Todd Dangerfield, Downtown Development Authority
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
Agenda Item 1
Item # 1 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
STAFF
Gretchen Schiager, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 10, 2014 REGULAR
MEETING.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the December 10, 2014 regular meeting of the Landmark
Preservation Commission.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 3
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 December 10, 2014
Ron Sladek, Chair
Doug Ernest, Vice Chair City Council Chambers
Maren Bzdek City Hall West
Meg Dunn 300 Laporte Avenue
Kristin Gensmer Fort Collins, Colorado
Dave Lingle
Pat Tvede Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Alexandra Wallace on the Comcast cable system
Belinda Zink
Laurie Kadrich Karen McWilliams Josh Weinberg Gino Campana
Staff Liaison, CDNS Director Preservation Planner Preservation Planner Council Liaison
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
Regular Meeting
December 10, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Sladek called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Dunn, Zink, Bzdek, Tvede, Wallace, Gensmer, Sladek
ABSENT: Ernest (excused), Lingle (excused)
STAFF: McWilliams, Weinberg, Schiager
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
No public comment.
Chair Sladek announced that the Great Western Sugar Company located within the Kingfisher Point
Natural Area has been officially listed on the National Register, making it the 25th Fort Collins property
to be individually listed.
Chair Sladek announced this is Pat Tvede’s last meeting, and thanked her for her years of service.
Landmark
Preservation
Commission
1.a
Packet Pg. 4
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 2
DISCUSSION AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 12, 2014 REGULAR
MEETING.
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the November 12, 2014 regular meeting of the
Landmark Preservation Commission.
Ms. Tvede moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the minutes of the
November 12, 2014 meeting. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 7-0.
[Timestamp: 5:35 p.m.]
2. PRELIMINARY/FINAL DESIGN REVIEW – ADDITION OF PHOTOGRAPHS ON COOPERSMITH’S,
220 EAST MOUNTAIN AVENUE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Zonta Club of Fort Collins is proposing a “Northern Colorado Women’s
Legacy Hall of Fame,” to consist of a wall of photographic images of significant
women. While the intent is that the images will remain for some time, the
installation is not permanent and is easily removed. The club has received
permission from the building owner, Old Town Property; the business owner,
Coopersmith’s; and the DDA, to install images in the black spandrel glass
walls of Coopersmith’s. Because the property affects the exterior appearance
of a Fort Collins Landmark property, Landmark Preservation Commission
approval is also required.
APPLICANT: Patti Smith, Zonta Club of Fort Collins
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report.
Applicant Presentation
Ms. Smith gave the Applicant presentation, providing background information and details about the
proposed project.
Public Input
None
Commission Questions and Discussion
The Applicant clarified that the woodcut prints will be digitally printed on graffiti-protection-coated
laminate. The laminate will be just outside the glass, and will not affect the glass. When asked
whether the laminate would be bolted into the window frames, the Applicant stated they are still
working out the best and least impactful way to attach them. Members asked for clarification on the
location, and the Applicant explained the installation will be on the six north windows of the Pizza
Pub, which is a newer building. Nothing will be attached to the older buildings. The Applicant
clarified the size of the artwork, and stated they believe it will be visible from other locations in the
area. The artwork will not be illuminated at night.
Chair Sladek asked whether the Commission had any concerns related to the Old Town Historic
District Design Guidelines, the Secretary of Interior Standards or the Municipal Code. No concerns
were expressed. Members stated it was a positive addition, and fit well with the Old Town Historic
District Design Guidelines 6-13 and 6-14 with regard to murals. Members discussed the impact on
the historic character of the District per 14-48b, Section 1, noting that this may be an opportunity to
highlight historic women in our area.
The Commission indicated they were comfortable with proceeding with a final design review.
Commission Deliberation
Ms. Gensmer moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Zonta Club’s
request for the addition of woodcut prints for a Northern Colorado Women’s Legacy Hall of
Fame on Coopersmith’s, 220 East Mountain Avenue, under Municipal Code Section 14-48b.
Ms. Tvede seconded. Motion passed 7-0.
1.a
Packet Pg. 5
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 3
[Timestamp: 5:57 p.m.]
3. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW - WATER WORKS INTERPRETIVE MUSEUM, 2005 NORTH
OVERLAND TRAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Poudre Landmarks Foundation (PLF) is exploring the reuse of the historic
Fort Collins Water Works buildings and site as a water interpretive museum,
and has received a State Historical Fund grant to assist with developing plans.
Alterations and new construction to designated Landmark properties are
subject to review under Municipal Code Section 14-48. The PLF has
submitted its preliminary design for the proposed improvements and
development of the Water Works Interpretive Museum. Any concerns,
comments or suggestion would be greatly appreciated, so that can be
incorporated or addressed as the design develops.
APPLICANT: Peter Stewart, Stewart Architecture
Ms. Wallace recused herself due to a conflict of interest.
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Stewart gave the Applicant presentation.
Public Input
None
Commission Questions and Discussion
Members asked for more details about the staging area on the east side and the alterations to the
doors. The Applicant explained that the paved area would be an all-weather exterior surface,
providing a safe, accessible route into the building and restrooms. The Applicant said the front doors
will remain. They currently swing in. The door on the right would maintain its hinge and be in a fixed
position, while the door on the left would have to swing out, possibly using concealed pivot hinges.
The other door would be widened and altered to swing out without removing the windows.
A Member asked whether the building was structurally sound. The Applicant explained that while
there are a few issues that need to be addressed, it is generally in remarkably good shape.
Members inquired about the archeological investigation, and whether the flagstone patio areas had
also been investigated. The Applicant stated they had, and they don’t believe they will be disturbing
any known archeological finds. Members pointed out they will need to have an archeologist on site
with the surveyor and when any ground work is being done. While there is not a lot of ground work,
there is some shallow work for grading and pavers.
Members noted that the mechanical and lighting systems need to be unobtrusive, and more of an
industrial look due to nature of building and historic use. The mechanical room is not visible to the
public, and the corrugated metal divider makes it clear that it’s new, while still in keeping with
industrial feel.
Members asked whether they intended to install storm windows. The Applicant stated they had not
yet done the heat-load calculations, but acknowledged it will be a low-performing building energy-
wise. Storm windows may not make enough difference to be warranted. The Applicant stated there
are no plans to add insulation to the building. They plan to use radiant floor heat, which is not visible,
and are also looking at alternative energy such as micro-hydroelectricity. With regard to cooling, the
Applicant said the building had a lot of thermal mass and very high ceilings, and they are hopeful that
they won’t need to have cooling. If needed, they may consider a geothermal water-based system for
cooling through the floors.
1.a
Packet Pg. 6
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 4
Chair Sladek asked whether the Commission had any concerns in light of Section 14-48b. A Member
stated that there did not appear to be any detrimental effects from the proposed work. Another
Member asked about planting shade trees and the need for irrigation. The Applicant stated the trees
were intended to minimally meet the County’s requirements, and to protect the view shed from the
cars in the parking lot.
Commission Feedback
Chair Sladek noted that this is a preliminary design review with no voting. He said the Commission
seems generally comfortable with the plan, and the project was headed in a good direction. The
Commission looks forward to seeing the plan again as the project progresses. The Applicant thanked
the Commission for their comments and feedback.
Ms. Wallace returned to the meeting.
[Timestamp: 6:43 p.m.]
Chair Sladek explained that the order of agenda items 4 and 5 had been switched at the request of an
Applicant.
5. DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, 1ST BANK, 100 S COLLEGE
AVENUE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for the LPC Design Review Subcommittee to review and
comment upon proposed exterior alterations to a property that has been
determined to be individually eligible for Fort Collins Landmark recognition.
APPLICANT: Jim Cox, Architecture Plus
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams provided the staff report.
Applicant Presentation
Jim Cox addressed the Commission on behalf of the Applicant. He introduced Adam Snyder and
Dawn Davis from 1st Bank, who were seated in the audience. Don Bernholtz ran the PowerPoint for
Mr. Cox’s presentation. Mr. Cox explained the two design options being proposed, one that they
considered to be the minimum treatment necessary, and the other being the Applicant’s preferred
treatment option.
Public Input
None
Commission Questions and Discussion
Members asked for clarification about the tempered glass versus plate glass for the windows. The
Applicant explained that the windows are currently plate glass, while the International Building Code
(IBC) requires tempered glass. There is no glass company in the U.S. that can replace windows of
this size and weight with thermal pane tempered glass. He found one company in Canada who will
do the work, but at a cost of approximately $350K. To minimize the costs, the proposed design would
have tempered glass only in the lower panels and heat strengthened glass on the upper panels,
separated with horizontal mullions.
Chair Sladek asked Staff about the history of modifications and additions to the building. Ms.
McWilliams provided a summary, based on her recollection. She believed that around 2000, Cache
Bank purchased the property and applied for a permit to alter the building by putting a stucco (EIFS)
product over the existing gold-colored tile. Because the building was not yet 50 years old, they were
not subject to the Historic Preservation review standards at the time. However, the stucco was
applied in such a way as to minimize any damage to the gold-colored tiles underneath.
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 5
In 2013, 1st Bank acquired the property, and submitted plans to change the roof configuration, install
new windows, cover the blue brick with a stone product, and add a rear addition, skylight, and ATM.
The CDNS Director and Landmark Preservation Commission Chair at the time reviewed the design,
and approved the rear addition, ATM, and skylight. At that time the other changes were not
approved, as it was felt they would greatly alter the historic character of the building. Recently, a
portion of the gold tile was exposed during exploratory demolition, and then the stucco was replaced,
so the gold tile is still underneath.
The Applicant explained that the gold-colored tile cannot be restored, because it is damaged, isn’t
frost-proof and cannot be properly maintained. The Applicant provided the Commission with photos
of the exposed tile to illustrate this point. He stated that with the proposed new upper windows, the
old tile would be completely removed. He explained that the existing gold tile was intended for
interior use. Members asked whether the gold tile could be replaced in order to comply with
Secretary of the Interior Standard 6. The Applicant has not been able to find gold frost-proof tile to
match the look.
Members asked if the canopy over the ATM was original. The Applicant stated it was not original and
had been added by a previous owner.
Members discussed the Applicant’s comments about enhancing the horizontality of the post-modern
design with the preferred design option. A comment was made that verticality is actually more
important to the original design. The Applicant said they had considered a design that would place
more emphasis on the vertical orientation, and expressed willingness to explore that further.
Chair Sladek asked that the Commission look at each element of the design as separate issue. The
windows and safety glass is one big item. The removal of the EIFS panels and underlying gold tile is
another issue, tying in with the addition of the spandrel windows in its place. The third item is raising
the canopy over the ATM to be in line with the canopy over the main entrance. He pointed out that
this change could make it look like it might have been part of the original building, which is a problem.
He felt that aside from the glass issue, the designs stray too far from the intent of the original design.
Another Member added that another issue is moving the sign back to its original location, which was
actually a positive change.
Members asked why there is only one bid for the glass. The Applicant stated that Commercial Glass
is the largest glass company in Northern Colorado and they are unable to install panels of this size
and weight due to the risk. The Applicant further explained that tempered glass is only required by
code if it is within 18” from the floor. If the glass is higher than that, it is not required to be tempered.
The Applicant was asked whether installing a bar in front of the window to prevent someone from
walking into it, or using 3M Scotchshield Safety Film, might be options. The Applicant stated the film
was not allowed below 18” from the floor by the IBC. He further stated that the option of installing a
safety bar as a way around using tempered glass below 18” is also not provided for in the IBC.
The Commission discussed the issue of removing the tile and installing spandrel windows. The
consensus was that the tile should not be removed, and it was noted that a future owner may be
interested in restoring the tile. The Applicant stated that the gold tile look was part of the original
Columbia Savings and Loan branding and doesn’t fit with 1st Bank branding. Members pointed out
that the branding and uniqueness of the building is part of its historic fabric and part of what makes it
landmark eligible.
There was some additional discussion about the horizontal and vertical lines of the building.
Members mentioned that the horizontal muntins should be as minimal as possible, and that no
additional vertical dividers should be inserted. The Commission discussed where they would prefer
to see a single horizontal muntin, but acknowledged that would be largely dependent upon the
engineering report. The Applicant reminded the Commission that an engineer still needs to look at
the minimal option.
Commission Feedback
Chair Sladek said the Commission prefers minimal approach. Overall, they felt that option was a
fairly minor change.
1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 6
The Applicant thanked the Commission for their input. Dawn Davis from 1st Bank commented about
their intent to try to make the design more mid-century modern, and stressed their desire to be a good
community partner. Chair Sladek thanked the Applicants for their presentation.
[Timestamp: 8:00 p.m.]
4. CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL DESIGN REVIEW OF REAR ADDITION, LANDBLOM PROPERTY AT
116 NORTH PEARL STREET
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a design review and final approval of a proposed rear
addition to this residence. The design was conceptually reviewed by the
Landmark Preservation Commission at its April 9, 2014 meeting.
APPLICANT: Ken and Michelle Christensen
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams provided the staff report.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Christensen spoke on behalf of the Applicant. He explained since the Commission last saw the
design in April there was a slight change involving the engineering of a window on the sloped roof.
The design still has the same footprint and height and meets design requirements for
Eastside/Westside neighborhoods.
Public Input
None
Commission Questions and Discussion
Members asked for clarification on the change to the window. The roofline changed so that it now
slants to the side in order to accommodate some structure above the window. Chair Sladek asked if
the Members had any concerns about the design. Only positive comments were made.
Commission Deliberation
Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the design of the rear
addition to the Landblom Property at 116 North Pearl Street finding that it complies with
Section 14-48 of the Municipal Code, Approval of Proposed Work. Ms. Gensmer seconded.
Motion passed 7-0.
Chair Sladek thanked the Applicant, who then thanked Staff for their help with the process.
[Timestamp: 8:07 p.m.]
6. DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, KAPPA DELTA SORORITY, 412 W
LAUREL STREET
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for the LPC Design Review Subcommittee to review and
comment upon proposed exterior alterations to a property that is individually
eligible for Fort Collins Landmark recognition.
APPLICANT: Greg D. Fisher, Architect
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Fisher introduced himself and Patricia Vincent who provided the background and goals of the
project. Mr. Fisher reviewed the plans and drawings for the design.
Public Input
None
1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
City of Fort Collins Page 7
Commission Questions
Members asked whether there were any historic photos of how the building originally looked. The
Applicant stated that there was one photo that didn’t make it into the packet, but the building looks the
same other than the addition of the trellis and canopy, and the colors. It was mentioned that Option
2, by retaining the concrete block and painting it a lighter color, would restore the building to
something similar to the original look.
Commission Discussion and Feedback
Chair Sladek guided the Commission through a discussion of the different elements of the proposed
design options, and the following points were made:
1. Freestanding canopy – Members approved of the change as long as it remains freestanding and
light.
2. Signage – Members noted the sign had already been moved. They agreed that it was fine with
the stipulation that it be attached in mortar joints.
3. Front Entry – The Commission was largely in agreement that changing the single front entry to a
double-door, and adding the sidelights, was acceptable as long as the concrete block work is
retained. They felt it was a good compromise, and the visual impact was not that great.
4. Block Work – The Commission agreed that retaining the block work and painting it a lighter color
was important. The proposed zinc skin would be attached at the mortar joints, covering but
preserving the block work. However, it was noted that if the block work were left uncovered, the
changes to the entrance would be more palatable. Too many cascading changes would impact
the integrity of the original design intent, when considered in the context of the Seven Aspects of
Integrity.
5. Upper glazing – While most of the Members expressed that they liked the aesthetic appeal of the
design and understood the utility of it, they felt the impact on the integrity of the original design
was too great. When considering the Seven Aspects of Integrity, the upper glazing would impact
the materials, design and feeling. The Commission acknowledged struggling with this element.
There was near consensus among the members not to support the upper glazing.
6. Lower glazing – A strong majority would support the lower glazing, as long as the block work is
retained and painted a lighter color.
[Timestamp: 9:09 p.m.]
OTHER BUSINESS
None
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Sladek adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager.
1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Draft LPC Dec 10, 2014 Minutes (2804 : Minutes of December 10, 2014)
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - UTILITY ADMIN BUILDING AND CREAMERY LABORATORY BUILDING
STAFF
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Update on Utility Administration Building and Old Creamery Laboratory
Building (Butterfly Building) – 222 LaPorte Avenue
APPLICANT: Brian Hergott, Facilities Project Manager
OWNER: City of Fort Collins
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This project was discussed with the Landmark Preservation Commission most recently at its October 8,
2014 meeting, at which the Commission passed a resolution which, in part, approved the relocation of
the historic Creamery Laboratory Building to the east of its current location. Since that meeting,
Facilities has further developed the plans for the new Utility Administration Building and Creamery
Laboratory Building. Facilities has submitted this latest design information to the Planning and Zoning
Departments as the second submittal of the PDP process, and is scheduled to hear their feedback on
January 14, 2015.
