Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 06/10/1997LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting June 10, 1997 Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225-0960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: Kathleen Tracy, Project Manager gave a presentation on the proposed Multi -Modal Transportation Center for Old Town. Mike Herzig, Department of Transportation presented the Impact that a new Interchange at Vine and Summitview will have on the historic Plummer School. The LPC gave a complimentary design review of 921 West Mountain and discussed the options of local designation and the demolition delay process. The LPC also discussed their role in giving complimentary reviews. The LPC granted final approval of the Harmony School addition, located at 2112 East Harmony. It was reported that the Trolley Barn Water Stand -Pipe will be relocated to the 1882 Old Waterworks site. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson called the meeting to order 5:35 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Ruth Weatherford, Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman and James Tanner were present. Mr. Frick arrived late. Diana Ross was absent. Joe Frank, Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams represented staff. GUESTS: Tim and Kris Lenczycki, owners, 921 West Mountain Avenue; Kathleen Tracy, Project Manager, Multi -Modal Transportation Center; All Hauser, Architecture One and Mark Young, Mark Young Construction; Mike Herzig, Fort Collins Department of Transportation, Timberline Road Project. AGENDA REVIEW: None. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. McWilliams reported that Jason Marmor, consultant for the East Side/ West Side Neighborhood Survey project, will begin June 16, 1997. Ms. Tunner passed out infonnation on a Golf tournament to benefit the Coy -Hoffman Barn. The "Save the Barn Committee," Link-N-Greens, and O'Dell's brewery are among the sponsors. Ms. Tunner reported that the C & S Depot project rehab plans have been sent to the Colorado Historical Society for review. A letter from James Stratis, Historic Preservation specialist included feedback and suggestion on the project. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter presented a letter from Debbie Raider, 606 West Mountain Avenue, which addressed an increase in street signs. Ms. Carpenter discussed how street signs can impact an historic district. Ms. Weatherford Landmark Preaervatbn Commkebn M edirg M1inutm June 10, 1997 Page 2 suggested that she write a letter in response. Ms. Carpenter said that in terms of districting guidelines, the potential impact of signage should be addressed. Ms. Tunner was asked to prepare a letter for City Council addressing these ideas. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The March 22, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as submitted. The May 15, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as submitted. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. McWilliams reported that Old Chicago's Restaurant will be changing the existing facade by installing bi-fold doors, which can be opened in good weather. She explained that only sections of the Colorado Building which have already been altered are changed in the new plans. Copies of the plans were voluntarily provided by the owner to staff. City Staff Presentation on a Multi -Modal Center In Downtown Fort Collins Kathleen Tracy, Project Manager, Multi -Modal Transportation Center Feasibility Study, presented the conclusion from a study conducted to analyze a feasible site for a new downtown transportation hub. She explained that the City Transportation Department received a grant from the Govemor's Office of Energy Conservation to explore establishing a transportation center in town. Alter -Lingle Architects P.C. was hired to design potential sites. The design and use of the site is to focus on Tranfort users. Cross-country buses, private charters, pedestrians, taxis, bicyclers, car-poolers and passenger rail will also be able to use the site. The C & S depot building is at the top of the list for feasible sites. The location and building is able to serve rail and it is an historic building which is already owned by the City. Other potential sites include the America building parking lot, west of the City Streets Facility on East Vine, the area by the United Day Care Center and the Trolley Barn building. These other sites were discounted because of the possible negative impact on the neighborhoods. The Transportation Department has been focusing on the depot which is also the site of a proposed Farmer's Market. Ms. Tracy said that the transporation center and the market would be two uses which would work together. She explained that the shell of the structure will be fixed up for the Farmer's Market soon and then the rest could be used for the transportation center. She reported that no hazardous materials or environmental impacts on the area are expected. Ms. Tracy said that eight bays for buses in a sawtooth pattern would be established for safe traffic flow. They are working on a circulation pattern which will move around "Annie the Dog's" grave. Parking spaces will be made available around the center. It will serve more as a transfer point from one form of transportation to another. Conceptual plans for the use of the depot should be completed by late summer. Ms. Weatherford discussed growth to the north in the future and how congested downtown is already. Ms. Carpenter asked if the center will be tied in with the mass transit corridor on Mason. Mr. Tanner asked why there is a need for such Landmark Preservation commission Mea ft Nnutea June 10, 1997 Page 3 a center. Ms. Tracy explained that Transfort customers need a safe place to transfer from one bus to the next and a central location where they can get information, purchase tickets and store gear and other items. Mr. Tanner asked why a multi -modal system is necessary. Ms. Tracy responded that the airport shuttle companies and other services would like a central location to bring their services together. The Civic Center Plan includes a transit center. Transfort