Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/2015 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Regular MeetingLandmark Preservation Commission Page 1 March 11, 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 March 11, 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 FEBRUARY 11, 2015 REGULAR MEETING. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the February 11, 2015 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. 2. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 25, 2015 REGULAR MEETING. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the February 25, 2015 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. Landmark Preservation Commission City of Fort Collins Page 2 3. REMINGTON - LAUREL MINI ROUNDABOUT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Engineering Department will be providing Information to the Commission on the Remington Greenway Pilot Project, a portion of which goes through the Laurel School National Register District. Part of this project involves construction of a mini-roundabout at the intersection of Remington and Laurel Streets. APPLICANT: Tim Kemp, Civil Engineer III and Project Manager 4. DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DESIGNATION AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK, 408- 410 LINDEN STREET, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request to determine the eligibility of the property at 408-410 Linden Street to qualify as a Fort Collins Landmark, pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code APPLICANT: Kim Szidon, Ranch-way Feeds 5. 430 N. COLLEGE, POWER PLANT/ENGINES & ENERGY LAB - CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL REVIEW OF HOPPER DESIGN PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this item is to review the proposed design for the hopper, and either approve, approve with conditions, or deny, the application. APPLICANT: Jeff Jensen, JPL Development 6. 301 SOUTH LOOMIS AVENUE - STATE TAX CREDIT PART 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Final Review — Part 2 State Tax Credit Review for Roofing of the David E. Watrous House and Garage, 301 South Loomis Avenue APPLICANT: Chester Daniel  OTHER BUSINESS  ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Gretchen Schiager, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 11, 2015 REGULAR MEETING. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the February 11, 2015 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft LPC February 11, 2015 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 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 February 11, 2015 Minutes  CALL TO ORDER Chair Sladek called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.  ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dunn, Zink, Hogestad, Wallace, Gensmer, Lingle, Ernest, Sladek ABSENT: Bzdek STAFF: McWilliams, Weinberg, Schiager  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None Chair Sladek asked whether agenda item #4, the Design Assistance Program policy clarifications, could be moved to the end of the agenda. Ms. McWilliams stated that would be fine. Landmark Preservation Commission 1.a Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 2  DISCUSSION AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 14, 2015 REGULAR MEETING. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the January 14, 2015 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. Mr. Lingle mentioned that in the section about the Utilities Administration Building, there was no mention of the trellis element, pylon wall, asymmetry and façade of the building topics that were discussed. He would like to have that added. Chair Sladek also mentioned that there was also a statement that the building was 20 square feet, which should have been 20 feet square. Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the minutes for the regular meeting of January 14, 2015 with the corrections as stated. Mr. Lingle seconded. Motion passed 8-0. [Timestamp: 5:36 p.m.] 2. 618 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE, PART 2 STATE TAX CREDIT FINAL REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Built in 1906-07, the Crose-Scott-Dickey House and Attached Garage was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark by Ordinance No. 018, 2013, adopted on February 19, 2013. The property was found to qualify for landmark status for both its association with Newton and Louise (Avery) Crose, and as an excellent example of Craftsman architecture. The building had been renovated several times during its more than 100-year history, before being purchased in 2012 by William and Kathleen Whitley. The Whitley’s have done extensive work to restore and rehabilitate the home to its current showcase condition. APPLICANT: William and Kathleen Whitley Ms. Dunn recused herself from this item due to a conflict of interest. Staff Report Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report. Applicant Presentation Mr. Whitley explained that when he and his wife bought the property, it had been used as a rooming house and was stripped of most of the interior details and had some structural issues. They tried to restore what could be restored, and rehabilitate what they could in a period-sensitive manner. He referred the Commission to the presentation included in the agenda packet. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Mr. Lingle asked Staff for guidance on how the Commission should evaluate this project. He noted, for example, that in the living and dining area, there was a need for beams and columns for structural support, which created a coffered ceiling where there was not one historically. He wondered whether that was a historically appropriate thing to do, and therefore whether the tax credits were applicable to that. Ms. McWilliams stated that the Commission will use the Rehabilitation Standards from the Secretary of Interior to evaluate this project, and those standards allow for alterations and additions to accommodate new needs, technology and changing use. The Commission would decide whether the purpose behind the addition of the coffered ceiling met the criteria or not. 1.a Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 3 Mr. Lingle pointed to Standard 3, with regard to creating a false sense of historical development, as his cause for concern. He wanted to clarify that if there was a functional and structural reason why the ceiling needed to be done, and the way it was done was in keeping with the period of the house even though it wasn’t there historically, whether that made the addition okay under the Rehabilitation Standards. Ms. McWilliams noted that there weren’t any historic interior photos, so there is really no way to know whether there may have been coffered ceilings. The Applicant mentioned that the beams shown in the pictures were decorative and were put in by the owner between 1960 and 2008. They are below a false ceiling, which was below the original ceiling, which was sagging. He felt he needed to raise the ceiling to be in keeping with the feel of the house, and that the coffered ceiling would be period appropriate. Mr. Hogestad suggested a better approach might have been to use Gypboard so it wouldn’t look like historic decoration. The Applicant said he also added bookcases and wooden trim. Mr. Lingle said he thought those were fine, but when elements are added that give a sense of historical character, it could be misleading. Chair Sladek mentioned that the decorative items added were Craftsman style and were in keeping with the period. He pointed out that since the materials are modern, and the records are on file with the City, anyone doing research on the home in the future would see that those items were added during this rehabilitation process. Mr. Lingle said that was a strong point. Chair Sladek noted that developers push the boundaries on tax credit projects by restoring or rehabilitating the exterior closely, but adapt the interior for a new use. The Applicant stated that everything they had done to the exterior was strictly restoration and repair. Chair Sladek asked the Applicant to give a rundown of what had been done to the exterior, and the Applicant noted the following:  There was a solar collector added in the 1980’s which they removed and repaired the siding.  The windows flanking the fireplace, which are exterior to the inside of the porch, were restored using three of the four original window casements. One was missing, but was remade to mimic the other sashes. The Applicant said he understood why Standard 3 could be problematic if they were strict about it. Chair Sladek cautioned against rejecting an entire tax credit because of one element that wasn’t done as closely as they might have liked. Mr. Lingle agreed, and complimented the work the Applicant had done, particularly noting the radiators. Ms. Zink commented about the modern kitchen, which was not from the Craftsman era. She noted that was a positive thing that speaks to Rehabilitation Standard 3 as a product of modern times. She thought the materials would make it clear that it wasn’t historic. Chair Sladek asked the Commission whether they could support this tax credit. For reference, Ms. McWilliams read the Secretary of Interior definition of rehabilitation. Chair Sladek stated the Applicant had achieved it. Mr. Hogestad said the fact that the work is recognizable as being newer resolves the concerns about Standard 3. He then asked how much work they plan on doing to the exterior in the future, particularly whether they intend to restore the Craftsman style gable ends. The Applicant hopes to do that, as well replace screens and brackets, repair rafter tails, and put authentic storms on the front. He is uncertain about going back to a screened porch due to a security issue. The tax credit will help fund the additional work. Most of the work so far has been to stabilize the structure and extend the life of structure as a single family house. They have not yet done any painting or repair to the siding yet, as they need to have a unified plan approved by the Commission to move forward. Mr. Ernest mentioned he was impressed with the floor plans, and asked if they found them or reconstructed them. The Applicant said that because he had to disassemble the walls, he was able to see evidence around the frame of what had been there and should have been there. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission, as a reviewing entity under Colorado Revised Statute Section 39-22-514, grant Part 2 State Tax Credit for Historic Preservation approval of the rehabilitation and restoration work on the Crose-Scott-Dickey House at 618 West Mountain Avenue, finding that the work meets the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 8-0. 1.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 4 Ms. Dunn returned to the meeting. [Timestamp: 6:05 p.m.] 3. FINAL REVIEW — PART 2 STATE TAX CREDIT REVIEW FOR INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR REHABILITATION OF THE BUILDING AT 320 WALNUT STREET PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Final Review — Part 2 State Tax Credit Review for Interior and Exterior Rehabilitation of the Building at 320 Walnut Street APPLICANT: Craig Hahn and Pete Turner, Owners Staff Report Mr. Weinberg presented the staff report, noting that Staff was presenting the item on behalf of the property owners who were unable to be present. He pointed out an error on page 77 of the packet where it states, “The items below were part of the rehabilitation project, but are submitted as ‘qualified costs’ for the tax credit application”. This should have said the items are NOT submitted as “qualified costs” for the tax credit application. Applicant Presentation None Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion A Member pointed out the photo of the door the Commission had approved being changed from a window, and asked why there was paint on the brick on either side of the door. Mr. Weinberg was unsure, but suggested it may have been done to cover recent graffiti. Members commented that graffiti should be removed, not painted over, and asked Staff to mention that to the owner. Members also commented that the garage door and kick plate were well done, and that the Applicant did pretty much what was approved previously, and said it seems to comply. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission, as a reviewing entity under Colorado Revised Statute Section 39-22-514, grant Part 2 State Tax Credit for Historic Preservation approval of the rehabilitation and restoration work on the building at 320 Walnut Street, finding that the work meets the Secretary of Interior Standards. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Motion passed 8-0. [Timestamp: 6:16 p.m.] Item #4 was moved to the end of the agenda. 5. LOOMIS ADDITION PROJECT: CONTEXT FINAL PRESENTATION AND LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR SURVEY GRANT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Final Report of the Loomis Addition Context Certified Local Government Grant Project; Request for Letter of Support for a State Historical Fund Grant for Survey of the Loomis Addition APPLICANT: Humstone Consulting, Mary Humstone, Project Director; Karen McWilliams, Preservation Division Manager Staff Report Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report. She explained that no vote was needed on the final report, but the Commission would need to vote on the letter of support. Applicant Presentation Ms. Humstone gave the Applicant presentation. Public Input None 1.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 5 Commission Questions and Discussion Ms. Dunn recused herself for the discussion due to a conflict regarding the survey. Chair Sladek complimented the Applicant’s work on a phenomenal project in terms of its quality and what was achieved. He then asked about garages and outbuildings in the area. The Applicant said they conducted a walking survey, not a windshield survey, but there are a range of garages from early single-car garages, two-car garages and carriage houses that have been converted to garages. They got a lot of photos of different kinds of garages, but not an accurate count. A Member also complimented the quality and approachability of the report. Chair Sladek suggested this area is a strong candidate for a historic district nomination, based on the results of the study. The Applicant said the mini-survey did not assess each house to see what changes have made. Based on the architecture, social history and contextual history, there is a strong case, but the integrity has not been verified. If the integrity is there, it may qualify under Standards A and C, but probably not B. The survey they are proposing would be for 312 buildings, which would require 280 reconnaissance survey forms and 32 intensive survey forms. Chair Sladek asked whether they can make sure the reconnaissance level survey will provide enough information to determine integrity. Ms. McWilliams it would be possible, but would impact costs due to spending more time at each property. Chair Sladek said that with pressure for changes in the area, a district establishment adds an additional layer of protection. Hopefully, the survey can answer the question of architectural integrity. The Applicant noted that the education can be done now, and would hopefully garner more interest in preservation of the area homes. Chair Sladek encouraged the Applicant to keep moving that forward while the survey is being applied for and completed. A Member asked how the context is made available to the public. Ms. McWilliams said that typically the survey and the context occur simultaneously, and the results of both are then mailed to the homeowners. In this case, there may be two mailings, although she wasn’t sure if that would be cost effective. Publications can also be made available on the City website, through Next Door, and via other City outreach methods such as “This Week in Development Review”. Chair Sladek encouraged Staff to make sure the report gets out to the public. Chair Sladek asked the Commission about the letter of support for the grant application, noting that a draft of the letter is in the packet. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission provide a letter of support for a State Historical Fund grant for a survey of the Loomis Addition. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 8-0. [Timestamp: 6:51 p.m.] Ms. Dunn returned to the meeting. 6. 1ST BANK, 100 S. COLLEGE AVE., LPC DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Following their December 10, 2014 meeting with the LPC’s Design Review Subcommittee (DRS), the applicants have requested another DRS meeting to discuss modifications to the large window panes. APPLICANT: Adam Snyder, 1st Bank; Jim Cox and Don Bernholtz, Architecture Plus Staff Report Ms. McWilliams gave the staff report. She recommended that the Design Review Subcommittee take a role call to determine whether each Member is in support of the project or not. Applicant Presentation Mr. Cox spoke briefly and introduced Mr. Bernholtz, who gave the Applicant presentation. He explained that they are no longer seeking to change the configurations of the existing glass, or change any of the smaller glass pieces. The current proposal only deals with the main, large panels of glass. 1.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 6 Rather than replacing the existing glass panels and adding exposed mullions on the outside of the glass, they propose to apply two horizontal lines of structural silicone bracing behind the existing glass. They believe this is the most elegant solution to satisfy the code requirements and meet wind load standards. Daytime reflections should obscure the structural treatment, although they will be seen at night if the interior is illuminated. The original proposal utilized only one mullion, but they have since learned that the maximum panel size a glass manufacturer will warrant is 55 square feet. The squares in the proposed design are subdivided to about that size. If one panel broke, you could retrofit new panels of glass using a silicone connection with minimal impact on visual appearance. The existing glass panels are laminated, which does qualify as safety glass, and will meet code. To provide the necessary support, structural bracing is placed behind the glass with a silicone connection, and it would be attached to the existing structure with bolted-in clips, which may be possible to remove in the future. They also propose to apply a removable, thin aluminum finish material, like a break-metal product, around the existing mullion structure which is damaged. This will provide a sharp, fresh appearance, to match the existing appearance, but it could be removed in the future. With this design, they have taken the Commission’s suggestions and concerns from the last meeting and have tried to preserve the aesthetic of the structure as much as possible. This glass treatment will protect the building from a high wind event. Mr. Bernholtz introduced Patrick Kervin, a Structural Engineer with Anchor Engineering, Inc. in Denver. Mr. Kervin described his credentials, explaining that he was previously a glazer, and specializes in glass and aluminum engineering. He was asked by the Applicant to assess whether the glass is safe, and determined that the existing glass system was overstressed. He said the existing glass is in pretty good shape, and the proposed scenario meets the allowable glass limits for possibilities of breakage per the GANA (Glass Association of North America) manual. He then provided an overview of his technical analysis, explaining that the glass needs the proposed supports to redistribute the load. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion A Member asked if the existing structure was a steel frame or a curtain wall. Mr. Kervin stated it was comprised of 6” x 6” steel columns with a u-channel. Members clarified that the Applicant plans to cover all of the existing break metal with new break metal. The Applicant pointed out the damage to the existing break metal. The Applicant clarified that the large system is structural steel columns and the plate of glass is held in with stops that are installed to the side of the structural vertical steel columns. There is no window frame, just stick-built component stops. The dented break metal is original to the building. Members asked whether the current break metal could be removed. The kick plate could be removed, and the panel under the storefront frame may be able to be removed, but the verticals are structural and can’t be removed. They plan to cover all of it with new break metal to give a uniform appearance. Mr. Cox said at one point, they had started to re-clad the windows, but stopped to see what would happen with this design review. He stated that he assumed the existing components are original, but doesn’t really know. Members said it looked like the galvanized components were replacements of the original, and asked if the original material was stainless or something else. Mr. Kervin explained that there are two systems. The one pictured on page 118 of the packet is a typical extruded aluminum 4½ x 2 storefront system with a kick panel. The one at the entry vestibule pictured on page 117 is a hybrid with a big tube steel frame and a beam for lateral support that was cladded with material that is most likely stainless, but it is hard to know if it is the original. A break metal with a bright finish would be the best match, like clear anodized aluminum. 1.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 7 A Member asked how the new break metal would be attached where it butts into the glass. They would likely put a half inch hem on the break metal, put it in, and then wet seal it all the way around. Members asked whether the jointing and seaming will match what the existing was. Mr. Kervin said the storefront should be clear anodized and can be matched. If the material at the front entry is stainless steel, it could be easily matched, but if is some “oddball” material that isn’t made anymore, they don’t know if it could be matched. Members inquired about the specific locations of the damage, to which Mr. Bernholtz replied that he didn’t catalog all of the damage, just provided general examples. However, he said it is pretty consistently marred up to about 3 ft. Members asked whether the damaged portions can be repaired rather than cladded. Mr. Kervin said that the aluminum store front cannot be repaired, adding that it would cause more damage and would end up looking worse. Members asked if the vertical atrium cladding will add additional joints that were not there historically. Mr. Bernholtz said they plan to do continuous cladding. A Member stated that he would like to see as much of original material preserved as possible. Mr. Bernholtz said they want a uniform look, explaining that the new cladding would be removable, and the original material would still be underneath. He also noted that 60-70% of the original material is damaged. In response to a question, Mr. Bernholtz explained that the glass line would be broken into thirds, with the bottom two sections evenly spaced, and the top section a little more squat. If one of the panels were to break in the future, the new glass panels would be glass-to-glass joints, as continuous as possible. Members commented that the design of the glass panels fits with asymmetry of the building overall. A Member questioned whether the new horizontal support needed to be deeper than the column. Mr. Kervin said they may be able to use a 2” x 3” or 2” x 4”, rather than the 2” x 6” depicted in the drawing. Chair Sladek asked the Commission whether they saw anything problematic related to the review criteria items A-E. One Member said it was not problematic as long as they follow the guidance offered tonight in terms of the materials, dimensions, finishes, seaming, joints, attachments, etc. He went on to say this structural solution is far more elegant than the previous proposal, having fairly minimal visual impact on the exterior. Chair Sladek asked the Commission about the cladding on the metal work. One Member said that while he realized the original material would be preserved underneath, he still would prefer as much of it as possible to be restored as original fabric, to which another Member agreed. Mr. Cox interjected that he thought cladding had previously been approved for another owner. Ms. McWilliams said that to the best of her knowledge, during an earlier Staff Review process, it had been specified that the original materials should be retained and left exposed. To her recollection, the issue of cladding had not previously come before the Commission. The gold-colored tile under the stucco-like material was allowed to be recovered because it had been covered already before the building was 50 years old. Chair Sladek asked the Commission if they object to the cladding as a whole, or if it’s a question of how it would be done. Some members felt there should be a more specific assessment of how much of the original material could be preserved, noting that they do not have enough information to make a decision. One Member wanted to see the different conditions of the existing material, and solutions for each, suggesting a good elevation drawing showing existing conditions and proposed alterations. Chair Sladek referred to review criteria item C with regard to obscuring exterior characteristics, and asked whether covering over historic fabric would qualify as obscuring. Member would like a more detailed presentation. While the horizontal bracing works well, the break metal is the concern. Commission Deliberation Chair Sladek noted that they would not be voting on this item, but suggested a roll call on the two elements of the proposal, the horizontal window bracing, and the cladding. The Members unanimously agreed that the horizontal window bracing was acceptable. 1.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 8 With regard to the cladding, Mr. Hogestad would like a more detailed assessment and proposal. Ms. Dunn agreed. Mr. Lingle was not as concerned about analysis and repair of the original material, but felt it was more important how the new material is attached, and that the finish more closely matches the original. Ms. Wallace agreed with what Mr. Lingle said about the finish, but was concerned about continuity if only portions are covered. Ms. Gensmer agreed with Ms. Wallace. Ms. Zink agreed with Mr. Hogestad. Mr. Ernest stated he agreed with the earlier comments. Chair Sladek agreed with Mr. Hogestad. Chair Sladek summarized the Commission’s feedback by saying that they unanimously support the window bracing, but have relatively unanimous concerns about the details of the cladding that need to be addressed before they could support it. [Timestamp: 7:56 p.m.] 7. 222 LAPORTE AVENUE - FINAL REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL FOR RELOCATION OF HISTORIC CREAMERY LABORATORY (BUTTERFLY BUILDING) AND CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY CUSTOMER SERVICE BUILDING PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Fort Collins, is requesting a Final Recommendation to Decision Maker on its project to relocate the historic creamery laboratory (Butterfly Building) and construct a new Utility Customer Service Building at 222 Laporte Avenue. APPLICANT: Brian Hergott, Facilities Project Manager, City of Fort Collins Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Attorney, City of Fort Collins Staff Report None. Applicant Presentation Jeff Mihelich gave the Applicant presentation. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion A Member pointed out that the content of the presentation was completely different from what was submitted for the packet. Mr. Mihelich apologized for the last minute changes, explaining that they were working on improvements to the window design that they felt were more representative of what they thought the Commission wanted to see. In response to a question, he said they changed the canopy in the back because they didn’t feel it would really be used. He also noted that the angle of the canopy was not changed, and matches the angle of the monument sign. Members asked about the block structure in back, and Mr. Mihelich explained it was a brick wall enclosure for the mechanical system with no roof structure. Chair Sladek emphasized that the drawings in the presentation are the current ones that should be considered. Members inquired about the signage at the footprint of the original location. Mr. Mihelich stated that they plan to include two signs, one at the footprint, and one at the laboratory building to explain the history of the building. Members suggested a flat marker could be used in the ground at the footprint. A Member asked about the fencing separating the raised area from the lower area. Mr. Mihelich said it was necessary for safety, but was designed to be transparent as possible, so as not to obstruct the view of the building. Several Members praised the design, and the changes that were made. They specifically mentioned liking that the stairs were closer to the building, the change in the color of brick and that the setback was a nice detail. 1.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 9 Commission Deliberation Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend approval of the designs for the Utility Customer Service Building at 222 Laporte Avenue as presented at tonight’s meeting, finding that it complies with Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code and Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code. Mr. Lingle seconded. Motion passed 8-0. Mr. Mihelich expressed his appreciation to the Commission for their guidance and suggestions, and thanked the Architect, Dominic Weilminster. [Timestamp: 8:19 p.m.] 4. DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM POLICY CLARIFICATIONS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to take action on aspects of the Design Assistance Program discussed at the Commission’s January 28, 2015 Work Session. Staff Report Mr. Weinberg presented the staff report. Public Input No members of the public were present to comment, but a letter was submitted by Kevin Murray of Empire Carpentry which was provided to the Commission just prior to the meeting. Commission Questions and Discussion Following a question from a Member, Mr. Weinberg clarified that a property owner could get reimbursement for each project once. A second revision could be a separate project. A suggestion was made to add couple of sentences defining what constitutes a project. Mr. Weinberg said he could do that loosely in order to be more accommodating. Another Member recommended adding a statement that the applicant must agree to meet the Standards in order to receive funding. In response to another question, Mr. Weinberg stated that after the changes are finalized, he would e-mail the changes to those on the list. Members commented on Mr. Murray’s letter. It was noted that because structural engineering and maintenance aren’t specifically excluded, applicants could be confused as to what kind of projects qualify, possibly resulting in rejection of an application that could have been avoided. Members would like to see additional clarity in the document. A Member also pointed out that there are alternative means of funding if one goes through the landmark process. Mr. Weinberg suggested an FAQ on the website, as well as on the application, that provides examples of the types of projects that would not qualify and explains that this program is for conceptual designs rather than fully engineered drawings, may help to manage expectations. Commission Deliberation No voting occurred on this item. The Commission asked Staff to come back to the next meeting with the additional language they discussed. [Timestamp: 8:33 p.m.]  OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Lingle suggested that when last minute changes come in, the Commission should feel comfortable tabling the discussion and postponing the decision. Chair Sladek agreed, noting that Staff should also inform the Applicant that additional information submitted late may not be considered. Ms. Dunn asked for update on Button House plaque. Ms. McWilliams said a neighborhood meeting was held, which Ms. Wallace and Mr. Ernest attended. Ms. Wallace said approximately five homeowners attended, none of whom had attended the previous meeting as far as they could tell. Attendees were open to commemorating what had been there. They were also open to looking at other options like a marker placed in the concrete for the Button House and other homes in the District, or even commemorating the neighborhood in general with signs for the District at major 1.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 10 intersections or street signs. Mr. Ernest said that Sarah Burnett was also at the meeting, and said no one had e-mailed any comments. He didn’t see a meeting of the minds among attendees. Some said their neighbors didn’t even know they were in the Laurel Historic District. He said he would like to see signage for historic districts in general. Mr. Hogestad thought Neighborhood Services had looked into for signage for neighborhoods. Chair Sladek asked whether someone from an appropriate office within the City could come to a meeting to talk about signage. Ms. McWilliams said she would pull together some people for a work session. There was discussion that the low attendance at the meeting seemed to indicate that the people who had been so upset about the Button House only a year ago, had already forgotten it. Mr. Hogestad asked how people were notified of the meeting. Ms. McWilliams said a mailing was sent to the entire Laurel Historic District of 700 some homes, and was included in the City’s electronic notifications. Ms. Zink said the fact that people have short memories may actually demonstrate the need for a plaque. Chair Sladek mentioned that the CSU Medical Center will be built at the northwest corner of College & Prospect, and expressed concern about the historic homes in the area. Mr. Hogestad said he had a conflict of interest on that topic due to his employment at CSU, but noted that Cameron Gloss is the CSU contact for City business and may have an update. Mr. Lingle pointed out that the Planning & Zoning Board would have purview over that, and the LPC could give P&Z a recommendation. Ms. McWilliams said she would be happy to facilitate a meeting with CSU on that topic. Chair Sladek mentioned the upcoming election for Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission. Both he and Mr. Ernest expressed willingness to continue in their respective roles, but also encouraged others with an interest to throw their hats into the ring.  ADJOURNMENT Chair Sladek adjourned the meeting at 8:48 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager. 1.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Draft LPC February 11, 2015 Minutes (2984 : Minutes of February 11, 2015) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Cindy Cosmas, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 25, 2015 REGULAR MEETING. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the February 25, 2015 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 14 Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 February 25, 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 February 25, 2015 Minutes  CALL TO ORDER Chair Sladek called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m.  ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dunn, Zink, Bzdek, Hogestad, Wallace, Gensmer, Ernest, Sladek ABSENT: Lingle (excused) STAFF: McWilliams, Weinberg, Cosmas  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. Landmark Preservation Commission 2.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 2  DISCUSSION AGENDA 1. 430 N. COLLEGE, POWER PLANT/ENGINES & ENERGY LAB - REVIEW OF HOPPER DESIGN PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this item is to review the proposed design for the hopper, and either approve, approve with conditions, or deny, the application. APPLICANT: Jeff Jensen, JPL Development Staff Report Planner McWilliams presented the staff report, including background of the past changes to the building. She also stated that the applicant is interested in the LPC providing a final review of the hopper. Mr. Hogestad recused himself at 5:42pm due to a conflict of interest. Applicant Presentation Jeff Jenson, owner’s representative during the remodel/addition of the historical building, gave the Applicant presentation. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Members asked for details on other potential uses for the hopper. The Applicant explained that having a greenhouse would currently be an excellent use for it. He also stated that the hopper would be positioned in the exact location of its original historic location. Chair Sladek directed the members to review Section 14-48 of the Preservation Code, which is the Report of Acceptability, in order to determine the impact of alterations on landmark buildings. He also asked if there were any concerns in the overall new look of the hopper. His concern is that a hopper with surrounding windows may result in a substantial change to the character of the building from an historical perspective. He would rather not incur a modification to the original building. There was some question as to how the LPC originally addressed the visual impacts of the changes to the original smoke stack design – this would require some research. Mr. Ernest pointed out that the greenhouse is a new creation, whereas the smoke stacks were a recreation of the original look. One option would be to table this discussion and research what was done in the past with the smoke stacks. The Applicant did not indicate that there is any urgency with this project. The members decided that they would like to revisit this item at the next regular meeting on March 11, 2015. [Timestamp: 5:55 p.m.] Mr. Hogestad rejoined the Commission at 5:55pm. 2. 2015 LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM The purpose of this item is to introduce the 2015 Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program and discuss procedural items for design review and project prioritization. Staff Report Mr. Weinberg presented an overview of the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program, which is designed to provide grant funding to owners of historically-designated properties in order to assist them with maintenance and rehabilitation of these properties. The role of the LPC is to assist with design review and ranking of properties. Public Input None 2.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 3 Commission Questions and Discussion Mr. Weinberg clarified that each project would be presented individually as separate projects. [Timestamp: 6:00 p.m.] 3. 424 WEST OLIVE STREET - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation of the Building’s Front Porch APPLICANT: Brian Cooke and Lisa Viviani Staff Report Mr. Weinberg presented the staff report. Applicant Presentation Brian Cooke gave the Applicant presentation. He reiterated the goal of structurally rehabilitating the front porch. Andy Carlson, Loveland Daub Contractors, stated that the porch has an unusual sway, so some concrete foundation will be needed, as well as wood restoration. He also plans to install a simple, wooden railing. Public Input Kevin Murray, Empire Carpentry, supports this project, confirming how the applicants have spent considerable time and money in rehabilitating this property. Commission Questions and Discussion Members asked questions about the visual effects of the new porch, including the railing, construction of new porch, columns, and decking. Chair Sladek stated that item 3, under the Secretary of Interior Standards, states that changes that significantly alter the original architectural features of a building shall not be undertaken. There was some discussion regarding whether the railing is necessary and would it reduce the eligibility of landmark status. It was decided that the railing would not be reproducing historic accuracy but is more about complying with life safety. In addition, it will be made from wood and would be a removable feature, so there would be no permanent damage to house. Chair Sladek stated that he believes the addition of the railing to be a reasonable and aesthetically pleasing approach. Members asked whether the Commission should be commenting on all proposed work (including match items), and Mr. Weinberg stated that all proposed work should be considered. Regarding paint removal, members questioned whether pressure washing would be an appropriate treatment, since it is understood that contractors must comply with Secretary of Interior standards on such procedures for historic homes. Mr. Cooke stated that his painter would remove paint with low-pressure washing, not sandblasting. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 424 W. Olive Street. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 424 W. Olive Street, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 6:25 p.m.] 4. 314 EAST MULBERRY - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation and Repair of Mortar Joints in Foundation 2.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 4 APPLICANT: Carolyn and Jane Goodwin 2.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 5 Staff Report Planner Weinberg presented the staff report. Applicant would like to request funding for rehabilitation of foundation of this property. Applicant Presentation Kevin Murray, with Empire Carpentry, gave the Applicant presentation. He stated that this home, called the Bennett House, has been in the same family for more than 50 years. The home was damaged by recent flooding, and the current owners have had some financial difficulties in repairing and maintaining the home. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Members inquired about what had previously been funding for this property, and Mr. Murray recapped the prior events. Other questions arose regarding the stone and mortar deterioration and the water damage to the exterior of the building. Commission Deliberation Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to the final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 314 E. Mulberry. Ms. Dunn seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 314 E. Mulberry, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 6:39 p.m.] 5. 629 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation of East and West Elevation Brick Walls, Double-hung Window Rehabilitation, Storm Window Rehabilitation, Construction of New Storm Windows, Window Well Rehabilitation, Basement Window Rehabilitation. APPLICANT: David Haimson and Susan Rogers Staff Report Planner Weinberg presented the staff report. Applicant Presentation Dave Haimson gave the Applicant presentation, providing detail on what type of work would be performed on the building and stated that he would like to complete the entire project this year. Andy Carlson, Loveland Contractors, added that the proposed window changes would still match the existing windows. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion 2.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 6 Members inquired about how the window wells will be repaired, since the main choices are either concrete or corrugated metal. There was some concern about demolishing the existing concrete, which is considered to be historic material, and replacing it with a different material. Mr. Haimson responded that he did not believe the window wells would be visible from the street, adding that there would be landscaping that would also hide the wells. Members reminded him that landscaping should not be considered as mitigation for destroying historic fabric. There was more discussion as to which areas of the house would be affected during the window well replacement. Members asked if replacing the window wells with corrugated metal would affect the historic appearance of the property. Mr. Weinberg stated that the City grant funds cannot be used toward funding new material. Ms. McWilliams clarified that, while the City grant funds hold the rehabilitation to a higher, more accurate level of historic appearance, the owner match can pay for these improvements. Members discussed the other items requested for rehabilitation. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to the final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 629 W. Mountain. Ms. Wallace seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Members continued their discussion of the material options for rehabilitating the window wells. The members appear to be split in their acceptance of the material options. They discussed the potential risk to the structure, since the repair process may compromise other elements of the building. The property owner added that he would reconsider the proposed work based on this discussion. Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 629 W. Mountain, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria Section 14-48 of the Municipal Code, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7. Ms. Dunn seconded. Motion failed 4:4 (Hogestad, Bzdek, Wallace and Sladek dissenting). McWilliams suggested that the window well issue be tabled to allow the applicant to prepare a different design review; therefore, the window wells would not be part of this loan process. This issue could even be approved administratively by the Director of CDNS. The applicant agreed to withdraw this part of the loan application and pursue it separately. Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 629 W. Mountain, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, other than the window wells, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7. Ms. Dunn seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 7:30 p.m.] 6. 1530 REMINGTON STREET - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation of Western and Southern Elevation Terra Cotta Tile Roof. APPLICANT: David and Rita Merck Staff Report Mr. Weinberg presented the staff report, describing the proposed roof work in detail. Applicant Presentation None. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion 2.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 7 Members discussed the type of tile to be used in the proposed replacement, specifically addressing the roof elevations, the under layer, and the area of replacement (only a portion of the roof will be replaced). Commission Deliberation Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to the final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 1530 Remington Street. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 1530 Remington Street, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. Ms. Bzdek seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 7:42 p.m.] 7. 321 NORTH WHITCOMB STREET - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation of Historic Wood Windows. APPLICANT: Kate Polk Staff Report Planner Weinberg presented the staff report. Applicant Presentation Kate Polk, Applicant, gave the Applicant presentation. Kevin Murray, with Empire Carpentry, added that the repairs would not compromise the historic integrity of the home. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion None. Commission Deliberation Ms. Bzdek moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to the final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 321 N. Whitcomb Street. Ms. Zink seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Ms. Bzdek moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project of 321 N. Whitcomb Street, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7. Ms. Wallace seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 7:48 p.m.] 8. 220 REMINGTON STREET - LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conceptual/Final Design Review — Proposed Work Includes Rehabilitation of Historic Windows and Cellar. APPLICANT: Colleen Scholz Staff Report 2.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 8 Planner Weinberg presented the staff report, describing how this property is being converted from a residency to an office. Applicant Presentation Kevin Murray, with Empire Carpentry, gave the Applicant presentation, describing some of the unique characteristics of the property and the proposed window replacements. Public Input None 2.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 9 Commission Questions and Discussion Members asked about the hardware replacement, the rebuild of the cellar support walls, and historic windows. The cellar door replacement or rehabilitation will not be considered at this time. Commission Deliberation Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission waive the conceptual review and move to the final review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project for 220 Remington Street. Mr. Ernest seconded. Motion passed 8:0. Final Review Mr. Ernest moved that the LPC approve the final design review for the Landmark Rehabilitation Loan project on the 220 Remington Street, finding that the proposed work meets the criteria of Chapter 14, Section 14-48, of the Municipal Code: approval of proposed work, specifying Standards 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Ms. Dunn seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 8:08 p.m.] A short break was taken – the hearing resumed at 8:15pm. Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Application Rating – Each LPC member ranked each of the applicants on a paper form. The results will be shared at a later time. 9. DESIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM POLICY REVISIONS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to take action on aspects of the Design Assistance Program (DAP) discussed at the Commission’s January 28, 2015, Work Session and the February 11, 2015, Regular Meeting. Staff Report Mr. Weinberg gave the background of the DAP and the proposed program changes, which are highlighted in the Staff Report. Public Input Kevin Murray, with Empire Carpentry, suggested that the design assistance program continues all the way through to project completion. He also stated that he does not agree with funding projects that require dismantling a building. Lastly, he feels that historic building designs should be developed in an effort to maintain the building, not change it. Commission Questions and Discussion Members asked whether Mr. Murray’s concerns had been previously addressed. Chair Sladek clarified that Mr. Murray is concerned that the DAP is not including engineering and structural-related issues to minimize negative impacts. Mr. Weinberg reminded the group that the DAP pays for designs, not the physical labor of constructing the design. Ms. McWilliams reiterated that the program does not normally fund foundation restoration, due to the limited funds available. Members asked why structural engineering is excluded from the funding criteria in this program. Ms. McWilliams explained that the City has other funding programs available to assist with such repairs. This program is primarily concerned with visual impacts to the community. Commission Deliberation Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the changes identified in the Staff Report in terms of revisions to the Design Assistance Program. Ms. Bzdek seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 8:43 p.m.] Mr. Ernest recused himself at 8:45pm due to a conflict of interest. 2.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) City of Fort Collins Page 10  OTHER BUSINESS Letter of Support for the Water Works Project Ms. McWilliams stated the purpose of this letter of support: a request from the Poudre Landmarks Foundation, Friends of the Water Works, to support their grant request from the Poudre Heritage Alliance. The proposed project would provide conceptual interpretative design documents as well as a design for a micro/hydro-electrical generation system at the site. The documents will be used for bidding and construction for the long-term upgrading and rehabilitation of the Water Works property. The micro/hydro system will be used to generate some electricity but also for educational purposes, furthering enhancing the interpretative aspects of the center. Ms. Zink moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission provide a support for the Water Works project for a grant application to the Poudre Heritage Alliance. Ms. Gensmer seconded. Motion passed 8:0. [Timestamp: 8:51 p.m.] Mr. Ernest rejoined the Commission at 8:51pm. 10. LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2015 ELECTION OF OFFICERS The purpose of this item is to elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson for the 2015 term, as provided for in Sec. 2-279 of the Municipal Code. Mr. Ernest nominated Ron Sladek for Chairman. There being no other nominations, Mr. Sladek was confirmed as Chairman for the 2015 term. Ms. Bzdek nominated Doug Ernest for Vice Chairman. There being no other nominations, Mr. Ernest was confirmed as Vice Chairman for the 2015 term.  ADJOURNMENT Chair Sladek adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Cindy Cosmas 2.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: DRAFT LPC February 25, 2015 Minutes (3011 : Minutes of February 25, 2015) Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 Page 1 STAFF REPORT March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME REMINGTON - LAUREL MINI ROUNDABOUT STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Engineering Department will be providing Information to the Commission on the Remington Greenway Pilot Project, a portion of which goes through the Laurel School National Register District. Part of this project involves construction of a mini-roundabout at the intersection of Remington and Laurel Streets. APPLICANT: Tim Kemp, Civil Engineer III and Project Manager OWNER: City of Fort Collins RECOMMENDATION: N/A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is an informational update on the Remington Greenway Pilot Project, a portion of which goes through the Laurel School National Register District. Part of this project involves construction of a mini-roundabout at the intersection of Remington and Laurel Streets, and converting Pitkin and Elizabeth Streets to a four way stop. The project would support traffic calming, add buffered bike lanes and pedestrian bulb outs, and provide transit infrastructure for a future Transfort route along Remington Street. There is no federal involvement in this project, so there is no requirement for a Section 106 Review. ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo Remington & Laurel Project (PDF) 2. Jan 2015 Roundabout (PDF) 3. Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (PDF) 4. Rem-Laurel Planting Plan_02-12-15 (PDF) 5. Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (PPT) 3 Packet Pg. 25 Engineering Department 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.221.6605 970.221.6378 - fax fcgov.com/engineering Planning, Development & Transportation MEMO Date: March 2, 2015 To: Landmark Preservation Commission Copied: Laurie Kadrich, CDNS Director Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager Rick Richter, Director of Infrastructure Services Dean Klingner, Engineering Capital Projects Manager From: Tim Kemp, Civil Engineer III Re: Informational Update - Remington Greenway Pilot Project Background: • The concept of Green Streets (also referred to as Reshaping Streets) emerged as a community priority during the 2010-11 Transportation Master Plan update • Green Streets offer flexibility in street design and this project will include: o Traffic calming – conversion of signalized intersections  Pitkin converted to a four way stop  Elizabeth converted to a four way stop  Laurel converted to a mini roundabout o Support for active travel modes (cycling and walking) by adding buffered bike lanes and pedestrian bulb outs o Transit infrastructure for a future Transfort route along Remington o Rain garden by the University Center for the Arts (UCA) • This project was funded through a Budgeting For Outcomes (BFO) offer • The project extends along Remington Street from Spring Park Drive to Mountain Avenue (a portion of which goes through the Laurel School National Register Historic District) • Remington was identified as a key location to pilot the Green Street concept given its’ significance as a secondary commuter route and proximity to College Avenue, downtown and Colorado State University • This project will construct and study the benefits of solutions such as: buffered bike lanes, intersection calming, storm water quality and increased pedestrian comfort. Schedule: • Project Planning Phase Fall, 2013 – Summer, 2014 • Preliminary Design Fall, 2014 • Final Design Winter – Spring, 2015 • Construction May – July, 2015 3.a Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Memo Remington & Laurel Project (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.b Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Jan 2015 Roundabout (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 3.c Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Prelim Civil Drawings 2-18-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) TYPICAL CORNER SECTION PLANT PALLETT Pawnee Buttes Sandcherry Panchito Manzanita Yucca Blue Grama Sideoats Grama La Veta Lace Geranium Cinquefoil Autumn Joy Sedum Blue Flax White Evening Primrose Pineleaf Penstemon Fringed Sage Basket-of-Gold Plumbago Dwarf Coreopsis Dwarf Rabbitbrush Autumn Amber Sumac COMMON NAME H.Z. SIZE SUN BLOOM COLOR DECIDUOUS SHRUBS Dwarf Blue Rabbitbrush VL 1-2'/2-4' sun Pawnee Buttes Sandcherry L 1-2'/4-8' sun Creeping Three-leaf Sumac VL 12-18"/6-8' sun EVERGREEN SHRUBS Panchito Manzanita VL 1-2'/3-5' sun/shade Yucca Soapweed VL2-3' sun ORNAMENTAL GRASSES Sideoats Grama Grass L 8-24"/8-12" sun Blonde Ambition Grama Grass VL 2-3'/2-3' sun PERRENIALS Fringed Sage VL 6-18"/2-3' sun yellow Basket-of-Gold Alyssum L 8-12"/12-18" sun april-may yellow Plumbago L 8-12"/18-24" sun aug-sept blue Dwarf Coreopsis L 6-8"/6-12" sun june-sept orange/yellow La Veta Lace Geranium L 6-10"/15-20" sun/shade May-July purple Blue Flax L 12-20"/15-18" sun may-july blue White Evening Primrose L 6-12"/12-18" sun june-sept white Pineleaf Penstemon L 6-12"/12-18" sun june-sept orange-red Miss Wilmott Cinquefoil M 10-12"/12-18" sun/shade may-July Red Autumn Joy Sedum L 18-24"/12-18" sun july-oct magenta REMINGTONGREENWAY PLANTING PLAN NATIVE ROCK GARDEN 3.d Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Rem-Laurel Planting Plan_02-12-15 (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Roundabout) 1 REMINGTON GREENWAY PILOT PROJECT Informational Update for the Landmark Preservation Commission March 11, 2015 3.e Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 2 PROJECT OVERVIEW • Green Street Concept (Street Reshaping) • Multi-Modal Safety Improvements • Built within Existing City Right-of-Way • Intersection Conversions 3.e Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 3 PROJECT EXTENTS Remington – Spring Park to Mountain 3.e Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 4 PROJECT COMPONENTS • Buffered Bike Lanes • Pedestrian Bulb Outs and Transfort Stops • Rain Garden (University Center for the Arts) • Signalized Intersection Conversions 3.e Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 5 REMINGTON CROSS SECTION 3.e Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 6 REMINGTON AND LAKE Conversion from 4-way to 2-way Stop 3.e Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 7 PROJECT COMPONENTS Rain Garden – Storm Water Quality 3.e Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 8 REMINGTON AND PITKIN Conversion from Signals to 4-way Stop 3.e Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 9 REMINGTON AND ELIZABETH Conversion from Signals to 4-way Stop 3.e Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 10 REMINGTON AND LAUREL Conversion from Signals to Mini Roundabout 3.e Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 11 REMINGTON AND LAUREL Landscape Rendering 3.e Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 12 PROJECT SCHEDULE • Advertise for Construction – April, 2015 • Start Construction – May, 2015 • Construction Duration of 8-10 Weeks • Coordination with CDOT US 287 (College Avenue) Resurfacing Project 3.e Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini 13 Questions? Contact Information: Tim Kemp Civil Engineer III tkemp@fcgov.com 970-416-2719 3.e Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Remington Roundabout Engineering Presentation (2985 : Remington - Laurel Mini Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 1 STAFF REPORT March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DESIGNATION AS A FORT COLLINS LANDMARK, 408-410 LINDEN STREET, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE STAFF Josh Weinberg, City Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request to determine the eligibility of the property at 408-410 Linden Street to qualify as a Fort Collins Landmark, pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code APPLICANT: Kim Szidon, Ranch-way Feeds OWNER: Jesse Godinez RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission determine the building at 408-410 Linden Street to not qualify to be eligible for individual designation as a Fort Collins Landmark pursuant to Sections 14-1 and 14-5 of the Municipal Code, based on the findings of the February 2015 survey report by Jason Marmor of RETROSPECT. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND: The property at 408-410 Linden Street contains a brick dwelling, constructed around 1906/7. The eligibility of this property was initially reviewed by the Landmark Preservation Commission in March 2002 as part of the Old Fort Site Survey. At that time, the field determination was that this property was not eligible for individual landmark designation; however, the Landmark Preservation Commission determined the building to be individually eligible, for its historical associations with prominent early-20th century rancher and dairyman, George H. Wilcox. In January 2015, staff received a request to have the building’s eligibility evaluated. Because determinations of eligibility made prior to 2014 are good for just one year, the property requires that a new determination be made. To accompany the new determination, the property was re-surveyed. The survey historian has found additional information that indicates the property is likely not individually eligible for Landmark designation. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has analyzed the February 2015 report by Jason Marmor of RETROSPECT, which evaluates the building at 408-410 Linden Street. Many pieces of new information have been included in this report, which indicate the historical associations between the building and George Wilcox are more tenuous than previously thought. This new information includes: George Wilcox and his wife only lived in the house for a few years, from around 1907 to about 1913, which was after the period Wilcox was active in the dairy business, bringing into question the integrity of association; the substantial alterations the building has undergone after its period of significance, further obscuring the building’s association with Wilcox, and which adversely affect the building’s integrity of materials, 4 Packet Pg. 60 Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 2 design and workmanship; and the impacts densification and changes in the surrounding area has had on the property’s integrity of setting and feeling. Thus, staff finds the report successfully argues that the building does not qualify for individual designation as a Fort Collins Landmark. COMMISSION ACTION: Motion finding that the building does not qualify for individual Landmark designation: The Landmark Preservation Commission finds that the building at 408-410 Linden Street does not qualify for individual designation as a Fort Collins Landmark pursuant to Sections 14-1 and 14-5 of the Municipal Code, based upon the findings of the February 2015 survey report by Jason Marmor of RETROSPECT that support the building’s lack of association and integrity. Motion finding that the building does qualify for individual Landmark designation: The Landmark Preservation Commission finds that the building at 408-410 Linden Street does qualify for individual designation as a Fort Collins Landmark pursuant to Sections 14-1 and 14-5 of the Municipal Code, based upon its significance under Standard 2 for its association with prominent early-20th century rancher and dairyman, George H. Wilcox; and that the building retains a preponderance of the seven aspects of integrity. RELEVANT CODE PROVISIONS: Section 14-1 of the Municipal Code, “Definitions,” states: “Eligibility shall mean a resource’s ability to meet one (1) or more of the standards for designation as a Fort Collins landmark, or the criteria for designation on the National and/or State Register of Historic Places. There are three (3) levels of eligibility for designation: individual, contributing to a district, and noncontributing/not eligible.” “Exterior integrity shall mean the ability of a property to convey its significance. To be designated as a landmark, a property must not only be shown to be significant, but also must have exterior integrity. The degree of integrity required for landmark status is relative to a property’s significance. Exterior integrity is the composite of seven (7) aspects or qualities, which in various combinations define integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The more qualities present in a property, the higher its integrity. Ultimately the question of exterior integrity is answered by whether or not the property retains the identity for which it is significant. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure, and style of a property. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. Materials are the physical elements that form a historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, or site. Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property’s historic character. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property 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 Packet Pg. 61 Agenda Item 4 Item # 4 Page 3 Section 14-5, “Standards for determining the eligibility for designation of sites, structures, objects, and districts for preservation,” states: “Properties that possess exterior integrity are eligible for designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts if they meet one (1) or more of the following standards for designation: (1) The property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; or (2) The property is associated with the lives of persons significant in history; or (3) The property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (4) The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.” ATTACHMENTS 1. 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (PDF) 2. 2002 410 Linden Site Form (PDF) 3. March 13 2002 LPC Minutes (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 62 I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5LR.10308 2. Temporary resource number: N/A 3. County: Larimer 4. City: Fort Collins 5. Historic building name: George Wilcox House 6. Current building name: Godinez House 7. Building address: 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 8. Owner name and address: Dorothy Godinez 3000 Conestoga Court Fort Collins, CO 80526-2649 II. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 9. P.M. 6th Township 7N Range 69W NE ¼ of SE ¼ of SW ¼ of NW ¼ of section 12 10. UTM reference Zone 13; 493930 mE ; 4493080 mN 11. USGS quad name: Fort Collins, CO Year: 1960; Photorevised 1984 Map scale: X 7.5' 15' 12. Lot(s): Part of Lots 12, 14, 1nd 16 Block: 1 Plat: Fort Collins Original Townsite Year Platted: 1873 13. Boundary Description and Justification: The site boundary corresponds to the recorded legal description/ parcel limits, comprising the northeasterly portion of three contiguous lots (12, 14, and 16) in Block 1. The parcel thus defined (Larimer County Parcel No. 97122-09-002) is 31.5 feet wide fronting on Linden Street, and 105 feet deep. The parcel has a rectangular boundary and encompasses 3,307 square feet (0.076 acre) of land. The historic boundary encompasses all features associated with historic use of the property. III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Rectangular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length: 59 ft. x Width: 26 ft. 16. Number of stories: 2.0 17. Primary external wall material(s): Brick 18. Roof configuration: Hipped with gables Official eligibility determination (OAHP use only) Date ____________ Initials ________________ ______ Determined Eligible- NR ______ Determined Not Eligible- NR ______ Determined Eligible- SR ______ Determined Not Eligible- SR ______ Need Data ______ Contributes to eligible NR District ______ Noncontributing to eligible NR District OAHP1403 Rev. 9/98 COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Architectural Inventory Form 4.a Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 19. Primary external roof material: Asphalt/Composition shingles 20. Special features: Porch, chimney 21. General architectural description: The property contains two buildings: a 1½ story, Late Victorian- style multi-gabled brick home with visible alterations, as well as what appears to be an unused detached garage located behind the dwelling. The house rests on a concrete foundation, and is a rectangular-plan building covered by a steeply- pitched hip roof clad with shake shingles, with large gables placed on the façade and on both side elevations (NE or SW). These gables are steeply-pitched, have returning eaves and faces coated with stucco, and each contains a tall, 1/1 double-hung window covered by a wrought-iron bar security grate. The central portion of the dwelling’s main roof has been raised and covered with a very low-pitched peaked roof, the exposed sides of which are clad with galvanized sheet metal. The house’s exterior walls are constructed of pressed red brick laid in stretcher bond. The original window and door openings appear to have been fitted with dressed buff-colored sandstone lintels and sills. The façade features a full-width enclosed front porch with a brick closed rail. The front porch rests on a concrete footer, and its half-hipped roof is covered with composition rolled roofing. The centrally-placed porch entry is flanked on both sides by identical triple sets of 1/1 light windows. The upper portion of the façade is dominated by a large gable offset to the left. This gable contains a tall, narrow 1/1, double-hung window covered by a wrought-iron security grate. To the right of this large gable is a narrow gabled dormer containing a doorway that is accessed via a wooden stairway ascending from the front yard. The left, or northeast elevation is fenestrated with two similar 3-part windows, each consisting of a large fixed central pane flanked by narrow, 1/1 light, double-hung windows. Further back toward the rear are two smaller windows, including a tiny, fixed 1-light window, and another, small 1/1 light double-hung unit. The rear portion of this side elevation juts out slightly. A large gable similar to the gable on the façade is placed on the northeast elevation, and features cornice returns as well as a tall, narrow 1/1 light, double-hung window set into the stuccoed gable face. The window on this gable is equipped with a modern wrought-iron bar security grate. The right, or southwest elevation is partially obscured from view due to its close proximity to the adjacent restaurant building (400-404 Linden/El Burrito Restaurant). Features observed on this elevation include a large stucco-clad gable with returning eaves and narrow double-hung 1/1 window. Towards the back of the house is a large, non-original, crude hipped dormer containing a ribbon of three 1 x 1 light, sliding sash or fixed windows. The dormer roof is clad with composition rolled roofing. The first floor level of the southwest elevation is fenestrated with at least two windows placed between massive, buff-colored sandstone sills and lintels. Two plain red brick chimneys exit the peak of the roof, straddling the ridge line. Attached to the back end of the house is a wide, one-story, wood frame, enclosed rear porch that is clad with horizontal wood drop siding; this rear porch is possibly an addition. An entry is located on the left, or northeast side of the rear porch, sealed by a painted wooden door containing decoratively carved inset panels. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 4.a Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 23. Landscaping or special setting features: This house is situated in a small mixed-use area near the Cache la Poudre River and “Old Town” Fort Collins, in the general vicinity where a U.S. cavalry post named Camp Collins was occupied between 1864 and 1867. The house is the only residential building located on the southeast side of the 400 block of Linden Street, and faced a row of small wood frame, brick, and stone single family dwellings on the northwest side of the street. The property is located directly adjacent to a one story stuccoed restaurant building. The house and outbuilding occupy a diminutive lot, with very small front and back yards. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: Located directly behind the dwelling is an old, rectangular-plan, wood frame outbuilding clad with stamped sheet metal simulating masonry. The building is covered by a corrugated sheet metal-clad gable roof. The structure is not fully visible due to vegetation, but appears to be an unused detached garage. IV. ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY 25. Date of Construction: Estimate: 1906 Actual: Source(s) of information: The first city directory listing for this property was in 1907. 26. Architect: Unknown Source(s) of information: No information found (note: This address is not listed in a list of architectural projects completed by prominent architect Montezuma Fuller in Fort Collins (Bacon 1979). 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source(s) of information: NA 28. Original owner: George H. and Rose Wilcox Source(s) of information: Ansel Watrous, History of Larimer County, Colorado (Fort Collins: The Courier Printing & Publishing Company, 1911), p. 470. 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): According to the Larimer County Assessor, this house was built in 1900, and civil engineer W.C. Willitts’ map of Fort Collins verifies that the house was not built prior to 1894. The exact construction date for this house has not been determined with certainty, due in part to the lack of Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map coverage for the area where this property is situated, as well as lack of complete pre-1907 city directory data for Fort Collins. The first clear city directory entry for this address was in 1907, when the Wilcox family was living in the house. Several building permits for this property are on record for the period 1920-1949, including a building permit in December 1936 (#4548) for unspecified “remodeling.” This (c. 1936-37) remodeling episode may have added the gable to the roof as well as the large southwest side dormer. Other building permits from the 1920s-1940s include a permit issued to C.W. Cliffton (#6422) in November of 1940 to build a work shop building on the property for an estimated cost of $150. Then, in August of 1949, a permit (#11,356) was issued to Solome M. Vigil to “remodel basement.” The associated detached garage was probably built prior to 1930. 