HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 01/16/1991•
LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION
WORKSESSION MINUTES
JANUARY 16, 1991
The meeting began at 5:40 p.m. at 281 North College Avenue. Roll was called, and the
following members were present: Rheba Massey, Jennifer Carpenter, Prescott Handley, Rae
Ann Todd, and Ruth Weatherford. Bud Frick and Jim Tanner were absent.
Staff was represented by Carol Tunner and Joe Frank. Tracy Johnston acted as secretary.
Kari VanMeter was present as a guest.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Poudre River National Heritage Corridor
Ms. VanMeter first addressed the questions established at the December 19 worksession.
1. The NHC plan is specifically designed to focus on water management cultural
resources, as the river is considered the "birthplace" of agricultural irrigation.
It had become a National Water Heritage project.
2. Ultimately, there will be a plan for a federal heritage area. The role of local
entities will be to enhance local history associated with the area.
3. The NHC plan is not limiting --the legal ramifications will be minimal. It is
that reason that the City is seeking area designation rather than National Park
status. Emphasis will be on local control over affairs of local importance. The
role of the federal government will be advisory. They help the City form a plan
to its standards, then give technical advice. The NPS will possibly have 3 to 5
years additional study to do a master plan.
4. The National Heritage Corridor should not supersede the Historic Resources
Preservation Program but will give it a slice of the pie predone.
5. The final report on the cultural resources assessment will be in hand Friday,
January 18. The LPC's input is welcome and can give its perspectives on the
accuracy of the report and what to do next but it will not change what the NPS
decides.
Ms. Handley asked Ms. VanMeter if there will be pressure from outside agencies to historically
designate resources ahead of the time frame set by the LPC. Ms. VanMeter replied that it
should not, as it will not supersede local effort.
Mr. Frank asked Ms. VanMeter if she saw HRPP resources going to the NHC. She replied that
she had not.
Ms. VanMeter said that the City will try to stimulate citizen activity. It will start a public
information process in the two to three county area that houses the river basin. A public forum
will be scheduled, which Ms. Weatherford suggested that the LPC attend. Ms. VanMeter
reported the NHC legislation will provide $250,000 per year for five years. She also stated that
the NHC plan has the support of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Ms.
VanMeter also suggested that when the new HRPP consultant is hired, he/she should meet with
her regarding the NHC.
Ms. Massey stated that she feels this is a great opportunity. The NHC plan is in use in the
eastern part of the nation as a tremendous tool for economic development, as well as landscape
and historic preservation in the community. Ms. Massey expressed appreciation to Ms
VanMeter for her time, adding that the NHC is very exciting for the LPC due to its heritage
aspect.
Historic Resources Preservation Proeram
As part of the HRPP, the LPC has decided to discuss the Old Town Historic District and its
individual sites and buildings with respect to threats and protection measures. Ms. Massey
stated that Old Town already has a historic context written for the National Register with
contributing and non-contributing buildings identified. A history on each building has been
done.
Threats to the District
1. Possible re -location of railroad.
2. Zoning --currently zoned "C" (commercial) with any use -by -right without review.
3. Truck traffic.
A. Structural impact.
B. Economic impact (negative).
4. Lack of local design review control north of Jefferson Street because the area
is not locally designated.
5. Redevelopment pressures.
6. Vandalism.
7. Lack of incentives for restoration.
8. Security.
9. Demolition by neglect.
10. Incompatible land uses.
11. Absentee Ownership.
12. Change in tax laws (1986).
13. Lack of parking.
14. Lack of tenants.
15. Railroad as a barrier to pedestrians.
Protection Measures for the District
1. Sensitive relocation --mitigation of impacts to historic sites and properties.
Opportunity to maximize railroad through thematic interpretation.
2. Create a new historic overlay zone.
3. LPC support of a bypass.
4. LPC request designation of this area.
5. Early LPC coordination with Downtown Development Authority and Building
Inspector in redevelopment plans.
6. Implement Downtown Plan recommendations.
7. Develop local restoration incentives.
8. Develop a Demolition By Neglect/Minimum Maintenance Ordinance.
9. New Zoning Ordinance for Incompatible Land Use.
10. Identify buildings owned by absentee owners and educate them.
11. Proposal for changes in tax laws.
A. Downtown Development Authority, City Council, and LPC pass resolution
to legislators.
B. Offset with local tax incentives.
12. Provide parking.
2
13. Increase tenancy by:
A. Aggressive marketing.
B. Lower rent structure?
C. Empty stores used by artists, non -profits, etc.
14. Consolidate railroad tracks
Threats to Individual Buildings
LINDEN HOTEL
1. Demolition by neglect.
2. Lack of capital for development.
3. Vandalism.
4. Lack of major tenant.
5. Lack of parking.
6. Block lacks pedestrian amenities.
7. Lack of strategic planning for possible uses.
8. Lack of public awareness.
9. Lack of a major sponsor or consortium.
10. Insensitive interior rehabilitation.
NORTHERN HOTEL
1. Insensitive exterior and interior rehabilitation.
2. Vandalism and neglect.
3. Lack of capital for development.
4. Lack of major tenants.
5. Lack of parking.
6. Lack of strategic planning.
UNION PACIFIC DEPOT
1. Insensitive Rehabilitation.
Historic Sites
OLD FORT SITE
1. Redevelopment
2. Lack of public awareness
3. Lack of archaeological site inventory
4. Railroad relocation
Protection measures and historic sites to be determined at the next worksession.
OTHER BUSINESS
Eastside/Westside Rezonines
Ms. Massey presented a draft of a letter suggesting change in language in the LDGS concerning
PUDs in historic areas and neighborhoods. LPC feels that the original downzoning plan meets
with goals in historic preservation and will protect those areas.
Mr. Frank suggested that the LPC study the packets he distributed on the rezoning review
processes and invite Ken Waido to come to the February 6 meeting to answer questions.
3
Ms. Carpenter said that she feels it is vital that the City have an ordinance that any structure
50 years or older come under LPC purview. Ms. Handley added that the LPC should also look
at those approaching 50 years in age.
Ms. Massey requested detailed written comments be turned in to Ms. Tunner by January 25.
The comments will be reviewed and summarized at the February 6 meeting. At that time, the
LPC can devise five or six general recommendations.
January 29 Meeting for Chairs of Boards
Ms. Massey reported that the above meeting will be held to identify five common areas between
the boards to promote better coordination. She cannot attend but Mr. Frick, Vice -Chair, will
be asked to attend in her place.
RFP for HRPP Consultant
Mr. Frank told the LPC that the RFP's were sent out this week with a February 5 deadline for
return. Interviews will be scheduled February 15 from 8:00 - 1:30.
Taco Bell House
Ms. Tunner reported that the Taco Bell corporation has pulled their proposal from the P&Z
January agenda and will be looking at adaptive re -use plans for the house.
Miscellaneous
Ms. Tunner distributed copies of the Landmark Preservation Commission Annual Report and
LPC Guideline Books to those present.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
4