HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/21/2020 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Regular MeetingPage 1
Meg Dunn, Chair Location:
Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair This meeting will be held
Mollie Bredehoft, Co-Vice Chair remotely via Zoom
Michael Bello
Kurt Knierim
Elizabeth Michell
Kevin Murray Staff Liaison:
Anne Nelsen Karen McWilliams
Jim Rose Historic Preservation Manager
Regular Meeting
October 21, 2020
5:30 PM
Landmark Preservation Commission
AGENDA
Pursuant to City Council Ordinance 079, 2020, a determination has been made by the Chair after consultation with the
City staff liaison that conducting the hearing using remote technology would be prudent.
This remote Landmark Preservation Commission meeting will be available online via Zoom or by phone. No Commission
members will attend in person. The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:00 p.m. Participants should try to join at least
15 minutes prior to the 5:30 p.m. start time.
ONLINE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
• You will need an internet connection on a laptop, computer, or smartphone, and may join the meeting through Zoom at
https://zoom.us/j/92814828882. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). Keep yourself on muted
status.
• For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that
time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to comment.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BY PHONE:
• Please dial 253-215-8782 and enter Webinar ID 928 1482 8882. Keep yourself on muted status.
• For public comments, when the Chair asks participants to click the “Raise Hand” button if they wish to speak, phone participants
will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address
the Commission. When you are called, hit *6 to unmute yourself.
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE ONLINE OR BY PHONE:
Individuals who are uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or participate by phone may:
1) Email comments to gschiager@fcgov.com at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If your comments are specific to any of
the discussion items on the agenda, please indicate that in the subject line of your email. Staff will ensure your comments
are provided to the Commission.
2) Come in person to 281 N. College Avenue to utilize City technology to participate in the meeting. Please arrive 15 minutes
prior to the meeting and ring the doorbell at the north entrance so that staff may escort you into the building. Masks and
social distancing will be required. To participate this way, it is strongly recommended that you contact us at least 24 hours
prior to the meeting so that arrangements for proper social distancing and appropriate technology can be put in place to
protect the health and safety of the public and staff. Contact Gretchen Schiager at gschiager@fcgov.com or 224-6098.
Documents to Share: Any document or presentation a member of the public wishes to provide to the Board for its consideration
must be emailed to gschiager@fcgov.com at least 24 hours before the meeting.
Packet Pg. 1
Page 2
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 10:00 a.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.
• 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
• CONSENT AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2020.
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 16, 2020 regular meeting of the
Landmark Preservation Commission.
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
Page 3
• 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
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 Landmark 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.
3. TENNEY COURT NORTH AND WEST OAK STREET ALLEYS CONCEPTUAL REVIEW
DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking conceptual review comments from the Landmark
Preservation Commission for improvements to two alleys: Tenney Court North
and West Oak Street.
APPLICANT: Downtown Development Authority
City of Fort Collins
4. 126 S. WHITCOMB ST: APPEAL OF STAFF DECISION ON DESIGN REVIEW
DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the appeal of a staff design review decision for 126. S.
Whitcomb Street. The applicant is proposing demolition of the historic 1932
garage and replacement with a new 1.5 story garage on its location. Staff denied
the request on August 25, 2020, and the owner filed an appeal on August 26,
2020. Staff decisions may be appealed to the Landmark Preservation
Commission.
APPLICANT: Tara Gaffney (Property Owner)
5. 237/243 JEFFERSON CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW
DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking conceptual review comments from the Landmark
Preservation Commission for proposed additions to the two buildings at 237 &
243 Jefferson Street in the Old Town Historic District.
APPLICANT: Sunil Cherian (owner); Matt Rankin (architect)
6. ADOPTION OF THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION’S 2021 WORK PLAN
The purpose of this item is to discuss and adopt the Landmark Preservation Commission’s Work Plan
for 2021.
• OTHER BUSINESS
• ADJOURNMENT
Packet Pg. 3
1
Gretchen Schiager
From:meg dunn <barefootmeg@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 1, 2020 4:54 PM
To:Karen McWilliams; Gretchen Schiager
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Extending our virtual meeting period
Hi Karen,
Given our ongoing COVID‐19 “Safer at Home” recommendation from the State, I think it would be prudent for us to
continue to hold meetings virtually for the foreseeable future. Why don’t we set June 2021 as a cut off point to revisit
this, with the option to revisit the issue sooner if somehow a vaccine is found and quickly disseminated early next year,
and the Safer at Home recommendation is lifted. I know that P&Z is holding a mixed meeting soon, so I think we should
be open to that should the need arise.
So, to summarize: Let’s plan to continue our virtual LPC meetings until June 2021 with the understanding that, should
the need arise, we would be willing to consider an alternative option on a one‐off basis. Given that the members of the
LPC seem to feel that our virtual meetings have been going well, I don’t foresee this happening. But I would like to be
flexible should an applicant or appellant feel the need for an in‐person setting.
Thanks!
‐ Meg
Packet Pg. 4
Date:
Roll Call Bello Bredehoft Knierim Michell Murray Nelsen Rose Wallace Dunn Vote
9 present
Consent Agenda - Approval
(1 - Minutes of 9/16/20)Murray Wallace Bredehoft Bello Rose Knierim Nelsen Michell Dunn
Yes Yes Yes abstain Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 9:0
4 - 126 S Whitcomb Appeal - Continued to
December meeting Wallace Bredehoft Bello Rose Knierim Nelsen Michell Murray Dunn
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes recused Yes 8:0
5 - 2021 Work Plan Approval Bredehoft Bello Rose Knierim Nelsen Michell Murray Wallace Dunn
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 9:0
Roll Call & Voting Record
Landmark Preservation Commission
10/21/2020
LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
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!
Visitor Log
[This meeting was conducted remotely. The Secretary filled out the visitor log.]
DATE: 10/21/20
Name Mailing Address Email and/or Phone Reason for Attendance
Todd Dangerfield, DDA Applicant, Item 3
Cara Scohy, Norris Design
Applicant, Item 3
Tara Gaffney, Owner 126 S Whitcomb Applicant, Item 4
Sunil Cherian, Owner 237 & 243 Jefferson
Applicant, Item 5
Matt Rankin, R4 Architects Applicant, Item 5
Landmark Preservation Commission Hearing
Date: 10/21/20
Document Log
(Any written comments or documents received since the agenda packet was published.)
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Draft Minutes for the LPC 9/16/20 Hearing
2. Staff Design Review Decisions Report
DISCUSSION AGENDA:
(All new and updated documents below were added to the online packet on 10/20/20.)
3. Tenney Court North and West Oak Street Alleys
• Updated staff presentation (Att 3)
4. 126 S Whitcomb Appeal
• Updated staff presentation (Att 5)
• New - applicant presentation (Att 6)
5. 237 & 243 Jefferson Design Review
• Citizen emails/letters:
o None
• Updated Conceptual Plans (Att 2)
• Updated staff presentation (Att 6)
• New - Responses to Requests for Additional Information (Att 7)
• New – Old Town Design Standards Excerpts (Att 8)
6. 2021 LPC Work Plan
• Updated Draft Work Plan (Att 1)
EXHIBITS RECEIVED DURING HEARING:
Item # Exhibit # Description:
3 A Festoon Lighting Specs
5 A Updated Applicant Presentation
CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
The following disclosure statement is submitted to the Clerk of the City of Fort Collins pursuant
to the requirements of Article IV, Section 9 of the City Charter and, to the extent applicable,
Section 24-18-109(3)(a), C.R.S. or pursuant to City of Fort Collins Personnel Policy 5.7.2.F.
Name:
Title:
Decision(s) or contract affected (give description of item to be addressed by Council, Board,
Service Area Director, etc.):
Brief statement of interest:
Date: Signature:
REMOVAL OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
I affirm that the above-stated conflict of interest no longer exists.
Date: Signature:
cc (if Councilmember or Board or Commission member): City Attorney and City Manager
cc (if City employee): HR Director
Updated: March 2014
Kevin Murray
Landmark Preservation Commission Member
126 S. Whitcomb St. Appeal of Staff Design Review
10/14/20
Agenda Item 1
Item 1, Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 21, 2020
Landmark Preservation Commission
STAFF
Gretchen Schiager, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2020 REGULAR MEETING
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 16, 2020 regular meeting of the Landmark
Preservation Commission.
ATTACHMENTS
1. LPC September 16, 2020 Minutes – DRAFT
Packet Pg. 5
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 1 September 16, 2020
Meg Dunn, Chair Location:
Alexandra Wallace, Co-Vice Chair This meeting was conducted
Michael Bello remotely via Zoom
Mollie Bredehoft
Kurt Knierim
Elizabeth Michell
Kevin Murray
Anne Nelsen
Jim Rose
Regular Meeting
September 16, 2020
Minutes
•CALL TO ORDER
Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m.
[**Secretary's Note: Due to the COVID-19 crisis and state and local orders to remain safer at home and
not gather, all Commission members, staff, and citizens attended the meeting remotely, via
teleconference.]
•ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Bredehoft, Dunn, Knierim, Michell, Murray, Rose
ABSENT: Bello, Nelsen, Wallace
STAFF: McWilliams, Bzdek, Bertolini, Yatabe, Schiager, Albertson-Clark
Chair Dunn read a statement regarding the purpose and procedures for meeting remotely.
•AGENDA REVIEW
No changes to posted agenda.
•CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW
No items were pulled from consent.
•STAFF REPORTS
None.
•PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
Landmark
Preservation
Commission
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 6
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 2 September 16, 2020
• CONSENT AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 19, 2020
The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 19, 2020 regular meeting of the
Landmark Preservation Commission.
Mr. Knierim moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda
of the September 16, 2020 regular meeting as presented.
Mr. Murray seconded. The motion passed 6-0.
• DISCUSSION AGENDA
2. STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON 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.
Staff Report
The Commission did not request a staff report for this item.
Commission Questions and Discussion
None
3. 724 AND 726 SOUTH COLLEGE: APPEAL OF DETERMINATIONS OF ELIGIBILITY
DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the appeal of the determinations of eligibility for Fort Collins
local landmark designation of two residential properties at 724 and 726 South
College Avenue. On July 1, 2020, in fulfillment of a pre-submittal requirement for
development review applications, staff determined both properties are landmark
eligible based on evidence and conclusions presented by an independent historic
survey contractor in intensive-level survey site forms. When undergoing
development review, landmark-eligible properties are subject to the historic
resource requirements in Fort Collins Land Use Code Section 3.4.7. Staff
decisions may be appealed to the Landmark Preservation Commission.
APPLICANT: Gannett Properties, LLC (Property Owner)
Staff Report
Ms. Bzdek presented the staff report. She provided a summary of the item and pointed out the
development area on a map. She reviewed the role of the Commission and the applicable Code section
and noted that the decision on this item can be appealed to City Council.
Ms. Bzdek provided a timeline of numerous activities related to the development of this property,
including City Council decisions that impacted the relevant Code. She talked about Staff’s role in
reviewing independent surveys and determinations of eligibility and stated that a finding of eligibility
does not mean a property will be designated as a landmark.
Ms. Bzdek talked about the two requirements for landmark eligibility: Significance and Integrity. She
pointed out that Context is no longer part of the evaluation. She talked about specifics to the evaluation
of local significance under Criterion 3. She also explained that the term “vernacular architecture” refers
to the special qualities about the local built environment that speak to the history of the area, and
discussed the materials, workmanship and design that speak to vernacular wood frame dwellings.
Ms. Bzdek explained that not all seven aspects of integrity must be present, but those relating to
character-defining features that were in place during the period of significance should be intact. She
noted that evaluating integrity is based on the current condition of the property but does not require the
property to be in good repair, assuming that repairs can be made. She said for buildings which are
eligible because of their architecture, the most important aspects of integrity are workmanship,
materials, and design.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 7
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 3 September 16, 2020
She talked about the previous assessments of 724 South College in 1998, 2014 and 2019. The 2014
review found the property to be ineligible due to loss of context. Code changes since that time informed
the finding of eligibility in 2019.
Ms. Bzdek reviewed the history of 724 South College and the Shantz family that resided in the home
from 1902-1963. She pointed out the features of the design and construction that are particularly
important to vernacular wood frame dwellings, such as the front porch columns, wood shingle cladding,
steeply pitched roof and gabled dormers. She talked about the setting and context, and reviewed
changes to the property over time.
Ms. Bzdek talked about the results of the previous assessments of 726 South College. The property
was owned by Frank Shantz and used as a rental since 1903. She spoke about the significance of the
design and construction, pointing out specific features such as the hip roof, decorative front gable and
front porch with balustrade railing. She talked about the setting and context, and reviewed changes to
the property over time.
Applicant Presentation
Nicole Ament, attorney for the Appellant, stated that they do not believe these properties are eligible
under Section 14-22(b). She explained that Heritage Consulting Group had been retained to provide
a second opinion on the eligibility of the property.
Mick McDill and Todd Rosenzweig, owners of the property, spoke to the Commission about their history
with the property, noting that they would not have bought the properties had they known they were
eligible to be landmarked. Mr. McDill stated they were unaware that the previous determination of
ineligibility could change and did not know it was being reevaluated. He talked about the hardship a
determination of eligibility would have on their business.
Michael LaFlash, Heritage Consulting Group, provided his credentials before reporting on his findings.
He utilized Google Maps to show the surrounding area of the property. Mr. LaFlash discussed the
eligibility of the properties and pointed out that these properties were not included in the boundary of
the Laurel School Historic District. He asserted that the reasons for the 2014 determination of
ineligibility were still valid.
Mr. LaFlash talked about the lack of context as well as how zoning plays a significant role in the future
of this area. He said these properties are not individually significant under Criterion 3 and should not
be considered eligible for landmark designation.
Public Input
The Secretary read into the record a statement from Gwen Denton sharing her memories of 726 South
College Avenue where her great uncle and aunt lived for 12 years. She expressed her hope that the
building would be preserved.
Commission Questions
Chair Dunn reminded the Commission that their role was strictly to determine the eligibility of these
properties, per Chapter 14, Section 22 of the Municipal Code, and the discussion should center around
Significance and Integrity. The Commission is to review all the most current information and make a
new, independent determination. She reviewed the order of proceedings for the appeal hearing.
Chair Dunn apologized to the Appellant for the confusing process and noted that the changes to the
Code were needed to clarify and improve the process, but unfortunately, these properties straddled
those time periods.
Chair Dunn asked whether Mr. LaFlash had done a written survey of these buildings, whether he lives
in Fort Collins and if he had looked at the properties in person. He responded in the negative to all.
Ms. Ament explained that they tried to find a local consultant, but those that were available had conflicts
based on relationships with Staff.
Mr. Murray asked for clarification of the timeline, particularly whether the owners were made aware of
the recon survey done in 2019. Ms. Bzdek stated that when the 2014 determination was made, the
property owner was notified that it was good for five years. Sherry Albertson-Clark, Historic
Preservation Survey Consultant, explained that the owners were not notified of the 2019 recon survey,
since an intensive survey would be required.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 8
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 4 September 16, 2020
Mr. McDill stated that they did not receive notice in 2014, or at the time of their submittal in November
2019, that the 2014 determination of ineligibility was nearing expiration. Chair Dunn commented that
the process in the past did not include those notifications.
Mr. Knierim asked whether the Commission is only to look at the post-March 2019 code. Mr. Yatabe
said the Commission is to make their determination based on the current code.
Ms. Michell asked whether the context information from 2014 was to be disregarded. Ms. McWilliams
explained the Code changes that took place in 2019 specifically excluded context since it was already
covered under the setting aspect of integrity. Mr. Murray asked whether the context that was
considered in 2014 was the same as setting that is currently part of the Code. Ms. McWilliams
responded that it is similar, but the context was added for a couple of years to address neighborhood
changes.
Ms. Bredehoft asked whether future changes to the neighborhood should be considered. Ms.
McWilliams said the Commission should consider current conditions, not what may happen in the
future.
Chair Dunn asked for clarification on why Staff stated that design, materials, and workmanship were
key aspects of integrity for this property under Criterion 3, while Mr. LaFlash chose setting, feeling and
association as key aspects. Ms. Bzdek referenced the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
Bulletin 15 and stated that while all seven aspects of integrity are considered, if a building is eligible
based on its architecture and it has a loss of integrity in design, materials and workmanship then it
cannot convey that significance.
Mr. LaFlash agreed with Ms. Bzdek’s statement, but since they don’t believe the properties are
significant under Criterion 3 individually, they should be looked at as if they were contributing toward a
historic district, giving setting, feeling and association a higher weight. Chair Dunn asked why Mr.
LaFlash had dismissed Criterion 3. He responded that the properties lacked architectural integrity in
terms higher artistic value as required by the National Register.
[Secretary’s note: The Commission took a short break at this time. A roll call was conducted upon
reconvening to establish all were present.]
Chair Dunn asked Ron Sladek, former Landmark Preservation Commission Chair, to speak about the
2014 determinations. He explained that there was very limited information available for that
determination, so the decision was largely based on context and setting with context having the higher
priority.
Chair Dunn asked how long the forms were valid, and Mr. Sladek thought it was less than 5 years. He
suggested the period of construction be considered. Ms. Bzdek noted that the period of significance
for 724 South College is defined as 1901 – c. 1964, which was when its use changed from single-family
dwelling to student rental property. For 726 South College, the period is defined as 1901.
Ms. McWilliams confirmed that in 2014 the determinations were valid for one year, but that became
cumbersome, so it was later changed to five years. Ms. McWilliams said property owners were notified
by mail, however Ms. Bzdek added that the letter did not include the expiration date.
Chair Dunn asked Jason Marmor, the consultant who completed the recent surveys, for clarification on
the extensive period of significance for 724 South College. Mr. Marmor explained that the significance
for 726 was based only on architecture and stated if he were to do the survey again, he would limit the
period of significance for 726 South College to the year of construction as well.
[Secretary’s note: The Commission took a 20-minute break while Ms. Bredehoft prepared a motion. A
roll call was conducted upon reconvening to establish all were present.]
Commission Discussion for 724 South College Avenue
1. Location
Ms. Bredehoft said location is the same.
2. Design
Mr. Murray commented on the home being largely obscured by the tree. Chair Dunn said the actual
design elements of the home are intact.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 9
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 5 September 16, 2020
Ms. Michell said the overall design features such as the gables, front porch and original siding are
intact, but the setting is compromised. It is not high style but makes a statement as a vernacular home.
Ms. Bredehoft said it is a great representation of middle-class homes in Fort Collins. The front entry,
column detail, and the dormers that intersect with the roof are interesting and unusual.
Chair Dunn said the window pattern on the front is not common.
Mr. Rose talked about the delineation between the upper and lower story, and the aesthetic of the two
different materials.
Mr. Knierim asked if the screened-in porch was added. Ms. Bzdek stated the 1938 permit was to screen
in the porch. Chair Dunn said a screened-in porch was a common change during that period.
3. Setting
Ms. Bredehoft disagreed that the setting is lost. It still sits on College Avenue, across from CSU. The
two buildings on either side, as well as the commercial building to the north, have a residential feel, and
there are numerous homes along College being used as commercial. The setting is slightly diminished,
but mostly intact.
Mr. Rose said the filling station is still there, just with a different use. To the west, there have been no
changes since the college was started. He noted that historically, South College developed with a mix
of residential and commercial. He agreed that the setting is not lost.
Chair Dunn said the setting is probably 50/50 intact, and while mixed, maintains a sense of residential.
4. Materials
Mr. Murray asked if the windows are original. Ms. Bzdek said both properties retain many original
windows. Mr. Murray said most of the windows maintain the original style if not the original sashes. He
also commented that the cottage style window which was common in sitting rooms is probably original.
The upper windows are double hung and appear to be original.
Chair Dunn agreed that many of the windows appear to be intact.
5. Workmanship
Mr. Knierim noted that great care was taken in the design and construction of the home and the
selection of materials. Mr. Murray commented that these homes were built for specific people.
Ms. Bredehoft said many of the features discussed for design could also fall under workmanship.
Chair Dunn said the patterning and materials used for each story, and the columns on the porch, are
examples of the workmanship of the time. The way the gable is worked into the roofline is stunning.
Ms. Bredehoft added that the panels on the front of the porch under the windows are examples of the
workmanship.
6. Feeling
Ms. Bredehoft said it feels like a residential home, and the setback adds to that feeling. The wood
details, wood columns and overall size of the house and its tall, narrow shape feel like 1901.
7. Association
Ms. Bredehoft said the three houses, the commercial building to the north, and the gas station present
a residential neighborhood feel.
Chair Dunn offered an additional thought about setting in that the use of College Avenue has changed.
People used to park along College, but the experience is different when travelling by in a vehicle. From
the pedestrian level the setting is that of a neighborhood.
Significance
Mr. Murray stated that the architecture is outstanding for its time with the extra shingles on top, detailing
of the cottage style windows and Tuscan columns in the front. The screened-in porch was well done.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 10
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 6 September 16, 2020
Mr. Knierim said the home is well-preserved, so the architectural features are easy to see.
Chair Dunn said it is a good example of the architecture of the time and is supported by the integrity.
She added it is a downplayed middle-class home but would almost be considered high style for the
modest community of Fort Collins.
Mr. Rose commented about the construction type and the fact that the second story is not a full story,
which is indicative of the balloon framing common in that period. Mr. Murray agreed that the method
of construction has significance.
Commission Discussion for 724 South College Avenue Garage
1. Location
Chair Dunn said the location is the same.
2. Design
Chair Dunn said the design is close.
3. Setting
Ms. Bredehoft said it is still in the backyard, next to the alley and associated with the house.
4. Materials
Chair Dunn asked if the doors were original and wondered what material was under the stucco.
Mr. Rose said the stucco was an irreversible intrusion sufficiently detrimental to call into question
whether it is a contributing resource. He speculated that the doors are original.
5. Workmanship
Chair Dunn said the workmanship of the door and the eaves is visible, but the gable end and side have
been hidden. Chair Dunn stated that usually a house and garage have combined significance, but with
the loss of workmanship and materials due to the stucco, its significance is questionable.
Mr. Murray commented that the side with doors still has an overhang and looks like it fits with the house
and time period. The deterioration, stucco and shortening of the roof on the other side diminish the
integrity.
The members speculated about the piece of wood protruding from the roof and wondered if it was
related to a change in the operation of the doors from sliding to hinged.
Mr. Knierim expressed reservations about the integrity and significance of the garage on its own. Ms.
Bredehoft said it contributes to the residential lot but is not significant on its own.
Ms. Bredehoft made a motion but withdrew it in order to clarify the eligibility of the garage.
Mr. Rose said due to its questionable integrity the garage would be not considered a contributing
resource and therefore should not be included in the eligibility for 724 South College.
