Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 06/09/2004LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting June 9, 2004 Minutes City Council Liaison: David Roy (407-7393) Staff Liaison: Joe Frank (221-6376) Commission Chair: W. J. "Bud" Frick, Jr. (484-1467) SUMMARY OF MEETING: LPC discussed possible changes to the City Code relating to historic preservation. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission called to order with a quorum present by Chairman Bud Frick at 5:40 p.m. at 281 N. College Ave., Fort Collins, Colorado. Agnes Dix, Per Hogestad, Janet Ore, Ian Shuff and Myrne Watrous were present; Angie Aguilera was excused. Joe Frank, Karen McWilliams and Carol Tunner represented City staff. GUESTS: none MINUTES: The minutes of May 4 were accepted as presented. AGENDA REVIEW: Ms. McWilliams announced that the complimentary review of 4104 Ziegler Road — Feather Ridge Reception Center — was pulled from the agenda at the request of the City Attorney. Ms. McWilliams reported that the City Attorney's opinion is that the LPC should not be undertaking reviews on a complimentary basis because it is not one of the functions of the Commission identified in the Municipal Code. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner pointed out an article in the Colorado Preservationist magazine, the text of a presentation by Don Rypkema on The Economics of Preservation. She urged all LPC members to read it, and suggested bringing the author to address the Commission, perhaps in conjunction with the Downtown Development Authority. She had spoken to Chip Steiner about the possibility as he has a contact with him. Karen McWilliams announced that the Rules had appealed the LPC decision of April 28, 2004, to City Council. Joe Frank added that Council will hear the appeal on July 20; Ms. McWilliams will research the appropriate role for members of the Commission at that hearing. Janet Ore asked what basis Council will use in evaluating the appeal. Mr. Frank said that while they have to use the same evidence presented to the Commission in April, they may have a different interpretation. No new evidence can be submitted, but Staff will present advice and information to Council on the matter, including a memo outlining the criteria the Commission was obliged to follow in making its decision. Bud Frick pointed out that the LPC is one of the few City boards and commissions on which a higher level of expertise is required of members. Per Hogestad thought that the entire issue turns on the interpretation of the Land Use Code; Ms. McWilliams said Chapter 14 of the City Code was more relevant, particularly the determination of hardship. Landmark Preservation Commission June 9, 2004, Meeting Minutes Page 2 COMMISSION MEMBERS REPORTS Myrne Watrous reported on the DDA meeting of June 3. The DDA approved $200,000 for right-of-way improvements for 325 Cherry St., the Hattie McDaniels house. Greg Glebe, owner of the proposed Cherry Street Terrace/Loft project as well as the Hattie McDaniels House, wants to merge the two properties and add a parking structure at the rear of the rehabilitated Hattie McDaniels House. Ms. McWilliams added that she was reviewing a request for a variance to demolish a mud room that was not original on the Hattie McDaniels House but that she had not seen any plans for garages. The only designated structure to be included in the upcoming community capital program, Building on Basics (BOB), is a proposed $6.5 million addition to the Fort Collins Museum. Trimble Court in Old Town is included in a contract between the DDA and EDAW for alley design work to be completed by July 1. While the alley behind Austin's is not in the LPC's purview, the Woolworth building containing the restaurant is designated locally, and there was some question of the impact of the work on the structure. Joe Frank will look into it. DISCUSSION ITEM Code Changes — facilitated by Karen McWilliams. The issues surrounding the Rule Farm have pointed up the discrepancies between various City ordinances, specifically Chapter 14 of the City Code and Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code. Changes in the Land Use Code over the years have removed the option, previously available to owners of historic structures, of demolition. Although it was not the original intent to require all structure be kept on site, the Land Use Code does not allow demolition or relocation options. Commission members agreed that it is vital to clean up the confusion to allow the LPC and property owners more options. Bud Frick agreed with Ms. McWilliams that complimentary reviews were the major strength of the LPC, allowing owners to share ideas for preservation in a collaborative manner to tweak the design and educate them on various rehabilitation standards and requirements. Under the current interpretation by the City Attorney, the LPC can now interact with property owners in a regulatory manner only; Joe Frank pointed out there is no flexibility in the Land Use Code; the Land Use Code is scheduled for review in the fall, but the LPC can start discussing what we should preserve and why. Janet Ore and Per Hogestad both expressed concern that during the Rule hearing, the local preservation community did not express support for the LPC. The recent interpretation of the Land Use Code as also applying to designated or individually eligible single- family homes is making the LPC seem regulatory and inflexible and could cause property owners to avoid the LPC and