The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/13/2019 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Work SessionMeg Dunn, Chair 281 N. College Ave. Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair Conference Room A Kristin Gensmer, Co-Vice Chair Fort Collins, Colorado Michael Bello Mollie Bredehoft Please note this is not the usual location. Members of the public must ring the “Meetings” doorbell at the northeast entrance to the building for someone to let them in after 5:00 p.m. Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Katie Paecklar Anna Simpkins Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government (CLG) authorized by the National Park Service and History Colorado based on its compliance with federal and state historic preservation standards. CLG standing requires Fort Collins to maintain a Landmark Preservation Commission composed of members of which a minimum of 40% meet federal standards for professional experience from preservation-related disciplines, including, but not limited to, historic architecture, architectural history, archaeology, and urban planning. For more information, see Article III, Division 19 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. 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. An audio recording of the meeting is available upon request. Work Session November 13, 2019 5:30 PM • CALL TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • REVIEW OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING TO BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2019 AT 5:30 P.M. IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONSENT 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of October 16, 2019 2. Report on Staff Design Review Decisions for Designated Properties DISCUSSION 3. Frank J. Ulrich Property, 516 Laporte Ave - Application for Fort Collins Landmark Designation 4. 612 S Howes – Development Review 5. Approval of Changes to the Landmark Preservation Commission Bylaws • BOARD TOPICS 1. Sustainability and the SOI Standards 2. LPC Work Plan - Action Items • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Landmark Preservation Commission AGENDA Packet Pg. 1 DATE: STAFF: November 13, 2019 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner WORK SESSION ITEM Landmark Preservation Commission SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Sustainability & Historic Preservation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a brief informational presentation regarding the intersection of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties and the “Triple Bottom Line” approach to sustainability that has been adopted by the City (as well as other government and preservation organizations). The presentation will emphasize environmental sustainability, will review some general concepts as well as some common applications and conflict points. Staff is seeking input from the Commission regarding future, more specific, presentations or development regarding sustainability issues and historic preservation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff PowerPoint Presentation Packet Pg. 2 Historic Preservation & Sustainability 1 Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission Work Session, November 13, 2019 Sustainability - Definitions • “Triple bottom line” approach •Social • Connect people with history • Consider owner/resident needs (rehabilitation) • Consider local knowledge & craftsmanship • Economic • Boosts to local job growth • Small business incubation • Environmental • Embodied energy • Reduce, reuse, recycle (in that order) 2 (National Park Service) 1 2 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 3 Preservation & Environment • Primary Literature • National Park Service • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability • LOTS of supporting Briefs, Bulletins, and Tech Notes • National Trust for Historic Preservation • The Greenest Building: Quantifying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse • Saving Windows, Saving Money: Evaluating the Energy Performance of Window Retrofit and Replacement • Realizing the Energy Efficiency Potential of Small Buildings 3 Planning Concepts & Strategies • Conduct an energy audit first (solve problems a building actually has) • Consider inherent energy efficiency of the building • Reuse of existing materials is generally more energy-efficient than replacement due to: • environmental costs of manufacture • durability of historic materials (especially pre-1950) • No such thing as “maintenance free” 4 Where Air Escapes From a House (by percentage) – Image based on data from Energy Savers, U.S. Department of Energy. Illustration: Blank Space LLC. 3 4 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 4 Common Conflict Points • Inappropriate solar collector installations • Wall insulation that • affects defining characteristics or finishes; • isn’t reversible; or • compounds maintenance issues. • Addition of non-historic daylighting features (skylights, dormers, new window openings) • Removal/replacement of character-defining features for energy efficiency • Doors & Windows • Siding 5 Dept. of Energy National Park Service National Park Service Embodied Energy • Buildings have two significant energy costs 1. Construction 2. Operations (lighting, heating, etc.) • Embodied energy includes full supply chain • Costs of raw material extraction • Costs of material manufacture/processing • Costs of transportation • Costs of physical construction • Best practice to consider demolition energy costs as well 6 Materials - Architectural 50% Materials - Utilities 20% Fuel & Transport 17% Business Services 11% Furnishings 1% Machinery 1% Typical Embodied Energy Distribution U.S. Dept. of Energy, Energy Use for Building Construction. 5 6 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 5 Energy – Embodied vs. Operating • Ratio of embodied energy vs. annual operating energy varies depending on building • 5:1 up to 30:1 • Historic buildings (especially pre-1950) often have bulkier, more durable materials in larger volumes (higher ratio). • A holistic approach can often result in a greater net environmental benefit than high-efficiency new construction. • Sensitive improvements can have a significant environmental benefit. • Best to target building envelope & utilities. • Improvements focused on material preservation can be cost-effective. 7 MIT Energy Initiative Historic Buildings & LEED • Historic buildings can perform well under LEED, especially v4. • Masonry buildings perform particularly well. • Usually requires some modifications, but typically compatible with SOI Standards. 8 Alliance Center in Denver LEED Gold (U.S. Green Building Council 7 8 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 6 Approaches – Passive Heat/Cool • Operational approach (low cost; labor intensive) • Use transoms, window layout, and site plan to effect energy goals • Trees shading windows and roof • Eaves • Reduce exterior hardscape (concrete, asphalt, etc.) • Minor modifications • Install an attic fan or ceiling fans 9 National Park Service Approaches - Insulation • Best cost-effective approach to energy performance • Start with attic, move to outside walls if necessary • RECOMMENDED: Batt foam or rigid foam (breathable & reversable) • NOT RECOMMENDED: blown-in fiberglass (permanent and can cause moisture build- up that is hard to detect) 10 National Park Service 9 10 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 7 Approaches – Windows - First • Weatherstripping & caulking • small gain but low cost and non-invasive • Insulate the frame • a significant amount of a window’s energy loss happens through the frame rather than the glass, especially if the seams are poorly insulated. 