Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/2019 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Regular MeetingMeg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair City Hall West Kristin Gensmer, Co-Vice Chair 300 Laporte Avenue Michael Bello Fort Collins, Colorado Mollie Bredehoft 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. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:30 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php. Regular Meeting November 20, 2019 5:30 PM • CALL TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW o Staff Review of Agenda o Consent Agenda Review This Review provides an opportunity for the Commission and citizens to pull items from the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar be “pulled” off the Consent Agenda and considered separately.  Commission-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered before Discussion Items.  Citizen-pulled Consent Agenda items will be considered after Discussion Items. • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Landmark Preservation Commission AGENDA Packet Pg. 1 • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16, 2019. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the October 16, 2019 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. 2. REPORT ON STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS FOR DESIGNATED PROPERTIES Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. This item is a report of all such review decisions since the last regular meeting of the Commission. • CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW UP This is an opportunity for Commission members to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar. • PULLED FROM CONSENT Any agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by a Commission member, or member of the public, will be discussed at this time. • DISCUSSION AGENDA 3. FRANK J. ULRICH PROPERTY, 516 LAPORTE AVE - APPLICATION FOR FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property. APPLICANT: Dale Eggleston, Owner 4. 612 S HOWES – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DESCRIPTION: Proposed duplex addition to a historic property, 612 S Howes (the Anderson- Goff House, 1900). Site alterations would also include a five-stall parking pad on the alley side and a shared, improved courtyard between the old and new residences. The project would retain the existing residence without alterations and demolish the detached, non-contributing 1948 garage. APPLICANT: Stan Arnett, r4 Architects 5. APPROVAL OF CHANGES TO THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION BYLAWS The purpose of this item is to consider and approve changes to the bylaws for the Landmark Preservation Commission. • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT The Consent Agenda is intended to allow the Commission to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Agenda. Anyone may request an item on this calendar to be "pulled" off the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Agenda will be considered separately under Pulled Consent Items. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will be approved by Commission with one vote. The Consent Agenda consists of: ● Approval of Minutes ● Items of no perceived controversy ● Routine administrative actions Packet Pg. 2 Date: Roll Call Bello Bredehoft Dunn Murray Nelsen Paecklar Simpkins Wallace Gensmer Vote  absent  absent 7 present 1 & 2 - Consent - Minutes and Staff Design Review Report Bello Murray Dunn Paecklar Wallace Bredehoft Nelsen Simpkins Gensmer Yes Yes absent Yes Yes Yes absent Yes Yes 7:0 3 - 516 Laporte Designation Murray Dunn Paecklar Wallace Bredehoft Nelsen Simpkins Bello Gensmer Yes absent Yes Yes Yes absent Yes Yes Yes 7:0 4 - 612 S Howes Development Review approval Paecklar Wallace Bredehoft Nelsen Simpkins Bello Murray Dunn Gensmer Yes Yes Yes absent Yes Yes Yes absent Yes 7:0 5 - Updated Bylaws Wallace Bredehoft Nelsen Simpkins Bello Murray Dunn Paecklar Gensmer Yes Yes absent Yes Yes Yes absent Yes Yes 7:0 Roll Call & Voting Record Landmark Preservation Commission 11/20/2019 DATE: ---\ --( -'-- --JD----/ -CJ '---- LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Sign In Sheet THIS IS A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD Please contact Gretchen Schiager at 970-224-6098 or gschiager@fcgov.com if you inadvertently end up with it. Thank you! Landmark Preservation Commission Hearing Date: 11-20-19 Document Log (Any written comments or documents received since the agenda packet was published.) CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Draft Minutes for the LPC October Hearing 2. Staff Design Review Decisions Report DISCUSSION AGENDA: 3. 516 Laporte Landmark Designation • Updated Landmark Designation Application – replaced packet pgs 20-50 on 11-18-19 4. 612 S Howes Development Review • Updated landscape plans – replaced packet pgs 75-76 on 11-18-19 • LPC August 21, 2019 minutes excerpt – added to Supplemental Documents on 11-19-19 5. Bylaws EXHIBITS RECEIVED DURING HEARING: Item # Exhibit # Description: 4 A Photos of materials samples shown to the Commission Agenda Item 1 Item 1, Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY November 20, 2019 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Gretchen Schiager, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16, 2019 REGULAR MEETING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the October 16, 2019 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. LPC October 16, 2019 Minutes - DRAFT Packet Pg. 3 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 October16, 2019 Meg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair City Hall West Kristin Gensmer, Co-Vice Chair 300 Laporte Avenue Michael Bello Fort Collins, Colorado Mollie Bredehoft Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Katie Paecklar Anna Simpkins 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. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:30 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php. Regular Meeting October 16, 2019 Minutes • CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Bello, Bredehoft, Dunn, Gensmer, Nelsen, Paecklar, Simpkins ABSENT: Murray, Wallace STAFF: McWilliams, Bertolini, Yatabe, Schiager • AGENDA REVIEW Mr. Bertolini stated there were no changes to the posted agenda. Chair Dunn requested that the order of items 3 and 4 be switched. • STAFF REPORTS Mr. Bertolini reported on the History Colorado outreach meeting to be held on October 23, 2019. Landmark Preservation Commission ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 4 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 2 October16, 2019 • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2019. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 18, 2019 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. 2. STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES SINCE SEPTEMBER LPC MEETING Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. This item is a report of all such review decisions since the last meeting of the Commission. Ms. Paecklar moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda of the October 16, 2019 regular meeting as presented. Ms. Gensmer seconded. The motion passed unanimously. • DISCUSSION AGENDA [Secretary’s note: The order of items 3 & 4 was switched per Chair Dunn’s request.] 4. 249-261 S. COLLEGE AVENUE, ARMSTRONG HOTEL – REHABILITATION OF LEADED GLASS TRANSOM WINDOWS DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this item is to consider the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness regarding the rehabilitation of leaded glass transom windows at 249-261 S. College Avenue, the Armstrong Hotel. The transom windows have experienced deterioration since their 2005 restoration. The project would repair the windows and improve the interior storm window units. APPLICANT: CCC Armstrong, LLC Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the staff report. He stated this item relates to the transom window rehabilitation project at the Armstrong Hotel and provided historical information related to the hotel and windows. Mr. Bertolini stated the primary proposed solution is to install metal J supports inside the window frames with the intent to properly seat the leaded glass transoms in the window frames. Added bars and wiring are also planned for the storm units. Mr. Bertolini outlined the staff findings of fact. Applicant Presentation Mark Wernimont, Colorado Sash & Door, provided additional detail on the project. Public Input None. Commission Questions and Discussion Chair Dunn asked if the metal J support will be visible from the outside. Mr. Wernimont stated they will be fully encapsulated in the metal caps that are over the top of the units themselves. He stated the glass will be centered in the panel. Ms. Bredehoft asked how the glass would be supported. Mr. Wernimont responded. Ms. Nelsen asked about the faulty installation from 2005. Mr. Wernimont replied the frames did not support the weight of the leaded glass. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 5 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 3 October16, 2019 Commission Deliberation Mr. Bello moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the request for proposed rehabilitation of the leaded prismatic glass transoms for the Armstrong Hotel at 249-261 S. College Avenue as presented, finding that the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Ms. Gensmer seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 629 S HOWES – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - CONCEPTUAL DESCRIPTION: Construct ten new townhouse units and convert existing historic building into an additional housing unit at 629 S Howes in the Community Commercial Downtown Zone District. APPLICANT: Spencer Lindstrom, [au]workshop Ms. Nelsen recused herself from this item due to a potential conflict of interest. Staff Report Ms. McWilliams presented the staff report. She discussed the area of adjacency stating there are multiple historic resources within the 200-foot boundary; however, the historic resource on the site will be given more consideration. She stated this property connects two periods of significance: the first half of the 20th century and the second half. She discussed the criteria under which the property is eligible for historic designation. Ms. McWilliams discussed the proposed alterations to the property and stated staff has determined rehabilitation is the most appropriate treatment for the site. She detailed the proposed project to construct ten new townhouse units and convert the existing historic building into an additional housing unit. Ms. McWilliams noted this is a conceptual review and she outlined the role of the Commission. Applicant Presentation Spencer Lindstrom, [au]workshop, discussed the site and existing structure and detailed the proposed project. He discussed the compatibility of the proposed project with the neighborhood and outlined the project's compliance with the Secretary of the Interior standards. He stated he would like to have additional discussion related to building materials. Mr. Lindstrom discussed the project's goals of maintaining the 1905 aspects of the existing structure by removing the 1955 addition. He detailed possible options related to removing the addition as sensitively as possible noting there will be a plan of protection in place. Public Input None. [Secretary’s note: The Commission took a 5-minute break at this point and resumed the meeting at 6:53 pm.] Commission Questions and Discussion Mr. Bello asked if a restoration treatment might be appropriate rather than rehabilitation. Ms. McWilliams stated restoration is an option and explained what would be necessary in that approach. She noted removal of the rear porch would have an impact on a restoration. She explained that rehabilitation allows for more adaptive reuse than does restoration. Mr. Bello commented that there are two different historic periods to be considered and stated it makes sense to eliminate the front commercial addition to make the structure more compatible with the neighborhood. Chair Dunn stated the Commission must examine what makes the structure historic and determine the significance of the Geller Center to that history. Ms. Paecklar stated the brick that is under the addition should be restored and an intensive survey documenting the addition should occur if it is removed and the foursquare building is rehabilitated. Mr. Bello asked if the brick on the garage is the same as the brick on the house. Mr. Lindstrom replied in the negative. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 6 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 4 October16, 2019 Ms. Gensmer stated this decision hinges on the 1955 addition and the reasons the property is significant. Removing the addition would destroy any eligibility under the criterion related to the significance of the Geller Center. She stated she is unsure of there is enough historical context for the Geller Center to create significance. Ms. Bredehoft agreed more context is needed. Ms. Simpkins asked if the Geller Center sees this building as a significant part of its own history. Blake Carlson, property owner, stated he purchased the property from the Geller Center which did not seem to have much of an attachment to the building. He stated the Geller Center inhabited the foursquare as well and there is some element of preserving the Center with just preserving the foursquare. Mr. Bello asked if the project would be viable from a pro forma standpoint if the Commission determined the 1955 building needs to remain. Mr. Carlson replied that would greatly affect the project as the removal of the addition has been planned with all of the project iterations. He stated the addition does not seem historically valuable to him. Chair Dunn noted historic preservation relates to saving the history of the community, not just saving the attractive buildings. Ms. Paecklar stated the intensive survey would be helpful in making that decision. Chair Dunn noted that would be up to the applicant to complete prior to their next appearance before the Commission. Ms. Gensmer asked if the existing architectural inventory form is sufficient. Ms. McWilliams replied it would be best to complete a new form that details the Geller Center and its history in the community. Mr. Carlson stated he does not mind the idea of completing an intensive survey but would only do so if he felt the project would be denied without it. Chair Dunn noted he did not need to make a decision on that this evening. Ms. Paecklar stated the survey would help in the decision-making process and could provide enough detail and documentation about the structure that it would be okay to remove it. Chair Dunn stated The Geller Center is a significant part of this building's history and she would like to honor that. She discussed other possible ways to acknowledge the existence of the structure should it be removed. Ms. Simpkins suggested a name for the project could provide a nod to the history of the property. Chair Dunn summarized the Commission does not have enough information about the importance of the Geller Center and that a survey could help understand that. She requested staff contact the Geller Center staff to determine their feelings about the building and suggested the applicant consider mitigation ideas for providing visitors to the building a historical context of what was there. Mr. Bello stated he is not convinced this structure is the hallmark of the Geller Center. Chair Dunn replied that is what needs to be explored, noting it would be substantial if some type of movement first started in this addition in the 1960's. Mr. Lindstrom asked if an intensive survey would be needed by the Commission to make a decision about demolition of the addition. Chair Dunn replied having the information would be helpful as would some mitigation ideas that would work for the project. Ms. McWilliams noted historic preservation professionals are contracted to complete surveys and that may not be able to occur prior to the Commission's next meeting. Mr. Yatabe suggested the Commission decide what treatment is needed for the property in order to provide some direction to the applicant. Mr. Lindstrom confirmed they are not ready to submit a final application. Mr. Bello asked about the ultimate decision maker for this project. Mr. Yatabe replied the decision make would either be a hearing officer or the Planning and Zoning Board, either of which would examine the same standards and take into account a recommendation from the LPC. Mr. Bello asked if the decision maker could ultimately bar the applicant from removing the addition. Mr. Yatabe replied in the affirmative. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 7 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 5 October16, 2019 Chair Dunn asked if Commission members agree with staff that rehabilitation is the most appropriate treatment in this case. Ms. Simpkins replied it would depend on whether mitigation is going to be required for the addition, or if it is going to be ignored and the rehabilitation is going back to the 1905 structure. Chair Dunn suggested both options be considered. Ms. Paecklar stated the brick should be restored to the maximum extent feasible if the foursquare is going back to the 1905 date. Chair Dunn requested input on the windows. Mr. Bello stated there may not have been a door there originally. Ms. Paecklar asked if a specific pattern exists on the other side of the building. Mr. Lindstrom replied the relationship of all the windows is variable from side to side. Ms. Simpkins commented the windows are pretty stacked and stated there was probably a window on the addition side historically. Chair Dunn stated the window rather than the door would be most appropriate for 1905. Ms. Gensmer agreed and stated moving the stairs back to the front would activate the pedestrian walkway. Mr. Lindstrom asked what the Commission would recommend if the 1955 timeframe were utilized and the addition was allowed to be removed. Ms. Paecklar questioned the compatibility of the scale of the proposed patch materials to the materials on the addition. Mr. Lindstrom replied the original intent of the patch was not to reference the 1955 addition in materiality, but that could be examined. Ms. Paecklar stated the materials should relate to the addition. Mr. Bello stated adding some type of patch to the side of the foursquare diminishes its historic character. He suggested outlining the addition on the ground could be more appropriate. Mr. Lindstrom noted they will not know the condition of the brick until the addition is removed. Ms. Simpkins stated the use of a similar brick would be acceptable. Chair Dunn asked about the porch roof angle. Ms. Paecklar suggested it was likely hipped. Chair Dunn stated leaving the roof angle shows an addition once existed. Ms. Simpkins encouraged the connection to the front sidewalk be maintained. Chair Dunn asked for input about removing the back porch and garage. No members expressed any concerns. Chair Dunn suggested the possibility of reusing the garage brick somewhere on the property. Commission members and Mr. Lindstrom discussed the relationship between the new townhomes and the historic structure. Chair Dunn suggested the Commission consider massing under Section 3.4.7. Mr. Bello stated the brick should be moved from a massing standpoint and stated the bow window is recessed or inverted on different façades. Ms. Paecklar stated the bow window does not have the same dimensions as the window on the historic building which could lead to some confusion about the association. She also noted the bow window is on the side of the historic building rather than on the primary façade of the new building. Mr. Lindstrom replied the windows are different dimensions but have the same proportional relationship. Chair Dunn stated the inverted window is whimsical and interesting. Ms. Simpkins agreed. Ms. Gensmer stated the proposed placement of the brick helps with the massing and stated the 3-story height is a good transitional height. Regarding materials, Mr. Bello stated wrapping the lower level in brick could better associate the historic structure to the new buildings. Chair Dunn commented on the need to match the materials of the addition as well if it is required to remain. She discussed the difference between a setback and an overhang and noted an overhang is closer to the historic structure; therefore, the material choice becomes even more important. Commission members discussed specifics of the building materials and requested the applicant provide material samples as they get them. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 8 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 6 October16, 2019 Commission members discussed façade details. Chair Dunn asked about the window with the large piece of stone. Mr. Bellow replied it does not reference the other façade and is a little awkward. Chair Dunn suggested exploring glass brick or some other window look while still offering privacy. Ms. Bredehoft asked the applicant if they intend to meet this portion of the Code through proportion. Mr. Lindstrom replied in the affirmative. Ms. Bredehoft pointed out examples of windows not being in proportion and stated the intent of the Code may not be met by that. Chair Dunn commended the horizonal connection. Ms. Gensmer agreed. Ms. Bredehoft asked why the overhang does not align with any of the predominant features on the historic building. Mr. Lindstrom replied that is driven primarily by the cost of construction and desire to be efficient with studs. He stated he does not believe the alignment of the two would be noticed by a pedestrian at street level. Chair Dunn requested input on the flat façade on the house side of the street compared to the hipped roof on the historic building. Ms. Simpkins replied it is a bit stark. Chair Dunn stated the squareness of the new construction stands out. Ms. Paecklar stated she likes the differentiation clearly showing the new design incorporated into the property of an historic building. Ms. Bredehoft asked if the existing trees will remain. Mr. Lindstrom replied those aspects of the City process have yet to be completed. Ms. Bredehoft stated street line trees are important and suggested the applicant look at their preservation as much as possible. Ms. Bredehoft asked about the detention on the front of the yard and making the connection to the street more prominent. Mr. Lindstrom replied the approach to the house can be redesigned; however, there was a thought that the wetland foreground provided an entry to the house and was not utilitarian. Chair Dunn stated she likes the porches of each unit facing the house. She stated some design elements were done extraordinarily well. [Secretary’s note: Ms. Nelsen returned to the meeting at this point.] 