Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 08/03/1994a LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Special Regular Meeting August 3, 1994 Council Liaison: Gerry Horak Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: The LPC met with members of the G.I.D. Citizen Design Review Committee to discuss alternatives for paver designs around the Linden Hotel. The LPC approved a motion to consolidate the existing sandstone pavers to be roughly equidistant on Walnut and Linden Street at the corner and interlocking pavers throughout the rest of the area. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Chairman Jennifer Carpenter called the meeting to order at 5:35 pm in the Council Information Chambers, 300 Laporte Avenue. Secretary Diane Slater called the roll. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Bud Frick, Jean Kullman, Carl McWilliams, James Tanner, and Ruth Weatherford were present. Per Hogestad was absent. Joe Frank and Carol Tunner represented staff. GUESTS: Mitch Morgan, developer and member of Citizen Design Review Committee (CDRC); Dawn Sinnard, Vaught/Frye, Architect; Jan Meisel, City Planner; Bruce Hendee, Landscape Architect and Consultant to GID; Chip Steiner, DDA; Ellen Zibell, DBA; John Arnolfo, owner of Silver Grill; and all members of the CDRC. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes. STAFF REPORT: None. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None to approve. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: Ms. Tuner presented a design proposal regarding door and window changes in the historic State Armory (formerly the Paramount Cleaners), a building eligible for local designation. They are applying for a grant from the DDA and are asking for informal comments from the LPC. The doorway will be recessed and ramped, which staff feels is acceptable because currently a non -historic garage door exists there. However, they are proposing to change out two historic windows to the right of the doorway and make them contemporary. This is the primary facade of the building. Ms. Tunner feels that this would destroy integral architectural materials, contrary to the Secretary of the Interior Standards #9, which says that no historic materials should be removed and #10, changes should be reversible. Therefore, staff is asking the owners to retain historic materials and is = asking that non - historic previous changes be restored. Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 1994 Page 2 Mr. Tanner commented that he thinks the building would be much more interesting if they would consider restoring the left side of the building since they have a picture of how it looks and that they give consideration to taking it back to the way it was. Ms. Tunner said they would like to get light in. Mr. Tanner would discourage the removal of the two windows and would like to leave in the windows on the right and restore the windows on the left. He feels it would look better than leaving it half and half. Mr. McWilliams said that he has no major objection to the proposed changes to the main entrance in the middle. He felt it would be better to restore the whole building. Ms. Carpenter said she thought it would be better to restore the whole building and it would be all right to do something contemporary on the left but recommended leaving the existing windows on the right. Mr. Frick volunteered to accompany Ms. Tunner to a DDA meeting in the morning to work with the owners. ITEMS: Ms. Jan Meisel said that public comment had suggesting forming a Citizen Design Review Committee to contribute expertise on materials and appearance. The LPC has previously recommended maintaining the sandstone as much as possible in place and infilling with accent sandstone. The Design Review Committee would like to alter the recommendation. Mr. Hendee explained possible alternatives. Other issues to consider include cost: $560,000 is budgeted for the Linden Streetscape Improvements; appearance, particularly continuity with Old Town; preservation; maintenance; and staying on the construction schedule so as not to run into the Holidays. The CDRC felt that the design might look patchy with infill and wanted to look at other options to provide more carryover. Mr. Hendee presented three different options. First, the sandstone pavers would be left in position. This option has the advantage of leaving the existing stones in place but the edge of the pattern would not align with the building edge. The second option would utilize the sandstone as a street art image for the Linden Hotel and still tie in with the rest of the street. Although four pavers on Linden Street would be moved, this option is less expensive than extending the sandstone further. Therefore, interlock pavers would be used past the sandstone and trees would be planted as part of the pattern out front and to soften the edge. The sidewalk on Linden street will be widened. The third option is to extend the sandstone all the way to the edge of the hotel. Although it would give continuity to the building edge, it would be the most expensive. Mr. Hendee prefers option #2. Landmark Preservakion Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 1994 Page 3 Mr. Tanner asked if the National Park Service had been consulted and Mr. Hendee said he had faxed options #1 and #2 to the NPS, who said either one would be acceptable. Mr. Frick asked if paving materials lined up with buildings on the rest of the block and Mr. Hendee said they do not. Ms. Weatherford said she prefers option #1 because it retains the original stone in place and looks less awkward than an abrupt break in the sandstone but feels both options are acceptable. Mr. Frick asked where the sandstone lines up with the hotel in option #2 and Mr. Hendee said the stone would come almost to the edge of anon -functional doorway. Mr. Frick said that he prefers the third option aesthetically but not economically. He sees the advantages of the second option in solving some problems. Ms. Carpenter asked for public comment. Mr. Mitch Morgan said that the four pieces of sandstone on Linden Street are not enough to fill in all the way to the edge of the hotel on Walnut Street. He also likes #3 aesthetically but feels that it is too costly so he likes the second option because he feels the first option looks checkerboard. He said that other members of the CDRC also preferred the second option even though it doesn't quite line up with the Linden. He feels it would be a compromise. Ms. Sinnard said that she doesn't like where the sandstone ends in the second option so would also prefer the third option since the main entry is further up from where the sandstone ends. Mr. Tanner asked if the NPS had authorized moving the sandstone and how much consolidation would be acceptable. Mr. John Amolfo asked how the LPC felt about moving the four stones still on Linden Street and Ms. Weatherford and Ms. Tunner explained that leaving the setting of the building intact is considered integral to restoration of the historic fabric. Looking at the big picture, this sandstone represents the last original sandstone left in all of the Old Town area and, as such, its value lies in interpretation. The Secretary of Interior Standards recommends leaving as much original in place as possible. The Standards state that "The relationship between historic buildings and streetscape and landscape features within a historic neighborhood or district helps to define the historic character and therefore should always be a part of the rehabilitation plan. The Standards recommend identifying, preserving, and maintaining landscape features which are important to the overall historic character of the district. Such features can include streets, alleys, paving, walkways, gardens, etc.". Mr. Amolfo said he also likes historic but feels that today's needs must be addressed. Therefore, the paving should be retained, although not necessarily in the exact same position. Removing or radically changing features is not recommended and the NPS has approved moving the four stones from Linden to Walnut as shown in the second option. Mr. Morgan asked if the small pieces of stone missing from the design on the corner could be filled in and the LPC reacted positively. Mr. Frick moved to accept option #2 with the friendly addition of the cutting of existing stone to fill in the stone with the missing edges on Linden Street side. Ms. Weatherford seconded the motion. Landmark Preservation Commission Special Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 1994 Page 4 During discussion, Mr. Tanner said he would like more infill without patchwork and making a smaller section since it is known that the sidewalk was solid sandstone originally. He said the sidewalk was not a museum. Ms. Carpenter said not going all the way to the end of the Hotel on Walnut would be acceptable. She would like to use all the sandstone available to go as far out on either side of the door on the comer as possible to recreate the feel of what it used to be. Ms. Tunner pointed out that more cutting would be required to consolidate all of the stone in one spot. Ms. Kullman said that the section of stone would be too small to have much of an impact. Mr. Morgan suggested taking the stone further down Linden Street and Mr. Hendee said that would balance it. Mr. McWilliams and Mr. Morgan said that they felt using interlock pavers on Walnut would be aesthetically desirable. Mr. Hendee noted that the other intersections would be red and the Linden sandstone would be yellow and therefore stand out more. Mr. Morgan, Ms. Zibell, Mr. Steiner and Mr. Amolfo felt that consolidation of the sandstone in a solid band on either side of the door of the Hotel would be preferable. The motion on the floor failed. Aye: Weatherford. Nayes: Carpenter, Dick, Kullman, Tanner, McWilliams. Mr. Frick made a motion to modify option #2 to consolidate the existing sandstone pavers to be roughly equidistant to the curbline and use interlock pavers in the rest of the design. Mr. Dick added a friendly amendment that the point where the stone ended would be up to Mr. Hendee, the stonemason, and the amount of stone breakage. Mr. Tanner seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-1. Ayes: Carpenter, Prick, Kuliman, McWilliams, Tanner. Nay: Weatherford. The group discussed placement of trees and Mr. Morgan suggested leaving trees out of the sandstone area. Mr. Hendee noted that Walnut Street still has a smaller sidewalk so it is possible that any trees planted there might be moved in roughly, 10 years if the area is redeveloped. Ms. Kullman, Mr. Tanner, Ms. Weatherford, and Mr. McWilliams agreed that trees should be added later. The CDRC suggested using benches to match benches existing in Old Town. However, skateboarders can maintenance problems. Mr. Hendee showed alternative benches. The group generally agreed that bench #3, a metal slatted bench with armrests on either side would look desirable. Although they are slightly different from those in Old Town, they would be compatible and the others may be replaced eventually. OTHER BUSINESS: The LPC will not meet August 23. The meeting adjourned at 7 pm. Submitted by Diane Slater, Secretary.