Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 02/13/1996Ll LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1996 Council Liaison: Gina Janett Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225 - 0960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: Commission members visited the stairway entrance to the Police Substation and approved the plans. Restoration of the windows at Marten's Tire, 243 Jefferson Street was approved with conditions. Pete and Jan Cottier, owners of the Union Pacific Freight Depot, discussed Local Landmark Designation and rehabilitation of the structure. The Commission was updated on the C & S Depot Project. The LPC reviewed changes to the Rehabilitation Grant Program and to the Design Assistance Program. The LPC recommended a grant proposal for the survey of the East Side/West Side Neighborhoods and approved letters of support for a grant for the Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation. Ms. McWilliams updated the Commission on the Central Business District Survey. Discussion included a mini -grant for a Neighborhood History Project and some ideas concernin a downtown hotel. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Acting Commission Chairman, Bud Frick called the meeting to order 5:45 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Nicole Sneider, Secretary called the roll. Commission members Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman, Terence Hoaglund, and James Tanner were present. Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson and Ruth Weatherford, Vice -Chairperson were absent. Carol Tunner and Karen McWilliams represented staff. GUESTS: Doug Dohn from Dohn Construction and Todd Lund from Fore Property Management, Steve Wimp from Thunderpup Inc. represented Wallace Walberg owner of Marlon's Tire. Jeff Bridges, citizen, Pete and Jan Cottier, owners of the Union Pacific Freight Depot, Ken Morrison, 245 Jefferson St., Dick Beardmore, Director of the CSU Stabilization Center, Jack Gianola, Project Manager, Bob Smith, Storm Water Utilities Director, Dave Lingle, Aller-Lingle Architects, Sarah Zaske, CSU Stabilization Center, and Leanne Lawrie, City Planner attended the meeting. AGENDA REVIEW: None. STAFF REPORT: None. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Tanner moved to accept the December 12, 1995 minutes as submitted and Ms. Kullman seconded the motion which passed unanimously, (5-0). Landmark Preservation Aission • Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 2 CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: #11 Old Town Square Police Substation: Stairway Entrance A field trip to the site was scheduled for 5:00 p.m. Mr. Hoaglund, Mr. Frick, Mr. Hogestad, Ms. Tunner, Mr. Lund, Mr. Dohn, and Mr. Chavez visited the site. Mr. Dohn, Contractor, explained the stairway renovation. The stairs have an eleven inch run and a seven inch rise according to code, but the existing above ground handrail is not 42 inches high and does not pass the four inch sphere test. They suggested installing Plexiglas to be flush with the alligator teeth on the railing and attach a handrail down the stairway on the left side. Mr. Hogestad inquired how the stairway handrail will be attached. Mr. Dohn explained that it will be mounted to the stone. Mr. Hogestad then questioned how much of the window will be covered by the stairs. Mr. Dohn explained, only 1 - 1.5 inches of the sill is covered and the window is not covered at all. The window will be tempered glass according to code. Mr. Lund explained that Foxfire Property Management Co. has requested that the existing kiosk be moved because when the awning is installed it will extend past the existing railing. Mr. Lund thought that moving the kiosk to the entrance of the plaza would be a good idea because it would be more noticeable. Mr. Dohn described the J- clip attachment for the Plexiglas to the existing railing. Ms. Tunner asked if they would drill holes in the railing. Mr. Dohn explained they would have to drill holes because the Plexiglas will need a lot of support. Mr. Frick suggested that there may be some way of removing the alligator teeth and installing the Plexiglas clips underneath. Mr. Dohn did not know if that could be done. Mr. Frick then suggested attaching the stairway handrail to vertical support poles mounted to the steps rather than the stone sidewall. Mr. Lund added that the color of the concrete used for the steps will be the same as the field stone walls. Mr. Dohn said that a cap piece, Alumagrid, will be installed on the edge of the steps. Ms. Tunner then explained that the French drain would not be installed at the bottom of the stairwell, because water may leak under the side wall which is already bowing. At the LPC meeting, 281 North College Avenue, Mr. Hogestad reported on the updated drawings which give an idea of what the intent is for the stairway entrance. The lap on the window is four inches from the window sill to the tread of the stair. A French drain, previously discussed, will not be installed because it is not practical. A railing will only be installed along the side wall on the north side of the stairs. The existing ground level railing is 36 inches high but the code requires a railing height of 42 inches. An acrylic panel will be installed on the interior side of the railing in order to meet code. The existing baluster will be used without being disturbed. A hand rail will be mounted on vertical posts which will be anchored into the stair treads rather than the existing north side wall. Landmark Preservation Commis_. in Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 3 Ms. Tunner asked Mr. Hogestad if he felt there was any need to use a bond break between the concrete steps and the window sill. Mr. Hogestad replied that the stairs are a permanent structure and will help add support for the bowing north sidewall. He also added that there will be tempered glass installed in the window. Mr. Hogestad moved to accept the stairway as drawn and described to the Commission and the railing will be supported by vertical posts mounted to the stair treads. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tanner. Motion approved, 4-0. Ms. Kullman abstained from the vote because she did not attend the field trip to the site. 243 Jefferson. Marlen's Tire: Replace Rear Door and Windows The building and business is owned by Wallace Walberg who was represented by Steve Wimp from Thunderpup Construction. Ms. Tunner presented color pictures of the proposed windows which would fill in openings where concrete block had been added before and recently removed. The windows are 73 inches high by 37 inches wide with stone sills and segmental brick arches. They are dated from 1900-1910 in the addition. The original building dates back to the 1880s. Ms. Tunner showed a photograph of the opposite side of the building which has three intact historic windows which the applicant will be matching. The proposed new windows match the existing windows very well. The next part of the application was for the existing door with transom which had been covered with wood but since has been replaced with glass. The last part of the application was for a window on the other side of the building which was burned out in a fire. Ms. Walberg would like to have glass block installed in the window because it will be a bathroom. Mr. Wimp added that the Building Department suggested installing fire screens because the east wall of the building is on the property line. Mr. Frick said that fire rated windows have to be hollow metal. Mr. Wimp said that a forty-five minute fire rating was required and a fuse link fire screen would be a less expensive alternative. Mr. Frick described the fuse link fire screens as rolling shutters and requested that if metal windows were proposed to be installed then they should come back with a different application. Ken Morrison, owns the property and business next -door at 245 Jefferson. He questioned the Commission on what were the ramifications of the historic renovation of the neighboring building if he needs to extend his building to the south and thereby cover the restored windows. Mr. Frick explained that the Commission can only issue an opinion on a completed application before them. Mr. Morrison asked if the LPC has the power to block an expansion because it may affect a neighboring historic building. At this meeting the LPC can only address the restoration of the windows and can not examine how the windows may affect Mr. Morrison's plans for expansion. Mr. Tanner explained that there are two different issues to be dealt with. One is whether legally Mr. Morrison has the right in that zone to build an addition in the first place. The second issue is that Mr. Morrison would have to come before the LPC because his addition Landmark Preservation Caission • Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 4 would have an impact on an historic building. If that impact is significant enough, the application may be denied. Ms. Tunner explained that theoretically the LPC can stop Mr. Morrison's possible expansion but a denial from the LPC can always be appealed at City Council. At this point the LPC can not give an answer to his question because they have no application before them. Ms. Tunner read from LPC Guideline #9 and the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines which explain that windows contribute to the historic character of a building. Mr. Tanner did explain that the LPC's interests lie in mainly the preservation of front facades. Ms. Tunner will provide Mr. Morrison with copies of the design review guidelines. Mr. Hoaglund moved to approve the application for Marten's Tire as submitted, the owner could use fuse link fire screens but if metal windows are used there needs to be a submitted application with the Landmark Preservation Commission. Ms. Kullman seconded the motion which passed unanimously, 5-0. Conceptual Review of Union Pacific Freight Depot Rehabilitation A Potential Landmark Designation - Pete and Jan Cottier Pete and Jan Cottier presented a memorandum dated February 13, 1996 discussing their consideration for designating the Union Pacific Freight Depot and a Preliminary Scope of Work. An elevation drawing was also presented to the Commission. The depot was built in 1911 at 350 Linden Street. Most recently the structure was The New Belgium Brewery. Ms. Cottier explained that they are considering applying for Landmark Designation, but that depends on what the requirements are and if they fit with their intended use for the building. Mr. Cottier said they would like to preserve the outside of the building and use the interior space for a combination of warehouse and offices. Ms. Tunner explained that the building is currently part of the National Register District but is not locally designated. Mr. Cottier went on to explain that this area is currently an industrial environment and should remain that way until retail use is appropriate. They want to preserve the canopies on the sides and feel that the building lends itself to some interesting retail use. At this point, office space does not fit because of the layout inside. They would like to develop an ADA type of access on the south side. There are three freight doors on the south side that are in various states of decline. They would like to glaze a couple of those. Mr. Cottier also pointed out that they would like to preserve the transom glass which exists over those doors and add light to it. He described the doors as overhead doors. Two freight doors on the south side are gone but the eastern most door still exists. They want to do the same on the north side of the building. There are six doors on the north side which exist but they don't allow for