5. ADOPTION OF THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION’S 2020 WORK PLAN The purpose of this item is to discuss and adopt the Landmark Preservation Commission’s Work Plan for 2020. Staff Report Ms. McWilliams explained the requirement for, and purpose of, the work plan. She pointed out the changes made since the work session. Public Input No members of the public were present. Commission Questions and Discussion None. Commission Deliberation Mr. Bello moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission adopt the 2020 work plan as presented. Ms. Nelsen seconded. The motion passed unanimously. ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 9 DRAFT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 7 October16, 2019 OTHER BUSINESS Ms. McWilliams informed the Commission about efforts to install cell tower poles for 4G and 5G service, some of which may be in historic areas. She stated she would like to create a subcommittee of staff and Commission members to consider the issue. Ms. Gensmer and Chair Dunn volunteered. Mr. Yatabe discussed quorum and public meeting notification requirements. Chair Dunn stated she would like a committee of three and asked that staff send an email to absent Commission members to determine their interest. Ms. McWilliams noted there would be other City staff on the subcommittee. Chair Dunn said in that case, two members should be sufficient, but suggested keeping Ms. Simpkins in mind. Chair Dunn suggested examining the materials references for the next round of Code revisions. Chair Dunn discussed the Past Forward meeting, sharing key takeaways regarding diversity. She noted there will be an opening on the LPC at the end of the year which could be an opportunity for additional diversity. She would like to see different perspectives represented. Mr. Bertolini stated staff is looking to explore other aspects of Fort Collins preservation and civil rights history. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 8:53 p.m. Minutes prepared by Tara Leman, Tripoint Data, and respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on __________________. _____________________________________ Meg Dunn, Chair ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 1 STAFF REPORT November 20, 2019 Landmark Preservation Commission ITEM NAME STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES, OCTOBER 4 TO NOVEMBER 6 STAFF Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner INFORMATION Staff is tasked with reviewing projects and, in cases where the project can be approved without submitting to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, with issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness or a SHPO report under Chapter 14, Article IV of the City’s Municipal Code. Staff decisions are provided in this report and posted on the HPD’s “Design Review Notification” page. Notice of staff decisions are provided to the public and LPC for their information, but are not subject to appeal under Chapter 14, Article IV, except in cases where an applicant has requested a Certificate of Appropriateness for a project and that request has been denied. In that event, the applicant may appeal staff’s decision to the LPC pursuant to 14-55 of the Municipal Code, within two weeks of staff denial. The report below covers the period between October 4 and November 6, 2019. Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of Decision 508 E. Myrtle St. Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 7, 2019 416 E. Elizabeth Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 7, 2019 301 Edwards St. Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 15, 2019 429 Garfield St. Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 17, 2019 812 Peterson St Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 22, 2019 719 E. Prospect Rd Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 25, 2019 2306 W. Mulberry St. Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). City Landmark. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 28, 2019 312 E. Elizabeth Roof replacement in-kind (asphalt shingle). Contributing property to Laurel School HD. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved October 31, Agenda Item 2 Item 2, Page 2 item). City Landmark. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. 412 Wood St. Construction of new shed, new garage, and some alterations to rear and side of property to accommodate internal uses. City Landmark. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved with conditions October 25, 2019 729 Remington St. Roof replacement in-kind (wood shingle). City Landmark. Reviewed under Chapter 14, Article IV. Approved November 1, 2019 Packet Pg. 12 Item 3, Page 1 STAFF REPORT November 20, 2019 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME FRANK J. ULRICH PROPERTY, 516 LAPORTE AVE - APPLICATION FOR FORT COLLINS LANDMARK DESIGNATION STAFF Reyana Jones, Historic Preservation Specialist Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager PROJECT INFORMATION APPLICANT: Dale Eggleston, Owner PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the request for a recommendation to City Council for landmark designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property. COMMISSION’S ROLE AND ACTION: One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to provide a recommendation to City Council on applications for the designation of a property as a Fort Collins Landmark. Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code provides the standards and process for designation. At the hearing, the Commission shall determine whether the following two (2) criteria are satisfied: (1) the proposed resource is eligible for designation; and (2) the requested designation will advance the policies and the purposes in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation. Following its review, and once the Commission feels it has the information it needs, the Commission should adopt a motion providing its recommendation on the property’s Landmark eligibility to City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has determined that the Frank J. Ulrich Property is eligible for Fort Collins Landmark designation, having significance under Standard 3, Design/Construction and retaining all seven Aspects of Integrity. Staff recommends that the Landmark Preservation Commission approval a motion to Council recommending landmark designation. STAFF EVALUATION OF REVIEW CRITERIA STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and EXTERIOR INTEGRITY Staff has determined that the Frank J. Ulrich Property is eligible under Standard 3, Design/Construction. Standards of Significance: Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards: Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 13 Item 3, Page 2 Standard 1: Events The resource is associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. A resource can be associated with either or both of two (2) types of events: * A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or * A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. N/A Standard 2: Persons/ Groups The resource is associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. N/A Standard 3: Design/ Construction The resource embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of resources. The resource may be significant not only for the way it was originally constructed or crafted, but also for the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it illustrates changing tastes, attitudes, and/or uses over time. This property includes an excellent example of a Craftsman Bungalow. The 1924 house features characteristic Craftsman architectural details such as exposed rafter ends, windows with multi-light upper portions, and a prominent front porch made of a natural material- uncut stone. The large detached garage picks up some design elements from the house as well, notably the exposed rafter ends. YES Standard 4: Information potential The resource has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. N/A Standards of Integrity Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities established by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Standard 1: Location Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic or prehistoric event occurred. The house and garage have not been moved. YES Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 14 Item 3, Page 3 Standard 2: Design Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a resource. The design of the Frank J. Ulrich house, constructed in late 1924, has not changed since 1968, based on a tax assessor sketch. Although the original porch was remodeled in 1944, it does not detract from the house’s integrity because its distinct design is compatible with Craftsman style, and it is historic in its own right, executed by the home’s first owner, Frank Ulrich. The house still features exposed rafter ends, and many of the sash windows still have multi-light upper portions, indicative of the Craftsman design. The 1923 garage also retains its character-defining Craftsman details, like its exposed rafter ends, shingled gables, and multi-light windows. It has two additions that were likely constructed in 1924 and 1927 for Frank Ulrich, according to building permits for a “back porch” and “garage repairs,” respectively. These additions are visible in the 1968 tax assessor photo and sketch. YES Standard 3: Setting Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Setting refers to the character of the place; it involves how, not just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. This property retains its residential setting on Laporte Avenue. It remains open onto the alley to its east rather than being obscured by a fence. There are mature trees to the west of the house, as pictured in the 1968 tax assessor photo. YES Standard 4: Materials Materials are the physical elements that form a resource. The house and garage retain integrity of materials overall. The house’s character-defining materials, wood siding and windows, are mostly intact. The wood siding appears to be original and is consistent across the building. Most of the windows on the house appear to be historic, excluding the lower portion of one window on the north elevation, an egress window on the east elevation, and possibly basement windows on the west elevation that have been obscured by plastic awnings. The front and side doors of the house are modern doors. The garage‘s dropboard siding appears to be original. The windows also appear original, although the glass of some of the east windows appears to have been replaced, altering the number of lights. There appears to be an opening for a door and small window on the rear elevation, but these have been boarded up. YES Standard 5: Workmanship 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. Several details on this house and garage evoke the workmanship of the builder. For example, the house and garage both features architectural elements of exposed rafter ends and square, ribbon coursed shingles in their gable ends. The house also has an unusual front porch with a knee wall of uncut stone and square columns. YES Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 15 Item 3, Page 4 Standard 6: Feeling Feeling is a resource’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 resource's historic or prehistoric character. This house evokes the feeling of a Craftsman Bungalow from the early to mid-twentieth century through its retention of design, materials, and workmanship. Though the porch was remodeled in the 1940s, its prominence is suggestive of the porches of other Craftsman-style bungalows. This feeling is reinforced by the similarity between the garage and house’s architectural details. This property also promotes the feeling of its neighborhood along Laporte Avenue. Many of the houses in the area, like the one on the Frank J. Ulrich Property, are single-story, modest bungalows. The Frank J. Ulrich Property is representative of the kind of homes in this neighborhood. YES Standard 7: Association Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or prehistoric resource. A resource 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. The relative size of the house and garage speaks to the property’s association with their first owner: Frank J. Ulrich. Frank Ulrich was a well-known automobile painter in town. Interestingly, the unusually large garage was constructed before the house on the lot. The continued prominence of the garage on this property speaks to this association. YES ALIGNMENT WITH CITY CODE AND PURPOSE Policy (a) It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects and districts of historical, architectural, archeological, or geographic significance, located within the City, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people. The designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property promotes the policies adopted by Council specifically by protecting, enhancing and perpetuating significant resources in the City through the protection, recognition and incentives offered landmarked resources. YES Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 16 Item 3, Page 5 Policy (b) It is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic standing of this City cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical, architectural, archeological, and geographical heritage of the City and by ignoring the destruction or defacement of such cultural assets. Designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property will promote the City’s economic standing directly, through property, use and sales taxes and revenue; and indirectly through the promotion of heritage tourism. The City’s cultural standing is promoted by residents and visitors better understanding our history and the people who shaped it. The City’s aesthetics are promoted through the protection and recognition of a distinct architectural variation of the Craftsman Bungalow and a complementary, prominent garage. YES Purpose (a): Survey, identify, designated, preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate those sites, structures, objects and districts which reflect important elements of the city’s cultural, artistic, social, political, architectural, archeological, or other heritage; Designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property meets Purpose (a) by designating, preserving, protecting, enhancing and perpetuating the important historic resources on this property. YES Purpose (b): Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past; This request meets Purpose (b) by fostering civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past. YES Purpose (c): Stabilize or improve aesthetic and economic vitality and values of such sites, structures, objects and districts; This request meets Purpose (c) by improving aesthetic and economic vitality and values through stabilizing and restoring and rehabilitating the property, which in turn stabilizes the neighborhood and promotes the neighborhood’s history and character. YES Purpose (d): Protect and enhance the City's attraction to tourists and visitors; This request meets Purpose (d) by protecting and enhancing the City's attraction to tourists and visitors by promoting the history and the character of the neighborhood. YES Purpose (e): Promote the use of important historical, archeological, or architectural sites, structures, objects and districts for the education, stimulation and welfare of the people of the City; This request meets Purpose (e) by promoting the use of important architectural resources for the education, stimulation and welfare of the people of the City. YES Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 17 Item 3, Page 6 Purpose (f): Promote good urban design; This request meets Purpose (f) by promoting good urban design through the retention of neighborhood character and for the resources’ unusual and interesting Craftsman architecture and design. Interestingly, the large garage was constructed before the house using Craftsman elements like exposed rafter ends and decorative shingles in the gable ends, and those design elements were replicated on the house. YES Purpose (g): Promote and encourage continued private ownership and utilization of such sites, structures, objects or districts now so owned and used, to the extent that the objectives listed above can be attained under such a policy; This meets Purpose (g) by continuing the private ownership and utilization of these resources. YES Purpose (h): Promote economic, social and environmental sustainability through the ongoing survey and inventory, use, maintenance, and rehabilitation of existing buildings. This meets Purpose (h) by promoting economic sustainability through the taxes and revenue generated and the use of financial incentive programs; environmental sustainability through the continued use of the resource, preserving embodied energy and existing materials; and social sustainability through peoples’ ability to tangibly experience history and architecture. YES FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS OF FACT: In evaluating the request for a recommendation to City Council regarding landmark designation for the Maneval/Mason/Sauer Property, staff makes the following findings of fact: 1. That all owners of the Frank J. Ulrich Property have consented in writing to this request for Fort Collins Landmark designation of the property; 2. That the Frank J. Ulrich Property has significance to Fort Collins under Significance Standard 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report; 3. That the Frank J. Ulrich Property has integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association to convey its significance as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report; 4. That the designation will advance the policies and purposes stated in the code in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation, as supported by the analysis provided in this staff report. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission adopt a motion to Council recommending the landmark designation of the Frank J. Ulrich Property. SAMPLE MOTIONS SAMPLE MOTION FOR APPROVAL: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend that City Council adopt an ordinance to designate the Frank J. Ulrich Property, 516 Laporte Ave., as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is eligible for its significance to Fort Collins under Standard 3, Design/Construction, as supported by the analysis provided in the staff report dated November 20, 2019, and that Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 18 Item 3, Page 7 the property clearly conveys this significance through all seven aspects of integrity; and finding also that the designation of this property will promote the policies and purposes of the City as specified in Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. SAMPLE MOTION FOR DENIAL: I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend that City Council does not adopt an ordinance to designate the Frank J. Ulrich Property, 516 Laporte Ave., as a Fort Collins Landmark, finding that this property is not eligible because of a lack of significance or the failure of the property to convey its significance through its integrity, and/or finding that the designation of this property will not promote the policies and purposes of the City as specified in Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. ATTACHMENTS 1. Landmark Designation Application 2. Staff Presentation 3. Location Map Agenda Item 3 Packet Pg. 19 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Fort Collins Landmark Designation LOCATION INFORMATION Address: 516 Laporte Ave. Legal Description: Commencing 50 feet south of south-east corner of lot 10, block 62, Fort Collins, west 40 feet, north 165 feet, east 40 feet, and south 165 feet Property Name (historic and/or common): Frank J. Ulrich Property OWNER INFORMATION Name: Dale K. Eggleston Company/Organization (if applicable): 516 Laporte LLC Phone: (970) 566-5566 Email: jdmegg@aol.com Mailing Address: 1201 Parkwood Dr., Fort Collins, CO 80525 CLASSIFICATION Category Ownership Status Present Use Existing Designation Building Public Occupied Commercial Nat’l Register Structure Private Unoccupied Educational State Register Site Religious Object Residential District Entertainment Government Other FORM PREPARED BY Name and Title: Reyana Jones, Historic Preservation Specialist Address: 281 N. College Ave., Fort Collins, CO 80524 Phone: (970) 221-6206 Email: preservation@fcgov.com DATE: September 13, 2019 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 20 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES Individual Landmark Property Landmark District Explanation of Boundaries: The boundaries of the property being designated as a Fort Collins Landmark correspond to the legal description of the property, above. The property (hereinafter the “Property”) consists of the 1924 house, 1923 garage, and non-historic dog house (parcel no. 9711129016). STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE and INTEGRITY Properties are eligible for designation if they possess both significance and integrity. Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object or district to the history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation. For designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort Collins Landmark Districts properties must meet one (1) or more of the following standards set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(a): Standard 1: Events This property is associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation. It is associated with either (or both) of these two (2) types of events: a) A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory or history; and/or b) A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation. Standard 2: Persons/Groups This property is associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented. Standard 3: Design/Construction This property embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or is part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of properties. The Frank J. Ulrich Property is significant under Standard 3, Design/Construction, as an excellent example of a Craftsman Bungalow. Built in 1924, this single-story dwelling exhibits Craftsman architecture’s characteristic large front porch and exposed rafter ends, the latter feature repeated on the detached garage. Many of the sash windows have multi-light upper portions, another Craftsman detail. Craftsman buildings also tend to use natural materials, as reflected in the porch’s prominent knee wall made of uncut stone. This porch was remodeled in 1944, a historic alteration to the house; its broad, flat roof and rock knee wall and piers make the home a distinct variation of the Craftsman Bungalow along Laporte Avenue. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 21 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Standard 4: Information Potential This property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object or district to be able to convey its significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some of seven (7) aspects or qualities set forth in Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-22(b): location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object or district to be eligible as long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. Standard 1: Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic or prehistoric event occurred. The house and garage on the Frank J. Ulrich Property have not been moved. Standard 2: Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style of a resource. The design of the Frank J. Ulrich house, constructed in late 1924, has not changed since 1968, based on a tax assessor sketch. It also still matches the dimensions listed on the 1924 building permit, 24X34 feet. Although the original porch was remodeled in 1944, it does not detract from the house’s integrity because its distinct design represents a historic alteration executed by the home’s first owner, Frank Ulrich. The house still features exposed rafter ends, and many of the sash windows still have multi-light upper portions, indicative of the Craftsman design. The 1923 garage also has Craftsman details, like its exposed rafter ends, shingled gables, and multi-light windows. It has two additions that were likely constructed in 1924 and 1927 for Frank Ulrich, according to building permits for a “back porch” and “garage repairs,” respectively. These additions are visible in the 1968 tax assessor photo and sketch. The 1968 photo also shows a small door hood over the east door of the garage that is no longer there.1 Standard 3: Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Setting refers to the character of the place; it involves how, not just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. This property retains its residential setting on Laporte Avenue. It is also still open onto the alley to its east rather than being obscured by a fence. There are also still mature trees to the west of the house, as pictured in the 1968 tax assessor photo. Standard 4: Materials are the physical elements that form a resource. The house and garage retain integrity of materials overall. The house’s wood siding appears to be original and is consistent across the building. Most of the windows on the house appear to be historic, excluding the lower portion of one window on the north 1 Building Permit no. 532, July 29, 1924, Building Permits, Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/bp/id/3969. The permit book containing this record is missing from the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services; Building Permit no. 1864, November 1, 1927, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO; 1968 Tax Assessor Card: 516 Laporte Ave., Tax Assessor Card Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 22 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 elevation, an egress window on the east elevation, and possibly basement windows on the west elevation that have been obscured by plastic awnings. Additionally, on the west elevation, the right window of the paired center windows appears to have had its glass partially replaced, but the window itself is intact. The front and side doors of the house are modern doors. The roof now has impact-resistant asphalt shingles; the original roofing material is just noted as “shingles” on the building permit for the house. The garage‘s dropboard siding appears to be original. The windows also appear original, but the glass of some of the windows on the east side appears to have been replaced, based on the inconsistency of the number of panes in like windows. There appears to be an opening for a door and small window on the rear elevation, but these have been boarded up. Standard 5: 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. Several details on this house and garage evoke the workmanship of the builder. For example, the house and garage both features architectural elements of exposed rafter ends and square, ribbon coursed shingles in their gable ends. The house also has an unusual front porch with a knee wall of uncut stone and square columns. Standard 6: Feeling is a resource’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the resource's historic or prehistoric character. This house evokes the feeling of a Craftsman Bungalow from the early to mid-twentieth century through its retention of design, materials, and workmanship. Though the porch was remodeled in the 1940s, its prominence is suggestive of the porches of other Craftsman-style bungalows. This feeling is reinforced by the similarity between the garage and house’s architectural details. Standard 7: Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or prehistoric resource. A resource 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. The relative size of the house and garage speaks to the property’s association with their first owner: Frank J. Ulrich. Frank Ulrich was a well-known automobile painter in town. Interestingly, the unusually large garage was constructed before the house on the lot. The continued prominence of the garage on this property speaks to this association. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 23 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 HISTORICAL INFORMATION Frank J. Ulrich was born in Indiana in 1876. By his twenties, Frank lived in Wisconsin and worked as a carriage painter. 2 In Ontario, Canada, he married his wife, Maude (Minnie) Taylor.3 By 1910, Frank and Maude lived in Salt Lake City, Utah with their daughters, Nina and Thelma, where Frank continued his work as a carriage painter. Their son, Frank Taylor Ulrich, was born in 1914.4 The family moved to Fort Collins by 1919 and lived on Mason Street, where Frank Sr. transitioned professionally to automobile painting, advertising regularly in the Fort Collins Courier.5 In 1923, he was also in charge of painting the Fort Collins streetcars, which were purchased by the City in 1919.6 As Frank Ulrich transitioned from carriages to cars in his professional work, the automobile era similarly rolled into Fort Collins by the 1920s. Fort Collins began paving College Avenue in the late 1910s to make travel by car easier.7 Automobile infrastructure, like gas stations, garages, and car dealerships, popped up around town, as did professional opportunities related to the auto industry, like the work Ulrich did in car painting. As more people purchased cars, garages began to replace carriage houses in new residential areas, like in the 1920 Westlawn Subdivision, but also in the older parts of town, including the area where 516 Laporte Ave. would be located. On June 1, 1923, Ulrich purchased lot 10, block 62 of the original Fort Collins plat from Levi Cunningham, who ran a business as a concrete contractor.8 Ulrich worked with Cunningham to build a sizable garage on the same lot several months later. The frame garage was 20x20 feet with a concrete foundation, wood floors, drop siding, and a shingled roof.9 Ulrich took out another building permit to construct another garage at 516 Laporte Ave. in early 1924; this structure appears toward the rear of the lot on the 1925 Sanborn Map,10 and it was demolished at an unknown date. In July 1924, a building permit shows that Ulrich intended to build a “back porch” on a structure at 516 Laporte Ave.; because the house did not exist on the lot by that time, it is possible that this permit referred to the rear addition to the garage, but it cannot be 2 “1900 United States Federal Census,” Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004, http://www.search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1900usfedcen&h=734549<br/>48&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt. 3 “Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1801-1928,” Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010. 4 “1920 United States Federal Census,” Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004, http://www. search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1920usfedcen&h=625804<br/>74&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt. 5 No Title. Fort Collins Courier, July 2, 1919. 6 “City Street Cars Are Being Painted,” Fort Collins Courier, August 17, 1923. 7 “Fort Collins History and Architecture: Post-World War I Urban Growth, 1919-1941,” Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD, https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/post.php. 8 Warranty Deed, Levi Cunningham to F.J. Ulrich, June 1, 1923, Book 462, Page 154, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO.; Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer County Directory: 1922 (Omaha: R.L. Polk, 1922) in City Directory Collection, Local History Archive at the Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 9 Building Permit no. 165, September 6, 1923, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. 10 1925 Sanborn Map, Fort Collins, CO, ProQuest, http://0- sanborn.umi.com.catalog.poudrelibraries.org/co/0996/dateid-000009.htm?CCSI=1820n. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 24 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 certain.11 Another permit for “garage repairs,” applied for by O.E. Long for Ulrich, was issued in 1927; there are no other details listed on the document.12 Toward the end of 1924, Ulrich constructed the 24x34 foot frame bungalow on the property for $3000.13 He and his family lived at 516 Laporte Ave. into the 1940s. Ulrich continued to run his successful auto painting business, and he held the position of Deputy Sheriff for the County in the 1930s.14 In July 1944, Ulrich remodeled his house’s front porch using uncut stone, the appearance it retains today.15 Frank Ulrich’s house is a Craftsman Bungalow. The Craftsman style evolved from late nineteenth- century Britain’s Arts and Crafts Movement. The Arts and Crafts Movement emerged during the Second Industrial Revolution as a reaction to mass-production; it favored the hand-crafted works of artisans. In America, around the turn of the century, Gustav Stickley championed this movement, selling blueprints for “Craftsman” homes. Stickley was exposed to “bungalow” designs when he traveled to Bengal, India, and this building form influenced many of his and other architects’ designs; the bungalow is “the most common expression of Craftsman style architecture.”16 In contrast to ornamented Victorian houses of the same era, Craftsman designs focus on simplicity and functionality. In 1945, the Ulrichs sold their property to Grant C. Miller and his wife, Effie. M. Burgess.17 Grant worked as a sanitary inspector for the City and in Poudre Canyon many years, specializing in water sanitation, according to the 1930 census.18 Effie and Grant did not live in the house at 516 Laporte Ave., according to City Directories, but their daughter, Harriet, did. Harriet Miller married Rodney Southwick in 1926.19 She and Rodney lived in Wyoming for several years, but Harriet moved back to Fort Collins in the late 1940s, and she worked as a bookkeeper at Colorado A&M.20 Harriet transferred the property back to parents in 1949.21 She passed away in 1952.22 11 Building Permit no. 532, July 29, 1924, Building Permits, Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/bp/id/3969. The permit book containing this record is missing from the City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services. 12 Building Permit no. 1864, November 1, 1927, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. 13 Building Permit no. 752, November 28, 1924, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. 14 “City and County Peace Officers,” Photograph, Image ID#H06503, Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD, https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/14621/rec/2. 15 Building Permit no. 7856, July 1, 1944, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. 16 “Bungalow,” History Colorado, https://www.historycolorado.org/bungalow. 17 Warranty Deed, F.J. Ulrich to Grant Miller, et al., August 28, 1945, Book 793, Page 393, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 18 “1930 United States Federal Census,” Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004, https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=6224&h=113266409&tid=&pid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=ofc755&_phstart=successSource. 19Colorado, County Marriage Records and State Index, 1862-2006 [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2016, https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=61366&h=383461&tid=&pid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=ofc767&_phstart=successSource. 20 R.L. Polk Directory Company, Polk’s Fort Collins City Directory: 1948 (Omaha: R.L. Polk and Co., Inc., 1948) in City Directories Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 25 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 The Millers rented the property at 516 Laporte Ave. until they sold it in 1961. Their tenants, among others, included: Rex Leslie McCaulley, a press operator at Don-Art Corporation, and his wife, Barbara; Henry J. Meyer, a grain operator for the Great Western Sugar Company, and his wife, Millie Feit; Marvin S. Hoflund, owner of Marv Hoflund Service Station, and his wife, Marjorie; and Robert R. Lechleitner, a teacher at Colorado State University, and his wife, Frances. The Millers sold to Valesca L. Saunders in 1961.23 Less than one year later, Valesca sold to Robert Tingey, who resided in the residence with his wife, Nellie, until his death in 1969.24 The Poudre Valley National Bank of Fort Collins served as executor in the sale of Tingey’s property after his death, and Dean W. and Georgia Ackerman purchased the property for $9,000.25 Less than six months later, the Ackermans sold to Richard R. and Betty L. Patrick for $13,350.26 Richard worked as a mechanic, and Betty worked as a licensed nurse.27 The Patricks lived in the house at 516 Laporte Ave. until they sold the property to Robert W. and Frances M. Richburg in 1972.28 The Richburgs rented the property until they sold it in 1974 to Glenn O. and Agnes Marjorie Eggleston, who also used it as a rental, the use that persists to today.29 Agnes Marjorie passed away in 1989, and Glenn passed away in 1990.30 In September 1999, Dale K. Eggleston acquired the property through personal representative deeds and, through a bargain and sale deed, transferred the property to himself and Mary F. Eggleston, trustees of the Dale K. Eggleston Trust.31 In 2007, the Dale K. Eggleston Trust granted the Mary F. Eggleston Trust a 50% interest in 21 Warranty Deed, Harriet L. Southwick to Grant Miller, et al., April 16, 1949, Book 872, Page 55, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 22 Ancestry.com. U.S., Find A Grave Index, 1600s-Current [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012, https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=60525&h=6847999&ssrc=pt&tid=2818208&pid=262060750291. 23 Warranty Deed, Grant and Effie M. Miller to Valesca L. Saunders, May 15, 1961, Book 1141, Page 272, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 24 Warranty Deed, Valesca L. Saunders to Robert S. Tingey, January 29, 1962, Book 1163, Page 387, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO; City Directories Collection: 1962-1969, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 25 Executor Deed, Estate of Robert S. Tingey to Dean W. and Georgia Ackerman, January 05, 1970, Book 1424, Page 792, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 26 Warranty Deed, Dean W. and Georgia Ackerman to Richard R. and Betty L. Patrick, June 08, 1970, Book 1434, Page 394, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 27 Johnson’s: 1971, Fort Collins, Colorado City Directory (Loveland: Johnson Publishing Co., 1971) in City Directories Collection, Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Fort Collins, CO. 28 Warranty Deed, Richard R. Patrick to Robert W. and Frances M. Richburg, August 12, 1972, Book 1516, Page 854, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 29 Warranty Deed, Robert W. and Frances M. Richburg to Glenn O. and Agnes Marjorie Eggleston, May 08, 1974, Book 1600, Page 705, Title Books, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, Fort Collins, CO. 30 Ancestry.com. U.S., Find A Grave Index, 1600s-Current [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012, http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi. 31 Personal Representative Deed, Estate of Agnes Marjorie Eggleston to Dale K. Eggleston, September 30, 1999, Instrument # 20000001388, Larimer County Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; Personal Representative Deed, Estate of Glenn O. Eggleston to Dale K. Eggleston, September 30, 1999, Instrument # 20000001389, Larimer County Official Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; Bargain and Sale Deed, Dale K. Eggleston to Dale K. Eggleston and Mary F. Eggleston, Trustees of the Dale K. Eggleston Trust, September 30, 1999, Instrument # 20000001390, Larimer County Official Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 26 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 the property.32 Shortly after, both the Dale K. Eggleston Trust and Mary F. Eggleston Trust transferred the property to 516 Laporte, LLC, the current title holder.33 ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION Construction Date: 1923 (garage); 1924 (house) Architect/Builder: Levi Cunningham (garage); Unknown (house) Building Materials: Frame, concrete Architectural Style: Craftsman Bungalow Description: The Frank J. Ulrich House, a single-story, front-gabled Craftsman Bungalow, faces south on Laporte Avenue. Wood novelty siding clads this residence, which rests on a concrete foundation, and asphalt shingles sheathe its roof. The house has wide overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends. The footprint is nearly rectangular. The 24x26 foot forward portion of the house has a basement; the smaller rear portion consists of a 12x8 foot section to the west and a 10X8 foot enclosed porch to the east. The property’s garage sits just north of the house, slightly offset to the east. A wood fence encircles part of the back yard, including the rear portion of the garage. An alley runs along the east side of the property. The house’s façade (south elevation) features Craftsman details. The prominent porch, remodeled in 1944,34 uses uncut stones in its knee wall and stair. The porch surfaces are parged with concrete. Square columns sit atop the stone knee wall to support a nearly flat roof with exposed rafter ends. The gable end is visible just above the porch’s roof; it has a gable vent and decorative, ribbon-coursed square shingles. Paired nine-over-one, wood sash windows flank either side of the centered, non-historic front door. The east elevation has paired nine-over-one, wood sash windows, like those on the porch, toward its south side. Just beneath these paired windows is a casement egress window, installed in 2010. North of the paired windows is a one-over-one, wood sash window. Beneath that window is a three-light, wood basement window. On the north side of this elevation, the enclosed porch is slightly set back. The roof is discontinuous between the main portion of the house and the enclosed porch on this elevation; the roof over the enclosed porch extends from the ridge at a steeper angle than the rest of the roof, its south edge tucked beneath the eaves of this elevation’s south portion. The enclosed porch has a non-historic door with a gabled door hood 32 Special Warranty Deed, Dale K. Eggleston Trust to Mary F. Eggleston Trust, May 30, 2007, Instrument # 20070040604, Larimer County Official Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. 33 Special Warranty Deed, Dale K. Eggleston Trust to 516 Laporte LLC, June 20, 2007, Instrument # 20070047899, Larimer County Official Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder; Special Warranty Deed, Mary F. Eggleston Trust to 516 Laporte LLC, June 20, 2007, Instrument # 20070047900, Larimer County Official Records Search, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. 