buses would use the space most frequently, other bus companies may only come through a couple times a week. Mr. Tanner stated that if carpooling is to take place, parking space is needed. Ms. Tracy said that they are not proposing to provide parking. She expects people to be dropped off or take some other kind of transporation to meet their ride. A new parking structure is proposed across the street and the center would be a place for people to complete their transportation. The LPC expressed concerns over the amount of asphalt which would be added to the site. Ms. Tracy said that the plans will meet the new requirements for landscaping. There will also be a buffer zone between the street and the site. Mr. Frank added that other locations for these types of centers include a CSU Transit Center. Ms. Tracy discussed the plans for the north side of Lory Student Center as another large center. Mr. Frick asked if they could tie the transporation system in with the trolley. Ms. Tracy explained that the idea was incorporated in the original plans and that the trolley runs on regular gauge tracks. Mr. Tanner asked why the center was not proposed to be located closer to the population center of the city. Mr. Frank explained that major employment is downtown. Ms. Tracy added that another center is proposed for Horsetooth and a park-n-ride is planned for Harmony and 1-25. Ms. Tunner referred to the Secretary of the Interiors Standard #1, which suggested that an historic property should be used for its original intended purpose. Ms. Carpenter offered the LPC's support and advice during the design process for the depot's eventual use. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: 921 West Mountain Avenue - Comolimetary Review of Addition (Tim and Kris Lenczycki) Owners, Tim and Kris Lenczycki need to expand their home to meet their family's needs. They have plans for a second story addition and would like to discuss whether such an addition would be approved if the house was designated as a local landmark. If not, they will go through the demolition delay process. Mr. Lenczycki presented the plans and has already submitted them to the Building Department. On the original plans, the building edge came too close to the property line. Revised plans were drawn up and he requested the LPC to review them. He explained that the plans are in keeping with the simple design of the house. Mr. Lenczycki stated that sometimes the guidelines pertaining to historic structures were difficult to interpret and stressed that their priorities include timing and economics. A sunroom has already been added onto the back of the house. He commented that a single story addition, as suggested by Staff, may break up the flow of the interior of the house. Mr. Tanner spoke about ways to preserve the original structure. Landmark Preservation Commission Mee9ng Mkaies June 10, 1997 Page 4 Ms. Weatherford commented that a two story addition would change the streetscape. Mr. Lenczycki commented that single story homes are next door and across the street is a two story, so the street is mixed. The Commission discussed the East Side/West Side Design Guidelines and how it addresses such design characteristics as mass, form, proportions and details which help to keep a modem addition subordinate and compatible to the original historic structure. Mr. Lenczycki added that the revised elevation drawing does not show the existing porch, which will remain unchanged. The LPC discussed the process, benefits and disadvantages of both designation and the demolition delay. Mr. Lenczycki thought that the demolition delay process was the shorter way to go. Ms. Weatherford said that designation works to preserve Mountain Avenue as an historic district and explained that major alterations to a structure can have a major impact on the streetscape. Ms. Carpenter added that there is a greater impact particularily when alteration effects a potential National Historic District, such as W. Mountain Avenue. Mr. Tanner explained some of the design guidelines which designated properties should follow and different design options which are possible. Upon reviewing the drawings, Mr. Hogestad commented that they are not well crafted and are lacking details. He suggested that they look at the building and try to match what already exists. Even if the structure with the addition were not designatable, at least it would meet the East Side/ West Side Design Guidelines. He explained that a hipped goof would make the addition compatible with the original house. Mr. Frick added that the drawings are lacking exterior details. The scale of the windows on the addition is off; they are too large. He said that the floor plan is well done, but the elevations need more work in order for the addition to work in the neighborhood. Mr. Hogestad concluded that the building can still be designed to be compatible with the neighborhood, without being designated. Ms. Tunner stated that traditionally, windows on the second floor of the house were made smaller. Mr. Hogestad suggested that they study the historic details on their house and others in the neighborhood. Mr. Lenczycki said that the zoning ordinances may not make it possible to have a hipped roof with a dormer. The LPC agreed that they would be available to take a look at their plans during the demolition delay process. Ms. Carpenter suggested that they try and re -interpret the details on the house. 