Included are an updated site plan and perspectives showing the current design for the new building. The
Laboratory Building has been elevated, as previously discussed, so it is out of the flood plain, and its
diagonal orientation has been maintained. The site plan also embraces this diagonal orientation which
will be used to tie the two buildings together. The steps to the new building represent a portion of the
current location, and this original location will be marked. The use of the relocated building has not been
determined, but discussions are taking place as the design moves forward. Facilities is also having
discussions with the structural engineer about re-constructing a sign similar to the one previously
installed on the upper block wall.
The paperwork is being prepared to request landmark designation for the Old City Hall building and
Texaco (Haiston Oil) building. Facilities is looking to bring these forward to the Commission in March for
Council recommendation. Designation for the laboratory building will be sought later, after it has been
moved to the new location.
2
Packet Pg. 11
Agenda Item 2
Item # 2 Page 2
ATTACHMENTS
1. 1-12-15 LPC Meeting Narrative (DOCX)
2. 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (PDF)
3. 005_ELEVATIONS (PDF)
4. LS-SitePlan (PDF)
5. LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 8 2014 MINUTES (DOCX)
2
Packet Pg. 12
Operation Services
300 LaPorte Ave, Building B
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6610
970.221.6534
fcgov.com
January 6, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
281 N College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO. 80522
RE: Update on Utility Administration Building and Old Creamery Laboratory Building (Butterfly
Building) – 222 LaPorte Avenue
In follow up to our discussion at the LPC work session on October 8, 2014 we have updated our design
with plans of relocating the Creamery Laboratory Building to the east which will allow the new Utility
building to be constructed along LaPorte Avenue.
We have included an updated site plan and perspectives showing the current design for the new building.
We have elevated the Creamery building as discussed so it is out of the flood plain and we have
maintained its diagonal orientation. Our site plan also embraces this diagonal orientation which will be
used to tie the two buildings together. The steps to the new building represent a portion of the current
location and we are looking at ways to mark this original location. We have not determined how this
relocated building will be used at the new location, but discussions are taking place as the design moves
forward. We are having discussions with our structural engineer about re-constructing a sign similar to the
one previously installed on the upper block wall.
The paperwork is being prepared to request landmark designation for the Old City Hall building and
Texaco (Haston Oil) building. We are looking to bring them to the commission in March for
recommendation. We prefer to wait and request designation for the laboratory building after it has been
moved to the new location.
We have recently submitted this latest design information to Planning and Zoning as the second submittal
of the PDP process. We are scheduled to hear their feedback on January 14, 2015.
Brian Hergott
Facilities Project Manager
City of Fort Collins
2.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: 1-12-15 LPC Meeting Narrative (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and Creamery Laboratory Building)
1
Block 32/42 Development
Update for new Utilities Building
and existing Creamery
Laboratory Building
Landmark Preservation Committee
January 12, 2015
2.b
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
2
Current Block 32/42 Master Plan
2.b
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
3
Key items for Creamery Building
• Relocated building to be visible for those traveling
LaPorte Avenue and is to have a functional use.
• Tell the story behind this old building and why it exist.
• Create a tie back to the building’s original location.
• Create a tie with the new Utilities building and the other
surrounding buildings.
• Reconstruct a sign similar to the original Dairy Gold
sign and have it serve a promotional function.
• Use some special landscaping features around the
building.
• Submit this building along with Old City Hall and Haston
Oil for landmark designation.
2.b
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
4
Current Site Plan
2.b
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
5
Southeast Perspective
2.b
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
6 Southwest Perspective
2
.b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
7 Northeast Perspective
2
.b
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
8 South Perspective
2
.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
9
Comments
2.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: 01122015 Utilities Building Update - Landmark Preservation Presentation (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
A
LEVEL 2
114'-8"
LEVEL 3
128'-0"
C
T.O. STRUCT
141'-4"
B A.2
W09.2
W09.2
W08.2 W01
W02
W02 W02
W02
W01 W08.2
W09.2
W09.2
08.43A
08.91C
04.01
04.43A 04.43A
04.72E
04.72E
04.01
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
ENCLOSURE WALL
04.01
04.72D
04.72B
W10
W10
14'-8" 13'-4" 13'-4"
11'-4"
41'-2"
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
1
LEVEL 2
114'-8"
LEVEL 3
128'-0"
T.O. STRUCT
141'-4"
2 2.6 3 3.4 4 4.6 5 5.4 6 7
W09
W08 W03
W04
W04 W02
W02
W01 W01
W07
W06
W05 W05
W06
W07 W07
W06 W06
W07 W02
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
A
LEVEL 2
114'-8"
LEVEL 3
128'-0"
C
T.O. STRUCT
141'-4"
A.2 B
W09.2
W09.2
W08.2 W01
W02
W02 W02
W02 W09.2
W09.2
W14 W13.2
04.01
08.43A
08.91C
08.91C 04.72E
04.72E
04.01
04.43A
04.01
04.72C 04.01
04.43A 04.72D
04.01
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
ENCLOSURE WALL
14'-8" 13'-4" 13'-4"
11'-4"
41'-2"
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
1
LEVEL 2
114'-8"
LEVEL 3
128'-0"
T.O. STRUCT
141'-4"
7 6 5.4 5 4.6 4 3.4 3 2.6 2
08.43A
08.43A
08.43A
W09
W02 W02 W02 W02
W02 W02 W02
W13 W12 W12
W11
W11
W01
W02
W02 W02 W02 W02 W02 W02 W02
W02 W02 W02 W02 W02
W01 W01 W01 W01 W01 W01
W04
2.d
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: LS-SitePlan (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and Creamery Laboratory Building)
LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 8, 2014 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed Relocation of “Butterfly Building” at 222 Laporte Avenue.
APPLICANT: Jeff Mihelich, City of Fort Collins, City Manager’s Office
Brian Hergott, City of Fort Collins, Operation Services
OLD CREAMERY LABORATORY BUILDING (BUTTERFLY BUILDING) – 222 LAPORTE AVENUE
Staff Report
Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report, pointing out the applicable Land Use Codes.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Mihelich gave a presentation on behalf of the City of Fort Collins. He discussed competing goals
within the City organization, and a desire to address them. He said the Butterfly Building was iconic
and unique. He asked the Commission to consider whether the Butterfly Building would still be
eligible for landmark designation if it were moved, stating that six of the seven aspects of integrity
would be unaffected by moving the building. He mentioned that the building has already lost a lot of its
context due to the other developments around it. He pointed out that moving the building to the east
of the new Utilities Administration Building (a.k.a. UAB) was the most desirable option from the City’s
perspective and asked the Commission to provide a recommendation based on that location.
Public Input
None
Commission Questions and Discussion
One Member reviewed the seven aspects of integrity and commented on whether she believed each
was affected by moving the building. She pointed out that the building has already lost some of its
integrity with regard to several aspects due to the changes in its surroundings and the loss of the
Dairy Gold sign. She said that, while these losses have already happened, they still must be
considered in terms of eligibility and whether moving the building further impacts eligibility.
Mr. Lingle disclosed that he and Ms. Bzdek had participated in an informal conceptual review of this
project with City Staff last week.
Members asked when the building was last reviewed for eligibility, which was in May of 2014, at
which time it was determined to be individually eligible. Members discussed whether the
significance of the building’s historic use and Googie architecture are high enough to offset some of
the diminishment of integrity. Chair Sladek pointed out that there is more flexibility for a local
designation than there is at the National level and that they don’t necessarily have to meet the State
or National level of standards. He further pointed out that all seven aspects of integrity do not have
to be in place, just a preponderance of them.
Mr. Mihelich commented that he would like to explore the idea of adding a sign in a similar style to
the Dairy Gold sign, if that would help to preserve the building’s eligibility. Members were generally
in agreement that bringing back the Dairy Gold sign would be a very positive step, barring any
trademark-related legality, and commented that it would help with the feeling and association
aspects. The restoration of the Northern Hotel sign was given as an example. Mr. Mihelich said
they would look into that.
Members questioned what the future use of the building would be. Mr. Mihelich assured the
Commission that the building would be used, but that ideas for its specific use were still being
explored, including an educational function with regard to sustainability. This idea was well received
by Members, as it could nicely tie the UAB to the idea of preservation of historic structures.
Members also commented that they liked the idea of marking the outline of the original building and
using interpretive signage at both the new and old location. Chair Sladek pointed out that the
interpretive signage should not reference the name “Butterfly Building”, which is a recent nickname
and not historically accurate.
Chair Sladek requested that the City launch a landmark designation process for this building, the
Old City Hall building, and the Texaco building within the next six months. Mr. Mihelich committed to
start the process on all three of those buildings right away.
A Member commented that the design of the UAB as currently proposed is not representative of the
kind of cutting edge technology for which the building will be used and suggested that the City take
another look at its design elements.
2.e
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 8 2014 MINUTES (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
A Member pointed out that, because the Commission had seen a previous design which was more
respectful to this historic building, any motion will have to defend how this design meets Land Use
Code Section 3.4.7 with regard to protection of the building to the maximum extent feasible.
A Member inquired about the fact that the UAB was originally supposed to be net zero. Mr. Mihelich
explained that this building will be better than Gold Certified LEED, which is the City’s standard. He
went on to explain that the budget for the building was $20 million, but the original design came in
closer to $27 million, which they could not justify to Council. He said that they have already had
some discussions about making the skin of the building less utilitarian.
Members pointed out that the new UAB will be flanked by two historic buildings from the same era,
and that design inspiration can be taken from both.
Chair Sladek summarized the Commission’s comments, making the following points:
Of the three location options presented, the Commission prefers the southeast corner of the
property.
The Commission would like to see the Dairy Gold sign reconstructed.
The Commission would like to see a functional use defined for the building that is consistent
with its historic use as a promotional vehicle.
The Commission agrees that the marking of the original location and the use of interpretive
signage are of critical importance to the project.
The Commission agrees that the design of the new UAB should consider the context of the
Butterfly Building and the Old City Hall. While the relocation of the Butterfly Building does not
meet the “maximum extent feasible” requirements of Land Use Code Section 3.4.7, this can
be mitigated by drawing design inspiration for the new UAB from its mid-century modern
neighbors.
The Commission also requests that the City launch a landmark designation process for the
Butterfly Building, the Old City Hall building, and the Texaco (Haston Oil) building.
Members were in agreement that these points represented their recommendations and indicated they were
ready to proceed with a final review.
Commission Deliberation
Mr. Lingle moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the decision maker the
approval of the final development proposal for the Utilities Administration Building in regards to its
impact on the Butterfly Building, based on compliance with Municipal Code Sections 14.5 and 14.48
and Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code, finding that, while the relocation of the Butterfly Building
is detrimental to the seven aspects of integrity and does not meet the Land Use Code standard of “to
the maximum extent feasible”, the proposed design, in conjunction with the Commission’s outlined
recommendations, mitigates those concerns. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 8-0.
Sladek thanked the Applicant, and Mr. Mihelich thanked the Commission for their input, noting that
their suggestions will make this a much better project.
2.e
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 8 2014 MINUTES (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE COLLAMER/MALABY HISTORIC DISTRICT AT 303,
305, 313, AND 315 NORTH MELDRUM STREET
STAFF
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Collamer/Malaby Historic
District at 303, 305, 313, and 315 North Meldrum Street. The district has
significance to Fort Collins under Landmark Preservation Standards B and C.
APPLICANT: James and Carol Burrill
OWNER: James and Carol Burrill
RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Collamer/Malaby Historic District qualifies for Landmark
designation under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Standards B and C. If the
Landmark Preservation Commission determines that the historic district is
eligible under these standards, then the Commission may pass a resolution
recommending City Council pass an ordinance designating the Collamer/Malaby
Historic District as a Fort Collins Landmark under Designation Standards B and
C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Collamer-Malaby Historic District is significant under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Significance
Standards B and C and Exterior Integrity Standards A, B, C, D, E, F, and G.
These properties all relate to one of the pioneers of Fort Collins, Jacob Collamer. Collamer homesteaded the land
of the Grandview Cemetery. The Collamers and descendants have called 300 block of North Meldrum home since
1899, when Frank Collamer, a son of Jacob, first moved his family onto 317 North Meldrum. Furthermore, several
influential people from Fort Collins history exchanged ownership of the Emma Malaby Grocery Store before Frank
Collamer purchased it.
Malaby Grocery, now located at 313 North Meldrum, is one of the oldest commercial buildings in Fort Collins.
Construction on the store was completed in the 1870s when it stood on College Avenue near what is now the Old
Town Triangle. The wood frame structure retained the false front, indicative of the typical Old West style.
Commercial buildings boasted the false front vernacular style in the early days of Fort Collins history; however,
Malaby grocery is the last surviving example of the style.
The location and setting of the site contain a rich history of Collamer development and neighborhood businesses
although the structures on the 300 block are not all strictly original to the site. Minimal changes to the exterior of
the structures protect and convey the historical value of the buildings. As the properties stand on the 300 block of
North Meldrum, together they connect to the time of early Fort Collins development. Collamer descendants still
retain ownership of the property.
3
Packet Pg. 28
Agenda Item 3
Item # 3 Page 2
ATTACHMENTS
1. Landmark Designation Application (DOC)
2. Photos (DOCX)
3. Site Map (PDF)
4. Location Map (PDF)
3
Packet Pg. 29
Revised 08-2014 Page 1
Fort Collins Landmark Designation
LOCATION INFORMATION:
Address: 303, 305, 313, and 315 North Meldrum Street
Legal Description: Lots 1-4, Block 53, FTC.
Property Name (historic and/or common): Collamer-Malaby Historic District
OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: James E. Burrill and Carol S. Burrill
Phone: 970-619-0450
Email: Burrill@frii.com
Address: 305 N Meldrum Street, Fort Collins, CO 80521-2023
CLASSIFICATION
Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing
Designation
Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register
Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register
Site Religious
Object Residential
District Entertainment
Government
Other
FORM PREPARED BY:
Name and Title: Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planning Intern
Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, P.O. Box 580, Fort Collins,
CO 80522
Phone:
Email: cbumgarner@fcgov.com
Relationship to Owner: None
DATE: 1/07/2015
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.41
0
970.22
4- fax
fcgov.c
3.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 2
TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES
Individual Landmark Property Landmark District
Explanation of Boundaries:
The boundaries of the property being designated as a Fort Collins Landmark correspond to the
legal description of the property, above.
SIGNIFICANCE
Properties are eligible for designation if they possess significance, which is the importance of a
site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of
our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins
Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards:
Standard A: Events. This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable
contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated
with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events:
1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history;
and/or
2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the
development of the community, State or Nation.
Standard B: Persons/Groups. This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of
persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions
to that history can be identified and documented.
Standard C: Design/Construction. This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a
type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose
work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic
values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties.
Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield,
information important in prehistory or history.
3.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 3
EXTERIOR INTEGRITY
Properties are eligible for designation if they possess exterior integrity, which is the ability of a
site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The exterior integrity of a
resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities:
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do
not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall
sense of past time and place is evident.
Standard A: Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an
historic event occurred.
Standard B: Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic
form, plan space, structure, and style.
Standard C: Setting. This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings
that reflect how and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and
open space.
Standard D: Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that
originally formed the property.
Standard E: Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular
culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of
artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site.
Standard F: Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular
period or time. This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the
property's historic character.
Standard G: Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an
important historic event or person. It retains association if it is the place where the event or activity
occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling,
association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character.
3.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 4
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY
(Please describe why the property is significant, relative to the Standard(s) above, and
how it possesses exterior integrity.)
The Collamer-Malaby Historic District is significant under Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Significance Standards B and C and Exterior Integrity Standards A, B, C, D, E, F, and G.
These properties all relate to one of the pioneers of Fort Collins, Jacob Collamer. Collamer
homesteaded the land of the Grandview Cemetery. The Collamers and descendants have called
300 block of North Meldrum home since 1899, when Frank Collamer, a son of Jacob, first moved
his family onto 317 North Meldrum. Furthermore, several influential people from Fort Collins
history exchanged ownership of the Emma Malaby Grocery Store before Frank Collamer
purchased it.
Malaby Grocery, now located at 313 North Meldrum, is one of the oldest commercial buildings in
Fort Collins. Construction on the store was completed in the 1870s when it stood on College
Avenue near what is now the Old Town Triangle. The wood frame structure retained the false
front, indicative of the typical Old West style. Commercial buildings boasted the false front
vernacular style in the early days of Fort Collins history; however, Malaby grocery is the last
surviving example of the style.
The location and setting of the site contain a rich history of Collamer development and
neighborhood businesses although the structures on the 300 block are not all strictly original to
the site. Minimal changes to the exterior of the structures protect and convey the historical value
of the buildings. As the properties stand on the 300 block of North Meldrum, together they connect
to the time of early Fort Collins development. Collamer descendants still retain ownership of the
property.
3.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 5
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
(Please include city directory research and/or a title search if the property is important for
its association with a significant person.)
The Collamer-Malaby properties, now in the hands of James and Carol Burrill, hold a significant
place in the history of Fort Collins. Burrill’s family has owned the building since the early 20th
century and the 300 block of Meldrum even longer. Burrill’s great grandfather Frank Algerine
Collamer owned the grocery store before eventually selling it to his daughter, Emma Malaby.
Burrill’s great aunt Emma operated the store for a time before World War II; however, after the
war, the store remained unoccupied until 1989 when James and Carol opened Emma Malaby
Antiques.1
Burrill’s great-great grandfather (and Frank A. Collamer’s father) Jacob V. Collamer helped
establish Fort Collins. He participated in the Mercer colony, which hailed from Mercer county,
Pennsylvania. The colony movement was important to the growth of Fort Collins. In an attempt to
reduce risks associated with moving westward, entire communities moved together. The bond
between the members of the community allowed faster development of schools and churches.2
Jacob Collamer scouted the Cache la Poudre Valley in late 1860s with the Mercer colony.3 The
Mercer colony attempted the first colony in this area. They settled west of Fort Collins in the area
known as Prospect Park and the Scott-Sherwood addition and began building a canal.4 The
Mercer ditch, as they called it, ended up financially ruining the colony.
Even after the colony’s financial hardship, and departure of many of its members, not all
Collamers left Colorado. Many members of the colony, discouraged that they were not able to
complete the ditch themselves, left Fort Collins throughout the years leading up to 1879. In 1879,
a company completed the irrigation ditch, which is still used today.5 While Jacob Collamer
returned East, not all of his children followed. Frank Collamer, one of five brothers, stayed behind
and established roots in Colorado. He married Achsah Alice Hulse and had 12 children with her.6
Construction of the wood frame, false front commercial building that would eventually be Malaby
Grocery on South College Avenue also occurred in the 1870s. Ruth Collamer Burrill Dermody,
owner until her death in 1986, believed the building was built in 1874.7 False front commercial
structures saturated the Colorado landscape from the late nineteenth century through the early
twentieth.8 Before the completion of the railroad, builders used wood-framing construction
techniques, as wood was readily available and easy to transport. False front commercial buildings
also reflected the uncertainty of the times. Unsure if the business would succeed, owners did not
sink a lot of resources into construction of buildings in preparation for the worst. Additionally, the
false front created a more grandiose appearance than a simple canvas tent or front gabled
building. Malaby Grocery’s design embodies this balance of practicality and impressiveness.
Once brick became more readily available in the 1870s it was used as a reflection of owners’
desires to emulate the commercial blocks of the eastern US and as a symbol of the business’s
success.9 Builders also retired the wooden false front commercial design in favor of fire-resistant
1 Josephine Payson Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” Fort Collins Triangle Review, November 2, 1989, 7.
2 Fort Collins History Connection, “Establishing the City: Old Town and New Town. 1866-1877.”
3 Sources conflict on whether the Mercer colony arrived in 1868 or 1869; however, sources (Frank McClelland’s article, Ansel Watrous’s
History of Larimer County Colorado 1911 and Fort Collins History Connection early Fort Collins history) agreed that this group was the first
colony that tried to settle Fort Collins.
4 Frank McClelland, “Frank Collamer Watched Vast Plains Lands of Poudre Valley Developed Into Thriving Agricultural Center,” Pioneer
Men, May 3, 1946; Ansel Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado 1911 (Fort Collins, CO: The Old Army Press, 1972), 229.
5 Evadene Burris Swanson, Fort Collins Yesterdays (Fort Collins, CO: George and Hildegarde Morgan, 1993), 11.
6 Ansel Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado 1911 (Fort Collins, CO: The Old Army Press, 1972), 229; Clements, “Oldest Commercial
Building Reopens,” 3; Ten of the twelve children lived to adulthood.
7 Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” 3; Ayers, “Emma Malaby Grocery History Project,” 2.
8 “False Front Commercial,” History Colorado, http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/false-front-commercial.
9 Fort Collins History Connection, “Establishing the City: Old Town and New Town. 1866-1877.”
3.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 6
materials.10
The store exchanged hands several times throughout its existence. In 1869, Henry C. Peterson
filed for a homestead that included the land (148 North College Avenue) that the building would
be constructed.11 In 1872, Peterson gave The Larimer County Land Improvement Company a
quit-claim deed to it. From there, Sarah Ellis Eddy bought the land in 1873. A letter to the editor of
the Fort Collins Weekly Courier described Eddy as a “woman of education and culture.”12
Throughout the years, she owned a bookstore and sold real estate. She was one of Fort Collins’
first successful businesswomen.13 In 1881, Eddy sold to George T. Wilkins, who ran a
photography business in the store. Called “one of the latest, most needed and substantial
improvements in our city,” the Wilkins studio on College was a successful gallery.14 During
Wilkins’ ownership, he added a 30 pane window in the north wall.15 Wilkins sold the photography
studio to Thomas Quinn in 1896, who then sold to Benjamin T. Whedbee in 1899. Whedbee, the
first mayor of Fort Collins, country treasurer in 1864, and prominent business man wanted only
the land. He sold the structure itself to Frank Collamer in 1906.1617
Also during this time, the home on 303 North Meldrum was built. The home was built in
approximately 1898 and John T. Dealy was the first owner. The Collamers lived at 317 North
Meldrum until 1910, when they moved into the building at 303 North Meldrum. While they lived at
317 North Meldrum, the Collamers had a grocery store in the front of the home. Ruth Collamer
Burrill Dermody remembered how her father, Frank, had always wanted a grocery store.18
Frank Collamer moved the false front structure from North College to 313 North Meldrum near his
own home at 303 North Meldrum. Upon moving the structure to Meldrum, Collamer painted the
building white with dark trim and added a boardwalk porch and covered awning roof, supported by
four posts.19 Frank and Alice are listed as grocers in the 1907 Fort Collins City Directory, but later
that same year, Collamer sold the stock of this grocery store to Mr. W. E. Robinson and Grate.
The Collamers continued to operate and grocery store on Grant and Cherry Streets, as well as
own the land that Meldrum grocery sat on.20
The Robinson and Grate operations failed and Collamer re-opened the Meldrum grocery himself.
He added on a false-front wraparound addition in 1916 for more space. He needed this because
he also ran a woodyard business. The children of the family carried on the traditions. The boys
worked in the woodyard and the girls clerked in the grocery store. In 1919, Collamer’s daughter
Minerva took over operations, although Frank continued to own the land. Sometime within the
following couple of years, his daughter Emma Malaby and her husband Henry Ross Malaby
bought the store. The Malabys are listed as owners of the store in the 1922 Fort Collins City
Directory.
Frank’s son Arthur ran the woodyard business until World War I when he joined the armed forces.
During the war years, Ruth, his sister, took over operations. She had married Frank Burrill in 1914
10 “False Front Commercial,” History Colorado, http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/false-front-commercial.
11 The lot was then numbered 148 North College Avenue, but the present address is 146 North College Avenue.
12 Letter to the Editor, Fort Collins Weekly Courier, June 21, 1921, 6.
13 Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” 3; Letter to the Editor, Fort Collins Weekly Courier, June 21, 1921, 6-7; “Purely
Personal,” Fort Collins Courier, June 25, 1920, 3.
14 Fort Collins Courier, March 31, 1881, 4.
15 David Ayers, “Emma Malaby Grocery History Project,” Thesis, Colorado State University, 1984, 3.
16 Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado 1911, 233; Linda R. Wommack, From the Grave: A Roadside Guide to Colorado’s Pioneer
Cemeteries (St. Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Press, 1998) 214.
17 146 North College still has the building that Whedbee built – the Commercial Bank and Trust building. Over the years, the building
housed numerous businesses including banks, restaurants, and The Triangle Review.
18 Interview with Mrs. Ruth Collamer Dermody by Ellen T. Ittelson and Allyn S. Feinberg, December 1, 1983, accessed at the Fort Collins
Museum of Discovery Archives.
19 Ayers, “Emma Malaby Grocery History Project,” 9.
20 Fort Collins City Directory, 1907 (Fort Collins, Colorado: The Courier Printing and Publishing Company, 1907), 45; Ayers, “Emma Malaby
Grocery History Project,” 9-10; Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” 3; Fort Collins Weekly Courier, August 1, 1906, 12; Fort
Collins Weekly Courier, “Local and Personal,” May 19, 1907.
3.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 7
and worked in the transfer business following his death in 1924. After the war, another sibling,
Fred, took over the business.21 The transfer business delivered coal and hay sold from the
woodyard store. When Ruth remarried in 1926, she changed the name of her business to
Dermody Woodyard and Transfer. Ruth and her brother Fred ran a second hand store out of a
shed, which sold furniture and household goods. Fred also ran a hay, grain, and wood business
on the property.22 A barn on the property housed North Park hay and the stables housed horses
that were used for labor.23
Emma Malaby operated the grocery store until 1943.24 The store provided the neighborhood with
a variety of goods, ranging from household items to food and sweets. After the store closed, the
structure remained unoccupied until 1989. The owners, James and Carol Burrill, restored the
building to usable conditions and opened up Emma Malaby Antiques.25 Emma Malaby Antiques is
not currently open for business. As of 2014, the store has been in the hands of Collamer
descendants for 108 years. In that time, the structure has not moved from its location at 313 North
Meldrum. During that century-plus period, the family built additional structures on the Collamer-
Malaby properties to accommodate the family businesses.
21 David W. Ayers, “Emma Malaby Grocery History Project,” Summer 1984, 15.
22 Edited by Arlene Ahlbrandt and Kathryn Stieben, The History of Larimer County, Colorado Volume II, (Dallas, TX: Curtis Media
Corporation, 1987), 636.
23 Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” 7.
24 Ayers and Clements suggest that Malaby ran the store until 1943, but records can only confirm until 1940. There are no city directories
between 1941-1947.
25 Clements, “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” 7.
3.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 8
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
303 North Meldrum
This home is a rectangular, 1 ½ story structure with an asphalt shingled, intersecting side gable
roof. The home has two sections, the original structure, painted a salmon color, and the addition
that was painted yellow. The foundation is not visible from any side of the home. An unknown
builder constructed the original home, made of stuccoed brick, in approximately 1898.
The east elevation features a hipped roofed porch on a concrete pad, supported by four turned
posts and two pilasters. The coating on the home looks to be rough concrete or plaster painted in a
salmon color. The façade is symmetrical. In the center, an eight light storm door protects an inner
front door with one light over two lower panels. The inner door appears to have the original
hardware. Above the two rectangular doors is wooden arch. Two long, rectangular two over two
windows flank the door at equal distance. Both of these windows feature a wooden, semi-circle
arch wood surround. Several panes have the original glass. The asphalt shingled side gable roof
has two alterations: a centrally located skylight and a centrally located, interior chimney with
blonde, wire cut brick. Also visible from the east elevation is a one over one window on the yellow,
shed roofed addition.
The south elevation shows the seam between the original home and the yellow addition. On the
original building, two long, rectangular two-over-two windows are placed in a vertical line. The
home has moderately sized overhanging boxed eaves with no returns. The yellow addition has a
full length, screened/glass porch with a hipped roof and approximately four inch exposed lapped
siding. The porch has five one over one windows and a one light over one panel storm door. This
façade also features a shed roofed wall dormer with three windows. These windows have four
vertical lights over a single pane. There is a second interior, blonde, wire cut brick chimney.
The west elevation contains two one-over-one windows on the side porch. Adjacent to the west
side of the porch are modern, wooden stairs leading to the top floor entry. Current owner Jim Burrill
replaced the old stairs and small entry deck in 1996.26 The door is covered with a fly screen and
has a truncated, hipped roof hood with only one corner support. The other side is supported from
above by a tension rod to the main roof. There is a bulkhead cellar access with concrete sides and
a plywood door covered in AstroTurf. This elevation has the original wood siding. There is a pair of
two light casement windows forming a square with a horizontal one over one storm window over
each. The rear door is a one panel over one light over three panel door with original hardware.
There is a combination patio made of flagstone and concrete in front of the door leading to the
outhouse.
The outhouse on the west side of the home has approximately five inch lap siding with corner
boards and standing seam metal, front gabled roof. There is a window with no light on the west
side of the structure.
The north elevation has lapped siding on a yellow, shed roofed addition with a single pane window
and a stove pipe chimney. On the original, salmon-color home there are two long, rectangular two
over two windows placed in a vertical line.
303 North Meldrum / 412 Maple
26 Building Permit No. 0960131, City of Fort Collins, January 19, 1996.
3.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 9
This structure is a rectangular, 1 story with an asphalt shingled, clipped front gabled roof. The
rafters are exposed. The foundation is not visible from any side of the home.
The south elevation has white, narrow lapped siding. In the eave of the clipped front gable is wood
shingling. A row of four two light casement windows adorn this façade, which are pairs of two that
are incased in barn style decorations. There are four knee brackets connecting the façade to the
roof.
The east elevation has a central, exterior chimney made of red brick. A two light over one panel
storm door protecting a fifteen light door with original hardware. There are two, vertical two light
windows. The roof line of the back of the home changes to accommodate a hipped addition.
Owner Ruth Burrill requested the addition in 1926.27
The north elevation has another clipped gable end. There are six knee brackets, otherwise, this
elevation is considerably plain.
The west elevation, on the hipped addition has another vertical two light window. On the gabled
section of the home, there is a two panel storm door protecting a plain, wooden, single panel door.
There is another window, but this one is a one over one window.
303 North Meldrum / 414 Maple
This home is a rectangular, 1 story, 1 room structure with a metal side gabled roof with boxed,
overhanging eaves. The metal roof and trim are green while the wooden, lapped siding is white.
Current owner Jim Burrill reroofed the home in 2012, but originally the home had shingles.28 There
are the remnants of an interior chimney on the west side of the room, but there is a board and
loose bricks covering the hole.
The south elevation is symmetrical with two four over four double hung sash windows flanking a
two over one over two storm door. The front door is a four paneled door painted green and white.
The east elevation has one, one over one window. The rough faced, sandstone foundation is
visible from this side.
The north elevation has a single four over four window. On this side, there is built in ladder on the
roof going to the chimney.
There is a concrete pad in front of a boarded door on the west elevation.
Dermody Transfer
The Dermody Transfer is comprised of three separate buildings placed against each other. The
barn, the largest structure, is side gabled. The building next to it with the label of Dermody Transfer
has a shed roof. The smallest of the buildings is a packing shed with a flat roof.
The barn has a large, sliding entrance on the south elevation. The doors are wooden, but the rest
of the barn is covered in sheet metal siding. The roof is made of corrugated metal. The east
elevation has a four pane window in the eave. The north elevation has no openings. The west
elevation has three openings, two windows and a hinged loft door. The loft door was likely used for
hay that the Collamer family transferred from North Park to Fort Collins. The two windows are both
27 Building Permit No. 1399, City of Fort Colllins, May 13, 1926, accessed at
http://history.fcgov.com/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/bp&CISOPTR=1584&CISOBOX=1&REC=4.
28 Building Permit No. 9527, City of Fort Collins, October 14, 1946, accessed at
http://history.fcgov.com/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/bp&CISOPTR=9590&CISOBOX=1&REC=5.
3.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 10
very old. They have a wooden casement with mesh. One is on the right of the loft door and the
other in the eave.
The white building with Dermody Transfer painted on the south elevation has a shed roof and
minimal decorations. The south elevation has two doors. The door to the east side has vertical
wood planking. The newer door on the left is made of painted plywood. The doors are large, barn
doors. Although the south elevation is made entirely of wood, the rest of the structure has
corrugated metal siding and a metal roof.
305 North Meldrum
The original home on this lot was demolished in 2009 due to safety concerns.29 The new home
was then moved onto the property with the garage. Both of these came from Loveland.30 This
home is a one and a half story, L-shaped, steeply pitched cross gabled, asphalt shingled roof with
boxed, overhanging eaves. The structure has wood lapped siding, painted white, with blue trim. In
the gable end eaves are wood shingles which alternate between scalloped and shaped.
The east elevation has a partial inset, shed roof porch supported by two turned porch posts. This
façade has two Victorian windows with decorative upper panels and single glass lower panels.
One of these windows is beside the front door, the other on the cross gable. The front door has
two glass panes and one panel. Also under the cover of the porch is an octagonal window that is
facing northward. Two other windows begin under the eaves of the front gable. They are adjacent
and encased with the same molding. Both are one over one windows.
The south elevation is comprised of two sections. The main section of the home has two one over
one windows. The back section has an enclosed hipped roofed porch with a band of three ribbon
windows.
The west elevation features the door and another small, single pane window for the enclosed
porch. The door is a one light over two panel wooden door. There are two gable ends on the west
elevation. The gable end above the enclosed porch has two windows encased in the same
decorative molding that are one over one. Beside of this window is a narrow, single light window.
In the other gabled end are two of the narrow, single light windows. A one over one light window is
on the first floor as well. Also visible from the west elevation are two sets of glass block windows,
indicating the presence of a basement.
The north elevation has another hipped protrusion with a four paneled door and one over one light
window. Above this on the intersecting gable end there is a gabled dormer with boxed overhanging
eaves that faces north. The window is a six light over six light window. A pair of two one over one
windows encased in the same molding are on the main section of the home.
On the back of the lot, oriented toward the alley stands a white, lap sided two bay garage. It has a
front gable roof with boxed, overhanging eaves. The bay doors, west facing, are both eight
paneled. On the south elevation, there is a four light window. The north elevation has a people
door that is made of wood with four panels. There is another four light window on this side as well.
313 North Meldrum
Emma Malaby Grocery
29 Demolition, Building Permit No. B0900293, City of Fort Collins, January 20, 2009, accessed at
http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=1373455&dt=PERMITS.
30 Building Permit No. B0904351, City of Fort Collins, August 25, 2009, accessed at
http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=1464260&dt=PERMITS; Building Permit No. B0903232, City of Fort Collins, August
25, 2009, accessed at http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=1464257&dt=PERMITS.
3.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 11
The Emma Malaby Grocery is a one story, false front commercial building with a shed addition.
The main structure has a font gable roof with cedar wood and asphalt shingles.31 There are two
chimneys, both interior. The siding is wooden, painted white.
The east elevation features the building’s iconic false front. There is a porch supported by four
squared posts with a shed roof. The roof is made of wood shingles and has awning detailing on
both sides with bead board. Although the front is partially boarded for security reasons, the detail
of craftsmanship is seen by the detailed design on the kick board and fluted pilasters. The addition
from 1916 continues the false front and has another entrance. Two single light windows flank a
four panel wooden door.
The south elevation has two additional doors. On the main building, the door has two vertical lights
over two vertical panels. To the west, there is a twelve light window. On the back shed addition to
the building, there is another door and window. The door is a simple, wooden, four pane door. The
window is one over one. This addition has brown, wooden siding.
The west elevation shows an unadorned gable end and the back of the shed addition. There are
no openings on either.
The north elevation has two doors and two windows. The door to the west of the building is wide
and made of narrow, vertical boards. The other door adjacent to this one is a four panel wooden
door with original hardware. The two windows are identical single light windows.
Stacked Shed
Behind the Emma Malaby Grocery, there is a historic shed made of stacked boards in relatively
good condition. The east elevation of the shed has a vertical planked door with three horizontal
boards studded with bolts. The north elevation has a window with no light. Butted against the back
of this shed is a modern outbuilding; however, the two are not connected.
Barn
Further back on the property is a historic barn beside two modern outbuildings. The barn has
painted brown siding and a side gabled roof. The roof has asphalt shingles on top of wooden
shingles. On the east elevation, there are two barn doors with a horseshoe nailed above them.
These doors are painted white. The other opening on the barn is on the north elevation; however,
this is boarded up.
315 North Meldrum
Residence
The home is a one story, rectangular structure with a shingled, gable roof and shed addition. There
are overhanging, boxed eaves. The siding is made of white, vertical boards. The east elevation
shows the two intersecting roof lines. The front door is covered by a two light storm door. There
are two, long and narrow one over one windows on the east elevation. The south elevation has two
one over one windows. The south elevation also shows the shed addition in the back. There is a
one over one light storm door. The back door is not visible. The west elevation has a band of six
ribbon windows that are all one light, oriented to the south side of the addition. The north elevation
was mostly obscured from view by a fence; however, there are two windows and a door that were
seen. Behind the home was a modern, small outbuilding.
31 Building Permit No. 25649, City of Fort Collins, February 13, 1987, accessed at
http://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=2&docid=341679&dt=PERMITS.
3.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 12
Stable
The stable has metal roofing and a shed addition butted against it. The stable is made of wood
and has a central shed roof. That shed roof is intersected with another shed roof about a foot
down from the top. These two shed roofs are intersected by a third shed addition that is not
attached, but is placed against the rest of the stable on the west elevation. The stable is open on
the south elevation. The opening shows that structurally, there are posts to support the roof. The
south elevation also has the door for the shed addition. This door is made of vertical, hewn logs of
different lengths and widths. A vertical hewn log acts as the stabilizer for the vertical boards and
as a way for the door to lock. Beside the door is the original pin lock. The east and west elevation
do not have any openings. Although the north elevation is obscured from view, a door can be
seen from the inside of the stable that would open on the north elevation.
3.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 13
REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION (attach a separate sheet if needed)
Ahlbrandt, Arlene and Kathryn Stieben eds. The History of Larimer County, Colorado Volume II. Dallas,
Texas, Curtis Media Corporation, 1987.
Ayers, David W. “Emma Malaby Grocery History Project.” Thesis. Colorado State University, 1984.
Clements, Josephine Payson. “Oldest Commercial Building Reopens,” Fort Collins Triangle Review.
November 2, 1989. Fort Collins Museum of Discovery Archives.
“False Front Commercial.” History Colorado. http://www.historycolorado.org/oahp/false-front-commercial.
Fort Collins City Directories (1906-1950).
Fort Collins Public Library, Local History Archive (online). “Establishing the City: Old Town and New Town.
1866-1877,” History Connection. http://history.fcgov.com/archive/contexts/establishcity.php.
Fort Collins Public Library, Local History Archive (online). History Connection, including Building
Records and Permits. http://history.poudrelibraries.org/
McAlester, Virginia and Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Knopf, 2011.
Swanson, Evadene Burris. Fort Collins Yesterday’s. Fort Collins: George and Hildegard Morgan, 1975.
Various newspaper articles from Fort Collins Courier and Fort Collins Weekly Courier (1906-1989)
accessed through the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery Archives.
Watrous, Ansel. History of Larimer County, Colorado 1911. Fort Collins, CO: The Old Army Press, 1972.
Wommack, Linda R. From the Grave: A Roadside Guide to Colorado’s Pioneer Cemeteries. St. Caldwell,
Idaho: Caxton Press, 1998.
3.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Revised 08-2014 Page 14
AGREEMENT
The undersigned owner(s) hereby agrees that the property described herein be considered for
local historic landmark designation, pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation
Ordinance, Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins.
I understand that upon designation, I or my successors will be requested to notify the Secretary of
the Landmark Preservation Commission at the City of Fort Collins prior to the occurrence of any
of the following:
Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the
property, or;
Preparation of plans for construction of, addition to, or demolition of improvements on the property
DATED this __________________ day of _______________________________, 201___.
_____________________________________________________
Owner Name (please print)
_____________________________________________________
Owner Signature
State of ___________________________)
)ss.
County of __________________________)
Subscribed and sworn before me this _________ day of ___________________, 201____,
by _____________________________________________________________________.
Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires _________________________.
_____________________________________________________
Notary
3.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Landmark Designation Application (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
1
303 North Meldrum East Elevation
303 North Meldrum East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
2
303 North Meldrum South Elevation
303 North Meldrum South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
3
303 North Meldrum West Elevation
303 North Meldrum West Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
4
303 North Meldrum West Elevation Detail
303 North Meldrum North Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
5
303 North Meldrum North Elevation
Outhouse South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
6
Outhouse Northwest Elevation
Outhouse Northeast Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
7
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple South Elevation
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
8
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple East Elevation
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
9
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple North Elevation
303 North Meldrum/412 Maple Northwest Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
10
303 North Meldrum/414 Maple South Elevation
303 North Meldrum/414 Maple Northeast Elevations
3.b
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
11
303 North Meldrum/414 Maple North Elevation
303 North Meldrum/414 Maple West Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
12
Dermody Transfer South Elevation
Dermody Transfer South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
13
Dermody Transfer East Elevation
Dermody Transfer East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
14
Dermody Transfer North Elevation
Dermody Transfer West Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
15
Dermody Transfer West Elevation
Dermody Transfer West Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
16
Dermody Transfer West Elevation
305 North Meldrum East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
17
305 North Meldrum East Elevation
305 North Meldrum South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
18
305 North Meldrum South Elevation
305 North Meldrum West Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
19
305 North Meldrum Southwest Elevation
305 North Meldrum Northwest Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
20
305 North Meldrum North Elevation
305 Garage Southwest Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
21
305 Garage Northeast Elevation
313 North Meldrum Southeast Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
22
313 North Meldrum East Elevation
313 North Meldrum East Elevation Detail
3.b
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
23
313 North Meldrum East Elevation Detail
313 North Meldrum South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
24
313 North Meldrum South Elevation
313 North Meldrum Southwest Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
25
313 North Meldrum Northwest Elevation
Stacked Shed Northeast Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
26
Stacked Shed East Elevation Detail
Stacked Shed Southeast Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
27
Barn East Elevation
Barn Southeast Elevations
3.b
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
28
Barn North Elevation
Barn Southwest Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
29
315 North Meldrum Southeast Elevation
315 North Meldrum South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
30
315 North Meldrum West Elevation
315 North Meldrum Northeast Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
31
Stable South Elevation
Stable South Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
32
Stable South Elevation Detail
Stable East Elevation
3.b
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
33
Stable Southwest Elevation
Stable Interior to show North Elevation door
3.b
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Photos (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
305 N.
Meldrum
Garage
Barn
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
Stable
Stacked
Shed
305 N.
Meldrum
Residence
Emma
Malaby
Grocery
315 N.
Meldrum
Residence
303 N.
Meldrum
Residence
Outhouse
303 N.
Meldrum/
414 Maple
303 N.
Meldrum/
412 Maple
Dermody
Transfer
N
3.c
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Site Map (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
N SHERWOOD ST
N COLLEGEAVE
MAPLE ST
N MASON ST
N COLLEGE AVE
N MELDRUM ST
LAPORTE AVE
PINE ST
W OAK ST
N MELDRUM ST
N HOWES ST
N MASON ST
WALNU
T
W MOUNTAIN AVE
CHERRY ST
N HOWES ST
Site
N
Collamer-Malaby Historic District
303-315 North Meldrum Street
3.d
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Location Map (2793 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Collamer/Malaby Historic District)
Agenda Item 4
Item # 4 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE KRAMER/BARRAZA PROPERTY AT 520 NINTH
STREET
STAFF
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Kramer/Barraza Property
located at 520 Ninth Street. The property has significance to Fort Collins under
Landmark Preservation Standards A and C.
APPLICANT: Henry and Sylvia Barraza
OWNER: Henry and Sylvia Barraza
RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Kramer/Barraza Property qualifies for Landmark designation
under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Standards A and C. If the Landmark
Preservation Commission determines that the property is eligible under these
standards, then the Commission may pass a resolution recommending City
Council pass an ordinance designating the Kramer/Barraza Designation
Standards A and C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This property is significant under Standard (A) for its association with the development of the Andersonville
neighborhood, particularly of a second stage of construction following initial settlement. The Andersonville
neighborhood is significant for its association with the sugar beet industry and its labor practices in northern
Colorado, and with both the Germans from Russia and Hispanic communities in Fort Collins. The principal
structure at 520 Ninth Street is also significant under Standard (C), because it is a particularly early example of an
extremely minimal Cape Cod form. As well, the structure is an archetypal example of the organized growth of
vernacular domestic structures. This 1925 structure displays a moderate degree of physical integrity. While the
structure contains several additions, the majority of those modifications all occurred within the period of historical
significance and were standard and expected components of vernacular domestic architecture. This structure
retains sufficient integrity to convey its significance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Designation Application (DOC)
2. Photos (DOCX)
3. 520 Ninth Street (PDF)
4
Packet Pg. 79
Revised 08-2014 Page 1
Fort Collins Landmark Designation
LOCATION INFORMATION:
Address: 520 Ninth Street
Legal Description: Lot 13, Block 5, Anderson Place, City of Fort Collins
Property Name (historic and/or common): Kramer/Barraza Property
OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: Henry and Sylvia Barraza
Email: vegacrest@gmail.com
Address: 520 Ninth Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
CLASSIFICATION
Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing
Designation
Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register
Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register
Site Religious
Object Residential
District Entertainment
Government
Other
FORM PREPARED BY:
Name and Title: Josh Weinberg, Historic Preservation Planner
Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, P.O. Box 580,
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Phone: 970-221-6206
Email: jweinberg@fcgov.com
DATE: Prepared December 10, 2014.
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.41
0
970.22
4- fax
fcgov.c
4.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Designation Application (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 2
TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES
Individual Landmark Property Landmark District
Explanation of Boundaries:
The boundaries of the property to be designated correspond to the legal description of the
property, above.
SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY
Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance
is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology,
engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure,
object or district to be able to convey its significance.
Significance:
Standard A: Events. This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable
contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated
with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events:
1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history;
and/or
2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the
development of the community, State or Nation.
Standard B: Persons/Groups. This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of
persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions
to that history can be identified and documented.
Standard C: Design/Construction. This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a
type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose
work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic
values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties.
Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield,
information important in prehistory or history.
Integrity:
Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an historic
event occurred.
Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic form, plan
space, structure, and style.
Setting. This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings that reflect how
and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and open space.
Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that originally formed
the property.
Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of artisans' labor and
skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site.
Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time.
This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's
historic character.
Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an important
historic event or person. It retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred
and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association
requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character.
4.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Designation Application (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 3
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
This property is significant under Standard (A) for its association with the development of the
Andersonville neighborhood, particularly of a second stage of construction following initial
settlement. The Andersonville neighborhood is significant for its association with the sugar beet
industry and its labor practices in northern Colorado, and with both the Germans from Russia and
Hispanic communities in Fort Collins. The principal structure at 520 Ninth Street is also
significant under Standard (C), because it is a particularly early example of an extremely minimal
Cape Cod form. As well, the structure is an archetypal example of the organized growth of
vernacular domestic structures. This 1925 structure displays a moderate degree of physical
integrity. While the structure contains several additions, the majority of those modifications all
occurred within the period of historical significance and were standard and expected components
of vernacular domestic architecture. This structure retains sufficient integrity to convey its
significance.
Construction History: Larimer County tax assessor records indicate that the principal structure
on this property was constructed in 1925. The side-gabled core of the structure and end-gabled,
northeastern corner appear to have been separate buildings, connected through a series of shed-
roof additions, until the structure obtained its current, nearly rectangular form. The date and nature
of these additions is unclear. The structure's three-over-one-light, double-hung sash windows (as
seen in a photograph from a 1983 historical survey) were recently replaced with one-over-one-
light, double-hung sash windows.
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
In 1865, Peter Anderson and Moses B. Oliver claimed as a homestead the northwest quarter of the
northwest quarter of section 7, township 7 north, range 68 west. They received their land patent on
June 1, 1868. This parcel eventually became a piece of Anderson’s 330-acre farm, which he owned
with his wife, Cora. The Larimer County pioneer soon amassed a small fortune running cattle and
feeding lambs. He became vice president of the First National Bank of Fort Collins, president of
the Wellington Bank, and owned a harness shop and hardware store. Around 1900, Anderson
began experimenting with sugar beet cultivation. An avid civic booster, the farmer-turned-
businessman was the leading champion of a sugar beet processing factory in Fort Collins. He was
also one of the first farmers in Larimer County to use German-Russian labor. As construction
began on Fort Collins’s own sugar beet refinery in 1903, a German-Russian settlement evolved
from an assemblage of migrant worker shacks on the Peter Anderson farm. Officially platted as
Anderson Place, lots in the new settlement were notably more expensive than those in Buckingham
Place, a sugar-company-created subdivision southwest of the Anderson farm. Because German-
Russian settlers had to be more affluent to afford lots in Andersonville, as it soon become known,
the early houses constructed in that neighborhood were considerably larger and more
architecturally sophisticated than those in Buckingham. Despite a devastating flood on May 21,
1904, the neighborhood prospered, becoming closely identified with Germans from Russia and the
sugar beet industry, hosting the first German-Russian church in the area. After World War I,
changes in federal immigration policy forced the Great Western Sugar Company, an amalgamation
of northern Colorado sugar beet processors, to look elsewhere for labor. It began importing
Hispanic single men and families from the southwest and Mexico. Thus, starting in the early
1920s, the Andersonville neighborhood also became identified with Hispanic agricultural workers.
Peter and Cora Anderson sold this particular lot to Jacob Fabrizius in July 1905 for $110. From
1907 to 1924, ownership of the property transferred among Louis Morgaem, Fred Waag, John
Dell, Henry Fisher, and Katherine Berg. Local tax assessor records indicate that the current house
was built in 1925. This date corresponds to the end of Katherine Berg's ownership and the
4.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Designation Application (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 4
beginning of Katherine Kramer's ties to the property in 1925; she purchased the lot in June.
Katherine Kramer then transferred the property to her husband, Philip, three years later. Philip
Kramer was born in Varnburg, a German settlement in Russia, and came to Fort Collins in 1912
with his wife Katherine Ruby Kramer. Following Katherine’s death in 1935, Philip continued to
reside here until his own death in February 1952. Fred Cordova, Edward Gallegos, and Daniel
Abeyta resided here at some point throughout the next eight years. By 1960, Joe Eliseo Espinoza
became associated with this address. Espinoza was born in Trinidad, Colorado, in 1898. He
married Cedilia Aragon in Trinidad on January 22, 1921. He and his wife moved to Fort Collins in
1944, where he worked as a laborer and attended Holy Family Catholic Church. Mr. Espinoza
lived at this address until 1972 and died three years later in June 1975. Enrique Barraza became
associated with the property by 1972. Henry and Sylvia T. Barraza currently own and reside at
this address.
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
Construction Date: 1925
Architect/Builder: Unknown
Building Materials: Wood frame
Architectural Style: Cross-gabled Wood Frame Vernacular Dwelling
Description: Oriented to the west, the Kramer/Barraza home is set back approximately 35 feet
from the street. A planted grass yard with mature landscaping surrounds the structure, and an earth
and gravel parking area flanks Ninth Street. A combination of chain-link and woven-wire fences
encloses the yard. The dwelling rests on a concrete foundation. It consists of a steeply pitched-
side gabled core to the west, connected via a shed-roof structure to a front-gabled outbuilding,
most likely a summer kitchen, to the northeast. The L-shape formed by the core and connected
outbuilding was further filled with shed-roof additions, until the structure obtained a generally
rectangular shape. Exterior cladding varies from addition to addition, but consists primarily of a
combination of narrow and wide horizontal wood weatherboard, generally with one-by-four-inch
cornerboards. Vertical board-and-batten siding covers the north elevation of the shed roof
connection between the side-gabled core and front-gabled outbuilding. Broad, horizontal wooden
composition siding, without cornerboards, covers part of the southeastern-most shed-roof addition.
Windows on the original, side-gabled core are one-over-one-light, double-hung sash, with vinyl
frames and surrounds and aluminum screens. The remainder of the structure has one-beside-one-
light, sliding sash. Two-light, wood-frame hopper windows pierce the north- and south-facing
gables. A two-step concrete stoop, approached from the south, provides access to the front door.
Another door, approached by a one-step concrete stoop, opens on the south elevation. Gray
asphalt shingles cover all gabled roof surfaces, and brown rolled asphalt covers the shed roofs.
The eaves are boxed, with blue soffits and white fascia, on all portions except the former
outbuilding, which features exposed rafter ends. The eaves of the side-gabled core are particularly
shallow. A red-brick chimney emerges near the roof ridge of the side-gable core, and a metal
chimney protrudes from its east-facing slope.
The property contains four outbuildings. None of these outbuildings contribute to the significance
of the property. Sheds 1 and 3 are identical storage sheds. Shed 1 is located directly northeast of
the house, while Shed 3 is at the northeast corner of lot. Measuring 8 feet north-south by 12.5 feet
east-west, both structures are oriented to the south and lack permanent foundations. Blue-painted
plywood and flake board sheets clad the exterior walls. Opening on the east end of the front
(south) elevation of each shed is a large, plywood door, on metal strap hinges. West of each door is
a small, one-beside-one-light, sliding sash window, with a white vinyl frame. Brown, rolled
asphalt covers the sheds’ roofs, and the rafter ends are exposed. Shed 2 is located southeast of the
house, and immediately west of the garage/shop. Measuring 3 feet north-south by 4.5 feet east-
4.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Designation Application (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 5
west, the structure is oriented to the north, and lacks a formal foundation. Its walls consist of
turquoise-painted plywood and flake board sheets. A small plywood door, on metal strap hinges,
opens on the west end of the north elevation. Brown, rolled asphalt covers the shed roof, and the
rafter ends are exposed. A Garage/Shop is located at the southeastern corner of the lot. Measuring
17 feet north-south by 27 feet east-west, the structure is oriented to the west and lacks a formal
foundation. Exterior wall cladding varies widely, but is generally very wide, white-painted,
horizontal wooden composition siding. A one-panel wooden door opens on the south end of the
front (west) elevation. A one-beside-one-light, sliding sash windows, with aluminum-frame,
appears in the center of the south elevation. A small shed-roof structure, apparently a covered dog
run, is attached to the north end of the rear (east) elevation. Gray, rolled asphalt covers the front-
gabled main roof and shed roof.
REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION
Thomas, Adam. Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form, 520 Ninth
Street. Prepared in December 2002 by SWCA, Inc. as a component of the Buckingham,
Andersonville, and Alta Vista Inventory Project.
4.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Designation Application (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
520 9th Street, Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Western Elevation
Western and Southern Elevations
4.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Photos (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
520 9th Street, Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Western and Northern Elevations
Southern Elevation
4.b
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Photos (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
520 9th Street, Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Eastern Elevation
Non-Contributing Outbuilding
4.b
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Photos (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
RO
M
E
R
O
S
T
TRUJILLA ST
MARTINEZ ST
ALTA VISTA S
BUCKINGHAM ST
10T
H
S
T
BUCKINGHAM ST
ALTA VISTA ST
SAN CRISTO ST
11
T
H
ST
Site
520 9th Street,
Fort Collins, CO 80524
N
4.c
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: 520 Ninth Street (2791 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Kramer/Barraza Property at 520 Ninth Street)
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE LONGYEAR PROPERTY AT 719 REMINGTON
STREET
STAFF
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Longyear Property located
at 719 Remington Street. The property has significance to Fort Collins under
Landmark Preservation Standards B and C.
APPLICANT: James Danella, Property Owner
OWNER: James Danella
RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Longyear Property qualifies for Landmark designation under
Fort Collins Landmark Designation Standards B and C. If the Landmark
Preservation Commission determines that the property is eligible under these
standards, then the Commission may pass a resolution recommending City
Council pass an ordinance designating the Longyear Property as a Fort Collins
Landmark according to City Code Chapter 14 under Designation Standards B
and C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The principal structure at 719 Remington Street is significant under Landmark Designation Standard (C) as a well
preserved representation of early twentieth century Victorian-era vernacular architecture in Fort Collins. Character-
defining details of this architectural period include nearly full-width covered front porch with column supports,
decorative shingles in gables and on dormers, and dominant windows with decorative sashes. The two-bay garage
at the rear of the property, constructed with a very unique Mission style parapet façade, could also qualify for
individual Landmark designation, but is nonetheless a significant contributing element to the property. Additionally,
this property is significant under Landmark Designation Standard (B) for its association with Colorado Agricultural
College professor Burton O. Longyear. Longyear, who had the house constructed in 1904, and subsequently
occupied it until 1911, is known for his contributions to the study of Rocky Mountain Region horticulture and for
serving as the head of CAC’s Department of Botany and Forestry and as Colorado State Forrester from 1911-
1915.
5
Packet Pg. 89
Agenda Item 5
Item # 5 Page 2
ATTACHMENTS
1. Designation Application (DOC)
2. Photos (DOCX)
3. ca. 1935 (DOCX)
4. Garage, ca. 1934 (DOCX)
5. Map (PDF)
5
Packet Pg. 90
Revised 08-2014 Page 1
Fort Collins Landmark Designation
LOCATION INFORMATION:
Address: 719 Remington Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Legal Description: North 1/2 of the North 1/2 OF Lot 1, Block 127, Fort Collins.
Property Name (historic and/or common): The Longyear Property
OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: James Danella
Email: jdanella@gmail.com
Address: 719 Remington Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
CLASSIFICATION
Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing
Designation
Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register
Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register
Site Religious
Object Residential
District Entertainment
Government
Other
FORM PREPARED BY:
Name and Title: Josh Weinberg, Historic Preservation Planner
Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, 281 North College Avenue,
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Phone: 970-224-6206
Email: jweinberg@fcgov.com
Prepared January 5, 2015.
Planning, Development & Transportation
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
5.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Designation Application (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 2
TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES
Individual Landmark Property Landmark District
Explanation of Boundaries:
The boundaries of the property to be designated correspond to the legal description of the
property, above.
SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY
Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance
is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology,
engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure,
object or district to be able to convey its significance.
Significance:
Standard A: Events. This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable
contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated
with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events:
1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history;
and/or
2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the
development of the community, State or Nation.
Standard B: Persons/Groups. This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of
persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions
to that history can be identified and documented.
Standard C: Design/Construction. This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a
type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose
work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic
values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties.
Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield,
information important in prehistory or history.
Integrity:
Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an historic
event occurred.
Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic form, plan
space, structure, and style.
Setting. This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings that reflect how
and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and open space.
Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that originally formed
the property.
Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of artisans' labor and
skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site.
Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time.
This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's
historic character.
Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an important
historic event or person. It retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred
and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association
requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character.
5.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Designation Application (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 3
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
The principal structure at 719 Remington Street is significant under Landmark Designation
Standard (C) as a well preserved representation of early twentieth century Victorian-era
vernacular architecture in Fort Collins. Character-defining details of this architectural period
include nearly full-width covered front porch with column supports, decorative shingles in gables
and on dormers, and dominant windows with decorative sashes. The two-bay garage at the rear
of the property, constructed with a very unique Mission style parapet façade, could also qualify for
individual Landmark designation, but is nonetheless a significant contributing element to the
property. Additionally, this property is significant under Landmark Designation Standard (B) for its
association with Colorado Agricultural College professor Burton O. Longyear. Longyear, who had
the house constructed in 1904, and subsequently occupied it until 1911, is known for his
contributions to the study of Rocky Mountain Region horticulture and for serving as the head of
CAC’s Department of Botany and Forestry and as Colorado State Forrester from 1911-1915.
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
The Fort Collins Weekly Courier reported on January 4, 1905 that A.F. Huleatt had built an eight
room “modern” residence at 719 Remington Street for Colorado Agricultural College (CAC)
Horticulture and Botany professor Burton O. Longyear. Longyear, who began his teaching career
at Colorado Agricultural College in 1904, was an alumnus of Michigan State Agricultural College.
According to contemporary reports, Longyear was both a scrupulous scientist and inspiring
educator. He published a number of bulletins, and at least two books, dealing with the horticulture
of the Rocky Mountain region. His “Shade Trees of Denver” publication had considerable impact
on Denver’s ornamental horticulture. In 1909 he was appointed head of the newly-established
Department of Botany and Forestry ad CAC. Around that same time a degree program in forestry
was created under Longyear’s advisement, with its first graduate in 1912. In 1911, Longyear was
appointed to the position of Colorado State Forrester. He served in that position until 1915. He
returned to teaching at CAC where he stayed until retirement in the 1930s.
It is unclear who occupied the house immediately following Longyear, however, in 1923, F.D. and
Hattie Giddings bought the property and owned it until 1933. Giddings was the owner and
president of Giddings Manufacturing. From 1936 to 1940, Arthur and Adelina Hunt, along with
their sons, Wendell and Richard, lived in the house. From 1948 through 1969, Alvin and Leatha
Sansbrun occupied the residence. They were both retired, though Alvin owned an apartment
building at 706 South College Avenue. From the early 1970s to 2012, the house was occupied by
renters, mostly Colorado State University students. In 2012, James Danella purchased the
property and began rehabilitating it. Mr. Danella is now pursing Landmark designation.
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
Construction Date: 1904, House; 1928, Garage
Architect/Builder: A.F. Huleatt, builder
Building Materials: Wood, sandstone foundation
Architectural Style: Victorian-era vernacular dwelling
Description:
Oriented to the east, the house at 719 Remington Street is a 1½ story side-gabled dwelling with
prominent bellcast hipped-roof dormer on the slope of the front elevation roof. The building is clad
in narrow horizontal lapped siding. The dormer contains a rectangular single-hung window with
decorative upper sash. Eaves are wide and enclosed. The building has a rectangular footprint,
measuring thirty-two feet by thirty-seven feet. There are three bays across the first floor of the
primary elevation, containing a central entry flanked by two large single hung windows with
decorative upper sashes. The foundation is coursed, rough-cut sandstone. The front porch is
nearly full-width, with square posts supporting its hipped roof.
5.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Designation Application (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
Revised 08-2014 Page 4
The southern elevation features an eave wall chimney, which protrudes through the wide
overhanging eave band. There is a bay window on the rear corner of this elevation, containing
three single hung windows. Square rectangular windows flank each side of the chimney. The
gable end of this elevation is shingled and contains a pair of single hung windows, each with
decorative upper sashes. The northern side elevation is nearly identical to the southern elevation,
save the bay window, and contains a pair and two single windows. There is also an entry at the
rear of this elevation. The lower level of the rear elevation has an enclosed shed-roofed porch in
the L-Shape crated by the primary building and the single–story hipped roof element on the
northwest half of the elevation. The enclosed porch is currently under construction with most
siding removed. The second story of the rear elevation features an intersecting gabled dormer
clad in shingles. There is a recently constructed shed-roofed addition to the south of the gabled
dormer, containing divided light double doors.
The property features a very unique stuccoed two bay garage with Mission style parapet on the
façade. Each bay of the building’s front elevation contains wooden doors, each with four
rectangular vertical lights and X-battens below. Simple asphalt shingled awnings cover each bay.
The parapet extends flat around the side elevations and drops off to the rear. The rear elevation
has sliding wooden doors on the northern corner and a boarded window opening to the south.
REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION
Fort Collins Weekly Courier, January 4, 1905.
Fort Collins City Directories, 1925 – 2006.
Hansen II, James E. Democracy’s College in the Centennial State: A History of Colorado State
University. Fort Collins, Colorado, 1977.
Larimer County Assessor Property Records.
Petit, Michael and Barbara. Information from the Fort Collins Midtown Historic District Survey –
The Longyear House, 716 Remington Street. Date unknown.
Watrous, Ansel. “History of Larimer County, Colorado,” (Fort Collins, Colorado: Printing and
Publishing, 1911), 281.
5.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Designation Application (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Northeast Elevation
Southeast Elevation
5.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Photos (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Southwest Elevation
West Elevation
5.b
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Photos (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Northwest Elevation
East Elevation
5.b
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Photos (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Northwest Elevation
Southwest Elevation
5.b
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Photos (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street Fort Collins Landmark Designation
Southeast Elevation
5.b
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Photos (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street, ca. 1935
5.c
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: ca. 1935 (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
S COLLEGE AVE
LOCUST ST
E LAUREL ST
REMI
NG
T
ON
S
T
MATHE
WS
ST
Site E PLUM ST
719 Remington Street,
Fort Collins, CO 80524
N
5.d
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: Map (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
719 Remington Street, Garage, ca. 1934
5.e
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: Garage, ca. 1934 (2790 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Longyear Property at 719 Remington Street)
Agenda Item 6
Item # 6 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE HOLMES/MANGES PROPERTY AT 1202 LAPORTE
AVENUE
STAFF
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Staff is pleased to present for your consideration the Holmes/Manges Property
located at 1202 Laporte Avenue. The property has significance to Fort Collins
under Landmark Preservation Standard C.
APPLICANT: Sharon Manges, Property Owner
OWNER: Sharon Manges
RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Holmes/Manges Property qualifies for Landmark designation
under Fort Collins Landmark Designation Standard C. If the Landmark
Preservation Commission determines that the property is eligible under this
standard, then the Commission may pass a resolution recommending City
Council pass an ordinance designating the Holmes/Manges Property as a Fort
Collins Landmark according to City Code Chapter 14 under Designation
Standard C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The principal structure at 1202 Laporte Avenue is significant under Landmark Designation Standard (C) as a well
preserved representation of early twentieth century Victorian-era architecture in Fort Collins. Character-defining
details of this architectural period include the hipped roof with intersecting gables, nearly full-width covered front
porch with classical column supports, and tall narrow windows with stone sills and lintels. The building displays a
moderate to high degree of physical integrity. While it has undergone several alterations, they are primarily located
to the rear and do not detract from the building’s historic form or character-defining elements. This structure retains
sufficient integrity to convey its significance. Please reference the Landmark designation application for more
detailed information.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Designation Application (DOC)
2. Photos (DOCX)
3. 1949 Photo (DOCX)
4. Map (PDF)
6
Packet Pg. 103
Revised 08-2014 Page 1
Fort Collins Landmark Designation
LOCATION INFORMATION:
Address: 1202 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Legal Description: A part of the SE l/4 of the NE l/4 of Section 10, Township 7 North, Range
69 west of the 6th P.M., County of Larimer, state of Colorado, being more particularly
described as follows: Beginning at a point which is 444.16 feet East of Southwest corner of
the SE l/4 of the NE1/4 of said Section 10, thence West 84 feet, thence North 230 feet, thence
East 84 feet, thence South 230 feet to the point of beginning.
Property Name (historic and/or common): Holmes/Manges Property
OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: Sharon Manges
Email: sharonmanges@gmail.com
Address: 1202 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
CLASSIFICATION
Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing
Designation
Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register
Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register
Site Religious
Object Residential
District Entertainment
Government
Other
FORM PREPARED BY:
Name and Title: Josh Weinberg, Historic Preservation Planner
Address: City of Fort Collins, Historic Preservation Department, 281 North College Avenue,
Fort Collins, CO 80522
Phone: 970-224-6206
Email: jweinberg@fcgov.com
Prepared December 10, 2014.
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.41
0
970.22
4- fax
fcgov.c
6.a
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: Designation Application (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
Revised 08-2014 Page 2
TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES
Individual Landmark Property Landmark District
Explanation of Boundaries:
The boundaries of the property to be designated correspond to the legal description of the
property, above.
SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY
Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance
is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology,
engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure,
object or district to be able to convey its significance.
Significance:
Standard A: Events. This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable
contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated
with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events:
1. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history;
and/or
2. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the
development of the community, State or Nation.
Standard B: Persons/Groups. This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of
persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions
to that history can be identified and documented.
Standard C: Design/Construction. This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a
type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose
work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic
values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties.
Standard D: Information potential. This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield,
information important in prehistory or history.
Integrity:
Location. This property is located where it was originally constructed or where an historic
event occurred.
Design. This property retains a combination of elements that create its historic form, plan
space, structure, and style.
Setting. This property retains a character and relationship with its surroundings that reflect how
and where it was originally situated in relation to its surrounding features and open space.
Materials. This property retains much of the historic physical elements that originally formed
the property.
Workmanship. This property possesses evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history or prehistory. This consists of evidence of artisans' labor and
skill in constructing or altering the building, structure or site.
Feeling. This property expresses the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time.
This results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's
historic character.
Association. This property retains an association, or serves as a direct link to, an important
historic event or person. It retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred
and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association
requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character.
6.a
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: Designation Application (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
Revised 08-2014 Page 3
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
The principal structure at 1202 Laporte Avenue is significant under Landmark Designation
Standard (C) as a well preserved representation of early twentieth century Victorian-era
architecture in Fort Collins. Character-defining details of this architectural period include the
hipped roof with intersecting gables, nearly full-width covered front porch with classical column
supports, and tall narrow windows with stone sills and lintels. The building displays a moderate to
high degree of physical integrity. While it has undergone several alterations, they are primarily
located to the rear and do not detract from the building’s historic form or character-defining
elements. This structure retains sufficient integrity to convey its significance.
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
The Fort Collins Weekly Courier reported in 1905 that Eugene Holmes was building an eleven
room brick residence on Laporte Avenue. J.B. Kuhn was the builder of the $2,500.00 house.
Holmes was born in Michigan in 1845 and was a veteran of the Civil War. He married Jennie Kelly
of Hannibal, New York, where he taught school. After moving to Colorado and teaching in various
parts of the state, the Holmes’ settled in Fort Collins. Eugene taught in Fort Collins, including at
Remington School. Ansel Waterous reported that the Holmes’ had a “beautiful home on Laporte
Avenue.” By 1919, Henry H. Lowe, a salesman, lived in the residence with wife Lura. From 1922
through 1929 Peter and Eva Krug lived in the residence. Peter was a rancher and passed away in
1929. Following Pete’s death, Eva lived in the house with son Alvin, a painter, and daughter
Clara, a student. In the late 1930’s it appears that the by-then-married Clara and her Husband
Elmar Deines also lived in the house with Eva. Elmar worked as a clerk at the Town Pump, a
“beer parlor.” Both Elmar and Clara are buried in Grandview Cemetery; he died on January 20,
1938 and Eva on September 24, 1968. Paul and Grace Frey lived in the house from 1948 to
1952. Paul was a professor of Chemistry at Colorado A&M. Retirees, William and Opal Corbridge,
occupied the house for a span of fifteen years from 1945 through 1969. The Manges family
purchased the property in 1970 and continues to live there today. Sharon Manges is pursuing
Landmark designation for the property.
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
Construction Date: 1905-6
Architect/Builder: J.B. Kuhn, builder
Building Materials: Brick, stone foundation
Architectural Style: Victorian-era hipped roof dwelling with intersecting gables
Description:
Oriented to the south, the Holmes/Manges home is set back approximately 50 feet from the
Laporte Avenue. A planted grass yard with mature landscaping surrounds the structure and an
earth and gravel drive isle flanks the eastern elevation of the property, leading back to a garage
building. Sandstone pavers lead from the driveway to the residence’s front porch and a wire fence
encloses the rear half of the yard. The brick dwelling rests on a stone foundation. It consists of a
tall hipped roof with prominent pedimented gables on front and side elevations. Eaves are
overhanging and enclosed. On the gable ends, brick walls extend without breaks to gables and
eaves return. The front elevation gable end contains a double-hung narrow window with rusticated
stone lintels and sills, while the side elevation dormers contain double hung windows. The hipped
front porch roof has a small centered gable with returns over the building’s primary entrance and
is supported by classical wood columns. The main entry door is paneled with square glazing and
is flanked by sash and decorative transom windows with stone sills and lintels. Northern, eastern,
and western elevations feature a combination of double hung and fixed windows. All appear to be
original wooden framed windows. There is a hipped roof porch on the eastern elevation with
turned spindle supports and a gabled, screened porch on the rear portion of the eastern elevation.
There appear to be two additions to the dwelling: one dating from very early, which closely mimics
the materials and style of the original building, while another dates from 1971 and is clearly
distinctive. The earlier addition is brick and has a hipped roof and stone foundation. It is located to
6.a
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: Designation Application (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
Revised 08-2014 Page 4
the rear of the original building, slightly offset to the east. The side covered porch is situated in the
L-shape of the offset addition, which was likely added at the time of the early addition. The 1971
addition consists of two second level dormers over northeast portion of the residence.
The property contains two outbuildings. The garage is located to the east of the residence and
features two bays accessed from the south elevation and a pair of horizontally-orientated multi-
light windows on the western elevation. The building is clad in horizontal drop siding and covered
by a front gabled roof with open eaves and exposed rafter tails. A small shed with gambrel roof is
tucked behind the garage to the north.
REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION
Ansel Watrous, “History of Larimer County, Colorado,” (Fort Collins, Colorado: Printing and
Publishing, 1911), 281.
Fort Collins Weekly Courier, “Eugene Holmes Called to Eternal Rest,” November 20, 1914.
Larimer County Assessor Property Records.
Fort Collins City Directories, 1913-14 – 1971.
R. Laurie and Thomas Simmons, Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Colorado Architectural
Inventory Form, 1202 Laporte. January 1992.
6.a
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: Designation Application (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
1202 Laporte Avenue Landmark Designation
Southern (Front) Elevation
Northern (Rear) Elevation
6.b
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: Photos (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
Eastern Elevation Western Elevation
Garage, Western Elevation Garage, Northern and Western Elevations
6.b
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment: Photos (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
1202 Laporte Avenue, 1949
6.c
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment: 1949 Photo (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
JUNIPER CT
N SHIELDS ST
LYONS ST
S MCKINLEY AVE
N MCKINLEY AVE
SYLVA
N CT
JAMITH PL
AVE
N MCKINLEY AVE
C
H
E
R
RY
ST
PEARL ST
N SHIELDS ST
N MCKINLEY AVE
LAPORTE AVE
SYLVAN CT
C
O
L
U
M
B
I
N
E
C
T
LYONS ST
W OAK ST
W MOUNTAIN AVE
MAPLE ST
Site
1202 Laporte Ave,
Fort Collins, CO 80521
N
6.d
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment: Map (2789 : Fort Collins Landmark Designation of the Holmes/Manges Property at 1202 Laporte Avenue)
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 1
STAFF REPORT January 14, 2015
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
FINAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION
STAFF
Josh Weinberg, City Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority is seeking a final design
review from the Commission on the proposed renovation project of Old Town
Square, within the Old Town Historic District.
APPLICANT: Matt Robenalt and Todd Dangerfield, Downtown Development Authority
OWNER: Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority.
RECOMMENDATION: N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Please reference the attached executive overview, renderings, and images for more detailed information regarding
the proposed changes to Old Town Square.
Review Criteria: Alterations to Fort Collins Landmark Districts are reviewed for compliance with Municipal Code
Section 14-48, “Approval of Proposed Work” and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for treatment of Historic
Resources, and the Old Town Historic District Design Standards. The Design Standards will be provided
separately.
Sec. 14-48. Approval of proposed work.
In determining the decision to be made concerning the issuance of a report of acceptability, the Commission shall
consider the following criteria:
(1) The effect of the proposed work upon the general historical and/or architectural character of the
landmark or landmark district;
(2) The architectural style, arrangement, texture and materials of existing and proposed improvements,
and their relation to the sites, structures and objects in the district;
(3) The effects of the proposed work in creating, changing or destroying the exterior characteristics of the
site, structure or object upon which such work is to be done;
(4) The effect of the proposed work upon the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of the
landmark or landmark district;
(5) The extent to which the proposed work meets the standards of the city and the United States Secretary
of the Interior then in effect for the preservation, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation of historic resources.
7
Packet Pg. 112
Agenda Item 7
Item # 7 Page 2
ATTACHMENTS
1. LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (PDF)
7
Packet Pg. 113
2. OTS Images (PDF)
3. OTS Letter (PDF)
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
TO: Landmark Preservation Commission
FROM: Matt Robenalt/Todd Dangerfield
THROUGH: Karen McWilliams/Josh Weinberg
DATE: January 7, 2015
RE: January 14, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission Meeting
Old Town Square (OTS) Renovation Executive Overview
Background
As part of the vibrant Downtown Fort Collins experience, the public plaza portion of Old Town Square
has been heavily used over the last 30 years. The infrastructure is reaching the end of its lifecycle and
maintenance costs have increased, making it more feasible to create and implement a renovation plan.
For the past several years the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) staff and the City Manager
have worked together to position and prepare for the renovation of Old Town Square.
The DDA and its project team, through this renovation project, are committed to preserving what is
special and endearing about the original design, while striving to enhance elements of the plaza to
create a high-quality, public gathering space that accommodates a variety of activities now and well
into the future. The team assembled by the DDA to undertake the renovation design have focused on
objectives of vibrant urban place making and translated those objectives into a Fort Collins specific
concept through a public engagement process.
The DDA Board has appropriated approximately $2 million for the renovation of Old Town Square, and
the City Council/General Improvement District Ex Officio Board of Directors approved $1 million from
the General Improvement District No. 1 for the same purpose.
60% Design Development Milestone
Beginning in April 2014, the design team embarked on a programmatic and schematic design process
that engaged the general public and stakeholders in more than five open houses and fifteen
stakeholder engagement meetings. Through this process a series of three options were developed and
refined into final schematic (conceptual) designs. The final schematic designs were unanimously
endorsed the Downtown Development Authority Board of Directors on September 11, 2014 and
presented to the Commission at the September 2014 Work Session.
Attached are a sampling of images representing prominent design elements proposed in the Square.
The images represent refinement of the schematic designs which were presented to the Commission in
September. Currently the designs are at their 60% design development phase and are expected to
progress to the final construction document phase by early February 2015.
Assessment of Designs
The Old Town Square Plaza (“OTS Plaza”) is located within the City of Fort Collins local historic district
and National Historic District. Originally established in the late 1860‘s by Jack Dow and Norman
7.a
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
Meldrum as the 100 block of Linden Street in the “Old Town” survey and plat, this area functioned as a
public street right-of-way for approximately 110 years prior to its redevelopment and conversion into
a public plaza in the 1980’s by Gene Mitchell, the City of Fort Collins, and the Downtown Development
Authority.
In 1998, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 102, 1998 (see attached) as an amendment to
Ordinance No. 170, 1979 to correct the unintended exclusion of the OTS Plaza (former Linden St. right-
of-way) in the written legal description of the Old Town Fort Collins Historic District.
Ordinance No. 102, 1998 identifies the following:
The Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,
Revised 1983 have been modified by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service to be more
comprehensive with its explanations for the treatment of historic resources, and replaced by The
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, 1995. Contained within
the 1995 Standards are treatments for cultural landscape rehabilitation, which is defined as the act or
process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions
while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical or cultural values.
The DDA analyzed the OTS Plaza renovation designs for compatibility with the Guidelines for the
Treatment of Cultural Landscapes and has provided an analysis in the attached matrix.
Requested Commission Action
DDA staff members Matt Robenalt and Todd Dangerfield, Jim Leggitt of studioINSITE, and Keith Meyer
of Ditesco Services will present the overall designs, focusing on the primary features and solicit
questions from Commission members. DDA staff is requesting Commission’s approval of the designs in
anticipation of studioINSITE’s final refinement of the designs for construction scheduled to begin mid-
February 2015.
7.a
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal
7.a
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal
7.a
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town
7.a
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.a
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Spatial Organization & Land Patterns
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining and preserving the
existing spatial organization and land
patterns of the landscape as they have
evolved over time. Prior to beginning
project work, documenting all features
which define those relationships. This
includes the size, configuration,
proportion and relationship of component
landscapes; the relationship of features
to component landscapes; and the
component landscapes themselves,
such as a terrace garden, a farmyard, or
forest-to-field patterns.
Undertaking project work without
understanding the effect on existing
spatial organization and land patterns.
For example, constructing a structure
that creates new spatial divisions or not
researching an agricultural property’s
development history.
Originally a commercial street with traditional retailing uses in
commercial block style buildings, the OTS Renovation design re-
establishes zones of pedestrian passage along the building storefronts
as were present when sidewalks existed along the original street. The
reestablished organizing pattern is most prevalent in the north portion of
the renovation project. No historic buildings are proposed for alteration.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining features that
define spatial organization and land
patterns by non- destructive methods in
daily, seasonal and cyclical tasks. For
example, maintaining topography,
vegetation, and structures which
comprise the overall pattern of the
cultural landscape.
Allowing spatial organization and land
patterns to be altered through
incompatible development or neglect.
Utilizing maintenance methods which
destroy or obscure the landscape’s
spatial organization and land patterns.
The OTS Renovation design will not alter any historic building facades or
grade level features such as historic light well covers, which will be
protected and preserved. Also, remnants of historic sandstone sidewalks
exist adjacent to the building housing the Food Co-Op. These historic
sandstone sidewalks will be protected and will remain unaltered. Trees
in OTS are protected through requirements of a “Tree Protection Plan”
that limit activities and the guide general contractor’s work to protect the
existing trees.
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Repairing materials that define the
spatial organization and land patterns by
use of non-destructive methods and
materials when additional work is
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Assessment of Final Design with US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
Topography
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining and preserving the
existing topography. Documenting
topographic variation prior to project
work, including shape, slope, elevation,
aspect, and contour. For example,
preparing a topographic survey.
Evaluating and understanding the
evolution of a landscape’s topography
over time. Using archival resources such
as plans and aerial photographs or, in
their absence, archeological analysis
techniques to understand the historic
topography.
Undertaking project work that impacts
topography without undertaking a
topographic survey. Executing project
work without understanding its impact on
historic topographic resources, for
example, watershed systems.
A thorough topographic survey of OTS was conducted in 2004 and is
being used as the design basis for the current project. Minimal
alterations to current topography are anticipated with the renovations
other than a regrading and leveling of the soils prior to installation of new
paving systems.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining historic
topography by use of non-destructive
methods and daily, seasonal and cyclical
tasks. This may include cleaning
drainage systems or mowing vegetative
cover.
Failing to undertake preventive
maintenance. Utilizing maintenance
methods which destroy or degrade
topography, such as using heavily
weighted equipment on steep or
vulnerable slopes.
The 1980’s OTS design established storm drainage systems that reflect
public plaza use. The OTS Renovation design will continue using many
of the same storm drainage utility pipes that were installed in the early
1980‘s. In the north area of the plaza where much of the spatial
reconfiguration is occurring to eliminate the kiosk building and current
stage, the addition of new storm water inlets will be installed to ensure
drainage is diverted away from historic building foundations.
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Repair declining topographic features.
For example, re-excavating a silted
swale through appropriate regrading or
reestablishing an eroding agricultural
terrace.
Destroying the shape, slope, elevation or
contour of topography when repair is
possible.
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Assessment of Final Design with US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
Vegetation
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining and preserving the
existing historic vegetation prior to
project work. For example, woodlands,
forests, trees, shrubs, crops, meadows,
planting beds, vines and ground covers.
Evaluating the condition and determining
the age of vegetation. For example, tree
coring to determine age. Documenting
broad cover types, genus, species,
caliper, and/or size, as well as color,
scale, form and texture. Retaining and
perpetuating vegetation through
propagation of existing plants. Methods
include seed collection and genetic stock
cuttings from existing materials to
preserve the genetic pool.
Undertaking project work that impacts
vegetation without executing an existing
conditions survey of plant material.
Undertaking project work without
understanding the significance of
vegetation. For example, removing
roadside trees for utility installations, or
indiscriminate clearing of a woodland
understory. Failing to propagate
vegetation from extant genetic stock,
when few or no known sources or
replacements are available.
The vegetation (trees) in Old Town Square were evaluated by the City
Forester to assess the health of the trees with the design team early in
the project. There are currently 21 trees in the project zone consisting of
honey locust, ash, oak, spruce and dwarf fruit tree. While the forester
has identified several honey locusts in the south portion of the plaza as
appropriate for removal, this project will not undertake this step. The
single spruce tree located at the far north end of the plaza will be
removed to allow greater visibility between the plaza and the 200 block of
Linden Street. Large spruce trees and evergreen pine species are rarely
used in urban plaza settings, and are more appropriate for screening
undesirable views or as wind blocks. The single dwarf fruit tree located
in the stage area seatwall planter will also be removed. Seven new
deciduous trees will be added through the renovation design and will
provide a shade canopy when mature in the north half of the plaza.
These new trees, in addition to the benefits of contributing to the urban
forest, act as design elements that help to re-establish pedestrian
walkway zones next to the Miller Block and McPherson Block.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining historic
vegetation by use of non-destructive
methods and daily, seasonal and cyclical
tasks. For example, employing pruning
or the careful use of herbicides on
historic fruit trees.
Utilizing maintenance practices which
respect the habit, form, color, texture,
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Assessment of Final Design with US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
Circulation
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining, and preserving the
existing circulation systems prior to
project work. All circulation features
should be documented, from small paths
and walks to larger transportation
corridors such as parkways, highways,
railroads and canals. Documenting
alignment, surface treatment, edge,
grade, materials and infrastructure.
Evaluating the existing condition and
determining the age of circulation
systems. For example, using aerial
photographs to understand a
transportation corridor’s change from a
two-lane route to a six-lane highway.
Executing project work that impacts
circulation systems without undertaking
an existing conditions survey.
Undertaking work without understanding
the significance of circulation systems.
For example, changing road alignments
and widths without a thorough
evaluation of the historic road.
The OTS Renovation Design is premised on an exhaustive Program
Plan that was developed through public input and stakeholder
engagement in the spring of 2014. The Program Plan was published on
June 12, 2014 and became the foundation for conceptual design
activities. The Program Plan subdivides Old Town Square into smaller
“character zones” and identifies unique physical and user characteristics
of each area. The plan examined special attributes of each area that
give it personality and identity, and also the zones that are almost
forgotten and weak in identity. The plan identified, and the concept
design was planned around six zones: 1) Events Square, 2) Central
Plaza, 3) The Forest, 4) CooperSmith’s Alley, 5) Whitton Court Alley
(East), and 6) Old Town Square Perimeter.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining circulation
systems by use of non-destructive
methods in daily, seasonal and cyclical
tasks. This may include hand-raking, top-
dressing, or rolling surface materials.
Utilizing maintenance practices which
respect infrastructure. For example,
cleaning out debris from drainage
systems.
Failing to undertake preventive
maintenance of circulation features and
materials. For example, using a snow
plow across a coarse textured
pavement. Using materials such as
salts and chemicals, that can hasten the
deterioration of surface treatments.
Allowing infrastructure to become
dysfunctional. For example, permitting a
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Assessment of Final Design with US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
Water Features
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining and preserving
existing water features and water
sources such as retention ponds, pools,
and fountains prior to beginning project
work. Documenting the shape, edge and
bottom condition/material; water level,
sound and reflective qualities; and
associated plant and animal life, and
water quality. Evaluating the condition,
and, where applicable, the evolution of
water features over time. For example,
assessing water quality and/or utilizing
archeological techniques to determine
the changing path of a watercourse.
Executing project work that impacts
water features, and associated
hydrology, without undertaking an
existing conditions survey. For example,
filling in a pond that was historically
used for farm or recreation purposes.
Executing project work without
understanding its impact on water
features. For example, placing a section
of stream in a culvert or concrete
channel.
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation. See
Alterations/Additions for the New Use below.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining water
features by use of non-destructive
methods in daily, seasonal and cyclical
tasks. For example, cleaning leaf litter or
mineral deposits from drainage inlets or
outlets.
Maintaining a water feature’s
mechanical, plumbing and electrical
systems to insure appropriate depth of
water or direction of flow. For example,
maintaining the timing and sequencing
mechanisms for irrigation systems.
Failing to undertake preventive
maintenance of water features and
materials.
Utilizing maintenance methods which
destroy or degrade water features, for
example, the use of harsh chemical
additives for maintaining water quality.
Allowing mechanical systems to fall into
a state of disrepair, resulting in changes
to the water feature. For example, failing
to maintain a pool’s aeration system
thus leading to algae growth.
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation. See
Alterations/Additions for the New Use below.
Old Town Square Plaza Renovation
Assessment of Final Design and US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
Structures, Furnishings + Objects
Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Identifying, retaining and preserving
existing buildings, structures, furnishings
and objects prior to beginning project
work. For example, gazebos and
bridges, playground equipment and
drinking fountains, benches and lights,
and statuary and troughs. Documenting
the relationship of these features to each
other, their surrounds, and their material
compositions. Evaluating the condition
and determining the age of structures,
furnishings and objects. For example,
utilizing Historic Structure Inventories
and historic aerial photographs to
understand the relationship of barns,
windmills, silos and water troughs in a
ranch compound or the placement of
light standards and benches along park
paths. Retaining the historic
relationships between the landscape and
its buildings, structures, furnishings and
objects.
Undertaking project work that impacts
buildings, structures, furnishings, and
objects without executing an “existing
conditions” survey. Undertaking work
without understanding the significance of
structures, furnishings and objects. For
example, removing an arbor that defines
the axis of a garden or fence posts that
delineate the limits of a vineyard.
Removing or relocating structures,
furnishings and objects, thus destroying
or diminishing the historic relationship
between the landscape and these
features. For example, relocating a
bridge from its historic crossing point or
relocating a historic flagpole to a new
location.
No historic materials or features are planned for removal or alteration.
Protect and Maintain Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Protecting and maintaining buildings,
structures, furnishings and objects by
use of non-destructive methods and
daily, cyclical and seasonal tasks. This
may include rust or limited paint removal,
and reapplication of protective coating
systems. For example, painting metal
wrought iron fences or repointing
masonry to match original mortar
material, color and profiles
Failing to undertake preventive
maintenance for structures, furnishings
and objects, resulting in their damage or
OVERALL VIEW OF OLD TOWN SQYARE OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
4
LEGEND
A Sandstone Bench
B Planting
C Fireplace
D Play Area
E New Pavers
F Rock Fountain
G Vernal Pool
H Tree Grate
I Festoon Lighting
J Stage
K Stairs/Ramp
L Public Toilets
L
WALNUT STREET
MOUNTAIN AVENUE
TRIMBLE COURT
COLLEGE AVENUE
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
ENLARGEMENT OF NORTH END OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
5
LEGEND
A Sandstone Bench
B Planting
C Fireplace
D Play Area
E New Pavers
F Rock Fountain
G Vernal Pool
H Tree Grate
I Festoon Lighting
J Stage
K Stairs/Ramp
L Public Toilets
B
D
E
F
G
H
I
J K
A
L
A
B
E
E
H
WALNUT STREET
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
ENLARGEMENT OF SOUTH END OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
6
LEGEND
A Sandstone Bench
B Planting
C Fireplace
D Play Area
E New Pavers
F Rock Fountain
G Vernal Pool
H Tree Grate
I Festoon Lighting
J Stage
K Stairs/Ramp
L Public Toilets
B C
D
E
I
A
A
E
E
E
MOUNTAIN AVENUE
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
VIEW OF THE CENTRAL WATER FEATURE WITH VERNAL POOL IN DISTANCE 21
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
LOCATION OF THE NEW PUBLIC TOILETS 25
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
OLD TOWN SQUARE RENOVATION: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATION JANUARY 11, 2015
NEW ENTRY SIGNAGE ON MOUNTAIN AVENUE 26
7.b
Attachment: OTS Images (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
7.c
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: OTS Letter (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
loss. For example, failing to stop water
infiltration at roofs and foundations.
Utilizing maintenance practices and
materials that are harsh, abrasive, or
unproven. For example, using only
aggressive and potentially damaging
cleaning methods such as grit blasting
on wood, brick, or soft stone or using
harsh chemicals on masonry or metals.
Prior to start of construction, a thorough photo and written documentation
of building exterior façade conditions will be conducted to ensure
historic buildings' are preserved in their current conditions. To prevent
any damage to historic building facades and foundations during site work,
contractors will be required to provide protection for the facades and
hand excavate when in close proximity to buildings. Contractors will not
be allowed to use mechanical vibratory methods for soil compaction in
close proximity to buildings.
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Repairing features and materials of
buildings, structures, furnishings or
objects by reinforcing historic materials.
For example, returning a children’s swing
to good working order, or reshaping a
section of a deformed monkey bar.
Replacing or destroying a feature of
structures, furnishings or objects when
repair is possible. For example, replacing
a pavilion’s tile roof with physically or
visually incompatible roofing; or,
removing a non-working historic light
fixture, rather than rewiring it.
No historic materials or features are planned for removal or alteration.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Using existing physical evidence of form,
material and detailing to reproduce a
deteriorated structure, furnishing or
object. If using the same kind of material
is not technically, economically, or
environmentally feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered. For example, replacing a
cast stone bench with a new casting
from the original mold.
Removing a structure, furnishing, or
object that is deteriorated and not
replacing it, or replacing it with a new
feature that does not convey the same
visual appearance. For example,
removing a wooden rustic footbridge and
replacing it with a concrete bridge
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation. See Alterations/Additions
for the New Use below.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing new structures,
furnishings and objects when the historic
features are missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the historic character of the landscape.
For example, replacing a picnic shelter
with one of a new compatible design.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based
on insufficient historical, pictorial and
physical documentation.
Introducing a new design that is
incompatible with the historic character
of the landscape. For example, replacing
a lost wooden fence with chain link
fence.
No historic materials will be removed or replaced with features or
materials that are based on insufficient historical documentation.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing a new structure,
furnishing or object when required by the
new use, which is compatible with the
preservation of the historic character of
the landscape. For example,
constructing a new farm outbuilding
utilizing traditional building materials or
installing appropriately scaled and
detailed signage.
Placing a new structure, furnishing, or
object where it may cause damage, or is
incompatible with the historic character
of the landscape. For example,
constructing a new maintenance facility
in a primary space.
Locating any new structure, furnishing or
object in such a way that it detracts from
or alters the historic character of the
landscape. For example, installing a
“period” gazebo that was never present
in the cultural landscape.
Introducing a new structure, furnishing or
object in an appropriate location, but
making it visually incompatible in mass,
scale, form, features, materials, texture
or color. For example, constructing a
visitors’ center that is incompatible with
the historic character of the cultural
landscape.
The kiosk is being removed and the stage relocated to the far northwest
corner of the plaza. The new stage location opens up north half of OTS
at the center, thus providing the spatial orientation that existed with the
original Linden Street, and re-establish the north/south viewshed that
existed in the original Linden Street. A permanent, low profile, steel
stage canopy structure has been designed with intention to minimize
visual impacts to the Linden Street corridor and surrounding historical
structures. Restroom facilities originally in the kiosk will be relocated to
a former entry foyer area within the privately owned Building 23 located in
the Square near Trimble Court Alley. An approximate 200 s.f. portion of
the lower masonry facade of this non-historical building will be renovated
to accommodate the restrooms and will include a relocated building entry
doors with transom windows, two restroom entry doors, signage and
additional facade mounted lighting. A new low-profile design, masonry
gas fireplace feature with overhead festoon lighting will be installed in the
southeast section of the plaza in proximity to the children's play area.
Seating walls will be incorporated into the design.
7.a
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Repairing water features by reinforcing
materials or augmenting mechanical
systems. For example, patching a crack
in an pond liner or repairing a failed
pump mechanism.
Removing a water feature that is
unrepairable and not replacing it, or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
For example, replacing a single orifice
nozzle with a spray nozzle, thus
changing the fountain’s historic
character from a singular stem of water
to a mist-like stream.
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation. See
Alterations/Additions for the New Use below.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Using existing physical evidence of
form, depth and detailing to reproduce a
deteriorated water feature. If using the
same kind of material is not technically,
economically, or environmentally
feasible, then a compatible substitute
material may be considered. For
example, replacing a lead pond liner
with one made of plastic.
Removing a water feature that is
unrepairable and not replacing it, or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
For example, replacing a single orifice
nozzle with a spray nozzle, thus
changing the fountain’s historic
character from a singular stem of water
to a mist-like stream.
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation. See
Alterations/Additions for the New Use below.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing a new water
feature when the historic feature is
completely missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the historic character of the landscape.
For example, replacing a lost irrigation
feature using materials that convey the
same visual appearance.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based
on insufficient historical, pictorial and
physical documentation. Introducing a
new design that is incompatible with the
historic character of the landscape. For
example, replacing a natural pond with a
manufactured pool.
Not applicable to Old Town Square renovation.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing a compatible
new water feature when required by the
new use to assure the preservation of
historic character of the landscape. For
example, siting a new retention basin in
a secondary, or non-significant space in
the cultural landscape.
Placing a new water feature where it
may cause damage, or is incompatible
with the historic character, such as
adding a water slide.
Locating any new water feature in such
a way that it detracts from or alters the
historic character of the landscape. For
example, installing a “period” fountain
where one never existed.
Introducing a new water feature which is
in an appropriate location, but is visually
incompatible in terms of its shape, edge,
and bottom condition/material; or water
level, movement, sound, and reflective
quality. For example, introducing a
wading pool in a non-significant space,
but utilizing non traditional materials and
colors.
The non-historic water fountain of the 1980’s original plaza design will
remain in the same location. The pool and moat surrounding the
fountain rocks will be modified by decreasing the depth of the pool and
eliminating the moat that flows in front of the current stage. A shallower
body of water in the fountain pool will decrease water demand required
to operate the fountain, but preserve the auditory effects of splashing
water. Two additional rock boulder features of the same stone-type will
be sourced from nearby quarry and placed in the modified fountain pool.
Seat walls will be constructed around the new pool, and will be
designated as a passive water feature, and interactivity discouraged. A
second water feature, known as the vernal pool, will be constructed in
the area between the original fountain and the new stage. The vernal
pool will be interactive and feature pop-jet type nozzles similar to Oak
Street Plaza. The vernal pool area will be defined by pavers with a
different shape and color than other areas of the plaza, but
complementary to the overall color palette. When the vernal pool is not
in use (late fall, winter, early spring) the plaza surface and grade is
indistinguishable from the rest of the Events Square character zone.
The original fountain and the vernal pool will be operated with a
redundant chlorination and ultraviolet water quality system that meets
current health code requirements for interactive water play areas.
7.a
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
failed drainage system to contribute to
the degradation and loss of associated
curbs or erosion of road shoulders.
The 1980’s OTS design established storm drainage systems that reflect
public plaza use. The OTS Renovation design will continue using many
of the same storm drainage utility pipes that were installed in the early
1980‘s. In the north area of the plaza where much of the spatial
reconfiguration is occurring to eliminate the kiosk building and current
stage, the addition of new storm water inlets will be installed to ensure
drainage is diverted away from historic building foundations.
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Repairing surface treatment, materials
and edges. For example, by applying a
traditional material to a stabilized
subsurface base or patching a canal
corridor retaining wall
Replacing or destroying circulation
features and materials when repair is
possible. For example, not salvaging
and reusing historic stone walk material
Remnants of historic sandstone sidewalks exist adjacent to the building
housing the Food Co-Op. These historic sandstone sidewalks will be
protected and will remain unaltered. Historic light well covers will be
protected and preserved.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Using physical evidence of form,
detailing and alignment to reproduce a
deteriorated circulation feature. If using
the same kind of material is not
technically, economically or
environmentally feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered. For example, replacing in
kind decayed timber edging along a
historic trail route.
Removing a circulation feature that is
deteriorated and not replacing it, or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
For example, replacing a set of stairs
with a wall or terrace
No historic materials will be removed or replaced.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing new circulation
features when the historic feature is
completely missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the historic character of the landscape.
For example, reinstating a lost park
entrance at a historic access point.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based
on insufficient historical, pictorial and
physical documentation. Introducing a
new circulation feature that is
incompatible with the historic character
of the landscape. For example, using a
standardized concrete barrier along a
historic parkway
No historic materials will be removed or replaced with features or
materials that are based on insufficient historical documentation.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing compatible new
circulation features when required by the
new use to assure the preservation of
historic character of the landscape. For
example, controlling and limiting new
curb cuts, driveways, and intersections
along a historic road.
Placing a new feature where it may
cause damage, or is incompatible with
the historic circulation. For example,
adding new driveways, intersections,
and “neck outs” along a historic road.
Locating any new circulation feature in
such a way that it detracts from or alters
the historic circulation pattern. For
example, installing a new bike path
when an existing historic path can
accommodate the new use.
Introducing a new circulation feature
which is in an appropriate location, but
making it visually incompatible in terms
of its alignment, surface treatment,
width, edge treatment, grade, materials
or infrastructure. For example, installing
a new parking lot in a non-significant
location, but utilizing paving materials
and patterns which are incongruous with
the landscape’s historic character.
The kiosk is being removed and the stage relocated to the far northwest
corner of the plaza. The 1980’s stage location created pedestrian flow
issues in the plaza as a result of crowd encroachment into the main
east/west corridor between CooperSmith’s Alley and Trimble Court Alley.
The new stage location opens up north half of OTS at the center, thus
providing the spatial orientation that existed with the original Linden
Street, and re-establish the north/south viewshed that existed in the
original Linden Street. A new paver system will be installed throughout
the plaza and perimeter. This new system will be similar to the concrete
pavers that were installed in the 1980’s during the original construction
of the plaza, but will be of a different color palette and interlocking
design. Accent stone pavers will be installed over new tree wells that
will be constructed in the north half of the plaza.
7.a
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
bloom, fruit, fragrance, scale and context
of historic vegetation.
Utilizing historic horticultural and
agricultural maintenance practices when
those techniques are critical to
maintaining the historic character of the
vegetation. For example, the manual
removal of dead flowers to ensure
continuous bloom.
Failing to undertake preventive
maintenance of vegetation. Utilizing
maintenance practices and techniques
which are harmful to vegetation; for
example, over- or under-
irrigating. Utilizing maintenance
practices and techniques that fail to
recognize the uniqueness of individual
plant materials. For example, utilizing
soil amendments which may alter flower
color or, poorly-timed pruning and/or
application of insecticide which may alter
fruit production. Employing
contemporary practices when traditional
or historic can be used. For example,
utilizing non-traditional harvesting
practices when traditional practices are
still feasible.
Trees in OTS are protected through requirements of a “Tree Protection
Plan” that limit activities and the guide general contractor’s work to
protect the existing trees. In the post-construction period, maintenance
of vegetation in Old Town Square will be provided by the City Parks
Maintenance team, the longtime partner of the DDA and daily
maintenance caretaker of Old Town Square. All pruning and tree
maintenance has and will continue to be coordinated with the City
forester.
Repair Historic Features and Materials
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Rejuvenating historic vegetation by
corrective pruning, deep root fertilizing,
aerating soil, renewing seasonal
plantings and/or grafting onto historic
genetic root stock.
Replacing or destroying vegetation when
rejuvenation is possible. For example,
removing a deformed or damaged plant
when corrective pruning may be
employed.
Not applicable to Old Town Square Renovation.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Using physical evidence of composition,
form, and habit to replace a deteriorated,
or declining, vegetation feature. If using
the same kind of material is not
technically, economically, or
environmentally feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered. For example, replacing a
diseased sentinel tree in a meadow with
a disease resistant tree of similar type,
form, shape and scale.
Removing deteriorated historic
vegetation and not replacing it, or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
For example, a large mature, declining
canopy tree with a dwarf ornamental
flowering tree.
Not applicable to Old Town Square Renovation.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing new vegetation
features when the historic feature is
completely missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial and physical documentation; or
be a new design that is compatible with
the habit, form, color, texture, bloom,
fruit, fragrance, scale and context of the
historic vegetation. For example,
replacing a lost vineyard with more hardy
stock similar to the historic.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replaced feature is based
on insufficient historical, pictorial and
physical documentation. Introducing
new replacement vegetation that is
incompatible with the historic character
of the landscape
As evidenced in historic photo documentation of the 100 Block of Linden
Street, now Old Town Square, there were no street trees. This absence
of vegetation was consistent throughout nearly all of the historic central
business district until the 1970’s when a special improvement district was
created to install street trees. Vegetation in Old Town Square was
planted in the 1980’s as part of the original plaza design.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing a compatible new vegetation
feature when required by the new use to
assure the preservation of the historic
character of the landscape. For example,
designing and installing a hedge that is
compatible with the historic character of
the landscape to screen new
construction
Placing a new feature where it may
cause damage or is incompatible with
the character of the historic vegetation.
For example, constructing a new building
that adversely affects the root systems of
historic vegetation. Locating any new
vegetation feature in such a way that it
detracts from or alters the historic
vegetation. For example, introducing
exotic species in a landscape that was
historically comprised of indigenous
plants. Introducing a new vegetation
feature in an appropriate location, which
is visually incompatible in terms of its
habit, form, color, texture, bloom, fruit,
fragrance, scale or context
Seven new deciduous trees will be added through the renovation design
and will provide a shade canopy when mature in the north half of the
plaza. These new trees, in addition to the benefits of contributing to the
urban forest, act as design elements that help to re-establish pedestrian
walkway zones next to the Miller Block and McPherson Block.
7.a
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
Not applicable to OTS Renovation.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Using existing physical evidence of the
form and composition to reproduce a
deteriorated topographic feature. If using
the same kind of material is not
technically, economically, or
environmentally feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered. For example, re-establishing
eroded bunkers or ramparts in a
battlefield with a substitute soil mix that
supports improved drainage and health
and vigor of ground cover plant
materials.
Removing a topographic feature that is
deteriorated and not replacing it, or
replacing it with a new feature that does
not convey the same visual appearance.
For example, changing stepped terracing
to a curved slope.
Not applicable to OTS Renovation.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing new topographic
features when the historic feature is
completely missing. It may be an
accurate restoration using historical,
pictorial and physical documentation or a
new design that is compatible with the
shape, slope, elevation and contour of
the historic topography. For example,
installing an artificial jetty to replace one
lost to beach erosion.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replacement feature is
based on insufficient historical, pictorial
and physical documentation. Introducing
a new topographic feature that is
incompatible in shape, slope, elevation,
aspect and contour.
Not applicable to OTS Renovation.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing new topographic features
when required by the new use so that
they are as unobtrusive as possible and
assure the preservation of the historic
landscape. For example, designing and
installing drainage systems to protect
historic topographic features.
Placing a new feature where it may
cause damage, or is incompatible with
historic topography. For example, failing
to provide proper drainage for a new
feature which results in the decline or
loss of topographic features. Locating a
new feature in such a way that it detracts
from or alters the historic topography.
For example, obscuring a historic
shoreline through the construction of a
new breakwall. Introducing a new
feature in an appropriate location, but
making it visually incompatible in terms
of its size, scale, design, materials, color
and texture. For example, installing
berms to screen new parking, but using
incongruous topographic shape and
contour.
The topography of the plaza will remain the same except for change that
will occur in the terraced area at the existing stage and seatwalls,
currently located north of the rock water fountain. The seatwalls on
either side of the stage will be removed, and the terraced area will be
regraded to the same level as the area north of the existing stage to
create a uniform grade plaza level.
7.a
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
required. For example, repairing
structures or regenerating vegetation
which comprise the individual spaces or
overall patterns of the cultural
landscape.
Failing to undertake necessary repairs
resulting in the loss of spatial
organization and land patterns.
Replacing a feature that defines spatial
organization and land patterns when
repair is possible.
The OTS Renovation design will not alter any historic features or
materials.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Replacing in kind an entire feature that
defines spatial organization and land
patterns that is too deteriorated to repair.
Removing a feature that is beyond repair
and not replacing it; or, replacing it with a
new feature that does not respect the
spatial organization and land patterns.
The OTS Renovation design will not alter any historic features or
materials.
Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing and installing new features
which respect or acknowledge the
historic spatial organization and land
patterns. It may be an accurate
restoration using historical, pictorial and
physical documentation; or be a new
design that is compatible with the spatial
organization and land patterns. For
example, installing a new shrub planting
which defines the edge of a missing
historic boundary.
Creating a false historical appearance
because the replacement feature is
based on insufficient historical, pictorial
and physical documentation.
Introducing new features that are
incompatible with the spatial organization
or land patterns.
The OTS Renovation design will not attempt to create false historical
representation of features. For example, historic photo documentation
reveals the original Linden Street configuration did not have street light
fixtures. No attempt is being made to replicate “era” specific lighting
fixtures, such as gas lamp-style fixtures, as part of the renovation. The
1980’s open globe style fixtures will be removed. In their place, a
pedestrian scale fixture consisting of a non-trendy pole and luminaire
fixture has been selected that will blend into the background and provide
energy efficient lighting for safety and ambiance. Also, vertical poles
intended to provide structure for the tivoli-style overhead lighting will be
of a similar non-descript design as the pedestrian light poles. These
poles are approximately 22’ feet in height, which is similar in height to the
three existing stage light poles. The renovation design has these new
poles planned in an organized pattern that helps better define the
pedestrian walkway in the north section of the plaza, similar to how the
pattern and configuration of electric utility poles were arranged according
to historic photo evidence.
Alterations/Additions for the New Use
Recommended Not Recommended OTS Renovation Design
Designing new features when required
by the new compatible use to assure the
preservation of the historic spatial
organization and land patterns.
Removing non significant features which
detract from or have altered the spatial
organization and land patterns.
Adding a new feature that detracts from
or alters the spatial organization and
land patterns. For example, constructing
a new farm house wing over a kitchen
garden. Placing a new feature where it
may cause damage to, or be intrusive in
spatial organization and land patterns.
For example, inserting a new visitors
center that blocks or alters a historic
view or vista.
Introducing a new feature that is visually
incompatible in size, scale, design,
materials, color and texture.
Removing historic features which are
important in defining spatial organization
and land patterns.
The 1980’s OTS design incorporated elements, specifically in the
northern portion of the plaza, such as the kiosk building and stage that
were not well integrated into the overall OTS site. The kiosk building
blocked the view looking north into the 200 block of Linden Street and
southward into the southern half of the plaza. The kiosk is being
removed and the stage relocated to the far northwest corner of the plaza.
The 1980’s stage location created pedestrian flow issues in the plaza as
a result of crowd encroachment into the main east/west corridor between
CooperSmith’s Alley and Trimble Court Alley. The new stage location
opens up north half of OTS at the center, thus providing the spatial
orientation that existed with the original Linden Street, and re-establish
the north/south view shed that existed in the original Linden Street. The
new stage design seeks to provide the lowest profile roof structure that
meets requirements for stage performances and structural engineering
while also creating visual permeability so that plaza guests can look
through the stage area at what is beyond. The angled orientation of the
stage is intended maintain the intimate feel of the current stage, and
provide an audience experience that is framed by the historic Linden
Hotel in the background.
Assessment of Final Design with US Department of Interior’s Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes
7.a
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: LPC Packet Submittal FINAL 1 7 15 - OTS (2796 : Final Design Review for Old Town Square Renovation)
W04
W03 W08
W02 W02 W09
08.91C
04.01
04.72A
04.01 04.01
04.72D
04.43A
04.72A
04.72B
04.43A
04.72C
04.72A
07.42D
07.62
04.72E
04.72E
07.62
08.43A
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
ENCLOSURE WALL BEHIND
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
ENCLOSURE WALL
W09 W09
04.72C
04.72D
04.72B
04.72D
04.72E 04.72E
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
ENCLOSURE WALL
W16 W01
14'-8" 13'-4" 13'-4"
11'-4"
1050 17th STREET,
SUITE A200
DENVER, CO 80265
303 295 1717 t
303 292 0845 f
No REVISION/SUBMISSION DATE
PROJECT No:
DATE:
SCALE:
COPYRIGHT 2011 - RNL. This document, and the ideas and design concepts incorperated herein, as an
instrument of professional service, can not be used, in whole or in part for this or any other project, without the
written authorization of RNL.
DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
K K
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1/8" = 1'-0"
12/23/2014 7:32:04 AM
C:\Revit_Local\2014\3618_CSB_ARCH_kfinnegan.rvt
PDP202
BUILDING
ELEVATIONS
12/24/14
3618-03
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
222 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
ARCHITECTURE/INTERIORS - RNL DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION ADMIN - AU WORKSHOP
LANDSCAPE - LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN
CIVIL - NORTHERN ENGINEERING
STRUCTURAL - JVA, INCORPORATED
MEP -MKK CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
LEED ADMINISTRATION - INSTITUTE FOR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
SUSTAINABILITY - ARCHITECTURAL ENERGY CORPORATION
ENERGY MODELING - AMBIENT ENERGY
UTILITY ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Author Checker
SHEET NOTES
04.01 BRICK VENEER
04.43A SANDSTONE VENEER PANEL
04.72A CAST STONE FRAME
04.72B CAST STONE SILL PROFILE
04.72C CAST STONE SILL PROFILE AT BASE
04.72D CAST STONE LINTEL
04.72E CAST STONE COPING PROFILE
07.42D PREFINISHED METAL PANEL WRAP AND ENTRY CANOPY
07.62 PREFINISHED ALUMINUM SHEET METAL PARAPET COPING
08.43A ALUMINUM STOREFRONT SYSTEM
08.91C FIXED ALUMINUM LIGHT SHELF, EXTENSION BY
STOREFRONT MFR
E1 EAST 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATION
A1 NORTH 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATION
BUILDING
SIGNAGE
2.c
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: 005_ELEVATIONS (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and Creamery Laboratory Building)
W02
W01 W01 W03
W04
W04
W09
W08
W02
W02
W02
W02
04.01
08.43A
08.91C
04.01
04.43A
08.91C
08.43A
04.72A
04.72B
04.72A
04.72C
04.01
04.72A 08.43A
08.43A
04.72B
08.43A
08.91C
04.01
04.72A
08.43A
07.42C
07.62
07.62
07.62
04.72E
W09 W09
08.43A
04.72A
08.91C
04.43B
04.72A
04.72D
04.72C
04.43A
07.42B
04.72F
W05 W16
14'-8" 13'-4" 13'-4"
1050 17th STREET,
SUITE A200
DENVER, CO 80265
303 295 1717 t
303 292 0845 f
No REVISION/SUBMISSION DATE
PROJECT No:
DATE:
SCALE:
COPYRIGHT 2011 - RNL. This document, and the ideas and design concepts incorperated herein, as an
instrument of professional service, can not be used, in whole or in part for this or any other project, without the
written authorization of RNL.
DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
K K
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1/8" = 1'-0"
12/23/2014 7:30:05 AM
C:\Revit_Local\2014\3618_CSB_ARCH_kfinnegan.rvt
PDP201
BUILDING
ELEVATIONS
12/24/14
3618-03
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
222 Laporte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
ARCHITECTURE/INTERIORS - RNL DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION ADMIN - AU WORKSHOP
LANDSCAPE - LOGAN SIMPSON DESIGN
CIVIL - NORTHERN ENGINEERING
STRUCTURAL - JVA, INCORPORATED
MEP -MKK CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
LEED ADMINISTRATION - INSTITUTE FOR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
SUSTAINABILITY - ARCHITECTURAL ENERGY CORPORATION
ENERGY MODELING - AMBIENT ENERGY
UTILITY ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Author Checker
SHEET NOTES
04.01 BRICK VENEER
04.43A SANDSTONE VENEER PANEL
04.43B SANDSTONE PANEL SOFFIT AND VENEER PANEL SIDE
WALLS AT ENTRY PORTICO
04.72A CAST STONE FRAME
04.72B CAST STONE SILL PROFILE
04.72C CAST STONE SILL PROFILE AT BASE
04.72D CAST STONE LINTEL
04.72E CAST STONE COPING PROFILE
04.72F CAST STONE PANEL OVER FRAMING
07.42B PREFINISHED METAL PANEL WRAP
07.42C PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLUMN WRAP
07.62 PREFINISHED ALUMINUM SHEET METAL PARAPET COPING
08.43A ALUMINUM STOREFRONT SYSTEM
08.91C FIXED ALUMINUM LIGHT SHELF, EXTENSION BY
STOREFRONT MFR
E1 WEST 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATION
A1 SOUTH 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATION
--
2.c
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: 005_ELEVATIONS (2799 : Development Review - Utility Admin Building and Creamery Laboratory Building)