34 Building Permit no. 7856, July 1, 1944, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 27 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 supported by robust wood brackets. There is a six-light window just above the door, and a six- over-six, wood sash window abutting this window to the left. The north elevation of the house has a gable vent and three windows. To the east, on the enclosed porch, are paired three-over-one wood windows; the lower portion of the right window was removed and replaced from the inside with what appears to be a metal storm with two sections. There is also a nine-light wood window to the west. The west elevation has three pairs of nine-light wood windows like the one on the north elevation. The right window in the center pair appears to have had some of its glass replaced, having three lights on the left and one larger light to the right rather than nine lights in a square. There are also two basement windows on this elevation, but they are obscured by coverings made of wood and corrugated plastic. The garage has wood dropboard siding, a concrete foundation, and its roof has asphalt shingles. Its roof has wide overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends. The garage consists of an original, front-gabled 20x20 foot portion, a rear, a hipped-roofed addition, and a shed-roofed attachment to that addition. The south elevation of the garage features a non-historic overhead garage door. To its right is another door made of wood. Although this wooden door is old, it is not the original door according to tax assessor photos. The gable end is decorated with ribbon-coursed square shingles like the front gable of the house. The garage’s east elevation likely once had tripled four-light, wood windows on the main portion of the building, but some of the glass has been replaced. The left window retains its four lights, the center window has just one large light, and the right widow has one light on its left side and two on its right. The north side of this elevation features a shed-roofed addition that projects east from the main building and also to the north. It appears that this shed-roofed portion was constructed in two phases, based on differences in roofing and siding interruption. Frank Ulrich took out a building permit in 1927 for “garage repairs,”35 but it is unknown whether that included the construction of this shed-roofed section. The south shed roof has overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends, whereas the north portion does not. A stovepipe pokes out of the south shed roof as well. The north portion has a pair of single-light, square windows. The garage’s north elevation consists of a hipped roof addition, likely constructed in 1924 based on building permits and the 1925 Sanborn Map,36 and the north side of the shed addition. The hipped roof addition has overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends. There is a six-light, wood window in its center. To the left of this window, there appears to be a small boarded-over window and boarded-over door opening. To the left of these elements is a four-light wood window, and the shed-roofed addition is just to its left. 35 Building Permit no. 1864, November 1, 1927, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO. 36 Building Permit no. 532, July 29, 1924, Permit Books, City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services, Community Development Building, Fort Collins, CO; 1925 Sanborn Map. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 28 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 The garage’s west elevation includes tripled four-light, wood windows on the building’s main portion as well as the west side of the hipped-roofed addition. There is a pair of four-light, wood windows on the addition. In addition to the historic garage, there is a non-historic dog house on the property. It is made of wood and has a gabled roof with asphalt shingles and overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends. The wood inside is stamped with the year 1998. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 29 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES of INFORMATION Building Permit Book Collection. City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Services. Community Development Building. Fort Collins, CO. Building Permit Collection. Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD. https://history.fcgov.com/collections/building-permits. City Directory Collection. Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. Fort Collins, CO. “City and County Peace Officers.” Photograph. Image ID#H06503. Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD. https://fchc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ph/id/14621/rec/2. Colorado, County Marriage Records and State Index, 1862-2006. Lehi, UT: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2016. https://search.ancestry.com/cgi- bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=61366&h=383461&tid=&pid=&usePUB=true&_phsrc=ofc767&_phstart= successSource. Find A Grave Index, 1600s-Current. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012. https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/findagraveus/. Fort Collins Courier Database. Colorado Historic Newspapers Collection. Colorado State Library. https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=cl&cl=CL1&e=-------en-20--1--img- txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0--&sp=FCC “Fort Collins History and Architecture: Post-World War I Urban Growth, 1919-1941.” Fort Collins History Connection: An Online Collaboration between FCMoD and PRPLD. https://history.fcgov.com/contexts/post.php. Landmark Web Official Records Search. Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. https://records.larimer.org/LandmarkWeb/Home/Index. “Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1801-1928.” Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010. http://www. search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=ontariomarr1858- 1899_<br/>ga&h=1837547&ti=0&indiv=try&gss=pt. Sanborn Maps Collection: Fort Collins. Proquest. http://0- sanborn.umi.com.catalog.poudrelibraries.org/co/0996/dateid-000009.htm?CCSI=1820n. Tax Assessor Card Collection. Local History Archive at the Fort Collins Museum of Discovery. Fort Collins, CO. Title Books Collection. Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Fort Collins, CO. United States Census Collection. Provo, UT: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004. https://www.ancestry.com/search/categories/35/. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 30 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 MAPS and PHOTOGRAPHS37 37 All photos taken by Reyana Jones, 2019. Map 1: 1925 Sanborn Map. The Frank J. Ulrich Property is outlined in blue. ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 31 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Map 2: Location Map ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 32 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Map 3: Satellite View ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 33 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 1: Façade (South Elevation) Photo 2: Façade (South Elevation)- Gable ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 34 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 3: Façade (South Elevation) – Front Door Photo 4: Façade (South Elevation) – East Windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 35 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 5: Façade (South Elevation) – Porch details Photo 6: West Elevation and South Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 36 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 7: West Elevation – South windows Photo 8: West Elevation – Center windows; muntins different on right window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 37 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 9: West Elevation – South covered basement window Photo 10: North Elevation and East Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 38 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 11: North Elevation – East windows Photo 12: North Elevation – Close-up of replaced window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 39 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 13: West Elevation – West window Photo 14: East Elevation and South Elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 40 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 15: West Elevation – Egress window (south side) Photo 16: West Elevation – 1/1 sash window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 41 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 17: West Elevation – North basement window Photo 18: West Elevation – Enclosed Porch Entry ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 42 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 19: Garage – South elevation Photo 20: Garage – South elevation door ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 43 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 21: Garage- East elevation and south elevation Photo 22: Garage- East elevation tripled windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 44 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 23: Garage- East elevation windows on shed-roofed portion Photo 24: Garage- North elevation ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 45 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 25: Garage- North elevation east window Photo 26: Garage- North elevation west window ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 46 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 27: Garage- North elevation boarded openings ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 47 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 28: Garage- West elevation and south elevation Photo 29: Garage- West elevation windows ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 48 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 Photo 30: Dog house Photo 31: 1968 Tax Assessor Photo ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 49 Planning, Development & Transportation Services Community Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The undersigned owner, or owners, of the Property hereby submit the Property for designation as a Fort Collins landmark pursuant to the Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. The undersigned owner, or owners, certify that all signatures necessary to consent to the designation of the Property are affixed below. I understand that upon designation, I or my successors will be requested to notify the Secretary of the Landmark Preservation Commission at the City of Fort Collins prior to the occurrence of any of the following: Preparation of plans for reconstruction or alteration of the exterior of the improvements on the Property or interior spaces readily visible from any public street, alley, park, or other public place; and/or Preparation of plans for construction of, addition to, or demolition of improvements on the Property. DATED this ________________ day of _______________________________, 201___. _____________________________________________________ Owner Name (please print) _____________________________________________________ Owner Signature State of ___________________________) )ss. County of __________________________) Subscribed and sworn before me this _______ day of ___________________, 201____, by____________________________________________________________________. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires _______________________. _____________________________________________________ Notary ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 50 1 Application for Fort Collins Landmark Designation – 516 Laporte Ave./Frank J. Ulrich Property Yani Jones, Historic Preservation Specialist Landmark Preservation Commission – November 20, 2019 Historic Information 2 City and County Peace Officers (1939)- Frank Ulrich 3rd from Right (photo from Local History Archive) Constructed: 1924 Photo: 1968 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 1 2 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 51 Maps 3 Street Map Aerial View Maps (cont.) 4 1925 Sanborn Map (from Poudre Library digital repository) 1968 Tax Assessor Sketch Map (from Local History Archive) 3 4 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 52 Façade, South Elevation 5 1968 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property Façade, South Elevation 6 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 5 6 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 53 West Elevation 7 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property North Elevation 8 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 7 8 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 54 East Elevation 9 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property East Elevation 10 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property Enclosed Porch 9 10 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 55 Historic Garage – South Elevation 11 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property Historic Garage – West Elevation 12 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 11 12 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 56 Historic Garage – North Elevation 13 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property Historic Garage – East Elevation 14 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 13 14 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 57 Non-historic Dog House 15 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property • Construction: • 1923 (garage); 1924 (house) • Standard 3: Design/Construction: • Craftsman Bungalow • Exterior Integrity: • Location, Design, Setting, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling, and Association 16 516 Laporte Ave. – Frank J. Ulrich Property 15 16 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 58 Role of the Landmark Preservation Commission Chapter 14, Article II of the Municipal Code, “Designation Procedures:” • Determine if property meets the criteria of a Fort Collins landmark • Must possess both significance and exterior integrity • Context of the area surrounding the property shall be considered Sec. 14-22(a): If all owners consent in writing, and a majority of Commission approves: • Commission may adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council the designation 17 17 ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 59 N Whitcomb St N Sherwood St Laporte Ave © 516 Laporte Ave. 1 inch = 112 feet Site ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 60 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 1 STAFF REPORT November 20, 2019 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 612 S HOWES – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STAFF Maren Bzdek, Senior Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed duplex addition to a historic property, 612 S Howes (the Anderson- Goff House, 1900). Site alterations would also include a five-stall parking pad on the alley side and a shared, improved courtyard between the old and new residences. The project would retain the existing residence without alterations and demolish the detached, non-contributing 1948 garage. APPLICANT: Stan Arnett, r4 Architects OWNER: Center Green Properties, LLC RECOMMENDATION: Approval LPC’S ROLE: At this meeting, the Landmark Preservation Commission will provide a recommendation to the decision maker regarding compliance with Land Use Code section 3.4.7 – Historic and Cultural Resources. BACKGROUND: The applicant has completed a conceptual development review process with City staff and the Commission at its August 21, 2019 meeting regarding the compliance of the proposed new construction with Land Use Code Section 3.4.7. As part of the pre-submittal requirements for a development application, the applicant ordered a third-party, intensive-level survey (attached) to provide an updated determination on the property’s eligibility for Fort Collins landmark designation. The survey professional concluded that the property, constructed in 1900, is eligible for designation as a landmark under Criterion (2), Persons/Groups, for its association with the lives of several people important to the history of Fort Collins: siblings Carl and Maude Anderson and Maude’s spouse, Ralph Goff, who all owned and managed the Fort Collins Courier; and Harper Goff, designer of Disneyland’s Main Street USA attraction, who lived in the home in his youth. The property is located on a block that includes several other historic resources that are eligible for landmark designation. PROPOSED DESIGN: Two-story duplex containing two two-bedroom units and a new parking pad accommodating five spaces at the rear of the property on the alley. The primary building materials are a 3-coat stucco system, horizontal wood lap siding, stone veneer, and asphalt, high-profile, shake style shingles. AREA OF ADJACENCY SUMMARY: The area of adjacency extends to an outer boundary that is 200 hundred feet in all directions from the perimeter of the development site. Any lot or parcel of property is within the area of adjacency if any portion of the lot or parcel crosses the 200-foot outer boundary. According to the requirements in 3.4.7(B), staff has identified the following historic resources that meet the above requirement and shall be used for the establishment of the Historic Influence Area, to which the standards in 3.4.7(E) apply. Packet Pg. 61 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 2 • Historic Resources on the Development Site, Abutting, or Across a Side Alley: • The Anderson-Goff House (1900; on development site, includes 1948 garage) – new construction must use on-site historic resources as the primary point of comparison for design compatibility requirements in 3.4.7 • 608 S Howes (abutting; eligible for landmark designation) • Other Historic Resources within 200 feet: • 620 S Howes, eligible for landmark designation • 624 S Howes, eligible for landmark designation • 629 S Howes, eligible for landmark designation • Historic Influence Area: The historic influence area, within which the standards provided in LUC 3.4.7 apply, includes the entire development site. REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT: Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources, contains the applicable standards for new buildings, where designated or eligible historic landmarks or historic districts are part of the development site or surrounding neighborhood context. 3.4.7(D): Treatment of Historic Resources on Development Sites – Design Review The Commission must determine if the proposal complies with the relevant code section, 3.4.7(D)(3), which requires the preservation and adaptive use of eligible resources on the development site, following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to the maximum extent feasible. There are two historic structures on the development site: the residence and a detached garage. Residence: The applicant plans to retain the existing historic residence (1900) without any proposed exterior alterations. Garage: The proposal calls for demolition of the detached garage (1948) to accommodate the new duplex and required parking. The proposed demolition of a secondary structure is somewhat offset by the applicant’s plans to avoid alterations to the primary residence and the fact that the garage was not constructed during the period of significance for the property (1900-1919, the period of occupation for the Anderson and Goff residents). The Commission discussed this consideration at its August 2019 conceptual review of the proposal and concurred that the garage is not a historic resource, and thus its treatment does not need to meet the Secretary of Interior’s Standards. Applicable Code Standard Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Standard Met (Y/N) SOI #1 A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships; The proposal maintains the historic residential, multifamily use of the property and preserves its most significant historic resource associated with its period of significance, i.e. the primary residence. The automotive parking and access space on the rear of property from the alley is maintained. It does create changes to the spatial relationships on the site through densification and the loss of the existing rear yard and the non-contributing garage, but those alterations Yes Packet Pg. 62 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 3 do not impact the primary public view of the property from Howes Street. SOI #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. As with Standard #1, staff finds the proposed work is in general compliance with this standard because it retains the historic character of the property at its public face along Howes Street, does not propose changes to distinctive materials on the historic residence, and includes only demolition of the non-contributing garage to accommodate the new construction. Yes SOI #3 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. The new construction and site alterations are clearly of their own time. The front of the property along Howes continues to serve as a record of the 20th century use of the site. Yes SOI #4 Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. The survey document treats the garage as a historic alteration to the property, contemporaneous with the rear addition and the stucco alteration to the residence. On the other hand, it was constructed after the period of significance suggested by the survey, which would be the combined period of occupation by the Anderson and Goff residents (1900 to 1919), and the property was determined to only be eligible under Criterion 2, Persons/Groups. As such, staff finds the loss of the garage is mitigated in this case because it is not a contributing resource for the Anderson/Goff period of occupancy. The Commission concurred with this at its August 2019 conceptual review of the project. Yes SOI #5 Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. The proposal includes no alterations to the historic residence and preserves all intact, distinctive materials and features. Yes SOI #6 Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. N/A Packet Pg. 63 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 4 SOI #7 Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. N/A SOI #8 Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. N/A SOI #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. The proposed new work is generally compatible with and differentiated from the original building and is clearly new construction as a separate structure on the site. Regarding the new structure’s compatibility with the historic property, the Commission highlighted several areas of concern at the August 21, 2019 conceptual review: lack of a clear design relationship to the historic structure (e.g. orientation and proportion of the windows, incompatible materials relative to the Anderson-Goff House versus other historic structures in the area, concern about the overhang and its impact on the residential character of the building), and lack of a prominent, well-defined entrance for the units. A more thorough discussion of how these updates comply with the specific code requirements in 3.4.7 is outlined below. Staff finds that the updated design now meets this standard. Yes SOI #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction will 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. Future demolition of the new duplex building would allow restoration of the essential integrity and setting of the original historic residence. Yes Packet Pg. 64 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 5 3.4.7(E)(1): Design Requirements for a Proposed Development Applicable Code Standard Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis Standard Met (Y/N) Massing and Building Articulation 1. New construction shall be similar in width or, if larger, be articulated into massing reflective of the mass and scale of historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. The