much light to enter the building. Mr. Frick asked if they were the original doors and Mr. Cottier said that he thinks so. He explained that they were made of beadboard and all the hardwood is still in place but they don't have much of a function, because from the Landmark Preservation Commis_..m Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 5 inside everything is boarded up. The dock on the north side is not very stable. From the north dock to the property line is about 7.5 feet. The docks on the north and south side may be a good place for retail space in the future. On the back a new concrete dock and roof cover were added which are not attractive, but functional. Mr. Cottier summed up his presentation by explaining to the Commission that three doors exist on the south side and six on the north. Other doors on the south side have been filled in. The original function of the building was to receive freight on the north side and transfer it over to the south side. They would like to first glaze two or three doors on the north side and at least one on the south and follow a pattern of transom lights along the side of the building. Their questions for the LPC are what advice do they have and what are the advantages and disadvantages to designating the property as a Local Landmark. Mr. Tanner asked what history of the depot that they have. Ms. Cottier said they have none. It was built by Union Pacific in 1911 and was used as a freight house. Then there was a transfer of title from UP to Inter -Mountain Color in 1983. Ms. Cottier could not find a photograph in the library. Mr. Hoaglund expressed that it would be nice to preserve a few of the doors. Mr. Cottier responded that his major goals include establishing a functional use for the building and securing the structural stability. Today he sees no use for the doors since the railroad is gone. He would like to save the canopies and other architectural features of the building. Mr. Hogestad suggested possibly rebuilding the north dock in the future and just stabilize it for now. Mr. Cottier explained that the north dock has been taking on a lot of water and the planks are rotted underneath. He feels that the platform is part of the design of the canopy. Ms. Cottier said they would like to add another platform on the south side to match the north. Mr. Hogestad suggested possibly leaving the doors in the raised position and installing glass underneath. Mr. Cottier explained that when the doors are lifted the transom glass is blocked and explained that two of the doors on the south side are gone. Mr. Frick suggested saving the doors and using then somewhere else. In their first phase the Cottiers would like to refinish the inside and use the building as a warehouse and offices. Ms. Cottier asked the Commission for advice on the front door of the building which is not original but part of the railing is. Mr. Cottier added that there is a single pane wood window that is in good shape. Mr. Tanner suggested saving the good windows and repairing the damaged ones. He suggested trying to find other ways besides tearing the old windows out to achieve heat efficiency, like installing a thermal glaze. Mr. Cottier does not like the look of the thermal glaze and would replace the windows but keep the same shadow line outside. He disagrees with the National Park Service suggestions. This building is not a museum, the structure needs to be able to function in the 21 st century. The architectural features should be preserved on the outside but it still needs to have some economical, viable use. Mr. Tanner explained that the Landmark Preservation Cornission • Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 6 Commission would like to see their proposed uses be satisfied but at the same time consider preserving the original historic fabric a priority by looking into alternatives to replacing features. Mr. Cottier added that 70% of the windows are fine and 30% need work. In terms of the exterior, they would like to add doors where no doors exist. But these additions should fit in within the character of the original overhead doors. Ms. Cottier said that on the back side there were two original overhead doors, one of which is completely gone and the other one still has the lights above it. Mr. Tanner suggested for them to take pictures and keep records to document the historic character and order to design a sensitive addition. Ms. Tunner added that historic preservation does not mean that adaptive reuse is not possible. She explained some of the incentives for designation. Ms. Cottier asked if they do get Local Landmark Designation, what process would they have to go through in terms of making any exterior changes to the building. Ms. Tunner explained the application process for a proposed project and gave the Cottiers copies of the Design Review submittal form. Mr. Cottier wanted to know if they glazed a couple of doors already and proposed to glaze additional doors, how would they be affected by the design review process. Ms. Tunner said that they would have to come to the LPC for Design Review Approval and explained that they would want them to save some of the doors so as to interpret the historic appearance. Mr. Tanner added that the Commission looks for compatibility in the design using color and materials. He suggested looking at similar buildings built around the same time in town. Ms. Tunner added that there is an archaeological site on the north side of the building. A book, Cavalry and Coaches by John Grey, shows a map with the East Officers Quarters at that site. The foundation of the quarters was excavated, recorded, and then reburied under a protective layer of plastic. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Update on C & S Depot Project and Support for a State Historic Fund Grant Application - CSU Stabilization Center Dick Beardmore, Director of the Stabilization Center, Jack Gianola, Depot Project Manger, Bob Smith, Stormwater Utility Director, Dave Lingle of Aller-Lingle Architects, and Sarah Zaske from the Stabilization Center participated in the presentation of the C & S Depot Project. This project has already been approved by the city. Part 11 Overall Project Description was provided for review. They are now seeking support from the LPC for a grant application for a State Historical Fund grant. Mr. Beardmore made the presentation. In August a grant application was submitted to the State Historical Fund based on the preliminary design. They submitted for funding in the amount of $100,000 for assisting Landmark Preservation Commis...,)n Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 7 with the masonry pointing, sandstone repairs, the cornice, roofing, and a canopy. This grant did not receive funding. Essentially they are working with the Preliminary Design Development drawings which the Commission has reviewed. They are currently redesigning elements of those plans. One big change that has been made since the last grant submittal is to preserve the entire length of the dock. A revised parking layout will be designed in order to accomplish that. Mr. Beardmore said that there are many features of the building which are historically important because they are related to the railroad and transportation system. These features are not necessarily part of the proposed adaptive reuse for a new Stormwater Utilities facility and they are asking again for an SHF grant for these items. They plan to ask for funding for the interpretative aspect and preservation of railroad features of the structure. The first item is the west gullwing roof. The design has very good energy efficiency and creates a high shade coefficient on the windows. They would restore the roof as an important artifact which is also highly functional. They would like support for the stabilization and restoration for the entire dock on the west side of the building. That would include items like foundation repairs, timbers, new planking and wood treatment for the timbers. In the front entry, regardless of the grant money, the decorative glass will be put back with some kind of clear less authentic material. Also more of a contemporary yet compatible approach will be taken to the front entry. They are requesting that as much existing historic fabric be saved as possible, knowing that some mill work will have to be done and to replace the glass will be expensive. Some interior features will be saved including preservation of the four freight doors, the new interior wall on the east side, moving the freight master's office, the window restoration, and preservation of the rolling fire doors. Mr. Beardmore also explained that after they changed the roof an imprint was left on the north face of the north wall which is considered to be the original truss and an interpretive feature. The exterior sandstone panel above the door which reads "Fort Collins" will be restored. They would also like to restore, protect, and interpret Annie the Dog's gravestone. They will try to keep some of the interior exposed brick walls. Some funding will go to interpretive signs, the display of old photographs, and a brochure which interprets the railroad including the Streets Dept. Facility at the old Sugarbeet Factory. The theme relates to railroad history which will contribute to the authenticity of the grant proposal. Again, if a grant for these items is not received, they may not be able to be done because of a tight budget for the project. They will come back to the LPC with final design plans. Ms. Tunner said that the dock on the building is very important because twelve cars on a train could unload at once, making this dock the largest intact dock in the state of Colorado. Mr. Beardmore added that they would like to reinstall the dock spur and the railroad spur and put a boxcar on it in the future. Ms. Tunner also expressed that this project fits in with the education aspect that the grant program encourages, and that it should be one of the City's highest priorities within the acquisition and development project category. Landmark Preservation Aission • Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 8 Ms. Kullman moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission write a letter of support for the C & S Depot Project grant application. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hoaglund which passed unanimously, 6-0. Rehabilitation Grant Program Changes - Leanne Lawrie, City Planner Ms. Lawrie provided a memorandum which outlined the changes to the Rehabilitation Grant Program and copies of the resolution and ordinance. According to the resolution, applications for the program will be accepted immediately after the resolution has been adopted. March 31, 1996 is the deadline for grant application and announcements of grant awards will be made April 30, 1996. Applications which are reviewed before the ordinance is adopted will be reviewed according to the 1995 program criteria. Applications submitted after the ordinance has been adopted will be subject to the new criteria. Ms. Lawrie believes that all applications will actually be subject to the new ordinance because it will be passed in March 15, 1996, so as applications come in this March they will be reviewed according to the new criteria established in the ordinance. Included in the resolution is language explaining that until the ordinance goes into affect all of the grants awarded in that time frame will be subject to the old criteria. Once the ordinance goes into affect, all of the projects are subject to the new criteria. No awards will be granted prior to adoption of the ordinance. Ms. McWilliams suggested changing the deadline for the application submittal this year from March 31, because it's a Sunday, to April 1. Staff can start