Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandmark Preservation Commission - Minutes - 03/05/1986• LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES March 5, 1986 The regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission was called to order at 5:32 p.m., at 200 W. Mountain Avenue. Commission members present included Dick Beardmore, Wayne Sundberg and Michael Ehler. Staff present included Sherry Albertson -Clark and Kayla Ballard. Cultural Resources Board members present included Alyce Milton, Jim Weitz, Christine Jones and Anne Steely. Sherry Albertson -Clark stated that Item C, Alman's Deli Works, has been continued to the April meeting. The Right Card - #17 Old Town Square Applicant - Shaw Sign & Lighting, for Cathy Ganz Request - Approval of signage Cathy Ganz gave a brief presentation of the colors (almond vinyl) of the lettering of the logo proposed. Dick asked what the total height of the log on the door would be. Cathy stated it would be 4 3/4" on the door and the window lettering would be in 2 lines of 3/4" each. Wayne moved to accept the application as presented. Michael seconded. Motion to approve passed 3-0. 237-241 Linden Applicant - Lee Cooper, C&W Properties Request - Approval of painting and signage Carol Tunner arrived at this time. Lee Cooper, managing partner, presented the colors (Richmond Gray facade and trim, Old Salem Gray signage interior and Lafayette Green for letter- ing). The lettering will be flush as opposed to rounded or protruding and 16 inches high. The material of the lettering on the signage has not been decided upon as yet but will not be a painted plastic. Michael moved to approve the application as presented. Wayne seconded. Motion to approve passed 4-0. LPC Minutes • • March 5, 1986 ` Page 2 Walnut Street Handtool Company - 233 Linden Applicant - Mike Whitmer, Signs and Designs Request - Approval of signage Mike Whitmer stated the proposal is for a sign with gold lettering on the inside of the glass outlined with maroon. There are 4 glass panels on the front with the main logo on the west 2 panels. One logo is also proposed to be on the south side of the building. Carol moved to approve the application as presented. Wayne seconded. Motion to approved passed 4-0. Avery House - 328 W. Mountain Avenue Applicant - Steve White, City of Fort Collins Request - Replacement of sandstone step Steve White presented a sample of the stone to replace the top step of the Avery House. He stated he searched 3 states for a stone close enough to match the existing sandstone but what was found was not close enough. He stated Holly Richter had donated sandstone from her yard that is a closer match but that is not long enough and would have to be placed in the step in 2 pieces. After a brief discussion of suggested places to find sandstone that would match the existing sandstone, the Commission concurred to table this item to the April meeting. Approval of Minutes of February 5, 1986 Meeting The minutes of the February LPC meeting were approved as presented. East Side Neighborhood Plan Michael Ehler abstained due to a conflict of interest. Sherry introduced Alan Canter, Community Development Director; Joe Frank, Acting Planning Director; Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design, and; the Cul- tural Resources Board. She then briefly discussed the Historic Preservation section changes that have been made to the East Side Neighborhood Plan. She stated that separate recommendations need to be made from both boards. Sherry stated that points that might need to be raised about the East Side Neighborhood Plan are: 1) demolition criteria wording 2) the use of his- toric preservation to encourage maintenance and upkeep of property, 3) pro- viding incentives regarding investment tax credits and 4) the need for and intent of a survey. Alyce Milton asked if other neighborhood plans, such as West Side, North Side and South Side, will be pursued in the future? LPC Minutes • • March 5, 1986 Page 3 Sherry replied that it is possible. The reason East Side Neighborhood was done first is because there was funds for it and there was an organized and interested neighborhood group. Future neighborhood plans depend upon funds and interest from neighborhood groups. Alyce stated she was concerned that this might be the only neighborhood plan and that she sees this as somewhat "protectionist." Alan Canter stated that a neighborhood plan can be looked at as protection- ist as a concern of certain things that may happen, as a deterrent to any- thing that could be coming about and could be looked as very construc- tively. There are several ways to look at a neighborhood planning process. Eldon gave an overview of the plan and stated the intent of the plan. He stated there were committees for each issue of concern in the plan and sev- eral committee meetings were held. The main concern was that of demolition of structures that contribute to the neighborhood and the protection of those structures. Joe stated that the makeup of the steering committee consisted of not just homeowners, but renters, investors and students. This is not just a home- owners document. Dick asked if there was enlightenment of the community as to the tools available in the local historic district to help preserve the historic character and what was the response to this. Eldon replied that there was not a lot of input or participation in the historic preservation section of the plan. Joe stated he felt the community was aware of the plan and the tools avail- able. Alyce stated that there is national designation of properties in this area but no local designation except for the McHugh House and Laurel School. Local designation offers protection but national designation is not intended for protection. Sherry stated that local designation can address almost every policy in this plan. A program that is brought up can be structured so it can be tied to local designation. Dick stated that one program might be that under historic preservation a national designation could be turned into a local designation. Alyce stated that the State Historic Society approached the Cultural Resources Board and asked why they do not try to turn the national district into a local district. Cultural Resources resisted only because of the lack of funds, manpower and time. Christine asked if local surveys were done or properties needs. Is this how information was derived? LPC Minutes • • March 5, 1986 Page 4 Eldon stated that the information was derived from people who participated in meetings from the Quality of Life Survey. As far as the individual needs and desires, every time there was a meeting someone new would come with new ideas. This plan is not all things for all people. Dick asked what the reaction of the neighborhood is to the plan. Eldon stated that the reactions are mixed but some propertyowners will feel threatened by the restrictions and get nothing in return. Joe suggested that the wording be changed to state that the city should explore local designation. This way it would not be binding to anybody. Dick stated that he does not like the words "historic preservation" used the way the plan is written. Everything that is laid out to be an objective can be easily worked legally with the mechanism that already exists. These two boards are charged by Council to look at this context. At this point, the tape for the meeting was inaudible, however there was discussion on local designation versus national designation, land use con- version of the East Side Neighborhood, tax incentives of property in the east side area and their various feelings of the wording in the plan regarding historic preservation. Alyce stated she would welcome any statement in the city's general guide- lines that states conversions or repairs or renovations to older properties should come under the review of the LPC. Sherry stated she was concerned about not wanting to put something in the plan that doesn't mean anything. If LPC isn't going to be able to have input to look at building permits or demolition criteria there is no reason to put that in the plan. This includes design guidelines as well. Joe read the Preface and explained its meaning. Dick asked if it would be difficult to change "historic preservation" to another term because he could not support it if it wasn't changed, not because it isn't good but because LPC would not be doing it's job. There were several suggestions for replacement of "historic preservation" which included "long term", "neighborhood character", "maintain historic character", and "historic conservation". The boards concurred that the word "preservation" would not be changed because it was used too many times in the context of the plan and had various uses. The Cultural Resources Board voted to recommend to City Council, with cover memo, cover letter and changes that were discussed at this meeting, that this policy plan be adopted. The vote was unanimous (4-0). The Landmark Preservation Commission voted to recommend to City Council, with cover memo, cover letter and changes that were discussed at this meet- ing, that this policy plan be adopted. The vote was unanimous (3-0). LPC Minutes • . March 5, 1986 Page 5 Other Business Sherry stated that Sally Ketcham is no longer the alternate but a full mem- ber of LPC. An alternate position no longer exists. Sherry reminded the Commission of the worksession scheduled for Wednesday, March 12th. She asked the Commission if they would consider discussing put- ting together a economic development statement at the worksession. The next regular meeting will be April 2, 1986, 5:30 p.m., 200 W. Mountain Avenue. The meeting adjourned at 7:56 p.m.