width of the original historic structure is 25 feet; the offset rear addition extends the overall width of the ground floor to approximately 30 feet on the rear elevation. The proposed building width is about 9 feet wider at 39 feet, 2.5 inches. The distance between the two structures is 29 feet, 6.5 inches, which allows for a shared courtyard between the buildings. The greater width of the new structure means that it is somewhat visible from Howes Street, although the nearly matching eave heights help to reduce the visual impact. From the less important alley view of the historic residence, the original historic structure will be very difficult to see. The degree of “similarity” is somewhat open to discussion and is meant to be understood and applied to a wide variety of scenarios in conjunction with the purpose statement for this code standard, which is to “integrate new construction into existing context and use massing options that respect historic buildings.” Staff finds that a building equal to or less than the width of the comparative historic building, when that building is on the front of the development site, would be most appropriate to meet this standard. In that scenario, visibility of the new construction from the street would be further minimized and would underscore the subordinate relationship of new construction to the original building. However, staff finds the degree of variation from that ideal is within an acceptable range and, in combination with the nearly 30-foot distance between the buildings, meets the minimum requirements of the standard. Yes Massing and Building Articulation 2. In all zone districts, stepbacks must be located on new buildings to create gradual massing transitions at the same height or one story above the height of historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. Additionally, in the Downtown zone district, the widest portions of stepbacks required in the Downtown zone district stepback standard shall be on building portions closest to historic resources. Because the building heights are the same, no stepback is required and this requirement is not applicable to the project. N/A Packet Pg. 65 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 6 Building Materials 3. The lower story facades until any stepback (required or otherwise) must be constructed of authentic, durable, high quality materials (brick, stone, glass, terra cotta, stucco (non EIFS), precast concrete, wood, cast iron, architectural metal) installed to industry standards. The proposed use of a traditional three-coat hard coat stucco finish meets the standard and provides a durable, low-maintenance option for the primary building material. The natural stone veneer product also appears to meet the standard for durability and authenticity, although the final product choice should be verified. The proposed use of Louisiana Pacific Smartside wood lap siding in the smooth finish, which is an engineered wood product, does not meet the standard in respect to authenticity but could be considered appropriate due to its expected durability. It is also used as a secondary material. Yes Building Materials 4. New construction shall reference one or more of the predominate material(s) on historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley, by using at least two of the following to select the primary material(s) for any one to three story building on the lower story facades until any stepbacks (required or otherwise): 1) type; 2) scale; 3) color; 4) three-dimensionality; 5) pattern. The proposal has been updated to reflect that the materials requirement should reference the structures at 608 S Howes (horizontal lap siding) and 612 S Howes (stucco) as the primary points of comparison because they are on or abutting the development site. The primary material is three-coat stucco that is similar to the historic stucco finish in type and color, which fully meets the standard. Yes Façade Details 5. Use at least one of the following: 1) similar window pattern; 2) similar window proportion of height to width; 3) similar solid-to-void pattern as found on historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. The predominate window proportions in the area of adjacency are vertically oriented rectangular openings, mostly as single one-over-one windows with a few pairs. The window pattern and proportions have been updated to reflect similar styles and proportions as well as a similar solid-to-void pattern, and appropriately compatible fenestration has also been added to the side elevations. Yes Façade Details 6. Use select horizontal or vertical reference lines or elements (such as rooflines, cornices, and bell courses) to relate the new construction to historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. Floor heights and roof heights are similar; the updated design shows a hipped roof to reference the historic roof, and a gabled entrance canopy has been added over the recessed entrance, which is now on the west elevation (further enhancing the design reference between the historic and new building). Most importantly, the building form has been updated to remove the overhang feature, resulting in a more similar and simplified rectangular residential building form. Yes Packet Pg. 66 Agenda Item 4 Item 4, Page 7 Visibility of Historic Features New construction shall not cover or obscure character-defining architectural elements, such as windows or primary design features of historic resources on the development site, abutting, or across a side alley. The position of the new construction on the site prevents visual impact on the existing structure at the front of the lot. Visibility is greatly impacted from the less important alley view, as noted above, but the visibility of the rear elevation and its features is retained from the interior of the site. Y 3.4.7(E)(3): Plan of Protection A plan of protection will be required prior to the final staff review and approval of this development project. Staff will work with the applicant to complete the document in full and ensure that the historic resources on and near the construction site will be fully protected throughout the construction process. Sample Motion: The Commission may propose a motion for a recommendation of approval or denial of the proposal based on the following suggested outline: “I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to the Decision Maker [approval/denial] of the development proposal for 612 S. Howes Street, finding it [is/is not] in compliance with the standards contained in Land Use Code section 3.4.7 for the following reasons: • The project [meets/does not meet] the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. • The project [design reflects/does not reflect] massing, building materials, and façade details that are compatible with the historic context, [creates/does not create] a visual relationship between the historic architecture and the new construction, and [meets/does not meet] the requirements outlined in Table 1 of Section 3.4.7. • The proposed design [protects/does not protect] the visibility of nearby historic resources. Note: The Commission may elaborate on these basic findings, propose additional findings, or remove any of these proposed findings according to its evaluation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Applicant Submittal 2. 612 S Howes Architectural Survey Form 3. Staff Presentation Packet Pg. 67 0DVVLQJDQG%XLOGLQJ$UWLFXODWLRQ ‡ 7KHSURSRVHGQHZFRQVWUXFWLRQVKDOOEHGHWDFKHGDQGVHWEDFNIURPWKHH[LVWLQJ VWUXFWXUHWRYLVXDOO\DSSHDUVPDOOHULQPDVVWRWKHRULJLQDOKRPHIURP+RZHV 6WUHHW ‡ 7KHQRUWKDQGVRXWKEXLOGLQJVHWEDFNVZLOOEHDSSUR[LPDWHO\IWLQFRPSOLDQFH ZLWK]RQLQJUHJXODWLRQV ‡ 7KHHDYHKHLJKWLVSURSRVHGWREHHTXDORUVOLJKWO\OHVVWKDQWKHH[LVWLQJKRPH ZKLOHWKHRYHUDOOURRIKHLJKWZLOOEHNHSWORZHUWRDLGLQPLQLPL]LQJWKHPDVVRIWKH QHZFRQVWUXFWLRQ ‡ 3URSRVHGPDLQHQWULHVDUHORFDWHGRQWKHZHVWHOHYDWLRQIDFLQJWKHVKDUHG FRXUW\DUGDQG+RZHV6WUHHW ‡ 7KHFHQWHUSRUWLRQRIWKHEXLOGLQJKDVEHHQFUHDWHGWRYLVXDOO\VHSDUDWHWKHOLYLQJ XQLWVXVLQJKRUL]RQWDOVLGLQJVLPLODUWRWKHSURSHUWLHVGLUHFWO\QHLJKERULQJWRWKH QRUWKDQGVRXWK ‡ 7KHSURSRVHGURRILVDKLSVW\OHURRIWRUHVHPEOHWKHH[LVWLQJKRPHDQG QHLJKERULQJVWUXFWXUHVDVUHFRPPHQGHGE\6WDII %XLOGLQJ0DWHULDOV ‡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acket Pg. 69 6WRQH9HQHHU ‡ 0DQXI7%' ‡ 3URGXFW2OG:RUOG ‡ &RORU6LPLODUWR([LVWLQJ +RUL]RQWDO6PRRWK/DS 6LGLQJ ([SRVXUH ‡ 0DQXI/3 /RXLVLDQD 3DFLILF ‡ 3URGXFW6PRRWK6PDUW6LGH /DS6LGLQJ ‡ &RORU*UD\ &RDW6WXFFR6\VWHP ‡ 0DQXI672 RUVLPLODU ‡ 3URGXFW0HGLXP7H[WXUH ‡ &RORU0DWFK([LVWLQJ $VSKDOW6KLQJOHV ‡ 0DQXI7DPNR+HULWDJH :RRGJDWH ‡ 3URGXFW\HDU+LJK SURILOHVKDNHVW\OHVKLQJOH ‡ &RORU:HDWKHUHG:RRG 6FDOH 3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH 'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\ $5&+,7(&76    30 $5&+ '9LHZVRI3URSRVHG +RZHV   6+RZHV6WUHHW 6$ )RUW&ROOLQV&2 1R 'HVFULSWLRQ 'DWH  /3&:RUN6HVVLRQ&RPPHQWV   /3&0HHWLQJ  9LHZ)URP&HQWUDO&RXUW\DUG 9LHZ)URP$OOH\ZD\ 0DWHULDO/HJHQG ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 70 )LUVW)ORRU3ODQ    5RRI%HDULQJ    6HFRQG)ORRU    $VSKDOW6KLQJOH+LS5RRI :RRG/DS6LGLQJ3DLQWHG &XOWXUHG6WRQH%DVH 7UHDWPHQW (JUHVV&RPSOLDQW'RXEOH +XQJ:LQGRZV 6WXFFRILQLVKVLPLODUWR H[LVWLQJ 6WXFFR%DQG &RYHUHGSDWLRDWPDLQ HQWULHV )LUVW)ORRU3ODQ    5RRI%HDULQJ    6HFRQG)ORRU    ([LVWLQJ+RPH7R5HPDLQ$V,V 6WXFFR)LQLVKVLPLODUWR H[LVWLQJ $VSKDOW6KLQJOH+LS5RRI &XOWXUHG6WRQH)LQLVK ([LVWLQJ6WXFFR)LQLVKWR 5HPDLQ $OOH\ZD\ +RZHV6WUHHW ([LVWLQJ:RRG'HFN 6WDLUV 3URSRVHG'XSOH[ “  3URSRVHG&RXUW\DUG “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“  3URSRVHG'XSOH[ “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acket Pg. 73 83 ([LVWLQJ3DYHG$OOH\ZD\ 6+RZHV6WUHHW 3DUNLQJ5HT VLQ72' ‡ 2QH  EVERGREEN TREES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE 7 Picea abies `Cupressina` 6` B&B Fastigiate Norway Spruce DECIDUOUS SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE 25 Caryopteris x clandonensis `Dark Knight` 5 gal. Dark Knight Spirea 13 Cornus sanguinea `Arctic Fire` TM 5 gal. Arctic Fire Dogwood GRASSES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE 53 Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster` 1 gal. Feather Reed Grass 3 Pennisetum alopecuroides `Hameln` 1 gal. Hameln Fountain Grass 15 Sporobolus heterolepis 1 gal. Prairie Dropseed PERENNIALS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE 6 Lavandula angustifolia `Munstead` 1 gal. Munstead English Lavender 22 Rudbeckia fulgida sullivantii `Goldsturm` 1 gal. Black-eyed Susan 01 GENERAL SYMBOL DESCRIPTION QTY IRRIGATED TURF - 1,190 sf DURA-TURF SOD NON-IRRIGATED NATIVE PRAIRIES 100 sf MEADOW GRASS MIX - ARKANSAS VALLEY SEED MIX OR APPROVED EQUAL ROCK COBBLE - GRAY 2,121 sf AREAS TO RECEIVE 4" - 8" MAX SMOOTH COBBLE OVER WEED BARRIER FABRIC Landscape Plan & Tree Inventory Sheet Number: Fort Collins CO Center Green Properties LLC PROJECT TITLE REVISIONS ISSUE DATE SHEET TITLE SHEET INFORMATION DATE SEAL NOVEMBER 13, 2019 DATE PREPARED FOR 612 South Howes Street 612 HOWES Boulder CO 80306-4655 PO Box 4655 OWNER: Landscape Plan & Tree Inventory Plant Palette SCALE 1" = 10'-0" 0 10' 15' 20' NORTH Existing Tree Schedule COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION TO BE REMOVED MITIGATION REQUIRED REASON FOR REMOVAL 1.KENTUCKY COFFEETREE 14.5" FAIR PLUS NO YES - 2.5 -- 2. BOXELDER 2"-4", 6 STEMS FAIR MINUS NO NO -- THAN FINISH GRADE / IRRIGATION TREE WELL TO BE PROVIDED OPEN BURLAP AROUND TRUNK. CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP GROUND COVER & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL & 1/3 COMPOST. THOROUGHLY WATER SETTLE SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.) 3" MIN. 2" AWAY FROM FOLIAGE SECTION EXISTING SOIL FOR SHRUBS THAN DIA. OF TO BE 6" LARGER PLANTING HOLE ROOTBALL FOR DIA. OF ROOTBALL 12" LARGER THAN GROUNDCOVER. KEEP MULCH LAYER FINISH GRADE TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE/IRRIGATION SHRUB WELL TO BE PROVIDED FOR ALL SHRUBS WITHIN THE BUFFER ENHANCEMENT ZONE CEDAR MULCH RING TO BE TWICE DIAMETER OF ROOT BALL - 2" DEPTH MULCH - SEE NOTES - 5" DEPTH MAXIMUM TRUNK TREE 3" MULCH 12" MIN. SECTION 12" MIN., TYP. NOTE: CEDAR MULCH TREE RING SHALL BE 36" DIA. BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL & 1/3 COMPOST. THOROUGHLY WATER SETTLE TIE GROMMETED NYLON STRAPS TO STAKE WITH WIRE. WIRE ENDS SHALL BE BENT BACK TO ELIMINATE BURRS AND WHITE PVC PIPE ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF WIRE FOR VISUAL AND SAFETY TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER EXISTING SOIL SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.) DRIVE TWO (2) WOOD STAKES PER TREE. REMOVE WIRE CAGE AND/OR TWINE. OPEN BURLAP AROUND TRUNK. CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP PLAN THAN DIA. OF 24" GREATER ROOTBALL FINISH GRADE OAHP1403 Official Eligibility Determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials Determined Eligible - NR Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Determined Not Eligible - NR Determined Eligible - SR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible - SR (Page 1 of 25) Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District I. Identification 1. Resource Number: 5LR1524 2. Temporary Resource Number: Not Applicable 3. County: Larimer 4. City: Fort Collins 5. Historic Building Name: Anderson-Goff House 6. Current Building Name: Not Applicable 7. Building Address: 612 S. Howes St. Fort Collins, CO 80521 8. Owner Name & Address: Center Green Properties LLC P.O. Box 4026 Boulder, CO 80306 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 77 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 2 of 25) II. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6th Township 7 North Range 69 West NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14 10. UTM Reference Zone: 13 Easting: 493193 Northing: 4492083 11. USGS Quad Name: Fort Collins, Colorado Year: 1960 (revised 1984) Map scale: 7.5' 12. Lot(s): S½ of Lot 8 Block: 106 Addition: Harrison’s Addition Year of Addition: 1881 13. Boundary Description and Justification: This legally defined parcel (97141-13-011), clearly delineated by an urban lot and block description, includes the historic house, garage, and their surrounding grounds. III. Architectural Description 14. Building Plan: Rectangular Plan 15. Dimensions in Feet: 25' x 44' 16. Number of Stories: 2 17. Primary External Wall Material(s): Stucco 18. Roof Configuration: Hipped Roof 19. Primary External Roof Material: Composition Roof 20. Special Features: Porch, Chimney, Fence, Glass Block, Flared Eave, Dormer 21. General Architectural Description: This two-story residence is of masonry construction and the original building had a rectangular footprint of 25’ x 32’. This was later expanded to the east with a 12’ x 29’ rear one-story wood frame addition. Facing toward the west, the house rests upon a slightly raised sandstone foundation, two courses of which are visible along the north, south and west walls. The exterior walls are finished with painted stucco. The hipped roof is flared at the eaves and covered with composition shingles. Around the perimeter of the eaves are multiple small, shaped, decorative wood brackets or modillions. A rectangular brick chimney is present on the north roof slope. The west slope has a small gabled dormer with a three-part fixed window. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 78 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 3 of 25) West Wall (front): The façade features a number of the home’s original features. Two entries are located near the northwest corner of the building, each presumably providing access to a separate interior residence. These are accessed by way of a small open porch that may also be described as a concrete stoop with two landings, one at each of the entrances. The northern and western outer edges of the stoop are lined with ornamental wrought iron rails. Two decorative wrought iron posts support the roof above. An early beadboard ceiling also remains in place. The roof above the stoop is gabled, with a flared extension to the south. It is finished with composition shingles. Each of the front entrances holds a wood panel door with a single light in the upper half. To the south of the entries, the first floor wall has an oversized double-hung window with what appears to be an operable lower light and a fixed upper one. This includes a sandstone sill, arched lintel, and wood frames and surrounds. On the second floor are two one-over-one double-hung sash windows, with the south one larger than the other. Both have sandstone sills along with wood frames and surrounds. North Wall (side): The north wall holds no entries into the house. On the main floor are three windows. One of these is a one-over-one double-hung sash window with a sandstone sill and arched lintel. The second is a similar window space that has been filled with twenty-four glass blocks. Toward the building’s northwest corner is a large oculus window with painted and stuccoed wood trim, opaque glass, and small sandstone blocks at the top and bottom. The second floor holds two one-over-one double-hung sash windows, both with sandstone sills. All of the windows have wood frames and surrounds. East Wall (rear): The east wall is dominated by the rear one-story addition, with the original second story wall exposed above. The entry into the addition is found at the building’s southeast corner. This holds a modern wood panel door. Outside of this is a small concrete stoop with metal pipe handrails and metal pipe posts that support a metal hood. North of the entry are two pairs of one-over-one double-hung sash windows with wood frames and surrounds, along with screens. The second floor is reached by way of a modern exterior wood staircase that rises at the building’s northeast corner. This reaches a small deck on the roof of the first-floor addition. The entrance to the house at the deck holds a storm door along with another door that could not be seen. Along the wall south of the entrance is a single one-over-one double-hung sash window with a sandstone sill and wood frame and surrounds. South Wall (side): The south wall holds no entries into the house. On the basement level are three small horizontal windows set into shallow concrete wells. The main floor on the original part of the house has three one-over-one double-hung sash windows with sandstone sills, arched lintels, and wood frames and surrounds. The rear addition to the east holds two small one-over- ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 79 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 4 of 25) one double-hung sash windows with wood frames and surrounds. On the second floor are three one-over-one double-hung sash windows with sandstone sills and wood frames and surrounds. 22. Architectural Style / Building Type: Foursquare 23. Landscaping or Special Setting Features: This residence is located on the east side of Howes Street, four houses south of Myrtle Street. This places it less than one block north of Colorado State University, in an area occupied by houses and heavily populated by students. To the west across Howes Street is a large office building that is owned and occupied by Colorado State University. The house faces west onto a fenced front yard planted with grass and bisected by a concrete sidewalk. Mature trees line a tree lawn along the street. The backyard is largely open, planted with grass, and bordered by fences and trees. A detached garage is located at the rear of the lot along the alley. A sidewalk runs from the garage to the entrance into the rear addition. 24. Associated Buildings, Features or Objects: Garage – This one-story wood frame building with a footprint of 22’ x 32’ is located east of the house along the alleyway. It holds two automobile bays, one at the center and the other to the north, both accessed from the alley to the east. The southern one-third of the building appears to hold shop and/or storage space that is accessed from the south. Resting upon a concrete pad, the building’s exterior walls are finished with board and batten siding. The roof is side-gabled and finished with composition shingles and exposed rafter ends. Two overhead garage doors are present on the east wall, one of them appearing to be much older than the other. The south wall holds a wood panel door with a boarded upper light, along with two small boarded windows with wood surrounds to the east. Along the west wall are three small windows. Two of these are boarded closed and the third contains the original four-light frame with broken panes of glass and boards across the interior. The north wall holds a single small boarded window. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate: Actual: 1900 Source of Information: “City and Country,” Fort Collins Weekly Courier, 26 April 1900, p. 8; “City and Country,” Fort Collins Weekly Courier, 9 August 1900, p. 6. 26. Architect: Unknown Source of Information: Not Applicable ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 80 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 5 of 25) 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of Information: Not Applicable 28. Original Owner: Carl Anderson Source of Information: “City and Country,” Fort Collins Weekly Courier, 26 April 1900, p. 8; “City and Country,” Fort Collins Weekly Courier, 9 August 1900, p. 6. 29. Construction History: House (1900) – While the county assessor’s records state that this house was constructed in 1899, two brief articles about its development that appeared in the Fort Collins newspaper provide evidence that it was actually built during the spring and summer of 1900. When it was erected, the house included a small open porch or stoop at its northwest corner and a full-width open porch to the rear. Historic assessor’s records indicate that the house was remodeled in 1948. This involved construction of the rear addition and likely included the application of stucco to the entire exterior of the building. A 1950 photograph shows that the stucco was present by that time. The small front porch or stoop, with its flared roof extension and wrought iron railing and posts, was also present by 1950 in its current form. Fire insurance maps indicate that a small open porch of the same size has been at this location since the house was constructed. Garage (1948) – In 1903, an animal shed (probably a small horse barn) was added to the rear southeast corner of the property along the alley. This was reportedly designed by Fort Collins architect Montezuma Fuller. Around 1920, the building may have been used as a chicken house. It was demolished in 1935 and replaced with a new chicken house. A historic building permit shows that the garage standing there today was constructed in 1948. 