accepting applications February 21, 1996, because there is no waiting period before the resolution goes into effect. Ms. Lawrie then reviewed some of the changes made to the ordinance. A property must be designated before the grant can be awarded. The property owner may start the designation process after they have applied for the grant, but the designation must be final prior to being awarded the grant. The project will be subject to a physical inspection by City staff to determine completion proof and expense before grants are awarded. While reviewing the applications, priority will be given to those who have never received a grant before, however applicants which have received grants in the past are still eligible. There will be one year to complete the project and if necessary a one year extension to be granted by the Landmark Preservation Commission. The deadline for grant application has been moved to December 15 because the City budget is decided December 1. Ms. McWilliams asked if Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman had been consulted on whether the LPC could designate a property with contingencies. Ms. McWilliams and Ms. Lawrie will speak to Mr. Eckman regarding this question. Ms. Lawrie informed the Commission that a sub -committee could review the applications. She presented a draft copy of a brochure and application for the LPC to review which was created for the Rehabilitation Grant Program. Ms. Lawrie requested that they get back to her promptly Landmark Preservation Commi,-..jn Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 9 with questions or comments because applications will be accepted beginning February 21, 1996. Public input included a recommendation by Mr. Jeff Bridges to distinguish between residential and commercial properties. For example, a bed and breakfast located in an owner's home or a shop in a house. Ms. McWilliams said she would consult with Mr. Eckman on that issue. Mr. Tanner motioned that the Landmark Preservation Commission recommend to Fort Collins City Council the approval of the resolution and ordinance for the Rehabilitation Grant Program. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hogestad, which passed unanimously, 5-0. Design Assistance Program - Carol Tunner. Historic Preservation Planner Ms. Tunner presented the final draft of the Design Assistance Program. She reviewed the previous LPC corrections that were made and asked for additional comments from Commission members. Mr. Hoaglund pointed out that on page 2, #2 orstreet furniture was a typo and should be deleted. Under #3, Minor and Major Rehabilitation was removed. Ms. Tunner added that the word alteration was replaced with rehabilitation. The word facade was also removed when referring to secondary elevations. The dictionary describes a facade as the front of the building or any elevation which has some kind of special design feature or might face the side street. So within the document facade is considered to be the front of the building only and all other sides are referred to as secondary elevations. The Commission also required that only designated buildings be eligible for the grant. The maximum award is for $900 or grouped awards for which the total may not exceed $900. #7 on page 3 requires that the project be complete twelve months after approval and a twelve month extension may be granted. On page 3, item #4, it was added that "full reproducible copies of design materials" are received by Staff. Also page 3, item #1 addressed issuing the request for proposal/qualifications to get referred consultants. It was discussed whether the consultants should meet 70% of the qualifications in order to limit the number of accepted firms. RFP's could be sent to design firms, architects, sign companies, and structural engineers. Qualifications are addressed on page 4, #2 and explains that consultants must attend a workshop for them to gain a better understanding of the program. Mr. Frick mentioned that you can't define the criteria for so many different professionals involved in the rehabilitation design process. Design experience with historic structures is one of the most important qualifications and the LPC will make the final approval of acceptable consultants. OTHER BUSINESS: Grant for Survey of East Side/West Side Neighborhoods Ms. McWilliams developed two grant options that were presented to the LPC. Option A Landmark Preservation Ceission Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 10 is for a Comprehensive Architectural Survey of all 5500 structures in the East Side/West Side Neighborhoods. A form would be completed on the architecture of the structure, concentrating on the facade, and also noting any additions or major alterations which are readily visible. Photographs would be taken of each property. In addition, an intensive level survey would be conducted on 300 selected properties for which a full architectural description and in-depth historic research would be recorded. This will provide an idea of where eligible structures are which will help to form and define historic districts. Option B proposes an intensive level survey of 900 properties where historic districts may potentially exist. The Advance Planning Department prefers Option A because it provides more information on a greater number of properties. Mr. John Albright, northern Colorado's representative on the State Review Board Committee, also prefers Option A. Option A gained overall support from the LPC, which added their recommendation that the city consider this grant a priority in the planning and survey category. Su000rt for a Grant for the Historic Fort Collins Develooment Corporation Mary Humstone from the Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation seeks support for a Community Initiated Development Grant application. In the project statement the program was described as a