Chair Dunn said the doors are the only thing that would speak to the period of significance.
[Secretary’s note: There was a lengthy gap in the discussion at this time while the Commission waited
for Ms. Bredehoft to prepare her motion. There was no official break at this time, so the audio and
video recordings continued to run.]
Commission Deliberation for 724 South College Avenue
Ms. Bredehoft moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission find the residential building at
724 South College Avenue eligible as a Fort Collins landmark, according to the standards outlined
in Section 14-22 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, finding that 724 South College meets Criteria 3
under Significance as a good example of a vernacular wood frame dwelling in Fort Collins, in that
it is a product of the local builder’s experience, available resources and a response to the local
environment, specifically in the balloon framing construction method that was used and additional
wood design details and application of the materials, and finding that 724 South College Avenue
meets all seven aspects of integrity, in that location, design, materials and workmanship are all
intact, and although College Avenue has been altered with time, the setting of the residential
character along the street frontage surrounding 724 South College is intact, and both feeling and
association are intact. In addition, the garage building associated historically with the residence is
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 11
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 7 September 16, 2020
not found to be a historic resource contributing to the significance or integrity of 724 South College
Avenue based on the finding that of the seven aspects of integrity only location and association are
met, and it does not meet Criteria 3 under Significance.
Mr. Knierim seconded.
Mr. Murray proposed an amendment to specify that the garage does meet two aspects of integrity:
location and association. Ms. Bredehoft and Mr. Knierim accepted the amendment.
The motion passed 5-1, Michell dissenting.
Ms. Michell explained her dissent, stating that while the house is intact, the residential setting of that
block is no longer intact.
Commission Discussion for 726 South College Avenue
1. Location
Chair Dunn stated the building has not moved.
2. Design
Mr. Murray said the classic hip-roof box is a standard design throughout Old Town Fort Collins. All the
features are intact including the original porch.
Chair Dunn stated that the hip-roof box is obvious, and the porch and railing are original.
3. Setting
Ms. Bredehoft commented that the feel of the Book Ranch has the same feel as the gas station would
have, and the setting is intact.
Mr. Rose said the setting for 726 is better than 724 due to its location.
4. Materials
Mr. Rose said the materials are the most common in wood-framed construction. He said it was a good
example of the use of materials that were available at the turn of the century.
Mr. Murray said the siding may have been replaced. Chair Dunn said even if the siding is not original,
it does fit with the era.
Mr. Rose pointed out the siding appears to have multiple layers of paint and is not uniform, which may
indicate it was not replaced in recent years. Also, the siding under the porch is protected which would
explain the apparent difference in condition. He stated that it retains the necessary integrity.
5. Workmanship
Mr. Murray commented on the likelihood that the front and back porches are original. He stated the
gapping in the railings, the floor, the shingles on the dormer and the handrail all appear to be original,
which is an indication of quality workmanship. The rooflines are very straight.
Chair Dunn pointed out the leaded glass window on the front porch is still intact. She also noted that
the transom window speaks to the time period.
6/7 Feeling & Association
Ms. Bredehoft said both the feeling and association are similar to the other house.
Significance
Chair Dunn said it is a more modest house.
Mr. Rose said it is a high-quality vernacular and the architecture is a good example for that period of time.
He commented that the porches are an architectural expression of interaction with the community.
[Secretary’s note: The Commission did not take a formal break but paused the discussion for 8 minutes
while Ms. Bredehoft prepared a motion. The audio and video continued to record during this time.]
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 12
Landmark Preservation Commission Page 8 September 16, 2020
Commission Deliberation for 726 South College Avenue
Ms. Bredehoft moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission find 726 South College Avenue
individually eligible as a Fort Collins landmark, according to the standards outlined in Section 14-
22 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code finding that 726 South College meets Criteria 3 under
Significance as it is a good example of a modest vernacular wood frame dwelling in Fort Collins, in
that it is a product of the local builder’s experience, available resources and a response to the local
environment at the turn of the century, specifically in the simple design elements including the
porch balusters, the diamond pattern under the gable, the lead glass transom and additional wood
design details and application, and finding that it meets all seven aspects of integrity, including
location, design, materials, workmanship, and although College Avenue has been altered with time,
the 726 South College setting is intact specifically considering its relationship to the adult Book
Ranch lot to the south which was once a local gas station, and the residential buildings directly to
the north, and that feeling and association are also intact.
Mr. Rose seconded. The motion passed 5-1, with Ms. Michell dissenting.
Ms. Michell explained her dissent, stating that the property doesn’t retain its residential setting.
Chair Dunn suggested voicing concerns earlier in the discussion rather than after the motion.
Chair Dunn suggested the Appellants speak with staff about options such as adaptive reuse of the
property and mentioned Ginger and Baker or the Goff House as examples. She also reminded the
Appellants they have the right to appeal to Council.
4. OVERVIEW OF WILLIAM B. “BILL” ROBB HISTORIC CONTEXT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION: This item introduces the Landmark Preservation Commission and the community
to a historic context project on local architect William B. “Bill” Robb.
Staff Report
Sherry Albertson-Clark introduced the item and reminded the Commission about the grant the City
received for this project. She explained why Bill Robb was chosen for the project. She mentioned that
Bill Rob’s granddaughter, Susan Downing, will be working on this project with Ron Sladek.
Mr. Sladek spoke about Bill Robb’s impact on the City, mentioning several specific projects.
Commission Questions and Discussion
Chair Dunn asked how many buildings would be included. Mr. Sladek responded that he would be
looking several dozen scattered all over the City.
Ms. Downing told the Commission she is excited about the project.
• OTHER BUSINESS
Jim Rose, a new Commission member, introduced himself and described his background in
architecture and historic preservation.
Chair Dunn reminded the Commission about the upcoming Boards & Commissions Super Meeting on
the City’s 2021 budget and the “Reimagine Boards & Commissions” project.
• ADJOURNMENT
Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 9:59 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager.
Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on __________________.
_____________________________________
Meg Dunn, Chair
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 13
Agenda Item 2
Item 2, Page 1
STAFF REPORT October 21, 2020
Landmark Preservation Commission
ITEM NAME
STAFF DESIGN REVIEW DECISIONS ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES, SEPTEMBER 3 TO OCTOBER 7,
2020
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 Landmark 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 September 3 to October 7, 2020.
There is no staff report this month.
Property Address Description of Project Staff Decision Date of
Decision
307 E. Plum St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/9/2020
511 Locust St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/10/2020
201 S. College Ave. Replace front sign w/ larger version. City
Landmark. Reviewed by staff under Municipal
Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/16/2020
611 Mathews St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/16/2020
315 E. Magnolia St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/22/2020
322 E. Myrtle St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved 9/28/2020
Packet Pg. 14
Agenda Item 2
Item 2, Page 2
245 Jefferson St. In-kind roof replacement (TPO membrane). City
Landmark. Reviewed by staff under Municipal
Code 14, Article IV.
Approved September 29,
2020
634 Mathews St. In-kind roof replacement (TPO membrane).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved September 30,
2020
408 Whedbee St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved September 30,
2020
615 W. Mulberry St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Unevaluated duplex over fifty years of age
Reviewed by staff under Municipal Code 14,
Article IV.
Approved October 1,
2020
404 E. Oak St. In-kind roof replacement (asphalt shingle).
Contributing building to Laurel School Historic
District (NRHP). Reviewed by staff under
Municipal Code 14, Article IV.
Approved October 5,
2020
Packet Pg. 15
Agenda Item 3
Item 3, Page 1
STAFF REPORT October 21, 2020
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
TENNEY COURT NORTH AND WEST OAK STREET ALLEYS CONCEPTUAL REVIEW
STAFF
Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking conceptual review comments from the Landmark
Preservation Commission for improvements to two alleys: Tenney Court
North and West Oak Street.
APPLICANT: Downtown Development Authority
OWNER: City of Fort Collins
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND: The Downtown Development Authority (DDA) has engaged in alley improvements in Fort Collins
since 2006 to enhance aesthetics and use of these connective spaces in the Downtown. A 2008 master plan
identified a multi-phased, prioritized approach to alley improvements and initial projects included Montezuma
Fuller, Old Firehouse, Dalzell Alley, Beardmore-Reidhead-Godinez, and Seckner Alleys. The current master plan
calls for finalization of the improvements in five separate phases that will occur between 2020 and 2029. Phase 1
includes two square blocks of enhanced alleyways identified as Tenney Court North and West Oak Street alleys.
The design and engineering team is Norris Design and JVA Consulting Engineers. Construction is expected to
occur between spring 2021 and November 2021. The DDA is engaged in the capital review approval process and
outreach with the public, including involved property owners and businesses, and seeks Commission feedback for
refinements of the plans in the final phase of design.
PROPOSED ALTERATION: The applicant is presenting 60% plans for proposed improvements to the Tenney
Court and West Oak Street alleys. The design for each alley is based on a unique theme, but serve the same
goals: to encourage additional outdoor uses, inspire redevelopment of adjacent private parcels, create festive
spaces with lighting and art installations, ensure emergency access and provide shared trash and recycling
strategies, and implement a shared street model for vehicular access. Specific design elements include:
• Vertical gateway elements
• Circular concrete planters
• Benches
• Local granite rocks
• Pedestrian lighting
• Trash location
• Wall mounted elements
• Festoon lighting
• Murals
• Special paving
Packet Pg. 16
Agenda Item 3
Item 3, Page 2
RELEVANT REVIEW CRITERIA:
Section 14-51. – Alterations to designated resources requiring a certificate of appropriateness or report.
Changes to rear elevations or other site features of designated landmark properties would require design review
and approval based on the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and a
satisfactory plan of protection that covers those alterations as well as abutting construction and site work.
Land Use Code Section 3.4.7 (E)
(1) Design Compatibility, Table 1: Requirements for New Construction Near Historic Resources
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.
Land Use Code Section 3.4.7 (E)
(3) Plan of Protection. A plan of protection shall be submitted prior to the Landmark Preservation Commission
providing a recommendation pursuant to below Subsection (F) that details the particular considerations and
protective measures that will be employed to prevent short-term and long-term material damage and avoidable
impact to identified historic resources on the development site and within the area of adjacency from demolition,
new construction, and operational activities.
ATTACHMENTS
1. DDA-LPC Staff Memo
2. Applicant Presentation
3. Staff Presentation
Packet Pg. 17
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
TO: Landmark Preservation Commission
FROM: Todd Dangerfield
THROUGH: Maren Bzdek
DATE: October 21, 2020
RE: Landmark Preservation Commission Meeting, October 21, 2020
Tenney Court North/West Oak Street Alleys Projects Executive Overview
Background
In 1981, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Plan of Development identified the alleys in the
downtown area as an untapped opportunity for enhanced pedestrian connections. In 2006, the DDA initiated a
pilot project which included improving the pedestrian-only Trimble Court (connecting College Avenue and Old
Town Square) and Tenney Court (connecting Mountain Avenue with the Civic Center Parking Structure). The
DDA’s goal in initiating this project was to enhance the alleys aesthetically and to stimulate increased economic
vitality and use of these spaces.
In 2008, the DDA engaged local design firm Russell+Mills Studios to identify and create a master plan of
proposed enhanced alleys between CSU, Downtown and the River District. Beginning in 2010, the first phase of
alley enhancements began with the construction of two alleys: Montezuma Fuller and Old Firehouse Alleys.
These two installations were followed by the construction of the Dalzell Alley enhancements in 2011 and the
Beardmore-Reidhead-Godinez and Old Firehouse East/Seckner Alleys in 2018.
The original master plan established a prioritized order of alleys to be enhanced. In 2019 the DDA Board
reviewed the ten remaining alleys identified for enhancement, reexamined the relevancy of the order and made
a few adjustments as well as establishing a model for “bundling” the remaining alleys into five separate phases
for design and construction in alternating years beginning in 2020 and continuing through 2029. The Board
established a finance plan for Phase 1 consisting of two square blocks of enhanced alleyways identified as
“Tenney Court North” and “West Oak Street alleys.” In early 2020, the DDA conducted a competitive process
for design and engineering services related to the project. The team of Norris Design/JVA Consulting Engineers
was formally approved for the project by the DDA Board in March 2020.
The DDA is budgeting approximately $2.8 million for construction of the alley projects. The City Manager’s
recommended budget identifies $300,000 from the General Improvement District No. 1 for the same purpose.
The construction of both alleys is scheduled to begin in spring 2021 and be substantially completed in November
2021.
Progress Designs
Beginning in April 2020, the design team embarked on a programmatic and schematic design process that so far
has engaged the City through the capital project review approval process as well as numerous individual
coordination meetings with property owners and businesses adjacent to the two alleys. With the challenges
posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions on group gatherings, the team continues to explore additional
opportunities for engagement with the public. Through this engagement process a final schematic (conceptual)
design was developed and approved by the DDA Board of Directors in July 2020.
The attached images represent the progress of designs since the approved schematics and prior to the
construction drawing milestone anticipated in early January 2021. Architectural goals include encouraging
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 18
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO
additional outdoor uses, inspiring redevelopment on adjacent private land, creating festive spaces using special
lighting and artistic installations, ensuring emergency access where applicable, creating shared trash and
recycling strategies as needed, and implementing a shared street model to allow vehicular access, including
business deliveries and access to internal private parking lots in a controlled and integrated manner.
Cara Scohy from Norris Design and Todd Dangerfield from the DDA will present an overview of the progress
designs at the meeting. The DDA is asking for comments and feedback in anticipation of further refinement
during the final phases of the design process.
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 19
TENNEY COURT NORTH & WEST OAK ALLEYRENOVATIONSDESIGN PROGRESS-LPC PRESENTATIONSEPTEMBER 2020ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 20
1733345FORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020TENNEY COURT NORTH09.24.2020PLAN VIEWKEYCivic Center Parking GarageNorth Mason StreetLaporte Avenue2
22253614Circular Concrete PlantersPedestrian LightingAnova BenchesTrash LocationVertical Gateway ElementLocal Granite Rocks7Wall Mounted Element174556668Festoon Lighting888ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 21
8FORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020TENNEY COURT NORTH09.24.2020EAST MURAL COORDINATIONKEYEFGHIJI25C367D14BAEddington BlendRiver RedBuffCharcoalStandard Concrete Sleeping ElephantGrey RockPoudre RiverColorado AspensPoudre FallsCircular Concrete PlantersVertical Gateway ElementDecorative String LightingAnova BenchesTrash LocationPedestrian LightingLocal Granite RocksStreetPlanBuildingElevationLaporte Avenue
Alley CDBGHFJ2345AAE67777778Wall Mounted ElementITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 22
FORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020TENNEY COURT NORTH09.24.2020SOUTH MURAL COORDINATIONKEYE25C36D14BAEddington BlendRiver RedBuffCharcoalStandard Concrete Circular Concrete PlantersPedestrian LightingAnova BenchesTrash LocationVertical Gateway ElementLocal Granite RocksStreetPlanBuildingElevationCDB234AE566North Mason StreetAlleyFGHHPingree ValleyForest Fire HistoryColorado AspensGF7Wall Mounted Element551766ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 23
FORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020TENNEY COURT NORTH09.24.2020` GATEWAY & WALL MOUNTED ELEMENTSWall Mounted ElementVertical Gateway Element1'-0"7'-0"3'-9"9'-5"1'-0"6'-3"1'-4"TENNEY ALLEY - FORT COLLINS6&21&(',0(16,216NO SCALEBarbara GrygutisBarbara Grygutis Sculpture LLC2'-512"3'-9""20'-0"2'-0"1'-0"5'-11"3'-634"2'-0"6'-0"2'-512"Barbara GrygutisBarbara Grygutis Sculpture LLCITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 24
6309.24.2020PLAN VIEWJoy OrganicsJay’s BistroACE HardwareDae Gee Korean BBQArmstrong HotelBrand Spanking NewThrift StoreKEY231Vertical Gateway ElementFestoon LightingHanging Baskets4Planter Pots5Benches554426Pedestrian Lighting624113FORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020WEST OAK ALLEYITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 25
09.24.2020VERTICAL GATEWAY ELEMENT',0(16,21629(59,(:NO SCALESDJHRIBARBARA GRYGUTIS SCULPTURE LLCFORT COLLINS ALLEY RENOVATIONS - 2020WEST OAK ALLEYITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 26
1
Conceptual Review: Tenney Court and West Oak Alleys
Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Planner
Landmark Preservation Commission, October 21, 2020
Summary: Tenney Court & West Oak Alleys
-Phased implementation of Master Plan for downtown alleys
-60% plans for proposed improvements to enhance use and provide services
Design elements:
Vertical gateway elements
Circular concrete planters
Benches
Local granite rocks
Pedestrian lighting
Trash location
Wall mounted elements
Festoon lighting
Murals
Special paving
2
1
2
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3
Updated 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 27
Tenney Court Alley
3
• 100 Block W Mountain
•2019 Recon Survey (no intensive-
level recommended)
• 100 Block N College
•107-109: Woolworth/Welch Block
•111-115: Windsor Hotel
•2020-2021 N. College Survey Project
West Oak Alley
4
• 201 S College (Old Post Office)
• 249-261 S College (Armstrong Hotel)
3
4
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3
Updated 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 28
West Oak Alley
5
Role of the LPC
Secretary of Interior’s Standards:
Evaluate impact of proposed
attachments, rear building entry
enhancements, site changes
•No identified changes to historic
resources
Development Review (Sec. 3.4.7):
Visibility of historic buildings and
features
•No identified concerns
Plan of protection
6
5
6
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3
Updated 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 29
7
Conceptual Review: Tenney Court and West Oak Alleys
Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Planner
Landmark Preservation Commission, October 21, 2020
Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
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.
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.
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.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be
retained and preserved.
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
8
7
8
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3
Updated 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 30
Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
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.
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.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be
disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials,
features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated
from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and
massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
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.
9
9
ITEM 3, ATTACHMENT 3
Updated 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 31
Description:
Grantor:
Property Address:
May 2018
ITEM 3, EXHIBIT A
Festoon Lighting - Added 10-21-20
Packet Pg. 31-1
Item 5, Page 1
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item 5
October 21, 2020
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
126 S. WHITCOMB ST: APPEAL OF STAFF DECISION ON DESIGN REVIEW
STAFF
Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner
PROJECT INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION: This item is to consider the appeal of a staff design review decision for 126.
S. Whitcomb Street. The applicant is proposing demolition of the historic
1932 garage and replacement with a new 1.5 story garage on its location.
Staff denied the request on August 25, 2020, and the owner filed an appeal
on August 26, 2020. Staff decisions may be appealed to the Landmark
Preservation Commission.
APPELLANT: Tara Gaffney (Property Owner)
LPC’S ROLE:
Section 14-55 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code establishes that “staff denial of a certificate of appropriateness
pursuant to Sec. 14-53 may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant.” In this hearing, the Commission
shall consider an appeal of the staff decision for the proposed project at 126 S. Whitcomb St., based on the
provided evidence from the 2013 Landmark District nomination, the applicant’s design review application, their
request for an appeal, and any new evidence presented at the hearing. The Commission must use the Municipal
Code 14, Article IV and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation for its decision. Final decisions
of the Commission shall be subject to the right of appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Section 14-9).
BACKGROUND
The primary Cunningham property dwelling was built in c.1904 as part of the 1873 Avery plat, the original townsite
for Fort Collins. The property has remained in residential use since that time. The property has been modified
since that time, including a 1927 remodel for room on the second floor and a porch, the 1932 construction of the
frame garage, a 1940 re-roofing, and the 1946 enlargement of a chicken house that was on the property. Later
projects include new roofs in 1973 and 2002.
January-May 2020: The previous owner engaged staff and applied for Design Assistance Program (DAP) funds to
scope a rear addition to the main house and rehabilitation/addition options for the garage. Staff engaged engineer
Geoff Robinson to assess not only load-bearing issues for the main house, but also the feasibility of correcting the
lean on the 1932 garage, stabilizing it from future deterioration, and constructing an addition on its rear/east
elevation. Mr. Geoff Robinson provided that analysis in May of 2020 and determined the garage could be easily
corrected, some shear strength added to prevent further deterioration, and an addition to the rear would help
provide stability.
Packet Pg. 32
Agenda Item 5
Item 5, Page 2
July 2020: New owner (Ms. Gaffney) contacts the office with initial drawings for a new garage and demolition of the
existing garage. Staff responds that there are alternatives, provides DAP materials, and guidance from Zoning
about the dimensions of the new garage proposal.
August 19, 2020: Ms. Gaffney submits a design review application pursuant to Municipal Code 14-53 to demolish
the 1932 garage and construct the new garage on its location.
August 25, 2020: Staff denies the application based on the findings that the garage is a contributing resource to
the Landmark District, demolition of contributing resources does not meet the SOI Standards, and that a feasible
alternative to achieve the desired program is likely available via the DAP product from May.
August 26, 2020: Ms. Gaffney submits an appeal to Community Development and Neighborhood Services. Based
on pandemic-related justification for the project in the appeal, staff requested an exception to Ordinance No. 079,
2020.
On September 15, 2020, Council adopted an exception to Ordinance No. 079, 2020 that included explicit
permission for an appeal of this staff decision to come forward to the LPC for consideration.
October 7, 2020: The appeal of the determination of eligibility was publicly posted with historic review underway
signs on the properties, in The Coloradoan, and on the City website.
STAFF ANALYSIS AND DECISION
The analysis and decision by staff is documented in the attached Denial for the Certificate of Appropriateness.
RELEVANT CODES AND PROCESSES FOR HISTORIC REVIEW
Sec. 14-54 (a)(3-4). – Commission design review and issuance of reports.
(a)(3) Alterations to Fort Collins Landmarks Meeting the Standards. If the Commission determines that
a proposed alteration to a Fort Collins landmark or resource(s) within a Fort Collins landmark district,
contributing or non-contributing, meets the Standards, the Commission shall approve the application
and issue a certificate of appropriateness. A certificate of appropriateness shall include, but not be
limited to, a statement that the requested alterations have been approved pursuant to this Article, the
date of approval, a copy of the design review application and the plans and specifications being
approved.
a.The proposed alteration shall not commence until the Commission has issued the certificate
of appropriateness and the applicant has obtained all applicable permits, subject to §14-52.
Alterations shall conform to the plans and specifications that the Commission approved in
connection with issuance of the certificate of appropriateness or the report and deviations from
such plans and specifications shall not occur unless such changes are first submitted to and
approved by the Commission in the same manner as the original application. If non-
conforming alterations are made, the City may issue a stop work order, refuse to finalize any
issued permit, refuse to issue a certificate of occupancy, refuse to issue additional City
permits, and take any other available action, or any combination of the aforementioned, until
the applicant has applied for and received approval for the non-conforming alteration. If the
non-conforming alteration is not approved, the applicant shall restore the site, structure, or
object to conform with the approved plans and specifications or to the original condition of the
site, structure, or object prior to any alteration occurring.
b.A certificate of appropriateness shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of issuance
and, thereafter, may be extended for one (1) additional year provided the Commission
determines that the proposed alteration continues to comply with the Standards. To be eligible
Packet Pg. 33
Agenda Item 5
Item 5, Page 3
for such extension, the Commission must receive an extension request on forms provided by
staff accompanied by all required information at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of
the certificate of appropriateness.
(4)Alterations to Local Landmarks Not Meeting the Standards. If the Commission determines that a
proposed alteration to a Fort Collins landmark or resource(s) within a Fort Collins landmark district,
contributing or non-contributing, does not meet the Standards, the Commission shall deny the
application and inform the applicant in writing of the specific reasons for such denial.
a.Upon denial of the application, the Director shall deny the application for a building or other
permit associated with the proposed alterations and shall inform the applicant of such denial.
b.No application shall be resubmitted pursuant to this Section under the original plans and
specifications denied by the Commission except upon a showing of change circumstances
sufficient to justify the resubmittal.
SAMPLE MOTIONS
If the Commission determines that the proposed project meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation in compliance with Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code, it may propose a motion based on the
following:
“I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
proposed project, according to the standards outlined in Section 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal
Code, based on the following findings of fact: [insert findings on how the project meets the Standards].
If the Commission determines that the proposed project conditionally meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation in compliance with Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code, it may propose a motion based
on the following:
“I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
proposed project, according to the standards outlined in Section 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal
Code, based on the following findings of fact: [insert findings on how the project meets the Standards],
subject to the following conditions: [insert conditions].
If the Commission determines that the proposed project does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for Rehabilitation in compliance with Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code, it may propose a motion based on the
following:
“I move that the Landmark Preservation Commission denies a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
proposed project, according to the standards outlined in Section 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal
Code, based on the following findings of fact: [insert findings on how the project does not meet the
Standards].
Note: The Commission may propose other wording for the motion based on its evaluation of the application.
Packet Pg. 34
Agenda Item 5
Item 5, Page 4
ATTACHMENTS
1.Excerpt from 2013 Whitcomb Street Landmark District Nomination Form
a.Full nomination is available online, here:
https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/files/whitcomb-street-district-nomination-
2013.pdf?1583529711
2.Staff Denial of Certificate of Appropriateness
a.Includes Design Review application and supplemental information from applicant
3. Engineer’s Report from DAP program
4.Appeal memorandum
5.Staff Presentation (updated 10-20-20)
6.Applicant Presentation (rec’d 10-20-20)
Packet Pg. 35
City of
ktColli~
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O . Box580
Fort Collins , CO 80522 .0580
Fort Collins Landmark District Designation
LOCATION INFORMATION:
District Name: Whitcomb Street Historic District, Fort Collins, CO 80521
Legal Description: See attached Boundary Discription and Exhibits for legal description of the proposed
district. Boundary includes all residences and associated ancillary buildings described in this report,
falling within the described boundary.
CLASSIFICATION
Category
Designation
D Building
D Structure
D Site
D Object
rg) District
Ownership
D Public
rg) Private
FORM PREPARED BY:
Status
rg) Occupied
D Unoccupied
Name and Title: Kevin Murray, Owner, Empire Surveys
Address: PO Box 245, Bellvue, Colorado 80512
Phone: (970) 493-3499 Email: empire @verinet.com
Present Use
D Commercial
D Educational
D Religious
rg) Residential
D Entertainment
D Government
D Other
Relationship to Owner: Neighbor and owner of 117 South Whitcomb
DATE: August 8, 2012
TYPE OF DESIGNATION and BOUNDARIES
D Individual Landmark Property
Explanation of Boundaries:
rg) Landmark District
Existing
D Nat'l Register
D State Register
The boundaries of the area being proposed as the Whitcomb Street Historic District correspond to the
legal description attached to this document. This Fort Collins Landmark District will encompass fourteen
properties, which together form a cohesive unit historically, architecturally, and developmentally
associated with the 100 block of South Whitcomb Street. The proposed district is generally bound on the
north by Mountain Avenue, on the south by Oak Street, and by alleys on the east and west sides.
Revised 09-2004 Page 1
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 36
SIGNIFICANCE
Properties that possess exterior integrity are eligible for designation as Fort Collins Landmarks or Fort
Collins Landmark Districts if they meet one (1) or more of the following standards for designation:
[gl Standard 1: The property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of history;
[gl Standard 2: The property is associated with the lives of persons significant in history;
[gl Standard 3: The property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction, or that represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a
significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
D Standard 4: The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history .
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Whitcomb Street Historic District is historically significant under Fort Collins Landmark Standard
Number 1, for its association with the development and social history of Fort Collins . Research into the
property owners and tenants indicate that this block is particularly reflective of upper middle class
domestic life in Fort Collins . This association with early prominent residents, such as Aaron Kitchel,
Horace Garbutt, and Stewart C. Case, makes the district significant under Fort Collins Landmark Stnadard
2. Additionally, a prevalence of the residential dwellings within the district, as well as the individually
designated Queen Anne residence at 601 West Mountain Avenue, are architecturally significant under
Fort Collins Landmark Standard 3.
The proposed landmark district provides a representative collection of Late 19th and Early 20th Century
one-and two-story residences, with an eclectic mix of Queen Anne and Crattsman architecture, as well as
a few Minimal Traditional dwellings. The periord of significance dates from the oldest construction, in
1889, to the newest built in 1940 on the last subdivided lot. During this span of dates, especially between
the period from 1900 to 1930, the city experienced unparalleled growth and prosperity, which necessitated
a rapid expansion in land annexation and residential construction. The builders of the Whitcomb Street
residences designed these homes for upper middle class families. Mmiy of these homes were ispired by
the high-style architectural details of adjacent houses on Mountain Avenue, but they understood that
modesty in size and style did not mean loss of comfort or individualistic details. The residents, too, as they
moved in and out of the neighborhood, perhaps also looked at those houses and aspired to a corresponding
higher socio-economic standard . The range of occupants is reflective of the social and demographic
changes during the first decades of the 20tli century. Many of the early residents were locally prominent,
including Aaron Kitchel, Horace Garbutt, and Stewart C. Case, while later residents were a mix of owners
and renters who had a variety of occupations, such as salesmen, clerks, butchers, mechanics, and students.
The changes continue today, as most of the original homes have now been restored to single-family,
owner-occupied dwellings, prized once again for their historic character and their proximity to the
traditional center of the city. The proposed district is an important example of a residential neighborhood
in the core of Fort Collins that has evolved with the times, yet managed to retain, mostly intact, its historic
character.
Revised 09-2004 Page 2
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 37
LOCATION INFORMATION:
Address: 126 South Whitcomb St.
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Legal Description: NORTH 1/2 OF LOT 8, LESS PART LY EAST OF DITCH, BLOCK 71, FORT
COLLINS
Property Name (historic and/or common): Cunningham Residence and garage
OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: John and Amy Volckens
Phone: (919) 225-9881 Email: jv@volkens.com
Address: 126 South Whitcomb St.
Fort Collins, CO 80521
CLASSIFICATION
Category
Designation
D Building
D Structure
D Site
D Object
~ District
Ownership
D Public
~ Private
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
Status
~ Occupied
D Unoccupied
Present Use
D Commercial
D Educational
D Religious
~ Residential
D Entertainment
D Government
D Other
Existing
D Nat'l Register
D State Register
The first residents listed at 126 South Whitcomb are John and Rosanna Cunningham in 1904. In 1910,
bookkeeper Clarence Moody was listed at the residence. J.E. and May Kircher were residents in 1913.
By 1917, students of Colorado Agricultural College move in to the residence. In 1922, Professor
William L. Burnett moves in with Eva, Raymond, Lois, and Grandma Rose. They stay until 1938.
Burnett would become State Entomologist and the Curator of the Colorado Agricultural College
Museum. He is responsible for a remodel in 1927 and a frame garage in 1932. In 1940, the Luggs are
listed but a permit to reroof is filed by W. E. Schlect for the residence. Schlect was listed as the owner
but may have simply been the contractor for the project. George, a carpenter, and Martha Earley are
residents for 20 years. In 1946, George enlarged the chicken house. The Wallace family moves in from
1964 to 1966. From 1968 until 1980, Dorothy Jennings and her children are listed, and she reroofs the
house in 1973. From 1980 until 1983, the house was used as an engineer's office. Primarily, students are
residents until the current owners bought the house. At different times, there are apartments listed on the
main floor, the second floor, and in the basement. In 2002, Marc L. and Mary E. Teets reroofed the
house and replaced the furnace in 2005.
Revised 09-2004 Page 36
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 38
ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
Construction Date: 1893
Architect/Builder:
Building Materials: Wood Frame, stone
Architectural Style: Queen Anne
Description:
This Queen Anne;: residence is a roughly square, one and one half story, wood frame structure with an
asphalt shingle, hipped roof. Roof features include intersecting cross gables, cornice returns on the
gables, wide overhanging boxed eaves, and some guttering over the porch. It has a stone foundation,
parged over, and asbestos siding. Wood fishscale shingles are found underneath the gable. The main
fac;ade is broken into three bays and contains an entrance to the south. The one story, partial-width inset
porch has overhanging eaves, two columns, and a wooden railing. The door is a modem aluminum door
flanked by a non-historic hexagonal window, and there is a large fixed pane picture window to the north
under the prominent front-facing gable. In the upper part of the gable is a single one-over-one double-
hung window.
The south elevation had two one-over-one double hung windows and a single one-over-one double-hung
window in the cross gable, which is clad in wood fishscale shingles. The east elevation features two one-
over-one double-hung windows, one with six lights and one with four lights. The back entryway has a
pyramidal shed porch with two four-by-four support posts. There is a modem aluminum door with a
fixed six-light window and two skylights in the roof. The north elevation has four one-over-one double-
hung windows. A shed dormer is covered in wood fishscale siding and features two one-over-one
double-hung windows. There are two chimneys present. A small front gabled one stall garage is situated
to the rear of the northern elevation. It has lapped wood siding and hinged solid doors.
The ornate Queen Anne, a subset of the Victorian period, was popular in Colorado between 1880 and
1910. This residence features typical hipped roof with cross gables, overhanging eaves, and pattern
shingles.
REFERENCE LIST or SOURCES ofINFORMATION (attach a separate sheet if needed)
Architectural Inventory Form, October 2005. Recorder: R Graham
City of Fort Collins. http://history.poudrelibraries.org. Building Permit Files.
10/3/1927; permit #1826; owner: Burnett, W.L.; permit to remodel
10/8/1932; permit #3390; owner: Burnett, W.L.; permit to build frame garage
9/3/1940; permit #6325; owner: Schlect, W.E.; permit to reroof
6/14/1946; permit #9244; owner: Early, George; permit to enlarge chicken house
5/31/1973; permit #20067; owner: Dorothy Jennings; contractor: Frank Neckel; permit to reroof
9/16/2002; permit #B0205812; owner: Teets, Marc L/Mary E; subcontractor: R&T Roofing; permit to reroof
2/14/2005; permit #B0500664; owner: Teets, Marc L/Mary E; subcontractor: Yeti Mechanical; permit to replace
furnace
City of Fort Collins. http://history.poudrelibraries.org. City Directories: 1902 through 2004.
History Colorado, "Architecture and Engineering Guides: Queen Anne." Accessed June 14, 2012.
http://www.historycolorado.org/archaeologists/queen-anne.
Revised 09-2004 Page 37
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 39
Revised 09-2004 Page 38
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 40
r
~ ~
l
~
~
I
I
i
~ .c: s:
8
i1
i5
0
·15
li
I
en
i ,g
~ g>
c
C ..
ii: ~ t
f ::,
i
! ..
C.
i ·c
ATTACHMENT 2
E~HIBIT OF
WHITCOMB STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT SHOWING ADDRESSES
MOUNTAIN
@) ~ @ I-
(/)
C)
I\ @
*-I<\, m
~ c., ALLEY
C) 0
" (@)
~ 0
I-
@ -
I
I
@ 3:
@ (ffi)
0 A K
JULY 23, 2012
1"=100'
THIS EXHIBITS SOLE INTENT IS TO GRAPHICALLY
REPRESENT PROPERTY ADDRESSES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY
OF THE PROPOSED WHITCOMB STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT DOES NOT REPRESENT A MONUMENTED LAND SURVEY AS
DEFINED IN C.R.S. 38-51-102. I
@
@
@
@
@
®
S T .
AV E .
._
" .
\
*-c.,
<...:
" ~
/
@ INDICATES STREET ADDRESS
i---------------------------------------0,
ill
di
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 41
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.416.4250
preservation@fcgov.com
fcgov.com/historicpreservation
Historic Preservation Services
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS - DENIAL
DENIED: August 25, 2020
APPEAL DEADLINE: September 8, 2020 (due to holiday on 9/7)
Tara Berglund-Gaffney
126 S. Whitcomb Street
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dear Ms. Berglund-Gaffney:
This letter provides you with confirmation that the proposed changes to your property at 126 S.
Whitcomb Street, a contributing property in the Whitcomb Street Landmark District, have been
denied by the City’s Historic Preservation Division because the proposed work does not meet the
criteria and standards in Chapter 14, Article IV of the Fort Collins Municipal Code.
1)Demolition of the historic 1932 one-bay garage northeast of the main house.
2) Construction of a new 1.5 story garage northeast of the main house.
The decision has been made based on the analysis contained in the table below. Property owners
can appeal staff design review decisions by filing a written notice of appeal to the Director of
Community Development & Neighborhood Services within fourteen (14) days of this decision.
If you have any questions regarding this denial, or if I may be of any assistance, please do not
hesitate to contact me. I may be reached at jbertolini@fcgov.com, or 970-416-4250.
Sincerely,
Jim Bertolini
Historic Preservation Planner
Applicable
Code
Standard
Summary of Code Requirement and Analysis (Rehabilitation) 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 property would remain in residential use without
substantial modifications to the primary historic residence.
Y
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 42
- 2 -
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.
The Whitcomb Street Landmark District was designated in 2013
under Standards 1, 2, and 3 as an important concentration of
late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century residential
development in Fort Collins. The District’s resources span the
period from 1889 and 1940, including the Cunningham property
at 126 S. Whitcomb constructed in c.1904 with the garage added
in 1932. While not the primary resource on most historic
properties, the addition of automobile garages to middle-class
dwellings in the 1910s-1930s reflects the dramatic cultural and
commercial shift from a primarily horse- and rail-driven
transportation infrastructure to an automobile one over the first
quarter of the twentieth century.
Garages, especially when constructed during an historic
district’s period of historical recognition, are considered
significant alterations in their own right and help define the
overall historic character of the property. They usually should
be preserved and in this case, demolition does not meet this
Standard.
N
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.
All proposed alterations would be clearly distinguishable as new.
The proposed new garage includes modern window and door
treatments and a slab foundation that avoid any false sense of
history if it were to be constructed.
Y
SOI #4 Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in
their own right will be retained and preserved.
As noted under Standard 2, the garage, constructed in 1932, is
an historic alteration in its own right and should be preserved.
Its proposed demolition does not meet this Standard.
N
SOI #5 Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques
or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be
preserved.
As noted under Standard 2, the 1932 garage is a distinctive, if
less articulate, feature of the site and should be preserved to
meet this Standard.
N
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 43
- 3 -
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.
As evidenced by the engineer’s report for this garage dated May
27, 2020, using Design Assistance Program funds, the garage
does have some structural weaknesses. However, that report
identified simple stabilization, correction, and reinforcement
techniques that could keep the garage standing and facilitate an
addition onto its rear to expand storage/work space. The
proposed demolition and replacement garage does not meet this
Standard.
N
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.
The expected depth of excavation to clear and replace the
existing concrete slab is not to a depth to reach undisturbed soils
that may contain significant archaeological information.
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 garage construction requires the demolition
of the 1932 garage which is, as noted previously, a distinctive
feature of the property. Because of that project element, it does
not meet this Standard.
But for the demolition of the historic garage, the new proposed
garage does appear to be sufficiently compatible with,
distinguishable from, and subordinate to, the historic residence.
It uses similar cladding materials to the original house (shingles
and lapboard), and is lower than the historic house, being
secondary in massing and scale, establishing compatibility. It
utilizes modern window and door treatments to help distinguish
it as new construction. But for the demolition of the historic
garage, the new garage would meet this Standard.
N
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 44
- 4 -
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.
As noted under Standard 9, because this project proposes the
demolition/deconstruction of the historic 1932 garage, it does not
meet this Standard. But for the demolition of the historic
structure, the proposed new garage would be completely
separate from the primary historic residence and would not
affect the primary resource’s historic integrity.
N
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 45
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 46
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 47
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 48
UPUPUPR4R4R4R4E2E2E3E3E4E4S1S1S2S2E1E114'20'1'-9"10'-6"1'-9"5'15'21'-2 1/16"5'30'-6 7/16"95'-10 3/8"1143 SQ FT13'-0" X 19'-0"LIVING AREAGARAGE5'SETBACK5' SETBACK15'SETBACK7" " " 1st Floor3068104752840DHUPR4R4R4R4E2E2Elevation 2E3E3Elevation 3E4E4Elevation 4S1S1Cross Section 1S2S2Cross Section 2E1E1Elevation 114'20'1'-9"10'-6"1'-9"5'21'-2 1/16"13'-0" X 19'-0"GARAGE5'SETBACK5' SETBACK15'SETBACK" 1st Floor30682850DHR4R4R4R4E2E2Elevation 2E7E7Elevation 7E3E3Elevation 3E4E4Elevation 4S1S1Cross Section 1S2S2Cross Section 2E1E1Elevation 15'-8"2'-8"5'-8"6'-7"2'3'2'6'-5"14'13'19'20'2'2'2'2'280 SQ FTLIVING AREADECK2nd Floor126 South Whitcomb St.Fort Collins, CO 80521SHEET:SCALE:, DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY:DESCRIPTION, -DATE:BY DATENO.PROJECT DESCRIPTION:SHEET TITLE:GarageA-18/18/2020GARAGENTSSavant Homes Inc.9.5' C.H.ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 49
126 South Whitcomb St.Fort Collins, CO 80521SHEET:SCALE:, DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY:DESCRIPTION, -DATE:BY DATENO.PROJECT DESCRIPTION:SHEET TITLE:GarageA-28/18/2020NTSSavant Homes Inc.RIGHTSCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"REARSCALE: 1/4" =1'-0"LEFTSCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"COMPOSITE DECKING.6" SIDING4X4 POSTASPHALT SHINGLESITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 50
126 South Whitcomb St.Fort Collins, CO 80521SHEET:SCALE:, DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY:DESCRIPTION, -DATE:BY DATENO.PROJECT DESCRIPTION:SHEET TITLE:GarageA-38/18/2020NTSSavant Homes Inc.CROSS SECTION 1SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 51
126 South Whitcomb St.Fort Collins, CO 80521SHEET:SCALE:, DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY:DESCRIPTION, -DATE:BY DATENO.PROJECT DESCRIPTION:SHEET TITLE:GarageA-48/18/2020Savant Homes Inc.NTSCROSS SECTION 2SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2Packet Pg. 52
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 53
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 54
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 55
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 56
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 57
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 58
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 59
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 60
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 61
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 62
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 63
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 4Packet Pg. 64
1
Jim Bertolini, Historic Preservation Planner
Landmark Preservation Commission 10.21.2020
Appeal: 126 S. Whitcomb Street
Landmark Design Review
2
1
2
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 65
Role of the LPC
• Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
•Is garage a contributing feature of property?
•Does proposed project meet the Standards?
• Provide a decision under Municipal Code 14, Article IV
• Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of
appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Sec. 14-9)
3
Current Review Timeline
4
• January 8, 2020: Previous owner approved for DAP engineering funds to assess garage
• May 27, 2020: Engineer Geoff Robinson provides DAP product – engineering solution for
garage plus addition
• July 7, 2020: Initial contact by new property owner for garage proposal
• July 13, 2020: Initial submittal of Garage drawings
• July 16, 2020: Informed owner, based on email from Zoning, that new garage design did
not comply with Zoning requirements
• August 19, 2020: Owner submits Design Review application
• August 25, 2020: Staff denies application
• August 26, 2020: Applicant provided written notice of appeal (within 14 days)
• September 15, 2020: Council adopted exception to Ordinance No. 079, 2020
• October 21, 2020: LPC appeal hearing
3
4
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 66
Property Background
• Contributing Property to Whitcomb
Street Landmark District
• Designated January 15,
2013
• Standards 1, 2, and 3
• Period of Significance 1889-
1940
• House constructed in c.1904
• Garage in 1932
5
Property Background - Treatment
6
• c.1904: House constructed
• Oct 4, 1927: Remodel for room on second floor and porch
• Oct 8, 1932: frame garage
• Sept 3, 1940: re-roof
• June 14, 1946: Enlarge chicken house
• May 31, 1973: Re-roof
• Sept 16, 2002: Re-roof
•July 2013: Landmark Rehab Loan award ($7,500) – Removal of asbestos siding,
rehabilitation of original wood lapsiding, siding and trim painting, and installation of
insulation & vapor barrier in side-walls and attic
• July 30, 2015: Re-roof
5
6
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 67
Proposed Project
7
1. Demolition of 1932 garage building northeast of main house
2. Construction of new 1.5 story garage northeast of main house
Existing Conditions
8
7
8
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 68
Staff Analysis
• Project meets Rehab Standards:
• 1 – same use or compatible
new use
• 3 – Avoid false sense of
history
• Standards 7 & 8 don’t apply
• 8 – chemical & physical
treatments
• 9 - archaeology
• Project does not meet Rehab
Standards:
• 2 & 5 – preserve character-
defining features
• 4 – preserve historic
alterations
• 6 – Repair vs. replace
• 9 – compatible,
distinguishable new
construction
• 10 - reversibility
9
Staff Analysis: Basis for Decision
• Existing 1932 garage is a contributing resource to the Whitcomb Street
Landmark District
• Based on DAP report from Geoff Robinson, garage can be corrected,
reinforced, and can receive a rear addition to add extra space
• Demolition of a contributing resource to a Landmark District does not meet
the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation (2, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10)
10
9
10
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 69
Appeal
• Owner filed appeal on August 25
• Staff forwarded to Council based on the motivation for the appeal
(pandemic-related)
• Council approved on September 15
11
Responses to LPC ?’s
• History of work on main house, including public incentives?
• See Slide 6
• LRL Loan for $7,500 awarded in 2013
• Garage door info?