2112 East Harmony, Harmony School - Addition Final Design Review Al Hauser, Architecture One, and Mark Young, Mark Young Construction, provided samples of the brick intended for the school addition and the window color for the new gymnasium. Ms. Carpenter commented that this application has been reviewed extensively, so new materials or changes are to be examined. Ms. Tunner explained that some of the Commission's concerns in the past included the windows on the addition, the pier depth in the brick and the color of the brick and the windows. Mr. Hauser explained that the openings of the brick on the north side of the original schoolhouse and the removal of the chimney have provided enough original brick to restore damaged brick areas on the original structure. The new brick will only exist on the addition. The samples of the new brick for addition include a Kansas brick which is a red, orange, chocolate color Landmark Preservation Co nmissbn Mestlry Minutes June 10, 1997 Pepe 5 brick which can be wire cut with a matte finish. The windows for the gymnasium will have a bronze framing and obscure glazing on the inner panel. This technique will be used unstead of the Kai -Wall windows originally proposed and will be applied similar to window frosting. The windows and doors on the original Harmony School building will remain white. The mechnical screen on the building will also be in a bronze color. Mr. Frick asked if the window mullions on the addition will be set into the glass. Mr. Hogestad said that the window glazing was a better alternative to Kal-Wall, but he is concerned about the sun's radiation coming through the glazed windows. Ms. Tunner commented that the windows on the addition are larger than the ones on the school. Mr. Hauser explained that they are a few inches wider, which helps with the load bearing. Mr. Young mentioned that they were interested in relocating an old house on the property. Recently the house had been vandalized and they do not think they will be able to restore it. At this point they are interested in demolishing the structure. The applicants will return to the LPC to discuss this issue at a later date. Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the application fof final review for 2112 East Harmony, the Harmony School, known as the Heritage Christian Early Childhood Center, to include the following: the brick, window glazing, window type, concrete block and the screening on the roof for the mechanical equipment. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kullman, which passed unanimously. (6-0) DISCUSSION: 2524 East Vine Drive. the Plummer School - Road Development Plans Mike Herzig, Fort Collins Department of Transportation explained that a grade separation for the roads around the railroad switching station at Summitview and Vine is included in the revised 1996 Streets Master Plan. He explained that they have been studying the impact of a grade separation between the railroad and Summitview. They concluded that an interchange under or over the tracks will be sufficient and they also looked at the impacts of a future truck bypass in the area. They anticipate between one and two hundred trucks moving through Summitview every day. The proposed design of the under or over roadway interchange also needs to work for trucks. They can only expand towards the north of the street for the interchange, because the railroad lines exist to the south. Expanding to the north, the road will be very close to the Plummer School entrance. Mr. Herzig explained that the future development is driven by the Timberline expansion project. The area around the school on the northwest comer has already been platted for residential lots and will be called Waterfield. The Plummer school will be affected by the street upgrade and there is talk of moving the building. Ms. McWilliams said that the school is on the State Register of Historic Places and is eligible for the National Historic Register. The National Register discourages moving historic structures. Ms. Carpenter WWmark Preservation commlesion Meeting Minutes June 10. 1997 parit discussed the City's facade easement on the building. Ms. McWilliams said that they should make every effort to preserve the structure. Trolley Barn Water Stand -Pipe Removal to the Old Waterworks Site - An Update Ms. Tunner reported that the Poudre Landmarks Foundation, Inc. appreciated that the Water Standpipe will be installed at the old 1882 Waterworks facility. They identified a possible site for the Standpipe, just east of the waterworks building and discussed how the mounting curbstone should be included.. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Tanner requested a discussion on complimentary design review in general and the time spent at this meeting discussing demolition and designation of 921 West Mountain Avenue. He explained that the Commission has been reviewing plans, which they would not normally see. He said that the LPC provides some friendly advice, but it comes across with an official tone. This type of review should not occur at an LPC meeting and citizens need to understand the LPC's role. Ms. Carpenter asked if this type of review was not done here, where else could it be done. Mr. Tanner said it may be appropriate for the Design Sub -Committee, if the property is designated. Mr. Frick pointed out that they took over an hour to review drawings, which they do riot have purview over. Ms. Carpenter said that it was an educational process and that the LPC provided information and help. Mr. Tanner thought that maybe they should have been directed to staff. In an official meeting setting, their help may not sound like recommendation, but rather instructions. Ms. Weatherford agreed that it is an educational process and that it may take time for people to understand the language of design and architecture. Ms. McWilliams said that many applicants are interested in designation and staff people are not architects or design professionals and can not speak for the Commission. Mr. Frick said that the applicants should have gone through the application process. Ms.Carpenter said that she felt that the applicants realized a better direction to go in. Mr. Tanner said that they had no paperwork or plans on the property ahead of time with which to conduct a review. 'Mr. Hogestad said that the applicants had a sense of what would work when they left the meeting. Ms. Weatherford suggested that the LPC be provided with specific information on what the applicant would like to discuss. The LPC agreed that the entire Commission can provide more information and that education is part of their work plan. Mr. Frick said that in the future staff can set up a complimentray review time to help explain the designation and demolition process and to help the applicant determine which way to go. The meeting adjourned 8:00 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.