30. Original Location: Yes V. Historical Associations 31. Original Use(s): Domestic / Multiple Dwelling 32. Intermediate Use(s): Not Applicable 33. Current Use(s): Domestic / Multiple Dwelling 34. Site Type(s): Residential Duplex ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 81 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 6 of 25) 35. Historical background: This property first appeared in the historic record in October 1879, when all of the vacant land in block 106, along with several of the surrounding blocks, were sold for $3,500 by Alice and Arthur Patterson to James Harrison. In March 1881, Harrison filed a plat for Harrison’s Addition with the Larimer County clerk’s office. The addition occupied the six square blocks bordered by Mulberry Street on the north, Laurel Street on the south, College Avenue on the east, and Meldrum Street on the west. It was also located just north of the small but growing campus of Colorado Agricultural College, now known as Colorado State University. In September 1881, Harrison sold Lot 8 in Block 106 for $200 to John A. McCoy, about whom nothing is known. One year later, in November 1882, he sold the south half of the lot to Bessie Graham for $125. Bessie was the wife of Guy Graham, both of them immigrants from Ireland. Prior to their arrival in Fort Collins, they lived for years in Esopus, New York, where Guy was a boat captain on the Hudson River. In Fort Collins, they resided in a home on Peterson Street and Guy initially worked as a day laborer and later became a landlord. Bessie held on to the vacant lot on Howes Street for a full decade before selling it in late 1892. She died five months later, in May 1893, and was buried in Grandview Cemetery. Guy lived until 1909 and was also laid to rest there. Bessie Graham sold the lot on Howes Street at the end of December 1892 for $200 to prominent Fort Collins architect Montezuma Fuller, about whom much has been written. Key to the property on Howes Street is the fact that Fuller was not only designing buildings during this time period but was also investing heavily in properties, including vacant lots. The low purchase price for Lot 8 indicates that it was still vacant at that time. Just over one month later, in February 1893, he transferred it to his wife, Anna Eliza Fuller, along with a number of additional properties in town. Anna held on to the lot on Howes Street through the end of the decade before selling it to a new owner. There is no evidence that the Fullers developed the property during their period of ownership throughout the 1890s. In August 1899, Anna Fuller sold the south half of Lot 8 to Carl Anderson for a purchase price of $275, again providing evidence that the property was still vacant. By that time, Anderson was the principal stockholder, president and general manager of the Courier Printing & Publishing Company, which produced the Fort Collins Courier newspaper and provided job printing services to the community. Born in 1872 in St. Charles, Iowa, the son of a newspaper owner, he learned the printer’s trade and became a travel writer for a railroad. After attending the University of Mississippi, he moved west to Colorado intending to purchase the Loveland Reporter. However, that deal fell through and instead he acquired a majority of stock in the Courier Printing & Publishing Company of Fort Collins, which he took control of in early 1899. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 82 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 7 of 25) On 26 April 1900, the Fort Collins Courier printed a small item of local interest informing its readers that work was about to commence on the construction of a $2,000 brick residence on South Howes Street for Carl Anderson. At that time, he was living in a rental house on East Mulberry Street, which he shared with his sisters Maude and Pearle. Elizabeth Maude was employed as advertising manager of the Courier Printing & Publishing Company and Clara Pearle was a student in her early teens. The new house rose over the following months and was completed in time for the Anderson siblings to move in during the second week of August. In a second small article published on 9 August 1900, the newspaper described the “eight room brick” house as a “handsome” building. No information was provided by the newspaper regarding who might have designed and built the house. While it may have been the work of architect Montezuma Fuller, a thorough search of historic records from the time period uncovered no evidence of his involvement in the project. When the house at 612 South Howes Street was constructed, it was designed with two entrances, one for the owners and another providing access to a separate residential unit for tenants. The first tenant in the home was Mrs. E. M. Smith, who resided there around 1901. A subsequent tenant around 1903 was Ralph Parshall, who at the time was a student at Colorado Agricultural College. Parshall received his B.S. in civil and irrigation engineering and went on to a notable career as a professor and director of the Division of Irrigation with the US Department of Agriculture’s Soil Conservation Service. He invented the Parshall Flume, a device for measuring running water in ditches that spread across the world. Years later, Parshall was involved in planning for the Colorado-Big Thompson project. Throughout the 1900s and 1910s, the rental space in the house continued to be occupied by a series of students. The Anderson siblings lived together in the house at 612 South Howes Street throughout the first decade of the twentieth century, and at some point it appears that Maude acquired a one-half interest in the property. However, this changed during the summer of 1909. In late June of that year, Carl married Genora Evans and they moved into a house of their own on West Oak Street. A few days later, on the first day of July, Maude married a man by the name of Ralph Algene Goff. Born in 1882 in Missouri, by the late 1890s Ralph had moved west with his family to Colorado City west of Colorado Springs, where his father worked as a lumber dealer. Around 1906, he moved to Fort Collins and worked for the Newton Lumber Company before taking a bookkeeper position with the J. V. Barker Mercantile Company. He also had a fine tenor voice and became known in the local music community. On Ralph and Maude’s wedding day, Carl transferred his one-half ownership in 612 South Howes Street to his sister, who became the property’s sole owner. Following their wedding ceremony, which took place in the house on South Howes, Ralph and Maude honeymooned in Colorado Springs and Manitou Springs. Back in Fort Collins, they settled into the house and Ralph became ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 83 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 8 of 25) involved with the family publishing business. He essentially stepped into Maude’s positions as secretary and advertising manager. Although the Courier was sold in 1916, Ralph continued on as its secretary-treasurer and superintendent. In June 1913, the home served as the venue for another family wedding, this time of Jesse J. Jones and Clara Pearle Anderson, the younger sister of Carl and Maude. Pearle graduated from the State Teachers’ College in Greeley and had been employed as a Fort Collins kindergarten teacher. Jesse was involved with a family contracting business known as Jones & Son. Following the wedding, they resided in a house at 221 West Mulberry Street. On 16 March 1911, the Goffs welcomed the arrival of what would turn out to be their only child, a boy they named Ralph Harper. Known by his middle name, he spent his first decade of life in the house on South Howes and would later become one of Fort Collins’ most renowned native sons. In 1920, Ralph retired from the publishing business as the company came under new ownership again with consolidation of the town’s two primary newspapers, the Courier and the Express. The Goffs left Fort Collins and moved to Santa Ana, California, where Ralph became a merchant. He died in 1924 and was buried in that city’s Fairhaven Memorial Park. Maude took on sales jobs and then opened a women’s clothing store in the mid-1930s. She died in 1956 and was buried in the same cemetery as her husband. Between 1931 and 1934, Harper attended the Chouinard Art Institute in Los Angeles. In 1935, he married Florence Newcom and began to secure work as an illustrator for prominent publications including Esquire, Collier’s and National Geographic. Harper was employed from around 1935 to 1948 as a movie set designer at the Warner Brothers studio, working on films such as Casablanca, Sergeant York, and The Charge of the Light Brigade. During World War II, he developed paint schemes for camouflage used by the Army and Navy. In 1951, Harper had a chance meeting with Walt Disney in a London model train store and was offered a job with Disney’s production company. Accepting the offer, he went to work for Disney Studios as an art director and production designer. One of his most notable projects there was the 1954 film 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, for which he designed the Nautilus submarine. When Walt Disney launched the development of Disneyland in the early 1950s, Harper Goff became one of the project’s primary designers, or “imagineers.” He is credited with having designed Main Street USA along with the Jungle River Cruise. One of Harper’s main sources of inspiration for the look and feel of Main Street USA came from his memories of growing up in Fort Collins, when he was living in the house at 612 South Howes Street. Harper remained active professionally into the 1970s, working on the Dragnet television series and providing art direction for the films Fantastic Voyage and Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. He was also involved in the design of EPCOT’s World Showcase in Orlando. Harper died in 1993 in Palm Springs and was buried adjacent to his grandfather in Colorado Springs’ Evergreen Cemetery. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 84 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 9 of 25) In October 1914, Ralph and Maude Goff secured a $2,500 loan from the Colorado Investment and Realty Company using their house on Howes Street as collateral. Around 1919, it seems that they either defaulted on the loan or failed to pay their property taxes, because the house ended up with the Larimer County public trustee and the Goffs moved into a rental on South Myrtle Street before they left for California. In October 1925, the county sold the property at public auction to the Colorado Investment and Realty Company, which had submitted a high bid of $4,653. During the 1920s, the house was occupied by two primary rental tenants. The first of these was Mable P. Snyder, the widow of J. Augustus Snyder. She lived in the home with her son Monroe from about 1920 to 1925 and rented furnished rooms to boarders. Mable also hosted meetings of a women’s group known as the Current Events and Travel Club. In December 1920, the Fort Collins Courier printed an article about a fire in her chicken house that killed forty-two birds, wiping out an important source of her income. The next occupants, from about 1926 to 1928, were farmers Joseph and Mable Bungler, along with their children Alfred, Josephine and Paul. Both Alfred and Josephine were students at nearby Colorado Agricultural College. In 1929, the Colorado Investment and Realty Company sold the property at 612 South Howes Street for $5,000 to Mae Femling. The contract involved a payment plan financed by the seller and in 1934 Mae received the deed to the property. Born in Wisconsin in 1885, she had worked as a nurse for many years, first in Sterling and then at the hospital in Fort Collins. In 1931, she married Charles William Ohley, a native of Pennsylvania who was born there in 1874 and then farmed in Kansas for a number of years. Mae and Charles remained in the house on Howes Street into the 1940s. Charles died in 1945 and was buried in Grandview Cemetery. Three years later, Mae sold the house and then died in 1949 and was buried next to her husband. The new owners who purchased the property in 1948 were John and Helen McIver, who had arrived in Fort Collins about a decade earlier. Born in Minnesota in 1890, John was manager of the Prudential Insurance Company office in Fort Collins. Helen was a native of Wisconsin, born there in 1897. The couple lived in the house for about four years. Around 1950, they were renting the secondary residential unit to Lou and Leta Green. He worked for the Forney Manufacturing Company. In 1952, the McIvers sold the home to Robert and Mary Comstock. Robert was a geologist who worked for the Ideal Cement Company. They remained there for four years and during that time rented the second unit to Rome Snell, a department manager at Montgomery Wards. In 1956, the Comstocks sold the home to John and Harriett Toliver, who owned the property for the next twenty-two years. During the late 1950s, the house was occupied by two tenants. The primary residence housed Robert and Lois Richards. He was a supervisor and service foreman with the Mountain States ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 85 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 10 of 25) Telephone & Telegraph Company. A college student by the name of Everette Stockwell occupied the secondary unit. The Tolivers appear to have first occupied the home in the early 1960s and remained there for many years. John was a sales clerk and then officer of the Toliver-Kinney Mercantile Company, a downtown hardware store. They appear to have rented the second unit in the house to students. The Tolivers held onto the property until 1978, when they sold it to local developer and property investor Lester Kaplan. 36. Sources of information: Ariel Yearbook, Santa Ana High School, Santa Ana, California, 1929-1930. Biography of Ralph L. Parshall, Guide to the Ralph L. Parshall Collection, Colorado State University, Water Resource Archive, 2017. Burial Records, Bertha Mae Femling Ohley and Charles William Ohley, Grandview Cemetery, Fort Collins, CO. Bertha’s Date of Death: 24 November 1949. Charles’ Date of Death: 11 May 1945. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, Bessie and Guy Graham, Grandview Cemetery, Fort Collins, CO. Bessie’s Date of Death: 29 May 1893. Guy’s Date of Death: 9 September 1909. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, Carl A. Anderson, Grandview Cemetery, Fort Collins, CO. Date of Death: 25 November 1943. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, John Patrick McIver and Helen B. McIver, Grandview Cemetery, Fort Collins, CO. John’s Date of Death: 17 September 1964. Helen’s Date of Death: 17 July 1987. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, Mable R. Pearson Snyder, Grandview Cemetery, Fort Collins, CO. Date of Death: 13 January 1939. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, Ralph Algene Goff and Elizabeth Maude Anderson Goff (Willsey), Fairhaven Memorial Park, Santa Ana, CA. Ralph’s Date of Death: 18 January 1924. Maude’s Date of Death: 28 July 1956. Located at www.findagrave.com. Burial Records, Ralph Harper Goff, Evergreen Cemetery, Colorado Springs, CO. Date of Death: 3 March 1993. Located at www.findagrave.com. California Voter Registrations, Listings for Ralph Goff, Maude Goff and Harper Goff, 1922-1934. City of Fort Collins Building Permits, 612 S. Howes St., 1935-1948. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 86 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 11 of 25) Colorado State Census, Listings for Guy and Bessie Graham, Fort Collins, CO, 1885. “Disneyland’s Main Street USA,” The E Ticket, Number 14, Winter 1992-1993. Draft Registration Record, Ralph Algene Goff, Fort Collins, CO, 12 September 1918. Draft Registration Record, Ralph Harper Goff, Hollywood, CA, 16 October 1940. Fire Insurance Maps of Fort Collins, Sanborn Map Company, 1895-1963. Fort Collins City Directories, Listings for 612 S. Howes St., 1902-1968. Fort Collins Courier “Local and Personal News,” 23 April 1919, p. 4. “Happenings in Society, Clubs and Churches,” 19 January 1920, p. 4. “Messrs. Emmerson and Goff Retire,” 24 May 1920, p. 2. “For Rent,” 2 August 1920, p. 7. “Rooms for Rent,” 13 September 1920, p. 7. “Stolen,” 16 November 1920, p. 5. “Forty-Two Chickens Are Killed in Fire on South Houes [sic] St.,” 17 December 1920, p. 1. “Society,” 4 November 1921, p. 4. “Personals,” 25 January 1922, p. 3. “Personals,” 29 August 1922, p. 3. Fort Collins Express “A Short Story of the Daily Courier by Carl Anderson,” 20 May 1923, Express Section, p. 5. Fort Collins Topographic Quadrangle Maps, US Geological Survey (1908, 1960, 1969, 1984) Fort Collins Weekly Courier “City and Country,” 26 April 1900, p. 8. “City and Country,” 9 August 1900, p. 6. “City and Country,” 19 September 1901, p. 5. “Wanted,” 6 May 1903, p. 8. “Lost,” 8 June 1904, p. 11. “Lost,” 6 November 1907, p. 12. “Block Voile Skirt Lost,” 16 September 1908, p. 9. Local Note, 23 December 1908, p. 8. “Local and Personal,” 2 June 1909, p. 15. “Maude Anderson Becomes Bride of Ralph A. Goff,” 7 July 1909, p. 6. “Local and Personal,” 7 July 1909, p. 15. “Good Rooms for Students,” 15 September 1910, p. 4. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 87 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 12 of 25) “Counteractive Agents,” 13 June 1913, p. 6. “Jones-Anderson,” 20 June 1913, p. 2. Francaviglia, Richard V. Main Street Revisited. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 1996. Gluck, Keith, “Harper Goff: The ‘Second’ Imagineer,” The Walt Disney Family Museum, 9 May 2017. Located Online at www.waltdisney.org. Harper Goff, IMDb Listing, Located Online at www.imdb.com. “Harper Goff,” Obituary, Variety Magazine, 6 April 1993. Historic Building Inventory Record, 612 S. Howes St., Fort Collins, CO (Site #5LR1524). Prepared by Tom and Laurie Simmons, Front Range Research Associates, January 1992. Iovine, Julie V., “A Tale of Two Main Streets,” New York Times, 15 October 1998, p. 1. Larimer County Assessor, Real Estate Appraisal Cards and Photographs, Parcel 97141-13-011, County Assessor’s Office and Fort Collins Museum of Discovery Archives, 1950-2018. Larimer County, Clerk & Recorder’s Office, Title Records (S½ Lot 8, Block 106) Warranty Deed (Block 106), Alice M. and A. H. Patterson to James Harrison, 21 October 1879 (Book K, Page 380). Warranty Deed (Lot 8), James Harrison to John A. McCoy, 27 September 1881 (Book 24, Page 259). Warranty Deed (S½ Lot 8), John A. McCoy to Mrs. Guy Graham, 20 November 1882 (Book 38, Page 14). Warranty Deed (S½ Lot 8), Mrs. Guy Graham to M. W. Fuller, 31 December 1892 (Book 95, Page 21). Warranty Deed (S½ Lot 8 plus other properties), M. W. Fuller to Anna Eliza Fuller, 11 February 1893 (Book 95, Page 83). Warranty Deed (S½ Lot 8), Anna Eliza Fuller to Carl Anderson, 23 August 1899 (Book 173, Page 552). Warranty Deed (one-half interest in S½ Lot 8), Carl Anderson to Maude Anderson, 1 July 1909 (Book 265, Page 395). Warranty Deed (one-half interest in S½ Lot 8), Carl Anderson to Maude Anderson Goff, 18 September 1909 (Book 266, Page 192). Trust Deed, Maude A. and Ralph A. Goff to the Colorado Investment and Realty Company, 3 October 1914 (Book 216, Page 267). Certificate of Purchase, Public Trustee of Larimer County to the Colorado Investment and Realty Company, 23 October 1925 (Book 494, Page 198). Agreement for Sale & Purchase, Colorado Investment and Realty Company to Mae Fleming, 22 August 1929 (Book 612, Page 4). ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 88 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 13 of 25) Warranty Deed, Colorado Investment and Realty Company to May [sic] Ohley, 19 November 1934 (Book 648, Page 470). Warranty Deed, Mae Ohley to John P. and Helen B. McIver, 13 April 1948 (Book 852, Page 139). Warranty Deed, John P. and Helen B. McIver to Robert P. and Mary O. Comstock, 25 October 1952 (Book 939, Page 471). Warranty Deed, Robert P. and Mary O. Comstock to John O. and Harriett S. Toliver, 9 March 1956 (Book 1014, Page 38). Warranty Deed, John O. and Harriett S. Toliver to Lester M. Kaplan, 26 January 1978 (Book 1831, Page 777). Marriage Record, Mable Pearson and J. A. Snyder, Watertown, SD, 18 December 1909. Marriage Record, Mae Femling and Charles Ohley, Greeley, CO, 31 August 1931. Marriage Record, Ralph Algene Goff and Elizabeth Maude Anderson, Fort Collins, CO, 1 July 1909. Marriage Record, Ralph Harper Goff and Florence W. Newcom, Los Angeles, CA, 26 August 1935. McWilliams, Karen. City of Fort Collins, 2004 Architectural Survey. Site Form for 612 S. Howes St. New York Census Records, Listings for Guy and Bessie Graham, Esopus, NY, 1875. North Hollywood, California City Directory, Listings for Harper and Florence Goff, 1944. “Old Town and Disneyland’s Main Street USA,” Fort Collins History Connection, Located Online at www.fcmod.org. Plat of Harrison’s Addition to the City of Fort Collins, 24 March 1881, Larimer County Clerk and Recorder (Book RE1, Page 49). Santa Ana and South Orange County, California City Directories, Listings for the Goff Family, 1923-1934. US Census Records, Carl A. Anderson (brother) and Maude E. Anderson (sister), Fort Collins, CO, 1900-1910. US Census Records, Guy and Bessie Graham, Esopus, NY, 1870; Fort Collins, CO, 1880-1900. US Census Records, John and Helen McIver, Fort Collins, CO, 1940. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 89 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 14 of 25) US Census Records, Mable Pearson Snyder, Lincoln, IA, 1900; Watertown, SD, 1910; Fort Collins, CO, 1920-1930. US Census Records, Mae Femling Ohley and Charles Ohley, Sterling, CO, 1910- 1920; Pratt County, KS, 1920; Fort Collins, CO, 1930. US Census Records, Ralph A. and Maude Goff and Harper Goff, Colorado City, CO, 1900; Fort Collins, CO, 1920; Santa Ana, CA, 1930; Los Angeles, CA, 1940. Watrous, Ansel. History of Larimer County, Colorado. Fort Collins, CO: The Courier Printing & Publishing Company, 1911. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Applicable Fort Collins Criteria (Fort Collins Municipal Code, Chapter 14, Section 14-5) A. Events: Associated with events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the community, State or Nation (a specific event or pattern of events) X B. Persons/Groups: Associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can be identified and documented C. Design/Construction: Embodies the identifiable characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represents the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality; possesses high artistic values or design concepts; or part of a recognizable and distinguished group of properties D. Information potential: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history Does not meet any of the above Fort Collins designation criteria Analysis of Fort Collins Significance: In Fort Collins, a property may be eligible for local designation even when it is found to be ineligible for the more stringent State and National Registers of Historic Places. In this case, the property at 612 South Howes Street is eligible for designation as a City of Fort Collins landmark under Criterion B for its association with the lives of several persons who are important to the history of the community. These include siblings Carl and Maude Anderson along with Ralph Goff, all three of whom were instrumental in the field of publishing as the owners and managers of the Fort Collins Courier. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 90 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 15 of 25) The house is also eligible for its association with Harper Goff, who lived there from 1911 to 1920. Harper began his career in the mid-1930s as an illustrator working for Esquire, Collier’s and National Geographic. He then became a successful Hollywood art director and set designer with Warner Brothers and Disney Studios from the 1930s to the 1970s. Throughout this period, he worked on a number of highly successful films, among them Casablanca, Sergeant York, The Charge of the Light Brigade, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Fantastic Voyage and Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. He also worked on the Dragnet television series. During the early 1950s, Harper was engaged by Walt Disney to serve as one of the firm’s first “imagineers.” In this role, he designed the Main Street USA attraction at Disneyland, which he based in part upon his memories of growing up in Fort Collins while living in the house on South Howes Street. Harper studied the historic character of downtown Fort Collins and used the look and feel of some of its buildings as inspiration for the design of Main Street USA. Because of this achievement, he is celebrated in the community as one of the city’s most famous native sons. Although Harper lived in Fort Collins during his childhood, with his professional achievements coming later, it was his experience there that provided memories that became part of one of the nation’s most important and beloved entertainment venues. If the property at 612 South Howes Street is someday clearly found to have been designed by local architect Montezuma Fuller, it will need to be reevaluated to determine whether it is locally eligible under Criterion C in relation to its architecture. Although elements of its original design, workmanship and materials remain apparent today, this may be problematic because the building’s exterior was faced with stucco in the late 1940s, obscuring the original brickwork. The property is not eligible under Criteria A or D. 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 possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 91 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 16 of 25) X Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Not Applicable 40. Period of significance: Not Applicable 41. Level of significance: National No State No Local No 42. Statement of significance: Based upon the extensive archival research and field documentation completed for this project, this property was found to have been developed in 1900 during a period of economic and neighborhood expansion in Fort Collins. It was one of many houses built around that time in the 600 block of South Howes in the Harrison’s Addition, located just north of the Colorado Agricultural College campus. In this case, the house was originally constructed as a duplex, allowing the owners to generate income from tenants. Between 1900 and 1920, the property was owned and occupied by the Anderson and Goff families, who were related by marriage. Carl Anderson, who had the house built, was the owner and manager of the Fort Collins Courier newspaper together with his sister Maude. They lived in this house from 1900 to 1909. The rental unit was occupied by a series of college students. In 1909, Maude married Ralph Goff and the couple occupied the home until they moved out in 1920. Ralph immediately joined the family business and became an important manager of the Fort Collins Courier. In 1911, they were joined in the home by a son named Ralph Harper, who grew up there and later developed a highly successful career as a Hollywood art director and set designer. During the course of his career, he was involved in a number of films that are among the industry’s most famous classics. Harper then became one of Walt Disney’s original “imagineers,” responsible for the conceptual design and development of Disneyland’s Main Street USA attraction. He turned to his childhood in Fort Collins as a primary source of inspiration for the feature’s design. This property does not appear to be eligible for the NRHP under Criterion A because it was not found to have been adequately associated with an important historic event or pattern of events. Despite the importance of several early owners and occupants of the home to the local community and its history, the house was not where Harper Goff engaged in the career that brought him fame. Similarly, while the Andersons and Goffs were important in the local publishing business during the first two decades of the twentieth century, this is not where their work was conducted. Consequently, the property does not meet the standard for NRHP eligibility under Criterion B. In relation to Criterion C, the house retains many elements of its early twentieth century style and detailing. Yet the archival record indicates that it was likely stuccoed years later in the late 1940s. Although this is a historic alteration, the building’s original brickwork is obscured and there are certainly better ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 92 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 17 of 25) examples of the Foursquare style in Fort Collins. Because of this, the property does not convey an adequate enough sense of its original historic architecture and materials to qualify as eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C. There is no indication that it might be eligible under Criterion D. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: The brick Foursquare style house on this property was constructed in 1900 and over the following decades appears to have remained largely unaltered. In 1948, the building was remodeled. Archival evidence shows that the work completed certainly involved construction of the rear addition. Assessor’s records also suggest that the house’s exterior was stuccoed at that time. The small front porch may date from when the house was erected, with fire insurance maps from as early as 1901 showing that a porch of similar size was already present at that location. This home never had a full-width front porch, as has been speculated. Inspection of the porch’s architectural details confirmed that it is certainly over fifty years old. A 1950 photograph of the property shows that the current porch, complete with its flared and extended roofline and wrought ironwork, was already present by that time. Behind the house, the rear yard originally held an animal barn in the property’s southeast corner. This may have been used to shelter a horse and buggy. Built in 1903, the barn was later removed in 1935. The automobile garage that stands along the alley today was erected in 1948, the same year that remodeling of the house was completed. This building is not known to have experienced non- historic alterations other than replacement of one of the garage doors. While redevelopment has taken place across the street to the west and across the alley to the east, the house is in its original location and continues to stand among residences of similar age to the north and south. Consequently, the aspect of setting has been partially diminished. The building retains a number of historic features, including its asymmetrical facade, Foursquare style and massing, raised sandstone foundation, double-hung sash windows with exposed sandstone sills and arched lintels, a large oculus window on the north, its hipped roof with a small front dormer, and decorative modillions along the eaves. The stuccoed walls appear to date from 1948 and are a historic alteration to the building. Today the house exhibits a reasonably good degree of integrity in the areas of design and feeling. The aspects of materials and workmanship are somewhat diminished due to the brickwork being covered with stucco. Overall, this property retains a degree of integrity that generally allows it to convey its origins in the early twentieth century, its historic use as a residential duplex, and its association with its early and prominent owners. The only substantial alteration to the house within the past fifty years is the rear exterior stairway and rooftop deck on the rear addition. These are minimally exposed to view from the front of the property. Because the building’s original brickwork has been covered with stucco, the house does not appear to retain a level of ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 93 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 18 of 25) integrity that would support NRHP significance in relation to the period from 1900 to 1920 when it was occupied by the Andersons and Goffs. On the other hand, its integrity seems adequate enough to provide support for significance and eligibility as a potential Fort Collins landmark. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Not Eligible 45. Is there National Register district potential? No Discuss: This property appears does not appear to be associated with an adequate concentration of historically and architecturally significant properties that are contiguous to one another and might allow for the creation of a National Register district. If there is National Register district potential, is this building contributing: N/A 46. If the building is in an existing National Register district, is it contributing: N/A VIII. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: #4829-4871 Negatives filed at: Tatanka Historical Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1909, Fort Collins, CO 80522 48. Report title: Intensive-Level Documentation of the Property at 612 S. Howes St., Fort Collins, CO 49. Date(s): 12 October 2018 50. Recorder(s): Ron Sladek, President 51. Organization: Tatanka Historical Associates, Inc. 52. Address: P.O. Box 1909, Fort Collins, CO 80522 53. Phone number(s): 970 / 221-1095 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 94 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 19 of 25) Site Location Map USGS Fort Collins 7.5’ Topographic Quadrangle 1960 (photorevised 1984) ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 95 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 20 of 25) Aerial Site Diagram ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 96 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 21 of 25) Historic Photographs Historic View of the House, 1950 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Historic Assessor’s Card ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 97 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 22 of 25) Historic Photographs Historic View of the House, 1968 Fort Collins Museum of Discovery, Historic Assessor’s Card ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 98 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 23 of 25) Current Photographs Front of the House, View to the Southeast Front of the House, View to the Northeast ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 99 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 24 of 25) Current Photographs Back of the House, View to the Northwest Rear of the House, View to the Southwest ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 100 Resource Number: 5LR1524 Address: 612 S. Howes St. Architectural Inventory Form (Page 25 of 25) Current Photographs Garage, View to the Northeast Garage, View to the Southwest ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 101 612 S Howes: Development Review 1 Maren Bzdek, Sr. Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission, November 20, 2019 Area of Adjacency Map 2 Legend Development Site Abutting Within 200 Ft Area of Adjacency Boundary 1 2 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 102 On-Site Historic Resources 3 Anderson-Goff House • Eligibility: Criterion 2 (Persons/Groups) • Carl Anderson, Maude Anderson Goff, Ralph Goff (Fort Collins Courier) • Harper Goff (Walt Disney designer) • 1900: Duplex constructed • 1900-1919: Period of Significance • 1948: Garage, Rear Addition, Stucco Proposed Alterations 4 3.4.7 (D)(3) – Eligible Resources on Site Building Alterations (Residence): • None Building Alterations (Garage): • Demolition Site Alterations: • Duplex behind historic residence • 5-stall parking pad • Courtyard area between structures 3 4 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 103 Staff Findings Alterations to Existing Structures/Site Primary Residence (Historic Duplex) • No proposed changes - all SOI Standards met re: building alterations Garage (Proposed Demolition) • Garage constructed after period of significance • Is not a contributing resource on the site (Commission determination, August 21, 2019) Site Alterations • Additional density, improvements, character change to site in the rear • No proposed changes to the site along Howes 5 Staff Findings 6 Complies with Design Compatibility Standards [3.4.7(E), Table 1] • Standard 1 (similar width): meets minimal requirement for new construction on the rear • Standard 2 (stepback requirement): N/A • Standard 3 (material quality, authenticity, durability): Stucco and natural stone veneer meet standard; engineered wood siding acceptable in small quantity) • Standard 4 (compatible materials): Simplified, compatible finish materials (primarily hard coat stucco) • Standard 5 (windows): Window style/proportion/pattern (vertically oriented, rectangular double-hung, some paired) • Standard 6 (reference elements): Similar roof (hipped, asphalt shingles); similar building form (overhang removed; gabled entrance canopy added) 5 6 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 104 612 S Howes: Development Review 7 Maren Bzdek, Sr. Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission, November 20, 2019 7 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 105 EXCERPT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 August 21, 2019 Meg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair City Hall West Kristin Gensmer, Co-Vice Chair 300 Laporte Avenue Michael Bello Fort Collins, Colorado Mollie Bredehoft Katie Dorn Kevin Murray Anne Nelsen Anna Simpkins 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. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:30 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php. Regular Meeting August 21, 2019 Minutes – Excerpt for 612 S Howes • CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Bello, Bredehoft, Dunn, Gensmer, Nelsen ABSENT: Wallace, Dorn, Murray, Simpkins STAFF: McWilliams, Bzdek, Yatabe, Schiager, Lambrecht ***BEGIN EXCERPT*** 2. 612 S HOWES – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DESCRIPTION: Proposed duplex addition to a historic property, 612 S Howes (the Anderson- Goff House, 1900). Site alterations would include a five-stall parking pad on the alley side and a shared courtyard between the old and new residences. The project would retain the existing residence without alterations and demolish the detached 1948 garage. APPLICANT: Stan Arnett, r4 Architects Landmark Preservation Commission ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 August LPC Minutes Excerpt - Added 11/19/19 Packet Pg. 150-1 EXCERPT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 2 August 21, 2019 Staff Report Ms. Bzdek presented the staff report. She clarified the area of adjacency specifying that the historic properties directly abutting the property are the priority for compatibility considerations, based on the relevant Code provisions. She reviewed the history of the on-site historic resources and clarified the period of significance. Ms. Bzdek stated early staff findings show it is worth discussing the garage being constructed after the period of significance in terms of its proposed demolition. [Secretary's Note: The Commission took a brief recess due to a technical issue.] Applicant Presentation Mr. Arnett gave the Applicant presentation detailing the proposed project and parking. He also noted all four units will include transom windows and detailed the proposed façade. [Secretary's Note: The Commission took a brief recess due to a technical issue.] Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Chair Dunn requested the Commission discuss the garage and noted the property does not have to be landmarked in order to be considered historic under the Land Use Code. She also noted the property has been determined to be eligible based on a thorough survey by a third party, but because it hasn't been landmarked, it hasn’t been clearly determined whether the garage would be part of the eligibility. Mr. Bello stated he did not believe the garage was significant given its later date of construction. Ms. Nelsen agreed stating the garage is secondary to the home. Ms. Gensmer and Ms. Bredehoft agreed. Chair Dunn stated she does not believe the garage is historic as it falls outside the period of significance. Chair Dunn suggested discussing each standard one by one. Regarding standard 1, Chair Dunn stated the project complies. Regarding standard 2, Chair Dunn noted the Commission agrees the garage is not historic. The Commission agreed the project meets standards 3, 4, and 5, and standards 6, 7, and 8 do not apply. Chair Dunn stated standard 9 addresses making new work differentiated from the old and compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. She requested Commission input on this issue. Ms. Nelsen asked the applicant if he is familiar with the Secretary of the Interior standards and Old Town guidelines. Mr. Arnett replied he has not done many historic projects; however, the addition is intended to not tower over the existing structure and has the same roof pitch making it not visible from the street. Ms. Nelsen requested additional information on how this design communicates with the surroundings. Mr. Arnett replied he examined the addition from the view corridor. Ms. Nelsen asked Mr. Arnett if he considers the addition to be secondary to the existing structure. Mr. Arnett replied in the affirmative. Ms. Nelsen commented on the eave lines being identical and asked if that could be dropped for the addition. Mr. Arnett replied in the negative noting the existing home is quite shallow. He noted the first- floor elevation for the new structure has been kept at grade. Mr. Bello discussed the verticality of the windows on the existing building versus the horizontal windows on the addition. ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 August LPC Minutes Excerpt - Added 11/19/19 Packet Pg. 150-2 EXCERPT Landmark Preservation Commission Page 3 August 21, 2019 Ms. Gensmer commented on the sandstone foundation of the existing building but noted it is not the dominant material. She encouraged Mr. Arnett to look at the material ratios. Ms. Bredehoft asked about the proposed scale of the stone veneer. Mr. Arnett replied the stone would be larger and perhaps not as cultured. Ms. Bredehoft stated the front entry is not obvious. Mr. Arnett replied placing entries in the courtyard seemed too intimate for guests; therefore, the entries are faced to the east to be closer to the parking lot. Ms. Bredehoft commented on the lack of a sense of arrival and asked why the front entrance is being downplayed. Mr. Arnett replied he was attempting to keep as much room in the courtyard as possible. Chair Dunn commented on the overhang looking more office-oriented than residential. She stated she would prefer to see a gable or something similar to what is on the historic house to mark the front entrance. Ms. Nelsen commented on ensuring drainage does not affect the historic materials of the existing property. Mr. Arnett replied he has a civil engineer working on a swale design. Chair Dunn asked why the parking is not directly off the alley. Mr. Arnett replied there is a desire to not have to back into the alley. Ms. Gensmer stated it is compatible to keep parking at the rear of the lot, though it does take up space. She agreed with the concept of preserving as much courtyard space as possible. Ms. Bredehoft asked where residents would be storing garage items. Mr. Arnett replied the property manager will be responsible for yard maintenance. Ms. Nelsen stated she does not see compatibility and is not convinced the building is secondary on the lot. Chair Dunn stated the compatibility should show a family resemblance to the historic structure. Ms. Nelsen commended the perspective from the street. Regarding standard 10, Chair Dunn noted the new structure is a separate building rather than an addition. Chair Dunn requested materials samples when they are decided upon. She noted the historic structure has been covered in stucco and suggested its inclusion on the new building could be helpful. ***END EXCERPT*** ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4 August LPC Minutes Excerpt - Added 11/19/19 Packet Pg. 150-3 Photos of Materials Samples Shown to the Commission at the Hearing ITEM 4, EXHIBIT A Packet Pg. 150-4 Agenda Item 5 Item 5, Page 1 STAFF REPORT November 20, 2019 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME APPROVAL OF CHANGES TO THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION BYLAWS STAFF Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager BACKGROUND In January 2017, the schedule of Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) meetings changed, from two regular meetings each month to a regular meeting on the third Wednesday of each month, preceded by a work session on the second Wednesday. This change to the previous bylaws was approved unanimously; however, the change was not transmitted to the City Clerk’s Office or Council. Due to this lapse, it was decided that the cleanest course of action would be for the LPC to consider the change to the bylaws as a new action. Proposed changes are: 1) Changing the meeting schedule from two regular meetings each month to one regular meeting and one work session. This is the schedule the LPC has been using since January 2017. 2) Omitting reference to a specific date/time for meetings and work sessions. This would prevent a future change of date or time resulting in outdated by-laws. The change in schedule from two regular meetings each month to one meeting and one work session has: • Aligned the LPC’s review process with that of the Planning and Zoning Board and the City’s development review schedule; • Enabled applicants and staff to better prepare items for discussion and decision making by enabling Commissioners to identify and request additional information needed for making an informed decision; and • Created more time to discuss policy items and for Commission training. A vote of the Commission is needed to change the LPC’s bylaws. The proposed changes to the bylaws are highlighted in the attached document. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the revised Landmark Preservation Commission bylaws. ATTACHMENTS 1. Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article III, Divisions 1 and 19 2. Current LPC Bylaws (2009) 3. Proposed LPC Bylaws Packet Pg. 106 Excerpts from Relevant Sections of Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article III Division 1, Sec. 2-76. - Board or commission action; member participation. Each board or commission shall conduct its business in accordance with the Charter, the code, other policies that may be established by the City Council, and the bylaws duly approved by such board or commission. Division 19, Sec. 2-279. - Officers; bylaws. The Commission shall elect annually from its membership a chairperson and such officers as may be required. Bylaws may be adopted by the Commission, which bylaws shall not be inconsistent with the Charter, the Code or other policies that may be established by the City Council. A copy of the bylaws shall be filed with the City Clerk for the use of the City Council immediately after adoption by the Commission, and the same may be subject to the approval of the City Council. ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 107 ITEM 2, ATTACHMENT 2 Packet Pg. 108 CITY OF FORT COLLINS LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION BYLAWS ARTICLE NAME The name of this Commission is the City of Fort Collins Landmark Preservation Commission. ARTICLE II- GENERAL ACTIVITIES Meet regularly to carry out the functions of the Commission as set forth in Section 2-278 and Chapter 14 of the Code of the City and Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code. Commission members also have the responsibility to stay current on issues regarding local architecture, local history, and good preservation practices. ARTICLE III - COMMITTEES The Chairperson may appoint any necessary committees to assist the Commission. Committees shall be dissolved by the Chairperson upon completion of the assigned task including the submittal of any reports which may be required. ARTICLE IV - MEETINGS The Commission shall establish the schedule for regular monthly meetings and work sessions based on the preference of the members, availability of an appropriate meeting space, and staffing considerations. Special meetings may be held upon the giving of at least twenty-four (24) hours advance notice. Questions of order shall be decided by Robert's Rules of Order. ARTICLE V - AMENDMENTS TO BYLAWS Proposed amendments may be presented and voted upon at any regularly scheduled meeting. The vote of a majority of the members of the Commission shall be necessary to approve any amendment. Approved November 20, 2019. Landmark Preservation Commission, Meg Dunn, Chair ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3 Packet Pg. 109 T-POST TREE TRUNK WIRE, TYP. NOTE: THE WIRE BETWEEN THE STAKE AND THE TREE MUST HAVE SLACK 5' MIN. GROMMETED NYLON STRAP, TYP. NOTE: WIRE BASKETS AND TWINE SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED PRIOR TO TREE INSTALLATION. THAN FINISH GRADE / IRRIGATION TREE WELL TO BE PROVIDED TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER DRIVE THREE (3) WOOD STAKES PER TREE FOR TREES OVER 6' IN HEIGHT. DRIVE TWO (2) WOOD STAKES FOR TREES 6' IN HEIGHT OR LESS. SPACE ANCHORS EQUALLY AROUND TRUNK. AVOID DAMAGE TO BRANCHES. EXISTING SOIL SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER TABLET (TYP.) BACKFILL W/ 2/3 NATIVE SOIL & 1/3 COMPOST. THOROUGHLY WATER SETTLE REMOVE WIRE CAGE AND/OR TWINE. OPEN BURLAP AROUND TRUNK. CUT & REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP 18" MIN., TYP. SECTION 12" MIN. ROOTBALL THAN DIA. OF 24" GREATER FINISH GRADE PLAN TREE TRUNK T-POST GROMMETED NYLON STRAP, TYP. WIRE, TYP. NOTE: THE WIRE BETWEEN THE STAKE AND THE TREE MUST HAVE SLACK TOP OF ROOT CROWN TO BE 1" HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE NOTE: WIRE BASKETS AND TWINE SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED PRIOR TO TREE INSTALLATION. DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL CONIFER TREE PLANTING DETAIL NOTE: CEDAR MULCH TREE RING SHALL BE 36" DIA. 3" MULCH ROOTBALL DEPTH ROOTBALL DEPTH ROOTBALL DEPTH TIE GROMMETED NYLON STRAPS TO STAKE WITH WIRE. WIRE ENDS SHALL BE BENT BACK TO ELIMINATE BURRS AND WHITE PVC PIPE ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF WIRE FOR VISUAL AND SAFETY FOR ALL TREES WITHIN THE BUFFER ENHANCEMENT ZONE FOR ALL TREES WITHIN THE BUFFER ENHANCEMENT ZONE EVERGREEN TREES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE HEIGHT WIDTH REMARKS 7 Picea abies `Cupressina` 6` B&B 20` 4` FULL SPECIMEN, EVENLY Fastigiate Norway Spruce BRANCHED W/ STRAIGHT TRUNK & TOP LEADER DECIDUOUS SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE HEIGHT WIDTH REMARKS 25 Caryopteris x clandonensis `Dark Knight` 5 gal. 3` 3` 24" (h) FULL SPECIMEN, EVENLY AND Dark Knight Spirea WELL BRANCHED 13 Cornus sanguinea `Arctic Fire` TM 5 gal. 4` 4` 24" (h) FULL SPECIMEN, EVENLY AND Arctic Fire Dogwood WELL BRANCHED GRASSES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE HEIGHT WIDTH REMARKS 53 Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster` 1 gal. 5` 2` WELL ROOTED AND ESTABLISHED Feather Reed Grass 3 Pennisetum alopecuroides `Hameln` 1 gal. 3` 1.5` WELL ROOTED AND ESTABLISHED Hameln Fountain Grass 15 Sporobolus heterolepis 1 gal. 3` 2` WELL ROOTED AND ESTABLISHED Prairie Dropseed PERENNIALS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE HEIGHT WIDTH REMARKS 6 Lavandula angustifolia `Munstead` 1 gal. 2` 1.5` WELL ROOTED AND ESTABLISHED Munstead English Lavender 22 Rudbeckia fulgida sullivantii `Goldsturm` 1 gal. 2` 2` WELL ROOTED AND ESTABLISHED Black-eyed Susan Sheet Number: Fort Collins CO Center Green Properties LLC PROJECT TITLE REVISIONS ISSUE DATE SHEET TITLE SHEET INFORMATION DATE SEAL NOVEMBER 13, 2019 DATE PREPARED FOR 612 South Howes Street 612 HOWES Boulder CO 80306-4655 PO Box 4655 OWNER: Landscape Notes & Details 1. PLANT QUALITY: ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE A-GRADE OR NO. 1 GRADE - FREE OF ANY DEFECTS, OF NORMAL HEALTH, HEIGHT, LEAF DENSITY AND SPREAD APPROPRIATE TO THE SPECIES AS DEFINED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN (AAN) STANDARDS. ALL TREES SHALL BE BALL AND BURLAP OR EQUIVALENT. 2. IRRIGATION: ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WITHIN THE SITE INCLUDING TURF, SHRUB BEDS AND TREE AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. THE IRRIGATION PLAN MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. ALL TURF AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC POP-UP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL SHRUB BEDS AND TREES, INCLUDING IN NATIVE SEED AREAS, SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC DRIP (TRICKLE) IRRIGATION SYSTEM, OR WITH AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE APPROVED BY THE CITY WITH THE IRRIGATION PLANS. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE WATER REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PLANT MATERIAL. 3. TOPSOIL: TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE, TOPSOIL THAT IS REMOVED DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE CONSERVED FOR LATER USE ON AREAS REQUIRING REVEGETATION AND LANDSCAPING. 4. SOIL AMENDMENTS: SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND DOCUMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE SECTION 12-132. THE SOIL IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, INCLUDING PARKWAYS AND MEDIANS, SHALL BE THOROUGHLY LOOSENED TO A DEPTH OF NOT LESS THAN EIGHT(8) INCHES AND SOIL AMENDMENT SHALL BE THOROUGHLY INCORPORATED INTO THE SOIL OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST SIX(6) INCHES BY TILLING, DISCING OR OTHER SUITABLE METHOD, AT A RATE OF AT LEAST THREE (3) CUBIC YARDS OF SOIL AMENDMENT PER ONE THOUSAND (1,000) SQUARE FEET OF LANDSCAPE AREA. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY THAT ALL PLANTED AREAS, OR AREAS TO BE PLANTED, HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY LOOSENED AND THE SOIL AMENDED, CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 12-132. 5. INSTALLATION AND GUARANTEE: ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO SOUND HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES IN A MANNER DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE QUICK ESTABLISHMENT AND HEALTHY GROWTH. ALL LANDSCAPING FOR EACH PHASE MUST BE EITHER INSTALLED OR THE INSTALLATION MUST BE SECURED WITH AN IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT, PERFORMANCE BOND, OR ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR 125% OF THE VALUATION OF THE MATERIALS AND LABOR PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR ANY BUILDING IN SUCH PHASE. 6. MAINTENANCE: TREES AND VEGETATION, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, FENCES, WALLS AND OTHER LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS WITH THESE FINAL PLANS SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT IN THE SAME MANNER AS PARKING, BUILDING MATERIALS AND OTHER SITE DETAILS. THE APPLICANT, LANDOWNER OR SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST SHALL BE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS IN GOOD CONDITION. ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE MAINTAINED FREE FROM DISEASE, PESTS, WEEDS AND LITTER, AND ALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES SUCH AS FENCES AND WALLS SHALL BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN A STRUCTURALLY SOUND CONDITION. 7. REPLACEMENT: ANY LANDSCAPE ELEMENT THAT DIES, OR IS OTHERWISE REMOVED, SHALL BE PROMPTLY REPLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE PLANS. 8. THE FOLLOWING SEPARATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN TREES/SHRUBS AND UTILITIES: 40 FEET BETWEEN CANOPY TREES AND STREET LIGHTS 15 FEET BETWEEN ORNAMENTAL TREES AND STREETLIGHTS 10 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER MAIN LINES 6 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES. 4 FEET BETWEEN SHRUBS AND PUBLIC WATER AND SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINES 4 FEET BETWEEN TREES AND GAS LINES 9. ALL STREET TREES SHALL BE PLACED A MINIMUM EIGHT (8) FEET AWAY FROM THE EDGES OF DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEYS PER LUC 3.2.1(D)(2)(a). 10. PLACEMENT OF ALL LANDSCAPING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SIGHT DISTANCE CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED BY THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. NO STRUCTURES OR LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS GREATER THAN 24" SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DECIDUOUS TREES PROVIDED THAT THE LOWEST BRANCH IS AT LEAST 6' FROM GRADE. ANY FENCES WITHIN THE SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLE OR EASEMENT MUST BE NOT MORE THAN 42" IN HEIGHT AND OF AN OPEN DESIGN. 11. THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH ALL OTHER FINAL PLAN ELEMENTS SO THAT THE PROPOSED GRADING, STORM DRAINAGE, AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS DO NOT CONFLICT WITH NOR PRECLUDE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS ON THIS PLAN. 12. MINOR CHANGES IN SPECIES AND PLANT LOCATIONS MAY BE MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION -- AS REQUIRED BY SITE CONDITIONS OR PLANT AVAILABILITY. OVERALL QUANTITY, QUALITY, AND DESIGN CONCEPT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH THE QUANTITIES INCLUDED IN THE PLANT LIST, SPECIES AND QUANTITIES ILLUSTRATED SHALL BE PROVIDED. ALL CHANGES OF PLANT SPECIES AND LOCATION MUST HAVE WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 13. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF THREE INCHES. A PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY FORESTER BEFORE ANY TREES OR SHRUBS AS NOTED ON THIS PLAN ARE PLANTED, PRUNED OR REMOVED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS INCLUDES ZONES BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND CURB, MEDIANS AND OTHER CITY PROPERTY. THIS PERMIT SHALL APPROVE THE LOCATION AND SPECIES TO BE PLANTED. FAILURE TO OBTAIN THIS PERMIT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CODE SUBJECT TO CITATION (SECTION 27-31) AND MAY ALSO RESULT IN REPLACING OR RELOCATING TREES AND A HOLD ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. General Landscape Notes 1. ALL EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND WITHIN ANY NATURAL AREA BUFFER ZONES SHALL REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED UNLESS NOTED ON THESE PLANS FOR REMOVAL. 2. WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED EXISTING TREE, THERE SHALL BE NO CUT OR FILL OVER A FOUR-INCH DEPTH UNLESS A QUALIFIED ARBORIST OR FORESTER HAS EVALUATED AND APPROVED THE DISTURBANCE. 3. ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES SHALL BE PRUNED TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS FORESTRY STANDARDS. TREE PRUNING AND REMOVAL SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A BUSINESS THAT HOLDS A CURRENT CITY OF FORT COLLINS ARBORIST LICENSE WHERE REQUIRED BY CODE. 4. PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION, BARRIERS SHALL BE ERECTED AROUND ALL PROTECTED EXISTING TREES WITH SUCH BARRIERS TO BE OF ORANGE FENCING A MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) FEET IN HEIGHT, SECURED WITH METAL T-POSTS, NO CLOSER THAN SIX (6) FEET FROM THE TRUNK OR ONE-HALF (½) OF THE DRIP LINE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. THERE SHALL BE NO STORAGE OR MOVEMENT OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, DEBRIS OR FILL WITHIN THE FENCED TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 5. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PREVENT THE CLEANING OF EQUIPMENT OR MATERIAL OR THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF WASTE MATERIAL SUCH AS PAINTS, OILS, SOLVENTS, ASPHALT, CONCRETE, MOTOR OIL OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL HARMFUL TO THE LIFE OF A TREE WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF ANY PROTECTED TREE OR GROUP OF TREES. 6. NO DAMAGING ATTACHMENT, WIRES, SIGNS OR PERMITS MAY BE FASTENED TO ANY PROTECTED TREE. 7. LARGE PROPERTY AREAS CONTAINING PROTECTED TREES AND SEPARATED FROM CONSTRUCTION OR LAND CLEARING AREAS, ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY EASEMENTS MAY BE "RIBBONED OFF," RATHER THAN ERECTING PROTECTIVE FENCING AROUND EACH TREE AS REQUIRED IN SUBSECTION (G)(3) ABOVE. THIS MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PLACING METAL T-POST STAKES A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY (50) FEET APART AND TYING RIBBON OR ROPE FROM STAKE-TO-STAKE ALONG THE OUTSIDE PERIMETERS OF SUCH AREAS BEING CLEARED. 8. THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES, IRRIGATION LINES OR ANY UNDERGROUND FIXTURE REQUIRING EXCAVATION DEEPER THAN SIX (6) INCHES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY BORING UNDER THE ROOT SYSTEM OF PROTECTED EXISTING TREES AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF TWENTY-FOUR (24) INCHES. THE AUGER DISTANCE IS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FACE OF THE TREE (OUTER BARK) AND IS SCALED FROM TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT AS DESCRIBED IN THE CHART BELOW: TREE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (INCHES) AUGER DISTANCE FROM FACE OF TREE (FEET) 0-2 1 3-4 2 5-9 5 10-14 10 15-19 12 OVER 19 15 9. “NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED DURING THE SONGBIRD NESTING SEASON (FEBRUARY 1 TO JULY 31) WITHOUT FIRST HAVING A PROFESSIONAL ECOLOGIST OR WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST COMPLETE A NESTING SURVEY TO IDENTIFY ANY ACTIVE NESTS EXISTING ON THE PROJECT SITE. THE SURVEY SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER. IF ACTIVE NESTS ARE FOUND, THE CITY WILL COORDINATE WITH RELEVANT STATE AND FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES TO DETERMINE WHETHER ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON TREE REMOVAL AND CONSTRUCTION APPLY.” Tree Protection Notes Planting Details NATIVE GRASS - DETENTION BASIN MIX 2015 1. SEED SHALL BE A MIXTURE THAT MATCHES THE FOLLOWING: NON-IRRIGATED FOOTHILLS MIX COMMON NAME % Lbs/PLS SIDEOATS GRAMA 5% 0.6 BLUE GRAMA 5% 0.1 CANADA WILD RYE 5% 1.0 SWITCHGRASS 10% 0.6 LITTLE BLUESTEM 10% 0.8 SIX WEEKS FESCUE 5% 0.1 BEEPLANT 10% 0.8 PLAINS COREOPSIS 5% 0.1 PURPLE PRAIRIE CLOVER 5% 0.1 ANNUAL SUNFLOWER 10% 1.5 PRAIRIE ASTER 10% 0.2 MEXICAN HAT 5% 0.04 BLACK-EYED SUSAN 5% 0.03 BLUE VERBENA 5% 0.03 1. DRILLED APPLICATION RATE: THIS MIX IS BASED ON 70 SEEDS/SF AND IS ONLY CALCULATED FOR ONE ACRE. THIS MIX IS BASED ON THE CONTRACTOR USING A DRILL SEED APPLICATION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CALCULATING THE APPROPRIATE SEED AMOUNTS TO PURCHASE. MIX SHOULD BE DOUBLED IF HAND BROADCASTED. 2. POUNDS PER ACRES ARE IN PLS (PURE LIVE SEED) AND MUST BE ORDERED THAT WAY. 3. ALL MATERIALS FURNISHED SHALL BE FREE OF COLORADO STATE NOXIOUS WEEKS AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE III, SECTION 21-40 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS. 4. ANY CHANGES TO THIS SEED MIX MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL AREAS PROGRAM STAFF. 5. NATIVE SEED AREAS: ADEQUATE TEMPORARY IRRIGATION WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE FOR THESE SEEDED AREAS, AND THAT NATIVE GRASSES SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION OF ACCEPTABLE HEIGHT, FREE OF WEEDS, TRASH AND DEBRIS, AND SHALL NOT REPRESENT A FIRE HAZARD NOR BECOME A NUISANCE SITE FOR WATER OR WIND EROSION. Native Grass Seed Mix Full Landscape Notes & Details LS2 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 76 Updated 11-18-19 3. ASH TREE 4" FAIR MINUS NO NO -- TOTAL MITIGATION REQUIRED 0 MITIGATION TREES #1: KENTUCKY COFFEETREE SIZE: 14.5" CONDITION: FAIR PLUS MITIGATION REQ'D: 2.5 #3: ASH TREE SIZE: 4" MITIGATION REQ'D: 0 #2: BOXELDER SIZE: 2"-4", 6 STEMS MITIGATION REQ'D: 0 Materials Legend Hydrozone Table ZONE AREA WATER USE GALLONS HIGH 0 SF 18 GAL/SF 0 GAL MODERATE 2,251 SF 10 GAL/SF 22,510 GAL LOW 1,061 SF 3 GAL/SF 3,183 GAL VERY LOW 100 SF 0 GAL/SF 0 GAL TOTAL / AVERAGE 3,412 SF 25,693 GAL 7.53 GAL/SF PROPOSED WOOD SLAT PRIVACY SCREEN - SEE DETAIL A Detail A - Wood Slat Privacy Screen 6' DARK STAIN PROPOSED BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING - TO REMAIN PROPOSED BIKE RACK HOWES STREET RAIN GARDEN - SEE SEED MIX LS1 TRASH ENCLOSURE PROPOSED 3' MAN GATE ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 75 Updated 11-18-19 EHGURRP± VSDFHV [ VSDFHV ‡ 7KUHH  EHGURRP VSDFHV [ VSDFHV ‡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acket Pg. 74 ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 72  /3&:RUN6HVVLRQ&RPPHQWV   /3&0HHWLQJ  :HVW(OHYDWLRQ 0DLQ(QWU\ 1RUWK(OHYDWLRQ 6RXWK(OHYDWLRQ6LPLODU ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 71  LQWKHQHLJKERUKRRG ‡ 7KHSUHGRPLQDQWH[WHULRUILQLVKLVSURSRVHGWREHKDUGFRDWVWXFFRWREHVLPLODULQ FRORUDQGWH[WXUHWRWKHH[LVWLQJKRPH ‡ /DSVLGLQJKDVEHHQVHOHFWHGWRUHIHUHQFHWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIKRPHVGLUHFWO\WR WKHQRUWKDQGVRXWKRIWKHH[LVWLQJKRPH ‡ :LQGRZVDQGGRRUVZLWKJODVVZLOOEHLQFOXGHGIRUQDWXUDOGD\OLJKWLQJHJUHVVDQG SURSRUWLRQDOO\VLPLODUWRWKHH[LVWLQJKRPHZKLOHPHHWLQJEXLOGLQJFRGHUHJXODWLRQV IRUHJUHVV ‡ 'RXEOHKXQJZLQGRZVDUHSURSRVHGDQGLQVRPHORFDWLRQVSDLUHGDV UHFRPPHQGHGE\VWDIIDQGLQFKDUDFWHURIWKHIRXUVTXDUH GHVLJQVW\OH ‡ $VSKDOWVKLQJOHVDUHSURSRVHGDVWKH\DUHW\SLFDOLQWKHUHVLGHQWLDOKRPHVRQWKLV EORFNDQGPHHWORFDOEXLOGLQJFRGHUHJXODWLRQV )DFDGH'HWDLOV ‡ :LQGRZVRQWKHH[LVWLQJKRPHVLQWKHQHLJKERUKRRGYDU\LQSURSRUWLRQVFDOHDQG VW\OH7KHLQWHQWLVWRXVHZLQGRZVL]HVDQGSURSRUWLRQVWKDWDUHVLPLODUWRWKH DGMDFHQWKRPHVWRWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWZKLOHSURYLGLQJDQ\UHTXLUHGHJUHVV ‡ 6WRQHZDLQVFRWLVKHOGORZWRUHIHUHQFHWKHVWRQHIRXQGDWLRQVRIWKHH[LVWLQJ KRPHDQGQHLJKERULQJUHVLGHQFHVDQGZLOOUHVHPEOHODUJHFXWVWRQH ‡ 6WXFFREDQGLQJLVLQFOXGHGWRFUHDWHVFDOHDQGGHWDLOWRWKHWZRVWRU\IDoDGH ‡ $VPDOOJDEOHVW\OHIXOO\RSHQFDQRS\URRILVORFDWHGRQWKHZHVWHOHYDWLRQWR LGHQWLI\WKHPDLQHQWULHVWRWKHSURSRVHGXQLWVVLPLODUWRWKHH[LVWLQJHQWULHVDORQJ +RZHV6WUHHWDQGWKHH[LVWLQJGXSOH[ 9LVLELOLW\RI+LVWRULF)HDWXUHV ‡ 7KHSURSRVHGQHZFRQVWUXFWLRQZLOOEHGHWDFKHGDQGVHWEDFNIURPWKHH[LVWLQJ VWUXFWXUHWRPDLQWDLQWKHLQWHJULW\RIWKHH[LVWLQJKLVWRULFDOO\UHOHYDQWKRPH7KLVLV WRDOORZWKHVWUHHWYLHZIURP+RZHV6WUHHWWRUHPDLQLQLWVFXUUHQWH[LVWLQJVWDWH ZKLOHPLQLPL]LQJVLWHOLQHVRIWKHQHZVWUXFWXUHRQWKHEDFNRIWKHORW 6LWH)HDWXUHV /DQGVFDSLQJ ‡ 7KHH[LVWLQJWUHHVRQWKHSURSRVHGORWDUHSODQQHGWRUHPDLQZKLOHQHLJKERULQJ WUHHVZLOOEHWULPPHGDVQHHGHGGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ ‡ 7KHFRXUW\DUGZLOOEHODQGVFDSHGDVDFRPPRQVSDFHDQGPDLQHQWU\ LGHQWLILFDWLRQIRUQHZUHVLGHQFHV7KHVSDFHZLOODOVRDFWDVDEXIIHUWRWKHWZR VWUXFWXUHVDOORZLQJSULYDF\ ‡ 7KHILQDOGHVLJQZLOOEHGHWHUPLQHGEDVHGRQWKHUHTXLUHGVWRUPGUDLQDJHGHVLJQ UHTXLUHGE\WKH)RUW&ROOLQVHQJLQHHULQJGHSDUWPHQW 6FDOH 3URMHFWQXPEHU 'DWH 'UDZQE\ &KHFNHGE\ $5&+,7(&76 $VLQGLFDWHG 30 $5&+ '9LHZV +LVWRULF6XPPDU\ +RZHV   6+RZHV6WUHHW 6$ )RUW&ROOLQV&2 1R 'HVFULSWLRQ 'DWH  /3&:RUN6HVVLRQ&RPPHQWV   /3&0HHWLQJ  +LVWRULF &XOWXUDO6XPPDU\ (RZHV6W[LVWLQJ6WUHHW9LHZ +RZHV6W 3URSRVHG9LHZIURP+ ([LVWLQJ)URQW +RZHV (OHYDWLRQ ([LVWLQJ5HDU(OHYDWLRQ ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1 Packet Pg. 68 2019 508 Remington St. Re-application for basement egress door and stair (approved by LPC in 2015). Additional egress window & well on north elevation (new Approved October 31, 2019 Packet Pg. 11