• None available. Either not historic or not character-defining
• Dimensions of garage?
• Provided by applicant: 216 Sq Ft, 12’4”W x 18’4”L x 12’H
• Ditch and constraints on property?
• Applicant presentation includes map; irregular parcel line a result of
undergrounded Arthur Ditch, which formerly ran behind property.
12
11
12
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 70
Role of the LPC
• Consider evidence regarding proposed work and whether it meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
•Is garage a contributing feature of property?
•Does proposed project meet the Standards?
• Provide a decision under Municipal Code 14, Article IV
• Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of
appeal to the Fort Collins City Council (Sec. 14-9)
13
13
ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 5
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 71
Garage Project –Appeal to CDNS126 South Whitcomb Street, Fort Collins, CO 80521The following circumstances were considered in making the decision to proceed with this project (in specific reference to plans provided by previous home owners):1.Need for larger garage space.2.Need for home office & exercise space.3.Assumed to be less expensive and less disruptivethan home addition.ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 72
Existing GarageBuilt in 1932216 Sq Ft 12’4”W x 18’4”L x 12’H•Unsafe•Not secure•Small - cannot fit a car•Not aesthetically pleasingITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 73
House - Vernacular DesignDefining historical characteristics:•Wide & defining soffits•Roof pitch•Narrow wood siding•Overhanging eavesITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 74
Garage Location •No alley access will require removal of existing garageITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 75
Ditch on PropertyDITCH•Ditch further restricts location of garageITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 76
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation - relative to project -1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. a) There are no historically defining characteristics of this building as it relates to the house. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved.a) The existing garage does not appear to have features that match the house or that characterize the property. The newly designed garage will add distinctive features to match the house. 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. a) The newly designed garage will meet all of these requirements.10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. a) The newly designed garage will be a detached structure and any future removal will not impair the house.ITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 77
New Garage Design•Design consistent with house•Aesthetically pleasing•Larger 14’W x 20’L x 20’HITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 78
Added Indoor Space•Home office space•Home schooling space•Exercise spaceITEM 4, ATTACHMENT 6 Added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 79
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 1
STAFF REPORT
Landmark Preservation Commission
October 21, 2020
PROJECT NAME
237 & 243 JEFFERSON STREET – CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW
STAFF
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking conceptual review comments from the Landmark
Preservation Commission for proposed additions to the two buildings at 237 & 243
Jefferson Street in the Old Town Historic District.
OWNER/APPLICANT: Sunil Cherian (owner); Matt Rankin (architect)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUTHORITY: The Old Town Historic District, which includes the properties at 237 & 243 Jefferson Street, was
listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1978 and, with a somewhat smaller boundary, was designated
as a Fort Collins Landmark district in 1979. Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-51, “Alterations to designated
resources requiring a certificate of appropriateness or report,” requires that the applicant obtain a report of
acceptability from the Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) for proposed alterations to designated historic
resources.
The applicant is requesting conceptual review of a proposal to add a second floor to the one-story building at 243
Jefferson and extend this building’s rear elevation; and to extend the rear elevation of the two-story building at 237
Jefferson Street. Additional changes to the site, to be determined, are proposed at the rear of both properties, but
will include parking to accommodate the proposed use.
LPC’S ROLE
Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article IV, provides the process and standards whereby alterations to officially
designated Fort Collins Landmark properties are reviewed. This is a Conceptual Review.
Hearing Procedure. 14-54(a)(2)(a): Conceptual review. Conceptual review is the first phase of the hearing and
is an opportunity for the applicant to discuss requirements, standards, design issues and policies that apply to
designated resources. Problems can be identified and solved prior to final review of the application. Conceptual
review of any proposed alteration may be limited to certain portions of the work as deemed appropriate by the
Commission.
The appliable code requirements for this project include the Old Town District Design Standards
https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/pdf/old-town-design-standards.pdf, and the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards and Treatments for Historic Resources, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.
Packet Pg. 80
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 2
BACKGROUND
The 2017 intensive level Colorado Inventory Record Forms for these buildings are attached. Relevant portions of
the forms and supplemental information, focusing primarily on the areas proposed to be altered, are provided here.
Constructed in 1879, the Stover & Deaver Block originally contained three bays (235, 237 & 243) stretching for 75”
along Jefferson Street. In late 1904, the southeastern third of building was demolished, to be replaced the following
year with a one-story building, now addressed as 243 Jefferson Street. Over the years the ownership of each bay
changed independently of each other; currently the buildings at 237 and 243 Jefferson are under common
ownership, with 235 under separate ownership. This project affects just the 237 & 243 buildings.
In relation to the aspects of integrity, the building experienced the loss of one-third of its original design
and massing twenty-five years into its existence. Its current size reflects how it has appeared for the last
115 years, far longer than it did in its original condition. The early demolition of the southeast bay reflects
a historic alteration that is now simply part of its history.
237 Jefferson:
This two-story masonry commercial building block has a 50' x 58' rectangular plan with two bays (235 & 237), each
with a distinct business. Resting upon a sandstone foundation, the building block is constructed with brick walls laid
in running bond coursing. Its flat roof is bordered by low masonry parapet walls. The building block standing there
today represents the northwest two-thirds of its original 75' frontage along Jefferson Street. Its southeast exterior
wall was originally an internal firewall, and the exposed upper area retains visible evidence of the previous roof
joists and roofline. 237 Jefferson Street is the southeast storefront (shown here with the blue sign band).
Packet Pg. 81
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 3
The entire southwest (rear) wall
of the building block is clad in
stucco over the original
brickwork, and it has been
remodeled in stages since the
late 1980s. The southeast bay
(237) holds a pair of eighteen-
light doors with flanking six- light
sidelights, all set in wood
frames. A tall four-light window
to the northwest appears to be
in a former pedestrian entry
space. Above these, the upper
floor holds two four-over-four
double hung sash windows set
in wood frames, which appear to
be historic. An open concrete
patio is behind the southeast
part of the building, beyond
which the rest of the property
extending to Old Firehouse
Alley consists of a gravel
parking lot.
Rear Elevation of 235 (Old Town Yoga) and 237 (Subject Property) Jefferson Street
243 Jefferson:
This one-story masonry
commercial building has a long
narrow 25' x 120' rectangular
plan. This includes the original
building, along with an early rear
addition. Its brick walls, exposed
on the sides and rear, are laid in
running bond coursing. The flat
roof is bordered by low masonry
parapet walls. The facade
features a single storefront
flanked by brick pilasters. With
its height and wood
construction, the design of the
storefront evokes that of a false
front building. However, the
building dates from the early
1900s and is predominantly
masonry rather than wood
frame.
Packet Pg. 82
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 4
Southeast (side): Much of this wall abuts an adjacent one-story commercial building and is only exposed to view
toward the rear. There the brick wall of the original building holds a 36-light glass block window with a sandstone
sill and brick segmental arch lintel. The southeast wall of the early rear addition holds three two-over-two double
hung sash windows with wood frames, sandstone sills, and brick segmental arch lintels. Rising above the parapet
is a short square brick chimney.
Southwest (rear): The rear wall
of the building is also the
southwest wall of the early
addition. While the corners of
the building retain their
brickwork, the space between
them is clad in stucco.
Centered in the wall is an
entrance that contains a wood
door with ten-lights, along with
a storm door and a single-light
transom. The entry is flanked
by metal-framed windows,
each of which consists of a
four-light awning, below which
are two fixed lights. Wood
shutters are fixed to the wall on
either side of the windows.
Northwest (side): Much of this wall abuts the adjacent two-story Stover & Deaver Block and is only exposed to the
rear. There the brick wall of the original building holds a two-light window set in an original opening, with a stone sill
and brick segmental arch lintel. To the southwest of that is a small non-historic concrete block addition with a shed
roof and a slab door that faces toward the southwest. Near the original building's southwest corner is a two- over-
two double hung sash window with a wood frame, stone sill and flat header. The northwest wall of the early rear
addition holds three two-over-two double hung sash windows with wood frames, sandstone sills, and brick
segmental arch lintels. Rising above the parapet along this side of the building are four short square brick chimneys.
One of the Stover & Deaver Block's early occupants was the Fort Collins Courier. In November 1904, the Courier
staff temporarily vacated the premises at 243 Jefferson and the two-story bay was demolished to make room for a
new building. The Courier Printing & Publishing Company evidently wanted the offices and printing plant to be
located on the same level rather in a two-story facility. To accommodate this, the new building would be one-story
in height with a footprint of 25' x 95'. According to the December 7 article, the space would house the "business
office, manager's office, editor's room, and job, composing and press rooms, supplied with modern conveniences
in addition to a fireproof vault." A basement beneath the rear area of the building would provide additional space
for paper storage and the heating plant. Abutting the Stover & Deaver Block on the northwest for the first 80' of its
length and with no building to the rear or on the adjacent lot to the southeast, much of the new Courier Building
would be fully exposed to view.
Plans for the new building were prepared by Fort Collins architect Albert Bryan, who designed the 1903 Carnegie
Library, 1904 Unity Church, and the 1905 remodel of the Northern Hotel. The Courier reported on 7 December 1904
that the $2,000 construction contract had been awarded to Hess Brothers, a popular local company.
Packet Pg. 83
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 5
STAFF’S COMMENTS:
This project is also subject to the City’s Development Review process, which conducts a separate Conceptual
Review at which staff provides comments. The following comments were provided to the applicant by Historic
Preservation staff on September 28, 2020, based on the code requirements contained in Fort Collins Municipal
Code Chapter 14, Article IV, which includes the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Treatments for Historic
Resources, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf and the Old Town District Design
Standards https://www.fcgov.com/historicpreservation/pdf/old-town-design-standards.pdf with page numbers for
easy reference.
1. Rooftop additions should be set back by at least one bay or one-half the length of the existing historic
building.
a. Set the addition on 243 Jefferson Street back by one-half the length of the existing historic building.
The addition appears to meet this, apart from the solar shade.
b. Rethink the fixed solar shade; if a fixed solar shade is necessary for the project, it would need to be
set back to begin one-half of the length of the existing historic building.
c. If retained, the solar shade would need to be designed to be more transparent and inconspicuous.
Relevant Standards:
• SOIS: Recommended (p. 101, Roofs):
o Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights
when required by a new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally
visible on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-
defining historic features.
• SOIS: Recommended (p. 159, New Exterior Additions):
o Designing a compatible rooftop addition for a multi-story building, when required for a new
use, that is set back at least one full bay from the primary and other highly-visible elevations
and that is inconspicuous when viewed from surrounding streets.
• OTDS: Standard 3.32 (p. 63):
o Design an addition or secondary structure to be subordinate to the historic building. Place a
rooftop or upper-story addition to the rear, to minimize visual impacts from public streets.
o Please note illustration on p. 63 showing placement of rooftop addition.
2. Make the additions as subordinate and inconspicuous as possible by lowering the height of the
additions on both buildings to be at or lower than the height of the existing roof of the historic building
at 237 Jefferson Street. This will be even more important if solar panels are proposed to be added to
the roofs.
Relevant Standards:
• SOIS: Recommended (p. 101, Roofs): Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or
terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so that they are
inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage
or obscure character-defining historic features.
• SOIS: Recommended (p. 159, New Exterior Additions): Designing a compatible rooftop addition for a
multi-story building, when required for a new use … that is inconspicuous when viewed from
surrounding streets.
Packet Pg. 84
Agenda Item 4
Item 4, Page 6
• OTDS: Standard 3.22: (p. 59):
o Preserve the historic roofline on a historic structure. Maintain the perceived line and
orientation of the roof as seen from the street.
• OTDS: Standards 3.31 (p. 62) and 3.32 (p. 63):
o Design an addition or accessory structure to be compatible with the historic structure. Design
an addition or secondary structure to be visually subordinate to the historic building.
3. Railing around front deck should be transparent. The solid wall on the side of the front deck should
instead continue the open rail design of the front elevation or use a transparent material.
• OTDS: Standard 4.8 (p. 75):
o A railing shall be simple in design.
o The railing shall be transparent in its overall appearance. One shall be able to see through to
the building.
4. Materials. The rolling garage door should be made to be as transparent as possible, and contain the
minimal number of dividers and structural elements necessary. (See code sections cited above about
transparency). More comments on materials will be provided as material selections are made.
5. Alterations/Additions to Rear Elevations:
While I need more information to fully assess the changes to these elevations, I do not anticipate any
significant issues. While the buildings’ appearance from the alley is important to the District, alleys are
usually the preferred location for additions. I will need photographs of the existing windows and doors,
to better evaluate their historic age and materials, as well as your choice of materials for the addition.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Secretary of Interior Rooftop Additions
2. 243 Jefferson Conceptual Plans (updated 10-20-20)
3. 243 Jefferson Architectural Inventory Form
4. 235-237 Jefferson Architectural Inventory Form
5. Applicant’s Photos
6. Staff Presentation (updated 10-20-20)
7. Applicant’s Responses to Requests for Additional Information (added 10-20-20)
8. Old Town Design Standards Excerpt (added 10-20-20)
Packet Pg. 85
REHABILITATIONROOFS RECOMMENDEDNOT RECOMMENDEDAlterations and Additions for a New Use Installing mechanical and service equipment on the roof (such as heating and air-conditioning units, elevator housing, or solar panels) when required for a new use so that they are inconspicu-ous on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. Installing roof-top mechanical or service equipment so that it dam-ages or obscures character-defining roof features or is conspicuous on the site or from the public right-of-way. Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or ter-races, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continu-ing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. Changing a character-defining roof form, or damaging or destroying character-defining roofing material as a result of an incompatible rooftop addition or improperly-installed or highly-visible mechanical equipment. Installing a green roof or other roof landscaping, railings, or furnishings that are not visible on the site or from the public right-of-way and do not damage the roof structure. Installing a green roof or other roof landscaping, railings, or furnish-ings that are visible on the site and from the public right-of-way. [17] New wood elements have been used selectively to replace rotted wood on the underside of the roof in this historic warehouse. ROOFS 101ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1Packet Pg. 86
REHABILITATIONNEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDEDNOT RECOMMENDEDRooftop Additions Designing a compatible rooftop addition for a multi-story build-ing, when required for a new use, that is set back at least one full bay from the primary and other highly-visible elevations and that is inconspicuous when viewed from surrounding streets. Constructing a rooftop addition that is highly visible, which nega-tively impacts the character of the historic building, its site, setting, or district. [ 63] (a) A mockup should be erected to demonstrate the visibility of a proposed rooftop addition and its potential impact on the historic building. Based on review of this mockup (orange marker), it was determined that the rooftop addition would meet the Standards (b). The addition is unobtrusive and blends in with the building behind it. New addition NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 159ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1Packet Pg. 87
REHABILITATIONNEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDEDNOT RECOMMENDEDLimiting a rooftop addition to one story in height to minimize its visibility and its impact on the historic character of the building. Constructing a highly-visible, multi-story rooftop addition that alters the building’s historic character. Constructing a rooftop addition on low-rise, one- to three-story his-toric buildings that is highly visible, overwhelms the building, and negatively impacts the historic district. Constructing a rooftop addition with amenities (such as a raised pool deck with plantings, HVAC equipment, or screening) that is highly visible and negatively impacts the historic character of the building. [64] Not Recommended:It is generally not appropriate to construct a rooftop addition on a low-rise, two- to three-story building such as this, because it negatively affects its historic character. 160NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 1Packet Pg. 88
%+838383838383836)556)55 6)(QWU\$FFHVV6WDLU6)([LVWLQJ95%26)([LVWLQJ%2FF6)([LVWLQJ%2FF&RXUW\DUG5RRI7RS'HFN(DVW5RRI7RS'HFN(QWU\$FFHVV6WDLU([LVWLQJ%2FF([LVWLQJ95%2([LW&RUULGRU0HFKDQLFDO1HZ$2FF556WDLU6WRUDJH([LVWLQJ%XLOGLQJ1HZHJUHVVZLQGRZ6WXGLR%HGURRP6)1HZ$2FF 6)0HFKDQLFDO6)(DVW5RRI7RS'HFN3URMHFW'HVFULSWLRQ 7KHSURMHFWZLOOFRQVLVWRIDQHZQGIORRUDGGLWLRQDERYHWKHH[LVWLQJEXLOGLQJORFDWHGDW-HIIHUVRQ6WUHHW7KLVZLOOFRQVLVWRIQHZ
$
DVVHPEO\RFFXSDQF\VSDFHLQFOXGLQJDVPDOOURRIWRSGHFN7KHUHZLOODOVREHDQDGGLWLRQWRWKHSURSHUW\DW-HIIHUVRQ6WUHHWDVZHOO7KLVDGGLWLRQZLOOLQFOXGHPHQ
VDQGZRPHQ
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
1HZ&RQVW&RGHVW)ORRU3ODQ
1HZ&RQVW&RGHQG)ORRU3ODQ1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Updated 10-20-20Packet Pg. 89
8383%+83%+838383
$-HIIHUVRQ6W6XLWH-HIIHUVRQ6W$$([LVWLQJ&RQFUHWH3DUNLQJ3DG([LVWLQJ&RXUW\DUG%HGURRP([LVWLQJ95%25HQWDO$
-HIIHUVRQ6W6XLWH
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
([LVWLQJ)LUVW)ORRU3ODQ
([LVWLQJ6HFRQG)ORRU3ODQ
([LVWLQJ5RRI3ODQ1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Updated 10-20-20Packet Pg. 90
%+8383%+83838383838383%+1HZ5RRI7RS'HFN1HZ5RRI7RS'HFN1HZ$VVHPEO\6SDFH([LW6WDLUQG([LWVWDLUIURP$VVHPEO\VSDFH1HZ2+GRRU-HIIHUVRQ6W6XLWH6WRUDJH(GJHRIGHFNSURYLGHQHZJXDUGUDLOKLJKDERYHQHZGHFN
0HQ
V:RPHQ
V([LVW6WDLU([LVWLQJ95%28QLW-HIIHUVRQ6W6XLWH-HIIHUVRQ6W([LVWLQJ:DWHU(QWU\ 1HZ)LUH5LVHU6WXGLR%HGURRP1HZFRPSOLDQWHJUHVVZLQGRZ5HORFDWHGDQGH[SDQGHGHOHFWULFDOVHUYLFH
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
1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQQG)ORRU3ODQ
1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ)LUVW)ORRU3ODQ
1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ5RRI3ODQ
$UFKLWHFWXUDO6LWH3ODQ1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWHITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Updated 10-20-20Packet Pg. 91
-HIIHUVRQ-HIIHUVRQ
%$
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
([LVWLQJ1RUWKHDVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQ
([LVWLQJ6RXWKHDVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQ([LVWLQJ-HIIHUVRQ6WG([LVWLQJ&RXUW\DUGG1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH-HIIHUVRQ-HIIHUVRQ
([LVWLQJ(DVW(OHYDWLRQ
([LVWLQJ:HVW(OHYDWLRQITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Updated 10-20-20Packet Pg. 92
)LUVW)ORRU3ODQ
%([LVWLQJ6HFRQG)ORRU3ODQ
$1HZ&RQVWQG)ORRU3ODQ
([LVWLQJ6HFRQG)ORRU3ODQ
1HZ&RQVWQG)ORRU3ODQ
1HZQG)OU3ODWH+JKW
&RXUW\DUG
1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ9HUWLFDO&LUFXODWLRQ&RUH
1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ$VVHPEO\VSDFHEH\RQG
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
1RUWKHDVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQ
6RXWKHDVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQ1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ-HIIHUVRQ6WG1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ-HIIHUVRQ6WG )URP8QLRQ6LGHZDON1HZ&RQVWUXFWLRQ&RXUW\DUGG1R'HVFULSWLRQ'DWH
(DVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQ
:HVW%XLOGLQJ(OHYDWLRQITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2 Updated 10-20-20Packet Pg. 93
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 2
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 94
" #
&669391< <97929<9DI5D5B=9>1D9?>
%0@ " #?=0:97C ,>0 94>4,7=
0>0<8490/7424-70!%
?<?B14?E<DEB1<)5C?EB35*EBF5I 0>0<8490/!:>7424-70!%
0>0<8490/7424-70&%
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B= 0>0<8490/!:>7424-70&%
#,20
:1
!00/,>,
:9><4-?>0=>:07424-70!%4=><4.>
!:9.:9><4-?>492>:07424-70!%4=><4.>
45>D96931D9?>
%0=:?<.0!?8-0< #)
'08;:<,<C%0=:?<.0!?8-0<%?D@@<9312<5
:?9>C #1B9=5B
4>C ?BD?<<9>C
4=>:<4.?47/492!,80 ?EB95B'E2<9C89>7'B9>D9>7?=@1>IE9<49>7
?<<09>?47/492!,80%?D@@<9312<5
?47/492//<0== !5665BC?>*D
?BD?<<9>C&
"A90<!,80//<0== ?B75##
'1C31<*D
?BD?<<9>C&
5?7B1@893 >6?B=1D9?>
# D8':A9=34;%?BD8 %,920 .5CD
*
:1>30*.
:1>30*.
:1>30%.
:1&0.>4:9
(' %010<09.0+:90
,=>492 !:<>3492
(&&$?,/!,80 ?BD?<<9>C?<?B14?
*0,<
@8?D?B5F9C54
,;=.,70
:>=%.R?6#?D7:.6
//4>4:9 ?BD?<<9>C&B979>1<+?G>C9D5 *0,<:1//4>4:9
:?9/,<C0=.<4;>4:9,9/ ?=>414.,>4:9+89C@B?@5BDI3?>C9CDC?6@1B35<
1>49C4569>542I1<?D1>42<?3;45C3B9@D9?>
D9>3<E45CD85<1>41>4
2E9<DB5C?EB35CD81D1B589CD?B931<<I1CC?391D54G9D89D1>4B5=19>9>@<135D85B5
D?41I
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 95
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20 :1
B389D53DEB1<5C3B9@D9?>
?47/492#7,9 )53D1>7E<1B'<1>
4809=4:9=4900>H
!?8-0<:1&>:<40=
#<48,<CB>0<9,7),77 ,>0<4,7=B93;*DE33?
%::1:9142?<,>4:9 <1D)??6
#<48,<CB>0<9,7%::1 ,>0<4,7,>;>?G>
&;0.4,70,>?<0=*57=5>D1<B3889=>5I
090<,7 <.34>0.>?<,7 0=.<4;>4:9 139>7 D?G1B4 D85 >?BD851CD ?>D? !5665BC?>
*DB55DD89C?>5 CD?BI=1C?>BI3?==5B391<2E9<49>781C1<?>7>1BB?GPH
P
B53D1>7E<1B@<1>
+89C9>3<E45CD85?B979>1<2E9<49>71<?>7G9D81>51B<IB51B
1449D9?>
DC2B93;G1<<C5H@?C54?>D85C945C1>4B51B1B5<1949>BE>>9>72?>4
3?EBC9>7
+856<1DB??69C2?B45B542I<?G=1C?>BI@1B1@5DG1<<C
%?BD851CD 6B?>D +85 61K145 6B?>DC 49B53D<I ?>D? D85 3?>3B5D5 C945G1<;
@1B1<<5<9>7 !5665BC?> *DB55D 1>4 651DEB5C 1 C9>7<5 CD?B56B?>D 6<1>;54 2I 2B93;
@9<1CD5BC
.9D89DC85978D1>4G??43?>CDBE3D9?>D8545C97>?6D85CD?B56B?>D
5F?;5CD81D?6161<C56B?>D2E9<49>7
?G5F5BD852E9<49>741D5C6B?=D8551B<I
C1>49C@B54?=9>1>D<I=1C?>BIB1D85BD81>G??46B1=5
D9C>?DDBE<I1
@9?>55B5B12E9<49>7
5>D5B549>D85CI==5DB931<CD?B56B?>DD85=19>5>DB1>35
3?>D19>C1G??4@1>5<4??BG9D81C9>7<5<978D1<?>7G9D81DB1>C?=<978D12?F5
+89C 9C 6<1>;54 2I @19BC ?6 <1B75 C9>7<5 <978D G9>4?GC D?@@54 2I 8?B9J?>D1<
21>4C?66?EBC=1<<5BDB1>C?=<978DC
.??4;93;@<1D5C1B525<?G5138C5D?6
G9>4?GC
+8B55<5F5<C?68?B9J?>D1<G??4@1>5<CC@1>D85G94D8?6D85G1<<
12?F5D85CD?B56B?>D
*?ED851CDC945$E38?6D89CG1<<12EDC1>14:135>D?>5 CD?BI3?==5B391<
2E9<49>71>49C?><I5H@?C54D?F95GD?G1B4D85B51B
+85B5D852B93;G1<<?6D85
?B979>1<2E9<49>78?<4C1 <978D7<1CC2<?3;G9>4?GG9D81C1>4CD?>5C9<<1>4
2B93;C57=5>D1<1B38<9>D5<
+85C?ED851CDG1<<?6D8551B<IB51B1449D9?>8?<4C
D8B55DG? ?F5B DG?4?E2<58E>7C1C8G9>4?GCG9D8G??46B1=5CC1>4CD?>5
C9<<C 1>4 2B93; C57=5>D1< 1B38 <9>D5<C
)9C9>7 12?F5 D85 @1B1@5D 9C 1 C8?BD
CAE1B52B93;389=>5I
*?ED8G5CDB51B+85B51BG1<<?6D852E9<49>79C1<C?D85C?ED8G5CDG1<<?6D85
51B<I 1449D9?>
.89<5 D85 3?B>5BC ?6 D85 2E9<49>7 B5D19> D859B 2B93;G?B; D85
C@13525DG55>D85=9C3<149>CDE33?
5>D5B549>D85G1<<9C1>5>DB1>35D81D
3?>D19>C1G??44??BG9D8D5> <978DC1<?>7G9D81CD?B=4??B1>41C9>7<5 <978D
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 96
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20 :1
DB1>C?=
+855>DBI9C6<1>;542I=5D1< 6B1=54G9>4?GC5138?6G89383?>C9CDC
?616?EB<978D1G>9>725<?GG89381B5DG?69H54<978DC
.??4C8EDD5BC1B569H54
D?D85G1<<?>59D85BC945?6D85G9>4?GC
%?BD8G5CD C945 $E38 ?6 D89C G1<< 12EDC D85 14:135>D DG? CD?BI *D?F5B
51F5B <?3; 1>4 9C ?><I 5H@?C54 D? D85 B51B
+85B5 D85 2B93; G1<< ?6 D85
?B979>1< 2E9<49>7 8?<4C 1 DG? <978D G9>4?G C5D 9> 1> ?B979>1< ?@5>9>7 G9D8 1
CD?>5C9<<1>42B93;C57=5>D1<1B38<9>D5<
+?D85C?ED8G5CD?6D81D9C1C=1<<
>?> 89CD?B933?>3B5D52<?3;1449D9?>G9D81C854B??61>41C<124??BD81D6135C
D?G1B4D85C?ED8G5CD
%51BD85?B979>1<2E9<49>7PCC?ED8G5CD3?B>5B9C1DG?
?F5B DG? 4?E2<5 8E>7 C1C8 G9>4?G G9D8 1 G??4 6B1=5 CD?>5 C9<< 1>4 6<1D
85145B
+85>?BD8G5CDG1<<?6D8551B<IB51B1449D9?>8?<4CD8B55DG? ?F5B DG?
4?E2<5 8E>7 C1C8 G9>4?GC G9D8 G??4 6B1=5C C1>4CD?>5 C9<<C 1>4 2B93;
C57=5>D1<1B38<9>D5<C
)9C9>712?F5D85@1B1@5D1<?>7D89CC945?6D852E9<49>7
1B56?EBC8?BDCAE1B52B93;389=>5IC
<.34>0.>?<,7&>C70?47/492'C;0 1B<I+G5>D95D85>DEBI?==5B391<
,9/=.,;492 :< &;0.4,7 &0>>492 0,>?<0= +89C @B?@5BDI 9C <?31D54 ?> D85
C?ED8G5CDC945?6!5665BC?>*DB55DD8B55@B?@5BD95C>?BD8G5CD?6#9>45>*DB55D
D9CC9DE1D549>D85>?BD85B>1B51?6D854?G>D?G>3?==5B391<49CDB93D1>49C
CEBB?E>454 2I 3?==5B391< 2E9<49>7C 9> 1<< 49B53D9?>C
9B53D<I 2589>4 D85
2E9<49>7 9C 1 C=1<< ?@5> 3?EBDI1B4 5>3<?C54 2I 1 2B93; G1<< 1>4 G??4 71D5
5I?>4 D89C D85 B5CD ?6 D85 @B?@5BDI D81D 5HD5>4C D? &<4 9B58?EC5 <<5I
3?>C9CDC?617B1F5<@1B;9>7<?D
==:.4,>0/?47/492=0,>?<0=:<"-50.>=%?D@@<9312<5
-
B389D53DEB1< 9CD?BI
,>0:1:9=><?.>4:9 =>48,>0 .>?,7
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N F?<ED9?> ?6 1 %5GC@1@5BO
$1B38
@
<.34>0.> <25BDBI1>
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N F?<ED9?> ?6 1 %5GC@1@5BO
$1B38
@
?47/0<:9><,.>:< 5CCB?D85BC
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N9DI 1>4 ?E>DBIO
535=25B
@
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 97
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
"<4249,7"A90< ?BD?<<9>C?EB95B
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N F?<ED9?> ?6 1 %5GC@1@5BO
$1B38
@
:9=><?.>4:9 4=>:<C+85=1C?>BI2E9<49>7?>D89CC9D5G1C3?>CDBE3D549>
G9D81P G94561K1451<?>7!5665BC?>*DB55D1>4145@D8?6P
>
D89C
G1C5H@1>454D?G1B4D85B51BG9D81PHP2B93;1449D9?>
"<4249,7 :.,>4:905C
-
9CD?B931<CC?391D9?>C
"<4249,7(=0= ?==5B35MEC9>5CC 'B?65CC9?>1<
9>0<80/4,>0(=0=?==5B35M*@5391<DI*D?B5
?<<09>(=0= ?==5B35MEC9>5CC 'B?65CC9?>1<
?=5CD93M*9>7<5G5<<9>7
&4>0'C;0=%5GC@1@5B&66935'B9>D9>7'<1>D?>DB13D?B*8?@C+9B5
*8?@)5C945>35
4=>:<4.,7-,.62<:?9/&>E7ECD
D85549D?B?6D85
B5@?BD54D81D858145H1=9>541C;5D38?6D8561K1456?B1>5G2EC9>5CC2<?3;
D81DG?E<4255B53D546?B=5B381>DC.9<<91=
*D?F5B1>4!?8>51F5B?>#?D
1>4 D85 >?BD8G5CD 81<6 ?6 #?D 9> <?3;
?>CDBE3D9?> ?6 D85 DG? CD?BI
*D?F5B51F5B<?3;2571>51B<ID81D=?>D81>4G1C3?=@<5D549>&3D?25B
+8B5521ICG945D852E9<49>781416??D@B9>D?6PHPG9D85138CD?B56B?>D
?33E@I9>7P?66B?>D1751<?>7!5665BC?>*DB55D
DG1C45C97>54D?3?>D19>
D8B55=19> 6<??BCD?B5CG9D83?==5B391<?BB5C945>D91<?33E@1>DC12?F5
+85
2E9<49>7PC 144B5CC5C 6B?= >?BD8G5CD D? C?ED851CD G5B5 1>4
!5665BC?>*DB55D
3?=@<5D545C3B9@D9?>1>489CD?BI?6D85*D?F5B51F5B
<?3; 9>3<E49>7 1449D9?>1< B565B5>35C 9C 6?E>4 9> 1 C5@1B1D5 C9D5 6?B=
#)
&>5?6D85*D?F5B51F5B<?3;PC51B<I?33E@1>DC?B979>1<<I8?EC549>D85
=944<521I1D!5665BC?>*DB55D4EB9>7D85=94
CG1CD85
?G>54C9>35
2ID85?EB95B'B9>D9>7'E2<9C89>7?=@1>I
+85
>5GC@1@5BD85>=?F54>5HD4??B9>D?D85C?ED851CD21I1D!5665BC?>*DB55D
1>4B5=19>54D85B59>D?D8551B<I
C
>%?F5=25B
D85
CD166
D5=@?B1B9<IF131D54D85@B5=9C5C1>4=?F549>D?C@1351D
1CD$?E>D19>
F5>E5
+8521IG1C45=?<9C854?F5BD856?<<?G9>7G55;CD?=1;5B??=6?B1
>5G2E9<49>7D81DG?E<48?EC5D85>5GC@1@5B?66935C1>4@B9>D9>7@<1>D?>D85
C1=5>1BB?G<?D
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 98
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
'<1>C6?BD85>5G2E9<49>7G5B5@B5@1B542I ?BD?<<9>C1B389D53D<25BDBI1>
G8? 45C97>54 D85
1B>5795 #92B1BI
,>9DI 8EB38 1>4 D85
B5=?45<?6D85%?BD85B> ?D5<
+85
B5@?BD54?>535=25B
D81D
D85 3?>CDBE3D9?>3?>DB13D814255>1G1B454D? 5CCB?D85BC1<?31<
3?=@1>ID81DG1C2ECI5B53D9>71>E=25B?63?==5B391<B5C945>D91<1>4@E2<93
2E9<49>7C1B?E>4D?G>
+8569B=<1E>3854G?B;?>D85C9D59==5491D5<IG9D8D85
7?1<?63?=@<5D9>7D85@B?:53D9>51B<I
+85?EB95B'B9>D9>7'E2<9C89>7?=@1>I5F945>D<IG1>D54D85?66935C1>4
@B9>D9>7@<1>DD?25<?31D54?>D85C1=5<5F5<B1D85B9>1DG? CD?BI6139<9DI
+?
133?==?41D5 D89C D85 >5G 2E9<49>7 G?E<4 25 ?>5 CD?BI 9> 85978D G9D8 1
6??D@B9>D?6PHP
33?B49>7D?D85535=25B1BD93<5D85C@135G?E<4
8?EC5D85N2EC9>5CC?66935=1>175BPC?66935549D?BPCB??=1>4:?23?=@?C9>7
1>4@B5CCB??=CCE@@<954G9D8=?45B>3?>F5>95>35C9>1449D9?>D?169B5@B??6
F1E<D
O 21C5=5>D 25>51D8 D85 B51B 1B51 ?6 D85 2E9<49>7 G?E<4 @B?F945
1449D9?>1<C@1356?B@1@5BCD?B1751>4D85851D9>7@<1>D
2EDD9>7D85*D?F5B
51F5B<?3;?>D85>?BD8G5CD6?BD8569BCD P?69DC<5>7D81>4G9D8>?2E9<49>7
D?D85B51B?B?>D8514:135>D<?DD?D85C?ED851CD=E38?6D85>5G?EB95B
E9<49>7G?E<4256E<<I5H@?C54D?F95G
?>CDBE3D9?> @B?355454 B1@94<I 1>4 5CC B?D85BC 814 D? 14F5BD9C5 6?B
1449D9?>1<2B93;<1I5BCD?;55@E@G9D8D85@B?:53DPC1=29D9?ECC3854E<5
5CC
B?D85BC1<C?2B?E78D9>CE23?>DB13D?BCD?81>4<5C@5391<9J545<5=5>DC?6D85
@B?:53D
+85C59>3<E454!
<19BG8??F5BC1GD85CD?>51>42B93;G?B;1<?>7
G9D8 @19>D9>7 1>4 453?B1D9>7 2I D85 ?BD ?<<9>C .1<< '1@5B ?=@1>I
+85
<E=25BG1C13AE9B546B?=D85?B29><13;#E=25B?=@1>ID852B93;CG5B5
=1>E613DEB542ID85 ?BD?<<9>C'B5CC54B93;?=@1>ID85B??6G1C9>CD1<<54
2ID855>F5B <1D5B9D5?=@1>I1>4D85=5D1<359<9>731=56B?=D85'5>>
$5D1<59<9>7?=@1>I?6?<?B14?*@B9>7C
&>
!1>E1BI
D85>5GC@1@5BGB?D5D81DND85>5G
2E9<49>79CG5<<
14F1>354D?G1B43?=@<5D9?>1>4C??>D85?669356?B35G9<<2589;9>7213;D?
D859B>5G?<4AE1BD5BC
O+852E9<49>7G1C69>9C854?> 52BE1BI
1>4D85CD166
B5DEB>54 D? G?B; E>45B D85 49B53D9?> ?6 549D?B >C5< .1DB?EC 1>4 2EC9>5CC
=1>175B 1B< >45BC?>
> 1 <1B75 6B?>D @175 1BD93<5 D9D<54 N F?<ED9?> ?6 1
%5GC@1@5BOD85
B5@?BD54D856?<<?G9>712?ED9DC>5G2E9<49>7
+85?EB95B9C>?G>935<IC5DD<549>9DC>5G2E9<49>75B53D54?>D85C9D5?6D85?<4?>5
?>!5665BC?>CDB55D1>49CB514ID?B5359F53?=@1>I59D85B?<4?BI?E>7B938?B@??B
@B5DDI?B@<19>G9D82EC9>5CC?BG9D8?ED9DM2EDD8?C5G9D82EC9>5CC@B565BB54
+8?E78
>?D79F5>D?2?1CD9>7G531>>?D<5DD85?@@?BDE>9DI@1CCG9D8?EDC1I9>79>1<<C9>35B9DI
D81DG525<95F5G5>?G81F5D85>935CD3?J95CD25CD1BB1>754=?CD3?>F5>95>D1>4
3?=6?BD12<5 1>4 1D D85 C1=5 D9=5 D85 25CD 5AE9@@54 @B9>D9>7?66935 9> %?BD85B>
?<?B14?
+85C51B5>?DF19>7<?B9?EC453<1B1D9?>C=145G9D8?ED4E53?>C945B1D9?>?6
D859BG5978D2ED1B5CD1D5=5>DCCEC35@D92<5?6@B??6
*35@D93C1B53?B491<<I9>F9D54D?
3?=59><??;EC?F5B1>4253?>F9>354
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 99
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
+85 >5GC@1@5B D??; 14F1>D175 ?6 D85 ?@@?BDE>9DI D? 9>CD1<< D85 <1D5CD
D538>?<?7I9>9DC>5G@B9>D9>7@<1>D
+89C31=59>D856?B=?61$5B75>D81<5B
<9>?DI@5 =1389>5 G8938 D85
3<19=54 G1C D85 ?><I ?>5 9> #1B9=5B
?E>DI
<?>7G9D8D89CD8569B=9>CD1<<541>5G@?G5B@B5CC6?<49>7=1389>5
@1@5B3EDD5BCCD9D389>7=1389>5C1>41>E=25B9>7=1389>5
&D85B5AE9@=5>D
9>3<E454CD1@<5BC3129>5DC>5GC31C5C9=@?C9>7CD?>5C1>431C5B13;C
I
D85
8141<B514I?ED7B?G>9DC>5G2E9<49>71>4=1>175=5>D
45D5B=9>54D81D1>5H@1>C9?>?6D856139<9DIG1C>535CC1BID?1<<5F91D53B?G49>7
9>D853?=@?C9>71>4@B5CCB??=
'B?=9>5>D ?BD?<<9>C1B389D53D$?>D5JE=1
E<<5BG1C5>71754D?@B5@1B5@<1>C6?B1B51B1449D9?>1>4D853?>DB13D9>769B=
?6!?>5CE<<G1C89B54D?3?=@<5D5D85G?B;
9>9C854256?B5D855>4?6D85
I51BD852B93;CDBE3DEB5144541>?D85BP?6<5>7D8D?D852E9<49>7
.9D8D85
5HDB1C@135D85
G1C25DD5B12<5D?81>4<59DC>5GC@1@5B?ED@ED1<?>7
G9D89DC2??=9>72??;1>4:?2@B9>D9>72EC9>5CC
+85:?245@1BD=5>D81>4<54
D85@B9>D9>7?69D5=CCE381C@?CD5BC@1=@8<5DCCD?3;35BD96931D5C9>F9D1D9?>C
@B?7B1=C 1>4 2EC9>5CC 31B4C
D D85 B51B ?6 D85 2E9<49>7 D85 >5G 1449D9?>
8?EC54D8539B3E<1D9?>45@1BD=5>D1>4AE1BD5BC6?BD85G19D9>7>5GC@1@5B2?IC
+85B5CDG1C?33E@9542ID8529>45BI1<?>7G9D89>3B51C546<??BC@1356?BD85
3?=@?C9>7B??=1>4DI@5C5DD5BC
+8521C5=5>DG1C1<C?5H@1>454D?5><1B75
D85CD?3;B??=
+85?EB95B'B9>D9>7'E2<9C89>7?=@1>IB5=19>549>D89C2E9<49>7D8B?E78
51B<I
G85> 9D =?F54 9>D? 1 <1B75B 6139<9DI ?> D85 C?ED8G5CD 3?B>5B ?6
)5=9>7D?>*DB55D1>4 1CD$?E>D19>F5>E5
.9D8D89C381>75D852E9<49>71D
!5665BC?>*DB55D5>D5B541>5G@81C5?69DC5H9CD5>35
+85>5HD?33E@1>D
G1CD85'5>>?3;$?D?B?=@1>I?G>542I6?B=5B5<<FE5B5C945>DBD8EB
'5>>?3;
+8569B=?665B541ED?=?D9F5B5@19BC1>4?33E@954D852E9<49>74EB9>7
D8551B<I
C
B?E>4
9D8?EC54D85?<?B14?'9@5*E@@<I?=@1>I
1>4D85'5>>?3; <53DB93?=@1>I
+85?33E@1>DC<1D5B9>D85453145G5B5
G5<45B.
$
1BB5<<1>41>1ED?B5@19BC8?@?@5B1D542I#
+9<D?>
+852E9<49>7G1CF131>D9>D8551B<I
C1>4D85>?33E@9549>
2I1D9B5
C1<5C69B=;>?G>1C*D5F5>CB?D85BC
&G>542I <?I41>4539<*D5F5>CD85
3?=@1>IB5=19>54D85B56?B=1>II51BC
EB9>7.?B<4.1B 9DG1C:?9>542I
&" )E225B .5<45BC G8938 ?665B54 EC54 D9B5 B5DB5149>7
+85 69B=C 1<C?
?33E@954D8514:135>DC@135D?D85>?BD8G5CD1D!5665BC?>*DB55D
*D1BD9>7
1B?E>4
2?D8?6D85C5C@135C2531=5*D5F5>C+9B5*5BF935
+852E9<49>7
3?>D9>E54D?25EC546?B1ED?=?D9F5C5BF9351>4D9B5C1<5C9>D?D85
C
*9>35D85<1D5
CD85?EB95BE9<49>781C255>13?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D85
&<4 +?G> %1D9?>1< )579CD5B 9CD?B93 9CDB93D 1>4 D85 &<4 +?G> ?BD ?<<9>C
#1>4=1B; 9CDB93D
6D5B <1>7E9C89>7 6?B C5F5B1< 453145C 1>4 CE665B9>7 6B?=
4565BB54 =19>D5>1>35 1>4 81@81J1B4 B5=?45<9>7 566?BDC D85 2E9<49>7 81C
5H@5B95>354B5>5G1<1>4B58129<9D1D9?>9>B535>DI51BC1C9D9C?33E@9542I1
>5G75>5B1D9?>?6?G>5BC1>42?D8B5C945>D91<1>43?==5B391<D5>1>DC
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 100
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
&:?<.0=:1491:<8,>4:9
8<2B1>4D B<5>5 1>4 "1D8BI> *D9525>
+85 9CD?BI ?6 #1B9=5B ?E>DI
?<?B14?-?<E=5
1<<1C+/EBD9C$5491?B@?B1D9?>
B389D53DEB1< 9CD?B931<?=@?>5>D ?B=!5665BC?>*DB55D ?BD?<<9>C*9D5
#)
%?F5=25B
E9<49>7'5B=9DC6?B!5665BC?>*DB55D9DI?6 ?BD?<<9>CE9<49>7'5B=9DC
??;?H'
?BD?<<9>C$EC5E=?69C3?F5BI
-1B9?EC'E2<9C85BC
N+85?EB95B?6693581C255>B5=?F54LO
535=25B
@
N%5G1>4 =@B?F54 ?B=O535=25B
@
N+85?EB95BO!E<I
@
N?EB95B&66935)5=?F54O%?F5=25B
@
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO535=25B
@
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO
535=25B
@
N.1>D54O
535=25B
@
N%5G ?=5C6?B%5G'5?@<5O!1>E1BI
@
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO
!1>E1BI
@
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO
52BE1BI
@
N F?<ED9?>?61%5GC@1@5BO$1B38
@
N?EB95BE9<49>7 HD5>454 55DO535=25B
@
N*D1D5E49D?B*D?>5LO!E<I
@
N'5>>?3;$?D?B?
OE7ECD
@
N%?D935O %?F5=25B
@
NBD8EB'5>>?3;.54C ?<1&7<5C2I+E5C41IO
!E<I
@
#1B9=5B ?E>DI CC5CC?B )51< CD1D5 @@B19C1< )53?B4C !5665BC?> *D
?BD?<<9>C?<?B14?