30. Original location ___X____ Moved _______ Date of move(s): N/A V. HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS 31. Original use(s): Residential – Single Family Dwelling) 4.a Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 32. Intermediate use(s): Residential - Multi-Unit Dwelling 33. Current use(s): Unknown 34. Site type(s): Single dwelling 35. Historical background: This handsome brick house was probably built around 1907 to serve as the home of George H. Wilcox and his wife Rose. Wilcox was a successful dairy rancher, who, according to Larimer County historian Ansel Watrous, championed the use of alfalfa as cattle feed and owned a “splendid herd of selected dairy animals,” mainly consisting of Holstein cattle. George Wilcox was born in Iowa in 1856, and married Rose Webber in Ouray, Colorado in 1893. He later relocated to Fort Collins where he achieved success in the dairy business. By 1913, George and Rose Wilcox had moved to 226 Elm Street, and rancher Max Orenstein and his wife Eva moved into their Linden Street house. It is possible that the Wilcoxes chose to relocate after the Union Pacific Railroad established a new rail line nearby, paralleling Riverside Avenue/Jefferson Street, resulting in a drastic change of character in this part of Fort Collins. The Orensteins were replaced around 1918 by yet another retired rancher named Arthur Tittman, who occupied the house with his wife Nellie until the early 1920s. By 1925 the Tittmans had relocated to another residence in Fort Collins, at 503 S. Howes Street. The Linden Street home may have been acquired in the 1920s by John E. Anderson, whose name is listed on building permits for this address into the 1940s. Subsequent occupants/tenants of this house include laborer Albert Wickham and his wife Lottie in the late 1920s, followed by Alvin and Edna Sandmann in the early 1930s. The Sandmanns appeared to have been a retired couple, while a son who also lived in the house, W.F. Sandmann, was employed as a carpenter. By 1936, during the Great Depression, the Sandmanns had been replaced by truck driver Walter H. Gabriel and his wife Gladys. The Gabriels’ tenure was short, and by 1938 the home was inhabited by laborer Walter J. Schildknecht and his wife Lydia. By the late 1940s the house and the adjoining property had been acquired by Solome M. (“Sam”) Vigil, who opened a bar called “Sam’s Place” in the building now occupied by the El Burrito Restaurant. Sam Vigil’s wife, Mary, worked at the nearby Seder and Son Molded Products Company, at 300 North College Avenue. In 1960, following the death of Sam Vigil, the property, including this house, was sold to Jesse, Willie, and Augustina Godinez. The Godinez family opened a Mexican restaurant next door (the El Burrito Restaurant), and apparently used this house for some time as a residence. It appears that Jesse Godinez lived here until c. 1972, and that his mother, Augustina, continued to live at this address until her death in 1991. Sometime after the Godinez family acquired the house they remodeled it to enclose the porch and to convert the upper floor of the building into a second dwelling unit (#408 Linden Street) with a separate exterior entrance on the façade. The present use of the building is unknown, although it is still in the possession of the Godinez family. The property was initially recorded as a historical resource in July of 2001, when it was included in an intensive-level cultural resources survey of the “Old Fort Site” area for the City of Fort Collins’ Advance Planning Department. At that time, this historic house was designated as site # 5LR.10308. The property is located in an area that is subject to ongoing revitalization including new building construction projects, streetscaping, etc. 4.a Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 36. Sources of information: City of Fort Collins Building Permits Log Book, 1920-1949 1935 Entry dated July 27, 1935 for Building Permit # 4014 to “Reshingle house” at 408 Linden Street, issued to owners John E. Anderson and son. 1936 Entry dated December 26, 1936 for Building Permit # 4548 for “Remodeling” at 410 ½ Linden Street, issued to owners John O. and John E. Anderson. 1940 Entry dated November 23, 1940 for Building Permit # 6422 for a “Work Shop” at 410 Linden Street, issued to owner C.W. Clifton. 1949 Entry dated August 17, 1949 for Building Permit # 11356 to “Remodel basement” at 410 Linden Street, issued to owner Solome M. Vigil. Fort Collins City Directories, for the years 1902-1904, 1906-1911, 1913-1914, 1917, 1919, 1925, 1927, 1929, 1931, 1933-1934, 1936, 1938, 1940, 1948, 1950, 1952, 1954, 1956-1957, 1960, 1962-1964, 1966, 1968-1973, 1975-1976, 1979, 1981, 1983-1991, from the collection of the Fort Collins Local History Archive. Larimer County Assessor 1948 Property Record Card for 408-410 East Oak Street (Parcel No. 97122-09-002). 1970 Property Record Card for 408-410 East Oak Street (Parcel No. 97122-09-002). 2015 Property information record for 408-410 East Oak Street, Fort Collins (Parcel No. 97122- 09-002). Accessed online, February 13, 2014. Marmor, Jason D. 2002 Historical Contexts for the Old Fort Site, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1864-2002. Report prepared for the City of Fort Collins Advance Planning Department by Entranco, June 2002. 2002 A Cultural Resources Inventory of the Old Fort Site, Fort Collins, Colorado. Report prepared for the City of Fort Collins Advance Planning Department by Entranco, June 2002. 2001 Colorado Cultural Resource Survey-Architectural Inventory Form (OAHP #1403) for 5LR.10308, the George Wilcox House, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins. Prepared by Balloffet-Entranco for the City of Fort Collins Advance Planning Department for the Old Fort Site Cultural Resources Survey Project. Watrous, Ansel 1911 The History of Larimer County. Fort Collins: Courier Printing & Publishing Company. 4.a Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO VI. SIGNIFICANCE 37. Local landmark designation: Yes ______ No ___X____ Date of designation: N/A Designating authority: N/A 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: ______ A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; ______ B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; ______ C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or ______ D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. ________ Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) ___X____ Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: NA 40. Period of significance: NA 41. Level of significance: National NA State NA Local NA 42. Statement of significance: The single family dwelling located at 408-410 Linden Street in Fort Collins was built in the first decade of the twentieth century, during a period of unprecedented population growth and an architectural building boom due to the establishment (in 1903) of a new beet sugar refining plant on the outskirts of town. However, unlike many homes built for the influx of sugar factor workers and others, including employees of the railroads and Colorado Agricultural College (now Colorado State University), this property was evidently and coincidentally built as an urban retirement home for dairy farmer George H. Wilcox and his wife Rose. Aging farmers and ranchers often moved to town for comfort and convenience after either selling their agricultural properties, or handing them over to younger members of their families. However, this pattern is not of sufficient historical importance for the property at 408-410 Linden Street to qualify for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A. The Wilcox’s retirement house in Fort Collins was only inhabited by them for a few years after they quit farming, and does not reflect the success they achieved in the dairy business. Consequently, the Linden Street house does not qualify for the NRHP under Criterion B. The Wilcox House was originally a typical example of a relatively plain, 1½ story Late Victorian dwelling in Fort Collins; however, its architectural integrity has been greatly diminished by a number of substantial alterations (see #43, below). Due to poor integrity, the property cannot qualify as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP under Criterion C. For similar reasons of poor integrity and lack of important associations, the house at 408-410 Linden Street would not qualify for designation as a Fort Collins Local Landmark. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: This house exhibits multiple major alterations that have impacted its architectural integrity. These changes include: 1) the raising of 4.a Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO the central portion of the upper story roof, and covering it with a very low-pitched front gable roof; 2) the addition of an upper story access vestibule on the façade, in the form of a gabled dormer equipped with a door, and an associated exterior stairway with landings constructed of dimension lumber and placed adjacent to the façade; 3) enclosing of the formerly open front porch as shown on Larimer County Assessor’s photo from 1948 (attached); and the addition of stucco to the gable faces as well as wrought-iron bar security grates added to windows in these gables. As a result of all of these alterations, which, based on historic photographs (attached) appear to post-date the 1960s, the house at 408-410 Linden Street no longer retains integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. Also, land use changes to the surrounding area of the “Old Fort Site” as well as an apparent change of use of this particular property (from single family housing to multi-family housing and now possibly to non-domestic use) have also caused the significant diminishment of the house’s integrity of feeling and association. Unfortunately, the cumulative loss of integrity precludes the property from qualifying for the NRHP or for designation as a City of For Collins Local Landmark. VII. NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT 44. National Register (individual) eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not (Individually) Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes _ No X Discuss: The area where this property is situated contains a mix of industrial, commercial, and residential properties that do not share a significant historical context. If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing ___Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing ___Noncontributing VIII. RECORDING INFORMATION 47. Photograph numbers: 5LR.10308-1 through 20 Negatives or digital photo files filed at: City of Fort Collins, Development Review Center (Current Planning) - Historic Preservation, 281 N. College Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80524 48. Report title: NA 49. Date(s): February 25, 2015 50. Recorder(s): Jason Marmor 51. Organization: RETROSPECT 52. Address: 936 Wild Cherry Lane, Fort Collins, CO 80521 53. Phone number(s): (970) 219-9155 History Colorado - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 4.a Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO Location of 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins (5LR.10308), shown on a portion of the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5’ Fort Collins, Colorado topographic quadrangle map (1960; Photorevised 1984). 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308) • 4.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO Linden Street Willow Street N El Burrito Restaurant 408-410 Linden Street Dorothy Godinez House and outbuilding Poudre Feed & Supply Co. Grain Elevator 4.a Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 1948 Larimer County Assessor’s Photograph of 410 Linden Street (Source: Fort Collins Local History Archive) Photo of 410 Linden Street, taken in the 1960s (note cars) (Source: Fort Collins Local History Archive) 4.a Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 1. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking southeast. 1. House at 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), adjacent to the El Burrito Restaurant, looking east. 4.a Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 2. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking east-southeast. 3. Distant view of 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), looking southeast. 4.a Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 4. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), looking southeast. 5. Façade/northwest elevation of house at 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking southeast. 4.a Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 6. Northeast elevation of house at 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking southwest. 7. Stairs to upstairs entry and other alterations to 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), facing southeast. 4.a Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 8. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), close-up of stucco-clad gable on facade. 9. Rooftop entry on front of house, accessing upper story living space designated as 408 Linden Street. 4.a Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 10. Stairway to upper story living unit (408 Linden Street) and attached to building’s façade. 11. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking south showing northeast elevation. 4.a Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 12. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking south. 13. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), close-up of stucco-clad gable on northeast elevation. 4.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 14. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), rear portion of northeast elevation showing windows with dressed sandstone sills and lintels. 15. Close-up of sandstone-trimmed windows on NE elevation of house at 408-410 Linden Street. 4.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 16. Chimney on roof of house at 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308). 17. 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), showing stamped sheet-metal clad outbuilding in rear, looking south. 4.a Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Architectural Inventory Form 5LR.10308, 408-410 Linden Street, Fort Collins, CO 18. Closer view of metal-clad outbuilding behind house at 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308). 19. Rear of 408-410 Linden Street (5LR.10308), view looking southeast. Arrow points to sheet metal- clad outbuilding behind house. 4.a Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: 408-410 Linden-Site Form - 2015 (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.b Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: 2002 410 Linden Site Form (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.c Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: March 13 2002 LPC Minutes (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.c Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: March 13 2002 LPC Minutes (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.c Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: March 13 2002 LPC Minutes (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) 4.c Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: March 13 2002 LPC Minutes (2983 : Landmark Designation of 408-410 Linden Street) Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 1 STAFF REPORT March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 430 N. COLLEGE, POWER PLANT/ENGINES & ENERGY LAB - CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL REVIEW OF HOPPER DESIGN STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this item is to review the proposed design for the hopper, and either approve, approve with conditions, or deny, the application. APPLICANT: Jeff Jensen, JPL Development OWNER: City of Fort Collins; leased to CSU for its PowerHouse Energy Campus RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the project, finding that it does not meet all of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At its February 25, 2015 Regular Meeting, the landmark Preservation Commission tabled this item to this meeting, in order to receive additional information for its consideration, including the minutes of previous reviews pertaining to the hopper and the wind turbines. This information is provided as attachments to this item. The historic Power Plant Building, located at 430 North College Avenue, was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark in September 1987 by Ordinance No. 121, 1987. The building was recently rehabilitated, and an addition built, for use as CSU's Powerhouse Energy Campus. The rehabilitation involved several meetings with the Landmark Preservation Commission during 2011 and 2012 on the character of the addition and rehabilitation of the historic building. As part of the design, it was discussed that wind turbines resembling the original smoke stacks could be installed on the building, and that the coal hopper could be recreated and used for signage. The design team has now submitted plans for the wind turbine and hopper. These turbine plans were reviewed by the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services (CDNS), under the Administrative Approval Process for designated properties (Municipal Code Section 14-49). The wind turbines closely match the design conceptually approved by the Commission in 2012, and the application was approved by the CDNS Director. The design team is now submitting an application for the hoppers, for review by the Commission under Section 14- 46, "Work requiring a Building Permit." The application proposes converting the hopper into a greenhouse through the installation of several translucent panels. Except for the translucent panels, the design mimics the size, scale, location and similar materials that were used for the original coal hopper. Section 14-48 provides the criteria by which alterations and additions to designated Landmark properties are reviewed; these are included in your packet. 