Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 04/22/1997LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting April 22, 1997 Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225-0960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC approved plans for the Replogle/Bennett House, 314 East Mulberry, including woodwork, window and door repair, rebuilding the east porch steps and repainting, for the Rehabilitation Grant and State Tax Credit. Plans for the restoration of the front porch on the Ellen Scheidt House, 226 Peterson, were modified and approved for State Income Tax Credit, Part 1. Two Rehab Grant extensions were approved, for 700 Remington and 300 East Elizabeth. The Commission discussed the Demolition Delay ordinance with Input from the public. Greg Belcher presented his plans to move the Webster House, 1110 East Lincoln, to 107 North Meldrum and to build an addition. The LPC discussed with the applicant possible local designation of the property. The LPC discussed the pros and cons of administering the State Tax Credit Program locally and decided to send applications to the Colorado Historical Society for review after the end of the year. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Ruth Weatherford, Commission Co -Chairperson called the meeting to order 5:35 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Diana Ross, Per Hogestad, Bud Frick and James Tanner were present. Jennifer Carpenter and Jean Kullman were absent. Joe Frank, Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams represented Staff. GUESTS: Carolyn Goodwin, owner, and Mark Moses, contractor for 314 East Mulberry; Toby Wright, owner of 226 Peterson Street; Pete Cottier, owner of 350 Linden Street; Greg Belcher and Steve Slezak, citizens, for moving the Webster House on East Lincoln; Steve Short, citizen. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A correction was made to the March 25, 1997 LPC meeting minutes on page 3, paragraph 2. The word "amended' was changed to read "amendment." The March 25, 1997 LPC meeting minutes were accepted as corrected. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner referred the Commission to an Old House Maintenance Workshop to be held in Central City, May 17, 1997. The workshop features renowned preservation specialist John Leeke of Portland, Maine. Ms. Tunner also passed out invitations to the Preservation Mixer to be held on May 9, 1997 in the Harmony Mill by the Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation and the City of Fort Collins. Landmark Preservation Commiwbn Mm" MYades April 22,1997 Pays 2 REPORTS: None. AGENDA REVIEW: Ms. McWilliams added a complimentary review of 107 North Meldrum and the Webster House, 1110 East Lincoln. Ms. Tunner added two grant extensions for 706 Remington and 300 East Elizabeth. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: 314 East Mulberry, Reoloale/Bennett House - Repair Woodwork, Windows, Doors, Rebuild East Steps and Repaint for the Colorado State Income Tax Credit, Part 1 and Local Landmark Grant Ms. Tunner presented the project in three elements, painting, reconstructing the east steps and various repairs/replacement of the woodwork on the house. Mark Moses, contractor explained that filling the woodwork needs to be done immediately. The wood adjacent to the windows and stone foundation needs replacement. Most of the replacement is flat work or bed moulding which is still available as exact duplicates of the existing design. Some glass windows need to be reglazed. Mr. Moses thought that the painters bid is low, so Ms. Goodwin will not be able to do as much woodwork He stressed that the woodwork should be completed now, in order to avoid further deterioration. Mr. Tanner inquired about the type of epoxy intended for the wood repair. Mr. Moses said that he will fill in the wood with epoxy, so it is impervious to water. Mr. Frick asked about painting the house. Ms. Goodwin explained that she received two bids, one for the historical structure on the front and one for the back addition. Mr. Frick stated that the Local Grant money does not apply to the addition, but State Tax Credit can apply. Mr. Hogestad moved to accept the application for 314 East Elizabeth as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (5-0) 226 Peterson Street. Ellen Scheidt House - Restore Front Porch for the Colorado Income Tax Credit. Part 1 Ms. Tunner explained that the house has an enclosed porch, which the applicant would like to remove, leaving the original roof and skirt. Then he will install porch columns according to historic photo -documentation. The house is located in the Laurel School National Register Historic District and is not a locally designated property. Toby Wright, owner explained that he worked with Jim Reidhead and Jeff Moore on the design and construction drawings. Mr. Wright said that he will be doing the demolition work himself and then hire a contractor to help with the construction. The columns may be wood or fiber -glass, but will duplicate the original columns. Mr. Wright submitted some white paint chips, #2540 Attamont Off-white and Orchina White, which colors are compatible with the existing house trim. He said that the porch floorboards also need to be replaced and painted battleship gray to help preserve the wood. Four front steps and a handrail are also included in the plan. One modification to the plan is to raise the planting bed to avoid the Larxnuk Preservetlon commission Lies" Minutes April 2Z 1997 Paps 3 need for a non -historic stair handrail. Mr. Frick discussed some possible drainage problems and inquired about the porch floor. Mr. Wright explained that he lifted up the carpet and plywood underlay and underneath the floor looks bad. He said that he will keep the existing bead board ceiling if possible or replace it with like kind if necessary. This was noted on the submitted drawings. Mr. Tanner asked how the raised bed would work against the porch skirt. Mr. Wright said that he will use a back and front retaining wail to help preserve the porch footers and skirting. Mr. Tanner explained that he is more interested in the design. Mr. Wright illustrated the design concept in plan view. He does not think that the porch is twenty-six inches all around and he will need to regrade for proper drainage. Mr. Frick suggested just doing the grading at the base of the stairs. Mr. Hogestad explained that it needs to be done according to code. Mr. Tanner moved to approve the proposal for 226 Peterson Street as submitted with notations to the plan that the front steps hand rail and adjoining baluster be deleted, and that the porch ceiling and floor be replaced with like kind if necessary. The motion was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (5-0) OTHER BUSINESS: Grant Extensions Ms. Tunner presented two requests for grant extensions. She explained that Flynn's Inn, 700 Remington had a problem with scheduling the work and needs an extension until July. Mr. Hogestad move to approve the extension to the end of July 1997. The motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (5-0) Ms. Tunner reported that Jane Welzel, owner 300 East Elizabeth, requested an extension because the contractor needs the weather to be consistently warm in order to repair the chimney. Mr. Tanner moved to approve the extension to get the chimney fixed by the end of July 1997. The motion was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (5-0) 321 Garfield Ms. Tunner reported that Don and Vicki Mykles' house, which received a Rehabilitation Grant award last spring, is for sale. The house is being marketed with the inclusions of the City Of Fort Collins Rehabilitation Grant for window replacement. Friend of Preservation Award Ms. Tunner suggested that Dr. Paul and Mary Thode of 714 West Mountain Avenue receive the award for removing the asphalt siding and restoring their house. The Landmark Preservation Commission Mee ft Minutes April 22,1997 Page 4 Commission was pleased with awarding a residential property, especially because the theme this year is "Preservation Begins At Home." Mr. Frick moved to nominate Dr. Paul and Mary Thode for the restoration of 714 West Mountain Avenue for the Friend of Preservation Award. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hogestad, which passed unanimously. (5-0) Mr. Tanner commented that there is a brick house next door where a huge crack running down the brick was recently repaired. He said that this repair is more of a significant preservation job than removing siding. The repair job required a lot of work and the building had been threatened. Ms. Tunner commented that the new mortar color is lighter than the rest of the house. The LPC discussed the criteria and process involved in awarding the Friend Of Preservation Award. Demolition Delay Discussion Ms. McWilliams presented an April 17, 1997 memo exploring the demolition delay and the proposed ordinance. Mr. Frank explained that the original intent of the demolition delay ordinance differs from its present interpretation and administration, and is giving historic preservation a negative regulatory reputation. The HRPP Plan was meant to get people on board with designations, education and incentives, not regulations. Ms. McWilliams commented that cutting into the building by even a quarter of an inch can require a burdensome delay, $250 fee, and a public hearing. Ms. McWilliams explained that too much time is spent reviewing alterations and administering the ordinance, and citizens are angered by the costs involved with the process. Staff recommends changing the ordinance to reflect the original intent, which is reviewing building demolitions and relocations, not alterations. Pete Cottier, citizen, stated that he is angered by the ordinance. The building he has is important, but he has chosen not to designate. He has four highly visible elevations to deal with and for economic reasons, they do not want to designate. However, he will be required to go through the demolition review process for even minor alterations. Ms. Weatherford asked what is the original purpose of the demolition delay. Mr. Frank explained that the original ordinance was passed in 1994. At that time, "portion thereof' was included in the ordinance, but was intended to provide for review of major alterations that would significantly impact a building's integrity, not to review every minor alteration made. Ms. Weatherford said that the document needs to be reworded. She added the ordinance only delays and angers people and the Commission is only becoming regulators. The Commission discussed implementing more education programs and incentives, as outlined in the HRPP. Ms. McWilliams explained that current staffing hours do not allow them to add new incentives, but staff can focus on education and community outreach programs. Mr. Frank added that they can go after additional grants as well. 0 L wxlmerk Pres mft Comm"" Msetkp Minutes April 22.1997 Pegs 5 Steve Short, citizen, asked how the community will be able to preserve historic architectural features and structures without the demolition delay. He asked how you would prevent a homeowner from destroying a significant architectural feature. Staff and the Commission agreed that the best way is through education. Ms. McWilliams presented an example of how citizens are perceiving the delay from the last LPC meeting. She explained that like other property owners who have approved plans and the proper permits, Jan Weisel and the Buffington did not alter their plans because of the demolition delay review, and were also angered by the delay. The LPC agreed that they have no business reviewing or commenting on the plans for changes to a stucture and can only review the demolition itself. Ms. McWilliams suggested that education should be taking place before the plans are drawn up. Mr. Tanner commented that he was shocked when he first saw "or portion thereof' in the ordinance because every little alteration would have to come through review. Ms. Tunner stated that Ms. Carpenter could not be present tonight, but would like the opportunity to discuss several points of concern that she has, regarding the demolition delay ordinance. Mr. Cottier commented that they can't control every house over fifty years old. Mr. Frick added that on individually designated structures or in an historic district, significant features can be inventoried and protected. 107 North Meldrum and the Webster House, 1110 East Lincoln - Greg Belcher Complimentary Desian`Review Greg Belcher inquired what the process would be to move the Webster House with or without its being designated. He presented plans, and explained why his drawings have not been changed to reflect new plans to move the Webster House onto the site. Ms. McWilliams explained to Mr. Belcher that because the building was determined to be eligible, he would have to go through the demolition delay process. Mr. Belcher said that he would like to move the house and add on with an addition attached by a greenhouse or atrium at a lower roof line. The addition is proposed to match the existing design of the Webster Farmhouse. Mr. Tanner asked what the LPC was reviewing. Ms. McWilliams explained that the Commission was being asked if the farmhouse would still be eligible for designation if a mirror image addition was added. Mr. Belcher stated that if it was not designatable, then he could not apply for State tax credit. He understands that the house could currently be designated, but if he can not construct his addition as planned he has no interest in designating it. Mr. Frick discussed whether the proposed addition would change the eligibility. He explained that an addition must be secondary in nature, and not affect the integrity of the structure. Mr. Belcher explained that someone has purchased the existing house at 107 North Meldrum and he would like to move it off the lot. Mr. Hogestad asked about the square footage needed in the addition. Mr. Belcher explained that he needs a large addition because he intends to create additional bed and breakfast facilities. Mr. Tanner said that there are ways of getting the square footage without dominating the historic structure. Mr. Frick asked how far back on the lot the Webster House would sit. Mr. Belcher said that it is a 40' footprint and is 26 by 35'. Mr. Frick said that if it is designed correctly it could be done, with the addition smaller, but longer. Mr. Landmark Preservation Cammiasbn Meeting MhAes April 22.1997 Pne8 Hogestad added that it is a question of mass and not creating a huge block of window walls. He thinks Mr. Belcher can add on in a linear fashion, without it looking like a train. 'The overall image and proportions of one building to the other are more important than the size. Mr. Belcher said that continually redoing his drawings is not cost effective and felt that they have a conflict of opinions. Mr. Tanner explained that he can use more of the lot space and spread the addition out so that it does not dominate. Mr. Belcher commented that the lot size is limited. Mr. Frick suggested an example in Napa, California where a separate building was done. Mr. Belcher explained that they must be connected according to City Plan. Steve Short, citizen, asked if there is a way to encourage the preservation of this building without getting weighed down in specifics. Steve Slezak, citizen, asked if the front of the house can be turned to face the parking lot. Mr. Hogestad said that the existing orientation should be maintained. Mr. Frick concluded that the addition would need to be subordinate or spread out in smaller areas in order to make it work and be able to designate the Webster Farmhouse. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Existina Programs Assessment - State Tax Credit Ms. Tunner handed out a table on the pros and cons of administering the State Tax Credit locally. Mr. Frank reported that they are spending a lot of time on the program. He questioned the marginal return. Time will still be made to educate people about the program and help make contacts with the State. Interest was good at first and they tested the program for two years. Ms. Tunner described how the number of applications have risen over time. Ms. Weatherford suggested that they can apply for more grants with the time saved. It would also get the Commission out of a regulatory mode. Mr. Frank said that they need to start informing people that they will not be taking any more applications for the State Tax Credit program after the end of the year. He asked the Commission if anyone has an objection to sending the review down to the State. The Commission was all in agreement to send the State Tax Credit applications down to the State for next years reviews. Administrative Review Ms. Tunner notified the LPC of two administrative reviews she had performed: • 408 West Mountain - Maintenance and repair of bead board porch skirt and rear addition. The work will be completed to duplicate the original. • Avery House - A gas meter will be moved outside requiring drilling through the stone foundation. Ms. Tunner required that the one inch pipe go through the mortar joint. The meeting adjoumed 7:40 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.