Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 07/22/1992Landmark Preservation Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 22, 1992 Council Liaison: Loren Maxey Staff Liaison: Joe Frank SUMMARY OF MEETING: Commission members met at 5:15 p.m. at Old Town Plaza with representatives of Shaw Sign and Awning, Foxfire Property Management and the Downtown Business Association to view the site of a proposed permanent canopy structure to cover the center stage. The applicants and Commission members retired to 281 North College where the Commission voted 5 to 1 to deny the applicants' proposal because they believed it did not meet the Historic Old Town Guidelines. Mr. Frank explained a new RFP process for the Cunningham Corner Barn. Mr. Janonis (Ms. Carpenter, alternate) volunteered to review bids. FIELD TRIP: Staff requested the Commission to meet at 5:15 in Old Town Plaza to view the center stage area site where the applicants, Shaw Sign and Awning, Foxfire Property Management and the Downtown Business Association, propose to install a canopy over the stage area. Commission members Jennifer Carpenter, Bud Frick, Brian Janonis, Rheba Massey, James Tanner and Ruth Weatherford, Commission secretary Charlotte Plaut, and staff representative Carol Tunner were present at the field trip. Kevin Callihan and Darek Johnson of Shaw Sign and Awning, Todd Lund of Foxfire Property Management, and Maggie Kunze, director of the Downtown Business Association attended the field trip. Ms. Tunner introduced the conceptual and final design review for the canopy. Mr. Callihan explained the canopy concept and colors chosen. Mr. Johnson, designer for Shaw Sign and Awning, stated that the purpose of the canopy is to provide protection for performers from sun and rain, preserve and enhance the image of the area and create a festive atmosphere. It will be a focal point at the heart of Fort Collins. It is designed to have a removable canvas top to be up half the year. Ms. Kunze stated that the Downtown Development Authority made the initial request to install a permanent cover for the stage that will provide a festive atmosphere. Mr. Lund stated that the cover would make it possible to have more events in the plaza, such as weddings. They would like the canopy up by New West Fest. Mr. Tanner inquired how many events are held on stage each week. Ms. Kunze responded that there are one to three events held on stage each week. The current canopy must be put up and taken down before and after each event. Landmark Preservation Commission July 22, 1992 2 Ms. Tunner advised the applicants that the logo will be required to be submitted for administrative sign review. Engineered drawings may be required by the Building Inspection Department. At 5:55 p.m. the Commission and applicants retired to 281 North College Avenue. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission Chair Rheba Massey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., 281 North College Avenue. Jennifer Carpenter, Bud Frick, Brian Janonis, Rheba Massey, James Tanner and Ruth Weatherford were present. Kirk Jensen was absent. Kevin Callihan and Darek Johnson of Shaw Sign and Awning and Todd Lund of Foxfire Property Management represented the applicants. Carol Tunner and Joe Frank represented staff. CURRENT ITEMS: Old Town Plaza - To install a canopy over the center stage. Ms. Tunner made the presentation for staff. She explained that, according to staff's interpretation of the guidelines, the proposal appears to be a combination of a new structure, an awning, or more correctly a canopy, and street furniture. Canopies are not addressed in the guidelines so the closest application is for awnings. She recommended the structure based on the guidelines. Mr. Callihan made the presentation for the applicants. The applicants propose a pipe framework for the canopy of 3-inch pipe finished in Old Town green, rising to navy blue, to magenta, with decorative work around the Old Town logo in pink, yellow and dark purple. The proposed canopy fabric is an acrylic yellow, #6316. Following the applicants' presentation, the LPC was given the opportunity to ask questions. Mr. Frick inquired why the proposed structure is 95% symmetrical and 5% asymmetrical. If it were symmetrical, it wouldn't be so obvious. Mr. Johnson responded that the 5 % that is asymmetrically designed is necessary for drainage. This design is the only way to keep rain water off the steps, where performers often place musical instruments. The design is also asymmetrical because of physical limits on the west side. Mr. Frick suggested an overhang in the back for drainage. 0 Landmark Preservation Commission July 22, 1992 3 Mr. Johnson pointed out that this would cause the canopy to cover the landscaped area behind the stage. Ms. Tunner asked how many square feet of canvas was being proposed. Mr. Johnson stated that the canopy will require 500 to 600 square feet of canvas. Ms. Tunner asked how they propose to maintain the light yellow color. Mr. Johnson said that the proposed color will show dirt less than darker colors. He noted that any fabric that is used outdoors requires cleaning and maintenance and it would probably be cleaned each mid -summer season. Ms. Tunner asked the applicant to explain the roof drainage channels under the canopy. Mr. Johnson said they were each 12" wide flanges, painted purple, and would carry water from the valleys of the canvas back onto the planters behind the stage. Ms. Weatherford asked whether the LPC agrees with the concept of the canopy. She stated that the canopy creates a problem with the openness of the plaza, but she understands the need to protect performers from sun and rain. She asked if the structure could be temporary rather than permanent. She also questioned if the structure serves the theme of the plaza. In response, Ms. Massey cited the 1981 H.O.T. Guidelines and the minutes of the October 20, 1982 LPC meeting which she provided copies of for the Commission. The 1982 minutes express a concern for cluttering the streetscape on the plaza. Ms. Massey stated that her opinion is that the canopy structure is an intrusion on the open space of the plaza. Ms. Massey referred to page 7 of the Guidelines and stated that the design does not reinforce existing characteristics. The design also violates guideline #29 because it would block the view of historic structures. The design violates page 6 of the Guidelines because it does not provide visual continuity. Ms. Massey stated that she would support a temporary structure. Mr. Tanner said that he reviewed the Guidelines and found that the responsibility of the Commission is to assure that any new structure will add to the historic visual impact. Large surfaces of plastic are not appropriate. He noted that the area under discussion is about the only open view left in the plaza. He opposes any permanent alteration. Mr. Janonis stated that the purpose of the central area of the plaza is openness. Ms. Carpenter stated that the proposal under consideration is different from the conceptual project that the LPC Design Review Sub -Committee saw two week ago. She does not oppose a permanent structure, but the structure should not block or overpower the area. The proposed structure does not meet that criteria, nor does it provide visual continuity. Landmark Preservation Commission July 22, 1992 4 Mr. Frick stated that he supports the concept of the canopy. He would like a lighter, airier structure, however. The proposed structure detracts from the historic building behind the stage. He stated that the structure must look like it was intended to be there. He sees the proposed structure as a kind of building without walls. There is too much metalwork. Mr. Frick stated that the stage needs a cover and asked the applicants to consider tying canvas to flagpoles or other more temporary ideas. Ms. Massey opened the discussion for public comment. Mr. Johnson stated that the light posts and cables are not engineered to withstand wind stress. He noted that the canopy must be capable of holding possible snow loads as well. Mr. Johnson stated that he likes the idea of a permanent canopy structure for the stage area. He sees the structure as metalwork with a lot of space around it. He designed the structure with arches and circles from the buildings in the plaza. The design picks up on the characteristics of the area. Mr. Johnson suggested that if poles were used, they would look very curious when the canvas is not in place. The proposed structure could be simplified and have less lattice work. He noted that the building behind the stage already has blocked visibility. Mr. Johnson further noted that the structure must be sturdy and practical. If cables are used, children will hang from them. Mr. Johnson then excused himself from the meeting for another appointment. Mr. Lund asked the Commission to consider the problems that putting up and taking down the canopy for every event causes the property management company. He stated that there are activities on the stage during all twelve months. Many top performers turn down engagements because they do not like the facility. Mr. Lund stated that Foxfire would like to attract more activity to the plaza. Mr. Lund also mentioned the issue of vandalism as the structure must be sturdy. There is 24-hour security, but vandalism still occurs. Foxfire had hoped that the new canopy could be in place in time for New West Fest, but it appears this will not happen. Mr. Lund stated that funds are available now, but does not know if funds will still be available in the Spring. Ms. Massey asked for a motion on the proposal and instructed the Commission members to vote basing their decision on guidelines. Applicable guidelines include: Guideline #29, "Design new buildings that avoid reproducing the historic architecture of Old Town," Guideline #61, "The placement of street furniture should function so as to serve the public," and page 6, which addresses the basic characteristics of the district. Ms. Weatherford moved that, although the Commission appreciates the effort that has gone into the proposal, regretfully the Commission must deny the proposal. Ms. Carpenter seconded the motion. The motion to deny the proposal to install a canopy over the center Landmark Preservation Commission July 22, 1992 5 stage passed 5-1. Ayes: Carpenter, Frick, Massey, Tanner and Weatherford. Nays: Janonis. Mr. Janonis voted no on the motion, citing Guideline #29. He stated that the proposal meets the requirements of this guideline. Ms. Weatherford voted yes on the motion, citing the proposal does not meet Guidelines #29 and #61. Ms. Carpenter voted yes on the motion, citing it does not meet Guideline #36 which addresses background and accent colors. Mr. Frick voted yes on the motion, citing Guideline #29. Mr. Frick stated that the proposal meets Guideline #29 for itself, but does not meet this guideline for the building behind it. He would support three light poles with a bend, so that when the canvas is not in place the building behind the stage will not be obscured. Mr. Tanner voted yes on the motion. He stated that no guideline addresses the proposed structure. Mr. Tanner cited Guideline #27 which states that trim materials should be subordinate to and work with the major facade material, Guideline #29, Guideline #48 which states that permanently fixed bars should be avoided on storefront windows, Guideline #52 which states that signs should be subordinate in size to the other facade elements, and Guideline #53 which states that sign design should be compatible in color and material with the facade and the street as a whole. Ms. Massey voted yes on the motion, citing Guideline #29. She stated the intent of Old Town Plaza is open space and the new structure should be compatible with the old. This structure blocks the historic building. OTHER BUSINESS: Increasing the LPC to nine members, Mr. Frank reported that he sent a memo to Steve Roy, City Attorney, informing him that the LPC has requested that City Council increase LPC membership from seven to nine members. He suggested that the Commission write a letter to Loren Maxey, stating the reasons for the desired increase in membership. Ms. Massey and Mr. Frank will collaborate on this memo. Landmark Preservation Commission July 22, 1992 6 Update on bids on the Cunningham Corners barn. Mr. Frank presented to the Commission a letter from Susanne Edminster, Financial Policy Analyst for the City Finance Department, on the status of the Cunningham Corners bam. All bids were turned down. Mr. Frank encouraged the Commission to present more creative options at the August 5 meeting. He stated the LPC will continue to be involved in the bid decisions. Mr. Frank asked for a volunteer to review bids on a new RFP designed to consider the bam on site. Mr. Janonis volunteered to review bids. Ms. Carpenter will act as an alternate representative. Challenge Fort Collins Ms. Carpenter asked for LPC input on opportunities and threats to Fort Collins. She invited Commission members to attend a Challenge Fort Collins meeting on July 30, 1992 from 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the First Presbyterian Church. ADJOURN: Ms. Massey adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. and members left on a walking tour workshop of downtown to discuss current guidelines. Submitted by Charlotte Plaut, Secretary