'8?D?7B1@8C?6D85*D?F5B51F5B<?3;1>4D85?EB95BE9<49>7?<<53D9?>
?6D85B389F5C?6D85 ?BD?<<9>C$EC5E=?69C3?F5BI3
!56
!56
!56
'B5C5BF1D9?>'<1>>9>7 9<56?B!5665BC?>*DB55D9DI?6 ?BD?<<9>C
N+85.55;<I?EB95BO
&3D?25B
@
*1>2?B> 9B5 >CEB1>35$1@C ?BD?<<9>C?<?B14?
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 101
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
*E71B55DC*DB55D31B*E2EB2C1>4D859DI51ED96E<
?BD?<<9>C
9CD?BI1>4B389D53DEB5 ?BD?<<9>C 9CD?BI?>>53D9?>
335CC54&><9>5
1DGGG
89CD?BI
637?F
3?=
*G1>C?> F145>5EBB9C
?BD?<<9>C&'E2<9C854
2ID85ED8?B
1>4
.1DB?EC>C5<
?BD?<<9>C&?EB95B'B9>D9>7
'E2<9C89>7?=@1>I
-
*97>96931>35
:.,77,9/8,<6/0=429,>4:905C
;;74.,-70!,>4:9,7%024=>0<<4>0<4,
/ ==:.4,>0/A4>30@09>=>3,>3,@08,/0,=429414.,9>.:9><4-?>4:9>:>30
-<:,/;,>>0<9:1:?<34=>:<C
/ ==:.4,>0/A4>3>3074@0=:1;0<=:9==429414.,9>49:?<;,=>
/ 8-:/40= >30 /4=>49.>4@0 .3,<,.>0<4=>4.= :1 , >C;0 ;0<4:/ :< 80>3:/ :1
.:9=><?.>4:9:<<0;<0=09>=>30A:<6:1,8,=>0<:<;:==0==0=3423,<>4=>4.
@,7?0= :< <0;<0=09>= , =429414.,9> ,9/ /4=>492?4=3,-70 09>4>C A3:=0
.:8;:909>=8,C7,.649/4@4/?,7/4=>49.>4:9
,=C407/0/:<8,C-074607C>:C407/491:<8,>4:948;:<>,9>4934=>:<C:<
;<034=>:<C
$?,74140=?9/0<<4>0<4,:9=4/0<,>4:9=>3<:?23
:0=9:>800>,9C:1>30,-:@0!,>4:9,7%024=>0<.<4>0<4,
<0,=:1=429414.,9.0?==5B35 ?==E>931D9?>C B389D53DEB5
#0<4:/:1=429414.,9.0
?==5B351>4?==E>931D9?>C
B389D53DEB5
0@07:1=429414.,9.0 !,>4:9,7%? &>,>0 %? :.,705C
&>,>0809>:1=429414.,9.0?>CDBE3D549>
D85?EB95BE9<49>7G1C5B53D54
D?B5@<1351>51B<95BDG? CD?BI3?==5B391<2E9<49>7D81D814255><?31D54?>
D89CC9D5
+85>5G?>5 CD?BI=1C?>BI2E9<49>78?EC54D85?66935C1>4@B9>D9>7
@<1>D?6D85?EB95B'B9>D9>7'E2<9C89>7?=@1>IG8938814?33E@954D85
@B5F9?EC2E9<49>7C9>35D85<1D5
C
+8569B=>?D?><I@E2<9C854D85
2ED1<C?@B?F9454:?2@B9>D9>7C5BF935CD?D853?==E>9DI
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 102
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
.85> 3?=@<5D54 D85 >5G 2E9<49>7 G1C C194 D? 8?<4 D85 69BCD $5B75>D81<5B
<9>?DI@5 =1389>5 9> #1B9=5B ?E>DI
>
D85 6139<9DI G1C 5H@1>454 D?
133?==?41D5D853?=@1>IPC7B?G9>72EC9>5CC
+85
B5=19>54D85B5
D8B?E7851B<I
G85>9D=?F549>D?<1B75BAE1BD5BC9>D854?G>D?G>49CDB93D
EB9>7D85
CD852E9<49>71D!5665BC?>*DB55DG1C@B9=1B9<I?33E@9542I
1ED?B5@19BC8?@C
B?=D85
CD8B?E78D855>4?6D8535>DEBI9D8?EC541
C8?@D81DC?<4>5GD9B5C1>4?665B54B5DB5149>7C5BF935
>B535>DI51BCD85C5
DI@5C?6C8?@C81F5=?CD<I49C1@@51B546B?=!5665BC?>*DB55D1>4D852E9<49>7
81CB5F5BD54D?<978D5B3?==5B391<EC5C
+?41I9D1@@51BCD?81F5?66935C@135
9>D856B?>DG9D81B5C945>35D?D85B51B
+852E9<49>73?>D9>E5CD?3?>F5I9DC
89CD?B93 175 1>4 1@@51B1>35 =5B9D9>7 9DC CD1DEC C9>35 D85 <1D5
C 1C 1
3?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D8589CD?B93<1>4=1B;49CDB93DCG9D89>G89389D9C<?31D54
><978D?6D85%1D9?>1<)579CD5B3B9D5B91D89C2E9<49>79C5<9792<5E>45BB9D5B9?>
9>D851B51C?6?==5B351>4?==E>931D9?>C6?B9DC1CC?391D9?>G9D8D8551B<I
DG5>D95D835>DEBI45F5<?@=5>D?6 ?BD?<<9>CP4?G>D?G>3?==5B391<49CDB93D
1>46?B9DCEC56B?=
D?
1CD85?66935C1>4@B9>D9>7@<1>D?6D85?EB95B
'B9>D9>7'E2<9C89>7?=@1>I
D9C1<C?5<9792<5E>45BB9D5B9?>9>D851B51
?6 ?==E>931D9?>C 6?B 9DC 1CC?391D9?> G9D8 >C5< .1DB?EC
> 1449D9?> D?
G?B;9>71CD85>5GC@1@5BPC<?>7D9=5@B?=9>5>D549D?B.1DB?EC1ED8?B54D85
6?E>41D9?>1<
G8938G1C@E2<9C8549>
2ID85
>5GC@1@5B 3?=@1>I
9>1<<I D85 2E9<49>7 9C 5<9792<5 E>45B B9D5B9?> 1C 1
7??45H1=@<5?6D85 1B<I+G5>D95D85>DEBI?==5B391<CDI<5?61B389D53DEB5
+85?EB95BE9<49>73?>D9>E5CD?2513?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D85&<4+?G>
?BD?<<9>C#1>4=1B;9CDB93D
==0==809> :1 34=>:<4. ;3C=4.,7 49>02<4>C <07,>0/ >: =429414.,9.0 +85 89CD?B93
3?==5B391<2E9<49>7?>D89C@B?@5BDIG1C3?>CDBE3D549>
1>45H@1>454
D?G1B4 D85 B51B D8B55 I51BC <1D5B
5C@9D5 381>75C 9> 9DC EC5 ?F5B D85 @1CD
35>DEBI 9D 81C 5H@5B95>354 65G 1<D5B1D9?>C
+85 61K145 81C 5CC5>D91<<I
B5=19>54D85C1=5C9>35D8551B<I
C1>4=1I5F5>41D5213;51B<95BD81>
D81D
+85 =?CD >?D93512<5 381>75C G5B5 =145 9> D85 =94
C D? D85 B51B
B5C945>35
+85C581F59>3<E454CDE33?9>7?6C?ED8G5CDG1<<9>CD1<<1D9?>?61
G1<<54@1D9?1>4B53?>CDBE3D9?>?6D85?B979>1<C?ED851CDG9>4?GC
>B5<1D9?>D?D851C@53DC?69>D57B9DID852E9<49>75H8929DC1F5BI7??4457B55?6
9>D57B9DI B5D19>9>7 =?CD ?6 9DC 1B389D53DEB1< 651DEB5C 41D9>7 6B?= 9DC ?B979>1<
3?>CDBE3D9?> 1>4 51B<I 5H@1>C9?>
?>F5I9>7 9DC 89CD?B93 175 1>4 EC5 D85
?EB95BE9<49>73?>D9>E5CD?C5BF51C13?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D85&<4+?G>
%1D9?>1< )579CD5B 9CD?B93 9CDB93D 1>4 D85 &<4 +?G> ?BD ?<<9>C #1>4=1B;
9CDB93D
-
%1D9?>1<)579CD5B <97929<9DICC5CC=5>D
!,>4:9,7%024=>0<07424-474>C1407/,==0==809> <9792<5
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 103
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
=>30<0!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>;:>09>4,7 05C
4=.?== +89C @B?@5BDI 9C 1CC?391D54 G9D8 1> 145AE1D5 3?>35>DB1D9?> ?6
89CD?B931<<I1>41B389D53DEB1<<IC97>96931>D@B?@5BD95CD81D1B53?>D97E?EC?B
3<?C5D??>51>?D85B1>41<B514I3?>CD9DED51>5CD12<9C854%1D9?>1<)579CD5B
49CDB93D
D 9C C9DE1D54 G9D89> D85 &<4 +?G> ?BD ?<<9>C %1D9?>1< )579CD5B
9CDB93D1>4D85<?31<<I 45C97>1D54&<4+?G> ?BD?<<9>C#1>4=1B;9CDB93D
1>30<04=!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>;:>09>4,74=>34=-?47/492.:9><4-?>49205C
1>30-?47/4924=49,90B4=>492!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>4=4>.:9><4-?>49205C
-
)53?B49>7 >6?B=1D9?>
#3:>:2<,;39?8-0<=
!02,>4@0=1470/,>+1D1>;1 9CD?B931<CC?391D5C >3
'
&
?H
?BD?<<9>C&
%0;:<>>4>70 9CD?B93 )5C?EB35C *EBF5I ?6 !5665BC?> *DB55D ?BD
?<<9>C?<?B14?
,>0=
*5@D5=25B
%0.:</0<= )?>*<145;'B5C945>D
"<2,94D,>4:9 +1D1>;1 9CD?B931<CC?391D5C >3
//<0== '
&
?H
?BD?<<9>C&
#3:909?8-0<=
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 104
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
*9D5#?31D9?>$1@
,* * ?BD?<<9>C
P+?@?7B1@893(E14B1>7<5$1@
B5F9C54
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 105
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
*9D5917B1=
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 106
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<#)
//<0==!5665BC?>*D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
EBB5>D'8?D?7B1@8C
B?>D?6D85E9<49>71D!5665BC?>*DB55D
-95GD?D85*?ED8G5CD
)51B?6D85E9<49>71D!5665BC?>*DB55D
-95GD?D85%?BD851CD
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 107
" #
%669391<<97929<9DI5D5B=9>1D9?>
%0@ " #?=0:97C ,>0 94>4,7=
0>0<8490/7424-70!%
?<?B14?E<DEB1<(5C?EB35)EBF5I 0>0<8490/!:>7424-70!%
0>0<8490/7424-70&%
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B= 0>0<8490/!:>7424-70&%
#,20
:1
!00/,>,
:9><4-?>0=>:07424-70!%4=><4.>
!:9.:9><4-?>492>:07424-70!%4=><4.>
45>D96931D9?>
%0=:?<.0!?8-0< "(
'08;:<,<C%0=:?<.0!?8-0<$?D@@<9312<5
:?9>C "1B9=5B
4>C ?BD?<<9>C
4=>:<4.?47/492!,80 )D?F5B51F5B<?3;
?<<09>?47/492!,80$?D@@<9312<5
?47/492//<0==
5665BC?>)D
?BD?<<9>C%
"A90<!,80//<0==)D5G1B4C89@""
5665BC?>)D
?BD?<<9>C%
?B75""
&1C31<)D
?BD?<<9>C%
5?7B1@893 >6?B=1D9?>
# D8':A9=34;$?BD8 %,920 -5CD
)
:1>30)-
:1>30)-
:1>30$-
:1&0.>4:9
(' %010<09.0+:90 ,=>492 !:<>3492
(&&$?,/!,80 ?BD?<<9>C?<?B14?
*0,< @8?D?B5F9C54 ,;=.,70
:>="?D7:.6
//4>4:9 ?BD?<<9>C%B979>1<*?G>C9D5 *0,<:1//4>4:9
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 108
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20 :1
:?9/,<C0=.<4;>4:9,9/ ?=>414.,>4:9*89C@B?@5BDI3?>C9CDC?6@1B35<C
@B5F9?EC<I
1>4
4569>542I1<?D1>42<?3;
45C3B9@D9?> D 9>3<E45C D85 <1>4 1>4 2E9<D B5C?EB35C D81D 1B5 89CD?B931<<I
1CC?391D54G9D89D1>4B5=19>9>@<135D85B5D?41I
B389D53DEB1<5C3B9@D9?>
?47/492#7,9 (53D1>7E<1B&<1>
4809=4:9=4900> H
!?8-0<:1&>:<40=
#<48,<CB>0<9,7),77 ,>0<4,7=B93;)DE33?
%::1:9142?<,>4:9 <1D(??6
#<48,<CB>0<9,7%::1 ,>0<4,7+>;>?G>
&;0.4,70,>?<0=)57=5>D1<B3889=>5I <1CC<?3;
090<,7 <.34>0.>?<,7 0=.<4;>4:9 139>7 D?G1B4 D85 >?BD851CD ?>D? 5665BC?>
)DB55DD89CDG?CD?BI=1C?>BI3?==5B391<2E9<49>781C1 PHPB53D1>7E<1B
@<1> (5CD9>7E@?>1C1>4CD?>56?E>41D9?>9D9C3?>CDBE3D54G9D82B93;G1<<C
<1949>BE>>9>72?>43?EBC9>7 DC6<1DB??69C2?B45B542I<?G=1C?>BI@1B1@5D
G1<<C *852E9<49>7CD1>49>7D85B5D?41IB5@B5C5>DCD85>?BD8G5CDDG?D89B4C?6
9DC?B979>1<P6B?>D1751<?>7 5665BC?>)DB55D DCC?ED851CD5HD5B9?BG1<<G1C
?B979>1<<I 1> 9>D5B>1< 69B5G1<< 1>4 D85 5H@?C54 E@@5B 1B51 B5D19>C F9C92<5
5F945>35?6D85@B5F9?ECB??6:?9CDC1>4B??6<9>5
$?BD851CD 6B?>D *85 61K145 6B?>DC 49B53D<I ?>D? D85 3?>3B5D5 C945G1<;
@1B1<<5<9>7 5665BC?> )DB55D 1>4 ?>5 CD?B56B?>D 9C @B5C5>D 9> 5138 ?6 9DC DG?
21IC *85>?BD8G5CDCD?B56B?>D9C144B5CC541C
5665BC?>)DB55D1>49D9C
6<1>;542I2B93;@9<1CD5BC C<978D<I?6635>D5B=19>5>DB1>353?>D19>C1G??4
@1>5<4??BG9D8149F9454<978D1<?>7G9D86?EBDB1>C?=<978DC12?F5 $?BD8G5CD
?6D855>DBI9C1<1B75G9>4?G@1>5<3?>C9CD9>7?6DG5>DI6?EBC=1<<69H54<978DC
C5D9>1>449F94542IG??46B1=9>7G9D81C5F5><978DDB1>C?=12?F51>41
G??4;93;@<1D525<?G *89C9C13DE1<<I169H54?F5B8514C8?@4??BD81D41D5C
6B?=D85 C96>?D51B<95B )?ED851CD?6D855>DBI9C1>?D85BG9>4?G@1>5<
3?>C9CD9>7?65978DC=1<<5B69H54<978DCG9D8DG?<1B75B<978DC12?F51<<C5D9>1>4
49F94542IG??46B1=9>7 *89C1<C?81C1G??4;93;@<1D525<?G G??4C97>
@1>5<C@1>CD85G94D8?6D85G1<<12?F5D85CD?B56B?>D
*85C?ED851CDCD?B56B?>D9C144B5CC541C
5665BC?>)DB55D1>49D9C6<1>;54
2I2B93;@9<1CD5BC *89C8?<4CDG?5>DB95C?>51D59D85B5>4?6D85CD?B56B?>D
1383?>D19>C1G??4@1>5<4??BG9D81C9>7<5<978D1<?>7G9D8D8B55C945<978DC
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 109
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20 :1
1>41>5978D<978DDB1>C?=12?F5 *85>?BD8G5CD5>DBI9C1<C?C85<D5B542I1
>5G31>F1C1G>9>7 5>D5B5425DG55>D855>DB1>35C9C1<1B75G9>4?G@1>5<
3?>C9CD9>7?6DG5>DI6?EBC=1<<69H54<978DCC5D9>1>449F94542IG??46B1=9>7
G9D81G??4;93;@<1D525<?G *89C9C13DE1<<I169H54?F5B8514C8?@4??BD81D
41D5C6B?=D85 C96>?D51B<95B *85?@5>9>76?BD89C<1B75C5D?6G9>4?GC
9>4931D5CD81D9D?>3585<41>?F5B8514C8?@4??B D9C1<C?6<1>;542I2B93;
@9<1CD5BC -??4C97>@1>5<CC@1>D85G94D8?6D85G1<<12?F5D85CD?B56B?>D
*85C53?>46<??B9C1<C?49F94549>D?DG?21IC *85C51B51<C?6<1>;541>4
49F94542I2B93;@9<1CD5BC 13821I8?<4CD8B55DG??F5BDG?4?E2<58E>7C1C8
G9>4?GCG9D8G??46B1=5CG??4C9<<C1>4C81@542B93;C57=5>D1<1B38<9>D5<C
*85E@@5BG1<<9C?B>1=5>D54G9D82B93;45>D9<21>;C3?B25<<9>73B?CC5C1>4
B535CC54@1>5<C >
18?B9J?>D1<=5D1<21BG1C9>CD1<<5413B?CCD85E@@5B
G1<<1D
5665BC?>)DB55DD?CD129<9J5D85613145
)?ED851CDC945*89CG1<<12EDC1>14:135>D?>5CD?BI3?==5B391<2E9<49>7
1>49C?><I5H@?C54D?F95G12?F59DCB??6<9>5 *856?B=5B9>D5B9?B2B93;69B5G1<<
D85B5 D81D >?G C5BF5C 1C 1> 5HD5B9?B G1<< 5H8929DC @8IC931< 5F945>35 ?6 D85
C?ED851CD2E9<49>7C57=5>DD81D81C255>B5=?F54 *852B93;G1<<9C<1B75<I
2<1>;1>4@1BD91<<I3?F5B54G9D8G81D1@@51BCD?2561454G89D5@19>D
)?ED8G5CD B51B *85 5>D9B5 B51B G1<< 9C 3<14 9> CDE33? ?F5B D85 ?B979>1<
2B93;G?B; 1>4 9D 81C 255> B5=?45<54 9> CD175C C9>35 D85 <1D5 C *85
>?BD8G5CD21I
8?<4C1@19B?6G??4@1>5<4??BCG9D8G81D1@@51BD?25
=E<D9@<561EH<978DC1>41DG5>DI6?EB<978D7<1CC2<?3;G9>4?G *85C51B5C5D
9>D?1<1B75B9>69<<54?@5>9>7D81D=1I81F5?>3585<41>?F5B8514C8?@4??B
4:135>DD?D854??B9C16?EB?F5B6?EB4?E2<58E>7C1C8G9>4?GG9D81G??4
6B1=5C5D9>1>1B3854?@5>9>7 2?F5D85C59C131>F1C1G>9>71<?>7G9D8
DG?6?EB?F5B6?EB4?E2<58E>7C1C8G9>4?GCG9D8G??4C9<<C?>D85C53?>4
6<??B *85E@@5B6<??B9CB5138542IG1I?6>?>89CD?B93G??4CD19BG1IG9D81
C9>7<56<978DD81D1335CC5C1>5>DBI1DD852E9<49>7PCC?ED8G5CD3?B>5B *89C
8?<4C14??BG9D8=E<D9@<5<978DC1<?>7G9D81DB1>C?=12?F5
*85C?ED851CD21I
8?<4C1@19B?65978D55><978D4??BCG9D86<1>;9>7C9H
<978DC945<978DC1<<C5D9>G??46B1=5C D1<<6?EB<978DG9>4?GD?D85>?BD8G5CD
1@@51BC25<?31D549>16?B=5B@545CDB91>5>DBIC@135 2?F5D85C5D85E@@5B
6<??B8?<4CDG?6?EB?F5B6?EB4?E2<58E>7C1C8G9>4?GCC5D9>G??46B1=5C
$?BD8G5CDC945*89CC945G1<<12EDCD8514:135>DDG?CD?BI,1>45G1B;<?3;
1>49C>?D5H@?C54D?F95G
<.34>0.>?<,7&>C70?47/492'C;0$9>5D55>D85>DEBI?==5B391<
,9/=.,;492 :< &;0.4,7 &0>>492 0,>?<0= *89C @B?@5BDI 9C <?31D54 ?> D85
C?ED8G5CD C945 ?6 5665BC?> )DB55D 12?ED 81<6G1I 25DG55> &9>5)DB55D 1>4
"9>45>)DB55D D9CC9DE1D549>D85>?BD85B>1B51?6D854?G>D?G>3?==5B391<
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 110
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
49CDB93D1>49CCEBB?E>4542I3?==5B391<2E9<49>7C9>1<<49B53D9?>C 9B53D<I
2589>4D85>?BD8G5CD@1BD?6D852E9<49>79C1C=1<<3?EBDI1B45>3<?C542I1
2B93;G1<<1>4=5D1<71D5 >?@5>3?>3B5D5@1D9?9C2589>4D85C?ED851CD@1BD
?6 D85 2E9<49>7 5I?>4 D85C5 D85 B5CD ?6 D85 @B?@5BDI D81D 5HD5>4C D? %<4
9B58?EC5<<5I3?>C9CDC?617B1F5<@1B;9>7<?D
==:.4,>0/?47/492=0,>?<0=:<"-50.>=$?D@@<9312<5
, B389D53DEB1< 9CD?BI
,>0:1:9=><?.>4:9 =>48,>0 .>?,7
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N ?=5 #1DD5BCO
)5@D5=25B
@
<.34>0.> 5?B75- !9>7@B5CE=54
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N ?=5#1DD5BCO
E7ECD @
?47/0<:9><,.>:<*5>>5I?<@9DDC!9>7
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N ?=5#1DD5BCO
E7ECD @
"<4249,7"A90< - )D?F5B ?8>51F5B
&:?<.0:1 91:<8,>4:9N ?=5#1DD5BCO
E7ECD @
:9=><?.>4:9 4=>:<C*852E9<49>7?>D89CC9D5G1C3?>CDBE3D549> G9D81P
<?>761K1451<?>7 5665BC?> *89CG1CC8?BD5>54D? PG85>D85C?ED851CD5B>
D89B4?6D852E9<49>7G1C45=?<9C854C?=5D9=51B?E>4
"<4249,7 :.,>4:9/5C
, 9CD?B931<CC?391D9?>C
"<4249,7(=0= ?==5B35M)@5391<DI)D?B5
9>0<80/4,>0(=0=?==5B35M)@5391<DI)D?B5
?==5B35M-1B58?EC5
?==5B35MEC9>5CC
&B?65CC9?>1<
?=5CD93M#E<D9@<5G5<<9>7
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 111
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
?<<09>(=0= ?==5B35M)@5391<DI)D?B5
?==5B35MEC9>5CC
&B?65CC9?>1<
&4>0'C;0=(5D19< )D?B5C $5GC@1@5B %66935 @1BD=5>DC ED?
)5BF935 1B175/?71)DE49?)53?>481>4)D?B5 E>;
51<5BC89@
4=>:<4.,7-,.62<:?9/%>E7ECD D85549D?B?6D85
B5@?BD54D81D858145H1=9>541C;5D38?6D8561K1456?B1>5G2EC9>5CC2<?3;
D81DG?E<4255B53D546?B=5B381>DC-9<<91= )D?F5B1>4 ?8>51F5B?>"?D
1>4D85>?BD8G5CD81<6?6"?D9><?3; *8545C97>G1C453<1B54N1=?45<
?6>51D>5CC1>4C9=@<939DI O >D85C8?BD1BD93<59DG1C1<C?1>>?E>354D81DD85
CDBE3DEB5G?E<4252E9<D2ID853?>DB13D9>7@1BD>5BC89@?6*5>>5I?<@9DDC
!9>7 ?8> ?<@9DDCG1C1@B?<96931>48978<IB571B454 ?BD?<<9>C2E9<45B
G8?@B?F9454@<1>C1>475>5B1<3?>DB13D9>7C5BF935C6?B>E=5B?ECB5C945>35C
@E2<932E9<49>7C1>43?==5B391<2<?3;C9>3<E49>7C5F5B1<?> 5665BC?>)DB55D
DD85D9=5D85?><I*5>>5IC9>D851B51G5B52B?D85BC(?<<9>1>4#5<F9>G8?
G5B5@B9=1B9<I5=@<?I541CCD?3;=5> *85!9>7<9CD54G1C<9;5<I 5?B75-
!9>71<?31<31B@5>D5BB5@?BD542ID85>5GC@1@5BD?81F5@B5@1B54D852E9<49>7
C;5D38 -89<5>?D1>1B389D53D85=1I81F5255>B5C@?>C92<56?B9DC45C97>
@?CC92<I9>3?>:E>3D9?>G9D889C@1BD>5BC *8569B=?6*5>>5I1>4!9>7G8?C5
C8?@ G1C <?31D54 ?> -1<>ED )DB55D 3?=@<5D54 D85 31B@5>DBI G?B; ?> D85
@B?=9>5>D *54=?> ?EC5 ?D5< 2E9<D 9> ?> D85 >?BD8G5CD 3?B>5B ?6
5665BC?>1>4"9>45>
-9<<91= )D?F5BG1C2?B>9> 9>,9B79>911>49> 851454G5CD13B?CC
D85@<19>CD?D85?<?B14?6B?>D95B 569BCDC5DD<549>D8597*8?=@C?>,1<<5I
1>416D5B5>7179>79>D85=5B31>D9<52EC9>5CCD85B56?B1453145=?F54>?BD8D?
?BD ?<<9>C *85B5 85 5CD12<9C854 1 75>5B1< CD?B5 9> D85 6?B=5B %<4 B?ED
2E9<49>7?>D85C?ED8G5CD3?B>5B?6 5665BC?>)DB55D1>4"9>45>)DB55D >
)D?F5B 2531=5 1 3?6?E>45B ?6 D85 &?E4B5 ,1<<5I 1>; 5 B5=19>54 21>;
@B5C945>D E>D9< 1>4 G1C 9>F?<F54 9> >E=5B?EC ?D85B 3?==5B391<
5>D5B@B9C5C )D?F5B1<C?C5BF54?>D85 ?BD?<<9>C39DI3?E>39< 549549>
1>49C2EB9549> B1>4F95G5=5D5BI
?8>51F5BG1C2?B>9>,9B79>914EB9>7D85<1D5 C1>41BB9F549>5>F5B9>
58514549>D?D85=?E>D19>C1>4C@5>DC5F5B1<I51BC=9>9>71>4D85>
?@5B1D9>7 1 C1G=9<< 9> D85 F939>9DI ?6 <13; 1G; 1>4 5>DB1< 9DI >
51F5B B5<?31D54 D? "1B9=5B ?E>DI 1>4 ?@5B1D54 1 <9F5CD?3; B1>38 6D5B
C5F5B1<I51BC85=?F549>D? ?BD?<<9>C1>4=1>17541<9F5BICD12<5 51F5B
D85><1E>385412EC9>5CC?>"9>45>)DB55DD81D85?@5B1D541CD85?CC 554
)D?B5 > 85 @1BD>5B54 G9D8 -9<<91= )D?F5B ?> D85 45F5<?@=5>D ?6 D85
5665BC?>)DB55D2E9<49>7;>?G>1CD85)D?F5B51F5B<?3; 6D5BC5<<9>789C
6554 CD?B5 D85 6?<<?G9>7 I51B 51F5B B5DEB>54 D? <9F5CD?3; B1>389>7 9> D85
=?E>D19>C -85>8549541>4G85B5859C2EB954B5=19>E>35BD19>
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 112
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
?>CDBE3D9?>?6D85DG?CD?BI)D?F5B51F5B<?3;2571>9>51B<IE7ECD
1>4@B?7B5CC541D1B5=1B;12<IB1@94@135 I<1D5)5@D5=25BD852B93;G1<<C
G5B5CD1>49>71>4D8569>9C89>7D?E385CG5B53?=@<5D54D856?<<?G9>7=?>D8
*8B5521ICG945D852E9<49>781416??D@B9>D?6PHPG9D85138CD?B56B?>D
?33E@I9>7
P?66B?>D1751<?>7 5665BC?>)DB55D *852E9<49>7G1C45C97>54D?
3?>D19> D8B55 =19>6<??B CD?B5C 1<?>7 G9D8 3?==5B391< 1>4
?B B5C945>D91<
?33E@1>DC?>D85E@@5B6<??B ?BC?=5D9=5D85C53?>4CD?BIG1C?33E@954
2I4G5<<9>7E>9DC1<D8?E78D81D1@@51BCD?81F5351C542I
*852E9<49>7PC
144B5CC5C6B?=>?BD8G5CDD?C?ED851CDG5B5
1>4
5665BC?>)DB55D
*?41I:ECD
1>4
B5=19>CD1>49>71CD85I494G85>3?>CDBE3D549>
5665BC?> )DB55D >?BD8G5CD 21I *85 2E9<49>7PC 69BCD ?33E@1>D G1C D85
?CC 554)D?B5?G>542I ?8>51F5B &B5F9?EC<I<?31D54?>"9>45>)DB55D
D852EC9>5CCC?<465547B19>81I6<?EB1>4=51< >9DC>5G<?31D9?>D85CD?B5
?33E@954D85>?BD8G5CD21I1D
5665BC?>)DB55D1>4D89CC@135B5=19>541
6554CD?B5D8B?E78D855>4?6D8535>DEBI
> E7ECD C855@ B1>385B #1BD9> ,1>45G1B; @1BD>5B54 G9D8 =5B381>D
81B<5C F1>C D? @EB381C5 D85 2EC9>5CC 6B?= ?8> 51F5B 1<?>7 G9D8 D85
2E9<49>7 9> G8938 9D G1C <?31D54 (1D85B D81> 381>79>7 9DC >1=5 D85 >5G
?G>5BC3?>D9>E54D??@5B1D59D1CD85?CC 554)D?B5 > 1>E1BI D85
@1BD>5BC89@ 49CC?<F54 1>4 #1BD9> 3?>D9>E54 ?> 1C 9DC C?<5 ?G>5B %>5 I51B
<1D5B9> 1>E1BI
8513AE9B54D8514:135>DF131>D<?DD?D85>?BD8G5CDD81D
G1C<?31D5425DG55>D85?CC 554)D?B51>4D85 5665BC?><?3; #1BD9>8141
DG?CD?BI3?==5B391<2E9<49>75B53D54?>D81D@B?@5BDIG8938G1C3?=@<5D549>
@B9<
1>42531=5;>?G>1CD85,1>45G1B;<?3; 29?7B1@8I?6#1BD9>
,1>45G1B;49C3ECC9?>?6D89C14:135>D2E9<49>71>41449D9?>1<B565B5>35C1B5
6?E>49>D85C9D56?B=6?B
5665BC?>)DB55D"(
#1BD9>C?<4D85?CC 554)D?B59>#1B38
G89<5D85,1>45G1B;<?3;G1C
E>45B3?>CDBE3D9?> H13D<I?>5I51B<1D5B9>#1B38 85B513AE9B54D85
2EC9>5CC > 1>E1BI 85@EB381C541<?31<61B==1389>5BI1>49=@<5=5>D
451<5BC89@;>?G>1C)3?DD&?G5BC *89C=14589=D85C?<5175>D9> ?BD
?<<9>C6?B#3?B=93;@B?4E3DC 51<C?D??;9>1@1BD>5B ?B4?>1>4
381>754D859B69B=PC>1=5D?,1>45G1B; ?B4?> >1449D9?>D?6554@B?4E3DC
1>4 61B= =1389>5BI 1>4 9=@<5=5>DC D85I 2571> C5<<9>7 1 3?=@<5D5 <9>5 ?6
G17?>C31BB9175C1>42E7795C45C97>546?BF1B9?ECEC5C *85=?CD8978<I
B571B454?6D85C5G5B52E9<D2ID85)DE4521;5B?=@1>I
(5AE9B9>7 1449D9?>1< C@135 6?B D859B 7B?G9>7 2EC9>5CC ,1>45G1B; ?B4?>
;5@DD856554CD?B59>D85)D?F5B51F5B<?3;1>45H@1>4549>D?D8514:135>D
,1>45G1B;<?3;G85B5D85I@<1354D859B31BB9175CG17?>C2E7795C1>461B=
9=@<5=5>DC ?B4?><56DD8569B=9> 1>E1BI 1>4#1BD9>3?>D9>E54
1<?>5 ?@5B1D9>7 ?ED ?6 D85 DG? 14:135>D 2E9<49>7C D8B?E78 D85 <1D5 C
*8B?E78?EDD89C@5B9?4D852EC9>5CCB5=19>541@B9=1BI45CD9>1D9?>6?B1>I?>5
9>D85 ?BD?<<9>C1B51<??;9>7D?2EI655461B=9=@<5=5>DC?B1F1B95DI?6
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 113
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
6?EBG855<548?BC54B1G>3?>F5I1>35C >#1B38 #1BD9>1>489CG965
1D85B9>5 <56D ?> 1> 5HD5>454 F131D9?> 213; 51CD 9>3<E49>7 1 F9C9D G9D8 89C
61=9<I 9> G5CD5B> $5G /?B; 9C 69>1< 14F5BD9C5=5>D 6?B D85 2EC9>5CC ?>
5665BC?>)DB55D1@@51B549>D85
D81DC1=5=?>D8 -85>
D85IB5DEB>54<1D5BD81DI51B#1BD9>C?<4D8569B=1>4B5D9B54D?1 13B561B=
9>D85 1B=?>I9CDB93DC?ED8?6 ?BD?<<9>C
*85 >5G ?G>5B ?6 D85 6554 CD?B5 G1C D85 &?E4B5 ,1<<5I *B149>7 ?=@1>I
=1>17542I) )D5G1BD *855>D5B@B9C5?33E@954D85C@135D8B?E78
1<?>7 G9D8 D85 14:135>D C@135 9> D85 ,1>45G1B; <?3; > D85 69B=
3?>CDBE3D541G1B58?EC5?>D85B51B?6D85@B?@5BDI5HD5>49>76B?=D85213;?6
D852E9<49>71D
5665BC?>)DB55D1<<D85G1ID?D851<<5I %>5CD?BI9>85978D
9DG1C?6G??46B1=53?>CDBE3D9?>G9D89B?>3<1449>7 *89CG1C5H@1>454?F5B
D85 >5HD 65G I51BC D? ?33E@I =E38 ?6 D85 C@135 2589>4 2?D8
1>4
5665BC?> )DB55D *85 G1B58?EC5 G1C EC54 D? CD?B5 G17?>C 1>4 61B=
9=@<5=5>DC > 1>E1BI
D85 3?=@1>I 1>4 2E9<49>7 G5B5 C?<4 D? $
?E>D5B?6-B1I ?G5F5B69F5=?>D8C<1D5B85C?<4D85=D? -89D5?6
#?>D5,9CD1 <D8?E78D85&?E4B5*B149>7?=@1>I?@5B1D546?BC5F5B1<=?B5
I51BC9D4?5C>?D1@@51BD?81F5CEBF9F5425I?>4
5DG55>D85=94 C1>4=94
CD85C@1351D
5665BC?>)DB55DG1C
F131>D B?E>4
D85C854G1CEC54D?CD?B5:E>;=?CD<9;5<I2I1C3B1@
=5D1<451<5BG8??33E@954D85C@1351D
5665BC?>)DB55DD85I=978D81F5
1<C??33E@954
5665BC?>)DB55D1B?E>4
B?E>4 D85C@13585<4
+>9D54 1D385B95C12EC9>5CCD81D1@@1B5>D<I@B?F94543893;CD?61B=5BC1>4
1>I?>55<C5G9C89>7D?B19C5@?E<DBI *855>D9B52E9<49>7C55=CD?81F5C1D
F131>D4EB9>7D85 B51D5@B5CC9?>?6D85 C
I D85C@1351D
5665BC?>)DB55DG1C?33E@9542I1>1ED?=5381>93
>1=54B<95 B9DJG8?5F945>D<IEC549D6?BB5@19BC *89C<1E>3854D8521I9>D?
9DC>5HD@81C5?6EC5G89383?>D9>E549>D?D85<1D5DG5>D95D835>DEBI EB9>7
D85 CD85?33E@1>DCG5B5&5D5BB5F97PC1ED?B5@19BC8?@1>41B1491D?B
B5@19BC8?@?@5B1D542I-1BB5>05>?B 9>1<<I6B?=1B?E>4 9>D?D8551B<I
CD8521I85<4 1HD?>PCED?)5BF935)E@@<IG8938EC54D8514:135>D
C@135C9>D85)D?F5B51F5B<?3;1>4,1>45BG1B;<?3;6?B75>5B1<B5@19BC
1>4=?B5C@5391<9J541ED?5<53DB93C5BF935
5665BC?>)DB55D35>DB1<21I*85=944<521IG1C?33E@9546B?=1B?E>4
D? 2ID85?66935C?6D85
33?B49>7D?D8569B5
9>CEB1>35=1@6B?= 81>4@B9>D9>7G1C1<C?4?>5D85B5 *85C@135G1C
F131>D1B?E>4 1>4D85>EC54D?CD?B5G17?>C4EB9>7D85=944<5?6D85
453145 =?CD <9;5<I 2I #1BD9> ,1>45G1B;PC 69B= 9> D85 14:135>D C@135 D? D85
>?BD8G5CD EB9>7D85F5BI51B<I C9DG1CEC541C181IG1B58?EC5 *85
21ID85>8?EC541C53?>481>4CD?B51>4:E>;2EC9>5CCD81DB5=19>54D85B5
6B?=1B?E>4 D? EB9>7D85=94
C9DG1C?33E@9541C1<E=25B
G1B58?EC5 6D5BC9DD9>7F131>D4EB9>7D85 B51D5@B5CC9?>?6D85 CD85
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 114
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
C@135 8?EC54 )D5F5>C B?D85BC <1D5B )D5F5>C *9B5 )5BF935 1>4%! (E225B
-5<45BC 6B?= D85 C 9>D? D85 C I D85 <1D5 C 9D 814 253?=5
#1B<5>PC*9B5)5BF935G8938B5=19>54D85B5D8B?E78D85 C
5665BC?>)DB55DC?ED851CD21I45=?<9C854*85C?ED851CD21I9>D85
)D?F5B51F5B<?3;G1C?33E@9544EB9>7D85 C2I181B>5CCC8?@ *89C
G1C6?<<?G542ID85
@B9>D9>7C8?@G8938B5=19>54D85B5
6B?=D85 CD8B?E78D85 C ?G5F5BD85DG?CD?BI21IG1C45=?<9C854
9> D? =1;5 B??= 6?B 1 >5G ?>5CD?BI 2E9<49>7 D81D D85 >5GC@1@5B 814
3?>CDBE3D549>D81D1B51?6D85@B?@5BDI *856E<<CD?BI?6D852E9<49>71D
5665BC?>)DB55D9C6?E>49>D85C5@1B1D5C9D56?B=6?BD81DC9D5"(
)9>35D85<1D5 CD85)D?F5B51F5B<?3;81C255>13?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D
?6D85%<4*?G>$1D9?>1<(579CD5B 9CD?B939CDB93D1>4D85%<4*?G> ?BD?<<9>C
"1>4=1B; 9CDB93D 6D5B <1>7E9C89>7 6?B C5F5B1< 453145C 1>4 CE665B9>7 6B?=
4565BB54 =19>D5>1>35 1>4 81@81J1B4 B5=?45<9>7 566?BDC D85 2E9<49>7 81C
5H@5B95>354B5>5G1<1>4B58129<9D1D9?>9>B535>DI51BC1C9D9C?33E@9542I1
>5G75>5B1D9?>?6?G>5BC1>42?D8B5C945>D91<1>43?==5B391<D5>1>DC
&:?<.0=:1491:<8,>4:9
B389D53DEB1<
9CD?B931<?=@?>5>D ?B=
5665BC?>)DB55D ?BD?<<9>C)9D5
"(
$?F5=25B
,1B9?EC&E2<9C85BC
N ?=5#1DD5BCOE7ECD @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO E7ECD @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO
)5@D5=25B @
N 51F5B? O %3D?25B @
NEC9>5CC ?EC5C1>4EC9>5CC1>4&B?65CC9?>1<#5>9> ?BD?<<9>C?<?
1> O 1>E1BI @
N 51F5B? O
#1B38 @
N$5G 9B=O
E7ECD @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO
%3D?25B @
N$?D935?69CC?<ED9?>O 1>E1BI @
N?CC 554)D?B5O 1>E1BI @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO
E>5 @
N ?>5?>1>H3EBC9?>O
E<I @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO E7ECD @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO )5@D5=25B @
N?45)E==?>CO
@B9<
@
NB5CC#1;5BO
@B9<
@
N ?=5#1DD5BCO #1I @
N ?=5#1DD5BCO 535=25B @
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 115
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20:1
N$5G1>4 =@B?F54 ?B=O
535=25B @
N*85?EB95BO
E<I @
N 1B=5BC1>4 5545BCO)5@D5=25B @
N&?E4B5,1<<5I*B149>7?=@1>IO 52BE1BI @
N*85&?E4B5,1<<5I*B149>7?=@1>ILO$?F5=25B @
N$?D935D?55D(19C5BCO @B9< @
N&?E4B5,1<<5I*B149>7? O E<I @
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO 1>E1BI
@
N&?E4B5,1<<5I*B149>7? O
1>E1BI
@
N*?41IPC$5GCO
#1I
@
N9DI1>4?E>DBIO535=25B @
"1B9=5B?E>DICC5CC?B(51<CD1D5@@B19C1<(53?B4C
5665BC?>)D
@B5F9?EC<I
1>4
?BD ?<<9>C
?<?B14?
&8?D?7B1@8C?6D85)D?F5B1>451F5B<?3;?<<53D9?>?6D85B389F5C?6D85
?BD?<<9>C#EC5E=?69C3?F5BI3
56
56
56
56
&B5C5BF1D9?>&<1>>9>7 9<56?B
5665BC?>)DB55D9DI?6 ?BD?<<9>C
)1>2?B> 9B5 >CEB1>35#1@C ?BD?<<9>C?<?B14?
)G1>C?>F145>5EBB9C
?BD?<<9>C%&E2<9C854
2ID85ED8?B 1>4
-1DB?EC>C5<
?BD?<<9>C%?EB95B&B9>D9>7
&E2<9C89>7?=@1>I
, )97>96931>35
:.,77,9/8,<6/0=429,>4:9/5C
;;74.,-70!,>4:9,7%024=>0<<4>0<4,
. ==:.4,>0/A4>30@09>=>3,>3,@08,/0,=429414.,9>.:9><4-?>4:9>:>30
-<:,/;,>>0<9:1:?<34=>:<C
==:.4,>0/A4>3>3074@0=:1;0<=:9==429414.,9>49:?<;,=>
. 8-:/40= >30 /4=>49.>4@0 .3,<,.>0<4=>4.= :1 , >C;0 ;0<4:/ :< 80>3:/ :1
.:9=><?.>4:9:<<0;<0=09>=>30A:<6:1,8,=>0<:<;:==0==0=3423,<>4=>4.
@,7?0= :< <0;<0=09>= , =429414.,9> ,9/ /4=>492?4=3,-70 09>4>C A3:=0
.:8;:909>=8,C7,.649/4@4/?,7/4=>49.>4:9
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 116
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
,=C407/0/:<8,C-074607C>:C407/491:<8,>4:948;:<>,9>4934=>:<C:<
;<034=>:<C
$?,74140=?9/0<<4>0<4,:9=4/0<,>4:9=>3<:?23
:0=9:>800>,9C:1>30,-:@0!,>4:9,7%024=>0<.<4>0<4,
<0,=:1=429414.,9.0?==5B35
B389D53DEB5
#0<4:/:1=429414.,9.0 ?==5B35
B389D53DEB5
0@07:1=429414.,9.0 !,>4:9,7$? &>,>0 $? :.,7/5C
&>,>0809> :1 =429414.,9.0 ?>CDBE3D54 9> D85 )D?F5B 51F5B <?3;
5=5B754 4EB9>7 D85 51B<I D?G>2E9<49>7 5B1 G85> D85 C?ED8 C945 ?6 D85
2<?3;?6 5665BC?>)DB55D5H@5B95>354D853?>CDBE3D9?>?61C5B95C?6DG?CD?BI
=1C?>BI 3?==5B391< 2E9<49>7C *8B?E78?ED 9DC 89CD?B93 @5B9?4 @B9?B D? 696DI
I51BC17?D89C2E9<49>78?EC541B5<1D9F5<I=?45CD>E=25B?6B5D19<1>4C5BF935
2EC9>5CC5C *85=?CDC97>96931>D?6D85C589CD?B93EC5CG5B5DG?3?>C53ED9F5
5>D5B@B9C5CD81DC?<46554@B?4E3DC61B=9=@<5=5>DC1>4G17?>C31BB9175C
1>42E7795C25DG55>D85<1D5 C1>451B<I C *85C?ED851CD21I?6D85
2E9<49>7 G1C B5=?F54 9> 1>4 B5@<1354 G9D8 1>?D85B 2E9<49>7 D81D 9C
B53?B454C5@1B1D5<IC55"(
*85 )D?F5B 51F5B <?3; 453<9>54 25DG55> D85 C 1>4 C G85> 9D
8?EC541:E>;2EC9>5CCC53?>481>4CD?B51>41ED?B5@19BC8?@C EB9>71
65G89CD?B93@5B9?4C9DC1DF131>D1>4G1CEC541CG1B58?EC5C@135 B?E>4
D85-?B<4-1B 5B1D85CD?B56B?>DCG5B5B5=?45<54D?133?==?41D5D851ED?
B5@19B C8?@C 1>4 D85 2E9<49>7 3EBB5>D<I B56<53DC 2?D8 9DC ?B979>1< 1>4 <1D5B
89CD?B93 1@@51B1>35C > B535>D I51BC D85 B5@19B C8?@C 81F5 =?CD<I
49C1@@51B54 6B?= 5665BC?> )DB55D 1>4 D85 2E9<49>7 81C B5F5BD54 D? <978D5B
3?==5B391< EC5C CE38 1C 1 I?71 CDE49? *?41I 9D 3?>D9>E5C D? 3?>F5I 9DC
89CD?B93 175 1>4 1@@51B1>35 =5B9D9>7 9DC CD1DEC C9>35 D85 <1D5 C 1C 1
3?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D8589CD?B93<1>4=1B;49CDB93DCG9D89>G89389D9C<?31D54
><978D?6D85$1D9?>1<(579CD5B3B9D5B91D852E9<49>79C5<9792<5E>45BB9D5B9?>
9>D851B51?6?==5B356?B9DC1CC?391D9?>G9D8D8551B<I45F5<?@=5>D?6 ?BD
?<<9>CP4?G>D?G>3?==5B391<49CDB93D1>46?B9DCEC56B?= 1C1C1<5C
6139<9DI 6?B 6554 @B?4E3DC 1<?>7 G9D8 61B= 9=@<5=5>DC 1>4 8?BC54B1G>
3?>F5I1>35C <D8?E78 1CC?391D54 G9D8 @B?=9>5>D =5B381>D 21>;5B 1>4
3?==E>9DI<5145B-9<<91= )D?F5BD852E9<49>7G1C3?>CDBE3D542I89=1C1>
9>F5CD=5>D ?>C5AE5>D<I9D4?5C>?D1@@51BD?255<9792<5E>45BB9D5B9?>
*852E9<49>79C5<9792<5E>45BB9D5B9?>1C17??45H1=@<5?6D85$9>5D55>D8
5>DEBI?==5B391<CDI<5?61B389D53DEB5 *85)D?F5B51F5B<?3;3?>D9>E5C
D?2513?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D85%<4*?G> ?BD?<<9>C"1>4=1B;9CDB93D
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 117
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
==0==809> :1 34=>:<4. ;3C=4.,7 49>02<4>C <07,>0/ >: =429414.,9.0 *85 89CD?B93
3?==5B391< 2E9<49>7 ?> D89C @B?@5BDI G1C 3?>CDBE3D54 9> 1>4 B5=19>54
9>D13DD8B?E78 G85>9DCC?ED851CD21IG1C45=?<9C8541>4B5@<1354G9D8
D85 14:135>D ?>5CD?BI 2E9<49>7 1D
5665BC?> )DB55D I D85 <?G5B
61K145 ?> D85 B5=19>9>7 35>DB1< 1>4 >?BD8G5CD 21IC 814 255> B5=?45<54 D?
133?==?41D5>5GEC5C1C1ED?B5@19BC8?@C *89CG?B;=?CD<9;5<ID??;@<135
9> D85 C 6?<<?G9>7 -?B<4 -1B *85 E@@5B 61K145 ?> D85C5 21IC 81C
B5=19>54 9>D13D 6B?= D85 2E9<49>7PC ?B979>1< 41D5 ?6 3?>CDBE3D9?> *85 B51B
5HD5B9?BG1<<81C5H@5B95>354C5F5B1<=?496931D9?>CD81D81F5?33EBB54C9>35D85
<1D5 C (5F95G?6@8?D?7B1@8C6B?=1B?E>4 C8?GCD81DD852E9<49>7
81C381>754<9DD<5C9>35D81DD9=5
>B5<1D9?>D?D851C@53DC?69>D57B9DID852E9<49>75H@5B95>354D85<?CC?6?>5
D89B4?69DC?B979>1<45C97>1>4=1CC9>7DG5>DI69F5I51BC9>D?9DC5H9CD5>35 DC
3EBB5>DC9J5B56<53DC8?G9D81C1@@51B546?B=?B5D81>135>DEBI61B<?>75B
D81>9D4949>9DC?B979>1<3?>49D9?> -9D8DG?D89B4C?6D852E9<49>7CEBF9F9>7D?
D85@B5C5>D41ID8551B<I45=?<9D9?>?6D85C?ED851CD21IB56<53DC189CD?B93
1<D5B1D9?> D81D 9C >?G C9=@<I @1BD ?6 9DC 89CD?BI 5C@9D5 D89C 381>75 D85
2E9<49>7D81DCD1>4C?>D89CC9D55H8929DC17??4457B55?69>D57B9DI DB5D19>C
=1>I651DEB5C41D9>76B?=9DC?B979>1<3?>CDBE3D9?>3?=29>54G9D8?D85BCD81D
41D56B?=D85@5B9?4:ECD16D5B-?B<4-1B ?>F5I9>79DC89CD?B931751>4EC5
D85)D?F5B51F5B<?3;3?>D9>E5CD?C5BF51C13?>DB92ED9>75<5=5>D?6D85
%<4 *?G> $1D9?>1< (579CD5B 9CD?B93 9CDB93D 1>4 D85 %<4 *?G> ?BD ?<<9>C
"1>4=1B;9CDB93D
, $1D9?>1<(579CD5B<97929<9DICC5CC=5>D
!,>4:9,7%024=>0<07424-474>C1407/,==0==809> <9792<5
=>30<0!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>;:>09>4,7 /5C
4=.?== *89C @B?@5BDI 9C 1CC?391D54 G9D8 1> 145AE1D5 3?>35>DB1D9?> ?6
89CD?B931<<I1>41B389D53DEB1<<IC97>96931>D@B?@5BD95CD81D1B53?>D97E?EC?B
3<?C5D??>51>?D85B1>41<B514I3?>CD9DED51>5CD12<9C854$1D9?>1<(579CD5B
49CDB93D D 9C C9DE1D54 G9D89> D85 %<4 *?G> ?BD ?<<9>C $1D9?>1< (579CD5B
9CDB93D1>4D85<?31<<I45C97>1D54%<4*?G> ?BD?<<9>C"1>4=1B;9CDB93D
1>30<04=!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>;:>09>4,74=>34=-?47/492.:9><4-?>492/5C
1>30-?47/4924=49,90B4=>492!,>4:9,7%024=>0</4=><4.>4=4>.:9><4-?>492/5C
, (53?B49>7 >6?B=1D9?>
#3:>:2<,;39?8-0<=
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 118
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
!02,>4@0=1470/,>*1D1>;1 9CD?B931<CC?391D5C >3
& % ?H ?BD?<<9>C%
%0;:<>>4>70 9CD?B93 (5C?EB35C )EBF5I ?6 5665BC?> )DB55D ?BD
?<<9>C?<?B14?
,>0= )5@D5=25B
%0.:</0<= (?>)<145;&B5C945>D
"<2,94D,>4:9 *1D1>;1 9CD?B931<CC?391D5C >3
//<0== & % ?H ?BD?<<9>C%
#3:909?8-0<=
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 119
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
)9D5"?31D9?>#1@
+) ) ?BD?<<9>C P*?@?7B1@893'E14B1>7<5#1@
B5F9C54
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 120
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
)9D5917B1=
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 121
%0=:?<.0!?8-0<"(
//<0==
5665BC?>)D
B389D53DEB1< >F5>D?BI ?B=
#,20
:1
EBB5>D&8?D?7B1@8C
B?>D?6D85E9<49>71D
5665BC?>)DB55D
,95GD?D85)?ED8G5CD
(51B?6D85E9<49>71D
5665BC?>)DB55D
,95GD?D85$?BD851CD
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 122
123456789ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 123
1ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 124
2ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 125
3ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 126
4ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 127
5ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 128
6ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 129
7ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 130
8ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 131
9ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 5Packet Pg. 132
1
237 & 243 Jefferson Street
Conceptual Design Review
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager
Landmark Preservation Commission, October 21, 2020
2
1
2
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 133
LPC Role
Conceptual Design Review:
Provide conceptual comments regarding compliance with adopted standards:
• Old Town District Design Standards
• Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
3
Additional Information
• Back walls of both buildings: currently and proposed.
• Existing and proposed dimensions on all plans
• Side elevation plans
• Contextual plans showing relation to adjacent buildings; reference lines
• Conceptual section(s), if available
• Show the addition from eye-level from various perspectives
• Idea of materials
• Discuss the railings around the decks
4
3
4
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 134
235 & 237 Jefferson Street
5
• 1879 – Stover & Deaver Block
• 2-story brick commercial
• Originally 3 bays wide
• SE third removed 1904
235 & 237 Jefferson Street
6
• Rear Elevation 235 & 237
• Stucco parging
• Arched windows
• Multi-light entrance
5
6
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 135
243 Jefferson Street
7
• 1905 – Courier newspaper
• 1-story brick commercial w/
wood parapet
243 Jefferson Street
8
• Rear Elevation 243
• Early addition to 1905 building
• Brick with arched windows
• Stucco and no-historic door
7
8
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 6
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 136
From:Sunil Cherian
To:Karen McWilliams
Cc:matt@r4architects.com;Gretchen Schiager
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: 237/243 Jefferson LPC Conceptual Review - Request for additional information
Date:Monday, October 19, 2020 4:25:28 PM
Attachments:2020.10.19 Jefferson Street Concept Set.pdf
Hi Karen,
Please see comments below (in blue) and attached updated plans. Thx.
Sunil
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 4:56 PM Karen McWilliams <KMCWILLIAMS@fcgov.com>
wrote:
Hello, Sunil and Matt -
At the October 14, 2020 Landmark Preservation Commission Work Session, LPC members
requested that the following information be supplied for the 237/243 Jefferson Conceptual
Review on October 21, 2020. As this is a conceptual review, as much information as
possible is requested, but is not required; however, the extent and quality of the comments
you receive will be dependent on the information submitted.
Please provide staff (Karen McWilliams and Gretchen Schiager, both copied here) with any
information you can by 5 p.m. Monday (Oct. 19) for inclusion in the LPC’s Tuesday update
packet. Information should be in a digital format. Any information not available on Monday
can be provided at the Wednesday evening meeting. The next day (Thursday, Oct.22), staff
will need a digital copy of all materials and documents provided, to complete the meeting
record.
Please let me know if you have any questions! Best, Karen
Information requested:
More information on the appearance of the back walls of both buildings currently, and
what would change.
Existing elevations and new elevations provided in updated plans. We don’t have all the information
you are looking for regarding appearance and finish at this conceptual level but will provide that
should we be allowed to move forward with the project.
I am in fact looking for guidance on these aspects of the project (please specify your criteria, if any,
that have to be met) so that I can provide it to my Architect to take into consideration as we
develop detailed design.
Measurements: Both existing and proposed dimensions on all plans
Plans have dimensions in them.
Side elevation plans (both sides)
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 7
Added 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 137
Included in plans
Contextual plans that show the proposed addition in relation to the buildings on each
side; reference lines between the proposed and existing would be very helpful
Visible in plans
Conceptual section(s), if available
Sections not available at this time
Plans or photographs that show the addition from eye-level from various perspectives,
including from sides, the back alley, and from across Jefferson Street as it would look
standing in front of Union
Several 3-d depictions of the addition provided in updated plans. One is taken from the sidewalk in
front of Union.
Please be prepared to discuss idea of the materials on new additions
We have not developed plans for materials yet, but the general idea is to contrast the addition with
a sleek, simple and contemporary design. The pergola, as shown, is a placeholder and likely would
not be wood as is shown; more likely an aluminum or steel pergola w/ retractable awning
shades.We are open to your ideas/suggestions.
Please be prepared to discuss the railings around the decks
Perimeter railings would be an extension of the wall materials with exception of Jefferson Street
restricting movement onto the adjacent roof . . . this would be steel.
Karen McWilliams
Historic Preservation Manager | City of Fort Collins
kmcwilliams@fcgov.com | 970.224.6078
Tell us about our service, we want to know!
COVID19 Resources
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 7
Added 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 138
For all residents:https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus
For businesses:https://www.fcgov.com/business/
Want to help:https://www.fcgov.com/volunteer/
Recursos COVID-19
Para integrantes de la comunidad: https://www.fcgov.com/eps/coronavirus
Para empresas: https://www.fcgov.com/business/
¿Quieres ayudar o necesitas ayuda? https://www.fcgov.com/neighborhoodservices/adopt
Recursos de United Way: https://uwaylc.org/
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 7
Added 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 139
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 9 added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 140
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 9 added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 141
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 9 added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 142
ITEM 5, ATTACHMENT 9 added 10-20-20Packet Pg. 143
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-1
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-2
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-3
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-4
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-5
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-6
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-7
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-8
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-9
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-10
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-11
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-12
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-13
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-14
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-15
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-16
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-17
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-18
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-19
ITEM 5, EXHIBIT A
Applicant Presentation - presented at hearing
Packet Pg. 143-20
Agenda Item 6
Item 6, Page 1
STAFF REPORT October 21, 2020
Landmark Preservation Commission
PROJECT NAME
ADOPTION OF THE LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION’S 2021 WORK PLAN
STAFF
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Manager
PROJECT INFORMATION
The purpose of this item is to discuss and adopt the Landmark Preservation Commission’s Work Plan for
2021.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City’s Municipal Code requires boards and commissions to develop work plans identifying goals for the next
year. Work plans take effect on January 1. For reference, the LPC 2020 Work Plan is attached.
The Commission should consider a motion for adoption of the 2021 work plan.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft LPC 2021 Work Plan (updated 10-20-20)
2. LPC 2020 Work Plan
Packet Pg. 144
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.416.2740
970.224.6134- fax
fcgov.com
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 21, 2020
TO: Susan Gutowsky, Council Liaison
CC: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk
FROM: Meg Dunn, Chair, Landmark Preservation Commission
RE: Landmark Preservation Commission 2021 Work Plan
Landmark Preservation Commission (Est 1968):
The City of Fort Collins is an organization that supports equity for all, leading with race. The
Landmark Preservation Commission proactively addresses barriers that perpetuate inequality, to
help minimize impacts to historically under-represented and under-resourced community members;
and directly supports the City's goals of sustaining an environment where residents and visitors feel
welcomed, safe and valued in the community.
The LPC is a nine-member board, at least 40% of whom must have professional expertise in historic
preservation, architectural history, architecture, archaeology, or closely related fields:
o Architecture (Nelson, Rose); Landscape Architecture (Bredehoft); Land Development (Bello);
Historic Preservation (Murray, Wallace, Michell); and Education (Dunn, Knierim).
The LPC performs the Certified Local Government (CLG) responsibilities for the City of Fort Collins:
o Enables City to administer preservation regulations on behalf of the state and federal
governments; residents to receive 25% Colorado State Tax Credits for Historic Preservation; and
City to receive CLG grants for training, surveys, building preservation, and community education;
o Requires enforcement of state and local legislation for the designation and protection of historic
properties consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards; requires on-going survey of
historic resources.
LPC is the final decision-maker on:
o Alterations to properties designated on the National Register, Colorado State Register, and as
Fort Collins Landmarks; determinations of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation; and
allocation of Landmark Rehabilitation Loan funds.
LPC makes recommendations:
o To Council on Fort Collins Landmark designations; to the Colorado State Review Board on
nominations to the National and State Register; and to Decision Makers on compatibility of
developments adjacent to historic properties.
LPC advises Council on the identification and significance of historic resources, threats to their
preservation, and methods for their protection; and advises Council and staff about policies,
incentives, and regulations for historic preservation.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 145
Landmark Preservation Commission
2021 Work Plan
- 2 -
2020 Overview:
Generated $227,315 in new sustainable rehabilitation work by providing 12 property owners a total
of $79,322 in Landmark Rehabilitation Loans.
Completed a comprehensive Historic Structure Assessment of Fort Collins Water Treatment Plant
No. 1 at Gateway Park, supported by a State Historic Fund (SHF) grant; an intensive level survey of
50 Downtown College Avenue properties, supported by a second SHF grant, is underway.
Completed the survey and inventory of 1,474 properties in the 18 months since adoption of the
revised historic preservation codes, increasing the number of properties with up-to-date
evaluations of eligibility from 227 to 1,701, or 14% of the City’s 50+ year and older building stock
(approx. 12,000 buildings total); 60% were evaluated as not eligible, 30% as contributing to a
possible historic district; and 10% as individually eligible and a priority for protection.
Recommended six properties for official designation as Fort Collins Landmarks;
2021 Responsibilities and Initiatives:
In 2021, the Landmark Preservation Commission will continue to directly support Council’s affirmed
values of triple bottom line stewardship and innovation, centered in equity and inclusion. Aligning its
strategic objectives with those of City Council, the Commission:
Will support the Neighborhood Livability and Social Health Key Outcome Area by:
• Enhancing the community’s sense of place by actively working to see Design Assistance
Program (DAP) funding reinstated in the 2022 Budget. The DAP provides a voluntary,
educational means to address the impacts of poorly designed new construction on established
character, improving the outcomes of 144 construction projects since 2012 and reducing the
number of complaints Council received on this issue by 20%.
• Protecting historic character through landmark designation; and helping to ensure compatible
alterations and new development through design review and development review.
• Celebrating historic resources through a community recognition and appreciation
opportunities, such as the Friends of Preservation Awards; virtual tours; signage and brochures;
and partnerships with community history organizations.
• Supporting affordable housing goals by retaining and rehabilitating older building stock,
promoting more affordable options in housing; and by assisting Housing Catalyst in federal
clearance for the sale of properties eligible for federal, state, and local designation.
• Continue to develop a community-wide survey plan and identify priorities for historic survey.
Will support the Economic Health Key Outcome Area by:
• Allocating Landmark Rehabilitation Loans, and promoting State Tax Credits, State Historic
Fund grants, and other financial programs for work to preserve and rehabilitate eligible
residential and commercial properties.
• Supporting Housing Attainability and Affordability through revisions to the Rehabilitation Loan
Program and the Design Assistance Program to address issues of equity, inclusion, and financial
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 146
Landmark Preservation Commission
2021 Work Plan
- 3 -
need, and better assist low and moderate-income citizens with cost-effective repairs and
improvements to their homes.
• Ensuring a smooth, integrated Development Review process by providing early comments to
developers and staff on Land Use Code projects; and by providing decision makers with
recommendations on development near historic properties.
• Promoting and subsidizing the use of Fort Collins’ specialized skills and tradespeople to keep
more financial resources in the community.
Will support the Environmental Health Key Outcome Area by:
• Incentivizing sustainable building practices and energy conservation measures in older homes
through historic preservation review processes.
• Promote sustainability, retention of embodied energy, and waste-steam reduction by
encouraging the reuse of existing buildings and materials.
• Facilitating safe, cost-effective energy rehabilitation and retrofitting, and resource sustainability
through 0%-interest loans, grants, and free professional advice.
• Promoting the Historic Preservation Division’s Costs Calculator, an on-line tool that enables
area contractors and residents to understand the relative costs, longevity and energy trade-offs
in material choices.
Will support the High Performing Government Key Outcome Area by:
• Overseeing the implementation of the new historic preservation codes and processes and
continuing to identify improvements, recommending appropriate code revisions as needed.
• Providing the best service to Council and the residents of Fort Collins by identifying and
implementing innovative solutions and best practices through partnerships, continuing
education, and professional trainings.
• Building capacity, increasing productivity, and facilitating the career training and growth of
young professionals by working with CSU students in Historic Preservation, Archeology,
Construction Management, Heritage Tourism and other related fields of study.
• Furthering Council’s and the City’s goals and objectives through the performance of the
Commission’s duties.
ITEM 1, ATTACHMENT 1
Updated 10-20-20
Packet Pg. 147
City of ktColli�
Planning, Development & Transportation Services
Community Development & Neighborhood Services
281 North College Avenue
DATE:
TO:
CC:
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.416.2740
970.224.6134-fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
October 16, 2019
Susan Gutowsky, Council Liaison
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk n,rfL,{>-FROM: Meg Dunn, Chair, Landmark Preservation Commission
Landmark Preservation Commission 2020 Work Plan RE:
Overview of the Landmark Preservation Commission (Est 1968):
•Federally authorized Certified Local Government (CLG} since 1991. CLG status:
o Authorizes LPC to administer state and federal preservation regulations, notably Section 106
Review and Compliance for all projects with federal licensing, permitting, or funding. Ex: MAX
bus system, Linden Street improvements, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG}, flood
mitigation, telecommunications.
o Enables residents to participate in the 20% Colorado State Tax Credit program.
o Provides a dedicated pool of grant funding: Fort Collins has received over $200,000 in CLG
grants for training, surveys, building preservation, and community education and outreach.
o Requires enforcement of appropriate state and local legislation for the designation and
protection of historic properties, consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards.
o Requires on-going survey of historic resources.
•Nine-member board, at least 40% of whom must have professional expertise in the fields of historic
preservation, architectural history, architecture, archaeology, or closely related fields:
o Commission professional expertise includes: Architecture (Nelson, Paecklar, Simpkins);
Landscape Architecture (Bredehoft); Archeology (Gensmer); Finance (Bello); Historic
Preservation (Murray, Wallace); and Education (Dunn).
•Final decision-maker on:
o Requests for alterations to properties designated on the National Register, Colorado State
Register, and as Fort Collins Landmarks
o Determinations of eligibility for Fort Collins Landmark designation
o Allocation of Landmark Rehabilitation Loan funds
•Makes recommendations:
o To Council on Fort Collins Landmark designations;
o To the Colorado State Review Board on nominations to the National and State Register
o To Decision Makers on compatibility of developments adjacent to historic properties
•Advises Council on the identification and significance of historic resources, threats to their
preservation, and methods for their protection
•Advises Council and staff about policies, incentives and regulations for historic preservation.
ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 148
ITEM 6, ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 149
BOARD TOPIC 4, ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 150