Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 08/26/1998LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting August 26, 1998 Council Liaison: Scott Mason Staff Liaison: Joe Frank 221-6376 Commission Co -chairperson: Per Hogestad (303) 292-1875 SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission discussed lighting for the C & S Freight Depot and a porch renovation for 632 Peterson. The Preston Farm project was also discussed. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Mr. Hogestad called the meeting to order at 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Rande Pouppirt, Angela Milewski, James Tanner and Janet Ore were present. Angie Aguilera and George Lyons were absent. Carol Tunner, Joe Frank and Karen McWilliams represented Staff. GUESTS: Jack Gianola, City Facilities Project Manager; Dave Lingle, Aller/Lingle Architects; Roger Sherman, BHA Design; Julie Morton and Bob Allen, Homeowners, 632 Peterson. AGENDA REVIEW: No minutes were available STAFF REPORTS: Ms. McWilliams presented a report on the status of the Preston Farm Project. She reviewed some of the concerns that the Commission and Staff had regarding the project and explained that Staff had met with the applicants. Stan Ward, LGT, had honestly thought that the LPC understood that the plans had been submitted. They were able to clear the air surrounding a couple of issues. As a consequence, staff has written, for LPC approval, a letter of support from the LPC to the Planning and Zoning Board suggesting that they should approve the Preston Farm Business Park, Filing One. Ms. Ore asked if some of the things discussed at the meeting would not apply to the buildings on the western site. Ms. McWilliams said that the site is rather large and has always been divided into a western and eastern portion. Ms. McWilliams said that there was nothing historic on the western side. Everything from Corbett Drive over to the eastern edge are the building that the LPC is concerned about, and where the buildings should reflect the historic architecture of the Preston Farm. Mr. Frank said that the applicants have submitted architectural elevations and want to work with the LPC on those plans. Ms. McWilliams said that they submitted plans basically to hold their spot. Mr. Frank said that they had discussed the issue of trust with them. The applicants said that the elevations were developed before they met with the LPC. At the last meeting the Commission had offered the help of the Design Review Sub -Committee and LGT will come to a meeting with them. Ms. Ore asked if they would have to be sensitive to historic preservation because of the Commission's comments to the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Frank said that they wrote a very strong letter of intent to work with the LPC, so they have to work with the Commission. He added that the City Attorney said that they could apply the historic preservation criteria to the plan, even if they had continued with the old preliminary plan. Mr. Frank explained that there is historic preservation criteria in the new code and the LPC's comments are meant to provide direction. Ms. McWilliams added that they will have Landmark Preservation Commission August 26, 1996 Meeting Minutes Page 2 to come through the LPC for any exterior changes to the historic farm buildings, if designated. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Ms. Tunner reviewed the liaisons for the LPC. Ms. Milewski is the DDA liaison. Mr. Hogestad will attend the CSU-HARB meetings and the Design Review Sub -Committee consists of Mr. Hogestad, Ms. Ore, Ms. Aguilera with Ms. Milewski and Mr. Pouppirt as alternates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. CURRENT DESIGN REVIEW: 136 LaPorte Avenue. C & S Depot Reuse as a Transit Center - "Kiss and Ride" Ms. Milewski declared a conflict of interest and left the room for the discussion. Ms. Tunner presented a background on this project. She said that Dave Lingle came in a month ago with first draft conceptual plans for this site as a transit center. These plans were handed out. She responded that Staff in a brief consultation with the LPC chairperson, recommended that they redesign the kiss and ride to incorporate more elements of the historic depot. For example, the top of the waiting station caps to look more like the top of the parapet and to replace the standing seam metal waiting roofs with a take off of the gull -wing roofs of the depot. She added that rain water could collect in the middle and be funneled down the columns. Ms. Tunner explained that they now have come in with plans for the lights. To help the LPC with a decision she provided Fort Collins Light and Power Book, a history of the light and power system. Each of the headings of the chapters show the lights which they used during that year or period. Deciding what kind of lights to use, as governed by the Historic Old Town Guidelines, #62 says do not use elaborate imitations of historic street furniture. Historically, street furniture in Old Town was sparse and simple. She suggested that with photo -documentation they could reconstruct what was there. Mr. Lingle explained the improvements that they are proposing. The depot will be surrounded by a temporary parking lot, but permanent improvements will include ingress and egress leaves and curb cuts. There will also be a twelve foot pull -off lane to be used now for transfort buses. Eventually it will be a kiss and ride (drop-off place) and a place for taxis. Transportation planning has also asked for more room for bikes by moving the curb lines back to the east six feet. It will include a permanent articulated sidewalk. They will also relocate two transfort bubbles. Annie the Dog's grave site will also be preserved in the temporary and permanent design. He explained that the lighting will be permanent, so they need to discuss that tonight. There will be ten lights on the kiss and ride at four feet from the curb, to be at the center line of the sidewalk. They are proposing a single arm. Mr. Sherman put together four Landmark Preservation Commission August 26, 1998 Meeting Minutes Page 3 samples. The fixtures were mounted upside down and they would be on fourteen foot high poles. Mr. Sherman explained that they recommended that lighting that was used in the 1930s and referred to the War Effort, page 31 of Partners in Power. It illustrated a one arm light mounted upright on a finial fluted pole. That design is the preferred light. Other options included match other lights in town. Ms. Ore asked what was the date of the depot. Mr. Sherman said 1906. She asked why they chose a light from the 1930s. Mr. Sherman explained that they liked the simplicity and it matched the style of the building more. Mr. Pouppirt asked what efforts have been made in the past to use particular lighting. Ms. Tunner said that Old Town Plaza used simple lights and the D.B.A. once put out old acom lights at Linden and Walnut. Soon after they were removed and more contemporary lights were installed. She said the citizens seem to like the old simple style. Mr. Hogestad asked if Staff could ever find a picture of the lights along Mason. Mr. Sherman said that they would prefer to mount the lights upside down to better light the pedestrian area. Mr. Tanner said that he would like to see the Old Town area use a more contemporary design. An old design may detract from the historic features and they do not want to create an architectural park. Only the building and Annie's Grave are left. The reminiscent lights would give a false sense of history and detract from the building. Mr. Pouppirt liked what the applicants had come up with. Mr. Hogestad agreed with Mr. Pouppirt, now that the area is being used for transportation, area lighting would be better and is better for the pedestrian. Ms. Ore said that the choice in style should relate to the period of the building. Mr. Lingle said that they have talked about changing the detailing of the tops of the brick piers of the kiss and ride to flat top columns. He said it would reflect the style of a freight depot more. Mr. Hogestad asked if they had considered mounting the lights on the structure itself, rather than the poles. Mr. Sherman said that the problem was that they need lighting now. Mr. Tanner referred to Old Town Guidelines #60, if light is considered street furniture, use contemporary street furniture and materials, which are traditionally used in the surrounding area and do not use, elaborate imitations. Guideline #46, which deals with architectural details and ornamentation, new buildings which use historic imitations compete and detract from historic buildings and #62. He would argue that the lights that are proposed are relatively elaborate. Ms. Ore commented that the design looks more Victorian and if they were to replicate it may not look like this. Ms. Tunner noted that the LPC vote is necessary to clarify a preference, but the advice is advisory since it isn't a designated structure. Mr. Sherman said that if they don't like the lights, they could go with the ones, which were proposed for the new justice center and parking garage. He passed a picture around and explained they are single mounted with a gooseneck. Mr. Tanner moved that the Commission recommend using contemporary light fixtures as the same design as the other improvements in the area, rather than replicating other historic fixtures. Ms. Ore seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (4-0) Ms. Ore added that the design looks more like the lights from the building's period. Landmark Preservation Commission August 26, 1998 Meeting Minutes Page 4 632 Peterson, G. R. McDaniel House I. Porch Renovation for Local Landmark Design Ms. Tunner explained that the applicants had received a local landmark rehabilitation grant. They are in the process of painting the house and Ms. Tunner said that she approved the colors administratively and they could now start, while their painter was available. They used colors from the historic paint pallet, from the Buttermilk Paint Company. Ms. Tunner noted the rear patio and the French doors off of it will not be done at this time, so it was crossed off on the application. The main reason they came this evening was for repairs to the front porch. The porch skirt is in very bad shape. Ms. Tunner said that she does not believe that the porch deck is original and you can see where it has been cobbled in the sides. The beadboard paneling on the center of the porch skirt is still there and the frame, so you can see the design of how it was originally. She said that they would like to rebuild it so that the porch skirt no longer is in contact with ground, and replace the steps. She added that the deck is covered in knotty pine. She compared the decking to similar historic porches and recommended using nominal one by four boards, which are narrower, clear pine or fir, with the tongue and groove feature. Ms. Morton said that they would like to replace in -kind as much as possible. They found a supplier in Denver (Front Range Lumber in Lakewood) for narrower boards, with a clear mixed grain of Douglas Fir. Mr. Tanner asked if they would stain the wood. Ms. Morton would like to because it would be less maintenance. Mr. Hogestad said that painting it would provide more protection. Mr. Tanner asked if the skirting was bead -board. Ms. Morton said yes. She explained that her uncle will do the work and has worked on older houses before. Mr. Tanner asked if they had located any old photos to see what has been changed. Mr. Hogestad thought that they had enough original fabric to see what it had looked like. Ms. Ore asked about the color of the trim around the windows, which are planned to be painted white, with a red accent. Ms. Morton explained how it is a mud brown main body with darker green under the eaves and she didn't want darker red around the windows. Mr. Pouppirt moved to approve the porch repairs as proposed with the detailed dimensions as submitted, changing the tongue and groove porch decking from one by six to one by four and to make the porch skirt framing all the same size. Mr. Tanner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. (5-0) OTHER BUSINESS: None. Training - Video - "Additions to Historic Buildings" - James Stratis, Historic Preservation Specialist for the State Historical Fund The meeting adjourned 6:50 p.m. Transcribed from the meeting tape and submitted by Nicole Sneider, Secretary