preservation altogether. Mr. Frank suggested returning to the spirit of the Historic Resources Preservation Program Plan, which advocated identifying significant properties to be saved and focusing LPC and staff efforts on them. Ms. McWilliams pointed out that under the current Municipal Code; the staff is required to look at all buildings that are individually eligible. Ian Shuff asked why every house has to be eligible. Some just are not significant. Ms. McWilliams agreed that putting all efforts into every building that comes Landmark Preservation Commission June 9, 2004, Meeting Minutes Page 3 in the door is not a good use of resources, and the LPC may just have to accept that the City will lose some historic structures. Dr. Ore felt it was vitally important that any decisions made in the future relate to previous decisions, and that the LPC be clear about the standards used to make those decisions. Through discussion, it was proposed to establish a hierarchy of eligible buildings, based on the pyramid developed for the HRPPP. The idea is that the least significant buildings — those that would simply contribute to a historic district if one existed — would receive the least amount of assistance, perhaps education about historic preservation, and be held to the least restrictive regulations, while more significant buildings would receive greater benefits and greater regulatory requirements. There would be a distinction between single family residences and commercial structures. Myrne Watrous disagreed with relaxing the regulatory approach, feeling that the alternative is rapidly losing Fort Collins history. Mr. Shuff pointed out that without community support, the LPC's efforts would be meaningless. Dr. Ore was concerned that any hierarchy developed could result in mansions being saved while bungalows were bulldozed. Mr. Frank suggested keeping the incentives for designation, while Mr. Frick advocated keeping the design review process in place. The question of the no - interest loan program for designated properties was discussed, and whether the lack of applications in recent years indicated that owners were no longer interested in preservation. It was felt that the small amounts available and low interest rates were bigger factors in the current cycle. Mr. Frank and Ms. McWilliams suggested that the bone of contention, especially in the Rule case, was the level of regulation applied to a property based on eligibility rather than designation. No changes were proposed for the review of properties already designated, or once they are designated; the questions to be resolved concern those buildings deemed individually eligible for designation, especially those for which the owners have not requested designation. Mr. Frick asked if a finding of individual eligibility could be somehow flagged to appear during a title search, or some other method of informing property owners of possible eligibility could trigger disclosure and more public input to the process. Mr. Shuff suggested sending the owners a letter on the 50th anniversary of the house's construction. Ms. McWilliams suggested sending the results of any surveys done to owners and setting a time period of input. Mr. Hogestad asked, if a hierarchy is developed, how do we determine where a property fits? The next question was whether the LPC and staff should wait until a property owner requests designation or, for those properties deemed highly significant, should we be more proactive? Mr. Frank felt it would be fairly simple to identify those that should be on the "A" list of eligibility. Ms. McWilliams suggested getting input from local historic groups to develop such a list. Dr. Ore cautioned that any list should contain a broad spectrum of properties to reflect the patterns of history in Fort Collins. Mr. Frank added that, although buildings built after World War II are reaching the 50-year mark, the City has yet to develop a context for evaluating the significance of structures from that period. Dr. Landmark Preservation Commission June 9, 2004, Meeting Minutes Page 4 Ore, noting that nothing has been written about Fort Collins in that period, suggested reviewing the National Register criteria; Mr. Frick agreed. Discussion of changes to city codes will remain on the agenda for future meetings. Mr. Frick asked that individual meetings not be overloaded with code -related items. Staff will e-mail Commission members as items become available for review. Public input: None. OTHER BUSINESS Carol Tunner announced that she would be meeting with property owners at 321 E. Mulberry to discuss replacing aluminum windows on the north side with wood storm windows and replacing the wood siding which is deteriorated. She reported that the owners reported greater heat retention from insulating the building than if they had replaced windows on the east side. Ms. Tunner also announced that the #13 (kiosk) in Old Town Square is replacing the fabric on its existing awning frames. She is also working with Ed Stoner on selecting a cherry awning for The Flagship Building, #1 Old Town Square, rather than the black fabric with white stripes that was previously planned. John Atencio Jewelers will have their own awning recovered in black which will be compatible with the cherry color. The new business that is replacing the now defunct Dreamweavers on College Avenue intends to replace the purple awning with a beige one. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Kate Jeracki, Recorder July 20, 2004