workshop to provide training for historic preservationists, community activists, architects, and developers in the process of developing historic properties. The workshop will be conducted by the National Main Street Center of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The workshop would include a study focusing on the Northern Hotel, which is a contributing building to the Historic Old Town District in Fort Collins, and is also on the National Register of Historic Places. Ms. Kullman moved for the Landmark Preservation Commission to write a letter in support of the grant application for Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation's Community Initiated Development Program. Mr. Hogestad seconded the motion, which passed unanimously, 5-0. The Central Business District Survey Ms. McWilliams updated the Commission on the progress of the CBD survey being performed by Retrospect. Thirty forms have been completed and are ready to be reviewed by the LPC. There will be a total of 120 forms. Ms. McWilliams suggested breaking up into small groups. Mr. Frick said to bring in the first thirty forms to be reviewed right away. Mr. Tanner preferred to review the forms all at once during a work session. He believes they would be able to examine the forms more thoroughly if they were reviewed in just one or two sessions so that they could better understand and remember how to review them. Mr. Frick said that they should wait until at least sixty are done. Ms. Tunner will try to dedicate a work session in the near future to review the CBD survey forms. Ms. McWilliams informed the Commission that the project should be completed by summer. Landmark Preservation Commit -.on Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 11 City Council Meeting - February 20, 1996 Ms. McWilliams updated the Commission as to upcoming City Council issues. She suggested that all LPC members try to attend the February 20, 1996 Council session. In terms of the East Side/West Side Design Standards and Guidelines, that evening should decide what happens to that document. This document will strongly impact historic neighborhoods. At the last Council session, Council voted for Option #2 which placed the Standards with zoning, and required that the Current Planning Staff look at some of the standards which were not able to be included into zoning. This option means that there will be no standards, only zoning, and guidelines which are unenforceable. Ms. McWilliams also informed the Commission that the Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties in Fort Collins document has been pulled and along with the district designation process, set aside, so one more public meeting may be conducted, giving people from outside the East Side and West Side Neighborhoods a chance give input. The ordinance which would allow the City Manager to authorize rules and regulations was not accepted by City Council. The Process for Historic District Designation will go back to Council at the same time as the Standards and Guidelines document. Joe Frank suggested holding the public meeting at an LPC meeting or have an Open House. Mr. Frick preferred getting additional public input at the next LPC meeting. Mr. Frank and Ms. Carpenter highly recommended inviting City Council members to an LPC regular meeting to have an open discussion concerning the document and the process. A breakfast meeting was suggested. Annie the Dog's Grave Stone Ms. Tunner said that she had received a phone call that the grave stone for "Annie the Dog" had fallen over. Ron Dixon from Fort Collins Monument cemented the stone back in place no charge. Harold Asmus will repaint the letters on the tombstone. Neighborhood History Project Mini -grant - Jeff Bridges Under the education category of the State Historical Fund, Mr. Bridges is submitting an application for a mini -grant for a Neighborhood History Project. The project will cost $27,000 total. They will research all original property ownership information for over 600 structures within 36 blocks contained by Stover, Laurel, Pitkin and College Avenue. The area overlaps the Laurel School National Register District by 260-270 structures. Matching funds will come from community fund raising and commitments from local businesses. Half of the funding is dedicated to producing historic documentation and educating the homeowners about the history of the neighborhood. He asked for a letter of support and stated that the grant is in the same pool as the grant application for the Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation. Mr. Bridges believes that they are in good shape and have lots of support for their grant. In this process they would first establish the historic background and then tie the existing architectural features to the properties. Mr. Frick expressed that it was a great idea. Mr. Tanner suggested writing 0 • Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting February 13, 1996 Page 12 a letter of support, but Mr. Bridges explained that the grant application has already been submitted. The Northern Hotel - Bud Frick Mr. Frick stressed that the Northern Hotel needs suggestions and support in terms of rehabilitation and adaptive reuse. The Civic Center Advisory Committee is looking at a twelve block area for development in the northern end of Downtown Fort Collins. Mr. Frick suggested including an historic subdivision in the neighborhood. With a housing area to the north, the Civic Center would stay active at night. Mr. Frick expressed to the Committee how important it is to identify historic structures in the area and offered the idea of possibly moving the concept of a hotel to the north as part of the Civic Center area. This is an interesting time because as the city grows there is a higher demand for city and civic facilities as well as housing. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary