Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 11/12/19960 City Clerk 4 LANDMARK PRESERVATION Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Council Liaison: Gina Janett Staff Liaison: Joe Frank Commission Chairperson: Jennifer Carpenter (225-0960) SUMMARY OF MEETING: The awning recover of B-17 Old Town Square was approved. The reconstruction of the porch steps was approved with provisions for the Good House, 223 South Howes, for the Rehabilitation Grant Program. Signs, awnings and bollards were approved for installation along the alley entrance of 223 Linden Street. The LPC conceptually reviewed the proposed rear addition for the Shenk House, 629 West Mountain. Owner of the McGannon-Middleswart House, 300 East Elizabeth discussed the progress of the chimney repair. The historic clay tile roof was approved for repair on the Welscher House, 1304 South College Avenue. Programs such as the Rehabilitation Grant Program and the Design Assistance Program, as well as the Administrative Review Ordinance and the Central Business District Survey Final Report were discussed. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Jennifer Carpenter, Commission Chairperson called the meeting to order 5:35 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Nicole Sneider, Secretary called the roll. Commission members Ruth Weatherford, Bud Frick, Per Hogestad, Jean Kullman, Diana Ross and James Tanner were present. Leanne Lawrie, City Planner attended the meeting. Karen McWilliams, Carol Tunner and Joe Frank represented staff. GUESTS: Steve Short, resident and architectural conservator; Kevin Murray, Empire Carpentry and Andy Miscio, owner 223 South Howes, the Good House; Bob Coontz, owner 233 Linden Street; David Haimson and Susan Rogers, owners 629 West Mountain Avenue, the Shenk House; Jane Welzel, 300 East Elizabeth, the McGannon-Middleswart House; Robert Siberud, owner, 1304 South College Avenue, the Weischer House. AGENDA REVIEW: Under Other Business the Historic Mid -Town Neighborhood Grant proposal for an historic walking and biking tour was discussed. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. Tunner reported that Coopersmith's Brewing Co. was considering other design options for their proposed malt silo. They had informed Staff that the corrugated design, which was approved by the LPC only, came in a 9 by 20 or a 12 by 20 feet size. Ms. Tunner informed the Commission that Martell's moved into Old Town and, without approval, the owner had removed the existing awning and replaced it with a new one. The Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Page 2 Saltillo Grill was in the process of changing their awning to black and has painted the awning frame black as well. She will notify both of the approval process. Ms. Tunner presented an example of the pebble backed facade which was being removed for the Trimble Block project. Ms. McWilliams reported that the U.S. Forest Service wants to sell the building at 148 Remington and was interested in designating the building as a Local Landmark. She also informed the Commission that Steve Whittal was interested in demolishing his garage, did not think that the structure was historic and plans to come before the LPC. Staff does think that the structure was original based on the material from which it was constructed and the architectural features. it is an early three bay garage which is unusual. The house on the property is contributing to the Laurel School National Register District. Ms. Lawrie informed the Commission that there is a public workshop scheduled for Thursday, November 21, 1996 at the Lincoln Center. Mr. Frank reported on the grant application for the Poudre Big Thompson River Heritage Corridor Interpretive Project. He explained that the City would provide a match of five thousand dollars towards the project and the project would be administered by Ms. McWilliams. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Carpenter spoke of a collaborative effort between Historic Fort Collins Development Corp. and the City to help revitalize the Northern Hotel. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The top of page three of the September 24, 1996 LPC meeting minutes were corrected to read ` Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties'. Ms. Weatherford moved to accept the September 24, 1996 LPC meeting minutes as corrected. The motion was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (7-0) CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: Riaht Card, B-17 Old Town Square. Suite #134 - Recover Awning Ms. Tunner explained that this is a recover of existing awning frames. A logo of the business will be placed on one awning facing each direction. The proposed awning color, Persian Green is close to the storefront color and exists down the street, on Cooper & Cooper Goldsmiths. 0 Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12,1996 Page 3 Ms. Weatherford moved to approve'the awning recover for the Right Card, B-17 Old Town Square, Suite #134. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kullman, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 223 South Howes. the Good House - Porch Steps Reconstruction for the Rehabilitation Grant Program and State Tax Credit Kevin Murray, Empire Carpentry, said that he hoped for the porch step construction to look as it did in the 1940s. He found salt and pepper bricks from Rockwell Hall which he will use to rebuild the steps. He explained because it was a commercial building they would need to install a forty-two inch guardrail, down the center and a handrail down both sides of the steps. The porch wall is currently twenty-nine inches to the top of the brick and will also need a rail. Mr. Murray provided an overlay of the installed railing on a photo. He explained that they would like to do a minimal iron railing and maybe paint it brown. They will look into the building code. Historically, there was a railing down the middle of the stairs. Mr. Murray and Mr. Hogestad discussed that the porch rail of two horizontal bars at twelve to fourteen feet long may require a vertical support. If the LPC were to write a letter of support, then Mr. Murray can try to negotiate with the Building Department. Ms. Carpenter suggested that they look into the Conservation Code, which had been adopted by the City. Mr. Murray explained that they were having trouble removing the porch floor paint because temperature was a limiting factor, so they will have to wait until spring when the temperature warms up. He explained that the brick was softer than they had thought, so power washing was destroying it. He said that they will continue to try and get the paint stripped off the two white piers of the porch. It was stated that the installed handrail would have to extend past the top and bottom of the stairs for twelve inches and this would obstruct the sidewalks around the house. Mr. Tanner expressed his support for their request for a variance. Ms. Carpenter requested that staff meet with Mike Gebo to discuss the issue of the handrail. Ms. Tunner added that more information was submitted by the applicant, including, paint color, window coverings and doors for approval for State Tax Credit. Mr. Tanner moved to approve the re -building of the brick side -walls, and approve the installation of safety railing with the proviso that the Commission appeal to the Building Inspection Department for a variance on the positioning and dimensions of the railing. The motion was seconded by Ms. Weatherford, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Montage Graphics/Linden Press, 223 Linden Street - Signs. Awnings and Bollards Installation Bob Coontz, owner 223 Linden Street, explained that trucks traveling through the alley adjacent to his building were frequently hitting the cornice of the building. Mr. Coontz submitted an application for the addition of alley awnings, bollards and projecting signs. Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12,1996 Page 4 In the process, it was discovered that the tenant had recovered the front awning and added signage without approval. The projecting signs on the side of the building, are not permitted by code. Two alleys storefronts exist, Montage Graphics and Linden Press. The applicant submitted new drawings showing awnings fit into the curvature of the doorway, revealing the architectural feature above the doorway. The proposed signs would be mounted flush to the building and bollards to the right of each door. Mr. Frick pointed out that the awning went beyond the doorway just a bit and asked what the total dimensions of the signage was. Mr. Coontz said that the total signage was four feet long by twelve inches wide. Mr. Coontz said that he was also thinking about installing a horizontal sign with the names of the two businesses up towards the front of the building. Ms. Tunner recommended that a directory of businesses be installed towards the front of the building, which could be reviewed administratively. Mr. Frick suggested that the awning stop at the width of the doorway and not go beyond, so that the shape of the opening and the detail of the brick is preserved. Mr. Coontz was concerned that the awning would be too narrow because the opening of the first door was thirty-seven inches and the second door was thirty- five inches. Ms. Tunner inquired about the bollard and awning material. Mr. Coontz explained that the awning material was the same as what was used on the front of the building and the dimensions were 4.5 inches by 42 inches high. The proposed bollard was the same as what had been approved by the LPC for the Linden Streetscape. Mr. Frick moved to approve the proposal for awnings on the side doors in the alley with the provision keeping within the archway of the doors, exposing the architectural brick work and open on the sides and mounting into woodwork and not into brick. With the provision that the dimensions for materials, signage and bollards be reviewed and approved administratively. The motion was seconded by Ms. Kuliman, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Ms. Tunner explained that the Shenk House was a comer house. It has a rear kitchen porch addition, which has a poor foundation and is not insulated. The owners would like to remove the whole addition and then rebuild it out by one foot. They would like to save a Juniper tree which is adjacent to the existing porch. The existing porch is sided with bead board or railroad siding. They would like to find a clapboard for the proposed addition. They have been looking around town for ideas and would like to use a 1930's design. Ms. Rogers was not sure what kind of roofing would be appropriate for such a shallow angle, at this time they were considering a shed roof. Mr. Tanner said that a twelve by fifteen foot addition may look unsightly with a shed roof and may not be compatible with the house. Mr. Haimson explained that from either street the addition would not be very visible. Mr. Tanner explained that the guidelines suggested using a small connection between the house and the addition. Mr. Frick suggested leaving the replaced porch as the connector with a pitched roof or designing a pitched roof piggy- 0 • Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Page 5 backed onto the house. He suggested that the owners get a copy of the East Side/West Side Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Properties. Mr. Frank suggested that the Design Assistance Program would help. The LPC suggested roll roofing, metal or a rubber membrane. Mr. Haimson said that he preferred the low sloping roof because it was very unobtrusive and was not visible from any angle around the house and did not like the design alternatives which the LPC came up with. The LPC did like the siding material which the applicant chose. Mr. Tanner inquired about the windows on the addition. Mr. Haimson explained that the proposed windows had similar proportions as used inside the bathroom window. Mr. Frick said that according to code, they would need an egress window out of the building. The square footage of the main house was between seven and nine hundred feet and the addition was two hundred forty feet. Jane Welzel, owner, had received a Local Rehabilitation Grant for the repair of the chimney on her house. She explained to the Commission that she had recently discovered that the chimney was not lined properly and mortar is deteriorating from the moisture. The chimney will need to be re -lined and then re -bricked. Bricks which have fallen out, she has saved to be used in the re -construction. The chimney had also been lined for a gas furnace, which was not made of the proper material and presents a hazard as well. Kent Young and Robert Adel, contractors, Blazing Colors and CapriServices plan to take down the chimney to the roof line, stabilize it, re -build it and re -line the inside of the chimney with the proper material. She had originally intended on using the grant money for only the brick work. Ms. Welzel wanted to know how she could use the grant money. First she need to re -line the chimney and shore up the support at the bottom. The chimney bricks above the roof line need to be removed because they are falling out. She can not afford to the work all at once. Ms. Weatherford said that she did not see a problem with the grant because all of the work applied to re -building the chimney. Ms. Lawrie explained that she would have until April or the LPC could issue extensions. Ms. Weatherford moved to approve. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hogestad, which passed unanimously. (7-0) 1304 South College. the Welscher House - Repair of Historic Clav Tile Roof for Local Rehabilitation Grant Program and State Tax Credit Program Robert Siberud, owner explained that the roof on the building had been leaking for a number of years. He did not want to patch the roof. They would like to repair the tile roof and install an ice and water shield along the eaves. Clay tiles have been located in Denver so that the broken tiles could be replaced. Independent Roofing in Greeley would be completing the work. Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Page 6 Mr. Tanner moved to approve the request to repair the roof at 1304 South College, from partial to full roof. The motion was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (7-0) DISCUSSION ITEMS: Local Landmark Rehabilitation Grant Program - Leanne Lawrie, City Planner Ms. Lawrie explained that an amendment to the ordinance was made removing the statement that owners who had received the grant before would go to the bottom of the list the following years. She reviewed that the issue of rehabilitation versus maintenance had been resolved. Mr. Tanner so moved to approve the changes to the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Ms. Tunner discussed the proposed Sub -Section 14 - 48.5 of the Code of the City, in which the administrative review of minor design changes such as color selections, awning recoverings and changes to proposals already approved by the LPC, was added. The Commission decided to require that administrative review of color would have to be based on an historic color palette provided by any paint manufacturer. If the proposed paint color was not from a manufacturers' historic color palette then the proposal would have to be reviewed by the LPC. Mr. Tanner moved to approve the new ordinance regarding Administrative Design Review with the provision that the addition be made specifying that administrative approval of color only be made from an historic palette of paint colors. The motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Central Business District Final Report - Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner Ms. McWilliams reviewed the status of Al's Newsstand for the Central Business District Final Report. She presented photo -documentation which illustrated that the building storefront had been substantially altered. She said that the building may still be historically significant, but the building must still have its integrity. It was discussed that the building needed to convey its use as a newsstand. Al's Newsstand was considered by Ms. Tunner to be a non-contributing structure because the storefront had been determined to be substantially altered. The commission decided the building had historical significance for both its long-term use as a newsstand and for its historic 12 foot width. Ms. Weatherford moved to accept the final survey report as presented. The motion 0 r Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Page 7 was seconded by Ms. Ross, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Design Assistance Program - Pre -Qualified Consultant's List Ms. Tunner said that she had received thirteen responses, eleven which were from design and architectural firms, one from a sign company and one from a landscape architecture firm. Mr. Frick declared a conflict of interest. Ms, Tunner reviewed the criteria in order of importance. Availability, experience, whether the designer had worked with the LPC, or was familiar with the Secretary of the Interior's. Standards. Ms. Tunner taped the workshop so that other local firms could participate at a later date. Ms. Carpenter thought that they should not have too many people and that maybe some should be eliminated. Because the ordinance did not include the word local, Ms. Tunner sent out over 160 letters to Denver and Boulder firms and everyone on the Purchasing Department's historic preservation list. The LPC wanted more time to review qualifications and referred the decision to the next meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Tunner discussed the Historic Walking, Biking Tour Grant Proposal which was submitted to the City Manager, who was now asking for support of the LPC. Mr. Tanner said that he needed some time to review the proposal. Ms. Carpenter said that there was no time to review it because grant applications were due November 15, 1996. Ms. Tunner thought that the program may fit in under Planning and Survey, or Education categories of the H.R.P.P. The budget for the proposed program indicated an LPC eight hundred dollar in -time match and also a funding match. Ms. Tunner explained that the LPC was already committed to approved certificate and plaque programs for funding. The LPC referred to page 8 funding options A of the proposal, where they found discrepancies and were confused. It was discussed that historic tour programs are already in place for Local Landmarks. Mr. Frick suggested that they table the item. The proposal contained inaccurate information in the area of funding on Page 8(a). Mr. Tanner moved that the LPC not endorse the proposal at this time on the basis of having inadequate time to review a complicated proposal. Cursory review of the proposal found certain inaccuracies and the allocation of funds which are not available. We recommend the proposal be denied. The motion was seconded by Mr. Frick, which passed unanimously. (7-0) Ms. McWilliams discussed two properties which were being considered for Local Landmark Designation. She said that the owners were looking for a sense of the structures' eligibility. The first property at 832 Oak would be contributing to an historic district and the LPC felt was worth the owners pursuing the designation. The second property was 710 Mathews, which had been extensively altered. The house was built in 1909 and the owners were not interested in restoring the structure back to its original appearance. The LPC encouraged the owner to think about utilizing the Rehabilitation Grant Program as an Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting November 12, 1996 Page 8 incentive to restore the front porch so it would become eligible. Ms. Tunner said that the City planned to take out the water standpipe at the old trolley barn. She did not think that it was there originally. The City plans to build a new one on Wood Street. She will research the history of the standpipe and how it relates to the historic trolley barn. The meeting was adjourned 8:50 p.m. Submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary.