HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 06/23/2004LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
June 23, 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 approved partial cover of basement grates at
172 N. College, Suite C, for "Spoons, Soups and Salads" restaurant in the
Northern Hotel. LPC also discussed possible changes to the Municipal and
Land Use Codes.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission called to order with a quorum
present by Chairman Bud Frick at 5:32 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: Martin Dickey, owner, for "Spoons, Soups and Salads" restaurant in the
Northern Hotel, 172 N. College Ave., Suite C.
MINUTES: Verbatim transcript of the April 28, 2004, hearing was unanimously
approved, with various typographical errors corrected, on a motion by Janet Ore
seconded by Agnes Dix. Summary minutes of the May 12, 2004, meeting were
accepted as presented.
STAFF REPORTS: Carol Tunner distributed a recent Fort Collins Coloradoan article on
the renovation of Boston churches. She also announced various upcoming conferences,
including the National Trust Conference in Louisville, Kentucky, Sept. 28-Oct. 3, and the
national convention of Association for Preservation Technology International in
Galveston, Texas, Nov. 3-7. A Rocky Mountain chapter of APTI has formed; Ms. Tunner
and Janet Ore both highly recommended the organization. Ms. Tunner also asked
Commission members to forward to her any nominations for this year's list of Colorado's
Most Endangered Places.
COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS: None
DESIGN REVIEW:
172 N. College Ave., Suite C, "Spoons, Soups and Salads" restaurant — Partial
Cover of Basement Grates, Conceptual/Final Review — Martin Dickey, introduced by
Carol Tunner.
The owners of "Spoons", on the Walnut Street side of the Northern Hotel, would like to
cover over a section of basement grates in the sidewalk to provide more outside seating
area. The grates are non -historic, and the owners propose covering them with diamond
Landmark Preservation Commission
June 23, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 2
patterned steel sheet metal painted black, installed with bolts and wing nuts from below.
This would make the covers totally reversible should the abandoned basement
storefronts located to the west ever be reused. The storefronts were covered over and
painted black with the 2000 rehabilitation of the building, and are now only visible from
the inside basement. (There are existing unpainted sheet steel covers over the grates at
the entrances to adjoining businesses.) Two staircases down to the lower level are still
visible on each end under the existing grates and will remain. Staff recommended the
proposed partial cover of the basement corridor for its reversibility, but questioned
painting the sheet metal which would have to be maintained. Ms. Tunner distributed
color photos.
Martin Dickey, owner, explained that after doing more research, from a liability
perspective, he would prefer to use a less -slippery finish, something like the Rhino
product typically used to coat the beds of pickup trucks. It would also keep the metal
from heating up in the summer and would be as maintenance -free as possible. He said
the area to be covered is 25 feet long, and the cover would consist of three sheets of
metal butted together. He has already received approval from the City's Engineering
Department for structural integrity. Agnes Dix asked about drainage. Mr. Martin said rain
would sheet off the cover onto the sidewalk and into the gutters. Commission members
agreed that the new finish proposed was the best solution, and black was the best color
to use.
Public input: None.
Agnes Dix moved the LPC accept for Conceptual and Final Review the partial
cover of the basement grates at "Spoons, Soups and Salads", 172 N. College
Ave., Suite C, with sheet steel covered in a generic version of Rhino lining in a
diamond pattern. Myrne Watrous seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0.
DISCUSSION ITEM:
Code Changes — introduced and presented by Karen McWilliams.
Ms. McWilliams outlined the Historic Resources Priority Protection Pyramid, a
component of the 1994 Historic Resources Preservation Program Plan (HRPPP), as
discussed at the previous meeting. The Commission reviewed the proposed levels of
preservation, from the lowest -- buildings that although old are not eligible for historic
designation — to the highest — those eligible for inclusion on the National Register of
Historic Places. Janet Ore emphasized the importance of the base of the pyramid —
support built through education and promotion — to build up a positive community
attitude toward preservation.
Ms. McWilliams reviewed the criteria for evaluating "preservation necessity" set forth in
the HRPPP. When the HRPPP was adopted, it was supposed to focus City staff's
limited time and resources. Since that time, through small, cumulative changes in the
Landmark Preservation Commission
June 23, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 3
Municipal and Land Use Codes, a pattern of treating every building over 50 years old
equally has developed. If the LPC decides to adopt the HRPPP model or one like it,
specific criteria would have to be developed for adoption by City Council.
