Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 11/04/1992Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 4, 1992 Council Liaison: Loren Maxey Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission approved the August 5, 1992 minutes, as submitted. The Commission voted unanimously to approve a proposal to bridge the glass sheds between #5 and #7 Old Town Square, Coopersmith's Brewing, as drawn, with the note that the middle bench will be split and moved. The Commission voted unanimously to approve a proposal to move the awning from the west side of the storefront to the south side of the storefront, located at #1 Old Town Square, Wildflower Company. The Commission voted to approve a proposal to install an iron fence at 202 Remington and to repaint the house trim, with the condition that color of the trim will be Forest Green. The Commission approved unanimously with conditions a motion to install an awning on 202 Remington. The Commission voted to accept the 1993 LPC work plan, as presented. Ms. Carpenter announced that Fort Collins has been invited to apply to host a Preservation Leadership Training Institute, sponsored by the National Trust, in June 1993. The Commission approved a memo to City Council, supporting Alternative 3 of the Northeast Area Transportation Study. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Char Jennifer Carpenter called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Bud Frick, Richard Hill, Kirk Jensen, and Ruth Weatherford were present. Brian Janonis and James Tanner were absent. Carol Tunner and Joe Frank represented staff. GUESTS: Tom Peterson, Planning Director for the City of Fort Collins, Peter Dallow, Administrative Services Director, Debra Kaestner, Administrative Assistant to Mr. Dallow were guests. Scott Smith, business owner of Coopersmith Brewing Company, and Glenn Konen, of Architect's Studio, represented Coopersmith's. Todd Lund, property manager for Foxfire Property Management, represented Wildflower Company. Dorlies Rasmussen, of Designing Women and Bob Savage, business and property owner of 202 Remington, represented St. Peter's Fly Shop. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 7, 1"2 MINUTES: Ms. Weatherford moved to approve the October 7, 1992 minutes, as submitted. Mr. Frick seconded the motion. The motion to approve the September 2 minutes, as submitted, passed 4-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, and Weatherford. Mr. Jensen was not present when the motion to approve the October 7 minutes was passed. Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 2 Mr. Jensen arrived and was present for the remainder of the meeting. ineham Corners Barn Mr. Frank requested an addition to the agenda to allow Mr. Dallow to present a proposal on the Cunningham Comers barn to the Commission for comment. Mr. Dallow explained that the Cunningham Comers barn is part of a Special Improvement District, and money is owed to the City on this property. The City has two priorities regarding the barn. One is to satisfy financial obligations to the bond holders, and the other is to preserve the barn for future use. Mr. Dallow stated that the City currently has a $312,000 investment in the barn for interest and mortgage and additional costs of $18,000 per year in debt and maintenance expenses. The six acres on which the barn is located has been appraised at $175,000 for multifamily residential development and $260,000 for commercial investment property. The options Mr. Dallow presented for the barn are to preserve the barn on site, to demolish the barn and sell the property or to move the barn and sell the property. Mr. Dallow asked the Commission for other options. Mr. Dallow reported that Administrative Services tested options in May, 1992 by soliciting bids from the public. Three offers were received and rejected as unworkable. In June 1992, the City decided to try to sell the property with the barn on it, with the condition that the purchaser restor and use the barn. Two offers were received and both offers have been rejected because they were too low. Mr. Dallow stated that now the City is seeking proposals to dismantle the barn, store it on City property and reassemble it at a later date. Mr. Dallow asked the Commission if they have established an exact date for the barn and how significant the barn is to the LPC's preservation plans. He asked the Commission if they have thought about a site to relocate historic structures. Ms. Weatherford stated that one long-term goal of the Commission is to have an architectural village, perhaps at the Brown Farm. She stated that there are reports that there is interest in starting a facility for boys clubs, girls clubs, latch -key children or other youth programs. She stated that another option is to make purchase for development contingent on the adaptive reuse of the barn on the property, but the barn could be moved from the center of the property. She f Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 3 suggested that the City try to sell the property, but work with a developer to use the barn as some kind of community center. Ms. Weatherford suggested that, if the City is really interested in selling the property, the barn should be listed with a commercial realtor. Ms. Carpenter stated that the barn can be moved on site and remain eligible for the National Register. Ms. Kaestner asked if the barn has been determined eligible for the National Register. Ms. Carpenter responded that the barn has been determined eligible. She stated that a new construction date of 1918 has been determined but if designated, that date would need to be further verified. Because there seems to be so little interest in moving the barn, Ms. Carpenter asked Mr. Dallow if the property would be more valuable without the barn. Mr. Dallow responded that offers to buy the property have been low because the barn is a liability. Ms. Carpenter inquired if the property is listed with a realtor. Mr. Dallow stated that it is not. Ms. Carpenter stated that moving the barn now does not make sense. She suggested that the property be offered for sale with the condition that the barn be moved to another part of the property. Mr. Jensen expressed a concern that potential buyers are unaware that the property is for sale. Mr. Frick suggested offering a density variation on the property as an incentive to preserve the barn. Mr. Frank commented that a density variation is already built into the PUD. Mr. Dallow stated that they will consider a density variation on their list of options. Ms. Carpenter responded to Mr. Dallow's earlier question on the significance of the barn to preservation planning. The Commission is in the process of setting priorities in the HRPP and, Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 4 therefore, she cannot answer that question at this time. She commented that the barn is very significant because it is one of the last remaining barns in the agricultural community. Ms. Carpenter stated that alternatives to dismantling the barn should be considered at this time but if the property cannot be sold with the barn, then the City should consider dismantling the barn. Ms. Weatherford suggested that the City put up a "For Sale" sign on the property and see what happens. CURRENT ITEMS: #547 Old Town Square, Coocersmith's Pub and Brewing - Bridging the glass sheds between the two buildings. Ms. Tunner introduced Scott Smith, business owner of Coopersmith's and Glenn Konen, designer for Architectural Studios to present the final review for bridging the glass sheds between #5 and #7 Old Town Square. Mr. Konen stated that after conceptual review on October 7, he had prepared a drawing and met with Mr. Frank and Ms. Tunner. Mr. Frank advised him that Staff did not like the planters. Mr. Konen contacted the State Liquor Board about the planters, and the State agreed to removing the planters and the 4 earlier proposed bridges. Mr. Konen believes they have satisfied the requirements of both the Liquor Board and Staff. Mr. Frick inquired if the center bench will be split and moved. Mr. Konen responded that it will. Ms. Carpenter asked for citizen input. There was none. Ms. Tunner noted that the Coopersmith's signage was removed from the proposal. The applicants will return for administrative review for the signage on the building. Ms. Tunner reaffirmed that the proposal no longer includes four bridges. Mr. Frick moved to accept the proposal, as drawn, with the note that the middle bench will be split and moved. Ms. Weatherford seconded the motion. The motion to accept the proposal, with the note on the center bench passed, 5-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Jensen and Weatherford. Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1"2 Page 5 #1 Old Town Square, Wildflower Company - Moving existing awning, Ms. Tunner explained that the applicant, Todd Lund, property manager of Foxfire Property Management, would like to move an existing awning from the west side of the storefront to the south side of the storefront. Ms. Tunner noted that staff recommends the proposal as presented, citing Guideline #43. Mr. Lund explained that Wildflower Company wants to move the awning to protect the southern exposure of the storefront from sun. He noted that the awnings are retractable. Ms. Tunner noted that the applicant will have to get a building permit to move the awning. Ms. Carpenter asked for citizen input. There was none. Mr. Jensen moved to accept the proposal to move the awning from the west side of the storefront to the south side of the storefront, as presented. Mr. Frick seconded the motion. The motion to approve the proposal to move the awning passed, 5-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Jensen and Weatherford. 202 Remington (McHugh -Andrews house) Repainting and new awnings. Ms. Tunner introduced the applicants, Dorlies Rasmussen of Designing Women and Bob Savage property and business owner of 202 Remington, St. Peter's Fly Shop. Ms. Tunner explained that the applicants propose to remove all existing window and porch awnings and install a new, almost perpendicular awning across the porch and a barrel -shaped awning, running 14 feet down the front steps toward the sidewalk. A business logo will be on the end of the sidewalk awning. The proposed awning color is Forest Green. Ms. Tunner noted that the applicants have included replacing the railings on the second floor balcony and an iron exterior boundary fence. Mr. Frick inquired if all the existing awnings will be removed. Ms. Rasmussen responded that they will because of safety considerations. Ms. Frick observed that most awnings are at an angle and inquired why the proposed awning is almost flat. He noted that the flat awning changes the appearance of the house. Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 6 Ms. Tunner explained that the only business signage will be on the proposed barrel awning. Mr. Frick inquired if the applicants had considered using only the barrel awning. Ms. Rasmussen responded that they had drawn it out with only the barrel awning and it looked very unbalanced. Mr. Frank explained that the barrel awning would cover only the sidewalk, not the building. Mr. Hill commented that the barrel awning does not seem to be appropriate to a residential -scale building. He asked the applicants to explain their reasoning. Ms. Rasmussen responded that the barrel awning with the signage is designed to attract commercial business to the residential -appearing structure. Ms. Weatherford stated that the barrel awning will significantly change the appearance of the home. Ms. Tunner noted that the LPC has approved barrel awnings for commercial buildings. Mr. Hill noted that, although the McHugh house is in a commercial zone, it is still a historic home. Ms. Carpenter inquired if the proposed awning meets requirements for the National Register. Ms. Tunner cited #86-079 of Interpreting the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, which addresses retention of distinguishing architectural character, compatible design for new alterations/additions and reversibility of new alterations. Ms. Tunner noted that the State Historical Society did not have a problem with a barrel awning for the old Post office. Ms. Rasmussen stated that the applicants would not have a problem with deleting the flat portion of the awning and using only the barrel awning. Mr. Frick noted that in the drawings, the building looks very good without any awnings. Ms. Tunner reminded the Commission that they must cite Guidelines to back their decision. She noted Staffs concern with the color of the window trim, pointing out that darker colors were popular in Victorian times. A Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 7 Mr. Frank suggested that the Commission consider the proposal for the awnings and the color changes separately. Mr. Hill moved to accept the proposal to install the iron fence and to repaint the trim, with the exception that color of the trim will be Forest Green, not cream. Mr. Jensen seconded the motion. The motion to approve the proposal to install the iron fence and repaint the trim passed, 4-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill and Jensen. (Ms. Weatherford was not present for the vote on the proposal.) Mr. Hill stated that the proposed awning is inappropriate for the structure and should be moved back from the sidewalk. Mr. Peterson suggested moving the awning back half way. Mr. Jensen asked for guidance on interpreting the Guidelines. Mr. Frick suggested that Guideline #9 is appropriate because the proposed awning obscures the building detail. Mr. Hill inquired if the applicants had considered a candy -stripe design for the awning fabric. Ms. Rasmussen stated that they had, but the candy -stripe fabrics available now all look like they belong on beach umbrellas. Mr. Frick moved to accept the proposal to install the barrel awning with the following modifications: 1. the barrel vault will be no more than 4 1/2 feet long on the horizontal surface, and, 2. the slightly angled awning over the porch will be deleted. Mr. Jensen seconded the motion. Ms. Carpenter requested a roll -call vote on the motion and instructed members to cite appropriate Guidelines as the basis for their votes. Ms. Carpenter voted no, citing Guideline #2. Mr. Frick voted yes, citing the Secretary of Interior's Guideline #9. Mr. Hill voted no, citing Guideline #2. Mr. Jensen voted yes, citing Guideline #9. Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 8 Ms. Weatherford was not present for the vote on the proposed awning. The motion to accept the proposal, as modified by Mr. Frick failed to pass because of the 2-2 vote. Ayes: Frick and Jensen. Nays: Carpenter and Hill. Ms. Carpenter asked for a new motion. W. Hill moved to approve the awning with the following conditions: 1. The barrel awning will project no more than 51/2 feet from the bottom step or no more than 4 1/2 feet on the horizontal surface. 2. The owner will restore the porch awning as it exists in current photos with standard slant -type awning projection. 3. The owner will replace the center column and decorative brackets at the top of the column. Ms. Carpenter seconded the motion. Mr. Savage requested that the applicants be given the option to reduce the size of the current awning. Ms. Tunner showed slides of the building. Mr. Hill, after drawing a sketch of his proposal, decided the awning as described in his motion would not be workable. Ms. Carpenter asked the applicants what they would like to do. She stated that the Commission can approve the proposal without an awning or with the historic awning. Ms. Carpenter commented that an almost flat awning is not historical. It would cover architectural details on the porch and darken it considerably. Mr. Savage stated that they preferred only the barrel awning be used, and the flat awning be deleted. Ms. Carpenter asked for a voice vote on Mr. Hill's motion. The motion, as written, failed on a voice vote. W. Frick reintroduced his motion to accept the proposal to install the barrel awning with the following modifications: 1. the barrel awning will be no more than 4 1/2 feet on the horizontal surface and 2. the flattened angle awning over the porch will be deleted. He added the applicant will be instructed to restore the center post and the decorative brackets at the top. Mr. Hill seconded the motion. Ms. Carpenter asked for citizen input. There was none. i 4 Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 9 The motion to approve the proposal, as finally modified, passed 4-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill and Jensen. Ms. Weatherford was not present for the vote. She returned for the remainder of the meeting. BID TO HOST NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGIONAL TRAINING SESSIONS: Ms. Carpenter announced that Fort Collins has been invited to apply to host a Preservation Leadership Training Institute, sponsored by the National Trust in June 1993. Mr. Frick asked how members of the LPC could apply to attend the institute. Mr. Peterson replied that there is a $300 fee and an applicant must go through the application process. Mr. Peterson suggested that LPC members apply to attend the institute and attempt to gain some public access to the institute. OTHER BUSINESS: Approval of a Memo to City Council on the Northeast Area Transportation Study Mr. Frank distributed copies to the Commission of a memo from the LPC to City Council, supporting Alternative 3 of the Northeast Area Transportation Study, and asked for Commission approval. The Commission supported the memo. Ms. Carpenter initialed the memo. Approval of a Draft of the 1993 LPC Work Program Mr. Frank requested approval of a draft of the 1993 LPC work program. Mr. Frank stated that Mr. Peterson had suggested adding a work session with City Council to the program. Mr. Frick moved to accept the work plan for 1993, as presented. Mr. Hill seconded the motion. The motion to accept the 1993 work plan, as amended, passed 5-0. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Hill, Jensen and Weatherford. Mr. Frank reminded the Commission that he needs their comments on the Executive Summary for the Historic Resources Preservation Program. Landmark Preservation Commission November 4, 1992 Page 10 Ms. Tunner announced that the LPC and the Colorado State History Department will co-sponsor a talk by Hungarian architect, Mihaly Zador, on November 18. Mr. Frank noted that this is the same night as the next LPC work session and the HRPP consultant is scheduled to attend. He suggested they arrange another date. Ms. Weatherford announced that she has received a letter from Mayor Susan Kirkpatrick, concerning increased staff time and increased LPC membership. Ms. Kirkpatrick proposed a joint session to discuss these issues with the LPC. Ms. Carpenter reminded the Commission of Ms. Massey's changes to the HRPP summary and instructed the Commission to submit any changes in the HRPP summary to Mr. Frank or Ms. Tunner. Ms. Carpenter adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Submitted by Charlotte Plaut, Secretary.