5 Packet Pg. 95 Agenda Item 5 Item # 5 Page 2 Upon review, staff feels that the proposal to add translucent panels to the hopper significantly changes the appearance of the designated Landmark building, and confuses the historical purpose of the hopper. Staff believes that this proposal would not comply with Rehabilitation Standard 3, which states, "Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken." ATTACHMENTS 1. Original Power Plant Rendering-photo (PDF) 2. LPC Wind Stack Submittal 2.10.15 (DOCX) 3. Rendering With Non Windowed Hopper (DOCX) 4. Rendering With Windowed Hopper (DOCX) 5. Applicant Photos presented at Feb 25 Meeting (DOCX) 6. 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (PDF) 7. 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (PDF) 8. Neenan LPC Presentation - Coal Hopper (PDF) 9. Neenan LPC Presentation - Photo (PDF) 10. 430 N. College - Photo from College Ave (DOCX) 5 Packet Pg. 96 5.a Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Original Power Plant Rendering-photo (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy February 10, 2015 Karen McWilliams Historic Preservation Planner City of Fort Collins RE: Engines and Energy Conservation Laboratory (EECL) SUBJ: Wind Stack & Hopper Design Submittal Dear Ms. McWilliams: Please see the attached design documents for the Wind Stack and Hopper elements at the recently remodeled Energy and Engines Conservation Laboratory (EECL), now known at the Powerhouse Energy Campus located at 430 South College. As you may know the original building included a coal hopper that was used to store coal for the power plant. Our design team has mimicked the size, scale, location and similar materials that were used for the original coal hopper. The intent of this submittal is for the Historic Preservation Commission to consider the addition of translucent panels at the hopper. In lieu of creating a non-usable element to the historic facility, the user would like to utilize the hopper as a functioning greenhouse in the near future; thus the addition of the translucent panels to allow natural daylight into the hopper. Please see the attached hopper drawings that depict the new hopper. Feel free to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jeff Jensen JPL Development CC: Nancy Hurt - CSURF 5.b Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: LPC Wind Stack Submittal 2.10.15 (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Rendering With Non Windowed Hopper 5.c Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Rendering With Non Windowed Hopper (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Rendering With Windowed Hopper 5.d Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Rendering With Windowed Hopper (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Agenda Item #1 - 430 N. College, Photo 1 5.e Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Applicant Photos presented at Feb 25 Meeting (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Agenda Item #1 - 430 N. College, Photo 2 5.e Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Applicant Photos presented at Feb 25 Meeting (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Agenda Item #1 - 430 N. College, Photo 3 5.e Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Applicant Photos presented at Feb 25 Meeting (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & 5.f Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Hopper 5.f Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Hopper 5.f Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Hopper 5.f Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Hopper 5.f Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: 2011 April 13 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - Conceptual and Final Review of Hopper 5.g Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.g Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: 2012 June 20 LPC Minutes (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab - 5.h Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Neenan LPC Presentation - Coal Hopper (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & 5.i Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Neenan LPC Presentation - Photo (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Energy Lab 430 N. College – View looking to the northeast from College Ave. 5.j Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: 430 N. College - Photo from College Ave (3008 : 430 N. College, Power Plant/Engines & Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 1 STAFF REPORT March 11, 2015 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 301 SOUTH LOOMIS AVENUE - STATE TAX CREDIT PART 2 STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Final Review — Part 2 State Tax Credit Review for Roofing of the David E. Watrous House and Garage, 301 South Loomis Avenue APPLICANT: Chester Daniel OWNER: Chester Daniel Trust RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the application complies with the requirements of the State Tax Credit for Historic Preservation, and recommends approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORITY: The Colorado Tax Credits for Historic Preservation Program provides a tax incentive of 20% to property owners of designated historic properties for work that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. One of the optional duties that may be performed by a Certified Local Government is the local review and approval of these State Tax Credit applications. Alternatively, applications may be reviewed by History Colorado. Work on designated landmarks may occur prior to submitting a State Tax Credit application, as long as it occurs after the designation is final. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS: The requirements to apply for the State Tax Credits are: the property must be at least 50 years old, and designated on the State Register or landmarked by a Certified Local Government; a minimum of $5,000 in costs must be incurred; the project work needs to be completed with 24 months of application; the Part 2 of the state tax credit application must be submitted within 60 days of the completion of the project; and the work must meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Some components of the overall work may be approved and others rejected; however, if a rejected component will or has had an adverse effect on the property’s integrity and/or could affect its eligibility, the entire application is usually rejected. PROJECT: The David E. Wartrous House and Garage was designated as a Fort Collins Landmark by Ordinance No. 028, 1997, adopted on February 18, 1997. The property was found to qualify for landmark status for its architectural and historical importance to Fort Collins. This State Tax Credit project involved re-roofing of the historic house and garage. REVIEW CRITERIA: The applicable criteria for State Tax Credit reviews are the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 6 Packet Pg. 119 Agenda Item 6 Item # 6 Page 2 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. MOTION: This is a Final Review for State Tax Credits. If the Commission finds that the work meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, it should adopt a motion stating that the Commission, as a reviewing entity under CRS Section 39-22-514, grants Part 2 State Tax Credit for Historic Preservation approval of the rehabilitation and restoration work on the David E. Watrous House and Garage at 301 South Loomis Avenue. If the Commission finds that any of the work fails to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, it should adopt a motion stating that the Commission does not approve that work, and state the reasons why. ATTACHMENTS 1. 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (DOC) 2. Farmers Insurance Statement (PDF) 3. Majestic Roofing Invoice (PDF) 4. House Nov 1996, showing skylights (PDF) 5. Garage Nov. 1996 (PDF) 6. Photos - Before (PDF) 7. Photo - Removing Old Roof (PDF) 8. Photos - After (DOCX) 6 Packet Pg. 120 Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation History Colorado Publication #1322c Instructions APPLICATION FOR COLORADO STATE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION Pursuant to House Bill 90-1033 (CRS 39-22-514) I N S T R U C T I O N S PART 1 -- PRELIMINARY APPROVAL Part 1 should be completed prior to start of a restoration, preservation or rehabilitation project for which a taxpayer requests a state income tax credit. (PLEASE NOTE: Work completed prior to obtaining preliminary approval may not qualify for the tax credit. Ask History Colorado for details.) The completed form should be sent to your local government if listed below or to History Colorado if your community is not listed: NOTE: (Please consult OAHP Publication #1568 for local government contact information) 1. PROPERTY INFORMATION. Provide the name and address, including street, city, county and zip code, as well as the legal description of the property. Provide the name of the historic district if the structure is located within a designated historic district. Be sure to specify both the general type of property -- personal, business or investment (rental), as well as the specific use -- residential, retail, wholesale/manufacturing, office, etc. 2. APPLICANT INFORMATION. Provide the name of the taxpayer filing the application. Include the required information for both business and residence as well as the taxpayer identification number or social security number of the applicant. If more than one taxpayer intends to claim the credit, include on a separate sheet the name, address and taxpayer ID number for all taxpayers intending to claim the credit. 3. OWNER INFORMATION. If the owner is someone other than the applicant, include this information. If it is the same, write "same." 4. PROJECT CONTACT. Specify the contact person for the project (may be applicant, owner, or a third party). 5. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION. Provide a brief description of the property. Include a description of the exterior and any significant interior details: number of stories, basic floor plan, construction materials and details. Also describe distinctive architectural features, such as hardware, woodwork and trim, stairways and fireplaces. 6. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUILDING. Provide photographs to adequately show all sides of the structure(s)as well as close up photographs showing details. Interior photographs are also required for any interior rehabilitation work that will be claimed for tax credit. Photos must be at least 3" x 5" and may be either black & white or color. 7. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REHABILITATION/PRESERVATION WORK. In the numbered blocks, provide a description of the project. A separate block should be used to describe work on a specific feature (use as many additional sheets as necessary). Describe each feature and include its present condition, then describe the proposed work and the impact to the feature. Include labeled and numbered photographs of each feature. Use as many blocks as needed to completely describe the entire project. Examples of such features are: stairways, windows, doors, roofing, chimneys, floors, exterior and interior finishes, major spaces, etc. Drawings, if available, must be keyed to the descriptions. All proposed work on the project must be described, whether or not it is a qualified cost for the credit. For example, neither additions nor landscaping costs are allowable for the credit, nevertheless proposed additions and Aspen, Aurora, Berthoud, Black Hawk, Boulder, Boulder County, Brighton, Carbondale, Castle Rock, Central City, Crested Butte, Cripple Creek, Denver, Durango, Erie, Fort Collins, Fort Lupton, Georgetown, Gilpin County, Golden, Greeley, Idaho Springs, Lake City, Littleton, Longmont, Manitou Springs, Pagosa Springs, Park County, Saguache, Steamboat Springs, Telluride, and Westminster. List current as of March 2013 If your community is not listed, send to: History Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1200 Broadway Denver, CO 80203 6.a Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation History Colorado Publication #1322c Instructions landscaping should be described. 8. COST ESTIMATE OF PROPOSED WORK. To the best of your knowledge, provide an estimate of the costs of the proposed work. List separate costs as closely as possible to the features described in No. 7 of this application; however, only qualified costs on qualified rehabilitation work need be itemized. In addition to providing the total for qualified costs, include an estimate of the total cost of the entire project, including the cost of work that does not qualify for the tax credit such as additions, landscaping, site work, architect fees, etc. 9. PROJECT STARTING DATE AND PROJECT COMPLETION DATE. The work must be completed in a 24- month period. 10. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE. Provide signatures of all taxpayers claiming the credit (use additional sheets if necessary). PART 2 -- FINAL APPROVAL Part 2 must be submitted within 60 days of the completion of the project. The completed form should be sent to your local government if listed below or to History Colorado if your community is not listed: NOTE: (Please consult OAHP Publication #1568 for local government contact information) 1 - 4. Other than the name of the property, which must be indicated, these sections should be completed only if the information varies from that provided in Part 1. Wherever the information is the same, write "see Part 1," but be sure to include all new or differing information (see Part 1 for instructions). 5. PROJECT STARTING DATE AND COMPLETION DATE. Provide accurate starting and completion dates of project under consideration. 6. PHOTOGRAPHS OF COMPLETED WORK. Provide numbered and labeled photographs documenting all completed work. The photographs should as clearly as possible show all features described in No. 7 in Part 1. Photographs of the completed features should closely duplicate the "before" photographs provided with Part 1. 7. PROJECT COSTS. Provide the actual costs of the completed project for all qualified costs. List costs as closely as possible to the categories used under No. 8 in Part 1. Provide the total of all qualified costs on qualified rehabilitation. Also provide the total cost of the project including non-qualified costs. 8. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE AND DATE. Provide a signature and date for all taxpayers claiming the credit. - If your community is not listed, send to: History Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1200 Broadway Denver, CO 80203 Aspen, Aurora, Berthoud, Black Hawk, Boulder, Boulder County, Brighton, Carbondale, Castle Rock, Central City, Crested Butte, Cripple Creek, Denver, Durango, Erie, Fort Collins, Fort Lupton, Georgetown, Gilpin County, Golden, Greeley, Idaho Springs, Lake City, Littleton, Longmont, Manitou Springs, Pagosa Springs, Park County, Saguache, Steamboat Springs, Telluride, and Westminster. List current as of March 2013 PLEASE NOTE: History Colorado recommends that all applicants consult CHS Publication 1322b (Colorado Historic Preservation Income Tax Credit) prior to completing this application. This publication contains information on: - Eligibility requirements for properties and taxpayers. - Required review fees and project time limits. - How to determine which costs are “qualified expenditures,” and how to claim the tax credit. - Frequently asked questions (FAQs) concerning the credit. 6.a Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit APPLICATION FOR COLORADO STATE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION Pursuant to House Bill 90-1033 (CRS 39-22-514) PART 1 -- PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 1. PROPERTY INFORMATION Name of Property David E. Watrous House and Garage Address 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins County Larimer Zip 80521 Name of Registered Historic District n/a Property Type: personal X business investment (rental) Use of Property: Current Residential After Rehabilitation Residential Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 278, Loomis Addition, Fort Collins 2. APPLICANT INFORMATION (taxpayer claiming the credit) Name Chester Lane Daniel Trust Type of Entity: Partnership: General Limited n/a Corporation: Regular Subchapter S n/a Limited Liability Company n/a Name of authorized company official (if applicant is not an individual): Business address: n/a City/Town State Zip Telephone ( ) Residential address: City/Town 301 South Loomis Avenue, Fort Collins State Colorado Zip 80521 Telephone (970 ) 402-5184 Taxpayer Identification Number (or Social Security Number): Applicant is: (check one) owner X tenant If more than one taxpayer intends to claim the credit, include on a separate sheet the name, address and taxpayer ID number for all taxpayers intending to claim the credit. 3. OWNER INFORMATION, if applicant is other than owner (if owner is applicant, write "same") Name Same Address City/Town State Zip 4. PROJECT CONTACT Applicant X Owner Other (specify below) Name Chester Daniel Address 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins State Colorado Zip 80521 Telephone (970 ) 402-5184 6.a Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit 5. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (see instructions) Constructed in 1907-1908, the David E. Watrous House is a vernacular Queen Anne residence. Built of red brick laid in running bond, the one-and-one-half story house, with partially above grade basement, sits upon a rough-cut stone foundation. Although the basic plan is rectangular, this house has an irregularly shaped appearance, due to the hipped roof with projecting gables, the inset angled entry, and the wrap-around front porch. A partial width, semi-circular wood porch leads to a corner entry. The hipped porch roof is supported by Doric columns. The house was constructed with a roof gable on each of the south, east and north elevations; in 1996, a gable was added on the rear (west) elevation. The three original gables have a one-over-one light window, with wood surrounds angled at the top to fit the shape of the gable, and contain an applied wood embellishment mimicking a keystone shape. The 1996 gable contains a pair of one-over-one light windows, without the embellishments. All have decorative shingles in the gable ends. Windows on the main level are predominantly one- over-one double hung, and sash and transom, with stone lintels and sills. A canted bay window is located on the north elevation. An early, enclosed wood frame rear porch is located on the west elevation. The historic one car garage is located at the rear of the property facing Loomis Avenue. Clad with drop siding, the wood frame building contains a square four-light window on the west elevation. The offset non-original garage door is located on the east elevation, and is accessed off the east-west running alley. Alterations include the aforementioned roof gable on the rear elevation, as well as two bubble/tubular skylights on the east and south elevations. At an unknown time after 1968, the wood wrap-around porch was altered, and its roof removed. Circa 1982, it was described in a survey as a concrete porch with decorative black wrought iron railing and supports. In 1991, the concrete porch was removed and the wood porch and its roof were reconstructed, with the design based upon historical photographic evidence. Since at least 1982, the home’s roof material has been asphalt shingle; the garage was re- roofed with asphalt shingles sometime in the late 1990s or early 2000s. Original Date of construction: 1907-1908 6. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY MUST BE INCLUDED (see instructions) (if drawings are available, they should also be included) 6.a Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit 7. DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION Architectural Feature Re-Roof House & Garage Describe feature and its condition: The house’s original wood shingle roof was removed sometime prior to 1987; a roofing permit issued that year described the composition shingle roof as “33 squares, 3 tab overlay.” The garage roof retained its wood shingle through 1996; sometime in the late 1990s or early 2000s, the garage roof was also replaced with composition shingles. The composition shingle roofs had endured numerous wind and hail storms, and heavy snows, and were in poor condition. Following a late spring hail storm, an insurance claim was filed in May 2014, at which time the roofs were found to be damaged beyond reasonable repair. Describe work/impact on feature: Both the house and garage roofs were replaced. The existing composition shingles and underlying wood shingles were removed. On the house, new decking replaced the skip sheathing, and the house was re- roofed with new Tamko Heritage 30 year warranty composition shingles, in Natural Timber, with 6 nails per shingle. A drip edge, attic ventilation, and ice and water guard were provided on the house. As required by the City of Fort Collins, the roof was installed to meet the manufacturer’s high-wind specifications. One existing reflective tube skylight was reset; two additional bubble skylights were replaced with less visible flat panel skylights. The garage roof was also replaced. The composition shingle roof was removed, and replaced with new 3- tab 30 year composition shingle roofing over 15 lb. felt, to match the house. A ridge cap, drip edge, and ice and water shield were installed. A non-historic shed roof was also replaced; as this is a non-contributing structure, the costs for the shed roof replacement are not part of the State Tax Credit application, and have been subtracted from the total cost. Architectural Feature Describe work/impact on feature: Describe feature and its condition: 1. 2. 6.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit 8. COST ESTIMATE OF PROPOSED WORK Itemized: House: $19,776.84 Garage: $ 1,682.86 Estimated total qualified costs: $21,459.70 Estimated total project cost: $21,611.84 9. PROJECT STARTING DATE May 28, 2014 PROJECT COMPLETION DATE October 20, 2014 10. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE I hereby apply for preliminary approval to proceed with the above described work for which I intend to claim a state income tax credit for historic rehabilitation. I attest that I am the property's owner or a qualified tenant with a lease of five or more years and that the information I have provided is, to the best of my knowledge, true and correct. I hereby agree to allow representatives of the Reviewing Entity access to the property as may be necessary and reasonable for the review and approval of this application. Name Date December 2, 2014 6.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit CERTIFICATIONS (for official use only) Name of Property The David Watrous House & Garage Applicant Chester Lane Daniel Trust The Reviewing Entity certifies that this property: is individually listed in the State Register of Historic Places. X is a local landmark designated by a certified local government. Fort Collins City Council, Ordinance No. 028, 1997 is located in a historic district that is: on the State Register of Historic Places locally designated by a certified local government; and this property contributes does not contribute to the significance of the district. is not listed in the State Register of Historic Places nor is it a local landmark designated by a certified local government. The Reviewing Entity has reviewed the application and: approves the application as submitted and grants preliminary approval authorizing the owner to proceed with the proposed work. approves the application with the conditions stated below and grants preliminary approval authorizing the owner to proceed with the work with the understanding that these conditions shall be met. rejects the application for the following reason(s): tables the application and requests the following additional information before the application will be reconsidered: Reviewing Entity: City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission March 11, 2015 (specify SHPO or name of CLG town) Date 6.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit APPLICATION FOR COLORADO STATE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION Pursuant to House Bill 90-1033 (CRS 39-22-514) PART 2 -- FINAL APPROVAL 1. PROPERTY INFORMATION Name of Property David E. Watrous House and Garage Address 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins County Larimer Zip 80521 Name of Registered Historic District Property Type: personal X business investment (rental) Use of Property: Current Residence After Rehabilitation Residence Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 278, Loomis Addition, Fort Collins 2. APPLICANT INFORMATION (taxpayer claiming the credit) Name Chester Lane Daniel Trust Type of Entity: Individual Partnership: General na Limited na Corporation: Regular na Subchapter S na Limited Liability Company na Name of authorized company official (if applicant is not an individual): Business address: City/Town State Zip Telephone ( ) Residential address: 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins State Larimer Zip 80521 Telephone (970) 402-5184 Taxpayer Identification Number (or Social Security Number): Applicant is: (check one) owner X tenant If more than one taxpayer intends to claim the credit, include on a separate sheet the name, address and taxpayer ID number for all taxpayers intending to claim the credit. 3. OWNER INFORMATION, if applicant is other than owner (if owner is applicant, write "same") Name Same Address City/Town State Zip Telephone ( ) 6.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit 4. PROJECT CONTACT Applicant X Owner Other (specify below) Name Daniel Chester Address 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins State Colorado Zip 80521 Telephone (970) 402-5184 5. PROJECT STARTING DATE May 28, 2014 PROJECT COMPLETION DATE October 20, 2014 6. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY MUST BE INCLUDED (see instructions) 7. PROJECT COSTS (See attached statement from Farmers Insurance and invoice from Majestic Roofing) Total qualified costs: $20,513.65 Total project cost: $21,553.13 8. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE I hereby attest that I am the property's owner or a qualified tenant with a lease of five or more years, that all work on this project has been completed and executed according to the proposed project description as stated in Part 1 and approved by the Reviewing Entity, and that all itemized costs are allowable to claim for tax credits under CRS 39-22-514 (12)(e)and(g). I hereby agree to allow representatives of the reviewing entity access to the property as may be necessary and reasonable for the final approval of the completed work. Name Date 6.a Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit CERTIFICATION (for official use only) Name of Property David E. Watrous House and Garage Applicant Chester Lane Daniel Trust The Reviewing Entity has reviewed this application and: X Approves the completed work Does not approve the completed work Returns the application and requests additional information as stated below before the application will be reconsidered. Other TOTAL APPROVED AMOUNT FOR REHABILITATION $20,513.65 Reviewing Entity: City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission March 11, 2015 (specify SHPO or name of CLG town) Date **** N O T I C E T O T A X P A Y E R **** DO NOT FILE THIS FORM WITH YOUR TAX RETURN 6.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) Colorado Historic Income Tax Credit VERIFICATION OF QUALIFIED NATURE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION EXPENDITURES (To Be Filed With Tax Return) QUALIFIED PROPERTY Name of Property David E. Watrous House and Garage Address 301 South Loomis Avenue City/Town Fort Collins County Larimer Historic District Name (if applicable) _____________________________________________________________________ TAXPAYER Colorado Taxpayer ID Number (or SSN) _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Name Chester Lane Daniel Trust Address 301 South Loomis Avenue Phone (970)402-5184 City/Town Fort Collins State Colorado Zip 80521 QUALIFIED COSTS AND AMOUNT OF TAX CREDIT Total Qualified Cost For Project _$20,513.65______________________________________ Maximum Tax Credit for Project__$4,103.00________________________________________ Maximum Tax Credit for this Taxpayer ___$4,103.00_____________________________________ PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: October 20, 2014 REVIEWING ENTITY Name City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission Authorized Official Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Program Manager Phone (970) 224-6078 Address City/Town Fort Collins State Colorado Zip 80521 I, the duly, authorized official of the above named Reviewing Entity, hereby verify that the above named property is a qualified property pursuant to CRS 39-22-514(12)(h) and that the completed qualified rehabilitation meets the provisions of CRS 39-22- 514(3)(a)(III)(A)(B)(C). By: Date (signature of official) 6.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: 301 S Loomis STC 1322c (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Farmers Insurance Statement (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.c Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Majestic Roofing Invoice (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.d Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: House Nov 1996, showing skylights (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 6.e Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Garage Nov. 1996 (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.f Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Photos - Before (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 6.g Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Photo - Removing Old Roof (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 301 South Loomis Street – House – After Photo (View to Northeast) 301 South Loomis Street – House – After Photo (View to South) 6.h Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Photos - After (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2) 301 South Loomis Street – House - After Photo 301 South Loomis Street – Garage – After Photo (View to South) 6.h Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Photos - After (3007 : 301 South Loomis Avenue - State Tax Credit Part 2)