Bud Frick asked if it was more reinterpretation of existing Code language than changes;
Ms. McWilliams said it was both. Myrne Watrous said if regulations have gotten tougher
since 1994, that's because Council wanted it that way, and asked why staff or the LPC
should try to soften it. Ms. McWilliams said that some of the changes were inadvertent,
unintended consequences of other changes, for example, eliminating the exemption for
single-family dwellings, which was accepted by Council as part of a massive Land Use
Code update. It's changed the way staff reviews all building permits.
Janet Ore expressed concern that, given the lack of community support shown the
Commission during the Rule hearing, continuing to toughen up regulations could
eliminate any remaining support for preservation. Ian Shuff agreed, saying the
Commission is supposed to represent the community, but he felt there wasn't much
community support for the Commission. Ms. McWilliams felt the LPC should be
advocates, explaining why preservation is important. Bud Frick said the HRPPP was a
great tool to further preservation, but over the years, changes and reinterpretations
have put the Commission in the position of saying no to everything. Dr. Ore added that
the trap is when someone wants to list a building that is 50 years old but not really that
significant. Once you agree to that, to support a homeowner who wants to do the right
thing, it's a slippery slope: how can you say no to similar structures? For the pyramid to
work, the LPC will have to apply harder criteria to every structure, and not designate
everything that comes in. Ms. McWilliams suggested exploring the idea of making more
resources available to buildings that qualify at a higher level on the pyramid, and be
ready to accept that some buildings might be lost. It was agreed that in general, Fort
Collins residents don't support formation of historic districts; even areas quick to object
to new development projects don't want guidelines on their own properties.
Bud Frick suggested bringing back the Conceptual Design Subcommittee as an
educational program, to help homeowners not make a mess of their properties when
they do additions. He also suggested the City start researching the context for buildings
from the 1950s and '60s, since those are approaching the 50-year historical threshold.
Joe Frank said this is a priority, but until the context is completed, programs can't focus
on post -World War II buildings. In the meantime, the City may lose some of those
buildings, especially without public support for saving them.
Myrne Watrous asked how the pyramid would affect buildings that are already
designated. Bud Frick pointed out that once a building is designated, it is protected and
not in as great need of some of the incentives offered. Ms. McWilliams added that the
1994 pyramid provides a good framework, but there are lots of issues that must be
discussed to create a version that works today. Mr. Frick said the ideas behind the
pyramid are right on target, and suggested adding incentives for anyone who brings an
undesignated building in for a design review, perhaps making the services of the Design
Assistance Program available.
Landmark Preservation Commission
June 23, 2004, Meeting Minutes
Page 4
Other ideas discussed included notifying owners when their property approaches 50
years old; tying designation to the property title, so new owners are aware of it (it was
pointed out that this is already done); promoting preservation incentives; setting
requirements for single-family homes that will remain single-family residences that are
more realistic than the existing Land Use Code; possible sales tax waivers; more public
presentations and public relations efforts on behalf of historic preservation by
Commissioners and staff; adding staff; developing a context for post -WWII structures;
creating a checklist of designation requirements; and assisting owners of historic
properties in obtaining insurance. In general, the Commission agreed it was important to
get back to the carrot of incentives for preservation, and back off the stick of regulations.
Ian Shuff suggested that, if the LPC continues to rely entirely on regulations, there will
be no public support for preservation, but if the LPC removes all restrictions on single-
family properties, there will be worse additions built. It might take years for the public to
become concerned again and support to swing the other way. He wondered if there was
a better way to do it. Bud Frick suggested notifying owners when the properties turned
50 years old and inviting them in for an educational session on preservation and the
incentives available. Myrne Watrous said she was dead set against exempting
residential properties from restrictions. If they were, what incentive would there be to
designate a home if the neighbors could do whatever they want? Ms. McWilliams
explained that designated properties aren't protected from that now; the
Demolition/Alternation Review Process is simply a delay, not a denial.
Joe Frank suggested Bud Frick, as LPC chairman, call David Roy, as LPC liaison on
City Council, for his input and advice on some of the ideas the LPC has discussed. Mr.
Frick agreed it would be a good idea to let the Council know the LPC is working on the
issues. Mr. Frank pointed out that Council will be holding a study session on the LPC on
August 24. Myrne Watrous felt it was important for the Code changes to be discussed
on their own merits, apart from the contretemps over the Rule property. Mr. Frank
agreed, and Mr. Frick suggested that the discussion should center on how to make the
regulations friendlier, since the current legalistic approach makes the LPC look like the
bad guys. Janet Ore observed that calls for allowing owners to always pursue the
"highest and best use" of their property is part of a larger movement that has the
community good under attack, and it's important for the LPC to keep that in mind when
considering giving ground.
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Kate Jeracki, Recorder
August 4, 2004
�EP��