11 National Trust for Historic Preservation Windows - Second • Storm windows • Exterior (preferred – easier to provide proper ventilation/channeling for unit) • Interior (helpful where exterior storms are infeasible or would detract from character) • may require modifications to exterior sashes/casements • Modifications to historic windows • Add second pane (wood, single pane sashes or steel multi-light) • Insulate around window frame • Can seat dual glazing in many wood and metal window types with minimal modification 12 National Park Service 11 12 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 8 Windows – Third - Replacement • Replacement to dual-glaze only if deteriorated beyond repair • Best options depend on historic character • Wood or wood-clad • Metal • Quality of hermetic seal on new units varies greatly. • Rejection rate of new units can reach 25% • Some new wood units begin deteriorating within five years. •Vinyl • Seals are poorly suited to Colorado’s variable climate and fail quickly • Is a disposable product with a 15-20 year cycle in good conditions (increased cost to owner). • Often does not provide ROI to owner before replacement 13 National Park Service Daylighting • Allows more natural light, reduces electric use, and helps meet LEED performance measures. • Many historic buildings already provide this feature, depending on historic use • Skylights or dormers on secondary elevations. • Light tubes or light wells in inconspicuous places. • New window openings on secondary elevations. 14 National Park Service 13 14 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 9 Approaches – Solar Technology • PV and other panel/flat plate/tube collector systems • Usually can be accommodated but depends on: • roof slope • orientation • number of PV panels • Other solar tech is less proven in a preservation context • Solar roofing tiles • Window collectors 15 National Park Service Site Planning & Water Efficiency • Retain historic features that aid in stormwater management, such as green space/permeable surfaces. • Avoid paving up to a building foundation • Also affects building’s structural health • Consider bioswales, cisterns, etc., where appropriate 16 National Park Service 15 16 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 10 Substitute Materials - Issues • Siding • Vinyl, stucco, & metal accelerate moisture build-up and replacement schedules. • Windows • Even with compatible replacements, in most cases, replacement schedule is accelerated. • Usually, a combination of exterior storm windows with other features (insulating cellular shades, etc.) will be close to performance of new window at a fraction of the cost. • Roofing • Can have a significant influence on historic character • Only good solution for recyclability is metal, which has significant character issues • Asphalt has limitations on recycling • Solar collector options are not well-tested. • Integrity of materials and workmanship 17 National Park Service Approaches – Disposal & Deconstruction • Less established in historic preservation: What happens to materials when they do need disposed of? • At present, most is landfilled • Some can be recycled • Metal • Some types of wood/lumber (not fire-treated) • Limited deconstruction market 18 Deconstruction Mitigation for demolition of older structures not protected by historic status Embodied Energy/Embodied Carbon Waste Stream/Recycling Management Material Origin Stories: (Cultural Value) 17 18 BOARD TOPIC 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 11 DATE: STAFF: November 13, 2019 Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Planner WORK SESSION ITEM Landmark Preservation Commission SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION LPC Work Plan - Progress and Priorities EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Code requires all boards and commissions to file work plans on or before September 30 for the following year. According to the Boards and Commissions Manual, work plans should set out major projects and issues for discussion for the following year. The LPC adopted the attached 2019 work plan at its September 19, 2018 meeting, and the 2020 work plan at its October 16, 2019 meeting. Consideration of pending priorities associated with the work plan will be a regular work session discussion item. The regular recurrence of this discussion item is intended to provide the Commission with the opportunity to measure ongoing progress and identify action items. ATTACHMENTS 1. LPC 2019 Work Plan 2. LPC 2020 Work Plan Packet Pg. 12 BOARD TOPIC 2, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 13 BOARD TOPIC 2, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 14 City of ktColli� Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue DATE: TO: CC: P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134- fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM October 16, 2019 Susan Gutowsky, Council Liaison Darin Atteberry, City Manager Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk n,rfL,{>- FROM: Meg Dunn, Chair, Landmark Preservation Commission RE: Landmark Preservation Commission 2020 Work Plan Overview of the Landmark Preservation Commission (Est 1968): • Federally authorized Certified Local Government (CLG} since 1991. CLG status: o Authorizes LPC to administer state and federal preservation regulations, notably Section 106 Review and Compliance for all projects with federal licensing, permitting, or funding. Ex: MAX bus system, Linden Street improvements, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG}, flood mitigation, telecommunications. o Enables residents to participate in the 20% Colorado State Tax Credit program. o Provides a dedicated pool of grant funding: Fort Collins has received over $200,000 in CLG grants for training, surveys, building preservation, and community education and outreach. o Requires enforcement of appropriate state and local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties, consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards. o Requires on-going survey of historic resources. • Nine-member board, at least 40% of whom must have professional expertise in the fields of historic preservation, architectural history, architecture, archaeology, or closely related fields: o Commission professional expertise includes: Architecture (Nelson, Paecklar, Simpkins); Landscape Architecture (Bredehoft); Archeology (Gensmer); Finance (Bello); Historic Preservation (Murray, Wallace); and Education (Dunn). • Final decision-maker on: o Requests for alterations to properties designated on the National Register, Colorado State Register, and as Fort Collins Landmarks o Determinations of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation o Allocation of Landmark Rehabilitation Loan funds • Makes recommendations: o To Council on Fort Collins Landmark designations; o To the Colorado State Review Board on nominations to the National and State Register o To Decision Makers on compatibility of developments adjacent to historic properties • Advises Council on the identification and significance of historic resources, threats to their preservation, and methods for their protection • Advises Council and staff about policies, incentives and regulations for historic preservation. BOARD TOPIC 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 15 BOARD TOPIC 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 16 BOARD TOPIC 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 17